It all seemed a little creepy -- a cross between "American Idol" and one of those sadistic social science experiments from the 1960s -- when, on the first night, the foreign artist-contestants arrived in the Chelsea gallery, handed over their passports to the stern-looking young man in a uniform, and sat on their assigned mattresses in a row along a barren wall. They had become detainees.
"Before I got here, I was really nervous," Maria Sanjines, an artist from Colombia, South America, told me. "And now I see why."
"I didn't know this would be so extreme," said Dusanka Komnenic, an abstract painter from Serbia and Montenegro.
The two women were among the ten foreign artists from four continents who had been selected to participate in AsylumNYC, a week-long art competition and exhibition held last month at the White Box gallery.
Only two things were clear at the outset. First, the winner of the competition would get the free services of an immigration lawyer, who would help them apply for a particular type of visa for "extraordinary ability in the field of arts" that, if granted, would enable them to stay in the United States for three years.
Second, little else was clear -- not how the 10 finalists were chosen out of the 235 artists from 43 countries who applied; not how the winner would be chosen; not why the finalists were being asked to eat and sleep for five days and nights in the gallery under a set of draconian and arbitrary rules. They were not allowed to leave their assigned space without permission, could not talk to each other, could only speak to visitors and only in English, and were required to create a work of art using only materials that they could wrangle from visitors to the gallery. They were given a prison-drab green t-shirt to wear.
“We're creating an impossible situation, and we're making an impossible choice," said Martin Rosengaard, the man wearing the uniform (which, with pink piping and epaulettes, looked like an outfit that Michael Jackson might wear.) He is a member of the Berlin-based art collective, Wooloo Productions, that came up with AsylumNYC, the latest of their art projects.
”The first day I was depressed,” Valeria Cordero, an artist from Venezuela, said on the third day. “I understand what they’re doing now. They’re replicating the conditions that immigrants face. This is not really about art, it’s about immigration.”
Taylor and Kat and Ace and Mandisa and Bucky knew what it took to become an American Idol. But for Dusanka and Maria and Marlina and Nao and other foreign artists, the rules for becoming an American -- or even just performing in America -- can be excruciating.
Artists who wish to come to the United States face many of the same barriers that confront any immigrants, along with some additional obstacles.
"It's always been completely different to get immigration services for artists than anybody else," says Leon Wildes, a practicing immigration lawyer in New York for 45 years who is best known for having successful represented John Lennon and Yoko Ono in the government's efforts to deport them. "The law has always been based on having an applicant for immigration be sponsored by an employer, who guarantees a salary and so forth. But most artists are self-employed; nobody wants to hire a fine artist or a composer. The government has never amended the law to accommodate artists."
Nao Matsumoto, a furniture maker from Japan who now lives in Brooklyn (and one of the ten AsylumNYC finalists), certainly does not feel accommodated. “I don’t understand why we need a sponsor to apply for any visa. I have seen enough examples of employers completely manipulating immigrant workers using the green card or the work visa as leverage to make them work in bad conditions.” Nevertheless, artists and craftsmen must seek out a sponsor, and so, he says, “it is not what we as individuals want to do in this country, but what the sponsor wants to do using us.”
While Matsumoto expresses some sympathy with the foreigners who are in the United States illegally, he also is frustrated that so much attention has been on them lately, while those in the country legally can also face difficulties; his own legal visa is running out in a few weeks. “I am a professional craftsman and I have had all my higher education, undergrad and graduate, in the U.S. I have been living in this country for 12 years abiding by all the rules as a legal immigrant, paying taxes every single year. At this point, my feelings are, why not let me stay?”
Shahzia Sikander is one of the lucky artists from abroad. Born in Pakistan, where she attended the National College of Arts, Sikander came to the United States to study at the Rhode Island School of Design. On one of her first visits to New York City, she recalls, she went to the Drawing Center, and told them “I have my work with me. Can I show you?” They said they had only ten minutes to look at it. But that, as it turns out, was all it took: “They accepted me into a show.” Her modern take on traditional miniature painting soon was exhibited at museums such as the Whitney and the Museum of Modern Art. Now living in New York City, Sikander has an EB-1 visa, a category that accepts her as an artist of exceptional ability and allows her to stay in the United States as long as she wants. But even she does not sound please at the way things are set up. ”It took eight years,” she says. “I couldn't leave the country. It was kind of an imprisonment.”
Not all foreign artists would like to live here. Some merely want to visit – musicians, dancers and artists to perform, visual artists to accompany exhibitions of their work. That has become increasingly difficult as well.
”There are only 10,000 O-1 temporary visas for solo performers granted in the entire United States each year,” says immigration attorney Daniel Aharoni.
And in the past five years, it has been more inconvenient to get hold of those visas. "Since 9/11, the government must eyeball every applicant," Aharoni says. In those countries where there are no American embassies or consulates, the applicant must make a trip to the closest one, which can be quite far away.
This is an inconvenience felt not just by the artists, but by their (would-be) American audiences.
The cellist Yo-Yo Ma told Congress last month the story of two Iranian musicians who have performed in the United States some 10 times over the past decade, yet were forced to fly from Iran to Dubai three times in order to obtain a visa from the American embassy there in order to perform for an 11th time in the United States. “The process cost $5,000 and lasted three months,” Ma said. Other musicians, “Zola, one of the prodigies of the long-song tradition in Mongolia, and Wu Tong, the virtuosic Chinese Sheng player and singer,” were shut out completely. "It is on behalf of these culture guides that I am here today to urge you to simplify the visa process," the cellist testified in front of members of the House Government Reform Committee, so that there will no longer be such "extraordinarily high" barriers to have foreign artists visit the United States.
The visa application process for artists is so complex that a number of non-profit agencies have put together a Web site, Artists From Abroad, as a guide to the "principal nonimmigrant work-related visa categories used by the performing arts world." (Among the questions it tries to answer – what tangible proofs one needs to persuade the authorities that one is an artist of extraordinary ability.)
Dusanka Komnenic will get some help navigating the process. At the end of the week, Rosengaard and the other members of Wooloo announced that Komnenic had won the right to consult with the immigration attorney, Daniel Aharoni, who was waiving his usual fee of up to $10,000. They did not really explain why they had selected her. Perhaps it is because she had rebelled against the “border” in black tape that had been put up around her mattress, by putting more black tape on the ground and up the wall, “to cover the border, so that nobody could find it” – a metaphor for all those artists and immigrants, and immigrant artists who, she says, "do not want to be excluded."
Â
Every two weeks the New York City Council meets for its Stated Meeting to introduce and pass legislation. As a regular feature, Searchlight covers these meetings and posts a summary of the bills passed.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
"The goal is to make sure that... lobbyists can't wine and dine their way into the hearts of elected officials, and therefore wine and dine their way into the budget or into the law books." - Speaker Christine Quinn on a package of lobbying reform bills.
MEETING SUMMARY:
WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE AND HYBRID TAXIS
The New York City Council passed a bill (Intro 339-A) that will put more wheelchair accessible and alternative fuel taxis on city streets.
Of the 308 taxi medallions that will be sold next month, the legislation approved by the council ensures that 54 of them will be for new handicap accessible taxis and 254 will be hybrid taxis.
In total, the city will increase the number of wheelchair accessible taxis to 231 from 27 and the number of alternative fuel taxis to 273 from 19.
The legislation also seeks an additional 150 wheelchair accessible vehicles in the next medallion sale.
