SD-1: An Update From Regina Calcaterra

by: NYProgressive

Wed Mar 03, 2010 at 07:10:04 AM EST

In the initial interview, Calcaterra shared her views on why it's important to have a regulated Wall Street to help Main Street. She also expressed her support for marriage equality, discussed property tax reform and ethics reform.

In her second interview with TAP, Calcaterra provided updates on her campaign, thoughts on the expulsion of Sen. Hiram Monserrate (she called for his resignation in October and, last month, for his expulsion) and her opinion of the ethics reform bill passed by the legislature.

CALCATERRA ON THE CAMPAIGN

"The campaign has done tremendously well very early and keeps gaining steam. We have had great success in our daily engagements with voters of the 1st Senate District. Hard working men and women are paying attention to the issues and are providing a clear and strong indication that voters of eastern Long Island want meaningful change."

"In fact, more residents of the district contributed to our campaign financially than that of my opponent, who is a 34-year incumbent. Interestingly, my candidacy has also drawn the support of admired Americans like Pete Dawkins, a West Point legend, Heisman Trophy winner and former Brigadier General of the U.S. Army and Marie C. Wilson, co-founder of Take Your Daughters and Sons to Work Day, founder of the Ms. Foundation and founder and President of the White House Project. Additionally, our campaign has already begun receiving endorsements from the Women's Campaign Forum, NARAL Pro-Choice New York and the National Organization for Women in New York State, which is also gratifying given how early it is in the electoral process."

"Taking on an entrenched incumbent has always been difficult in New York, and will be this year, but we've gained good traction early which has already proven to be a tremendous help."

CALCATERRA ON MONSERRATE'S EXPULSION

"As a victim of, and witness to, childhood domestic violence, I am far too familiar with how emboldened the abuser gets when he/she gets away with their actions. If Monserrate remained as a sitting New York State Senator, in the eyes of abusers and victims, he did in fact get away with it. His continuation as a sitting New York State Senator could have led to a decrease in domestic violence reporting. A victim's decision to report domestic violence is most often influenced by fear of retaliation from their abuser or a belief that our criminal justice system cannot or will not stop the violence. Then, added on top of that belief was the assumption that Monserrate's actions were sanctioned by those in power, our Albany lawmakers."

"We have a long path to walk before New Yorkers will begin to look toward our state legislature with a sense of gratitude or appreciation, but the expulsion of Monserrate by his colleagues was a significant step along that path. Worth noting is that the Democratic Senate majority had a difficult decision to make, given how closely the Senate is split and the implications that doing the right thing could throw the leadership structure into turmoil. But even with knowing that, they made the right choice and put decency, integrity and the best interests of good government first. That is a welcome step in the right direction for honest government in Albany - and the kind of step that New Yorkers hadn't seen for a long time."

"New York is still in a recession. We have an ever-widening budget gap, 8.9 percent unemployment, children in 16.3 percent of all New York families living below the poverty line, and overtaxed residents who can no longer afford to live here. The New York State Senate has critical work to do and it should not have had to even waste the past few months investigating how to rid the Senate of Hiram Monserrate. However, now that he has been expelled it is time for the Senate to get back to the people's business."

The rest of the interview below the fold.

ON THE WEB:

Regina Calcaterra for Senate

Regina Calcaterra ActBlue Page

Follow Regina on Twitter and check out her Facebook page.

NY-Sen: Cooper Comes Around On Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Mon Dec 14, 2009 at 16:49:14 PM EST

Cooper's decision not to run for U.S. Senate and endorse Gillibrand was one that didn't come with the fall-in-line fanfare that usually accompanies such endorsements. In his endorsement, he explained how and why he got to this point.

"After I met with Kirsten for several hours, and had an opportunity to engage in in-depth discussions on a wide array of policy issues, I realized that my perceptions of her were primarily based on media reports and second-hand stories," said Cooper. "I now believe that she's the 'real deal' and I'm convinced she will vote the way I would, work as hard as I would, and strive for the same progressive goals as I would."

