Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Open Government

Open Government

Campaign War Chests


 
Sunnyside City Councilmember Eric Gioia has had no reason to worry about getting re-elected. Having won with 93 percent of the vote two years ago, this year he faces a first-time Republican candidate, Pat Hurley, in a district where Democrats outnumber Republicans four to one. Yet the council member had already raised over $308,000, more than twice as much as he is legally allowed to spend under the city's campaign finance laws, when, just six days before Election Day, Gioia held another fundraiser, at $250 per person, at a South Street Seaport restaurant.

"In the stock market, the hot stock gets the money," said Noah Arnow, a press representative for Gioia. "He's a rising star in city politics."

All across the city, incumbent City Council members, who face little or no competition this election season, apparently see themselves as "hot stocks," and continue to bring in the money. Other public officials who aren't even up for re-election this year are also fundraising. This is baffling only to people who do not understand New York politics. These politicians are stockpiling the cash for the future.

"Eric Gioia could end this [election] cycle with $500,000," said political consultant Hank Sheinkopf. "If he can do that every two years with little or no opposition, he will be the public advocate in 2009, which he is shooting for."

But candidates are not just raising money from individual donors. Millions of dollars come from taxpayers, who are helping pay the bill for glossy brochures and posters for incumbents facing little competition.

In Sunset Park, Councilmember Sara Gonzalez requested $82,500 in taxpayer money from the city's campaign finance program because she said her opponent had "the ability to infuse large sums of money into his campaign."

So far, Gonzalez's opponent - who does not even live in Brooklyn - has raised the "large sum" of $2,771.

Candidates argue that political campaigns are expensive and if they want to be competitive they must raise funds for the future. But critics argue that with this forever-fundraising, incumbents are distorting the city's campaign finance laws, bilking the taxpayers, and hijacking the political process away from a focus on community concerns.

The situation, they say, has become worse thanks to billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who used his own fortune to get elected and this year is spending $2 million of his own money to back a ballot proposal for nonpartisan elections. The more money that is spent, the more money that must be spent, and thus the more money that must be raised; the more money raised, the more money that must be raised.

Thus the amount -- and importance -- of money in New York City campaigns continues to rise.

MONEY IS (FUTURE) POWER

New York City is often praised for having one of the best and most stringent campaign finance programs in the country; City Council candidates who join the program are given public funds in exchange for agreeing not to spend more than $150,000 in any given election. While there are limits to how much money a candidate can roll over into the next election and count toward public matching funds, there are no laws limiting how much a candidate can raise. And there are no rules against raising money for future campaigns.

The biggest fundraiser in the New York City Council is Speaker Gifford Miller. While Miller has officially raised only $151,000 for this year's election, he has already put away $1.6 million for an "undeclared" seat in 2005. Miller will be term-limited out of the council in 2005 and many speculate that he will run for mayor.

Those same insiders believe that two Queens Council members, David Weprin and Melinda Katz, have their eyes on being the next speaker of the City Council when Miller leaves, which is why each has raised over $300,000.

Other public officials - who are not even up for reelection this year - are also stock piling for the future. City Comptroller Bill Thompson has raised over a million dollars and Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion has raised over $500,000.

Incumbents argue that term limits and redistricting make them more vulnerable to challengers and so they must plan for the future.

"Those who are looking to stay in politics are wise to continually raise money," said Evan Paulsen, a representative for Brooklyn Councilmember David Yassky, who has raised $144,000 this year and $84,000 more for an unspecified race in 2005. "The amount of money you raise - valid or not - gives you more power in politics and a seat at the table."

At a recent fundraising event, Bronx Councilmember Oliver Koppell was blunt when asked why he continues to raise money even though he faces little opposition; Koppell told the Norwood News that money can "frighten off the opposition."

TAXPAYER-FUNDED FIGHTS AGAINST PHANTOM OPPOSITION

Although term limits kicked out two thirds of the City Council members in 2001, this year, since the law allows officials two consecutive terms in office, incumbents once again reign supreme. In the September primary, only one incumbent lost. In the general election, nine of the 51 current council members do not even have an opponent. And many of the others face only nominal opposition.

Yet still they raise money -- and expect their matching funds from the taxpayers. This year, the city's campaign finance program gave City Council candidates $4.9 million in matching funds.

The system has provisions that are supposed to ensure that the money is not spent frivolously.

For example, if a candidate faces no opposition, he is not entitled to matching funds. If a candidate faces a "nominal" opponent, he is eligible for only a quarter of the available matching funds.

However, the program allows candidates to request additional funds and make their case that they face serious opposition. So this year, a dozen City Council incumbents wrote letters to the city's campaign finance board requesting the full amount of public funds.

