The Dominoes Continue to Fall - Republicans Contend with Primaries and Retirements
By Mike Connery on 06/06/2010 @ 01:14 PM
Another day and another domino falls in a chain reaction of events that looks to dash GOP hopes of retaking the State Senate in November. Three stories this weekend continue the trend we've been monitoring for weeks.
First up, Capital News reports that a contentious Republican primary between between concert pianist Andrew Russo and East Syracuse Mayor Danny Liedka is setting up the GOP for a repeat (defeat) performance in the district currently represented by Democrat David Valesky:
Six years later, Republicans appear to have a shot at retaking the seat from Valesky, which would considerably bolster their odds of winning back the upper chamber. But a potentially divisive Republican primary between East Syracuse Mayor Danny Liedka and Andrew Russo, a concert pianist, threatens to again thrash GOP hopes.
In addition, Russo has already gotten the Conservative Party’s endorsement to run on its line in November, which would present problems for Liedka and the GOP if he emerges as their nominee. Russo said that he would run an active general election campaign on the Conservative line regardless, unlike Dadey, who Russo said did not actively campaign on the Independence and Conservative lines in 2004.
The primary was sparked, in part, because local Republican county chairs have unable to pick a candidate in the race, announcing in mid-March that they were deadlocked. (Russo won the backing of Onondoga County, which has the highest Republican registration in the district, while Russo took Madison County, which has the second highest registration.)
This local primary is microcosm of a larger trend we've seen among the GOP across the state. New York Republicans are in chaos, unable to field strong challengers from within the party ranks, short on cash and facing primary challengers from the right and left. Indeed, the SRCC appears to be supporting Russo over one of their own purely because of his cash-on-hand advantage over Leidka:
But fearing the consequences of a heated primary in a district they have serious hopes of winning, the Senate Republican Campaign Committee has made no such promises, announcing in mid-May the unusual decision to back Russo in the intra-party struggle. Leadership of the SRCC says that it will be willing to put staffers into the district and recruit elected officials to campaign on Russo’s behalf.
Fundraising was a major factor in the SRCC’s decision: Russo had $96,000 cash on hand as of the January campaign finance filing, while Liedka acknowledges he has raised far less, though he has not made any official financial disclosure.
Meanwhile, both the Ithaca Journal and Democrat and Chronicle published stories examining the difficulties Republicans face due to the large number of retirements. Every week, it seems, brings news of another GOP senate retirement, each of which requires an expenditure of resources to defend previously safe seats and draws the GOP's attention away from top tier races.
Republicans are eagerly hoping they can win back the majority in the state Senate this year, but they unexpectedly face having to defend four seats in which veteran GOP lawmakers are leaving office at year's end.
The four departures complicates Senate Republicans' goal of flipping the tenuous 32-30 seat Democratic majority and regaining control of a chamber the GOP held for more than 40 years before the 2008 elections.
One domino at a time, Republican hopes of recapturing the chamber are fading. While GOP candidates are dropping like flies (or in-fighting like the Lord of the Flies), Democrats are fielding strong challengers in more districts than ever before.
New Yorkers still remember well what 44 years of Republican control of the senate was like. That's why anti-incumbent sentiment is directed strongly at upstate Republicans - holdovers from the reign of Joe Bruno - and why 3/4 of New Yorkers reject Republican control of the Senate.
And that's why 2010 is shaping up to be a good year for Democrats.
Republicans Give Their Own Party a Vote of No Confidence
By Mike Connery on 05/05/2010 @ 10:00 AM
An article in today's New York Times paints a dim picture of Republican prospects up and down the ticket this cycle.
With the Republican State Convention approaching, the party is plagued by infighting, short of money and struggling to assemble a competitive slate of statewide candidates for the fall, leaving many party leaders worried that they are poorly positioned to exploit what might be the most favorable political climate for New York Republicans in years.
At the top of the ticket, the GOP's most viable candidate is all but invisible, eclipsed by Paladino's racist emails, and a media-grabbing challenge by a former Democrat with a history of anti-immigrant rhetoric. High profile candidates have taken a pass at challenging Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, and a Republican has yet to announce for the AG race.
