Three facts about the NYS Senate Coup that are disputed, but should not be.

Three facts about the NYS Senate Coup that are disputed, but should not be.


My first blog entry!!

Hopefully my worst, as I hope to only get better as I continue to write in this style. It's very different from the dry, academic tone I'm used to writing in.


One: It was not the Governor's fault that it happened, or that it has not yet been resolved.

When politicians are unpopular, there is a tendency to blame them for things they had nothing to do with. One case in point is Senator Pedro Espada. I'll wager that not half of what's said about him is true, but, because at least some of it probably is, it's easy to believe everything, whether it makes sense or not.

Another case in point is Governor Paterson, who is very unpopular, due to a combination of his own screw-ups, circumstances, and the screw-ups of others.

So when Dean Skelos and Malcolm Smith and the various other leaders at the Senate (who's in charge of the Democrats tonight?) make statements that appear to blame the Governor for the coup and/or for its not being resolved yet, it's frightfully easy to buy into this twisted logic. Extraordinary Sessions are costing the people money! (And the proper term, per the New York State Constitution, is indeed “Extraordinary Session,” not “Special Session.”) The Sessions are accomplishing nothing! There are doubts about their constitutionality! Governor Paterson is making things worse!

Personally I think the Extraordinary Sessions are helping more than they are hurting, but that's for another entry.

Even if one disagrees with me on that particular point, however, it's very difficult to sustain the argument that the Extraordinary Sessions are making things worse. And it's impossible to sustain the argument that the Governor was somehow responsible for the coup. (With the sole exception that he elevated Malcolm Smith to the leadership position, and that Malcolm Smith's incompetence was a major factor here.)

However, despite the fact that it's Governor Paterson's fault that Malcolm Smith became Minority Leader at all (and thus became Majority Leader after the 2008 elections), it is definitely NOT the Governor's fault that Malcolm Smith did not see this coming. Fending off coup attempts is part of the Majority Leader's job. Senator Smith simply couldn't manage it.

There were signs for a long time that not all was well within Senator Smith's conference. The existence of the Gang of Three, that it took so long to solidify the Democratic Conference, should have been a major warning that Senator Smith was not secure upon the throne. Apparently it wasn't, at least not to Smith.

Did he actually think the Democratic Conference would be happy with the annoying habit he developed of killing bills important to the liberal cause by referring them to the Senate Finance Committee, where they died lingering deaths? One great example of this (there's others but I can't think of them right now) is Senator C. Johnson's Pay Equity/Comparable Worth bill, S. 955, found here:

http://open.nysenate.gov/openleg/api/html/bill/S955

Senator Smith also failed to fulfill his promise that he would reform the Senate chamber and be fairer to the Republicans than the Republicans were the Democrats. The following remarks by Senator L. Krueger have been widely circulated, but I'll bet she wasn't the only Democrat to feel this way, not the only Democrat to expect Senator Smith to live up to his own rhetoric:

http://www.lizkrueger.com/AlbanyUpdateLetter.html

(paragraph 3).

Finally, it's not Governor Paterson's fault that the Democrats didn't know enough about being in the Majority to know that you should glance over a Privileged Resolution before you bring it to the floor for a vote. (Didn't they have a retreat in Saratoga County where they learned this stuff?)

I don't think anyone expected Malcolm Smith to be stellar, including David Paterson. But I don't think anyone expected him to be this bad. And Senator Smith's incompetence is, most definitely, NOT Governor Paterson's fault.

It's also not the Governor's fault that Dean Skelos was ruthless and “mean” (Senator Skelos's nickname of “Mean Dean” has new meaning now) enough to execute his coup in the waning days of session, when he knew it would cause maximum chaos.

(As an aside....Does anyone else think that Dean Skelos, one of the smartest men in the Senate, was NOT dumb enough to think that he could hang a stable coalition around Senators Senators Monserrate and Espada? I, personally, think that Senator Skelos may have expected this chaos, feeling that he simply had more to gain than to lose.)

None of this was the Governor's fault, and it's not his fault that extraordinary measures, and Extraordinary Sessions, are called for to deal with this...unpleasantness.

This is a Legislative matter. For good and for ill. This isn't the Governor's fault. None of it. My argument that Extraordinary Sessions help more than hurt will have to wait for another day.


Two: The coup was probably legal, and probably stands.

I have spent years in the study of politics, both up-close and from afar. And in all those years I can think of almost nothing contradicting this proposition: The Legislature has an absolute, incontrovertible right to elect and appoint its own leadership. The closest thing I can find to anything that controverted this was over a century and a half ago, when press articles implied that the Lieutenant Governor had way more of a say in running the Senate than he or she does now. But that was a long time ago, and I haven't been able to verify it in any case. (It's definitely something to look into at some point, for a future entry, or maybe for a paper or something.)

If it helps, think of it this way. Remember all that talk of “ZOPAs” during 2008, when Malclom Smith announced he expected to be Majority Leader “very shortly,” due to Republican Senators being converted or lured away, like Senator Balboni was?

Let's say things had worked out for Senator Smith back then. How many people would have doubted that Senator Smith had the right to seize control of the Senate right then and there. Not many. Definitely not me. It wouldn't have even occurred to me, in all honesty.

Procedural questions about the nature of Privileged Resolutions and whether or not the Senate had technically adjourned are distractions.

So after the coup happened, the Democrats filed legal papers to undo it. These legal motions were dismissed. By definition, this means that the coup stands, simply by virtue of challenges to it being dismissed. This is basic common sense, basic chain of cause and effect logic.

In other words, if we were to go by the letter of the law as I understand it? Pedro Espada is Temporary President of the Senate. It doesn't matter how one feels about him. As near as I can tell that's just how it is.

However, Democrats need not fret, because.....


Three: If 32 votes can successfully oust Malcolm Smith, 32 votes can also successfully Dean Skelos, Pedro Espada, or whomever.

Basically this means that if the Democrats can get their act together and either re-flip Espada, or flip one of the Republicans, or if a Republican dies or leaves the Senate and a Democrat is elected in his or her place, then they will also have an incontrovertible right to seize control of the Senate yet again. What coups give, coups can also take away.


And there goes my first blog posting!


-Albany Exile