...

"Kirsten is smart, warm, energetic and committed to doing a great job," stated Cooper. "I've always said that my decision would ultimately be based on what's best for the Democratic Party, New York State and our nation.  And that's why I am today offering Senator Gillibrand my wholehearted endorsement."

In an e-mail sent out to supporters, Cooper further detailed how he got to this point and why he has decided to endorse Gillibrand:

But one recent Saturday, I flew down to Washington and had a private dinner meeting with Senator Gillibrand.  I did this because a mutual friend challenged me to do so.  He told me that what I knew about the Senator from press reports was simply wrong.  And he suggested that if indeed it was wrong, my ignoring that and running anyway would be like declaring war on Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction.

Didn't I have a responsibility, he asked, to take a few hours to determine whether the enemy was real?

I was somewhat reluctant, having come this far, but at the end of the day, I always try to do what I think is right.  So down I went to Washington, fully prepared for a "snow job" that I would easily detect and resist...and pretty certain I would come back to stand here today and declare my candidacy.

But what I found instead - based on facts I subsequently verified - is a woman quite unlike the one that has been portrayed in the press.

Believe me, it's a conclusion I did not jump to.

But in reviewing the "source materials," as you might put it, instead of relying on second-hand accounts, I determined that Senator Gillibrand is no more a tobacco stooge than I am...that she was 100% pro-LGBT equality long before she was ever appointed to the Senate...that her positions and votes on guns are not at all what that "100% NRA rating" had led me to assume.

Plus, as it turns out, Senator Gillibrand is smart, warm, energetic and committed to doing a great job.

The decision for Cooper, politically, is a smart one. While there are those who argue Gillibrand is vulnerable, her profile is still rising. For Cooper, it would have been an uphill battle even against someone with perceived weaknesses. He is a strong legislator and a brilliant activist, especially when it comes to leading on LGBT issues. But making the jump from county legislator to U.S. Senate would have been a big one. Perhaps too big.

Yet, Cooper showed a willingness to sit down with Gillibrand and get to know her. He learned who she really is through their one-on-one meetings and by the end of it, came to the realization that it wasn't in his best interest to run for Senate. Instead, he not only decided not to run, but endorsed the woman who he was almost going to primary.

NY-Sen: Cooper Announces He Won't Run; Endorses Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Mon Dec 14, 2009 at 14:20:17 PM EST

Today, Cooper held a press conference announcing the he will not run against Gillibrand. In addition, he announced that he is endorsing Gillibrand for Senate believing her to be the best candidate for the job.

In a tweet, Gillibrand said she was "honored" by the endorsement.

I am honored to receive the endorsement of one of Long Island's great leaders and champions of LGBT rights, Majority Leader Jon Cooper.

Cooper was considered a long-shot candidate because he would enter the race trying to make the leap from county legislator to U.S Senate. He would be in a better position than Jonathan Tasini, but still would face long odds.

Cooper's exit means that no elected officials from New York will face Gillibrand (unless something changes over the next several months).  

SD-1: Meet Regina Calcaterra, Candidate For New York State Senate

by: robert.harding

Mon Dec 14, 2009 at 12:52:59 PM EST

This fight for the Senate will have many battlegrounds and one of those battlegrounds will be Long Island. And for Regina Calcaterra, the 1st Senate District will be one district where the incumbent will face a serious challenge.

Calcaterra is a corporate fraud lawyer who has been involved in a number of high-profile cases, including the fraud cases involving Merrill Lynch and WorldCom. She has protected the pensions of employees whose futures are threatened by the fraudulent actions of Wall Street.

She also is the Democratic candidate challenging Republican Senator Kenneth LaValle in the 1st Senate District.

"In 2008, there was only one candidate on the ballot for the state Senate's First District - a 32-year incumbent who had experienced only nominal opposition during his entire tenure," Calcaterra said. "With so much at stake in state government, and with growing dysfunction in the Legislature, I decided to run for the seat in next year's election."

