Thursday, October 30, 2003
LOOKING AHEAD by Wally Dobelis
Party-less primary proposal needs your reflection
The November 4th election promises to be a dull one, except for Proposal (Question) Three on the ballot, Mayor Michael J. Bloomberg’s initiative for open, party-less primary elections in New York. The general idea is to let anyone run in the primary, then have the top two vote getters contend in the general election.
This is not a good idea, not purely as “the Republicans are trying to destroy the Democratic party” emotional issue, there are basic democratic principles involved. Bloomberg, a lifelong Democrat who ran in the September 2001 primary on the Republican ticket, handily defeating former Congressman, Bronx Borough President and Republican/Liberal Fusion Comptroller candidate Herman Badillo, proved the case that a rich unaffiliated do-gooder can win a major election over bemedalled, long-term party backed politician, despite total inexperience in matters of governance. In essence, he avoided the internecine pushing and shoving in the Democratic primary that proved pernicious to both Green and Ferraro, the top contenders.
Granted, some such disclosures contribute to the general disrepute that politicians have acquired in the past decades, fostering a cynical attitude that is not good for the political process. On the other hand, they provide a revelation of the contenders’ political views and personal lives, information that helps the electorate in determining the suitability of the candidates, both as individuals and political persons. It forces candidates to take positions. The Bloomberg proposal makes for a scene akin to the California recall vote, where a screen celebrity with great name recognition and unlimited funds can ride into office by pronouncing a short list of “motherhood” objectives and enter a decision-maker’s role without proving that he knows what he is doing. In effect, he is putting himself into the hands of experienced party advisors, who are often lackeys of the usual political influences. When a business enterprise tolerates such big-name “innocents” (to be generous) at the top, disaster results. Look at H. Carl McCall at the NYSE, trustingly approving Richard Grasso’s megamillion compensation package. Ugh!
Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, another Democrat who won on the GOP ticket, supports the Proposal. The proponents’ general attitude is that the party structure enables a small group of activists, people who participate in political clubs on a year-round basis, to choose candidates, voluntarily work for them by collecting signatures on designating petitions and vote for them in primaries, which attract low voter participation (typically under 20%) and assure party stalwarts of election, by discouraging opposition. Bloomberg points to the City Council election in which only 47 of the 51 members face opposition. Shouldn’t he consider that candidates may be hoarding up their money for the better chances at term limit expiry times?
The New York Democratic party and the good government organizations oppose the party-less primary concept. Herman “Denny” Farrell, the state chairman, has been speaking against the proposition in public meetings, and on October 30 he will appear at the Samuel J. Tilden Democratic Club. The NYPIRG, the Citizens Union and such groups as the UFT actively oppose Proposal Three, the latter declaring that such measure would disenfranchise people who belong to a political party so that they cannot choose the party’s candidate, blindfold voters by not requiring party identifications, help the wealthy candidates and silence the poor candidates, particularly the minorities. Interestingly, the US has moved away from the “popularity contest” type choice of Presidential candidates in conventions, favoring primaries, to recognize the grassroots party voters’ rights of choice.
The local Democratic clubs are incensed about the Proposition. It can effectively destroy a club of whatever persuasion, by eliminating the venue by which poor people with political views and objectives can rise to elective office. The means for most ordinary citizens to arrive politically is to join a club, learn the structure, work for others as volunteers, acquire credibility, then announce their candidacy and ask for the clubs’ support, by speaking in meetings, declaring their political philosophy and objectives, trotting out their credentials and subjecting themselves to merciless questioning . That’s democracy. This goes for Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives or Independence voters, Politics 101, if you wish. Michael Long, chairman of the Conservative Party, has told the New York Times that “voters have the right to know the candidate’ philosophy.” People with means who want to help their cause may rent petition gatherers, that’s not acting illegally, it is a time-hallowed practice.
Note that the practice of Democrats who enlist the support of the Liberal or Republican party structure has given us not only Bloomberg but also such mayors as LaGuardia and Giuliani. The fact that Bloomberg may keenly feel the nominal betrayal of his principles for the sake of “saving the city” is tough. I day nominal, because at the middle there is not much difference, the Bloomberg elephants and Clinton donkeys may safely rest in the same stable. Be big, Mayor B. I did forecast your election, way ahead of all others, in April 2000, and you are still pulling, in my book.