"Taxis are symbols of New York City," said City Councilmember John Liu, chair of the transportation committee. "But they are also a symbol of inaccessibility for too many New Yorkers and a symbol of pollution for too many New Yorkers."
Advocates for the disabled, who have fought for more than a decade for the taxis, said the effort was an important step, but that more must be done to serve the 60,000 city residents who use a wheelchair or scooter everyday.
The measure passed by a vote of 49 to 0. The bill also has the support of the Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the Taxi and Limousine Commission.
LOBBYING REFORM
The City Council also approved a set of regulations aimed at curtailing lobbyists' power at City Hall.
Intro 190-A will require that the City Clerk educate lobbyists on existing regulations and undertake random audits to ensure that lobbyists who also raise money for candidates or serve as political consultants are reporting their activities properly.
Intro 191-A will ban gifts from lobbyists to elected officials. Currently, officials are allowed to receive gifts valued at up to $50. Violators will be subject to a fine of up to $30,000. However, the bill was amended to allow exceptions for small gifts like pens, mugs and T-shirts.
Intro 192-A will change the city's campaign finance law so that contributions from registered lobbyists can no longer be matched with public funds. In the past, such contributions were matched $4 to $1.
The council also modified its own rules (Res 348) to limit access to the speaker's office, the private council lounge, and the floor of the council chambers when the body is voting.
"The goal is to make sure that... lobbyists can't wine and dine their way into the hearts of elected officials, and therefore wine and dine their way into the budget or into the law books," said Speaker Christine Quinn.
Some critics have said the council should have also prevented lobbyists from holding fundraisers for lawmakers and "bundling" donations that can still be matched by public funds.
Speaker Quinn said the effort was not the "final step on this matter" and that the council would continue to work to ensure that "scandals that have rocked other legislative bodies do not happen at City Hall."
The council also promised to make sure that the City Clerk enforces the new laws, something that has been lacking in the past.
"No City Clerk has ever fined a lobbyist ever," said Quinn.
The measure passed by a vote of 49 to 0 and has the support of Mayor Bloomberg.
LANDMARKS COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
The most divisive issue of the day was Mayor Bloomberg's appointment of Margery Perlmutter to the Landmarks Preservation Commission.
Some preservation groups objected to the appointment of Perlmutter, who works for the law firm Bryan Cave where she has represented clients such as Con Edison and Viacom. Those who opposed the appointment said Perlmutter's work created a conflict of interest.
"We are approving the first registered lobbyist to the Landmarks Preservation Commission," said Councilmember Tony Avella. "You can't serve two masters."
In her testimony at the committee meeting prior to the vote, Perlmutter promised to recuse herself from any matters that would present a conflict of interest with her law firm or her husband's architecture firm. She also agreed to resign from community board 8 in Manhattan.
Some council members were also upset that Perlmutter, who lives in Manhattan, will replace a commission member from Queens.
"The Landmarks Commission has been too Manhattan-centric," said Councilmember Lew Fidler.
But most council members said they felt that Perlmutter was "highly qualified" for the job.
"There wasn't debate about her resume or qualifications," said Councilmember Jessica Lappin, who voted in favor of the appointment. "The Municipal Art Society did a great deal of work examining her record and testified that her decisions were `within the mainstream.'"
Perlmutter's appointment was approved by a vote of 39 to 10; Tony Avella, Charles Barron, Gale Brewer, Helen Foster, Vincent Gentile, Eric Gioia, Tish James, Annabel Palma, Melissa Mark Viverito, and David Yassky voted "no."
COMMITTEE CHANGES
The council also made changes to the membership of its committees.
On the Contracts Committee, Michael Nelson will replace Al Vann.
On the Economic Development Committee, Michael McMahon will replace Peter Vallone, Jr.
And Carmen Arroyo and Dennis Gallagher were added to the Sanitation and Solid Waste Management Committee.
The next Stated Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 13, 2006.
Â
At the most recent meeting on May 10, 2006, members of the New York City Council introduced 27 new bills, most of which will never be passed into a law. Still individual council members hope their bills will at least generate public discussion - and result in some action - on the issues that concern them.
Here is a look at a few of the new bills that the council will consider in the coming weeks and months.
HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE TAXIS
Next month, the city is scheduled to sell more than 300 new taxi medallions, but some City Council members are threatening to stop the sale unless the Taxi and Limousine Commission agrees to make more of the cabs accessible to people in wheelchairs.
Only 27 of the 13,000 yellow cabs on the road are currently handicap accessible, even though an estimated 60,000 New Yorkers use wheelchairs. A bill (Intro 340) drafted by City Councilmembers John Liu and Oliver Koppell would require that 154 of the 308 taxi medallions sold next month be set aside for wheelchair accessible cabs.
"We must begin providing taxis that will give individuals with disabilities and senior citizens a greater choice in terms of transportation and make sure that no one is left stranded," said Koppell.
It would also require that 154 new cabs be environmentally friendly, hybrid cars.
STREET VENDORS
For the past 20 years, the city has limited the number of street vendor licenses that can be given out each year: 853 licenses to sell general merchandise and 3,000 licenses to sell food are distributed annually.
City Councilmember Charles Barron argues that street vending is one of the few occupations in which low-skilled New Yorkers can find work and that there should be no restriction on the number of licenses. Barron's bill (Intro 324) would remove the cap.
"If you're not going to supply jobs for people, and they have the where-with-all to create jobs for themselves, well don't limit them and say we're going to put a cap on how many food vendors can get a license," said Barron.
Supporters say it would benefit both workers and the city, which would collect as much as $27 million a year in taxes and fees. But opponents worry about more vendors clogging sidewalks.
UPGRADING 311
By many measures, the 311-call line that Mayor Michael Bloomberg instituted in 2003 has been a success. New Yorkers are able to dial one number and be connected with the city agency that can best address a complaint. 311 receives more than 1 million calls each month, and three quarters of the calls are answered in 30 seconds or less.
However, the City Council and other elected officials have criticized the mayor for failing to share 311 data with the public.
A bill (Intro 325) introduced by Gale Brewer would require the Bloomberg administration to make 311 call data available on the official city of New York Web site in a searchable format.
The bill would also enable New Yorkers to send complaints to the 311-call center by e-mail or online interactive technology.
REGULATING PEDICABS
The Bloomberg administration and the City Council are looking to regulate pedicabs, for-hire bicycle taxis that for years have had few rules governing their operation on city streets.
At the request of the mayor's office, City Councilmember Leroy Comrie has introduced a bill (Intro 331) that would require pedicab owners and drivers to obtain licenses from the city and to carry insurance in case of accidents.
(Read an article by a pedicab driver on the issue.)
DEMOLITION PERMITS
Some local officials complain that buildings in their neighborhoods - some that are in perfectly good shape or contain affordable apartments - are being torn down without their knowledge, so that developers can build new more expensive apartment buildings.
To address the issue, City Councilmember Letitia James introduced a bill (Intro 338) that would require the Department of Buildings, the agency that issues demolition permits, to notify the local council member and the community board if a building that is less than 75 years old is going to be torn down.
Councilmember Rosie Mendez has introduced a bill (Intro 340) that would institute additional requirements for the demolition of buildings that contain rent-regulated apartments.
DANGEROUS BASEBALL BATS
For several years, Staten Island Councilmember James Oddo has been on a crusade to ban aluminum baseball bats from the city's little leagues. Baseballs can travel up to 120 mph when hit off of a metal bat, compared to about 90 mph when hit off of a wooden bat. Teenagers across the nation have been seriously injured and even killed by baseballs hit off of metal bats.