Calcaterra's childhood is, in itself, a profile in courage. She experienced homelessness and poverty growing up and credits a certain group of people with making her the person she is today.

"Through the help of very hard-working people in government - teachers, social workers, librarians, police officers and even crossing guards - we got through it," she said. "They inspired me to take the path that got me here today, through public school, college and law school, and convinced me that government can absolutely do a better job than we see today."

Calcaterra took time to answer questions submitted via e-mail about her candidacy, where she stands on important issues and provided a general idea of what her platform will look like.

QUESTION: You make it a point on your website to list "Prosecuting Wall Street, Protecting Main Street" as, if I may presume, a priority. As it pertains to your district, why is protecting Main Street a high priority while ensuring that Wall Street is regulated?

CALCATERRA: Our current economic downturn might have been avoided had regulators been more vigilant and those on Wall Street were held to higher standards of transparency and honesty. Big companies like WorldCom and AIG took investment dollars from the pensions of hard working people like cops, firefighters, teachers and other civil servants. My job as a corporate fraud lawyer is to fight to get that money back so those hard-working people or taxpayers aren't out hundreds of millions, or even billions, of dollars. I have done this effectively on behalf of retirees and New York's taxpayers.

It shouldn't stop there, though. We've learned many lessons from what happened on Wall Street to cause the economic meltdown and a lot of it can be applied to Albany. Quarterly agency and authority budget reporting, certified audited year end agency financial statements, investigations that include legislative subpoena power, and agency head accountability can get government to work effectively again for everyone.

Q: After the defeat of marriage equality, you appeared at a pro-marriage equality rally. Your opponent, Senator LaValle, voted against the bill along with the whole Republican conference. Is it safe to say that you would be a "yes" vote for marriage equality? Why do you support marriage equality?

CALCATERRA: I will vote for marriage equality without hesitation. I do not believe in "separate but equal" treatment of any group in society, as Sen. LaValle proposed with favoring civil unions over legal marriage. I also believe we should not discriminate against families - - any families, any children - - for the reasons marriage equality opponents like Sen. LaValle suggest.

Q: Property tax reform has been an issue in the past that is still largely unsettled. Governor Paterson and other advocates have supported a property tax cap that would cap taxes at a certain percentage rate. Others have supported a circuit breaker, which would set your tax rate based on the money you make. Do you support either of those proposals or do you have other ideas for property tax reform?

CALCATERRA: Long Island has a deep problem with property taxes that can't be solved overnight. A major step toward fixing high property taxes has been taken by allowing voters the option of consolidating local government and getting rid of some unnecessary special benefit (and tax) districts at the local level. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo proposed that legislation last year, the Legislature passed it and Gov. Paterson signed it into law. It is unfortunate that Sen. LaValle voted against this measure; the first step toward reducing property taxes is reducing waste and redundancy in local government. Residents now have that opportunity in spite of Sen. LaValle's opposition.

If these efficiency and consolidation measures do not address the problems in the near term, a property tax cap should be part of the discussion. However taxpayers must be assured that schools and localities would receive adequate funding so it does not have the effect of forcing school districts to fire teachers, or municipalities to lay off law enforcement officers.

The ultimate tax cap is the voters' ability to hire new legislators who will force government to be efficient and effective.

Read more from Calcaterra about reform and analysis below the fold.

ON THE WEB:

Regina Calcaterra's Campaign Website

Regina Calcaterra's ActBlue Page

NY-Sen: Cooper To Announce Whether He Is Running Or Not December 14

by: robert.harding

Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 17:40:59 PM EST

Cooper made that announcement in an e-mail to supporters today. The e-mail is below:

It's been six months since I launched my exploratory campaign for the U.S. Senate.  Since then, I've had the pleasure of meeting with New Yorkers all across our great state.  This has given me the opportunity to hear about their concerns and frustrations, as well as their hopes for the future.

