(I have relatively little expertise in NY politics, but one of the people I trust the most- both because of his progressive politics and because he is a truly great organizer- is the founder of NY's Working Families Party. WFP is one of the best and most effective state level political operations on the progressive side in the country, so when Danny calls me about something, I pay attention, and he called the other day when he saw that BlogPac had endorsed one of Shelly Silver's primary opponents. I encouraged him to share his thoughts with you on the topic. Here they are... - promoted by Mike Lux)
I don't blog very often, being a bit intimidated by the blogging culture. But I have enormous respect for Open Left, and my anxiety is trumped by a desire to engage on an important topic.
I'm writing in response to the first Blue to Bluer post about the election campaign underway in New York between Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver and challenger Paul Newell (and a third candidate, Luke Henry). I currently serve as the Executive Director of New York State's Working Families Party.
First, let me say that the Working Families Party strongly supports the concept of Blue to Bluer. We have backed progressive challengers to incumbent Democrats repeatedly, and doing so is at the very core of our strategy to take the state, and our country, in a more egalitarian and humane direction. One prominent example of the value of the Blue to Bluer approach was the 2004 race for Albany District Attorney, in which the WFP and its allies took on a powerful incumbent because we wanted to highlight our opposition to the so-called Rockefeller Drug Laws. Our candidate (David Soares) won that primary, has served with distinction, and if the right-wing revives and tries to defeat him this year we will work just as hard to make sure he stays in office.
In fact, I think it's fair to say that the very reason for the 1998 formation of the WFP was to counter what we saw as the rightward drift of the Democratic Party. Public opinion in New York, as in the nation, is better and more progressive than public policy, and we felt then (and feel now) that building a ballot-line party under New York's "fusion" voting system would give us a powerful lever to advance ideas and elect candidates. As we enter what we hope will be a Democratic-leaning era in state (and national) politics, none of us should think for a nanosecond that the free-market, winner-take-all, anti-regulation crowd is about to give up or be reborn as egalitarian-minded social democrats.
|
| So it's a fight. And it's one we can win, if we're smart and organized. Over the last decade in New York, the WFP has been active on many such issues: minimum wage, "fair share" health care, inclusionary zoning, legal aid, translation services for immigrants, repeal of vacancy decontrol, education funding, lead paint regulations, living wage requirements on government contracts, telecom quality standards, fair taxes, foreclosure moratorium, paid family leave, authority reform, clean elections, Green Jobs and on and on. The lovely people at Murdoch's New York Post, the Manhattan Institute and other right-wing think tanks certainly can't stand us, which I suppose is validation of a sort.
So that's some background on our bona fides. On to the topic at hand, which is the race in Lower Manhattan between the incumbent (Silver) and the challengers (Newell and Henry). The WFP has not made an official endorsement yet, as the screening process is only just beginning. But I don't think I run much risk of surprising anyone with the prediction that our leaders and members are likely to be enthusiastic about supporting Silver.
The reason is simple: on every one of the issues noted above, and others that are unmentioned, the most reliable force in state politics for progressives over the last decade has been the Assembly Democrats led by Silver. He may be among the more uncharismatic politicians in world history, but it would be folly to mistake his lack of glitter for a lack of nerve.
Context is important. Over the 12 long years of drought otherwise known as the Pataki Administration, when the Governor and the Republican Senate Majority Leader (Joe Bruno) would combine to offer ever more right-wing answers to New York's problems, only Silver had the backbone to say no. Unlike some Democrats at the federal level, he refused to blink. He was an obstructionist of the best kind - holding out, month after month and year after year - not only standing in the way of the right, but forcing Pataki and the Senate to make concessions to the left.
His batting average has not been perfect - nobody's is. But he prevented more harm and accomplished far more good than anyone could have expected during an era when Democrats were a minority party among Albany's power centers.
He forced laws onto the books that made it more difficult for employers to fight union organizing, barred discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation, restored Food Stamps for immigrants that had been cut off at the federal level, and increased the minimum wage. At a time when enormous pressure was brought to bear on Silver to accept a weak settlement in the CFE case (this is the famous NY school funding case), Silver listened to the activist base and refused. As a result we ended up with a much better settlement for millions of New York City school children.
Even under a Democratic Governor (two in fact in the last 18 months), Silver continues to be Albany's immovable left flank. In the latest budget go-round it was only Silver who pushed for a progressive solution to the state's budget crisis - by proposing a tax on millionaires. He was outgunned on that by the Democratic Governor and the Republican Senate, but he was still able to use his seat at the table to make genuine gains on mortgage foreclosures, legal services, affordable housing and school aid.
These battles never end, because our opponents never rest. We need to get started now on the need for serious, targeted property tax cuts for the middle class combined with tax increases on those more able to pay more, and we'll need the netroots to help us. If past performance is any guide, Silver will be a crucial ally in the fight to "tax fairly and spend wisely." And that's the real battle for progressives in the state.
Put this all together and I just think that an attack on him from the left is, well, intellectually shallow and politically naive.
The real reason more good progressive legislation - public financing of elections is one such piece, and there are many others - the real reason these do not see the light of day in New York State is not because of legislative "dysfunction" but rather because of Republican intransigence. They disagree with us, and the Rs still have control of the Senate floor.
That could change in the 2008 election. And then the legislation that Silver's Assembly has long championed could and should become law. It will still take a lot of work from all of us - community, labor, enviros, netroots and more - to get it done, but if the Senate "flips" one can expect real gains in 2009 on keeping rents affordable, "clean elections," property tax cuts, fairer taxes more generally, marriage equality, family leave and "green jobs," just to name a few.
All of which is to say: History matters. Shelly Silver is kind of grumpy and definitely isn't cool, but he has proven - over and over again - that he is willing to take on the rich and powerful on behalf of tenants, workers, school children, small investors, nursing home patients, LGBT New Yorkers, toxic dump neighbors, Con Ed customers....So probing deeply into that history and record seems called for.
Paul Newell and Luke Henry are running principled campaigns, and they have every right to do so. Primary challenges are not just appropriate, they are healthy. They keep everyone on their toes, and that keeps democracy vital. I urge the netroots to meet with tenant and union leaders, with the public financing of elections crowd, with LGBT advocates. If that happens, and you're still persuaded that Silver deserves the attacks that the corporate press heaps on him, so be it.
I'll end where I began. Blue to Bluer is totally right on the basic approach, but wrong on the details of this one. Many thanks for your time and consideration. |