Oddo's bill (Intro 341), which was first introduced in 2002, would restrict the use of metal bats from competitive games for students high-school age and younger.
TAXPAYER FUNDED GREETINGS
Some elected officials in the city like to take out advertisements in their local newspapers to wish their constituents a happy holiday, to announce the anniversary of some long-time friend, or to congratulate a local civic organization on their latest event. The problem with this practice, according to City Councilmember Tony Avella, is that taxpayers are paying for what is effectively an advertisement promoting the politician.
Avella introduced a bill (Intro 323) that would make it illegal for public officials to buy such newspaper ads with taxpayer money.
Every two weeks the New York City Council meets for its Stated Meeting to introduce and pass legislation. As a regular feature, Searchlight covers these meetings and posts a summary of the bills passed.
MEETING SUMMARY:
EMERGING BUSINESS ENTERPRISE BILL
Last year, the New York City Council created the Minority and Women Owned Business Enterprise Program, which requires each city agency to establish a plan to encourage minority and women-owned businesses to compete for city contracts under $1 million.
In the process of creating that program, however, some members of the City Council felt that other business owners who may not fit the specific categories still need additional assistance in competing for city contracts.
In response, the City Council passed Intro 180-A, known as the Emerging Business Enterprise bill, which creates a new category for business owners who have been "socially and economically disenfranchised."
"There is a need for legislation that addresses issues not attributed to gender and race," said Councilmember Diana Reyna, who authored the bill.
The bill sets a goal of giving six percent of all city contracts under $1 million to this new category of business owner.
Council members admitted that they are still working out the details of exactly who can qualify, but they said that ideally it would include people with disabilities or other kinds of minority groups.
The Department of Small Businesses will administer the program and review applicants on a case-by-case basis.
"We know from anecdotal evidence that there are others who do not yet have fair opportunities to compete for contracts," said Councilmember Yvette Clark.
The measure passed by a vote of 46 to 4; Republicans James Oddo, Andrew Lanza, and Dennis Gallagher and Democrat Simcha Felder voted "no."
NEW OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT CENTER
The deployment center for the Office of Emergency Management's search and rescue team will soon have a new home in Brooklyn.
The current headquarters for the agency's team, which is trained to respond to catastrophic events, is located on Pier 36 in Manhattan. However, the pier is slated to become a park, and the agency has been looking for a new location that has easy access to all five boroughs.
At the suggestion of the Bloomberg administration, the council approved a new location for the Emergency Management center on Flushing Avenue in Bushwick, Brooklyn.
Councilmember Diana Reyna, who represents the district where the new center will be located, had proposed other development plans for the area, but agreed to the new center if the agency considers it only a temporary location.
Under the lease agreement, the Office of Emergency Management will have to find a new location after seven years.
The measure passed by a vote of 50 to 0.
NEW STREET NAMES
The council also passed legislation to rename 58 streets across the city, many for people who died in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
However, the council also gave some other famous people - including former City Councilmember Herb Berman, Special Olympics coach Joann Young, and singer Al Jolson - their own street signs. Even Bob Marley now has his own avenue in Brooklyn; a portion of Church Avenue will be renamed for the reggae singer.
The next Stated Meeting is scheduled for May 24, 2006.
Â
When I turn 18 next year, one of the first things I will do is to register to vote. To me, voting shows that a person belongs to a society. It symbolizes maturity and gives the voter a voice among millions. I have a year before I will have that voice, but what if I could vote right now? The idea of voting as a 16 or 17-year-old never crossed my mind until I heard about a group of New York City teens fighting for the right to vote in city elections. When I found out that some of these teenagers were gathering at City Hall to draw attention to their cause, I decided to see what they were all about.
On the steps of City Hall, I met the passionate group of teen members of Future Voters of America. The teens at the rally told me that since they live in a country that prides itself on being democratic, they should be able to participate in that democracy. They felt their needs and ideas were being overlooked by the city.
But they are not being overlooked by City Councilmember Gale Brewer, who has re-introduced legislation to allow 16 and 17-year olds to vote in local elections. New York City would be the first city in the United States to bestow this right, though a similar effort is underway in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and 16-year-olds already have the right to vote in local elections in nations as different as Israel, Germany and Brazil. In Iran, kids as young as 15 are reportedly allowed to participate in elections.
“A 13-year-old can be tried as an adult. A 16-year-old can drive and have a job,” Brewer said. “Teens need to have a say in the policies and decisions that affect their lives.”
The legislation is now in committee and if the City Council passes it and Mayor Michael Bloomberg signs it into law, Brewer estimates that as many as 200,000 16- and 17-year-olds would have the right to vote in city elections.
Brewer stood by her teen supporters at the recent rally at City Hall to draw attention to teen voting rights. And in a letter to City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, Brewer argued that the legislation would encourage more teens to get involved in local issues. “Their voices would be heard on key issues such as education, housing, community development and environmental concerns,” she wrote. “If given a chance to vote, the youth could increase their interest in civic life and continue voting in future years. It is often argued that many 18 to 20 year olds do not vote because they have not been exposed to involvement in political participation. This bill would address this issue.”
Students at the rally such as Eidia Monei from La Guardia High School and Aneeba Rehman from Hunter College agreed, arguing they are mature and knowledgeable enough to cast a ballot on issues such as public housing and the environment.
City Councilmember James Oddo of Staten Island is one of those opposed to the legislation. "We applaud the young activists who have such a strong interest in government, and we wish more of their classmates felt as strongly as they do," wrote Christopher DeSicco, spokeman for Oddo's office. "However, they appear to be the exception and not the rule, and we believe extending the franchise to teenagers under the age of 18 is simply bad public policy. The election of municipal officers is serious business and the city’s elected officials must approve a budget that now exceeds $50 billion annually. The choices made will affect the city for years. We cannot leave such important decisions to kids who are still in high school and who may not yet even have a basic understanding of basic American government.”
I myself am not sure that teens would take advantage of their voting rights. Of course, many adults don’t either. The teens who would be mostly likely to vote if the voting age is lowered do have strong opinions and ideas about public policies. And, say the advocates of a lower voting age, teens would bring a fresh new perspective to politics, their energy and spirit reminding adults of the excitement they once felt when they saw a world before them ready to be changed.
Desiree Bailey is a junior at Benjamin Cardozo High School in Queens, and a writer for the teen-written magazine New Youth Connections, published by Youth Communication. Â
Every ten years, public officials draw strange shapes on maps of New York State. Some resemble coffee spilled on maps; others look like huge claws or Abraham Lincoln riding a vacuum cleaner. This is not an exercise in abstract art, however; it is how legislative districts are drawn in New York State.
Critics have long mocked New York's acceptance of partisan redistricting – or gerrymandering – as antidemocratic, saying it explicitly discourages competitive elections. To date, there has been little momentum in Albany to change the way redistricting is carried out, though, largely because state legislators benefit from the current system. That may be changing however. The four major party candidates for governor have all recently called for serious redistricting reform, and a bill that would create an independent commission has been introduced into the state assembly.
There is wide agreement that change is needed, but some confusion about how that change would look.
"We need to know much better what we're getting into when we talk about reform," said Jeremy Creelan at a recent conference on redistricting organized by Citizens Union Foundation, which publishes Gotham Gazette, and the School of Public Affairs at Baruch College.