Running for the U.S. Senate is obviously a major decision with important consequences.  As such, I felt a responsibility not to rush into a decision.

As a friend and supporter, I'm glad to advise you that I'll be announcing my decision at a press conference on Monday, December 14th. More details will be provided as the date approaches.

Thank you very much for your support and please accept my heartfelt wishes for a very happy Thanksgiving!

Best regards,

Jon Cooper

When I interviewed Cooper in September, he made it clear that he wasn't going to rush this decision. In the comments of that post, at least one person brought up that the end of the year seemed to be a bit late. I agree with that, but given Cooper's profile and the fact he is more willing than Jonathan Tasini to actually campaign in New York, making the decision this late in the year is not a huge issue. It's not as if Cooper is starting from scratch here. He is an elected official who does have a base and has a fairly large county (Suffolk) that he could win votes from.

So will he or won't he? We'll find out December 14. The guess for you, the reader, is: Should he or shouldn't he? Should he run and give Gillibrand a challenge? Or should he do the same thing that possible candidates did before and drop out?

NY-Sen: Nadler Endorses Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 10:18:45 AM EST

Representative Jerrold Nadler announced today that he is endorsing Gillibrand, calling her a "great partner on many progressive causes" and praising her for the work she has done on a number of issues, including the issues important to the LGBT community and fighting for a public option.

"From protecting a woman's right to choose and standing up for issues of pressing concern to the LGBT community, to fighting for a robust public health insurance option and protecting our environment by working to reduce harmful emissions, Kirsten Gillibrand has been a great partner on many progressive causes," Congressman Nadler said. "We have worked closely together to provide our 9/11 heroes and affected community members with the health care and compensation they deserve, and on a variety of other issues facing our State and the Nation. New Yorkers want and need Kirsten on their side and I'm proud to endorse her for U.S. Senate."

Nadler's endorsement gives Gillibrand endorsements from 17 members of the 27 Democratic representatives that make up the New York congressional delegation.

The full list is below (I did not include Nadler, since this post is about his endorsement):

•Congressman Michael Arcuri (NY-24)
•Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
•Congressman Joe Crowley (NY-7)
•Congressman Eliot Engel (NY-17)
•Congressman John Hall (NY-19)
•Congressman Brian Higgins (NY-27)
•Congressman Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
•Congresswoman Nita Lowey (NY-18)
•Congressman Dan Maffei (NY-25)
•Congressman Eric Massa (NY-29)
•Congressman Michael McMahon (NY-13)
•Congressman Gregory Meeks (NY-6)
•Congressman Scott Murphy (NY-20)
•Congressman Ed Towns (NY-10)
•Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
•Congressman Anthony Weiner (NY-9)

One of the findings in the Marist poll was that 59 percent of Democrats who were surveyed said that they would support Gillibrand while 84 percent of Republicans said they would support Giuliani. The huge commitment by Republicans to support Giuliani is just how the Republican Party: When it is time to support their candidate, they usually do (See Scozzafava, Dede for an example of what happens when they don't). That strong support helps give Giuliani a 14 point lead in the poll. Everyone considers it a "weak" showing by Gillibrand, but I see it as a weak showing among Democrats who, almost a year after her appointment, are ignoring Gillibrand's record in the Senate and instead are looking for some reason to dislike her because of what she was in the past (a Blue Dog Democrat from a conservative district in upstate New York).

When looking at Gillibrand, it is easy to look at the past. You want an example of looking at the present and future? Look at why Nadler endorsed her. He made it clear: She is a partner on progressive issues. Her record as a U.S. senator has shown that and instead of just using her time as a Blue Dog and other ridiculous things against her, we should take the time to acknowledge the great work she is doing as a U.S. senator.

