Somebody buy the White House a deck of cards. Apparently, with all the massive emergencies nationally and internationally, from health care stalling to Afghanistan crumbling, the people in the West Wing do not have enough to do.
To date, the administration has formally or informally intervened directly in New York politics over and over again since Barack Obama won last November: to press David Paterson that he not appoint Kirsten Gillibrand to replace Hillary Clinton, to ramrod Steve Israel out of the race he was planning against Gillibrand, to have political director Patrick Gaspard rally support among elected officials for Bill de Blasio’s public advocate campaign, to lean on Hiram Monserrate to abandon the Senate coup, and now to try forcing Paterson to step aside. (Though the elevations of Clinton and John McHugh were also interventions that obviously spurred political events of their own, these were much more appropriate for the White House to do.)
New Yorkers can take pride in having our politics be of such a major concern to the leaders in Washington, just as they can take pride to see former Housing Commissioner Shaun Donovan running HUD or Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court bench. But there should come a limit, a point at which New York’s own political leaders recognize that there is nothing to boast of in being bullied. They need to speak up and tell the White House that enough is enough.
There are a lot of compelling reasons why Paterson should not run for a full term next year and, no doubt, many people who have reasons to wish for ways to pierce the governor’s near-legendary stubbornness and convince him to step aside. The precedent set, however, by acceding to the White House’s intervention without the traditional polite option of an exit through an appointment or ambassadorship has many risks, to say the least. For if this is allowed to happen—and given how few friends or polls the governor has to defend himself with, only a fool would believe that it will not—the lessons broadcast would demonstrate that for all the talk of an Empire State, New York is in fact a collection of political yes-men willing to put their own interests ahead of voters and the democratic process. So much for Excelsior.
While its agenda in Washington stumbles, the White House has been throwing its weight around in local politics, whether by undercutting the most popular Democrat in Colorado for daring to run against an appointed senator there, or for any and all of what it has done in New York. That Patrick Gaspard, the point man for these decisions, has personal and professional ties to many of the people involved with the New York moves should be of even more concern, though he is not the only one who has used the sheen of the White House to make self-serving actions seem connected to a higher purpose and power.
The local elected officials and political leaders need to wrest back control of the fates of themselves and the people they represent rather than bow to Washington’s Machiavellian strategizing. They need to stand up, speak up, stop just being happy that someone important from Washington shakes their hand or smiles in their direction. Be proud not just that some New Yorkers get political benefits, but use your positions to make sure all New Yorkers get all sorts of benefits. Politics is the art of negotiation and compromise—and it is time to negotiate and make the West Wing compromise for the sake of the state, its people and its democratic process. The slippery slope to letting sub-operatives in D.C. pick the next City Council members is not one leaders of the city or state should want to be skiing.
--
Photo by Andrew Schwartz
To date, the administration has formally or informally intervened directly in New York politics over and over again since Barack Obama won last November: to press David Paterson that he not appoint Kirsten Gillibrand to replace Hillary Clinton, to ramrod Steve Israel out of the race he was planning against Gillibrand, to have political director Patrick Gaspard rally support among elected officials for Bill de Blasio’s public advocate campaign, to lean on Hiram Monserrate to abandon the Senate coup, and now to try forcing Paterson to step aside. (Though the elevations of Clinton and John McHugh were also interventions that obviously spurred political events of their own, these were much more appropriate for the White House to do.)New Yorkers can take pride in having our politics be of such a major concern to the leaders in Washington, just as they can take pride to see former Housing Commissioner Shaun Donovan running HUD or Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court bench. But there should come a limit, a point at which New York’s own political leaders recognize that there is nothing to boast of in being bullied. They need to speak up and tell the White House that enough is enough.
There are a lot of compelling reasons why Paterson should not run for a full term next year and, no doubt, many people who have reasons to wish for ways to pierce the governor’s near-legendary stubbornness and convince him to step aside. The precedent set, however, by acceding to the White House’s intervention without the traditional polite option of an exit through an appointment or ambassadorship has many risks, to say the least. For if this is allowed to happen—and given how few friends or polls the governor has to defend himself with, only a fool would believe that it will not—the lessons broadcast would demonstrate that for all the talk of an Empire State, New York is in fact a collection of political yes-men willing to put their own interests ahead of voters and the democratic process. So much for Excelsior.
While its agenda in Washington stumbles, the White House has been throwing its weight around in local politics, whether by undercutting the most popular Democrat in Colorado for daring to run against an appointed senator there, or for any and all of what it has done in New York. That Patrick Gaspard, the point man for these decisions, has personal and professional ties to many of the people involved with the New York moves should be of even more concern, though he is not the only one who has used the sheen of the White House to make self-serving actions seem connected to a higher purpose and power.
The local elected officials and political leaders need to wrest back control of the fates of themselves and the people they represent rather than bow to Washington’s Machiavellian strategizing. They need to stand up, speak up, stop just being happy that someone important from Washington shakes their hand or smiles in their direction. Be proud not just that some New Yorkers get political benefits, but use your positions to make sure all New Yorkers get all sorts of benefits. Politics is the art of negotiation and compromise—and it is time to negotiate and make the West Wing compromise for the sake of the state, its people and its democratic process. The slippery slope to letting sub-operatives in D.C. pick the next City Council members is not one leaders of the city or state should want to be skiing.
--
Photo by Andrew Schwartz
