Friday, December 01, 2006
State Senate Squeaker Surprise
Stay in contact with Albert Baldeo email: abforstatesenate@aol.com
It struck some Democrats as odd that in such a Democratic year, with top Dems like Eliot Spitzer cruising to victory with money to spare (In their final pre-primary reports, Spitzer/Paterson had about $8 million in the bank, Alan Hevesi $4 million), that more wasn't done to unseat the Republicans in the city. Sen. Marty Golden didn't even draw a challenger. Matthew Titone had half a shot at taking the former John Marchi seat. Nora Marino was considered a credible challenger to Frank Padavan, but entered the race a little late. And no one gave Albert Baldeo, a lawyer and community activist who lost a city council bid in 2005, a chance against Serphin Maltese.
Posted in Campaign 2006 By Jarrett Murphy Newsday
Serph's Up
Friendly Democrats forget muscle, fumble state senate again
by Wayne Barrett November 14th, 2006
Stay in contact with Albert Baldeo email: abforstatesenate@aol.com
Last week we woke up to a New York more Democratic than at any time since 1942, when the party last controlled all six statewide offices. Just eight years ago, Republicans occupied half these once hotly contested posts—governor, lieutenant governor, senator, comptroller, and attorney general—but on Election Day, the GOP was even overwhelmed by a Democrat savaged daily by media and official demands for impeachment. Beyond the near record victory margins for Eliot Spitzer and Hillary Clinton, and the relatively modest triumphs of Alan Hevesi and Andrew Cuomo, the Democrats, incredibly, added three seats to their gluttonous 105-seat majority in the 150-seat assembly. In addition, three upstate and suburban GOP congressional strongholds fell to Democrats.
Yet remarkably, despite this groundswell, virtually nothing changed in that grizzled and white-haired old-men's club called the New York State Senate, which has been controlled by Republicans since 1964. Democrats gained just a single, still-disputed seat, apparently defeating Westchester incumbent Nick Spano, but allowing Republicans to still claim veto power over the Albany agenda through a muscular 34-to-28 senate majority. A tribute to the genius of computerized reapportionment, the GOP senate victory was also a commentary on the calamity of Democratic strategy and resolve, even in a year of historic opportunity. Little of the multimillions spent by the statewide Democratic players trickled down to the troops in the senate trenches, and the compromises that local party leaders have made with their GOP counterparts over the years came back at prime time to haunt the senate effort.
As surprisingly minimal as the shift in the balance of power was, the real shock came from within the boundaries of this very Democratic city, where the dominant party failed to seriously compete for any of the four seats held by incumbent Republicans.
Marty Golden, a mere two-term GOP incumbent from a district in the Bay Ridge section of Brooklyn previously represented by a Democrat, wound up with no opponent at all and strolled toward his office smoking a fat victory cigar at 5 p.m. on Election Day. Democrats nominated a gay attorney, Matt Titone, for an open seat in heavily Catholic Staten Island, taking a 10,000-vote loss and no advantage of the decision by 50-year GOP incumbent John Marchi not to seek re-election. Nora Marino, who challenged Queens Republican Frank Padavan, was an untested lawyer who couldn't win 40 percent of the vote in a district that's almost 70 percent Democratic. Two term-limited Democrats in the City Council, Mike McMahon and Tony Avella, passed on entering either the Staten Island or Queens races, as did assembly incumbents, uninspired by the muted party calls to arms.
But the biggest story in the subterranean senate catastrophe surfaced in another Queens senate district, represented for nearly 18 years by Serph Maltese, who doubles as the chairman of the Queens Republican Party. Maltese barely beat an obscure maverick, Albert Baldeo, who could not even get the Queens Democratic party to designate him a candidate, or even to support him. In half a dozen interviews over the weeks leading up to the election, senate Republicans and Democrats failed to list the two-to-one Democratic seat as even remotely competitive, yet Baldeo came within 783 votes of beating the supposed powerhouse Maltese, garnering almost 49 percent of the vote. Maltese himself was so oblivious to the seriousness of the threat that he spent much of Election Day making cookie runs to campaign volunteers and chatting with a Voice reporter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amid munches on an anaconda-sized sub sandwich at his GOP headquarters, beneath a giant print of Christopher Columbus, Maltese contended that Baldeo was attempting to convince voters that he was Italian. "Since the campaign began, he has never shown up at a single community event," said the 74-year-old incumbent, who also once chaired the county's Conservative Party. "What's the reason? I believe that's because he's very dark and he didn't want the average voter to know he's Guyanese. Even the Italians think he's Italian. My name doesn't sound as Italian as his." Since Baldeo's posters contained no photo of him, Maltese said his wife wanted him to put "Call Missing Persons" on his own leaflets attacking Baldeo. Maltese offered no explanation for why a phony Italian might almost have almost beaten a real one who'd controlled the district for nearly two decades.
The Democratic Senate Campaign Committee spent virtually none of its $2 million war chest on city candidates and barely talked to Baldeo, who proved to be its strongest losing candidate in the state. Baldeo's astonishing near-success is a measure of how strong the Democratic wave was, and how ineffective both the senate and Queens Democratic operations were in recruiting candidates. Baldeo, an immigration lawyer, put himself on the ballot without any party help. Democratic officials distanced themselves from him because he was arrested last year when he ran for City Council, spending a night in jail after he allegedly threatened his opponent's wife with a gun. He and his opponent eventually agreed to drop charges against each other, but party officials wanted nothing to do with him, or to support any alternative.
Early in 2006, City Councilman Joe Addabbo publicly toyed with the notion of running, but senate sources say he got no encouragement from the Queens party brass either. Even now, Baldeo says he's not getting any help from Queens officials in the legal challenge he hopes to mount against the election results, alluding to the possibility that "some truce" involving Maltese and the party exists.
In fact, the free pass for Maltese was a by-product of a non-aggression pact between him and Queens Democratic bosses that dates back decades, to when Tom Manton, the Democratic leader who died earlier this year, was still in Congress. Maltese gave Manton the run of his life in 1984 and then made peace. "He and I were friends," explains Maltese. "We were both Korean War veterans. Two years after the 1984 race, he said, 'You going to go this time?' I said, 'Tom, if you get hit by a truck tomorrow, I am not running for Congress.' Four years after that, I ran for senate. He was happy and I was happy." After Manton became ill, the gang around him was so friendly with Maltese that opposing him remained unimaginable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maltese has also routinely given the Republican line on the ballot to Supreme Court judges handpicked by Manton, though Maltese sometimes fails to cross-endorse blacks or women nominated for the bench by Queens Democrats, as he did this year. Manton and two of his law partners have raked in millions in fees from Queens Surrogate Court, and last year, Maltese did not run a Republican candidate against the surrogate that Manton arranged an initial, 14-year, term for in 1991. Manton and Maltese also manuevered last year to put a Manton-tied judge, Lawrence Cullen, on the Pataki-appointed Court of Claims, while Manton elevated Pataki's counsel to a Queens Supreme Court vacancy.
"Tommy and I cooperated on that," Maltese told the Times' Joyce Purnick in February. "We have a cooperative relationship for the people of Queens. There is nothing improper or unethical about that." In a more recent interview, Maltese freely discussed two other times he and Manton had reached a judicial agreement. The arrangement did mean, however, that until Baldeo, no Democrat had run against Maltese in 12 years. One senate leader recalls Manton telling him Maltese was "a friend" when he approached the resistant party boss about fielding a candidate against him.
Baldeo's near-win may end the arrangement, however. Addabbo said in a pre-election interview that he would be watching how Baldeo did, predicting that his numbers might be "very interesting." Saying that 2006 wasn't "the right time" for him, Addabbo added: "I suspect things might be different a couple years from now." A recent federal court decision eliminating the judicial nominating conventions that have allowed party leaders to jointly handpick Supreme Court judges has ended the prime rationale for this relationship. Malcolm Smith, a Queens state senator, has been unofficially selected as the new minority leader, and will replace lieutenant governor designee David Paterson in January, making it in the interests of the county party to take both Republican seats.
Mike Reich, the party's executive secretary and a law partner of Manton's, expressed confidence on Election Day that Addabbo and Avella, who's created a committee for a 2009 mayoral candidacy, would run for senate in 2008, potentially giving Smith two of the three new seats he'd need to control the senate. The new county leader, Manton protégé Joe Crowley, who also took over Manton's congressional seat, says he's committed to making Smith majority leader and is salivating for 2008. "I have a relationship with Serph and I respect him," says Crowley. "We both have jobs to do." Smith is an active alumnus of Christ the King, a Queens Catholic high school whose board Maltese chairs, and is also friendly with the likable senator. But he is unlikely to be able to figure out a way to win the senate without finishing the job Baldeo has begun.
Arrangements similar to Maltese and Manton's prevented a race in Brooklyn, where one party leader said that Golden made it a point to help Democratic senators on reapportionment and "member item" grants to their districts. Democrats like Senator Carl Kruger and Assemblyman Peter Abate, whose districts intertwine with Golden's, are seen as so cozy with him they discourage competition, as does Brooklyn Democratic boss Vito Lopez, whose GOP ties are legion.
In Staten Island, McMahon, perhaps Richmond county's most popular Democrat, is biding his time for a run for borough president in 2009. By staying out of the senate race, he may have cemented his ties with the island's powerful Conservative Party, whose leader, Jim Molinaro, the current borough president, had his own candidate in the race early on. McMahon calls any suggestion of a deal an "unfounded rumor," but he has run with Conservative Party support in the past, and both he and term-limited Molinaro have to give up their current posts in 2009. He says that running with the party's backing three years from now "is certainly something any candidate would consider."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Faced with these obstacles in the city, Eric Schneiderman and Liz Krueger, the two Manhattan state senators who ran this year's campaign, focused their resources on protecting Syracuse incumbent David Valesky and taking another shot at Spano, who beat repeat challenger Andrea Stewart-Cousins by 18 votes two years ago. Schneiderman invoked Stewart-Cousins's 2,000-vote win as justification for their strategic choices, though the committee may have overspent in Syracuse, where Valesky coasted to a 19-point triumph. The committee invested next to nothing, for example, in the campaigns of Suffolk County aide Jimmy Dahroug, who got 45 percent of the vote against 80-year-old Caesar Trunzo, or Susan Zimet, an Ulster County legislator pitted against the lackluster John Bonacic, though both were regarded as competitive races.
In fact, Eliot Spitzer was the biggest outside booster of the underfunded Senate Dems, and he will arrive in Albany in January having incurred the wrath of Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno. He dispatched a campaign aide to work full-time for Zimet, wrote sizable checks to several campaigns, hosted fundraisers for the senate committee, and made repeated appearances on behalf of senate candidates. Spitzer even used his own consultants to cut television commercials featuring him for Stewart-Cousins and Brooke Ellison, a 28-year-old quadriplegic Harvard grad who mounted a stem-cell-based, losing campaign against an entrenched incumbent on Long Island. Spitzer will also have more leverage over Bruno than the outgoing Pataki, fueled both by the size of his mandate and the real prospect that, should he decide to lead the charge for senate Democrats in 2008, the GOP might lose its last bastion of power.
Schneiderman, who lost to Smith in the fight to succeed Paterson as minority leader, insists that "this was a very good year for us." He refuses to comment on the reluctance of local leaders like Manton and McMahon to join the battle and sees the Democratic strategy as incremental. "Every seat we win," Schneiderman argues, "it's that much easier to win the next seat. We deserve an A." Schneiderman says there are seven or eight Republican seats where Democrats "have an enrollment advantage or close to it," and he expects that in a high-turnout presidential year, they will finally take the majority. But in an interview before the election, one consultant tied to some senate Democrats called it "a treasonable offense," contending that "the lack of preparation for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity is the biggest waste I can think of in the last 20 years."
Albert Baldeo proved his point.
It struck some Democrats as odd that in such a Democratic year, with top Dems like Eliot Spitzer cruising to victory with money to spare (In their final pre-primary reports, Spitzer/Paterson had about $8 million in the bank, Alan Hevesi $4 million), that more wasn't done to unseat the Republicans in the city. Sen. Marty Golden didn't even draw a challenger. Matthew Titone had half a shot at taking the former John Marchi seat. Nora Marino was considered a credible challenger to Frank Padavan, but entered the race a little late. And no one gave Albert Baldeo, a lawyer and community activist who lost a city council bid in 2005, a chance against Serphin Maltese.