The situation has party leaders and potential candidates all expressing dismay at the state of the party's political bench, all the way down to the State Senate:
“I’m just disappointed at the inability to attract top-level candidates in some of the statewide and Congressional and State Senate races,” said Henry F. Wojtaszek, a former chairman of the Niagara County party who lost a bid for state chairman to Mr. Cox last fall.
...
Elizabeth N. Feld, former mayor of the Westchester village of Larchmont, ran a spirited race in 2008 against the local Democratic state senator, but decided against a rematch this year.
“A lot of Republicans who might have run for office this year said, ‘I don’t have faith in this leadership,’ ” Ms. Feld said.
This is another piece in a string of bad news for Senate Republicans' political prospects. Unmentioned in the piece are the retirements of two Republican Senators - Dale Volker and Vincent Leibell. In both races, it looks as if a bruising primary season is in store for Republican candidates. A recent Quinnipiac Poll showed greater dissatisfaction and anti-incumbent sentiment among Republican base voters than among Democrats, and a NYPIRG study of voter enrollment data showing gains for Democrats in 51 of the Senate's 62 districts.
By contrast, Senate Democrats already have challengers announced in half a dozen races, and will bring the fight to many more Republican incumbents this cycle.
Friday Fun - Republican Conference on Facebook
By Mike Connery on 04/30/2010 @ 05:26 PM
Here's some comic relief for you on a Friday afternoon. With Leibell and Volker both retiring, and bad news from the Q-poll and NYPIRG numbers, it's not a good time to be an incumbent Republican.
Here's a little GOP conference drama playing out over Facebook.
Enjoy your weekend, and don't forget to add us to your RSS reader, or join us on Facebook and Twitter for more updates, analysis, and fun jabs at the NYGOP.
Quick Hits from the Campaign Trail: Another Repub Bites the Dust, Ritchie's Resume
By Mike Connery on 04/30/2010 @ 01:16 PM
The latest news from our conference, candidates, and campaigns.
- The Democratic Rural Conference kicks-off today.
- Dale Volker is retiring. Another Republican bites the dust.
- The Buffalo News likes some of the Democrat's Sunshine reforms.
- José Peralta is demanding that all GOP Gubernatorial candidates declare that they will never impose Arizona-style immigration laws on New York.
- Joe Addabbo is promoting green savings to local businesses and community leaders.
- Is this Patty Ritchie's resume? If so, would you vote for her?
- Eric Adams is promoting veteran friendly campuses.
- Didi Barrett continues to blog at The Albany Project.
- Finally, Greg Ball has . . . well, you know.
The Truth About Budget Extenders
By Mike Connery on 04/27/2010 @ 12:18 PM
Yesterday the Democratic Majority Conference passed another round of budget extenders. The extenders are receiving the lion's share of media attention this morning, so it's worth taking some time to know what exactly is included in the extender, and why Republicans who vote against the extenders are not only hypocritical, but also working against the interests of the public, who rely on the jobs and services the extenders provide.
First, a look at what, exactly, the extender's fund:
- $2.57 billion mandated payments to schools for General Aid Payments not associated with the Executive’s delays of school aid payments.
- $2.5 billion for local providers of the Medical Assistance Program including:
- $1.45 billion for payments to Medicaid providers including:
- $900 million for medical services provided by State facilities operated by OMH, OMRDD and OASAS.
- $311 million for nursing home services.
- $261 million for managed care services.
- $234 million for long term care services.
- $172 million for hospital inpatient services.
- $137 million for pharmacy services
- $67 million for non-institutional and other spending.
- $30 million for outpatient and emergency room services
- $29 million for clinical services
- $12 million for transportation services
- $7 million for dental services
- $40 million for contracts approved prior to April 1, 2010 where payments must be made during the period from April 1, 2010 to May 2, 2010.
- $40 million for contracts approved in the period from April 1, 2010 to May 2, 2010 where payments must be made during the same period.
As is readily apparent, these are all vital services that New Yorkers rely upon, and represent thousands of jobs that are putting food on the table and a roof over the heads of New York families. Those who support this extender are supporting our troopers, guardsmen, corrections officers, nurses, and social service workers who care for our veterans, the homeless, and mentally disabled.
