Paterson to City: Drop Dead. The Governor Hands New York's Senate Seat to an Upstate Blue Dog Conservative

| Fri Jan. 23, 2009 10:58 AM PST

Governor David Paterson's appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand, a one-term Congresswoman from a conservative upstate district, to fill Hillary Clinton's Senate seat is a slap in the face to both New York liberals and to New York City in general. Yesterday, as Gillibrand emerged as the frontrunner, the Village Voice's Wayne Barrett branded her "too Republican to replace Clinton," and "out of step with New York voters, particularly Democrats, on a host of issues."

Gillibrand has described her own voting record as "one of the most conservative in the state." She opposes any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, supports renewing the Bush tax cuts for individuals earning up to $1 million annually, and voted for the Bush-backed FISA bill that permits wiretapping of international calls. She was one of four Democratic freshmen in the country, and the only Democrat in the New York delegation, to vote for the Bush administration's bill to extend funding for the Iraq war shortly after she entered congress in 2007. While she now contends that she's always opposed the war and has voted for bills to end it, one upstate paper reported when she first ran for the seat: "She said she supports the war in Iraq." In addition to her vote to extend funding, she also missed a key vote to override a Bush veto of a Democratic bill with Iraq timetables.

Gillibrand's positions and voting record can be seen as especially offensive to New York City. As Barrett writes:

Gillibrand has a one hundred percent rating from the National Rifle Association ….Gillibrand even opposes any limitations on the sale of semiautomatic weapons or "cop-killer" bullets that can pierce armored vests….Gillibrand voted against both…financial service bailout bills last fall, which have delivered billions to New York, salvaging institutions like Citigroup. An editorial in Crain's, the city's premier business news magazine, said recently that Gillibrand "should be disqualified" from seeking the Senate seat "by her politically expedient vote" against the bailout.

Upstate residents may resent the city's perceived dominance of politics on both the state and local levels, but they are in fact biting the hand that feeds them: The city has historically paid about 20 percent more in federal taxes and twice as much in state taxes than it gets back in services from those governments. And it seems like the wrong time to do anything that could be hard on New York City, which is already hurting badly. As I wrote late last year, while the effects of the economic meltdown are felt nationwide, New York stands at its epicenter, and is taking the heat on two fronts: It is suffering, along with the rest of the country, from the far-reaching fallout of the Wall Street debacle. But it is also directly dependent upon the financial industry itself: Jobs, retail, services, the real estate market, and an astonishing 20 percent of the state's tax base all rest upon the now crumbling foundation of the financial sector. The trip from Wall Street to Main Street is a lot shorter in New York than it is anywhere else.

Advertisement

Advertisement

And while there may be plenty of valid reasons to vote against TANF, Barrett writes that Gillibrand's "argument against the bill seemed to be both parochial and political, contending that 'upstate New York needs a plan that will actually work to stabilize our economy and protect taxpayers.'"

This statement connects to the most sobering fact about Gillibrand: Upon entering the House two years ago, Gillibrand joined the Blue Dogs, the coalition of Democrats that stands to the right of the Democratic Leadership Council, and is known for their conservative positions on both social and fiscal issues. Gillibrand made it clear that she is pro-choice, and quickly changed her previous position against gay marriage. But the biggest upcoming battles in the Senate will involve fiscal policy, and the Blue Dogs have already telegraphed their intention to demand cuts to offset Obama's big economic stimulus package, especially in such longtime conservative targets as social safety net programs and old-age entitlements. In fact, there are clear signs that Republicans are counting on the Blue Dogs to keep the president and Congressional Democrats in check.

It certainly seems like a strange move for Paterson, who had a solidly progressive voting record as a state senator from Harlem. But Paterson has changed since he stepped into the statehouse. Since becoming governor, he has dealt with the state's fiscal shortfalls by presenting a budget that containing severe cuts to Medicaid and other components of the social safety net, while refusing to consider a "millionaire's tax."

A number of Albany-watchers have suggested why Paterson might make such moves: basically, as an expedient to his own political ambitions. As Politico described it yesterday:

Gillibrand brings several important political attributes critical to Patterson, who became governor when Eliot Spitzer resigned and has never topped a statewide ticket, when both run for their offices in 2010: She represents a relatively conservative part of upstate the governor hopes to woo, she's a formidable fundraiser with connections to Hillary Clinton's cash-generating apparatus and she's a woman in a state that prides itself of inclusiveness.