Posted in Campaign 2006 By Jarrett Murphy Newsday
Serph's Up
Friendly Democrats forget muscle, fumble state senate again
by Wayne Barrett November 14th, 2006
Stay in contact with Albert Baldeo email: abforstatesenate@aol.com
Last week we woke up to a New York more Democratic than at any time since 1942, when the party last controlled all six statewide offices. Just eight years ago, Republicans occupied half these once hotly contested posts—governor, lieutenant governor, senator, comptroller, and attorney general—but on Election Day, the GOP was even overwhelmed by a Democrat savaged daily by media and official demands for impeachment. Beyond the near record victory margins for Eliot Spitzer and Hillary Clinton, and the relatively modest triumphs of Alan Hevesi and Andrew Cuomo, the Democrats, incredibly, added three seats to their gluttonous 105-seat majority in the 150-seat assembly. In addition, three upstate and suburban GOP congressional strongholds fell to Democrats.
Yet remarkably, despite this groundswell, virtually nothing changed in that grizzled and white-haired old-men's club called the New York State Senate, which has been controlled by Republicans since 1964. Democrats gained just a single, still-disputed seat, apparently defeating Westchester incumbent Nick Spano, but allowing Republicans to still claim veto power over the Albany agenda through a muscular 34-to-28 senate majority. A tribute to the genius of computerized reapportionment, the GOP senate victory was also a commentary on the calamity of Democratic strategy and resolve, even in a year of historic opportunity. Little of the multimillions spent by the statewide Democratic players trickled down to the troops in the senate trenches, and the compromises that local party leaders have made with their GOP counterparts over the years came back at prime time to haunt the senate effort.
As surprisingly minimal as the shift in the balance of power was, the real shock came from within the boundaries of this very Democratic city, where the dominant party failed to seriously compete for any of the four seats held by incumbent Republicans.
Marty Golden, a mere two-term GOP incumbent from a district in the Bay Ridge section of Brooklyn previously represented by a Democrat, wound up with no opponent at all and strolled toward his office smoking a fat victory cigar at 5 p.m. on Election Day. Democrats nominated a gay attorney, Matt Titone, for an open seat in heavily Catholic Staten Island, taking a 10,000-vote loss and no advantage of the decision by 50-year GOP incumbent John Marchi not to seek re-election. Nora Marino, who challenged Queens Republican Frank Padavan, was an untested lawyer who couldn't win 40 percent of the vote in a district that's almost 70 percent Democratic. Two term-limited Democrats in the City Council, Mike McMahon and Tony Avella, passed on entering either the Staten Island or Queens races, as did assembly incumbents, uninspired by the muted party calls to arms.
But the biggest story in the subterranean senate catastrophe surfaced in another Queens senate district, represented for nearly 18 years by Serph Maltese, who doubles as the chairman of the Queens Republican Party. Maltese barely beat an obscure maverick, Albert Baldeo, who could not even get the Queens Democratic party to designate him a candidate, or even to support him. In half a dozen interviews over the weeks leading up to the election, senate Republicans and Democrats failed to list the two-to-one Democratic seat as even remotely competitive, yet Baldeo came within 783 votes of beating the supposed powerhouse Maltese, garnering almost 49 percent of the vote. Maltese himself was so oblivious to the seriousness of the threat that he spent much of Election Day making cookie runs to campaign volunteers and chatting with a Voice reporter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amid munches on an anaconda-sized sub sandwich at his GOP headquarters, beneath a giant print of Christopher Columbus, Maltese contended that Baldeo was attempting to convince voters that he was Italian. "Since the campaign began, he has never shown up at a single community event," said the 74-year-old incumbent, who also once chaired the county's Conservative Party. "What's the reason? I believe that's because he's very dark and he didn't want the average voter to know he's Guyanese. Even the Italians think he's Italian. My name doesn't sound as Italian as his." Since Baldeo's posters contained no photo of him, Maltese said his wife wanted him to put "Call Missing Persons" on his own leaflets attacking Baldeo. Maltese offered no explanation for why a phony Italian might almost have almost beaten a real one who'd controlled the district for nearly two decades.
The Democratic Senate Campaign Committee spent virtually none of its $2 million war chest on city candidates and barely talked to Baldeo, who proved to be its strongest losing candidate in the state. Baldeo's astonishing near-success is a measure of how strong the Democratic wave was, and how ineffective both the senate and Queens Democratic operations were in recruiting candidates. Baldeo, an immigration lawyer, put himself on the ballot without any party help. Democratic officials distanced themselves from him because he was arrested last year when he ran for City Council, spending a night in jail after he allegedly threatened his opponent's wife with a gun. He and his opponent eventually agreed to drop charges against each other, but party officials wanted nothing to do with him, or to support any alternative.
Early in 2006, City Councilman Joe Addabbo publicly toyed with the notion of running, but senate sources say he got no encouragement from the Queens party brass either. Even now, Baldeo says he's not getting any help from Queens officials in the legal challenge he hopes to mount against the election results, alluding to the possibility that "some truce" involving Maltese and the party exists.
In fact, the free pass for Maltese was a by-product of a non-aggression pact between him and Queens Democratic bosses that dates back decades, to when Tom Manton, the Democratic leader who died earlier this year, was still in Congress. Maltese gave Manton the run of his life in 1984 and then made peace. "He and I were friends," explains Maltese. "We were both Korean War veterans. Two years after the 1984 race, he said, 'You going to go this time?' I said, 'Tom, if you get hit by a truck tomorrow, I am not running for Congress.' Four years after that, I ran for senate. He was happy and I was happy." After Manton became ill, the gang around him was so friendly with Maltese that opposing him remained unimaginable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maltese has also routinely given the Republican line on the ballot to Supreme Court judges handpicked by Manton, though Maltese sometimes fails to cross-endorse blacks or women nominated for the bench by Queens Democrats, as he did this year. Manton and two of his law partners have raked in millions in fees from Queens Surrogate Court, and last year, Maltese did not run a Republican candidate against the surrogate that Manton arranged an initial, 14-year, term for in 1991. Manton and Maltese also manuevered last year to put a Manton-tied judge, Lawrence Cullen, on the Pataki-appointed Court of Claims, while Manton elevated Pataki's counsel to a Queens Supreme Court vacancy.
"Tommy and I cooperated on that," Maltese told the Times' Joyce Purnick in February. "We have a cooperative relationship for the people of Queens. There is nothing improper or unethical about that." In a more recent interview, Maltese freely discussed two other times he and Manton had reached a judicial agreement. The arrangement did mean, however, that until Baldeo, no Democrat had run against Maltese in 12 years. One senate leader recalls Manton telling him Maltese was "a friend" when he approached the resistant party boss about fielding a candidate against him.
Baldeo's near-win may end the arrangement, however. Addabbo said in a pre-election interview that he would be watching how Baldeo did, predicting that his numbers might be "very interesting." Saying that 2006 wasn't "the right time" for him, Addabbo added: "I suspect things might be different a couple years from now." A recent federal court decision eliminating the judicial nominating conventions that have allowed party leaders to jointly handpick Supreme Court judges has ended the prime rationale for this relationship. Malcolm Smith, a Queens state senator, has been unofficially selected as the new minority leader, and will replace lieutenant governor designee David Paterson in January, making it in the interests of the county party to take both Republican seats.
Mike Reich, the party's executive secretary and a law partner of Manton's, expressed confidence on Election Day that Addabbo and Avella, who's created a committee for a 2009 mayoral candidacy, would run for senate in 2008, potentially giving Smith two of the three new seats he'd need to control the senate. The new county leader, Manton protégé Joe Crowley, who also took over Manton's congressional seat, says he's committed to making Smith majority leader and is salivating for 2008. "I have a relationship with Serph and I respect him," says Crowley. "We both have jobs to do." Smith is an active alumnus of Christ the King, a Queens Catholic high school whose board Maltese chairs, and is also friendly with the likable senator. But he is unlikely to be able to figure out a way to win the senate without finishing the job Baldeo has begun.
Arrangements similar to Maltese and Manton's prevented a race in Brooklyn, where one party leader said that Golden made it a point to help Democratic senators on reapportionment and "member item" grants to their districts. Democrats like Senator Carl Kruger and Assemblyman Peter Abate, whose districts intertwine with Golden's, are seen as so cozy with him they discourage competition, as does Brooklyn Democratic boss Vito Lopez, whose GOP ties are legion.
In Staten Island, McMahon, perhaps Richmond county's most popular Democrat, is biding his time for a run for borough president in 2009. By staying out of the senate race, he may have cemented his ties with the island's powerful Conservative Party, whose leader, Jim Molinaro, the current borough president, had his own candidate in the race early on. McMahon calls any suggestion of a deal an "unfounded rumor," but he has run with Conservative Party support in the past, and both he and term-limited Molinaro have to give up their current posts in 2009. He says that running with the party's backing three years from now "is certainly something any candidate would consider."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Faced with these obstacles in the city, Eric Schneiderman and Liz Krueger, the two Manhattan state senators who ran this year's campaign, focused their resources on protecting Syracuse incumbent David Valesky and taking another shot at Spano, who beat repeat challenger Andrea Stewart-Cousins by 18 votes two years ago. Schneiderman invoked Stewart-Cousins's 2,000-vote win as justification for their strategic choices, though the committee may have overspent in Syracuse, where Valesky coasted to a 19-point triumph. The committee invested next to nothing, for example, in the campaigns of Suffolk County aide Jimmy Dahroug, who got 45 percent of the vote against 80-year-old Caesar Trunzo, or Susan Zimet, an Ulster County legislator pitted against the lackluster John Bonacic, though both were regarded as competitive races.
In fact, Eliot Spitzer was the biggest outside booster of the underfunded Senate Dems, and he will arrive in Albany in January having incurred the wrath of Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno. He dispatched a campaign aide to work full-time for Zimet, wrote sizable checks to several campaigns, hosted fundraisers for the senate committee, and made repeated appearances on behalf of senate candidates. Spitzer even used his own consultants to cut television commercials featuring him for Stewart-Cousins and Brooke Ellison, a 28-year-old quadriplegic Harvard grad who mounted a stem-cell-based, losing campaign against an entrenched incumbent on Long Island. Spitzer will also have more leverage over Bruno than the outgoing Pataki, fueled both by the size of his mandate and the real prospect that, should he decide to lead the charge for senate Democrats in 2008, the GOP might lose its last bastion of power.
Schneiderman, who lost to Smith in the fight to succeed Paterson as minority leader, insists that "this was a very good year for us." He refuses to comment on the reluctance of local leaders like Manton and McMahon to join the battle and sees the Democratic strategy as incremental. "Every seat we win," Schneiderman argues, "it's that much easier to win the next seat. We deserve an A." Schneiderman says there are seven or eight Republican seats where Democrats "have an enrollment advantage or close to it," and he expects that in a high-turnout presidential year, they will finally take the majority. But in an interview before the election, one consultant tied to some senate Democrats called it "a treasonable offense," contending that "the lack of preparation for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity is the biggest waste I can think of in the last 20 years."
Albert Baldeo proved his point.
Who "Lost" the State Senate?
Stay in contact with Albert Baldeo email: abforstatesenate@aol.com
If there's a blame game to be played, even this year, Democrats will be playing it, and the local obsession is who to blame for the pickup of "merely" a single seat in the New York State Senate in an election that saw apparently safe Congressional Republicans lose and saw the top of the ticket pull nearly three quarters of the vote.
So writers from Jerome Armstrong (who blames Spitzer} to Wayne Barrett (who blames compromised county Democratic leaders) have been trying to figure out what went wrong. Here are five versions. Feel free to pick the combination you think is right, or add your own.
1) Stop complaining. This was a great, historic year, the first year of consecutive Democratic wins in the State Senate in living memory. They've picked up four seats in two cycles. Now they're poised to take the body over, with Spitzer's help, in 2008. And this while Senate Democrats face unusually long odds: big labor backs the GOP, as does huge special interest money. So do many liberal advocacy groups. Mike Bloomberg wrote a huge check in the final days. Meanwhile, other institutional Democrats consider the State Senate a stepchild.