 

One Councilmember wanted $82,500 to fight "the entrenched political machine." His opponent raised a total of $1,130.
For the September primary race, Brooklyn Councilmember Charles Barron said he needed $82,500 because "the entrenched political machine has repeatedly found means of supporting my opponents."

However, this "political machine" seems to have broken down a bit, since Barron's primary opponent, Derek Booker, raised a total of $1,130.

Nevertheless, so far, the campaign finance board has awarded $66,000 to Charles Barron and $45,000 to Councilmember Sarah Gonzalez, who also requested the full amount.

While candidates are required to spend their matching money during this election year - and must return whatever they do not spend - getting their face and name out in the neighborhood through mailings and posters can only help in future elections.

Even the Republican council members, who have argued that the campaign finance program costs taxpayers too much money, are not above asking for some extra dough themselves from those taxpayers.

Staten Island Councilmember James Oddo, who voted against the program in 2001, requested additional funds. So did Staten Island Councilmember Andrew Lanza, who wrote "it is important, as one of only three Republicans in the City Council, that I am able to get my message out to voters." His only opponent, Roehl Sybing, may have even more trouble getting the message out, having raised only $4,447.

Oddo and Lanza were both awarded $82,500 in public funds.

A PERSONAL WAR CHEST

This election year, most of the money is coming from a different kind of war chest: Mayor Michael Bloomberg's wallet.

The mayor is spending $2 million of his own money in support of a ballot initiative to institute nonpartisan elections.

"I have a right as an individual citizen to spend my money," Bloomberg said.

The State Democratic Party is reportedly spending about $400,000 to defeat the measure.

Mayor Bloomberg defends spending his own money, saying that his financial independence means he is not beholden to unions, special interests, or donors. And he argues that nonpartisan elections will open city elections to more candidates and voters.

Opponents, who point out that the mayor's name and photograph are not even listed on the expensive brochures being mailed to voters, say that nonpartisan elections will only make it easier for rich, self-financed candidates to get elected.

In 2001, the mayor spent $75 million, or $100 for each of the 744,757 votes he received. Bloomberg has said he loves his job so much that he is prepared to spend the same amount - or even more - in 2005.

Facing that kind of war chest, would-be Democratic mayoral candidates like Council Speaker Gifford Miller want to start fundraising as early as possible.

"In politics," said Sheinkopf, "money is almost everything."

 

Campaign 2003 - General Election Guide to the Last Minute Voter


 


In an election season that newspaper headlines have described with words like "yawn" and "eye-glazing," Robert Newman is excited, in at least three ways.

Newman stays late at subway stops in Brooklyn while volunteers for the Working Families Party urge New Yorkers to vote "no" on Mayor Michael Bloomberg's ballot proposal for nonpartisan elections.

A registered Democrat, Newman is also campaigning with the Working Families Party, a small party started in 1998, which has a shot at electing their first member of the New York City Council in Fort Greene this year, in the race to succeed assassinated Councilmember James Davis.

Then there is the fact that Newman, a legal aid lawyer, is himself running for Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge. The Brooklyn judicial system has been plagued with scandal and Newman feels he has a shot. "I think voters are looking for an alternative," he said. "We have a whole slate of candidates."

Non-partisan elections, competitive City Council races, the Brooklyn judges scandal -- there are plenty of reasons to vote on November 4. For those New Yorkers confused by all of the brochures, ballot questions, and judicial and City Council races this fall, we offer the following guide:

• What Is At Stake?
• Who Is Running for City Council in My District?
• Which City Council Races Are Competitive?
• What Questions Are on the Ballot?
• What Are Nonpartisan Elections?
• Where Do I Vote?
• What If I Encounter Problems At the Polls
• How Do I Find Out the Results?


WHAT IS AT STAKE?

On November 4, New Yorkers will decide races for City Council, judicial seats, and district attorney. They will also answer "yes" or "no" to five ballot questions dealing with issues like debt, sewers, schools, city elections, contracts, and government administration.

City Council

While many New Yorkers may not be able to name their City Council member, most have something to say about issues like taxes, trash pick-ups, firehouse closures, or the school system, for which council members are responsible. In the last two years, the City Council has approved increases to the property tax, sales tax, and income tax. Just a few months ago, the council voted on a budget that cut 4,000 city workers and closed six firehouses. Next year, the city is expected to have a $2 billion deficit, which means that more cuts may be needed.

Judicial Races

The Brooklyn judicial system has been plagued by news reports of scandal and political patronage. Recently Brooklyn Democratic leader Clarence Norman was indicted for allegedly buying and selling judgeships, but many argue that the other boroughs have similar problems. (For more on the judicial scandal, play Gotham Gazette's Judges Game.)

