"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Start here

Where is the reform the Senate Democrats promised?

If there ever is an issue ripe for reform it is the process of reapportionment or better known as redistricting. The process, which occurs every ten years following the census takes place at the county and state level and determines the districts for county legislator at the local level and at the state level sets the districts for Assembly, State Senate and Congress. The Senate Democrats promised reform, but they have failed to deliver any reform so far in this session.

The process of redistricting should be done by either a bi-partisan or non-partisan citizen commission. The politics in the process either needs to be balanced or non-existent. The result would be much more competitive elections and the public having a stronger voice in the choice of their elected officials.

After you read this from Newsday, would you agree?
A major Democratic lobbyist predicts in a confidential memo that Gov. David A. Paterson - barring a miraculous popularity surge - will step aside and yield to Attorney General Andrew Cuomo the top spot on next year's ticket.

"It is perfectly possible that President (Barack) Obama offers Paterson a key national post as a face-saving move for the governor to exit the state political ring," states the veteran lobbyist, who asked to remain unidentified for business reasons.

Paterson says he will run again. But the fact that the veteran lobbyist, with no evident ax to grind, circulated this speculation privately to paying clients last week shows the risky position that Paterson's low survey ratings leave him in.

The lobbyist cites concerns that a Paterson loss could drag down the ticket, causing the state Senate Democrats to also lose an election that will be key for redistricting - and thus let Republicans again shape district lines for the state's congressional and legislative seats.
"The congressional delegation will . . . weigh in strongly to ease Paterson aside if they perceive him as a loser," the lobbyist says in the missive. "My prediction: Unless there is a dramatic turnaround in Paterson's poll numbers by the early fall, he will not run for re-election."

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Cuomo is the next governor.....

Anonymous said...

It has to be a donkey, so Cuomo is a good guess.
Interesting stuff lately about Bloomberg as well.

Dan Francis said...

NEWSDAY reports that a "major Democratic lobbyist" predicts... yada, yada, yap, yap, etc. etc.

What a crappy story... I'd believe that about as far as I could toss the irrate GOPers upset about being out of power.... give it rest.

The NYS GOP is now starting to look and sound like the national GOP: whining crybabies about being out of power ... so what - it happens. When they had power, quite awhile in the Senate as I recall, things were the same: scratch my lobbyist's back and I'll
scratch yours, etc.

This is the crap the people say they are fed up with... but are they really in the final analysis?

I doubt it. But, for sure we'll see next year who is "right (GOP)" and who is "left (DEM) out."

Won't we? You betcha' - gosh darn it; say it isn't so, Joe?

~ dmf

hermit thrush said...

The process of redistricting should be done by either a bi-partisan or non-partisan citizen commission. The politics in the process either needs to be balanced or non-existent. The result would be much more competitive elections and the public having a stronger voice in the choice of their elected officials.that's spot-on, in my opinion. this really isn't a democratic or republican issue; the dems in nys will gerrymander like crazy if they still hold the legislature in 2010, and republicans in other states do it when they control the legislature (just ask tom delay).

i know that iowa has an independent commission that draws its district lines, and the result has been reasonably-shaped districts and a much higher turnover rate for incumbents -- i.e. more competitive elections. if only we could do that across the country....

Anonymous said...

Well Hermit, if we could do something like that in our one party, corrupt, wasted state, it would be a wonderful, wonderful thing. It would make me very, very happy.

Absolutely giddy.

Maybe you should write Shelly Silver and ask him what he thinks. He has more political muscle than any other thug at the present time. And it has been proven that he has the best interests of our children in mind at all times.

Anonymous said...

where was this discussion when the Repubs were redistricting?

Political IV said...

Repubs were never totally controlling redistricting.

It is a joint process with the State Assembly that has been Democratic for years and the State Senate that up until this year was Republican.

And it was a flawed process then, and will be more as one party redraws the lines.

hermit thrush said...

piv is definitely right about that!

Live Blogging