2)Blame the county leaders: In Queens, Brooklyn, and elsewhere in the state, potentially vulnerable Republicans ran unopposed or faced weak opposition. A little-known Queens Democrat, Al Baldeo, with the help of maverick consultant Gary Tilzer, nearly beat Serphin Maltese, the county Republican leader. Two potentially vulnerable Republicans, Marty Golden and Frank Padavan*, ran unopposed. The Democrats ran a real, if second-tier candidate for an open seat on Staten Island, but didn't focus on it. But, returning to Queens, this is really all about Queens, where the Democratic Party has long been a profit-making, courthouse based institution, and has long cooperated with Republicans for mutual gain. Wayne Barrett lays this one out in detail.
3)Blame David Paterson: Paterson led an unprecedented 3 pickups in 2004, but he quickly lost the staff -- people close to his ally and sometime rival Eric Schneiderman -- who led that effort. He didn't recruit strong candidates for many seats, or any candidates at all for some of them -- whether or not county leaders objected. He didn't raise money early, though once he became Spitzer's running mate, and Spitzer got interested in the Senate, the money came in. And his decision to focus on only two seats -- while Democrats mounted strong congressional campaigns in a half dozen, mostly longer-shot districts -- is being questioned in retrospect. Almost a year ago, I was told by surprised potential donors that Paterson had told them candidly that Democrats wouldn't retake the Senate, which didn't really encourage giving.
4)Blame internal politics: Paterson's selection early this year as Lieutenant Governor brought Eliot Spitzer on board, but also proved distracting. The dynamic of the race to replace Paterson didn't help, as the DSCC chair, Liz Krueger, lined up behind Schneiderman and Paterson tacitly backed Malcolm Smith.
5)Blame Eliot Spitzer. That's what MyDD's Jerome Armstrong did. As MIk Moore explained, it makes little sense. He arrived late to the game and, once he got there, raised more money for Senate Dems than anyone else.
The central question, no matter who you blame, is recruitment. Two years ago, Rahm Emmanuel recruited some very good candidates for apparently unwinnable seats. Some of those seats became winnable, and Democrats were there to take advantage of the trend. That didn't happen in the State Senate.
On the other hand, as Eric Schneiderman argued to me today, four years of Paterson's leadership have the Democrats within striking distance. That's new and big. They've conquered the notion that their situation is permanently hopeless, and the heightened expectations are, in a way, of their own making.
And stay tuned. Says one consultant: "Three seats left in 2008 is totally within striking distance. And if Eliot is popular and decides to expend capital to build a majority, he can close the deal by overwhelming the traditional money imbalances and muscling county leaders. If Eliot decides it makes sense, he'll do it - regardless of the Senate Democratic Conference circular firing squad."
CORRECTION: The "deal" between Queens Republicans and Democrats doesn't apply to the wing of the GOP Padavan leads, and he did get a challenge, though not the strongest one imaginable.
Posted by Ben Smith at November 15, 2006 03:25 PM
Comments
Blame the elected Democrats in the State Senate as they could have better funded and supported the very good candidates that were out there or even the poor candidates who were running versus weak Republicans or for open seats.
After all how much money went into the race in Queens or the race in Staten Island? How many electeds pushed unions to endorse the Democrat in these races? How many of these incumbents who ran unopposed worked hard for these candidates?
The one lesson that Democrats learned nationally that state Democrats have not is if the person who has the party's nomination outright or through a primary was not YOUR personal first-choice you support them to the fullest extent possible regardless. This is how Tester and Webb won their Senate seats and how many people won congressional seats even in NY.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 03:40 PM
Why not blame the horrifically gerrymandered districts? Democratic Senate candidates look to have gotten twice as many votes as Republican ones, but due to beauties like the 51st SD are still a few seats out.
Posted by: BBill at November 15, 2006 03:48 PM
There were a whole lot of uncontested incumbent Democrats this year from the NYC area. What help did some of these Senate Democrats give to the challengers? Everywhere I went it seemed to be the same 3-4 people carrying the entire work load.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 03:53 PM
Frank Padavan did have a Democratic opponent.
Posted by: Jerry Skurnik at November 15, 2006 04:24 PM
Don't you understand what happened here? Spitzer and the Dems neglected the state senate on purpose! It was a tactical decision. Spitzer is going to ride in on a white horse and try to be the good guy and make lots of changes right away. A good guy needs bad guys. Spitzer needed the GOP to maintain control of the Senate so he can have Joe Bruno as his foil for the next two years. Otherwise who would Eliot blame if he can't do all the things he's promised to do?
Also in two years will be a presidential election, and the prevailing wisdom is that democrats challenging incumbent republicans will have their best chance when they have the higher turnout for a presidential election, and the coattails of a democratic presidential candidate at the top of the ticket.
It was all strategy. There is noone to blame. They didn't want the Senate. Yet.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 04:32 PM
You know, you got to hand it to Tilzer. Beneath all that mess is a truly political genius. He was the brains behind the Judge Lopez-Torres win.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 04:44 PM
(The central question, no matter who you blame, is recruitment.)
Since when to the political parties recruit candidates against incumbents? The just want the incumbents (of either party) to stay and keep the seat safe from the public, until it is vacant and their relatives or staff member can take over. Such careerists do not run races they are likely to lose. Only people who believe in something do, and such people are trouble.
Posted by: Cranky Independent at November 15, 2006 05:06 PM
Hi 4:32 pm
Interesting analysis and theory, but it is just not correct, unless you are in the Democratic Inner Circle and know something we plebes do not. I was with a leading Democratic State elected official on election night, and that pol was not pleased at the result.
As for the subsequent post and nonsensical statement at 5:06:
"Since when to the political parties recruit candidates against incumbents? ...."
WHO IS THIS NUT & HOW DO PEOPLE GET SO TWISTED?
Posted by: Dem Boy at November 15, 2006 05:27 PM
Maltese may not run in 2008, opening the door to City Councilman Gallagher to run with Rep and Cons endorsements.
Posted by: Nassau Nell at November 15, 2006 06:38 PM
Maltese may not run in 2009, opening the door to City Councilman Gallagher to run with Rep and Cons endorsements.
Posted by: Nassau Nell at November 15, 2006 06:38 PM
Maltese may not run in 2008, opening the door to City Councilman Gallagher to run with Rep and Cons endorsements.
Posted by: Nassau Nell at November 15, 2006 06:38 PM
As I've stated before (see,http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/missed_opportunity.htmlon 11/8/06), there is enough blame for everyone to take a piece. I think I've been quite vocal about this earlier and more often than most.
I outlined theory number #3 in all its gory details on MAY 10, 2006. See: http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/settling_for_the_steak_knives.html.
#4 is just a subset of #3; if Paterson had done what Spitzer had asked, and stepped down as leader early on, internal politics would have been resolved well before the election.
I outlined #2 in my pre-general election Voters Guide (http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/gatemouths_general_election_voter_s_guide.html, 11/6/06), but in a way, its just a subset of the Albany malaise outlined here: http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/albany_primer_why_does_nyc_get_screwed_at_budget_time.html(4/29/06). For its own reasons, the Assembly has little interest in a Democratic Senate; many County leaders are Assembly members, others depend upon the Assembly Democrats to provide them essential support. In Brooklyn, local Dems are bragging about how their decision to prevent an opponent for Marty Golden allowed the Democrats to pick up one more Assembly seat, bringing Shelly Silver's veto proof majority up to a superfluous 108 out of 150.
The ability of the entire Senate Democratic Conference(with a few exceptions) to repeat theory #1 over and over again as a mantra before the election is proof positive that Paterson is not solely to blame for his conference's lame performance. They knew they'd fucked up, and they had their excuse in place. The near victory of Baldeo is their worst nightmare. The use of their lame mantra cost them big. In 2000, the Senate Dems might have bitten off more than they could chew, but they put their money where their mouth was. Every conference member signed as personal guarantuer for a large pre-election loan. The lack of a similar commitment this year surely sent a message to others that commitment was lacking, so why bother helping. 2006 was a once every thirty years landslide not seen since 1974, which, as I outlined (http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/settling_for_the_steak_knives.html.) was also blown by the Senate Dems while their leadership was in flux. The excuse that they are waiting for 2008 is just that; presidential years have not always been such unequivocal successes for Senate Dems. The iron was hot this year, but no one struck. the opportunity may not recur.
As to reason #5, it is mostly unfair but not entirely so. The decision by Spitzer (and Hilary and Hevesi)to accept the Independence line, which was endorsing every Senate Republican candidate who either had a semblance of a chance or had a semblance of a challenge, was near unforgiveable. This IP's survial was on the line; they needed Spitzer as their candidate in order to survive. He had real leverage, he failed to use it, and he thusly contributed to Republican Senate margins. He could also have exerted some pressure on WFP to toe the line (though WFP deserves a numbered paragraph all its own).
But Spitzer also showed real balls. Despite threats from Joe Bruno he campaigned with threatened Democratic incumbent Valesky, and Democratic challengers like Stewart-Cousins and Ellison. Contrast Spitzer to Mario Cuomo who practically endorsed Senate Republicans. It is rumored that Spitzer may have helped, or offered help, in other ways as well. Could he have done more? Sure. Has anyone else in a comparable position ever done even half as much. No way!
In this sorry tale, Eliot Spitzer stands as a hero, albeit an imperfect one, yet practically the only imperfect hero we had.
Posted by: Gatemouth at November 15, 2006 06:44 PM
Another good read on Queens politics, or try this, a slightly shorter version of the same article, published in the New York Press.
Note the explanation give by State Senator and County GOP Chair Serphin Maltese in the first (longer) version of the article as one of the reasons they did not do more to back Stu Mirsky's candidacy against a local Democratic incumbent: “. . . the main club backing Mirsky had been very antagonistic toward the county leadership, but I think we have it worked out and have absolute unity now.”
As President and one of the founders of the Rockaway Republicans, I can say definitively that we were NOT "antagonistic" towards the County leadership when we began and only ended up at odds with them because of the way they reacted to our efforts to revive a Republican presence in our area. In fact, we reached out to the County organization repeatedly for help in getting started though they ignored us for nearly a year before we finally managed to get their attention. When we did, they played "hard to get." Instead of welcoming us into the fold, they threw up hurdles.
Apparently the fact that the Rockaway Republicans organized and chose to hold two parties for Bush in 2004, at which a combined 250 people turned out, made us, in County Chair Maltese's mind, "antagonistic." That a newly forming Republican club should have found itself caught up in an internal squabble between a County Chair and two district leaders who were feuding at the time (and still are), with neither having a clue as to whose side the Rockaway Republicans were on (actually we weren't on anyone's side but the President's) is incredible.
Our only goal in forming the Rockaway Republicans was to bring a Republican presence to our peninsula where none had existed before and which the County organization had all but ceded to the Democrats. The difficulties we faced and which continued to plague us for close to three years were hard to understand, considering we were a group of folks who, within their second year, ran thirty-one members for county committee seats (twenty-eight were elected) and held a Republican summit to unify and revitalize the party, in which some 120 leaders and activists from all over the city participated.
The relentless local newspaper articles detailing our plight, and our outreach to other clubs, probably forced County to ultimately give us a state charter, something we had been begging for since we started. If our desire to share our Republican principles with our neighbors made us "antagonistic," then that says much about the current Republican leadership.
Tom Lynch, President of the Rockaway Republicans
From Crain's New York Business
Paterson defends Dems’ Senate showing
State Senate Democratic Leader David Paterson argues that given Republican fund-raising advantages, it was a “great victory” for Democrats to gain one chamber seat, even in the context of Democratic landslides in statewide races and takeovers of statehouses across the country. He says Senate Democrats were outspent 4 to 1 by an entrenched Republican majority, yet ousted the third-most-powerful GOP senator, Nick Spano in Westchester, and came within 1,000 votes of defeating Serf Maltese in Queens.
But some say Mr. Paterson is to blame for not defeating Mr. Maltese. He provided no help to Mr. Maltese’s Democratic opponent, Albert Baldeo, who raised much of his $104,000 from family members and the South Asian community. Mr. Maltese raised $283,000, and state Senate Republicans paid for his literature mailings, says Mr. Baldeo’s campaign manager, Gary Tilzer.