Reformers are grappling with a series of questions:
- Should creative districts be created by trying to keep the numbers of Democrats and Republicans even?
- How important is it to have districts correspond to existing political borders, like county lines?
- Should neighborhoods have to be wholly included in single districts, or can they be split up?
- Should redistricting be used to create bases of political power for groups that have traditionally lacked it?
- What is the harm in having districts that look like historical figures riding household appliances?
Theoretically, redistricting updates district lines in order to reflect shifts in the state's population. The new districts must all contain roughly the same number of people (there is a ten percent allowable range of population size between districts). Districts are also supposed to be "compact and contiguous", so that they reflect actual geographic communities.
But the main criteria now used to determine how district lines are drawn, critics charge, is how well they will serve incumbent lawmakers. Lines now dip and weave to include friendly populations in some districts and cut unfriendly populations out of others. In at least one case, the lines swerve around several blocks, with the intent of protecting one incumbent from a potentially dangerous political opponent.
The people who benefit most from partisan redistricting are the ones who actively engage in it – those who already hold public office. Being a lawmaker in Albany is one of the more secure forms of employment that exists. About 98 percent of incumbents are reelected in each round of elections, usually by huge margins. Nearly 60 percent of incumbents in the last election either ran unopposed or faced an opponent who had raised less than $1,000.
In Texas, Republicans recently gerrymandered their way into greater representation on Congress over the objections of Democrats. In New York, the benefits are more bipartisan. The two parties have effectively agreed that the Senate belongs to the Republicans and the Assembly to the Democrats. Due to their efforts, there has been no change in the party that has controlled either house of the state legislature for over 30 years.
The practice of incumbents drawing district lines with the explicit goal of protecting their own jobs has been deemed legal by both state lawmakers and the courts. But because districts are drawn to shield legislators from competition, critics say, these officials tend to ignore the concerns of the constituents (whose votes don’t really matter) and instead focus on keeping in the good graces of party leaders (whose political support matters) or powerful interest groups (whose money does).
"I think it is that most New Yorkers feel that they are not in the system. There is a club of a small amount of people who have immense power in this state, and it leaves out most of us," said Rachel Leon of Common Cause New York.
Without fear of being held accountable for their lack of productivity, say Leon and others, state lawmakers perpetually fail to pass budgets on time, confront problems with Medicaid, implement the requirements of the Help America Vote Act, or address the problems of New York City public schools. The lack of real electoral competition also keeps lawmakers from minority parties from having a say in the legislative process. Strangely shaped districts make door-to-door campaigning much harder, handicapping grassroots candidates who want to challenge established incumbents. [See excerpt from forum: Disenfranchising Political Minorities]
Still, it is not only lawmakers that seek to gain from drawing lines that protect incumbents. Lucia Gomez began working on the last round of redistricting for the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, and saw nonprofit agencies working to help incumbents draw themselves secure districts. At first she assumed that politicians were taking advantage of their naiveté, but Lucia soon realized that these agencies were making a conscious political choice.
"Nonprofits and social services [organizations] rely so heavily on contracts that are provided by state agencies that they don't know any other way of having a relationship with their elected official other than doing whatever that elected official wants," she said. "A lot of our nonprofits are being used – and they love being used." [See excerpt from forum: Why Nonprofits Encourage Gerrymanding]
In other cases, those helping legislators to create secure districts have no choice.
About two-thirds of the 65,000 people in New York State prisons are locked up in facilities in rural, largely white, counties. These prisoners, who for the most part are racial minorities from urban areas, are counted as residents of the counties where they are incarcerated. They cannot vote there, however. Seven upstate senate districts containing prisons would not have enough people to get their own seat in Albany if it weren't for the non-voting prisoners also residing there.
The senators representing these districts, therefore, have a personal interest in maintaining high numbers of prisoners, said Maggie Williams of the Bronx Defenders.
"They're very aware that the reason that they're able to hold onto their seats is because of the prisons in their district," she said. [See excerpt from forum: The Way We Count Prisoners is a Crime]
There may be widespread agreement on the basic problem: incumbents use gerrymandering to guarantee a minimum level of opposition in elections. Most agree that more competition is desirable. But what is the best way to get there, and what else should be taken into account? [See excerpt from forum: Should Legislative Districts Be Redrawn to Encourage Competition?]
Sensibly Shaped Districts: Some say that the only consideration that should be taken into account when drawing districts is that they are compact, contiguous, and contain roughly the same amount of people. It is inappropriate to guarantee representation for certain ethnic groups, for instance, or to force competition between political parties. Otherwise redistricting remains a manipulative process; only the goals have changed.
Competition Will Take Care of Itself: Therefore districts, some say, should be formed only to reflect geographic communities. If they do not strive for any pre-determined outcome, some believe, legislators will automatically face challenges and thus be held accountable.
"A process that is indifferent to competitiveness will produce the result of competitiveness," said EJ McMahon of the Manhattan Institute.
Empowering the Disenfranchised: Others argue that districts must reflect the communities that people live in – even if these communities are not necessarily the most compact geographically. Furthermore, advocates for minority voting rights also believe that the historic lack of representation that such groups have suffered from needs to be taken into account. In fact, federal law requires it.
"The goal of redistricting and the election process is to give [communities with shared interests] a fair opportunity to have their interests represented," said Steve Carbo of DEMOS. "It is not a clean [process] that is best served by drawing the straightest and narrowest lines that are possible."
In other states, ostensibly independent commissions have been established to weight these myriad criteria in order to redraw political districts. Two states that have been cited as models are Iowa and Arizona.
Looking at these other states as a guide, Assemblymember Michael Gianaris is pushing a plan to create an independent commission in New York State that would handle the next round of redistricting in 2012. [See Gianaris excerpt from forum].
"We have a system now where the legal and stated goal is to actually reduce competition," he said. "If we just take that out of the equation, I feel we wouldn't have to worry too much about making sure Democrats and Republicans [are equally represented in each district], because you'd end up getting de facto competition."
All districts would have to have to be within one percent of the population of all others (as opposed to ten percent now), and the commission would be prohibited from creating a district with a partisan goal in mind. Its recommendations would have to be either approved or rejected by the legislature as a whole; lawmakers would not be allowed to make changes – except in the case of prolonged deadlock.
In other places, questions have been raised about the actual independence of such commissions. Gianaris' plan addesses this by putting "several layers" between the members and state legislators – instead of having direct appointments.
Because the state's population has been shifting towards the Democrats, the Republicans who control the State Senate have the most to lose from an impartial redistricting. But experts say that the Republicans will likely lose control of the senate no matter what. Smelling blood, some Democratic senators have been hostile to the idea of an independent commission as well, according to Gianaris.
Without a senate sponsor, the idea of an independent commission is currently stagnating. What may spark action, say advocates of reform, is the energy that the next governor puts into the issue. With all those running already lining up to support a new way to approach redistricting, they are optimistic that reluctant lawmakers will be forced to accept change.
"The one trump card we have is our gubernatorial candidates being very aggressive on this," said Gianaris. In the minds of reluctant legislators, he said, "the one thing worse than the legislature creating an independent plan is the whole thing getting thrown into court."
The police have charged Nicholas Morris with the murder of David Pacheco, the 2-year-old Bronx boy shot to death in his family car on the way to Easter dinner. But speaking during his meeting with 14 other mayors on guns in April, Mayor Michael Bloomberg cited another culprit: Congress.