WNYC public radio reporter Elaine Rivera mentioned the same factors this morning when she described Gillibrand as potentially a "tremendous" assett to Paterson when he runs for re-election. Less widely noted is the fact that she comes from a district that is 95 percent white, and that Paterson will be running as an African American in a state that has never had a black governor. In the end, it seems to be the upstate conservative chops that mattered: Another member of the shortlist, New York City Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, is also a woman with ties to Hillary Clinton and a saavy politician, and is far more qualified than Gillibrand—but she's an urban liberal.

As the muckraking Barrett points out, Gillibrand's personal and family connections are far-reaching, connecting her not only to Hillary Clinton and other prominent state Democrats like Charles Schumer and both Andrew and Mario Cuomo, but also to state Republicans:

The irony is that Paterson may be swinging from the nation's most prominent Democratic family to one with strong Republican ties. Gillibrand's father, Doug Rutnik, is an Albany insider and lobbyist whose ties to former GOP powerhouses Joe Bruno, George Pataki and Al D'Amato are legendary. In fact, Gillibrand won her seat when a state police domestic violence report about the GOP incumbent, John Sweeney, was mysteriously leaked, ostensibly with the acquiescence of the Pataki administration, which had its own reasons to oppose Sweeney. Bruno is under federal investigation now, [He was indicted this morning] and some of the subpoenas in the case involved a real estate deal that partnered Rutnik with Bruno and another lobbyist. Rutnik dated, and eventually lived with, a top Pataki and D'Amato aide for many years, until he broke up with her in 2006 to marry a cousin of his, Gwen Lee, who'd worked in high-paying state jobs secured by the same aide. Rutnik and D'Amato have been registered lobbyists for some of the same clients.

Gillibrand once worked for both D'Amato and Andrew Cuomo, another candidate for the senate seat. She was a special counsel when Cuomo ran HUD in the 1990s and her father was close to both Senator D'Amato and Governor Mario Cuomo in the same time period. Her former law firm, Boies, Schiller & Flexner, has been the largest single donor to her House campaigns, and David Boies, the senior partner at the firm, contributed $25,000 to Paterson's campaign committee on December 23, 2008, while the governor was considering Gillibrand's candidacy. Boies' son Chris, also a partner in the firm, contributed another $25,000 on the same day.

All in all, it appears that what happened this morning has very little to do with anyone's positions on the burning policy questions of the day. What happened is that one consummate political animal gave the nod to another.

This post also appears on James Ridgeway's new blog, Unsilent Generation.

James Ridgeway is a senior correspondent at Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

She was probably the only candidate that didn't owe back taxes and have illegal aliens doing her chores!

Myself and a lot of other victims of gun crimes will not vote for this politician who has put guns in the hands of the criminals who victimized us.

So you somehow think banning guns will keep them out of the hands of criminals?

Why are so many of my fellow Democrats such IDIOTS?!?

Guns deter crime. I'd rather shoot a robber or rapist than wait 20 minutes after calling 911.

I'm so glad Gillibrand was selected!!!

Oh, and I'm VERY happy she voted AGAINST the bail-outs for Wall Street firms and big banks that are now zombies kept alive to outcompete honest banks that didn't get into the toxic subprime crap. Hot damn, this Gillibrand is my kind of Democrat!

She looks better than the Kennedy and can be re elected when she runs against a Republican. Don't underestimate the Black man in the Governor's chair. Too many of you White Liberals are more bigoted than Dixie Republicans.

The constitution of most states is identical in this regard:
The Governor is empowered to select replacements for elected Federal officials upon their resignation, death or impeachment. Sorry to be cleche about this but . . . period.
Each state defines who is eligible to hold such seats. I think NY merely requires residency and a minimum age. Thus, had Paterson wanted, George W Bush could have rented a condo in Niagra Falls, and Welcome to the U.S. Senate Mr. President!
Those are the rules. Gov. Paterson used his authority. It is NOT a democratic process. My feelings on his selection are equally as irevelant as everyone elses. But just please understand how much worse it could have been.

Here's a newsflash for the elite liberal Manhattanites who write for Mother Jones...New York state doesn't stop at the Westchester Co. line. A slap in the face to New York City? Do you people realize that not a single Upstater is represented in any leadership position in Albany. It's all NYC. I say good for Patterson, he'll get my vote in the primary

I agree with Kevin Morgan. The belief that Upstaters should have no representation of any power is the height of arrogance.

NYC has a senior senator (Schumer) who is owned by the financial sector and continues to act not only against the best interests of Upstate, but against the best interests of the rest of the country. He repeatedly opposed regulation when it could have made a difference. If this the type of "enlightened" representation that we are supposed to get from NYC, we will pass, thank you.

Anyone who thinks someone who voted against the bailout was just being expedient doesn't belong writing for Mother Jones.

It is true that Gillibrand is a terrible choice for senator because of her conservative views. But James Ridgeway's support of the bankers' bailout shows he is incompetent and should not be writing for Mother Jones. Shame on you for employing this nitwit.