Close race, new chase
With recent surprise in State Senate contest, Dems now eye 2008 in an effort to unseat 18-year incumbent
Close race, new chase
With recent surprise in State Senate contest, Dems now eye 2008 in an effort to unseat 18-year incumbent - Newsday, November 29, 2006
Three weeks after a veteran figure in Queens politics nearly lost a Senate seat, the surprise close call is still reverberating in the borough - and possibly re-shaping the local electoral agenda for 2008.
According to the tentative tallies, state Sen. Serphin Maltese, an 18-year Republican incumbent and longtime conservative activist, held his 15th district seat by a mere 783 votes against Democratic challenger Albert Baldeo.
Baldeo, 46, an attorney, nearly pulled off the upset against Maltese - the Queens Republican chairman - without party support, defying insiders' expectations.
"There is no one in the world who can say to me that we should have known there was a vulnerability here," said Rep. Joseph Crowley, the new Queens Democratic chairman. "There was nothing to indicate that - absolutely nothing," Crowley said.
After the vote, Maltese, 73, who is of Italian ancestry, made an unusual claim - that Baldeo, a Guyanese immigrant of Indian ancestry, may have benefited from leading voters to believe that he too is of Italian background.
Maltese said he wasn't certain for a while because Baldeo was often not seen around the district, which stretches from Middle Village to Howard Beach, and has a sizeable Italian-American population. Maltese didn't deny he pointed out his Italian ancestry to potential voters.
"After we saw his Web site, we realized he was Guyanese," Maltese said of Baldeo during a telephone interview from Florida, where he's on vacation. "There's no doubt he's not Italian but the fact is, with his name, the average voter could very well say he was Italian."
Maltese did not say precisely how he thought Baldeo was misleading voters about his ethnicity - a charge Maltese earlier made in a Village Voice story and which Baldeo vehemently denied.
"He's so racially motivated to make these remarks, he shouldn't even be a state senator," Baldeo said. He accused Maltese of ignoring the needs of immigrants in the district, which he called a motive for his challenge and a reason he came so close.
Maltese got 17,122 votes, or 51.2 percent, to Baldeo's 16,339 votes, or 48.8 percent, according to still-unofficial tallies to be certified by the state Board of Elections.
While Baldeo's race was ignored by Democratic leaders before the election, he was given legal help and other assistance during the vote-certification process by Democratic leaders - who are already talking about 2008, when the seat is up again. Who will get the more-valued nomination next time is in question.
As a candidate, Baldeo had his share of problems. Last year, he spent a night in jail after he was accused of pulling a gun on the wife of an opponent when he ran for City Council. The charges have been dropped, but some Democrats have kept their distance.
And at least one other Democrat, City Councilman Joseph Addabbo of Far Rockaway, who'd been rumored for a possible candidacy this year, is leaning toward running in two years.
For the moment, some observers see the Democrats as having already blown a big chance.
"They were so focused on the statewide races and they built up these huge margins, they squandered this huge opportunity for a Democrat to unseat a dinosaur," said Doug Muzzio, a political science professor at Brooklyn College.
If there's a blame game to be played, even this year, Democrats will be playing it, and the local obsession is who to blame for the pickup of "merely" a single seat in the New York State Senate in an election that saw apparently safe Congressional Republicans lose and saw the top of the ticket pull nearly three quarters of the vote.
So writers from Jerome Armstrong (who blames Spitzer} to Wayne Barrett (who blames compromised county Democratic leaders) have been trying to figure out what went wrong. Here are five versions. Feel free to pick the combination you think is right, or add your own.
1) Stop complaining. This was a great, historic year, the first year of consecutive Democratic wins in the State Senate in living memory. They've picked up four seats in two cycles. Now they're poised to take the body over, with Spitzer's help, in 2008. And this while Senate Democrats face unusually long odds: big labor backs the GOP, as does huge special interest money. So do many liberal advocacy groups. Mike Bloomberg wrote a huge check in the final days. Meanwhile, other institutional Democrats consider the State Senate a stepchild.
2)Blame the county leaders: In Queens, Brooklyn, and elsewhere in the state, potentially vulnerable Republicans ran unopposed or faced weak opposition. A little-known Queens Democrat, Al Baldeo, with the help of maverick consultant Gary Tilzer, nearly beat Serphin Maltese, the county Republican leader. Two potentially vulnerable Republicans, Marty Golden and Frank Padavan*, ran unopposed. The Democrats ran a real, if second-tier candidate for an open seat on Staten Island, but didn't focus on it. But, returning to Queens, this is really all about Queens, where the Democratic Party has long been a profit-making, courthouse based institution, and has long cooperated with Republicans for mutual gain. Wayne Barrett lays this one out in detail.
3)Blame David Paterson: Paterson led an unprecedented 3 pickups in 2004, but he quickly lost the staff -- people close to his ally and sometime rival Eric Schneiderman -- who led that effort. He didn't recruit strong candidates for many seats, or any candidates at all for some of them -- whether or not county leaders objected. He didn't raise money early, though once he became Spitzer's running mate, and Spitzer got interested in the Senate, the money came in. And his decision to focus on only two seats -- while Democrats mounted strong congressional campaigns in a half dozen, mostly longer-shot districts -- is being questioned in retrospect. Almost a year ago, I was told by surprised potential donors that Paterson had told them candidly that Democrats wouldn't retake the Senate, which didn't really encourage giving.
4)Blame internal politics: Paterson's selection early this year as Lieutenant Governor brought Eliot Spitzer on board, but also proved distracting. The dynamic of the race to replace Paterson didn't help, as the DSCC chair, Liz Krueger, lined up behind Schneiderman and Paterson tacitly backed Malcolm Smith.
5)Blame Eliot Spitzer. That's what MyDD's Jerome Armstrong did. As MIk Moore explained, it makes little sense. He arrived late to the game and, once he got there, raised more money for Senate Dems than anyone else.
The central question, no matter who you blame, is recruitment. Two years ago, Rahm Emmanuel recruited some very good candidates for apparently unwinnable seats. Some of those seats became winnable, and Democrats were there to take advantage of the trend. That didn't happen in the State Senate.
On the other hand, as Eric Schneiderman argued to me today, four years of Paterson's leadership have the Democrats within striking distance. That's new and big. They've conquered the notion that their situation is permanently hopeless, and the heightened expectations are, in a way, of their own making.
And stay tuned. Says one consultant: "Three seats left in 2008 is totally within striking distance. And if Eliot is popular and decides to expend capital to build a majority, he can close the deal by overwhelming the traditional money imbalances and muscling county leaders. If Eliot decides it makes sense, he'll do it - regardless of the Senate Democratic Conference circular firing squad."
CORRECTION: The "deal" between Queens Republicans and Democrats doesn't apply to the wing of the GOP Padavan leads, and he did get a challenge, though not the strongest one imaginable.
Posted by Ben Smith at November 15, 2006 03:25 PM
Comments
Blame the elected Democrats in the State Senate as they could have better funded and supported the very good candidates that were out there or even the poor candidates who were running versus weak Republicans or for open seats.
After all how much money went into the race in Queens or the race in Staten Island? How many electeds pushed unions to endorse the Democrat in these races? How many of these incumbents who ran unopposed worked hard for these candidates?
The one lesson that Democrats learned nationally that state Democrats have not is if the person who has the party's nomination outright or through a primary was not YOUR personal first-choice you support them to the fullest extent possible regardless. This is how Tester and Webb won their Senate seats and how many people won congressional seats even in NY.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 03:40 PM
Why not blame the horrifically gerrymandered districts? Democratic Senate candidates look to have gotten twice as many votes as Republican ones, but due to beauties like the 51st SD are still a few seats out.
Posted by: BBill at November 15, 2006 03:48 PM
There were a whole lot of uncontested incumbent Democrats this year from the NYC area. What help did some of these Senate Democrats give to the challengers? Everywhere I went it seemed to be the same 3-4 people carrying the entire work load.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 03:53 PM
Frank Padavan did have a Democratic opponent.
Posted by: Jerry Skurnik at November 15, 2006 04:24 PM
Don't you understand what happened here? Spitzer and the Dems neglected the state senate on purpose! It was a tactical decision. Spitzer is going to ride in on a white horse and try to be the good guy and make lots of changes right away. A good guy needs bad guys. Spitzer needed the GOP to maintain control of the Senate so he can have Joe Bruno as his foil for the next two years. Otherwise who would Eliot blame if he can't do all the things he's promised to do?
Also in two years will be a presidential election, and the prevailing wisdom is that democrats challenging incumbent republicans will have their best chance when they have the higher turnout for a presidential election, and the coattails of a democratic presidential candidate at the top of the ticket.
It was all strategy. There is noone to blame. They didn't want the Senate. Yet.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 04:32 PM
You know, you got to hand it to Tilzer. Beneath all that mess is a truly political genius. He was the brains behind the Judge Lopez-Torres win.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 15, 2006 04:44 PM
(The central question, no matter who you blame, is recruitment.)
Since when to the political parties recruit candidates against incumbents? The just want the incumbents (of either party) to stay and keep the seat safe from the public, until it is vacant and their relatives or staff member can take over. Such careerists do not run races they are likely to lose. Only people who believe in something do, and such people are trouble.
Posted by: Cranky Independent at November 15, 2006 05:06 PM
Hi 4:32 pm
Interesting analysis and theory, but it is just not correct, unless you are in the Democratic Inner Circle and know something we plebes do not. I was with a leading Democratic State elected official on election night, and that pol was not pleased at the result.
As for the subsequent post and nonsensical statement at 5:06:
"Since when to the political parties recruit candidates against incumbents? ...."
WHO IS THIS NUT & HOW DO PEOPLE GET SO TWISTED?
Posted by: Dem Boy at November 15, 2006 05:27 PM
Maltese may not run in 2008, opening the door to City Councilman Gallagher to run with Rep and Cons endorsements.
Posted by: Nassau Nell at November 15, 2006 06:38 PM
Maltese may not run in 2009, opening the door to City Councilman Gallagher to run with Rep and Cons endorsements.
Posted by: Nassau Nell at November 15, 2006 06:38 PM
Maltese may not run in 2008, opening the door to City Councilman Gallagher to run with Rep and Cons endorsements.
Posted by: Nassau Nell at November 15, 2006 06:38 PM
As I've stated before (see,http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/missed_opportunity.htmlon 11/8/06), there is enough blame for everyone to take a piece. I think I've been quite vocal about this earlier and more often than most.
I outlined theory number #3 in all its gory details on MAY 10, 2006. See: http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/settling_for_the_steak_knives.html.
#4 is just a subset of #3; if Paterson had done what Spitzer had asked, and stepped down as leader early on, internal politics would have been resolved well before the election.
I outlined #2 in my pre-general election Voters Guide (http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/gatemouths_general_election_voter_s_guide.html, 11/6/06), but in a way, its just a subset of the Albany malaise outlined here: http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/albany_primer_why_does_nyc_get_screwed_at_budget_time.html(4/29/06). For its own reasons, the Assembly has little interest in a Democratic Senate; many County leaders are Assembly members, others depend upon the Assembly Democrats to provide them essential support. In Brooklyn, local Dems are bragging about how their decision to prevent an opponent for Marty Golden allowed the Democrats to pick up one more Assembly seat, bringing Shelly Silver's veto proof majority up to a superfluous 108 out of 150.
The ability of the entire Senate Democratic Conference(with a few exceptions) to repeat theory #1 over and over again as a mantra before the election is proof positive that Paterson is not solely to blame for his conference's lame performance. They knew they'd fucked up, and they had their excuse in place. The near victory of Baldeo is their worst nightmare. The use of their lame mantra cost them big. In 2000, the Senate Dems might have bitten off more than they could chew, but they put their money where their mouth was. Every conference member signed as personal guarantuer for a large pre-election loan. The lack of a similar commitment this year surely sent a message to others that commitment was lacking, so why bother helping. 2006 was a once every thirty years landslide not seen since 1974, which, as I outlined (http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/settling_for_the_steak_knives.html.) was also blown by the Senate Dems while their leadership was in flux. The excuse that they are waiting for 2008 is just that; presidential years have not always been such unequivocal successes for Senate Dems. The iron was hot this year, but no one struck. the opportunity may not recur.