NY-Sen: Human Rights Campaign Endorses Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 13:22:19 PM EST

It is because of her advocacy and support in the U.S. Senate that the LGBT community considers her a friend. Today, the Human Rights Campaign endorsed Gillibrand.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, announced today the endorsement of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) in the 2010 U.S. Senate race.  Gillibrand is the first U.S. Senator from New York to support full marriage equality for same-sex couples.

"Senator Gillibrand has emerged as one of the strongest advocates in the Senate for full equality for the LGBT community," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.  "From her personal lobbying of the New York legislature in support of marriage rights to helping garner support for a Senate hearing on repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' Gillibrand has time and again stood for fairness for all."

"I am very honored to once again have the endorsement of the Human Rights Campaign," said Sen. Gillibrand.  "Equality, civil rights, and equal justice for the LGBT community must be a clarion call for our party and our generation.  This is the civil rights march of our generation.  We must continue to push every day to repeal DADT, repeal DOMA, and provide equal protections in the work place for all Americans.  There is far more support for our cause than people realize.  Let's continue working together to write a new chapter of equality in this country."

Here are some key points regarding Gillibrand's record on LGBT issues:

•  Support of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples;
•  Helping lead efforts to repeal the discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the U.S. military.  At Sen. Gillibrand's urging, the Senate Armed Services Committee announced it would hold the first hearing on the policy in 15 years;
•  Cosponsor of the fully inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA);
•  Cosponsored and voted for the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act;
•  Supports full repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act.;
•  Cosponsor of the Uniting American Families Act, to allow same-sex couples in bi-national relationships to sponsor a partner for legal immigration to the U.S.;
•  Opposes amending the U.S. Constitution to discriminate, including opposition to the Federal Marriage Amendment;
•  Cosponsor of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act; and
•  Cosponsor of Early Treatment for HIV Act.

This is a big endorsement from the LGBT community. Getting the support of HRC shows that Gillibrand has been a great advocate for the LGBT community in the U.S. Senate and recognizes her past work in the House. Her support of equal rights is important, especially in New York, as we have our own fight for marriage equality brewing and having a sitting U.S. senator from our state out in front on these issues helps the pro-equality movement.

NY-Sen: Five Targets For 2010

by: robert.harding

Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:59:32 AM EST

The dysfunctional body has its share of problems. And by problems, I mean senators who are in Albany for all the wrong reasons. Instead of serving the people of their district and the citizens of New York, they are in Albany to serve their own interests. We need to get rid of those senators and replace them with not more and better Democrats, but the best Democrat for the job.

Early on, here are five targets to focus on moving forward.

PEDRO ESPADA JR.
This one probably goes without saying, but we can't take our eyes off the ball. In 2008, we replaced one corrupt Democrat - Efrain Gonzalez - with Espada. This time around, we need to replace Espada with someone who will serve SD-33 well and not put his desire for power over the interests and issues of the district. It would also be in the best interests of Democrats in the district to find a replacement, since Espada embarrassed them by temporarily caucusing with the Republicans.

HIRAM MONSERRATE
If we can't fire Monserrate before the 2010 elections, let's have the voters of SD-13 send him home. Assemblyman Jose Peralta has stepped up to challenge Monserrate should he stick around for 2010. Monserrate's beating of his girlfriend and his role in the coup shouldn't be what the Democratic Party stands for. We need someone else and we need the best Democrat to step forward.

KEVIN PARKER
Parker has his own legal woes (an assault case, actually) to worry about. His defending of Monserrate was interesting, given his own problems and the fate he could face. He was in a primary in 2008 and another primary in 2010 seems likely. This time, we need to replace him. He is known for his bad temper and that temper leads to bad things, including the assault charge he is facing. We can't have that in Albany. We need someone else.

FRANK PADAVAN
This is a seat Jim Gennaro nearly won in 2008. It is reminiscent of when SD-15 was narrowly won by incumbent Serf Maltese in 2006 only to be lost in 2008 to Joseph Addabbo. Padavan has very little wiggle room and if Gennaro aimed for a rematch with the resources of the DSCC invested in the race, he can win. Picking up SD-11 would be huge, since the district has a Democratic enrollment advantage and should be in our hands to begin with. Gennaro would make a good candidate for 2010, if he wants it.

