By MICHAEL SCHENKLER

SUPERBOWL!

The Giants are on the way to the Superbowl!

It’s the chance of a decade for those of you who aren’t sports freaks or even casual sports fans to become part of a New York sports experience. Set aside the evening of Sunday, January 28th to join in the time honored tradition of Superbowl fun and heartburn by inviting over or joining a small group of friends (too large means the serious watchers have too many distractions) for the "Superbowl party."

The party rules are simple: chips, dips, finger food and six foot heroes. A large screen TV is a plus. The fanatics sit closer. The casual watchers (often the wives and female kids — no sexist letters, please) sit far enough away that their chatter won’t interfere with the analysis of Greg Gumble and Phil Simms; but not so far as to be unable to ask questions, jump up for Giant heroics and give requisite high fives for any Giant score, interception, completed pass or run over 10 yards.

If it’s already starting to sound confusing for you beginners, the idea is that the team that scores the most points wins and that’s something to cheer about, as long as the team is the Giants.

They’re playing some Johnny come lately hoohahs from Baltimore — the Ravens. Only Edgar Allen Poe could get excited about a bunch of crows.

The Giants will have to move this odd shaped ball (sometimes referred to as a pigskin) down the field and across the other team’s goal line. The fans get to scream, drink, eat and pat each other in places otherwise considered improper. You’ll love it.

You’re gonna love it so much that we are preparing a guide to the Superbowl in next week’s Trib. It’ll have tips on watching; understanding, eating, drinking, patting, high-fiving and enjoying. We’ll pay homage to the Giants, help you to participate in a great Superbowl party, review Superbowl, winners, legends, lore and more while we help you root the Giants to a marvelous triumph by the worst team that ever won the Superbowl.

Even if you don’t have a big party, plan to spend it with your significant other and kids while the world watches. Check out the Trib for more next week.

Go Blue.

ALBANY SILVER SPIT & POLISH? It’s the way of politics; but, we don’t like it. Political leaders hand out rewards and mete out punishment not based on merit but based on loyalties and coalition building.

So it was with Speaker Sheldon Silver last week. Silver, who last year survived an attempted coup engineered by Queens County Dem boss Tom Manton, took the occasion of Albany reorganization to make his political statement to friends and enemies with lulus and committee assignments.

It was a gentle rebuke for the Manton minions with only three Queens Assemblymembers being punished by the Speaker: Barbara Clark, Nettie Mayerson and Tony Seminario each lost posts which carried a $10,000-plus paycheck bonus. The three never attempted to make peace with Silver.

Surprisingly, in an apparent attempt to build friendships, Silver elevated and rewarded a number of the Queens delegation who expressed a willingness to move forward with him in spite of their recent stance in opposition: Ivan Lafayette, the big winner, was named Speaker Pro Tempore; labor powerhouse Brian McLaughlin who was instrumental in the coup, not only survived, but was promoted to the position as chair of the influential Administrative Regulations Review; while Mark Weprin was appointed secretary of the Democratic Leadership Conference.

TERM LIMITS: As we sit here contemplating an amazing New York Superbowl win, there are folks sitting in the City Council contemplating a last ditch effort to overturn term limits.

We’ve covered this one before in this space. To me, the picture is clear: the Councilmembers who are involved in trying to orchestrate this outrageous act are self-serving, desperate individuals.

We don’t know their names . . . they’re embarrassed and trying to keep a low profile.

We do know that on two separate occasions this law has been put to the voters and on both occasions the voters overwhelmingly approved it. They’ve said they don’t want these councilmembers to serve more than two terms. Two referenda, clearly demonstrate the people’s will: in 1993, term limits were first passed, and in 1996, the voters rejected a Council effort to overturn them.

Why would the present Council consider overturning term limits without going to the people for a third time? It’s simple: the people would reject them and furthermore, they can’t do it in time to save their own jobs.

So why take such drastic action contrary to the clear will of the voters?

They’ll say they believe they know better than the voters. They’ll tell you that the present law will force out 36 of the 51 Councilmembers thus causing great instability. They’ll claim to fear that the City government would crumble if elected officials were forced out en masse.