As to reason #5, it is mostly unfair but not entirely so. The decision by Spitzer (and Hilary and Hevesi)to accept the Independence line, which was endorsing every Senate Republican candidate who either had a semblance of a chance or had a semblance of a challenge, was near unforgiveable. This IP's survial was on the line; they needed Spitzer as their candidate in order to survive. He had real leverage, he failed to use it, and he thusly contributed to Republican Senate margins. He could also have exerted some pressure on WFP to toe the line (though WFP deserves a numbered paragraph all its own).
But Spitzer also showed real balls. Despite threats from Joe Bruno he campaigned with threatened Democratic incumbent Valesky, and Democratic challengers like Stewart-Cousins and Ellison. Contrast Spitzer to Mario Cuomo who practically endorsed Senate Republicans. It is rumored that Spitzer may have helped, or offered help, in other ways as well. Could he have done more? Sure. Has anyone else in a comparable position ever done even half as much. No way!
In this sorry tale, Eliot Spitzer stands as a hero, albeit an imperfect one, yet practically the only imperfect hero we had.
Posted by: Gatemouth at November 15, 2006 06:44 PM
Another good read on Queens politics, or try this, a slightly shorter version of the same article, published in the New York Press.
Note the explanation give by State Senator and County GOP Chair Serphin Maltese in the first (longer) version of the article as one of the reasons they did not do more to back Stu Mirsky's candidacy against a local Democratic incumbent: “. . . the main club backing Mirsky had been very antagonistic toward the county leadership, but I think we have it worked out and have absolute unity now.”
As President and one of the founders of the Rockaway Republicans, I can say definitively that we were NOT "antagonistic" towards the County leadership when we began and only ended up at odds with them because of the way they reacted to our efforts to revive a Republican presence in our area. In fact, we reached out to the County organization repeatedly for help in getting started though they ignored us for nearly a year before we finally managed to get their attention. When we did, they played "hard to get." Instead of welcoming us into the fold, they threw up hurdles.
Apparently the fact that the Rockaway Republicans organized and chose to hold two parties for Bush in 2004, at which a combined 250 people turned out, made us, in County Chair Maltese's mind, "antagonistic." That a newly forming Republican club should have found itself caught up in an internal squabble between a County Chair and two district leaders who were feuding at the time (and still are), with neither having a clue as to whose side the Rockaway Republicans were on (actually we weren't on anyone's side but the President's) is incredible.
Our only goal in forming the Rockaway Republicans was to bring a Republican presence to our peninsula where none had existed before and which the County organization had all but ceded to the Democrats. The difficulties we faced and which continued to plague us for close to three years were hard to understand, considering we were a group of folks who, within their second year, ran thirty-one members for county committee seats (twenty-eight were elected) and held a Republican summit to unify and revitalize the party, in which some 120 leaders and activists from all over the city participated.
The relentless local newspaper articles detailing our plight, and our outreach to other clubs, probably forced County to ultimately give us a state charter, something we had been begging for since we started. If our desire to share our Republican principles with our neighbors made us "antagonistic," then that says much about the current Republican leadership.
Tom Lynch, President of the Rockaway Republicans
From Crain's New York Business
Paterson defends Dems’ Senate showing
State Senate Democratic Leader David Paterson argues that given Republican fund-raising advantages, it was a “great victory” for Democrats to gain one chamber seat, even in the context of Democratic landslides in statewide races and takeovers of statehouses across the country. He says Senate Democrats were outspent 4 to 1 by an entrenched Republican majority, yet ousted the third-most-powerful GOP senator, Nick Spano in Westchester, and came within 1,000 votes of defeating Serf Maltese in Queens.
But some say Mr. Paterson is to blame for not defeating Mr. Maltese. He provided no help to Mr. Maltese’s Democratic opponent, Albert Baldeo, who raised much of his $104,000 from family members and the South Asian community. Mr. Maltese raised $283,000, and state Senate Republicans paid for his literature mailings, says Mr. Baldeo’s campaign manager, Gary Tilzer.
Close race, new chase
With recent surprise in State Senate contest, Dems now eye 2008 in an effort to unseat 18-year incumbent
Close race, new chase
With recent surprise in State Senate contest, Dems now eye 2008 in an effort to unseat 18-year incumbent - Newsday, November 29, 2006
Three weeks after a veteran figure in Queens politics nearly lost a Senate seat, the surprise close call is still reverberating in the borough - and possibly re-shaping the local electoral agenda for 2008.
According to the tentative tallies, state Sen. Serphin Maltese, an 18-year Republican incumbent and longtime conservative activist, held his 15th district seat by a mere 783 votes against Democratic challenger Albert Baldeo.
Baldeo, 46, an attorney, nearly pulled off the upset against Maltese - the Queens Republican chairman - without party support, defying insiders' expectations.
"There is no one in the world who can say to me that we should have known there was a vulnerability here," said Rep. Joseph Crowley, the new Queens Democratic chairman. "There was nothing to indicate that - absolutely nothing," Crowley said.
After the vote, Maltese, 73, who is of Italian ancestry, made an unusual claim - that Baldeo, a Guyanese immigrant of Indian ancestry, may have benefited from leading voters to believe that he too is of Italian background.
Maltese said he wasn't certain for a while because Baldeo was often not seen around the district, which stretches from Middle Village to Howard Beach, and has a sizeable Italian-American population. Maltese didn't deny he pointed out his Italian ancestry to potential voters.
"After we saw his Web site, we realized he was Guyanese," Maltese said of Baldeo during a telephone interview from Florida, where he's on vacation. "There's no doubt he's not Italian but the fact is, with his name, the average voter could very well say he was Italian."
Maltese did not say precisely how he thought Baldeo was misleading voters about his ethnicity - a charge Maltese earlier made in a Village Voice story and which Baldeo vehemently denied.
"He's so racially motivated to make these remarks, he shouldn't even be a state senator," Baldeo said. He accused Maltese of ignoring the needs of immigrants in the district, which he called a motive for his challenge and a reason he came so close.
Maltese got 17,122 votes, or 51.2 percent, to Baldeo's 16,339 votes, or 48.8 percent, according to still-unofficial tallies to be certified by the state Board of Elections.
While Baldeo's race was ignored by Democratic leaders before the election, he was given legal help and other assistance during the vote-certification process by Democratic leaders - who are already talking about 2008, when the seat is up again. Who will get the more-valued nomination next time is in question.
As a candidate, Baldeo had his share of problems. Last year, he spent a night in jail after he was accused of pulling a gun on the wife of an opponent when he ran for City Council. The charges have been dropped, but some Democrats have kept their distance.
And at least one other Democrat, City Councilman Joseph Addabbo of Far Rockaway, who'd been rumored for a possible candidacy this year, is leaning toward running in two years.
For the moment, some observers see the Democrats as having already blown a big chance.
"They were so focused on the statewide races and they built up these huge margins, they squandered this huge opportunity for a Democrat to unseat a dinosaur," said Doug Muzzio, a political science professor at Brooklyn College.
A Curious Lack of Interest in a Senate Seat in Queens
New York Times November 10, 2006 By JONATHAN P. HICKS
Since Tuesday’s election, much has been made of how the Democratic Party captured numerous seats nationally and in New York State. But there is one race where some Democrats suggest their party missed an opportunity to oust a longtime Republican state senator.
In the 15th State Senate District in Queens, an incumbent Republican senator, Serphin R. Maltese, was re-elected to a 10th term, but by fewer than 800 votes. According to unofficial results, Mr. Maltese received 51.2 percent of the vote on Tuesday, while the Democratic candidate, Albert Baldeo, received 48.8 percent.
The 15th District is in an area of Queens where registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by more than 2 to 1. And at a time when Democrats have been making steady gains toward controlling the Republican-led State Senate, some Democratic officials question why the party placed so little attention on the seat held by the 74-year-old Mr. Maltese and provided Mr. Baldeo with little in the way of endorsements of political support.
In an interview yesterday, Mr. Baldeo, 46, a lawyer who ran unsuccessfully for a City Council seat last year, could name only one Democratic official who endorsed him: United States Representative Gregory W. Meeks. Mr. Baldeo said, however, that he was not willing to criticize the Democratic organization in Queens.
“I want to go forward from the past,” he said. “I’m in touch with the Democratic State Senate Committee, and they say they will help in making sure the recount process goes smoothly.” In fact, Mr. Baldeo has also asked for an investigation into complaints his office received about voter intimidation and other irregularities.
The reluctance of Democratic officials to support Mr. Baldeo’s campaign was in part a reflection of the longtime relationship that many Queens Democratic officials have enjoyed with Mr. Maltese, the chairman of the Republican Party in the borough and a founder of the state Conservative Party.
But some of the reluctance to support Mr. Baldeo, some officials said, resulted from the candidate’s troubles in last year’s election.
In the weeks before the primary for the City Council contest, Mr. Baldeo was arrested on charges accusing him of having waved a gun at the wife of a rival Democrat. The charges were dismissed. “It was a conspiracy to get me off the ballot,” he said of the incident, adding that Mr. Maltese included information about the arrest in literature during this campaign.
Aides to Mr. Maltese in his Queens district office said that the senator was out of town on vacation and could not be reached. United States Representative Joseph Crowley, the Queens Democratic chairman, did not return messages left with his office yesterday.
Early this year, the prospect of a competitive race against Mr. Maltese loomed large. City Councilman Joseph P. Addabbo Jr., a Queens Democrat, considered running against Mr. Maltese at the urging of aides to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, but decided against it.
Evan Stavisky, a political consultant who is close to Democratic candidates in Queens, said that Democratic officials in the state had been focused on Senate races in Yonkers and in Syracuse.
“For the first time in memory, the Senate Democrats picked up seats in successive election cycles,” he said, referring to the close race between Andrea Stewart-Cousins, a Democrat, and the incumbent Republican state senator, Nicholas A. Spano.
“I’m sure that the party will spend the next two years looking at vulnerable Republican seats and looking to get more Democrats elected,” Mr. Stavisky said.
State Democrats had better luck in District 60, which includes portions of Brooklyn and Staten Island, where they have apparently picked up a Republican-held Assembly seat. In that race, the Democratic candidate, Janele Hyer-Spencer, received 51.6 percent of the vote, while the Republican candidate, Anthony Xanthakis, received 48.4 percent in unofficial results. The incumbent, Matthew Mirones, did not run for re-election.
Since Tuesday’s election, much has been made of how the Democratic Party captured numerous seats nationally and in New York State. But there is one race where some Democrats suggest their party missed an opportunity to oust a longtime Republican state senator.
In the 15th State Senate District in Queens, an incumbent Republican senator, Serphin R. Maltese, was re-elected to a 10th term, but by fewer than 800 votes. According to unofficial results, Mr. Maltese received 51.2 percent of the vote on Tuesday, while the Democratic candidate, Albert Baldeo, received 48.8 percent.
The 15th District is in an area of Queens where registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by more than 2 to 1. And at a time when Democrats have been making steady gains toward controlling the Republican-led State Senate, some Democratic officials question why the party placed so little attention on the seat held by the 74-year-old Mr. Maltese and provided Mr. Baldeo with little in the way of endorsements of political support.
In an interview yesterday, Mr. Baldeo, 46, a lawyer who ran unsuccessfully for a City Council seat last year, could name only one Democratic official who endorsed him: United States Representative Gregory W. Meeks. Mr. Baldeo said, however, that he was not willing to criticize the Democratic organization in Queens.
“I want to go forward from the past,” he said. “I’m in touch with the Democratic State Senate Committee, and they say they will help in making sure the recount process goes smoothly.” In fact, Mr. Baldeo has also asked for an investigation into complaints his office received about voter intimidation and other irregularities.
The reluctance of Democratic officials to support Mr. Baldeo’s campaign was in part a reflection of the longtime relationship that many Queens Democratic officials have enjoyed with Mr. Maltese, the chairman of the Republican Party in the borough and a founder of the state Conservative Party.
But some of the reluctance to support Mr. Baldeo, some officials said, resulted from the candidate’s troubles in last year’s election.
In the weeks before the primary for the City Council contest, Mr. Baldeo was arrested on charges accusing him of having waved a gun at the wife of a rival Democrat. The charges were dismissed. “It was a conspiracy to get me off the ballot,” he said of the incident, adding that Mr. Maltese included information about the arrest in literature during this campaign.
Aides to Mr. Maltese in his Queens district office said that the senator was out of town on vacation and could not be reached. United States Representative Joseph Crowley, the Queens Democratic chairman, did not return messages left with his office yesterday.