Party-less primary proposal needs your reflection
The November 4th election promises to be a dull one, except for Proposal (Question) Three on the ballot, Mayor Michael J. Bloomberg’s initiative for open, party-less primary elections in New York. The general idea is to let anyone run in the primary, then have the top two vote getters contend in the general election.
This is not a good idea, not purely as “the Republicans are trying to destroy the Democratic party” emotional issue, there are basic democratic principles involved. Bloomberg, a lifelong Democrat who ran in the September 2001 primary on the Republican ticket, handily defeating former Congressman, Bronx Borough President and Republican/Liberal Fusion Comptroller candidate Herman Badillo, proved the case that a rich unaffiliated do-gooder can win a major election over bemedalled, long-term party backed politician, despite total inexperience in matters of governance. In essence, he avoided the internecine pushing and shoving in the Democratic primary that proved pernicious to both Green and Ferraro, the top contenders.
Granted, some such disclosures contribute to the general disrepute that politicians have acquired in the past decades, fostering a cynical attitude that is not good for the political process. On the other hand, they provide a revelation of the contenders’ political views and personal lives, information that helps the electorate in determining the suitability of the candidates, both as individuals and political persons. It forces candidates to take positions. The Bloomberg proposal makes for a scene akin to the California recall vote, where a screen celebrity with great name recognition and unlimited funds can ride into office by pronouncing a short list of “motherhood” objectives and enter a decision-maker’s role without proving that he knows what he is doing. In effect, he is putting himself into the hands of experienced party advisors, who are often lackeys of the usual political influences. When a business enterprise tolerates such big-name “innocents” (to be generous) at the top, disaster results. Look at H. Carl McCall at the NYSE, trustingly approving Richard Grasso’s megamillion compensation package. Ugh!
Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, another Democrat who won on the GOP ticket, supports the Proposal. The proponents’ general attitude is that the party structure enables a small group of activists, people who participate in political clubs on a year-round basis, to choose candidates, voluntarily work for them by collecting signatures on designating petitions and vote for them in primaries, which attract low voter participation (typically under 20%) and assure party stalwarts of election, by discouraging opposition. Bloomberg points to the City Council election in which only 47 of the 51 members face opposition. Shouldn’t he consider that candidates may be hoarding up their money for the better chances at term limit expiry times?
The New York Democratic party and the good government organizations oppose the party-less primary concept. Herman “Denny” Farrell, the state chairman, has been speaking against the proposition in public meetings, and on October 30 he will appear at the Samuel J. Tilden Democratic Club. The NYPIRG, the Citizens Union and such groups as the UFT actively oppose Proposal Three, the latter declaring that such measure would disenfranchise people who belong to a political party so that they cannot choose the party’s candidate, blindfold voters by not requiring party identifications, help the wealthy candidates and silence the poor candidates, particularly the minorities. Interestingly, the US has moved away from the “popularity contest” type choice of Presidential candidates in conventions, favoring primaries, to recognize the grassroots party voters’ rights of choice.
The local Democratic clubs are incensed about the Proposition. It can effectively destroy a club of whatever persuasion, by eliminating the venue by which poor people with political views and objectives can rise to elective office. The means for most ordinary citizens to arrive politically is to join a club, learn the structure, work for others as volunteers, acquire credibility, then announce their candidacy and ask for the clubs’ support, by speaking in meetings, declaring their political philosophy and objectives, trotting out their credentials and subjecting themselves to merciless questioning . That’s democracy. This goes for Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives or Independence voters, Politics 101, if you wish. Michael Long, chairman of the Conservative Party, has told the New York Times that “voters have the right to know the candidate’ philosophy.” People with means who want to help their cause may rent petition gatherers, that’s not acting illegally, it is a time-hallowed practice.
Note that the practice of Democrats who enlist the support of the Liberal or Republican party structure has given us not only Bloomberg but also such mayors as LaGuardia and Giuliani. The fact that Bloomberg may keenly feel the nominal betrayal of his principles for the sake of “saving the city” is tough. I day nominal, because at the middle there is not much difference, the Bloomberg elephants and Clinton donkeys may safely rest in the same stable. Be big, Mayor B. I did forecast your election, way ahead of all others, in April 2000, and you are still pulling, in my book.
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 5:26 PM 
