he real measure of just how deep a gash the extension of term limits left on democracy in this city will be the number of competitive races next year. If, in fact, they develop as the sleepy affairs most expect, everyone will understand how empty the rhetoric of increasing choice used to defend the extension really was.
But now, though lawsuits and potential intervention by Albany still loom, the time has come to consider what comes next. And what comes next should be affirmations from all those who had been laying the groundwork to run for other offices next year that they will indeed be running, no matter what. Whatever good or bad there may be to say about them otherwise, Tony Avella and Eric Gioia deserve praise for the consistency of their conviction to run for the offices they had been aiming for already. On a basic level, theirs is the example that the rest of the expected 2009 field should follow.
Some people have already decided to stay put in their current offices rather than try for something else next year, arguing that this is exactly what a sense of civic duty demands in these tough times for the city. That is a decent argument. But for those who had been seeking new positions on the Council, borough president, comptroller, public advocate or mayor with the argument that they could truly bring something new to these positions, the burden is on them to actually make the races. When better than at this moment of extreme challenges to have the kind of conversation about the inner workings of these offices that can only be initiated by a lively political campaign?
Those who had declared their candidacies, or all but declared their candidacies, began this process because they supposedly had positive ideas about what they could bring to the offices they were set to seek. If these were anything but convenient slogans or website banners, now is the moment to put them on the marketplace. Running primary or general election campaigns against incumbents may be difficult and even impolite, but for those who want to make the case that they were looking at the 2009 elections out of a sense of civic duty and not plain career ambition, running these campaigns is no doubt the moral and consistent thing to do. If they win, they will bring these new and better ideas into government. If they lose—provided their campaigns are serious and substantive—they will help shape the winner’s approach to governing for the better. One need only look at how much better the campaigning and policy positions of Barack Obama got as he survived the crucible of the Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton and John McCain for proof of how important tough campaigns can be even for those who win overwhelmingly.
This is a call to Democrats, but it is also a call to Republicans, whose performance at the polls in recent years has been ever more pathetic. While some of the blame, no doubt, goes to demographic shifts and a national party identity which is largely alien to residents of the five boroughs, if Republicans want to be taken seriously as an organization, they need to put the time, money and effort into real campaigns for every office. That 159 of 168 local offices are held by the Democrats and that almost all of these are uncontested in November means that any reasonable person should be asking why the GOP bothers to still exist in New York. The party needs to start answering that question by running serious candidates engaged in active campaigns, not jokers who happen to petition their way onto the ballot or placeholders from the party faithful, as has too often become the case. Even in a town that is so Democratic, making those in the party work for their power will make them govern better. The primaries should not be the only elections that matter.
And if they are, then the onus is on the Democrats to make the primaries real competitions, not pro forma events. In the many parts of this city where Republicans have no real hope of winning, the Democratic Party has a responsibility to encourage races among its own members, for the good of party dynamism, the democratic process, voter engagement and better results once in office.
Especially at the local level, political positions should not be lifetime appointments, nor jobs held for as long as those in them feel interested in holding them. Competitive races lead to better governing, keeping incumbents on their toes and elected officials deeply in touch with the needs of their districts. And when the incumbents do not respond accordingly, there is hope even for the long-shot challengers. Just ask Marty Connor and Daniel Squadron.
But now, though lawsuits and potential intervention by Albany still loom, the time has come to consider what comes next. And what comes next should be affirmations from all those who had been laying the groundwork to run for other offices next year that they will indeed be running, no matter what. Whatever good or bad there may be to say about them otherwise, Tony Avella and Eric Gioia deserve praise for the consistency of their conviction to run for the offices they had been aiming for already. On a basic level, theirs is the example that the rest of the expected 2009 field should follow.
Some people have already decided to stay put in their current offices rather than try for something else next year, arguing that this is exactly what a sense of civic duty demands in these tough times for the city. That is a decent argument. But for those who had been seeking new positions on the Council, borough president, comptroller, public advocate or mayor with the argument that they could truly bring something new to these positions, the burden is on them to actually make the races. When better than at this moment of extreme challenges to have the kind of conversation about the inner workings of these offices that can only be initiated by a lively political campaign?
Those who had declared their candidacies, or all but declared their candidacies, began this process because they supposedly had positive ideas about what they could bring to the offices they were set to seek. If these were anything but convenient slogans or website banners, now is the moment to put them on the marketplace. Running primary or general election campaigns against incumbents may be difficult and even impolite, but for those who want to make the case that they were looking at the 2009 elections out of a sense of civic duty and not plain career ambition, running these campaigns is no doubt the moral and consistent thing to do. If they win, they will bring these new and better ideas into government. If they lose—provided their campaigns are serious and substantive—they will help shape the winner’s approach to governing for the better. One need only look at how much better the campaigning and policy positions of Barack Obama got as he survived the crucible of the Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton and John McCain for proof of how important tough campaigns can be even for those who win overwhelmingly.
This is a call to Democrats, but it is also a call to Republicans, whose performance at the polls in recent years has been ever more pathetic. While some of the blame, no doubt, goes to demographic shifts and a national party identity which is largely alien to residents of the five boroughs, if Republicans want to be taken seriously as an organization, they need to put the time, money and effort into real campaigns for every office. That 159 of 168 local offices are held by the Democrats and that almost all of these are uncontested in November means that any reasonable person should be asking why the GOP bothers to still exist in New York. The party needs to start answering that question by running serious candidates engaged in active campaigns, not jokers who happen to petition their way onto the ballot or placeholders from the party faithful, as has too often become the case. Even in a town that is so Democratic, making those in the party work for their power will make them govern better. The primaries should not be the only elections that matter.
And if they are, then the onus is on the Democrats to make the primaries real competitions, not pro forma events. In the many parts of this city where Republicans have no real hope of winning, the Democratic Party has a responsibility to encourage races among its own members, for the good of party dynamism, the democratic process, voter engagement and better results once in office.
Especially at the local level, political positions should not be lifetime appointments, nor jobs held for as long as those in them feel interested in holding them. Competitive races lead to better governing, keeping incumbents on their toes and elected officials deeply in touch with the needs of their districts. And when the incumbents do not respond accordingly, there is hope even for the long-shot challengers. Just ask Marty Connor and Daniel Squadron.
