Tuesday, November 3, 2009

The Case for Senator Monserrate's Resignation

Introduction

In this article I shall outline a case for Senator Hiram Monserrate's resignation from the State Senate.

I'm not the first person to call for his resignation, and I doubt I'll be the last. My argument might have some similarities with those of others, but I'm pretty sure mine is noticeably different. I don't only deal with the assault conviction, for example. My argument is also pretty cynical, is amoral, and is based on an overall pattern of conduct and on lost credibility. The assault conviction is a factor, but not the only one. I don't care about Senator Monserrate's defense fund. I have no anger toward him about the coup. Though the way he started it, then backed out of it so quickly, is a factor, because I feel that reflects a great personality defect.

However, I take the position that, between the assault conviction and other circumstances, Senator Monserrate has destroyed all credibility for himself, and has crossed a line that makes him unfit to hold public office. There's quite likely other incidents reflecting his various personality defects, but frankly I've spent too much time and bandwidth on this matter as it is.

Senator Monserrate seems unable to follow-through on any important political action he takes, and seems to be brave only when he has a lot of backup or is facing someone weaker than he. This is the mentality of a bully, and while there may be other bullies in New York State politics besides Senator Monserrate, none of them have had public downfalls the way Senator Monserrate has.

Senator Monserrate picks fights, or starts them, and then backs down when he realizes he's in over his head. Contrast this with Senator Perdo Espada. Whether you like Senator Espada or not, he is not afraid to fight an opponent as strong as, or stronger than, he. Like him or not, that's an admirable character trait, one which is necessary to be a leader in State politics, and one which Monserrate lacks to such a degree that he's incapable of being credible even as a follower, let alone a leader. He has chosen to be a high profile Senator, and has since this decision revealed himself to be not up to the challenge. As it's too late for him to be an anonymous back bencher, it's time for him to go and find something else to do.

Who I feel the most pity for is his staff.


Resignation, Not Expulsion

I find resignation, not expulsion, to be the appropriate path here. I am not comfortable with the bizarre, expensive process to “investigate” Senator Monserrate that the Senate Democrats have initiated.

Expulsion has been used but one time in the recent history of the State Legislature. (Maybe one time ever.) In 1920, several sitting, duly elected, sworn-in Members of the State Assembly were expelled for the crime of belonging to the completely legal Socialist party. Their expulsion took place after they had been sworn in, and had voted for leadership positions. The expulsion process they were put through was lengthy and bizarre, incorporating what amounted to a full trial in the Assembly Judiciary Committee that went on for months. (Sources: Louis Waldman's Albany: The Crisis in Government, 1920; Seymour Martin Lipset and Gary Marks's It Didn't Happen Here: Why Socialism Failed in the United States, 2000; New York State Senate, Revolutionary Radicalism: Its History, Power, and Tactics, 1920.)

In my research, I haven't located a price tag for the proceedings (granted, I wasn't looking very hard, as it was of secondary concern to me), but it doesn't sound cheap and, so far, the contemporary Senate Democrats have shown no sign of being able to handle it at a discount rate in the case of Senator Monserrate. The process the Senate Democrats have initiated is thus not only expensive, but historically tainted.


Why is This Even an Issue?

Some appear to wonder why this is even an issue. Why not have automatic expulsion upon conviction of any crime? Shouldn't out public servants be exemplary?

At this point, we need to face the fact that the notion of an “exemplary public servant” is a myth. Your favorite politician has done something wrong, or borderline, or will be accused of doing something wrong even if he hasn't. The basis for the accusation will be something innocuous that will appear bad or wrong somehow when the correct tone of voice and choice of words is used to describe it.

And that's the best case scenario. The worst case scenario is that your favorite politician has some deep flaw, which will one day become public in an alarming and hurtful way.

It's really best if you disavow yourself of the notion of an exemplary politician. There are no real “good guys” in this story. We need to be more realistic about our expectations.

Even more importantly, Senator Monserrate was elected by the people of his district. What you or I may think of him matters a lot less in our system than does the mere fact that he was elected. This is an electoral democracy, after all. To throw out Senator Monserrate, or any elected politician, is to undo the outcome of an election. That should be a rare and terrible occurrence.


A Matter of Credibility, Not Morality

But, as stated above, Senator Monserrate needs to, for the good of the Senate and (more importantly) his district, resign as soon as possible. He simply has no credibility left. None. As we shall see, the assault conviction is simply one incident among several.


