....May 29, 3:25 PM
 
 
 
Eenie, Meenie, Dems Pick Monserrate, Not Sabini

JohnSabini,Hiram Monserrate
By MICHAEL SCHENKLER

A rare and strange political move took place last week when the Queens County Democratic organization “dumped” one of their own and voted to endorse another who they had previously considered an outsider or a renegade.

The Queens Dems, by a vote of 12-0 with two abstentions, threw their support to Queens Councilman Hiram Monserrate in his challenge to unseat incumbent State Senator Democrat John Sabini. It is the first time in recent memory that the party is backing a challenge to an incumbent who had previously had their support for the position.

The 13th State Senate District was redrawn for the 2002 election with the aim of electing a Latino candidate, but Sabini first captured it after being term limited from his Jackson Heights Council seat. At that time it was 56 percent Hispanic, 20 percent Asian and 9 percent black. The Hispanic population has grown since then.

Insiders have cited the changing demographics of the district, the fact that Sabini just narrowly held the seat by fewer than 250 votes two years ago when challenged by Monserrate and Sabini’s Albany drunk driving guilty plea as considerations for the dramatic shift of support.
Deeper probing leads to Party concerns that Monserrate’s efforts at political organizing could produce effective challenges to several district leaders in the communities of Jackson Heights, Corona and East Elmhurst. His political strength has been proven in the voting booth and is now being parlayed into threats that Democratic District Leaders may no longer have an easy path at retaining their party positions if they force Monserrate to put together a slate for his Senate campaign. Additionally, Monserrate has considered a challenge to party chair Joe Crowley’s Congressional seat which includes a large Latino area in the Bronx.

While pundits may question the wisdom of the powerful Queens Dem organization dumping one of its own in the face of threats, others would quickly respond it is a demonstration of the flexibility and wisdom of party leaders being able to take an uncomfortable situation and build and broaden the party base.

“Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.”
The factors in reaching this decision are many. Sabini, who just narrowly held the seat two years ago, was once the acting Queens Democratic Party chair – between the downfall of Donald Manes and the election of Tom Manton.

Councilmember Sabini, then a party officer in 1986, served as head of the Queens Dems. He expressed interest in retaining the position but was quickly pushed aside by stronger candidates. He did however serve for many years as a Democratic District Leader and strangely relinquished that position and the added leverage it would have brought him in fighting for party support last week. The Dems are reluctant to go against incumbents, but they are more reluctant to go against incumbents who are also district leaders who voted to elevate Congressman Joe Crowley as party chief. Sabini walked away from the position that would have given him a vote inside the Austin Street party headquarters.

Sabini, after the vote which dumped him from support by the party he has served, expressed his intention to run for his Senate seat and allow the people to decide who would be the Democratic candidate, which is tantamount to election in this district. Clearly, Sabini can expect help from Senate Minority Leader, South Queens Malcolm Smith and his Dem colleagues in Albany. But Smith is a wise and wily politician and has his eye on becoming Senate Majority leader for which he may need a victorious Monserrate’s vote if his Albany leadership is challenged. You can be sure that an equally wily Monserrate will define the terms of nominal support if Smith can expect on Monserrate in the future. As long as Monserrate looks like a winner, fewer and fewer insiders will go all out for the Sabini campaign effort.

Sabini’s first challenge will begin next week when he needs to circulate petitions and collect signature without the support of the Democratic clubs, something he has never done since he first worked for Ed Koch in the 1970s.

With the challenge of getting and staying on the ballot with the party structure on the other side, with the knowledge he barely eked out a victory two years ago and many more Latinos have since been registered and the fact that Hiram Monserrate is a fierce and tireless campaigner, Sabini needs to hope for a miracle.

The only miracles that insiders can imagine would be connected with the DA’s investigation of Monserrate’s Council discretionary funds and a community organization he is very close to.

Doesn’t it speak well of our system, one elected official plagued by a conviction for driving under the influence may need an indictment of another elected official – his opponent – in order to win reelection.