Related Articles: |
"The only thing that would have helped that child is if we had the courage to stand up and get the guns off the street," Bloomberg said. "The number of people in Washington who are deliberately voting to permit guns to go to the hands of criminals is really worrisome."
Gary Ackerman |
New York City politicians and law enforcement official often complain that, despite tough state and local gun laws, firearms remain readily available on the streets of New York City because of Congress’ opposition to gun control. But it isn’t only guns. The actions of the U.S. Congress affect New Yorkers in hundreds of ways, from student standardized test scores to the war in Iraq, where 35 New York City residents have lost their lives.
The 435 member House of Representatives includes 13 representatives from New York City, 12 of them Democrats. All House members are up for re-election this year. One, Major Owens in Brooklyn, has announced he will not seek re-election prompting five Democrats, including his son, two City Council members and two members of the State Legislature, to try to replace him (see related story).
Next door to Owens’ district, longtime incumbent Edolphus Towns is facing three challengers (see related story).
Joseph Crowley |
But New York’s other House members seem to have reaped the big blessing of incumbency – little serious opposition. While candidates have until July 13 to file for the September 12 primary, most express their intentions much earlier. And so far, there do not seem to be many viable candidates out there. According to Federal Election Commission records, K.T. MacFarland has raised money in the 14th Congressional District, but the Republican now seems inclined to forego a challenge to incumbent Representative Carolyn Maloney in Manhattan’s Silk Stocking District and run against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton instead.
Despite the apparent paucity of exciting races here, the fall’s congressional contests could make a big difference for New York City. If Democrats gain control of the House, the New York delegation, for better or worse, could hold more power in Congress than it has since 1994 when the Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, took control of the House.
Eliot Engel |
Despite the decline of the kind of urban agenda that played a key role in national politics in the 1960s and into the 1970s, Congress matters. No one seems to know this better than Bloomberg. Since his re-election in November, he has been increasingly outspoken on national issues. New York represents a big source of campaign money for candidates from both parties, so Bloomberg wants the city’s donors to put their mouths where their money is and make sure candidates for national and state office promise to pursue New York City’s interests. A crib sheet the mayor has distributed lists five litmus tests, four of them at least partly Congress’ responsibility:
Transportation: Use tax credits that were part of Washington’s aid package to New York after 9/11 to build a rail link from lower Manhattan to Kennedy Airport;
Security: Distribution of homeland security funds to state and local governments, based on the level of threat facing the city or state;
Development: Opposition to federal eminent domain legislation that would restrict the use of this power and, in Bloomberg’s words, “cripple responsible redevelopment and revitalization”;
Vito Fossella |
Housing: Support for financial incentives for affordable housing.
And Bloomberg is not the only one with a list of demands for Congress. Other groups and individual have their own ideas about what Congress can do for them. A few examples:
Health Care
About $1.8 million New Yorkers do not have health insurance. “The biggest issue we face as New Yorkers is access to affordable health care,” Bloomberg said last fall. Many observers do not expect that to change significantly until the House and Senate enact some kind of national health plan.
Carolyn Maloney |
Housing
The New York City Housing Authority recently announced it plans to raise fees and rents for some public housing tenants. The public housing authority said that it faces a budget shortfall because, while energy and pension costs continue to rise, the federal government has cut funds to help house low-income New Yorkers. If Congress appropriated more money for housing, the city could keep rents down or provide more services to public housing residents.
Immigration
An estimated 652,000 illegal immigrants live in New York City, and more than a third of New Yorkers were born outside the United States. The House of Representatives has passed a very tough bill, which sets criminal penalties for illegal immigrants and people who help them and tightens border security. The Senate is currently debating immigration. Any bill it passes would have to be reconciled with the House version. The outcome of this debate could determine whether thousands of New Yorkers can remain in the country legally or be forced to leave.
Gregory Meeks |
Transportation
After decades on many New Yorkers’ wish lists, the Second Avenue subway could finally become a reality. One reason for this is that Congress appropriated money for the new East Side line and other transit projects in a major transportation bill passed last year.
Sometimes congressional involvement in New York can seem almost petty. In 1986, for example, Congress, at the behest of then Congressmember Guy Molinari, decided to charge only a one-way toll (into Staten Island) on the Verrazano Narrows Bridge. Critics charge that this has increased congestion, caused accidents and costs the Metropolitan Transportation Authority some $10 million a year. Despite that, the toll cannot be charged in both directions without an act of Congress.
Congress controls billions of dollars that affect New York – and they do not always spend it to the city’s advantage. Bloomberg has said the city sends $13 billion more in taxes to Washington than it gets back in spending. And next year's budget, proposed by President George W. Bush and now being considered by Congress, could make that imbalance worse.
Jerrold Nadler |
According to an analysis by State Comptroller Alan Hevesi, the proposed federal budget, released in February, could cause the state to “lose billions in federal funding associated with reductions in Medicaid and Medicare, education, transportation and labor spending.” While Bloomberg asked Washington for $100 million more this year, the proposed budget cuts funds to the city by $1.35 billion, says a report by Representative Anthony Weiner, a Democrat.
The cuts cited by Weiner include a $32 million cut in the $203 million for homeland security the city gets from Washington and $84 million less for Medicaid and Medicare. “It is a budget that cuts the Big Apple to the core,” Weiner has said.
The budget currently is in Congress where some conservative Republicans are calling for more cuts in social programs that normally help cities. Before the budget can become reality, both the Senate and House must reconcile any differences between them and pass a budget that President Bush will sign.
Major Owens |
Of course Congress’ effects on New Yorkers extends beyond specific budget lines or programs directed at the city. As Americans, residents of the city are affected by laws passed by Congress. And so, when Congress bars discrimination, New Yorkers are among those it protects. When it calls for schools to test more, city students must fill in their bubble sheets. When it slashes taxes, some New Yorkers get to keep more money. And when Congress agrees to the war in Iraq, New Yorkers are among those who fight it.
To represent New York’s interests, the state has, like every other state, two senators. It also has 29 members of the House of Representatives. Thirteen of them are all or partly from New York City. The only Republic among those 13 is Vito Fosella of Staten Island.
Many, though not all, of the Democrats are at the left end of their party. Gary Ackerman, for example, has a 95 percent rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action and a 4 percent from the American Conservative Union, while Jerrold Nadler and Jose Serrano are among the most liberal members of the House,” according to the Almanac of American Politics. In 2002, seven of New York City’s representatives were among the 156 members of the House who voted against the war in Iraq.
As the country has become increasingly Republican, the New York delegation has become more Democratic. Since Charles Schumer defeated Republican Alfonse D’Amato in 1998, both the state’s senators have been Democrats. Of its 29 representatives, 19 are Democrats.
Charles Rangel |
Although the senators are in the minority party, both of them hold a high profile. Schumer is the top – or, in Washington parlance, ranking -- Democrat on the judiciary committee, playing a key role in confirmation battles over judges. He also chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which is spearheading efforts to win a Democratic majority in the Senate. And Clinton, who is up for re-election this year, is, of course, a likely presidential candidate.
But the representatives seem to have a tougher time on conservative Republican capital hill. “Except for Fossella, they are all Democrats in a Republican Congress so there is a limit to their effectiveness,” said Josh Kurz, political editor of the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call.