I was shocked to read such a dogmatic column from a writer who once paired with the great Andy Kopkind. Give Gillibrand an opportunity to see how she functions in a position representing the entire state versus the much more conservative and Republican leaning district she has represented. She is clearly a uniquely interesting politician with considerable brainpower. Note her university record and the fact of how quickly she attained partner at David Boes law firm. After a suitable time she might become Governor and be a great candidate for Prez. Think about her versus Sarah of Alaska.

NY already has a Senator from Brooklyn who is quite capable of representing NYC and the downstate area. Also, our Governor is from Hempstead, Long Island. Upstate needs its due share of representation. While I don't agree with her position on gun control, she seems too be a solid candidate as opposed Kennedy. The author here should be ashamed of this article.

I am a Democrat, a Liberal and a resident of Upstate New York (the Adirondacks). Traditionally, Democrats and down-staters ignore our area of the state and the economic depression that preceeded the national one by decades. Although I am opposed to Gillibrand's policy on gun control, I can't help but think that she might be able to successfully shine a light on the plight of the North Country and may also garner democratic support in an area that is traditionally Republican.

Hey Troy please explain how disagreeing with the NY Governors choice to replace Hillary is bigoted. Or is this the way you see everything? White guy disagrees with black guy. White guy must be racist.

Gillibrand's ratings in Congress:
100% NARAL pro-choice
100% ACLU civil liberties
Stated she's for marriage equity in her acceptance speech Friday (not reported, naturally.)

There's been some appaling "news" coverage over the past few days. Kennedy was never a serious choice with the public. Many were shocked that she put herself forward so badly prepared. Upstate residents are rightly offended by the condescending attitude of press and downstaters alike that there was "no need to consider geography" in the appointment. Really? How did we wind up with Pataki? D'Amato? Gillibrand will be the first Senator from North of Westchester since 1970.

Cuomo would have been an easier pick for the Governor politically. Several other options like Maloney, Hinchey or Slaughter are in very important House positions, better able to help New York where they are than as a very junior Senator.

Gillibrand is a lawyer (Dartmouth, JD from UCLA)former counsel to HUD and no "country bumpkin." She works hard, can raise money and when downstate Democrats finally get around to checking their facts, they will also support her.

It's McCarthy who looks bad here, and the lazy, star-struck press, not Gillibrand.

With so many serious national and international issues, I'd really hoped that Democrats and Republicans would not get caught up in abortion, gun control, gar rights, etc. issues. Those are the easy issues for most people, very emotionally charged and most people know where they stand. But our economic problems and the fact that we have two ongoing wars are the significant issues of the day. That they are so problematic and that people have little or no understanding of them is perhaps why we fail to deal with them effectively. Let's deal with the important stuff before this country completely collapses. The social issues that people get so caught up in can wait. If you're out of work, or have a son or daughter in Iraq or Afghanistan, you'd understand this.

Both the Govenor and Ms.
Gillibrand are merely filling in until the next election. New Yorkers will decide if they are worthy to represent the people.

Get yer gun. Go hunting. FTP

"Gillibrand voted against both…financial service bailout bills last fall, which have delivered billions to New York, salvaging institutions like Citigroup."...
Well, this is not the time talk about how anyone "salvaged" Citigroup, or should I say Greedigroup.

Let's see, pro choice, pro civil liberties, and pro gun.

Sounds consistently pro freedom to me.

From an Upstater:

What vintage is this whine?

Oh yeah, Sour Grapes 2009.

Goes well with that plate of crow being served on Wall Street.

Bon appetit!

And the former governor of NY was forced to resign because involvement in prostitution! This confirms that NY is the sleaziest state in the union!

No, Gillibrand wasn't negligent in taxes or exploit the cheap labor of nannies, but she prostituted herself in every political way imaginable--as did all those involved with her previous work or nomination. Rank those in political sordidness!

Designer handbags and

tagged as: 

Designer handbags and wallets from Gucci
Cheap Gucci Handbag
Gucci Handbag
Gucci Bags
Gucci Wallet
Gucci was founded by Guccio Gucci in Florence, Italy in 1921, and began its life as a family owned leather goods, handbag and saddle store. However, Guccio Gucci had travelled to Europe and London when young, and gained an understanding of Cosmopolitan Culture.Gucci make prestigious luxury products, including bag
Gucci Classics handbag
Gucci Cruise handbag
Gucci Fall Winter handbag

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback

We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.

Photo Essays

The chaos and humanity of war.
What becomes of Janesville, Wisconsin, now that GM's left town?
The other side of Gitmo.
American Holidays