It's a shame that the Working Families Party chose to avoid making an endorsement in tomorrow's race for New York's 35th State Senatorial district. Tom Watson is catching a lot of flack from WFP members for some blog items he wrote criticizing the party for sitting on the fence. While the tone of Tom's comments may have been over the top (of the two of us, he's always been the hot head), his criticism is, unfortunately spot on.
The leadership of the eight-year-old party is largely comprised of representatives from several of New York State's most powerful unions-- the Teamsters, the service workers union (SEIU), the communications workers union (CWA), the UAW. The party's self-professed (but ungrammatically expressed) goal is "to more forcefully inject the issues of working-class, middle-class, and poor people—like jobs, health care, education, and housing—into the public debate, and hold candidates and elected officials accountable on those issues." And the party's endorsements have historically lined up largely with those of the Democratic Party.
The Democratic candidate in the 35th is precisely the kind of candidate the WFP should be backing. Andrea Stewart-Cousins grew up in the poorest parts of Yonkers--a post-industrial working class city on the Bronx border. A working mother, she raised herself up by her bootstraps leaving behind a professional career for the Westchester County Board of Legislators where she helped create a human rights commission with subpoena and enforcement power to protect against discrimination in employment, business, and housing.
Stewart-Cousins' opponent, Republican Nick Spano, is a 20-year incumbent and one of the most powerful men in the New York State Senate. Two years ago Spano defeated Stewart-Cousins by 18 votes in an election that was subject a long battle over absentee ballots.
Spano is a man in position to bring home a lot of bacon. His website lists around $2.5 million in grants he's secured for public schools, senior centers, fire departments, libraries, colleges, and little leagues throughout his district. He is a member of the powerful Senate health committee, among other committees that control state spending and rules effecting healthcare, hospitals and just about everything else. Spano received a grade of "D" on a middle class legislation scorecard assembled by the progressive think tank the Drum Major Institute. He received the grade in part because of a vote to exempt the kind of high-deductible, low-cost health insurance most often offered to middle and working class employees from state rules regulating the type and quality of care they make available.
I can't say that it's because of his largess towards community groups or because of his position controlling state rules that impact health care spending, but Spano has long been able to garner union support, including an e endorsement this cycle from 1199 SEIU--New York's powerful health care workers union. This is the kind of cynical, back-scratching deal that got the American labor movement where it is today.
Perhaps the WFP position should be seen by liberals as a minor victory, a compromise that gets the more progressive and principled union leaders off the hook. After all, in 2004 the WFP actually endorsed Spano. But why does the party's endorsement really matter? After all, the party's ballot line is good for only around 140,000 votes statewide and around 6,000 votes in Westchester.
Here's why it matters: The Spano/Stewart-Cousins race is one of a tiny handful of races that could wrest the State Senate from generations of Republican control, an event that would surely do more "to forcefully inject the issues of working-class, middle-class, and poor people—like jobs, health care, education, and housing—into the public debate" than would another two years of a Republican majority.
In 2004 the WFP delivered 1,771 votes for Spano. That was less that 2 percent of Spano's total vote, but nearly 100 times the number of votes by which Spano won. The 35th senatorial district is that rare one in which the WFP line can actually change an election's outcome.
Hello There!
I am thrilled to pieces that Andrea Stewart Cousins is the likely winner!!! Finally, the 'process' appears to be working. I am a supporter of Andrea Stewart Cousins, and wish her all the best.
Thank God she continued in her quest to do what is right for the people.
Now, we can all expect Andrea Stewart Cousins to experience 'some trouble' with the old boy network. . . but there is no better woman to bring them to their knees!
GO ANDREA! And don't be quiet about it either! Expose them, Expose them, EXPOSE THEM!
Love,
Connie Headrick Crawford
Posted by: Connie Headrick | November 19, 2006 at 07:25 AM