“They’re doing about as well as could be expected,” said Marie Horrigan, political reporter for Congressional Quarterly. She added that some of the New Yorkers, such as Carolyn Maloney, have focused on promoting liberal issues, which are difficult to advance in this Congress.
The state has also lost clout in terms of numbers. In 1960, New York had 43 representatives in the House, by far the largest number in Congress. Today it has the third largest – behind California and Texas – and it will probably lose more seats after the 2010 census.
Jose Serrano |
The state’s fractured politics also take their toll. Representatives from some other big states typically meet together to set legislative priorities. But, the Buffalo News observed last year, “New York’s congressional delegation doesn’t work that way, mostly because of the New York City-upstate split in needs and interests.”
No member from New York City chairs a committee – because that role always goes to a member of the majority party. Fossella, elected in 1997, has little seniority, so does not chair any committees. Earlier this year, Joseph Crowley tried to become vice chair of the House Democratic caucus. Although insiders saw his as the frontrunner, he lost out to John Larson of Connecticut. Despite that, Kurz said, Crowley “is seen as a potential player in the future.”
An admittedly subjective review of the delegation, done in 2003 by the now seemingly defunct PoliticsNY web site gave New York’s representatives mixed marks. Jerrold Nadler (“one of the smartest liberals in Congress”) and Anthony Weiner (“among the best the Empire State sends to Congress”) scored highest. Major Owens (“doesn’t have much to say about what’s going on in Congress”) and Ed Towns (“the lowest profile member of the New York congressional delegation”) were at the bottom of the list.
Edolphus Towns |
The most prominent member of the delegation – and the longest serving – is Harlem’s Charles Rangel. He was first elected in 1970 and now serves as the ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means committee. The New York delegation can be divided into two groups, said Kurz: “There’s Charlie Rangel and there’s everybody else.” Even as a member of the minority he manages to have influence. “He’s well known, well-respected, bombastic, and he gets on TV,” Kurz said.
Even though he is currently not facing any serious opposition, Rangel has a lot at stake in November’s elections. If the House switches to the Democrats – a shift of 15 seats from the Republican to the Democratic column would accomplish that – Rangel would become chair of the committee. Becoming chair “would be the brass ring,” Rangel told the New York Observer. It would also give him a lot of say over policy on welfare, Medicaid and Medicare, issues of obvious concern to many of his Harlem constituents and other New Yorkers.
Nydia Velazquez |
If the Democrats do not win the House – and Rangel his leadership post – the congressman has indicated he might retire. That, some think, would further erode the city’s power in Congress. “There is only one Charles Rangel and when he leaves, there is going to be a power vacuum,” his colleague, Gregory Meeks of Queens has said.
New York State could help determine whether Rangel gets the “brass ring” or becomes a private citizen. Optimistic Democrats have said about a half dozen Republicans House seat in the state are “in play’’ – meaning they think they have a crack at them. Outside observers see a lower number, but think New York could see one or two seats switch from Republican to Democratic hands.
For now, though, it appears the GOP will keep its one seat in the city. Democrats had considered mounting a vigorous challenge to Fossella, but three city council members all declined to take on the race. His remaining opponent is Bay Ridge lawyer Stephen Harrison. The race is “very hard for a Brooklyn Democrat, even for someone from Bay Ridge or Dyker Heights," political consultant Hank Sheinkopf told the Daily News. "It would be very difficult for a Democrat to win”
Anthony Weiner |
The other New York City seats are, by and large, “safe,” according to the Almanac of American Politics. The people holding them – many of whom have been in Congress for more than a decade-- think the city would fare better in a Democratic House of Representative than in the current Republican one. And so New York’s fortunes in the next Congress may depend far more on what happens in suburban Denver, eastern Iowa and Chillicothe, Ohio, than the politicking on the city’s own sidewalks.
Â
It’s been nearly 15 years since an incumbent Democrat lost a reelection bid for Congress in New York City, and barring scandal or death, most U.S. Representatives face little risk of losing their seat over the course of a career. Harlem, for example, has had only had two representatives - Adam Clayton Powell and Charles Rangel - since the Congressional district was first created in 1944.
U.S. Representative Edolphus “Ed” Towns, who has represented the 10th district in Brooklyn since 1982, has not had it so easy.
In 1998, Towns narrowly survived a primary race against attorney Barry Ford. And this year, Towns faces several well-known Democratic challengers, including City Councilmember Charles Barron, Assemblymember Roger Green, and hip-hop writer and activist Kevin Powell.
One reason the 12-term incumbent faces opposition is his voting record, which has upset Democrats in both Washington DC and New York.
Last year, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi threatened to strip Towns of his committee assignments after he missed a key budget vote that the Democrats lost by just two votes. Towns offered no explanation, other than to say “people miss budget votes all the time.”
A few months later, Towns went against Democratic leaders and voted in favor of the Central American Free Trade Agreement (known as CAFTA), a trade deal that many union leaders and human rights activists opposed.
All three challengers -- Charles Barron, Roger Green, and Kevin Powell -- say they would have voted against the trade agreement because it moves jobs out of the U.S., hurts the environment, and exploits low-wage workers overseas.
Related Articles: |
Towns also hasn’t offered a clear answer to why he voted for the trade agreement, but his legislative aide, Rick Blake, defended the vote as “principled” and said the congressman has supported labor issues more than 90 percent of the time.
In the 10th district, which includes East New York, Bedford-Stuyvesant, Fort Greene, and parts of Brooklyn Heights and Cobble Hill, the incumbent and all three candidates agree on the most critical issues: jobs, education, and affordable housing.
Towns, who sits on the Health Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said he stands on his record (see his Web site) although in an interview he did not specify exactly what he has accomplished.
The congressman says he is currently working to build connections between local schools and the fire department in order to help encourage students to go into the profession. He also plans to “convene a summit” of educators and corporate leaders focused on improving the preparedness of youth for jobs and college.
City Councilmember Charles Barron -- a former Black Panther who calls Towns “lackadaisical” - is campaigning on his record in the council, including opening a youth center in the area, fighting for funding to renovate parks, and helping the City University of New York establish a long-term capital plan.
“I’ve demonstrated that I can deliver infrastructure,” said Barron.
If elected to Congress, Barron said he would advocate for more federal funding to help the district’s small businesses. He also wants to build a science and technology center as well as a planetarium to provide education and job training for residents. “We need to bring science, technology, and culture to the 10th district,” said Barron.
State Assemblymember Roger Green, who announced his candidacy for the house seat in April, said that there is a “disconnect” between Towns and his constituents. Green cites Towns votes to repeal the estate tax and to tighten bankruptcy regulations, which Green says will hurt the poor and benefit the wealthy.
“[We shouldn’t be voting for] tax credits for Paris Hilton so that she can buy jewel necklaces for her Chihuahua,” said Green.
Green also points to the efforts in the State Legislature to improve education, build affordable housing, and require large developers to employ minority-owned businesses.
Unlike Barron and Green, Kevin Powell, who first gained fame on the MTV television show “The Real World” and later helped found the hip-hop magazine Vibe, has never held elected office.
But Powell points to his record of political activism, such as working to raise money for local charities, fighting for voting rights, most recently, organizing Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. He said he would focus his campaign on reducing the rates of HIV and AIDS, improving education and after-school programs, and reducing crime.
“The problem with Towns is that he is not actively engaged in the community development process,” Powell said.
When it comes to the campaign, Towns has the advantage of an incumbent. He already received endorsements from local politicians like Rep. Charles Rangel and several members of the State Legislature and City Council. Towns has also raised almost $591,000.