Boshwabble!

When they tried to repeal by referendum in 1996, New Yorkers for Term Limits called their arguments "disingenuous." Their spokesperson said back then, "I think keeping their own jobs is what’s motivating this."

We agree!

There are more than 3,000 cities and counties across the country with term limits of six or eight years. Many were implemented in they same manner as NYC. So far, we have not heard of one City to fall to term limit chaos.

And better still, term limits have attracted a whole new group of bright, eager public servants. The hundreds of candidates preparing to run for vacant seats in 2001 include a large group of exciting, competent leaders. We, in Queens, can expect to see fourteen new, energetic, not-so-tainted or jaded candidates ascend to the Council. They will have something to prove to us and eight years to prove it. Queens and this City will be no worse off – likely better off.

Now, I’ve said it before, in principle I do not support term limits. Voters should have the freedom to accept or reject candidates at the ballot box and can impose term limits on any candidate at any election. This paper has not endorsed term limits — we never have – we always opposed it in the past, believing voters can always term limit officials on Election Day.

However, elections are not fought on a level playing field. Incumbents have all the advantages of office. They use their mailing permits, staffs, incredible ability to raise money from lobbyists doing business with the city, which makes challenging them near impossible. We do not recall in modern history, a single incumbent council-member who sought reelection and lost.

And so, as we bask in the victory of the Giant blowout, there sit a number – a large number of Council members trying to figure out if they can — without bringing shame to their names — repeal term-limits and garner enough votes to override a mayoral veto.

Well, with 36 of the 51 members term limited, surely they can find a majority of 26 who do not have the moral fortitude to adhere to the will of the people. However, coming up with the 34 members (two-thirds) needed to override a mayoral veto might not be so easy.

All of the 14 members of the Queens delegation is term-limited and therefore cannot seek reelection.

Councilwoman Karen Koslowitz said of any limit change, "It would be very difficult to pass, and time is quickly running out before party primaries in September."

Eastern Queens Councilman Sheldon Leffler said he has been contacted regarding possible legislative action against the term limits in recent months, but refused to name names.

Although they may support it, it appears no Queens legislator wants to step up and publicly take responsibility for a bill to change the current laws. Because of the strong support of the current term-limit laws by the voters, summed up one legislator, "It could be political suicide. At least for anyone desiring to run again."

However, Councilman Tom White, told Not4Pub, "Now that women, Latinos and blacks have more power than ever before, they want to change the rules."

Councilwoman Julia Harrison, facing the end of her 15-year run as Flushing representative in City Hall, said, "I’m not crying about it, but I do resent it. I feel we may be replaced by inexperienced, incompetent challengers. I don’t think the public realizes how badly things will be shaken up come the new year."

And Councilman Alfonso Stabile agrees that those new council-members coming in "may be ineffective," noting "There will be no Peter Vallone to teach them and show them the way." If his bid to become borough president fails, said Stabile, "I’ll definitely be looking to run again – I’m not ready to retire."

Many of the current Queens councilmembers, including Stabile, Koslowitz, Leffler, Mike Abel and Councilwoman Helen Marshall will vie for the borough president position next year. Some, like Councilman Morty Povman, have law firms to fall back on.

Others, like Councilman John Sabini told us, "As for me, I came out of the private sector, and will return to it if need be."

We are contacting each of the members of the Queens Council delegation and asking them where they stand on this issue. We shall share their responses with you – assuming they’re talking. We have sent email to each councilmember (except for Walter McCaffrey who does not have an email address) and the Tribune has phoned each member with the following question:

Please return this by fax or email, for immediate publication.

We think the issue is clear. If the Council wants to overturn term limits, take it back to the voters who passed it. Any attempt to override it by legislation, although perhaps legal, is a vacuous immoral act of desperate folks who are afraid of going into the workplace for real jobs.

We shall reject it and we shall reject each and every councilmember who supports it. A vote in favor of overturning the will of the people will follow each offending Councilmem-ber for the rest of their very short political careers.

Richard Schack contributed to this column.

_____________________________

Michael Schenkler can be reached at: MSchenkler@QueensTribune.com

Click Here For The Not 4 Publication Archives