Ain’t politics wonderful?

MSchenkler@QueensTribune.com

 
 
Draining The Slushwater

By HENRY STERN

The slushwater controversy, which began with the discovery of fictional community organizations used as placeholders to conceal City subsidies to favored groups, has transmogrified into an issue reaching into the halls of Congress.

In the process, it has morphed from an inquiry into a deceptive local practice into an assault on the entire process of legislators seeking and receiving funds to advance projects which have particular relevance to their constituents. The issue of discretionary funding is an example of how a molehill can grow into a mountain, possibly a volcano whose fire will consume all the moles who lived in their little hill.

For some years, there has been a rough bargain between successive mayors and the city council. The mayor would distribute well over 99 percent of the budget, and the balance would be allocated by the city council, with some crumbs for the borough presidents after they were stripped of their votes on the Board of Estimate in 1990. The City Council used its discretion to allocate sums to organizations in their districts which were supposed to work in the public interest.

In Albany, these are called “member items,” and in Washington, D.C. they are known as “earmarks.” In general, these items do not have a good reputation.

One reason is that these grants sometimes go to groups in which the elected official or a family member has a personal financial interest. Another reason is that they go to organizations that are no more meritorious than others who do not get grants, but are simply better politically connected. A third reason is that they sometimes lead to financial or service contributions to the politician by the group that is favored with an appropriation. Even if no money is involved, the office holder receives political benefit through the support of the people whom he has assisted.

In the case of Councilman Kendall Stewart of Brooklyn, there is an even stronger reason to disapprove: the United States Attorney has indicted Stewart’s former chief of staff and another aide for stealing $145,000 from an organization the Councilman had funded which was named for the chief of staff’s deceased daughter.

Some of the money went for campaign expenditures for Mr. Stewart, who denies any knowledge of the matter.

The groups so favored range in size and merit. There are Little Leagues, advocacy organizations, agencies supposedly providing social services to residents, etc. The effectiveness of these groups is not measured effectively and some appear to be controlled by people who a generation ago were called “poverty pimps”. Some provided effective service to poor people, but many did not, and others duplicated services already provided by city agencies.
When these deficiencies were combined with the secrecy in making the awards, and the use of dummy names so that funds could be held in reserve for later political or personal needs, the resulting scandal received wide publicity in mainstream.

The dispute later focused on what was generally considered a perfectly reasonable and respectable appropriation, an addition of $42.7 million to the budget for the three public library systems so they could stay open six days a week. It turned out that 22 trustees of the New York Public Library had, roughly at the same time, contributed $43,542 to what was expected to be Speaker Quinn’s mayoral campaign. Now the library trustees were generally well off and there is no suggestion that they were impoverished by their gifts. Nor is there any immediate quid pro quo here, Ms. Quinn has been a supporter of the library for many years. It would have looked better if the trustees had waited what was called “a decent interval” before getting their gifts bundled and handed over to the campaign, but that does not affect the basic morality of the transaction, which is within the American political tradition.

It was only a matter of time before the controversy would reach Congressman Anthony D. Weiner, at the moment probably the leading candidate for Mayor in 2009. It came in a Times story which began: “There is no doubt that Anthony D. Weiner wants to be mayor of New York. And there is no doubt, to that end, that he has seen an opening to wound a rival: criticizing Christine C. Quinn and the City Council he once was a member of for doling out money to favored groups in their districts.

“We should get rid of earmarks altogether, get rid of these member items altogether,” Mr. Weiner said last week, saying such a move would ‘restore public confidence’ in government. Of course, as a congressman, Mr. Weiner has his own earmarked funds to spread around his district - and he has shown willingness to do so.”

One of the basic reasons to elect public officials by local districts is to hear local views and meet local needs. A good Congressmember is an advocate for his district as well as the national interest. Remember, what some call stuffing with pork to others is bringing home the bacon.

StarQuwest@NYCivic.org

Not4Publication.com by Dom Nunziato
Michael Schenkler can be reached via this contact form.