GEORGE MAZIARZ
Two things: I live in the district (SD-62) and I know that it might come as a surprise that I pick Maziarz over others. But I see this as a real opportunity. The only thing that makes SD-62 a leaning Republican district is the county I live in, Orleans. Take it away and this is a Democratic district. Maziarz's connections to Steve Pigeon and his role in the coup are worth noting. Maybe we don't win in 2010, but a strong candidate will give him trouble.

It would also be key to look at Long Island for another pickup. Kemp Hannon in SD-6 is a possibility. But we also need to make gains in upstate. We have areas that are Democratic or "purple" districts where we could win, but currently, these districts are represented by Republicans. That needs to change.

We have a lot of work to do for 2010. In 2008, we took back the New York State Senate. In 2010, we need to do some renovations.  

Re: Tonight's Big Lesson

by: robert.harding

Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 01:29:55 AM EST

There will be much number-crunching tomorrow, but preliminary numbers (at least in Virginia) show that GOP turnout remained the same as last year, but Democratic turnout collapsed. This is a base problem, and this is what Democrats better take from tonight:

1.If you abandon Democratic principles in a bid for unnecessary "bipartisanship", you will lose votes.

2.If you water down reform in favor of Blue Dogs and their corporate benefactors, you will lose votes.

3.If you forget why you were elected -- health care, financial services, energy policy and immigration reform -- you will lose votes.

Tonight proved conclusively that we're not going to turn out just because you have a (D) next to your name, or because Obama tells us to. We'll turn out if we feel it's worth our time and effort to vote, and we'll work hard to make sure others turn out if you inspire us with bold and decisive action.

The choice is yours. Give us a reason to vote for you, or we sit home. And you aren't going to make up the margins with conservative voters. They already know exactly who they're voting for, and it ain't you.

I actually think the problem isn't related to any of that. You can't look at local and state elections through a national prism. As a friend said about NY-23, everyone in the nation can talk about health care, but they are talking about jobs (up there).

You have to start with the candidates. Jon Corzine was weak. His popularity was not there and he was suffering similar to how Governor David Paterson is struggling. In these tough economic times, it is hard to be governor of a state. States and municipalities are feeling the heat of the economic recession. As a result, voters feel the need to change things.

Virginia was odd. It reminded me of NY-26 in a way. Here you have Creigh Deeds (Alice Kryzan in NY-26) winning the Democratic primary by surprise only to lose the general election. Deeds didn't poll particularly well at all throughout the race, so his loss was expected. When that is the case, who is going to get excited about that?

The three points Kos came up with are great for a House or Senate race, but not for a gubernatorial race or for other local and state races. We are talking about a whole other set of issues. Instead of health care, we are talking budget cuts. Instead of Blue Dogs, we are worried about the Hiram Monserrates and Pedro Espadas of the world who seek to throw a legislature into disarray.

It does not surprise me that a national blogger has such a take on a state-level race. While I think the issues listed are important, I think they aren't relevant to Corzine or Deeds. We lost New Jersey because of the economic state of the state. We lost Virginia because the candidate that won the Democratic primary was running second the whole race. States are facing tough times right now. We know that in New York and no other state is closer to New York in terms of issues like New Jersey is. We can relate. And we see New Jersey as a red flag for our own elections in 2010.

NY-1: Bishop A Republican Target For 2010

by: robert.harding

Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 23:11:39 PM EDT

Congressman Tim Bishop will be a target for Republicans seeking to put a dent in the majority for Democrats in Congress and try to decrease the large number of Democrats in the New York congressional delegation.

The 1st congressional district does have a Republican enrollment advantage of about 27,000 voters. There are a large number of unregistered voters in the district, which balances things out.