Early this year, the prospect of a competitive race against Mr. Maltese loomed large. City Councilman Joseph P. Addabbo Jr., a Queens Democrat, considered running against Mr. Maltese at the urging of aides to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, but decided against it.
Evan Stavisky, a political consultant who is close to Democratic candidates in Queens, said that Democratic officials in the state had been focused on Senate races in Yonkers and in Syracuse.
“For the first time in memory, the Senate Democrats picked up seats in successive election cycles,” he said, referring to the close race between Andrea Stewart-Cousins, a Democrat, and the incumbent Republican state senator, Nicholas A. Spano.
“I’m sure that the party will spend the next two years looking at vulnerable Republican seats and looking to get more Democrats elected,” Mr. Stavisky said.
State Democrats had better luck in District 60, which includes portions of Brooklyn and Staten Island, where they have apparently picked up a Republican-held Assembly seat. In that race, the Democratic candidate, Janele Hyer-Spencer, received 51.6 percent of the vote, while the Republican candidate, Anthony Xanthakis, received 48.4 percent in unofficial results. The incumbent, Matthew Mirones, did not run for re-election.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
ALBERT BALDEO PROFILE
Albert has earned the following awards and citations: City Council Citation for Outstanding Political Activism, the Certificate of Merit from Senator Padavan for his exemplary and distinguished record of service to his community, the Congressional Award from Congressman Anthony Weiner for Special Recognition, the Nassau County Citation for his Selfless Commitment to His Fellowman that warrants attention and gratitude, Hillary For NY & New Yorkers for Fields for his generous contribution and support, the Polish American Congress for his leadership achievements, the Hispanic Award for community service, the New Americans Democratic Organization of NY for his civic, social and business leadership and the Community Leadership Award which was presented to him by the Hon. Eliot Spitzer on behalf of SAAPAC.
ALBERT BALDEO FOR STATE SENATE CONTRIBUTION PAGE
www.albertbaldeo.com/contribute.htm
Thank you for contributing to The Friends of Albert Baldeo. If you'd rather send a check please send to:
Friends of Albert Baldeo,
106-11 Liberty Avenue
Ozone Park, NY 11417
ALBERT BALDEO FOR STATE SENATE CONTRIBUTION PAGE
www.albertbaldeo.com/contribute.htm
Thank you for contributing to The Friends of Albert Baldeo. If you'd rather send a check please send to:
Friends of Albert Baldeo,
106-11 Liberty Avenue
Ozone Park, NY 11417
Monday, October 02, 2006
Democrats Must Vote against Guns and the NRA
Democrats must lead the way to remove our State Senate Serphon Maltese who votes against Assault Weapons bans and increase state restriction on the sale of firearms. Democrat Albert Baldeo supports the entire New Yorkers Against Gun Violence legislative platform.
Maltese has 100% NRA Rating
Senator Maltese supported the interests of the New Yorkers against Gun Violence 0 percent
Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all state legislative candidates in 2000, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund assigned Senator Maltese a grade of A+ (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).
Maltese Pro Gun Voting Record
New Yorkers against Guns Violence - 2004 Legislative Scorecard reports Maltese voted against the follow three pieces of Gun legislation:
Maltese voted against (S.397) would make it easier to obtain a concealed carry gun permit
Maltese voted against (S.8234) Nine measures, including: 1) Ballistic imaging; 2) Closed gun show loophole; 3) Assault weapons ban; 4) Safety locks; 5) Increased penalties for criminal possession and sales; 6) Age 21 for handgun permit/possession.
Maltese voted against (S.3508A) Would hold the gun industry liable for deaths or injuries caused if manufactures failed to adhere to a safe-sales code of conduct.
Maltese Pro Gun Is Out of Touch with His District and Fellow Queens State Senators
All of the State Senators in Queens except Maltese have been given 100% rating by
New Yorkers Against Gun Violence: John Sabini (Democrat), George Onorato (Democrat), Malcolm A. Smith (Democrat), Toby Ann Stavisky (Democrat) and even Republican Frank Padavan. The following Assemlbymembers have also been given 100% rating by New Yorkers Against Gun Violence: Audrey Pheffer, Nettie Mayersohn,Margaret Markey, Michele Titus,Jeffrion Aubry and Catherine Nolan
Albert Baldeo
Democrat For State Senate
Vote Baldeo for Gun Control: Election Day November 7, 2006
Maltese has 100% NRA Rating
Senator Maltese supported the interests of the New Yorkers against Gun Violence 0 percent
Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all state legislative candidates in 2000, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund assigned Senator Maltese a grade of A+ (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).
Maltese Pro Gun Voting Record
New Yorkers against Guns Violence - 2004 Legislative Scorecard reports Maltese voted against the follow three pieces of Gun legislation:
Maltese voted against (S.397) would make it easier to obtain a concealed carry gun permit
Maltese voted against (S.8234) Nine measures, including: 1) Ballistic imaging; 2) Closed gun show loophole; 3) Assault weapons ban; 4) Safety locks; 5) Increased penalties for criminal possession and sales; 6) Age 21 for handgun permit/possession.
Maltese voted against (S.3508A) Would hold the gun industry liable for deaths or injuries caused if manufactures failed to adhere to a safe-sales code of conduct.
Maltese Pro Gun Is Out of Touch with His District and Fellow Queens State Senators
All of the State Senators in Queens except Maltese have been given 100% rating by
New Yorkers Against Gun Violence: John Sabini (Democrat), George Onorato (Democrat), Malcolm A. Smith (Democrat), Toby Ann Stavisky (Democrat) and even Republican Frank Padavan. The following Assemlbymembers have also been given 100% rating by New Yorkers Against Gun Violence: Audrey Pheffer, Nettie Mayersohn,Margaret Markey, Michele Titus,Jeffrion Aubry and Catherine Nolan
Albert Baldeo
Democrat For State Senate
Vote Baldeo for Gun Control: Election Day November 7, 2006
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Electing Democrat Albert Baldeo to the State Senate will bring about the changes we need in Albany
Your current State Senator Works against YOU
1. Maltese Votes to Under Fund Our Children’s Education
Republican lawmaker, Serphin R. Maltese, ''votes year after year to under funds our City’s schools.'' - League of Education Voter
Maltese was accused by the education advocacy group the League of Education Voters of "shortchanging" kids in their districts in a statewide TV commercial. After the Campaign for Fiscal Equity successfully sued the state and proved it under-funded New York City public schools and denies its students their constitutional right to the opportunity to a sound basic education. The League charged that Maltese conspired with Governor Pataki to use the Republican majority in the state senate to block the state legislature from properly funding New York City's schools.
2. Maltese Vote against Assault Weapons Ban, has 100% NRA Rating
Senator Maltese supported the interests of the New Yorkers against Gun Violence 0 percent
Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all state legislative candidates in 2000, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund assigned Senator Maltese a grade of A+ (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).
3. Maltese does not believe that it is the responsibility of the state government to guarantee medical care to all of its citizens.
Maltese answer on National Political Awareness Test Questionnaire 1996
4. Maltese Blocks Government Reforms In Albany
Despite N.Y.U. Brennan Center for effective government issued report that called the New York State legislature the most dysfunctional in the nation
Maltese does not support:
Requiring limits on individual contributions to state legislative candidates
Requiring full and timely disclosure of campaign finance information
Requiring lobbyists to disclose all gifts of food or drinks to individual lawmakers.
5. Maltese was rated by environmental advocates at 13%
On the votes that the EPL-Environmental Advocates considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Maltese voted their preferred position 13 percent of the time.
Maltese answered that he does not believe in enacting tougher environmental standards to encourage the sale of cleaner burning fuels throughout New York.
- Maltese answer on National Political Awareness Test Questionnaire 1996
6. Maltese Voted Against Affordable Housing
Despite one in five New Yorkers who rent pay more than half of their income for housing,
Maltese voted against the Local Emergency Housing Rent Control Act which would prevent the rent control and stabilization law from expiring. The rent laws will not solve the city’s affordable housing problem it will at least save some affordable housing in the city and keep the housing problem from getting worse.
7. Maltese’s Republican Senate Keeps Prescription Cost High
The cost of prescription drugs have skyrocketed in recent years. The Maltese and his Republican friends who control the State Senate in Albany has stood in the way of any attempts to lower costs.
8. Maltese Voted Against Day Care and Workmen’s Compensation
Maltese voted against setting compensation levels for New Yorkers unable to work due to injuries on or off the job to the state’s average weekly wage. Maltese voted against Subsidized Day Care that would allow more single parents to rejoin the work full time.
The Republicans in Albany have been practicing a "me and my lobbyist and special interest friends first" philosophy that has been crippling our State. The legislature job of protecting seniors, fixing our schools improving health care is not getting done. I am running to return the State Senate back to the democrats and our state government back to the people. - Albert Baldeo.
Taking Back New York State Government
Taking Back New York Winning a Democratic Majority in the New York State Senate is the way to take back New York's state government, recently rated by NYU's Brennan Center for Justice as the most dysfunctional in the nation.
New Yorkers are focusing their energy and resources on doing everything they can to ensure the victories of Democrats down the ticket. Building our party at the state and local level is the key to our long-term success.
For years, the Republicans have held power in New York State through their control of the New York State Senate. But it is a tenuous hold in an overwhelmingly and increasingly Democratic state. This year the New York Senate Democrats have an extraordinary opportunity with the expected landslide victory of Eliot Spitzer for governor. Growing anger with a state government that experts call "the worst in the nation," demographic trends, and an accelerating Democratic advantage in voter registration (currently 5 to 3 and growing), make it clear that together we can take back the Senate by a clear majority.
Our success is the key to turning our state government around. When Democrats take the Majority, we will finally see important reforms to make the State Legislature effective and accountable. And we will finally see action on issues that are ignored under the current system: providing our communities with their fair share of funding for seniors, schools, transit, and economic development; expanding access to healthcare; reforming the unfunded mandates that starve local governments and threaten New Yorkers who rely on programs like Medicaid.
1. Maltese Votes to Under Fund Our Children’s Education
Republican lawmaker, Serphin R. Maltese, ''votes year after year to under funds our City’s schools.'' - League of Education Voter
Maltese was accused by the education advocacy group the League of Education Voters of "shortchanging" kids in their districts in a statewide TV commercial. After the Campaign for Fiscal Equity successfully sued the state and proved it under-funded New York City public schools and denies its students their constitutional right to the opportunity to a sound basic education. The League charged that Maltese conspired with Governor Pataki to use the Republican majority in the state senate to block the state legislature from properly funding New York City's schools.
2. Maltese Vote against Assault Weapons Ban, has 100% NRA Rating
Senator Maltese supported the interests of the New Yorkers against Gun Violence 0 percent
Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all state legislative candidates in 2000, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund assigned Senator Maltese a grade of A+ (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).
3. Maltese does not believe that it is the responsibility of the state government to guarantee medical care to all of its citizens.
Maltese answer on National Political Awareness Test Questionnaire 1996
4. Maltese Blocks Government Reforms In Albany
Despite N.Y.U. Brennan Center for effective government issued report that called the New York State legislature the most dysfunctional in the nation
Maltese does not support:
Requiring limits on individual contributions to state legislative candidates
Requiring full and timely disclosure of campaign finance information
Requiring lobbyists to disclose all gifts of food or drinks to individual lawmakers.
5. Maltese was rated by environmental advocates at 13%
On the votes that the EPL-Environmental Advocates considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Maltese voted their preferred position 13 percent of the time.
Maltese answered that he does not believe in enacting tougher environmental standards to encourage the sale of cleaner burning fuels throughout New York.
- Maltese answer on National Political Awareness Test Questionnaire 1996
6. Maltese Voted Against Affordable Housing
Despite one in five New Yorkers who rent pay more than half of their income for housing,
Maltese voted against the Local Emergency Housing Rent Control Act which would prevent the rent control and stabilization law from expiring. The rent laws will not solve the city’s affordable housing problem it will at least save some affordable housing in the city and keep the housing problem from getting worse.
7. Maltese’s Republican Senate Keeps Prescription Cost High
The cost of prescription drugs have skyrocketed in recent years. The Maltese and his Republican friends who control the State Senate in Albany has stood in the way of any attempts to lower costs.