Ballot Questions

While the ballot questions are written in confusing legal language and take some effort to comprehend, each will affect the future of the city. Should small towns be able to build more sewers or schools? Should the election system be overhauled? Does the city need to give more city contracts to women and minority-owned businesses? Is the government run efficiently? Voters will have to consider each of these questions.


WHO IS RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL IN MY DISTRICT?

On Election Day, some voters will find they live in a different City Council district than the last time they went to the polls.

Since the last local election in 2001, the City Council district lines were redrawn to reflect new census data, and so some voters have new representatives. Those who live on the edge of a district or in a neighborhood that has experienced a large change in ethnic make-up are most likely to see a change.

The best way to find your district is to:

1. Go to Gotham Gazette's Campaign 2003 page. 2. Type in your address. 3. Click "Find It!" 4. Click on the Campaign Button in the top right hand column.

On the district page, you will find a list of candidates running, information about their campaign contributions, candidate biographies, and an archive of news stories from the campaign trail.

There is also information on how each council member voted on the dozen most divisive votes of the last two years - like the 18.5 percent property tax increase, the law that banned smoking in bars and restaurants, and a resolution urging the U.S. not to go to war with Iraq.


WHICH CITY COUNCIL RACES ARE COMPETITIVE?

Since Democratic voters outnumber Republicans in New York, most of the City Council elections are in effect decided in the September primary.

The most watched race for the general election has been the district 35 campaign to fill the vacant seat of slain City Councilmember James Davis, who was shot in City Hall in July. Davis's brother, Geoffrey Davis, has been selected as the Democratic nominee. But he is facing a strong challenge from three other candidates - Letitia James, Anthony Herbert, and Abraham Wasserman.

District 19 in Queens is one of the few areas in the city that has elected a Republican to City Council. But in 2001, Democrat Tony Avella beat his Republican opponent, although only by 357 votes. Now a new Republican candidate is trying to win the seat back and is challenging the incumbent on his record on taxes, zoning, and parking.

District 43 in Brooklyn, City Councilmember Vincent Gentile, who has voted to raise several taxes since taking office in the spring, is hoping he can hang on to his seat in an area that has elected Republicans in the past.

For more races to watch, go to 2003 Campaign Coverage.


WHAT QUESTIONS ARE ON THE BALLOT?

On November 4, voters will be asked to answer "yes" or "no" to five ballot questions. (Read Guide to the Ballot Proposals)

The first two questions are amendments to the New York State Constitution that would allow small towns to borrow more money to build sewers and new schools. Although they would primarily affect small counties upstate, all voters in the state - including New York City voters who are not affected - have a say on this proposal because their taxes will pay for the measures.

The last three questions were placed on the ballot by Mayor Michael Bloomberg's charter revision commission and would change the city's laws regarding elections, contracting, and government administration.

Education advocates tried to put a sixth question on the ballot to consider the problem of school overcrowding, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg fought the measure in court and it was removed. (Read more about the class size ballot initiative)

Click on the questions below for a step-by-step guide to each question, with arguments pro and con:

The Five Questions

1. Paying for Sewage System
2. Paying for Schools in Small Cities
3. Non-Partisan Elections
4. City Purchasing
5. Government Administration


WHAT ARE NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS?

The most contentious question on the ballot this year: Should New York City institute nonpartisan elections?

This proposal would establish a new system of elections for local city offices. The September primary would be open to all candidates and voters, regardless of party affiliation. Candidates can still list their party affiliation on the ballot. The top two vote getters would then compete in the November general election.

If approved, the plan would not take effect until 2009, after Mayor Michael Bloomberg leaves office. Still, the mayor is spending $2 million of his own money to back the plan.

The mayor and the charter commission say that the ballot initiative will increase voter turnout and minority participation, create better choices for voters, and limit the corruption of party politics.

Critics say studies show that minority representation and voter participation have not increased in cities that have nonpartisan elections, and that this kind of nonpartisan elections has no track record in a city like New York. Some also object to the process by which this question was brought to the voters, and what they consider the mayor's stealth campaign to push it through.

For more information on the ballot proposal, try these Web sites:

Arguments both Pro and Con

• City's Campaign Finance Board Voters Guide

Vote "Yes"

• It Is Time for Non Partisan Elections by Frank Macchiarola, charter commission chair. (Gotham Gazette)
• Vote Yes, by Wayne Barrett. (Village Voice)
• City Charter Revision Commission
• Independence Party

Vote "No"

• Crusading for Some Real Reforms by Mark Green. (Gotham Gazette)
• Vote No by Tom Robbins. (Village Voice)
• New York Public Research Interest Group
• Association of the Bar of the City of New York
• Citizens Union
• Common Cause New York
• Women's City Club of New York
• Working Families Party


WHERE DO I VOTE?