Incident One: The Gang of Four....Sorry, Three

Readers will likely recall that Senator Monserrate, actually he was Senator-Elect at the time, was part of the original “Gang of Four,” or “Four Amigos,” four dissident Democrats who were decidedly uncomfortable with the idea of Senator Malcolm Smith as Majority Leader and Temporary President of the Senate.

Readers will also, however, recall that Senator Elect Hiram Monserrate caved in early, after just a few days really, and the Gang of Four quickly became the Gang of Three.

For the first time since his election to the State Senate, Senator Monserrate picked a fight he was not prepared for. The next time he made a big move and wasn't prepared to follow through, the consequences were greater.


Incident Two: The Coup That Wasn't

As is well-documented, Senators Monserrate and Espada, together with all 30 Republican Senators, launched a successful coup against then-Majority Leader and (then and current) Temporary President Smith back in June 2009. (Seems so long ago, doesn't it?)

Note Senator Monserrate in the picture attached to this article. He appears to be attempting to hide in plain sight, and to me at least he looks slightly uncomfortable. He had helped to initiate chaos he was unable to deal with the consequences.

And this was the second time, a more serious variant on what he had already done when he flirted with the Gang of Four. Whether the reasons for the Senator's actions were cynical or sincere is beside the point. Regardless of his motives, Senator Monserrate seems unable to stand up to anyone for very long. In Senator Monserrate, we have a person who is capable of causing chaos and then being frightened by it, like a child who is bewildered when his castle made of building blocks topples after he kicks it. It's not like the level of opposition his actions engendered was somehow not predictable. He just wasn't prepared.

Senator Monserrate really should have confined himself to the back bench. It would not have saved him from Incident Three, but it would have prevented the cumulative weight of these incidents from bearing down upon him.


Incident Three: The Assault Conviction

The details of Senator Monserrate's assault conviction are pretty well known, but let us review them anyway. In middle December 2008, then Member of the City Council and Senator-Elect Monserrate and his girlfriend had some kind of accident or altercation at their apartment. The girlfriend ended up with a seriously slashed face.

Hiram Monserrate was eventually charged with felony and misdemeanor assault. He was acquitted of felony assault, related to the slashing. He was, however, convicted of misdemeanor assault, relating not to the slashing but what happened afterward.

I am normally loath to post links to the New York Post (a publication which usually belongs not in the newsstands but in the toilet hanging off a plastic roll) but the article linked to above (the first of 2 links in the previous paragraph) has an important virtue: It features embedded video footage of now-Senator Monserrate dragging his bleeding girlfriend, post-slashing, first through a hallway, then through the apartment building foyer, then into an emergency room. She appears to be frightened, and clearly makes repeated attempts to get away from him.

Senator Monserrate was not convicted of anything related to the slashing incident. On that matter, there was clearly reasonable doubt, as the alleged victim had recanted her story and clearly did not want Monserrate prosecuted. However, the Judge concluded, the post-slashing dragging constituted misdemeanor assault. There was no reasonable doubt on that fact pattern; it was caught on video.

A sitting New York State Senator now faces jail time. While this outcome is not likely, jail time for first-time misdemeanors seems to be rare, it's well within the realm of the possible. That means it's also possible that the Senator will be drawing public pay while being unable to fulfill his public duties, because he is sitting in a jail cell.


Conclusions

Senator Monserrate should resign. He's done for anyway. As this link shows, the Queens Democrats, never his friends to begin with, have already designated his replacement, Assembly Member Jose Peralta. If there is a primary, all that's necessary to win is showing footage of these 3 incidents (the assault; the Gang of Four/Three; and the coup).

Again, and again, and again.

Senator Monserrate is the political equivalent of the schoolyard bully. Some of those guys can stand up for themselves, but most can't. Senator Monserrate can't. He clearly has personality flaws. If he had remained a back bencher, a member of the body who kept mostly quiet and did his thing, this wouldn't have mattered so much. He may have even been able to survive the assault conviction, by arguing that it was a private matter that didn't impact his job. But it's far too late for that.

And if he doesn't resign? Should the Senate follow through with the expensive and historically questionable process of removal?

I have no answer for that. Right now I'm just hoping he does the right thing and resigns.

No comments:

Post a Comment