Barron, however, has shown he can also raise money in his past City Council campaigns and has gained considerable name-recognition as an outspoken advocate for the poor.
“I have the best chance to retire the incumbent,” claimed Barron.
Green has a 26-year record in the New York State Legislature to build on, but it is not unblemished. In June 2004, Green resigned from the Assembly after he pled guilty to two counts of petty larceny and one count of filing a false instrument for falsifying for travel expenses. Still, Green was re-elected to his seat later in the year.
Powell, who is 40-years-old, has scheduled a series of fundraising events across the country for his bid -- and hopes to draw in voters with his youth and enthusiasm.
“Money, fame, status, personal achievements, and all that means very little to me when pain and suffering are still real on this planet,” his Web site states. “I am interested in the powerless becoming powerful."
Towns dismissed his challengers and said they were “not bona fide candidates.”
“Well, the ideal situation would be that I had no race,” Towns told the Daily News, “But if I’m gonna have one, let all run. God bless.”
New York City politicians rarely get an opportunity to run for Congress with any real chance of winning. And so one can only imagine the hungry looks that greeted Major Owens’ announcement in 2003 that he would retire after the 2006 elections, after 12 terms in Congress. In January 2004, with the election almost three years away, the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported that Owens’ son Chris, State Senators Carl Andrews and John Sampson, City Councilmembers Tracy Boyland and Yvette Clarke, former City Councilmember Steve DiBrienza and Assemblymember Nick Perry – all Democrats -- had expressed interest in the seat. Tracey Boyland and Yvette Clarke both did not want to wait for 2006, trying, without success, to defeat Major Owens in 2004. Since then, Boyland, along with Steven DiBrienza and John Sampson, have apparently have lost interest in the contest.
Five candidates remain, and more could drop out – or join in – before the September 12 primary.
But Roll Call did not include the candidate in the 11th District who has attracted the most attention, the most money – and the most controversy: City Councilmember David Yassky.
Yassky, who until recently did not live in the 11th district, is the only white candidate in a district once represented by Shirley Chisholm, the first African American woman elected to Congress. He has also raised more money than any other Democratic candidate running for an open seat in the entire country – $857,765 by March 31, according to the latest filings with the Federal Election Commission.
The controversy over David Yassky’s candidacy is emblematic of much of the debate leading up to the September primary. Although the five candidates have some disagreements on issues, the greater differences arise over emphasis and over who could do the best job representing the residents of parts of Bedford-Stuyvesant, Crown Heights, Prospect Heights, Park Slope and Flatbush.
“I think on at least 80 percent of the issues we agree,” Carl Andrews told the Sun.
Related Articles: |
The district is diverse, ranging from affluent areas of Park Slope to poorer areas of Crown Heights, with its mixture of Caribbean and Hassidic residents. The Atlantic Yards project falls in the district and only Chris Owens is on record as completely opposing the project, though some of the other candidates have called for changes in it or expressed reservations.
David Yassky, perhaps trying to impress residents with his knowledge of the nitty gritty of a district where, until recently, he has had not lived, says local issues can matter in the race. Commenting on the lack of decent stores in Brownsville, litter on Nostrand Avenue and parking shortages in Midwood, he said, “Voters don’t care whether you’re a congressman or a city councilman. They just want you to deal with their problems. And they have every right to that.”
But for the most part, the candidates focus on the national issues that they see affecting a district, which, even with its increased affluence, still has almost a quarter of its resident living below the poverty line. They cited education, health care and housing as key concerns, along with a need for economic development and more good jobs.
To address unemployment, Carl Andrews said he would try to place a moratorium on trade agreements that he thinks spur the outsourcing of jobs and would work for an increase in the federal minimum wage. Chris Owens wants to eliminate all federal taxes on small business that gross $1 million or less a year to help small businesses generate more jobs. All expressed skepticism about No Child Left Behind and want the federal government to help provide more affordable housing
As the only woman in the race, Yvette Clarke said she sees the race as being partly about “the challenges the women of the congressional district are facing with respect to welfare , with respect to the workforce and with respect to a number of issues from domestic violent to childcare that are not being addressed by the Republican Bush administration.”
The other candidates echo her criticism of the Bush administration, particularly of the war in Iraq. Along with the president’s tax cuts, Chris Owens, said, spending on the war “leaves less spending for the whole domestic agenda.” Chris Owens has called for Bush’s impeachment, and David Yassky advocated censure of the president.
But they have criticism for their own party as well. “The Democrats have not been effective in shaping the debate in a proper matter.” Yvette Clarke said. “We should have been much more definitive in our position around the Iraqi war.”
David Yassky said the Democrats could learn from Republicans. “Newt Gingrich when he was in the minority accomplished more than most Democrats because [the Republicans} had a clear. firm agenda that they fought for,” he said. “The problem with Democrats is they have not had the same level of clear, crisp substantive agenda.”
But the candidates expressed optimism about being able to change things – even if the Republicans remain in the majority. Carl Andrews said his four years as a Democrat in the State Senate has given him experience in being a member of a legislative minority. “One of the things I’ve learned is that you don’t necessarily get your name on a lot of pieces of legislation but you can be involved in the discussion around those pieces of legislation and you can advocate.”
Chris Owens said he would begin his tenure by introducing his small business tax cut “since I’ve never met a Republican who didn’t like a tax cut.” And David Yassky said he would focus on being substantive. As an example he cited his record in the City Council where he worked to include affordable housing in the rezoning for Williamsburg and Greenpoint
Each candidate thinks that he or she brings something special to the race – something that some or all of the opponents lack. Carl Andrews stresses his record, including work for Eliot Spitzer and time in the State Senate. Yvette Clarke cites her independence and, along with David Yassky, her record in the City Council. Chris Owens, whose only elected post was as a member of a community school board, notes his stands as an “aggressive progressive,” with a longtime commitment to such issues as same sex marriage, and his experience in the private sector. As a member of the state legislature for 14 years, Nick Perry said he is also the only candidate who served in the armed forces. “The district needs someone who is honest,” he said, “who comes with no cloud over them, someone who can make the district proud.”
Although Nick Perry declined to be specific, this is generally taken as a dig at Carl Andrews, who has ties to Clarence Norman, the longtime Brooklyn Democratic leader who was convicted for campaign violations earlier this year. Clarence Norman “is an issue people are trying to make,” Carl Andrews conceded. But he added,” When voters go to the polls, they’re not looking at Clarence Norman, they’re looking at Carl Andrews.”
Chris Owens’ opponents fault him a relative lack of electoral experience and for being the son of the long-time incumbent, although any criticim of Major Owens is muted. Chris Owens said he would not be a copy of his father. “Ideologically my father and I are very similar,” Chris Owens added. But he added he would be more savvy about fundraising and technology than the incumbent. And, tacitly acknowledging that Major Owens has been criticized for a lack of constituent service, his son said “I will definitely deliver the best customer service to the constituents of the district.
But no one else comes in for the kind of criticism that David Yassky does. Some observers think that as the only white facing a field of four blacks candidates in a district with a substantial white minority, David Yassky could win. At least in the blogosphere, David Yassky raised more alarms – and some ridicule – when he sent out a leaflet showing a matzoh and a ceremonial Passover goblet with the headline: “Ask the Fifth Question this Pesach: Are you ready for a congressman who actually gets thing done?” To add to the furor, it apparently went to more black residents of Crown Heights than Hasidic ones.