Which leads me to my next topic. Seventeen Republicans voted against the extender: DeFrancisco, Flanagan, Golden, Hannon, O. Johnson, Larkin, Libous, Marcellino, Maziarz, Nozzolio, Ranzenhofer, Seward, Skelos, Volker, Griffo, Winner and Young. Many of these Republicans have been in office for a decade or more. They had no problem voting for budget extenders when they controlled the chamber.
- 2008: 9 days late/ 2 extenders
- 2004: 133 days late/ 12 extenders
- 2003: 42 days late/ 5 extenders
- 2002: 42 days late/ 8 extenders
- 2001: 125 days late/ 12 extenders
- 2000: 39 days late/ 3 extenders
- 1999: 126 days late/ 19 extenders
- 1998: 14 days late/ 4 extenders
- 1997: 126 days late/ 10 extenders
- 1996: 104 days late/ 14 extenders
- 1995: 68 days late/ 10 extenders
Plainly, Republican opposition to the budget extenders isn't about taking a principled stand. It's about showboating for voters and shirking tough decisions. It's playing politics with people's lives and jobs. New Yorkers deserve more.
Poison Party?
By Mike Connery on 04/21/2010 @ 11:10 AM
Helping children is usually about as uncontroversial an issue as you can find in politics. Children are our future. Everyone is for children. Unless you're in the New York GOP.
Yesterday, as part of a package of Earth Day related legislation, the State Senate passed a bill sponsored by Brian Foley that prohibits the use of certain toxic chemicals for pesticide and weed control at schools.
Bill Before New York State Lawmakers Would Ban Use of Pesticides on School Playing Fields
Chemical companies are pressing lawmakers to vote against the bill. They say pesticides are highly regulated and safe to use.
Children are especially susceptible to pesticides because of their small size and still-developing organs, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Rather than a purely chemical approach, the agency recommends schools use Integrated Pest Management, which combines several more organic and less toxic techniques to manage pests and weeds, such as overseeding, mowing grass taller, watering less and applying “compost tea,” a liquefied form of compost.
“Put simply, IPM is a safer, and usually less costly option for effective pest management in a school community,” EPA regulators said.
It's not just safer, though. It could also save schools money in the long term:
Schools would see a slight increase in cost during the first two years of IPM, but after the third year, the price would fall about 25 percent below the costs of chemical lawn treatment, according to a study by Grassroots Environmental Education, a nonprofit public health advocacy group in Nassau County. That group has offered free training to school groundskeepers on ways to care for fields without pesticides.
Keeps kids healthy? Check. Fiscally responsible? Check. So why are 22 GOP Senators opposed to this again?
Would Senate Republicans Prefer a Government Shutdown?
By Mike Connery on 04/20/2010 @ 01:26 PM
Yesterday the State Senate voted to pass budget extenders that will fund the essential functions of government and protect vital services on which millions of New Yorkers depend. The budget extenders allow the state to continue paying our troopers, guardsmen, corrections officers, nurses, and social service workers who care for our veterans, the homeless, and mentally disabled. They provide funds for Medicaid, Social Security, and Unemployment.
Without these extenders, the state cannot function, and New Yorkers already struggling to make ends meet with take yet another hard hit. This is a big deal, with an immediate impact on the lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of the state's residents. So it's worth noting that 16 Republicans - as they have so often since they lost the majority - said 'No' to a functioning government, 'No' to services for their constituents, and 'No' to paying the first responders we rely upon in emergencies by voting against the budget extenders.
Here is the list of Republicans who voted against yesterday's bill. It's a wall of shame if ever there was one:
- John DeFrancisco
- John Flanagan
- Martin Golden
- Joe Griffo
- Kemp Hannon
- William Larkin
- Ken LaValle
- Tom Libous
- Carl Marcellino
- Michael Nozzolio
- Michael Ranzenhofer
- James Seward
- Dean Skelos
- Dale Volker
- George Winner
- Catharine Young
Here's my question. With so many New Yorkers struggling, and the state facing one of the biggest fiscal crises in recent memory, does this gang of 16 really think shutting down parts of the government and letting vital services lapse is a good idea? I wonder if their constituents would agree with their answer.