8. Maltese Voted Against Day Care and Workmen’s Compensation
Maltese voted against setting compensation levels for New Yorkers unable to work due to injuries on or off the job to the state’s average weekly wage. Maltese voted against Subsidized Day Care that would allow more single parents to rejoin the work full time.
The Republicans in Albany have been practicing a "me and my lobbyist and special interest friends first" philosophy that has been crippling our State. The legislature job of protecting seniors, fixing our schools improving health care is not getting done. I am running to return the State Senate back to the democrats and our state government back to the people. - Albert Baldeo.
Taking Back New York State Government
Taking Back New York Winning a Democratic Majority in the New York State Senate is the way to take back New York's state government, recently rated by NYU's Brennan Center for Justice as the most dysfunctional in the nation.
New Yorkers are focusing their energy and resources on doing everything they can to ensure the victories of Democrats down the ticket. Building our party at the state and local level is the key to our long-term success.
For years, the Republicans have held power in New York State through their control of the New York State Senate. But it is a tenuous hold in an overwhelmingly and increasingly Democratic state. This year the New York Senate Democrats have an extraordinary opportunity with the expected landslide victory of Eliot Spitzer for governor. Growing anger with a state government that experts call "the worst in the nation," demographic trends, and an accelerating Democratic advantage in voter registration (currently 5 to 3 and growing), make it clear that together we can take back the Senate by a clear majority.
Our success is the key to turning our state government around. When Democrats take the Majority, we will finally see important reforms to make the State Legislature effective and accountable. And we will finally see action on issues that are ignored under the current system: providing our communities with their fair share of funding for seniors, schools, transit, and economic development; expanding access to healthcare; reforming the unfunded mandates that starve local governments and threaten New Yorkers who rely on programs like Medicaid.
Albert Baldeo Protecting Seniors
Seniors must always be treated with Dignity and Respect. They have raised our family, built our city and defended our country. I will do I can to fight the Republicans in Albany have block senior funding and programs. New York seniors are paying a price because Republicans Control Albany - Albert Baldeo.
Albert Baldeo supports policies that enable those who have contributed so much to our heritage to mature in dignity with adequate shelter, nutrition, and health care. Albert support policies that enable senior citizens to contribute their knowledge and skills through active civic participation in their community. He encourage their active participation in the civic life of the county, acknowledging that great resource that lies within our senior population and the contribution such participation makes to the mental and physical well-being of seniors.
Albert Baldeo affirms the right of all individuals to make those critical decisions regarding quality and dignity of life in concert with their physicians, clergy, and loved ones.
Seniors are the fastest growing segment of the population and, as a group, they have very different needs. New York State needs to be a leader in innovative approaches to eldercare. I support a senior plan proposed by the next Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer:
Help seniors stay in their homes and in their communities
First, New York needs to help seniors stay in their homes and, if they can't stay in their homes, then in affordable housing in their communities.
To do so, we must allow seniors to leverage the equity in their homes by expanding affordable lending opportunities. That is why I support the State of New York's mortgage agency launching a reverse mortgage product -- with the necessary consumer protections in place -- to allow the elderly to tap into the equity in their homes. And for the large share of seniors who are renters, the State must increase the ways it helps them afford their rent, whether through expanding tax credits or grants.
We must also encourage development of housing alternatives for seniors in their communities whether they be group homes, assisted living or some other model. Sure, there are assisted living facilities, but most are too expensive an option for moderate to low-income families. In 2004, the legislature passed the Assisted Living Reform Act. Yet not one new assisted living facility has been developed since the act passed. Why? Because the Department of Health has not promulgated the necessary regulations.
Developing and implementing the necessary regulations for the development of assisted living facilities must be a priority. And to make assisted living a reality for many moderate to low-income seniors, the Department of Health should work jointly with the State' s housing agencies to make assisted living affordable. Also, New York needs to get the federal government to expand the use of waivers for Medicare and Medicaid, as other States have done successfully, to move Medicaid dollars into the community rather than into more expensive institutional settings. In the long run, this will be better for seniors, and will save money for New York's taxpayers.
We also need the State housing agencies to consider seniors in developing the State's housing programs. While the choice between the production versus the preservation or rehabilitation of affordable housing for seniors varies throughout the State, one thing is consistently needed everywhere. New York must think creatively about linking supportive services to housing. These services are critical if we want to give our seniors the opportunity to continue to live independently and comfortably in their homes and in their communities.
In addition, we have to make sure that we think about seniors when we are making investments back into our community. When one talks about development, we need to talk about sidewalks, think about disabilities, consider other kinds of lighting or extending crosswalks. We need to make sure that there are no actions taken without people thinking about what the implication is for our seniors going forward. We need to make sure our public parks and spaces are senior-friendly for everybody's ability to have a higher quality of life.
Make life affordable for seniors
Second, New York has to make life affordable for its seniors. Without this, seniors will not be able to afford to stay in their homes or communities. Many seniors are on fixed incomes, yet their costs of living are rising -- their property taxes, health care costs and energy costs, just to name a few.
New York State's overall tax burden is the highest in the nation and high local property taxes are one of the primary causes. Total property taxes increased by $7.4 billion over the past five years -- a 30% increase. These increases fall especially hard on senior citizens with fixed incomes. These numbers only remind us of the need to increase property tax relief and the necessity that it be targeted to those who actually require assistance.
An important piece is reducing the cost of prescription drugs -- a topic probably all of you know too well. The cost of prescription drugs is one of the fastest growing expenses in health care, so addressing this issue is an essential part of fixing our health care system New York State also has to better leverage its purchasing power to get consumers better prices.
And as it relates to protecting seniors specifically, we need to monitor how the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit ultimately plays out -- and what impact Part D has on the State's pharmaceutical assistance plan, EPIC. In particular, we need to see what happens come this September when the dozens of prescription drug plans in Medicare in New York State have to decide if they will stay with the program another year or quit and drop those they have enrolled. We have seen first hand in New York State with Medicaid managed care what happens when a new market is opened to the private sector, and how some drop out once profit margins are not what they expected.
Help seniors and their families plan and meet their long-term care needs
The next thing New York needs to do is to make it easier to save and pay for long-term care. Long-term care isn't just about nursing home care. It includes a broad range of medical and social services -- like help in activities of daily living such as bathing, dressing, and eating. The expansion of lending opportunities for homeowners should solve some of these payment issues -- but not all, and not for folks who do not own a home.
We also need to review the eligibility rules for all of the State's programs, whether it is for Medicaid or for obtaining long term care insurance. We need to make sure the rules are fair and transparent and are consistent with making it easier for individuals to share in the responsibility for paying for their long-term care, without having to lose their financial independence.
Some suggest that changing eligibility requirements for long-term care assistance is a large part of the answer to controlling Medicaid costs. Indeed, as part of one of his budget vetoes this year, Governor Pataki vetoed maintaining the provision that allows spouses of ill people to refuse to pay health care bills -- or so-called "spousal refusal." There may be some flagrant abuses that need to be addressed. But the fact is that very few families have the resources to pay the costs of nursing home care on their own. To truly manage this problem, we need to develop a strategy that addresses the fundamental issues of long-term care. So, before we begin to talk about whether New York should eliminate spousal refusal, New York State must make the hard choices necessary to match up its fiscal policies with peoples' preferences. Otherwise, New Yorkers are left with a difficult choice: Impoverish themselves or put a loved one in a nursing home. Or, worse yet, divorce their ill spouse so that the ill spouse could qualify for Medicaid. That certainly does not seem a good way to support and protect families.
Provide options across the full range of long term care settings
If we are going to ask individuals to pay for their long-term care, we must provide them with more choices of alternative, less restrictive settings and models of care. I talked earlier about alternative housing like group homes and assisted living. They are important alternatives, but not the only ones.
We all know that nursing homes can no longer be the only option. Not only are they the most expensive setting, they are also institutional settings that do not contribute to the quality of life of seniors who can and wish to stay at home. So, the fourth thing New York needs to do is to work to provide options across the full range of long term care settings. That could include offering foster care for seniors, home sharing, "granny flats," senior centers, or providing support like respite care to informal caregivers who want to keep their loved ones at home but cannot do so without help.
But nursing homes must also be an option. We have talked a lot about staying out of them, but we must also talk about those who are in them and make sure that they are getting the highest quality of care.
These efforts have been necessary to protect those currently in nursing homes and those who may need them in the future. They have also challenged the industry to develop a new -- and better -- paradigm for nursing homes. A movement is beginning around the country to change and redesign nursing homes away from the "big box" model. The State has tools -- whether through its regulatory powers or otherwise -- to encourage this shift. It must use them. Even with more alternatives, we cannot ignore the reality that nursing homes are part of the future. But let us insist that in New York we have good ones.
The Commission on Health Care Facilities in the 21st Century -- sometimes called the Berger Commission -- is supposed to make recommendations later this year for "rightsizing" our hospital and nursing home systems. I encourage you to attend the public meetings of the commission to give it your insight into what your communities' needs are, particularly the need for alternative settings and programs if nursing homes are to be closed.
Finally, as the Boomers become seniors, and even now, we must be sure that we have the necessary range of professionals -- from nurses to home care workers -- who are willing and able to meet the new demand for care in these new settings. The State, working together with our higher education institutions and the private sector, needs to make sure we have the educational programs, faculty and ongoing training so that we attract and maintain a quality workforce. These workers are the lynchpin to many of the strategies I have outlined today. We must make these valued jobs again.
Albert Baldeo supports policies that enable those who have contributed so much to our heritage to mature in dignity with adequate shelter, nutrition, and health care. Albert support policies that enable senior citizens to contribute their knowledge and skills through active civic participation in their community. He encourage their active participation in the civic life of the county, acknowledging that great resource that lies within our senior population and the contribution such participation makes to the mental and physical well-being of seniors.
Albert Baldeo affirms the right of all individuals to make those critical decisions regarding quality and dignity of life in concert with their physicians, clergy, and loved ones.
Seniors are the fastest growing segment of the population and, as a group, they have very different needs. New York State needs to be a leader in innovative approaches to eldercare. I support a senior plan proposed by the next Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer:
Help seniors stay in their homes and in their communities
First, New York needs to help seniors stay in their homes and, if they can't stay in their homes, then in affordable housing in their communities.
To do so, we must allow seniors to leverage the equity in their homes by expanding affordable lending opportunities. That is why I support the State of New York's mortgage agency launching a reverse mortgage product -- with the necessary consumer protections in place -- to allow the elderly to tap into the equity in their homes. And for the large share of seniors who are renters, the State must increase the ways it helps them afford their rent, whether through expanding tax credits or grants.
We must also encourage development of housing alternatives for seniors in their communities whether they be group homes, assisted living or some other model. Sure, there are assisted living facilities, but most are too expensive an option for moderate to low-income families. In 2004, the legislature passed the Assisted Living Reform Act. Yet not one new assisted living facility has been developed since the act passed. Why? Because the Department of Health has not promulgated the necessary regulations.
Developing and implementing the necessary regulations for the development of assisted living facilities must be a priority. And to make assisted living a reality for many moderate to low-income seniors, the Department of Health should work jointly with the State' s housing agencies to make assisted living affordable. Also, New York needs to get the federal government to expand the use of waivers for Medicare and Medicaid, as other States have done successfully, to move Medicaid dollars into the community rather than into more expensive institutional settings. In the long run, this will be better for seniors, and will save money for New York's taxpayers.
We also need the State housing agencies to consider seniors in developing the State's housing programs. While the choice between the production versus the preservation or rehabilitation of affordable housing for seniors varies throughout the State, one thing is consistently needed everywhere. New York must think creatively about linking supportive services to housing. These services are critical if we want to give our seniors the opportunity to continue to live independently and comfortably in their homes and in their communities.
In addition, we have to make sure that we think about seniors when we are making investments back into our community. When one talks about development, we need to talk about sidewalks, think about disabilities, consider other kinds of lighting or extending crosswalks. We need to make sure that there are no actions taken without people thinking about what the implication is for our seniors going forward. We need to make sure our public parks and spaces are senior-friendly for everybody's ability to have a higher quality of life.
Make life affordable for seniors
Second, New York has to make life affordable for its seniors. Without this, seniors will not be able to afford to stay in their homes or communities. Many seniors are on fixed incomes, yet their costs of living are rising -- their property taxes, health care costs and energy costs, just to name a few.