“He’s doing the smart opportunistic thing to do in politics. That doesn’t make it morally right,” Chris Owens said of David Yassky. If he hadn’t raised all that money “it wouldn’t be as objectional,” Chris Owens continued. “It’s the combination of class and race.”
“I don’t think his candidacy is reflective of the dreams and aspirations of the majority of the electorate in the 11th congressional,” Yvette Clarke said. “It’s clearly an opportunistic move.”
Nick Perry, though, thinks David Yassky may be hurting himself. “He was seen as a bright star with a future in Democratic politics in the city,” the assembly member said. But now he’s demonstrated an ambition that is “callous and selfish.”
David Yassky though has said that this whole controversy is of more concern to politicos than to voters, who want the best representation they can get. “This is such an opportunity for the people of Brooklyn to say that we’re all in this together and to talk and vote as Brooklynites and not as members of one group or another,” he told the Times. And, on a pod-cast, he likened the Pesach flyer to running an ad on a Spanish language radio station — something he said he would do as well.
He certainly has the money to. Carl Andrews, in second place in the money race, lags far behind with about $323,000, but said he has enough money to get his message out. Chris Owens falls a bit shy of $200,000 but said the pace has picked up lately, and Yvette Clarke with about $165,000 said her fundraising was delayed by her council campaign last year. Nick Perry is in last place with $109,0000 – but offers an explanation that should earn him the empathy of many. “I love my work full-time,” he said, “so it’s been hard to spend the time needed for fundraising.”
Â
Every two weeks the New York City Council meets for its Stated Meeting to introduce and pass legislation. As a regular feature, Searchlight covers these meetings and posts a summary of the bills passed.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
"Personally, I’ve heard enough about the Yankees and stadiums for a while. I'm about ready to start rooting for the Red Sox." – Councilmember Helen Foster.
MEETING SUMMARY:
BASEBALL STADIUMS
The New York City Council approved $2 billion in tax-free financing and subsidies to help both the New York Yankees and the New York Mets build new ballparks.
While the teams will pay the majority of the cost for the new stadiums, the city will provide tax-exempt bonds to finance the construction costs, saving the teams hundreds of millions of dollars in coming years.
The Yankees will receive $866 million in tax-exempt bonds to help finance the construction of their new $930 million stadium.
The Mets will receive $567 million in tax-exempt bonds to finance their $632 million stadium.
Under the plan, each team will repay the city for construction bonds and interest on debt through "payments in lieu of taxes" - also known as PILOTS. PILOTs are money from developers who build properties on city-owned land, but do not pay property taxes on it. Instead, they pay money into a specific fund.
The Independent Budget Office estimates that the tax-exempt bonds will save the Yankees $144 million and save the Mets $72 million over the next 40 years.
Both stadiums will also cost taxpayers.
The council estimates that the city will spend $91 million and the state will spend $74 million to pay for infrastructure, parking garages, and new parkland around Yankee stadium. The city will spend $164 million and the state will spend $74 million for the new Mets stadium.
Council members said that stadiums were worth the public investment, and that they will bring jobs and income into the local economy.
"Job creation and economic development is our job," said Councilmember Leroy Comrie. "And we have done both with these projects."
Council members from the Bronx and Queens, who have negotiated with the teams in recent weeks, also said they were able to win important commitments for their neighborhoods, including promises to hire local workers and to give 25 percent of contracts to minority and women-owned businesses. The teams will also invest in little league teams and donate tickets to children in the area.
"This is a grand slam for all of Queens," said Councilmember Hiram Monserrate.
An overwhelming majority of the members agreed. The Yankees financing passed by a vote of 46 to 3. The Mets project passed by a vote of 48 to 1. (Letitia James abstained from both votes.)
Councilmember Charles Barron, the only person to vote "no" on both ballparks, said that city should be using its resources to help low-income people, not subsidizing new stadiums for rich baseball team owners.
"This is a bunt single for the community and a grand slam for the Mets and the Yankees," said Councilmember Charles Barron.
Councilmembers James Sanders and Helen Foster voted against the Yankee plan, but in favor of the Mets stadium.
"Personally, I’ve heard enough about the Yankees and stadiums for a while," said Foster. "I'm about ready to start rooting for the Red Sox."
The Internal Revenue Service still must approve the financing, which has been called into question by Comptroller William Thompson and the Independent Budget Office. In 1986, Congress banned the use of tax-exempt bonds to build sports facilities unless 90 percent of the bonds are paid off using funds that would normally go to the city in the form of taxes.
The Bloomberg administration has asked the Internal Revenue Service to review the plan, and the council said it believes the agency will approve it.
AUTO INSURANCE FRAUD
New Yorkers pay four times the national average for car insurance, and Brooklyn has some of the highest auto insurance rates in the nation.
Part of the reason is that New York State has a no-fault automobile insurance system, which allows for people injured in accidents to have their medical bills paid quickly regardless of who is to blame for the crash. Another reason for the high rates is that many people try to take advantage of the no-fault system and cheat insurance companies.
In an effort to reduce insurance fraud the council passed a bill (Intro 243-A) to crack down on the medical clinics that are involved in schemes.
Under the bill, if a medical service company earns more than half of its revenues from no-fault insurance claims, then they will now be subject to audits and regulation by the Department of Consumer Affairs.
"We know how the scams work," said Councilmember David Yassky, who authored the bill. "Now we need laws in place to catch the scammers."
The measure passed by a vote of 50 to 0.
FIELDSTON HISTORIC DISTRICT
The council approved the creation of a new historic district (L.U. 91 and Res 283) in the Fieldston section of Riverdale in the Bronx.
In the early 1900s, the owners of the land comprising Fieldston decided to develop the area as a "private park devoted exclusively to country homes," according to the New York City Landmarks Commission. Frederick Olmstead, who also designed Central Park, contributed to the plan.
The historic district will include 257 houses, many of them large mansions with historic columns, porticoes, and intricately designed roofs.
The designation means that if owners want to do renovations of their homes, they must submit the plans to the Landmarks Commission and use authentic historical materials, which can often add to the cost of repairs.
Councilmember Oliver Koppell has a special interest in the designation – he owns one of the homes, which was recently valued at $2.7 million.
"It's a beautiful area," said Koppell. "It deserves to be protected."
"I'd like to congratulate Councilmember Koppell on the land marking of his home," joked Councilmember Miguel Martinez. "But I haven't been invited yet."
The measure passed by a vote of 50 to 0.
PUTTING AWAY TRASH CANS
After a sanitation worker empties a garbage can into a truck, New Yorkers are required to remove the trash can from the sidewalk "immediately" - or they can be fined, according to city law.
Responding to complaints from residents, the council passed a measure (Intro 28-A) that deletes the word "immediately" from the regulations.
Now, New Yorkers must put the trash can away by 9 p.m. on the day of collection. If the sanitation department does not come until after 4 p.m., then residents have until 9 a.m. the next morning.
VETERANS ADVISORY BOARD
The council passed a bill (Intro 233-A) aimed at strengthening the role of the Veterans' Advisory Board, which is supposed to help set city policy to aid former members of the U.S military. Some council members have criticized the board as ineffective.
Under the bill, the board must meet at least four times a year, submit an annual report of activities to the mayor and the council, and members can be removed for cause if they are not doing their duties.
The next Stated Meeting is scheduled for May 10, 2006.
Â