Registered voters should have received a yellow post card in the mail with the address of their polling place. If you did not, call the Board of Elections at 1-866-VOTE NYC, try the board's poll site locator web site, or e-mail them at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. with your complete address, and you should receive an email instructing you where to vote.

Polls open at 6:00 a.m. and close at 9:00 p.m. Absentee ballots must be hand-delivered to the Board of Elections by 9:00 p.m.


WHAT IF I ENCOUNTER PROBLEMS AT THE POLLS?

If you have problems at your polling site on Election Day, call the New York Public Interest Research Group Voter Help Line 212-822-0282 to register your complaint.

On their Web site, the New York Public Research Interest Group also has instructions for how to work the voting machine and a Voter's Bill of Rights, which answers basic questions like "Can I bring someone with me to help vote?" and "Can I still vote if the machine breaks?" (The answer to both questions is "yes.")


HOW DO I FIND OUT THE RESULTS?

Television stations and newspapers will cover the ballot questions and City Council races, but some results - like judicial races - are more difficult to find.

Visit Gotham Gazette's results page on election night and the following days. Remember, a close race can take days or weeks to decide.

Clarence Norman And Non-Partisan Elections


Earlier this month in state Supreme Court, Brooklyn Democratic leader and New York state assemblyman Clarence Norman faced charges of grand larceny and failing to file business records.

The charges outline a series of alleged misdeeds by the nine-term assemblyman, including failing to report thousands of dollars in campaign contributions, and accepting contributions in excess of the limits allowed by campaign finance law. He is also accused of taking $5000 from the Democratic Party coffers for personal use, and taking a per diem from the State of New York for travel expenses to and from Albany, while separately billing the county Democratic Party for the same travel related expenses.

Norman, who pled not guilty to all charges and professes his innocence, faces seven years in prison if convicted.

The arraignment of the Democratic Party boss came less than a month before New York City voters are scheduled to go to the polls and decide whether or not to replace the current citywide election system with a series of non-partisan elections. Supporters of the non-partisan election system have suggested there is a need to reduce the influence of political party bosses in the voting process.

These charges, if proven to be accurate, could be seen as an example of the need to change the system. But a non-partisan election system, on its own, won't automatically reduce the influence of political parties in city government. Here's a breakdown of what should, could, and will not change, depending on the outcome of the November 4th elections:

What Should Change

The fact that someone can hold an elected government office and be an elected party official simultaneously is more than an example of the potential for undue influence of a political party; it's an example of the potential for massive conflicts of interest.

It is an apparent quirk in an otherwise stringent set of financing and electioneering rules. But the body of legislation that encompasses local, state, and federal election law does not prohibit, in the City of New York, a person from holding both a party office and an elected legislative or executive office at the same time.

The law does provide extensive rules for ensuring that elected legislators don't do political work on taxpayer time, or for making sure that political parties and party committees don't collude with campaigns to do their campaigning directly for them. There are firewalls, and disclosure forms, and compliance standards, all to make sure that the work of political parties, and the work of political campaigns, and the work of governing, are all kept separate. As they should be.

But there is nothing preventing the people who are in charge of all those things from actually being the same person. And that should change.

What Could Change

The non-partisan election proposal doesn't actually get rid of political parties. It doesn't outlaw political parties, or take away their ability to organize; it just takes political party labels off of election ballots, and the nomination process out of party hands. The people running for office could still be endorsed by political parties, they could still receive the support of a party organization, they could still be their party's "preferred choice" or standard bearer. But without party primaries to officially determine the nominees, the candidates may not need the party the way they did in the past. They may still want the party's help. They may still court the party members. But they won't need the party. They can get along without the party, if they have to.

And when you go from being the party that chooses the nominee, to the party who is allowed to help the nominee, you've lost statutory authority. It doesn't necessarily follow that you are going to lose influence as well. But it's a possibility. Political parties are the single most important voting cue in New York City right now. And that could change.

What Will Not Change

If the non-partisan election proposal passes, the law will apply to all citywide elections for city offices. It will not apply to those elected officials who represent part of New York City in other levels of government:

• It will not apply to U.S. Congressmen and Congresswomen from New York City.
• It will not apply to state senators from New York City.
• It will not apply to members of the state assembly from New York City (e.g., it would not apply to Clarence Norman).

And, if the non-partisan proposal passes, it won't prohibit anyone who is a party leader or party official from running for office in a non-partisan election. Under the new law, the same person, in theory, could be a top party official and be elected mayor of New York at the same time.

Whatever happens on November 4th, whether non-partisan elections are voted into law, or the existing system stays in place, there are a number of factors that determine how much influence political parties hold in our election system. And the party primary/party nomination is only one of those factors.

Susan Reefer is a Republican pollster and media strategist. She is based in New York City.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years