New York State's overall tax burden is the highest in the nation and high local property taxes are one of the primary causes. Total property taxes increased by $7.4 billion over the past five years -- a 30% increase. These increases fall especially hard on senior citizens with fixed incomes. These numbers only remind us of the need to increase property tax relief and the necessity that it be targeted to those who actually require assistance.
An important piece is reducing the cost of prescription drugs -- a topic probably all of you know too well. The cost of prescription drugs is one of the fastest growing expenses in health care, so addressing this issue is an essential part of fixing our health care system New York State also has to better leverage its purchasing power to get consumers better prices.
And as it relates to protecting seniors specifically, we need to monitor how the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit ultimately plays out -- and what impact Part D has on the State's pharmaceutical assistance plan, EPIC. In particular, we need to see what happens come this September when the dozens of prescription drug plans in Medicare in New York State have to decide if they will stay with the program another year or quit and drop those they have enrolled. We have seen first hand in New York State with Medicaid managed care what happens when a new market is opened to the private sector, and how some drop out once profit margins are not what they expected.
Help seniors and their families plan and meet their long-term care needs
The next thing New York needs to do is to make it easier to save and pay for long-term care. Long-term care isn't just about nursing home care. It includes a broad range of medical and social services -- like help in activities of daily living such as bathing, dressing, and eating. The expansion of lending opportunities for homeowners should solve some of these payment issues -- but not all, and not for folks who do not own a home.
We also need to review the eligibility rules for all of the State's programs, whether it is for Medicaid or for obtaining long term care insurance. We need to make sure the rules are fair and transparent and are consistent with making it easier for individuals to share in the responsibility for paying for their long-term care, without having to lose their financial independence.
Some suggest that changing eligibility requirements for long-term care assistance is a large part of the answer to controlling Medicaid costs. Indeed, as part of one of his budget vetoes this year, Governor Pataki vetoed maintaining the provision that allows spouses of ill people to refuse to pay health care bills -- or so-called "spousal refusal." There may be some flagrant abuses that need to be addressed. But the fact is that very few families have the resources to pay the costs of nursing home care on their own. To truly manage this problem, we need to develop a strategy that addresses the fundamental issues of long-term care. So, before we begin to talk about whether New York should eliminate spousal refusal, New York State must make the hard choices necessary to match up its fiscal policies with peoples' preferences. Otherwise, New Yorkers are left with a difficult choice: Impoverish themselves or put a loved one in a nursing home. Or, worse yet, divorce their ill spouse so that the ill spouse could qualify for Medicaid. That certainly does not seem a good way to support and protect families.
Provide options across the full range of long term care settings
If we are going to ask individuals to pay for their long-term care, we must provide them with more choices of alternative, less restrictive settings and models of care. I talked earlier about alternative housing like group homes and assisted living. They are important alternatives, but not the only ones.
We all know that nursing homes can no longer be the only option. Not only are they the most expensive setting, they are also institutional settings that do not contribute to the quality of life of seniors who can and wish to stay at home. So, the fourth thing New York needs to do is to work to provide options across the full range of long term care settings. That could include offering foster care for seniors, home sharing, "granny flats," senior centers, or providing support like respite care to informal caregivers who want to keep their loved ones at home but cannot do so without help.
But nursing homes must also be an option. We have talked a lot about staying out of them, but we must also talk about those who are in them and make sure that they are getting the highest quality of care.
These efforts have been necessary to protect those currently in nursing homes and those who may need them in the future. They have also challenged the industry to develop a new -- and better -- paradigm for nursing homes. A movement is beginning around the country to change and redesign nursing homes away from the "big box" model. The State has tools -- whether through its regulatory powers or otherwise -- to encourage this shift. It must use them. Even with more alternatives, we cannot ignore the reality that nursing homes are part of the future. But let us insist that in New York we have good ones.
The Commission on Health Care Facilities in the 21st Century -- sometimes called the Berger Commission -- is supposed to make recommendations later this year for "rightsizing" our hospital and nursing home systems. I encourage you to attend the public meetings of the commission to give it your insight into what your communities' needs are, particularly the need for alternative settings and programs if nursing homes are to be closed.
Finally, as the Boomers become seniors, and even now, we must be sure that we have the necessary range of professionals -- from nurses to home care workers -- who are willing and able to meet the new demand for care in these new settings. The State, working together with our higher education institutions and the private sector, needs to make sure we have the educational programs, faculty and ongoing training so that we attract and maintain a quality workforce. These workers are the lynchpin to many of the strategies I have outlined today. We must make these valued jobs again.
Albert Baldeo Fighting for Better Schools
Albert will fight for our fair share of Education Finding
Three years ago a Supreme Court Judge ruled of City's children have been shortchanged for their fair share of the state's education dollars. The Republicans in Albany have refused to fix this.
Republican lawmaker, Serphin R. Maltese, ''votes year after year to underfund our schools.'' – League of Education Voter
Watch their TV Commerical to pressure Maltese to stop voting against our children: http://www.edvoters.org/
Political Action for Good Schools
The League of Education Voters of America is the national voice that will make creating a world class public education system for all Americans a priority for public officials. The League brings together a broad and diverse coalition of parents, teachers, education advocates, and community and business leaders to promote sound public education policies, and to support pro-public education candidates.
-----------------------------------------------------------
It seems self-evident that quality education should be among our highest priorities. Without delving into platitudes about the children being our future, suffice it to say that improvements in education carry great multiplier effects.
Better educated children yield better candidates for both advanced schooling and high-quality jobs. Higher literacy rates and higher incomes promote lower crime rates and reduced poverty, all of which is a self-reinforcing virtuous cycle. In that sense, a good education benefits not only its direct recipients, but also the system that provides it. Unfortunately, the reverse also holds true. Gaps in the availability or affordability of quality education tend to have all of the reverse effects, prompting a negatively self-reinforcing cycle.
This in part serves to explain why pockets of chronic poverty and underemployment can coexist alongside pockets of relative affluence and prosperity. Near the root of such problems, one often finds a disparity in the quality of the school system. The New York State School Report Card for 2004-2005 published by the State Education Department suggests just such a problem, particularly among public high schools.
The primary problem with public education is simply that it is cursed with being a government product and government products tend to be low quality (or at least of inconsistent quality).
The problem is not that too little money is being spent on education. On the contrary, the other curse of government products is that they tend to be expensive and wasteful. Even if you don’t have children or if you send your children to private or parochial school, you still get to bear the cost of that waste.
Instead, if we can introduce market-based performance and efficiency incentives within our school system, service quality will necessarily improve and costs will necessarily fall. Among the largest benefits of this cost reduction would be our ability to increase the percentage of expenditures that go to the primary drivers of product quality – teachers and educational materials - rather than wasteful bureaucratic byproducts. By reining in this waste and by encouraging cost-effective performance improvement by properly incentivized administrators, we can divert more money directly to attracting and retaining the best teachers, armed with the best equipment. As wasteful costs come down and as quality rises, we should soon begin to see the vast multiplier effects of a sound school system take root.
Three years ago a Supreme Court Judge ruled of City's children have been shortchanged for their fair share of the state's education dollars. The Republicans in Albany have refused to fix this.
Republican lawmaker, Serphin R. Maltese, ''votes year after year to underfund our schools.'' – League of Education Voter
Watch their TV Commerical to pressure Maltese to stop voting against our children: http://www.edvoters.org/
Political Action for Good Schools
The League of Education Voters of America is the national voice that will make creating a world class public education system for all Americans a priority for public officials. The League brings together a broad and diverse coalition of parents, teachers, education advocates, and community and business leaders to promote sound public education policies, and to support pro-public education candidates.
-----------------------------------------------------------
It seems self-evident that quality education should be among our highest priorities. Without delving into platitudes about the children being our future, suffice it to say that improvements in education carry great multiplier effects.
Better educated children yield better candidates for both advanced schooling and high-quality jobs. Higher literacy rates and higher incomes promote lower crime rates and reduced poverty, all of which is a self-reinforcing virtuous cycle. In that sense, a good education benefits not only its direct recipients, but also the system that provides it. Unfortunately, the reverse also holds true. Gaps in the availability or affordability of quality education tend to have all of the reverse effects, prompting a negatively self-reinforcing cycle.
This in part serves to explain why pockets of chronic poverty and underemployment can coexist alongside pockets of relative affluence and prosperity. Near the root of such problems, one often finds a disparity in the quality of the school system. The New York State School Report Card for 2004-2005 published by the State Education Department suggests just such a problem, particularly among public high schools.
The primary problem with public education is simply that it is cursed with being a government product and government products tend to be low quality (or at least of inconsistent quality).
The problem is not that too little money is being spent on education. On the contrary, the other curse of government products is that they tend to be expensive and wasteful. Even if you don’t have children or if you send your children to private or parochial school, you still get to bear the cost of that waste.
Instead, if we can introduce market-based performance and efficiency incentives within our school system, service quality will necessarily improve and costs will necessarily fall. Among the largest benefits of this cost reduction would be our ability to increase the percentage of expenditures that go to the primary drivers of product quality – teachers and educational materials - rather than wasteful bureaucratic byproducts. By reining in this waste and by encouraging cost-effective performance improvement by properly incentivized administrators, we can divert more money directly to attracting and retaining the best teachers, armed with the best equipment. As wasteful costs come down and as quality rises, we should soon begin to see the vast multiplier effects of a sound school system take root.
Albert Baldeo: Homeland Security
The first duty of government is to the security of its citizens. When it comes to safety, New York has a lot to be proud of.
New York City is the safest large city in America by nearly every measure. This distinction is due in no small part to the valor and skill of our police force and other emergency personnel. Thanks to aggressive prosecution, the influence of organized crime has been drastically reduced.
Still, as illustrated so viscerally on September 11, New York is far from immune from danger. While many lessons have been learned and capably implemented over the last 5 years, many aspects of our security infrastructure remain unacceptably deficient.
In recent years, we have witnessed a number of lesser events and false alarms that have offered us reminders of what remains undone. The blackout in the summer of 2003, the subway bombing hoax, and the illegal transit strike last December all laid bare how critically we rely on and take for granted our public infrastructure. These incidents have also shown us how relatively minor disruptions (a power surge in the midwest, a prankster, or a contract negotiation) can wreak havoc on millions.
Whether via accidental disruptions or intentional attacks, our critical infrastructure and our physical safety is always a concern in New York. The recent cutbacks in federal funding have further highlighted our dire need to allocate the spending power we have at our own discretion in the best way possible. Rampant fraud, waste, and secret spending throughout the state budget must finally be dealt with so we can allocate sufficient resources to these most vital programs.
New York City is the safest large city in America by nearly every measure. This distinction is due in no small part to the valor and skill of our police force and other emergency personnel. Thanks to aggressive prosecution, the influence of organized crime has been drastically reduced.
Still, as illustrated so viscerally on September 11, New York is far from immune from danger. While many lessons have been learned and capably implemented over the last 5 years, many aspects of our security infrastructure remain unacceptably deficient.
In recent years, we have witnessed a number of lesser events and false alarms that have offered us reminders of what remains undone. The blackout in the summer of 2003, the subway bombing hoax, and the illegal transit strike last December all laid bare how critically we rely on and take for granted our public infrastructure. These incidents have also shown us how relatively minor disruptions (a power surge in the midwest, a prankster, or a contract negotiation) can wreak havoc on millions.
Whether via accidental disruptions or intentional attacks, our critical infrastructure and our physical safety is always a concern in New York. The recent cutbacks in federal funding have further highlighted our dire need to allocate the spending power we have at our own discretion in the best way possible. Rampant fraud, waste, and secret spending throughout the state budget must finally be dealt with so we can allocate sufficient resources to these most vital programs.
Albert Baldeo Will Fight for Reforms in Albany
Albany's culture of complacency with politics as usual creates an unusual burden for New Yorkers. A broken budgeting process, a perverse concentration of power among a small handful of elected officials, and a shrouded pork spending process that is patently undemocratic have all served to entrench a ruling class that appears largely indifferent to reform. In addition to pursuing a comprehensive reform initiative to dismantle the skewed power structure, I would support the adoption of accounting methodologies that better reflect the fast-growing long-term liabilities in the state budget, in the spirit of the bi-partisan Truth in Accounting Act now before the U.S. Congress.