Here are the numbers as of April 1:

DEMOCRATS: 141,030
REPUBLICANS: 168,718
INDEPENDENCE: 18,967
CONSERVATIVE: 12,576
WORKING FAMILIES: 2,070
GREEN: 1,060
LIBERTARIAN: 109
BLANK: 124,896
TOTAL: 469,426

Bishop won in 2008 with 58 percent of the vote. He won in 2006 with 62 percent of the vote. So Bishop isn't exactly vulnerable. Obama narrowly won the district with 51 percent of the vote in 2008, so perhaps that is why the Republicans are adding this seat to the list.

Obviously, defending Bishop will be a priority. We don't need any surprises. Yes, Bishop won his last race by 16 points. But we don't want to sit back and assume that will happen again. So defending NY-1 and keeping Bishop in office will be a priority.

NY-Sen: Jonathan "Hollywood" Tasini

by: robert.harding

Sat Sep 26, 2009 at 21:07:08 PM EDT

Certainly, your home state (in this case, New York) comes to mind. And since New York is home to New York City, the go-to place for political fundraising dollars, you would have no problem raising funds from the large group of people willing to give the maximum amount to any candidate they like.

For Jonathan Tasini, his fundraising locale of choice isn't the state he wishes to represent, but rather Del Mar, California. That is where Tasini was last night for a fundraiser hosted by actor Richard Dreyfuss.

Jimmy Vielkind has more on the Tasini Hollywood fundraiser:

Jonathan Tasini, a labor activist who is mounting a left-flank challenge to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand will host a fund-raiser tonight in Los Angeles featuring actor Richard Dreyfuss.

Tasini told me by phone from LA that he has known Dreyfuss--the star of Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Mr. Holland's Opus--for about three years. Dreyfuss is an active Democratic donor, and played Dick Cheney in the 2008 film W. Tickets start at $100 a head.

I asked Tasini how things were going, in light of a new poll which shows Kirsten Gillibrand running behind potential Republican opponents.

"I believed from the very beginning that she will not be the senator from New York," Tasini said. "It will either be that I defeat he in the primary, or she'll lose in the general election. Democrats should be very concerned about that; I will be a much stronger candidate against any Republican."

"I intend to be the nominee. I'm very confident in that," he said, noting things are "very, very different" than his Quixotic 2006 primary against Hillary Clinton.

I have always wanted Siena or Marist to include Tasini in their polling. If he thinks Senator Kirsten Gillibrand will lose in the general election and that he "will be a much stronger candidate against any Republican" then we should know just how well he fares against the likes of Rudy Giuliani and George Pataki.

There are those who come here and criticize our coverage of this race and label the whole blog pro-Gillibrand even though there are only a few of us in this community who are outspoken in our support for Gillibrand. Yes, a few of us are front-pagers, but that doesn't make the whole group pro-Gillibrand. That is like the labeling that went on during the 2008 elections that tabbed Daily Kos as the blog for Obama and MyDD as the blog for Clinton. Were front-pagers on those respective blogs supportive of those respective candidates? Yes. But it wasn't an accurate label of those blogs.

The truth is that I would take primary opponents a little more seriously if they did two things:

(1) Ran on their own platform instead of trying to run against the incumbent. If you have to run on someone's weaknesses instead of your strengths, why bother running?

(2) Treated the race seriously by actively campaigning, traveling the state and by putting New Yorkers first just as you would have to do as senator.

In Tasini's case, he fails both. While he does have his own platform, that is not his primary focus. He is trying to highlight Gillibrand's weaknesses instead of his strengths. He did the same thing in 2006 with Hillary Clinton. It didn't work then and it won't work now.

Tasini had a problem with being viewed as a serious candidate in 2006. The same can be said now. Instead of making trips to Hollywood for fundraisers with actors, why not take that time and effort and come to upstate New York (not Ithaca, somewhere else), the North Country or hold a fundraiser on Long Island. There is more to this state than the five boroughs and Tompkins County. Apparently, Tasini doesn't know that.

NY-Sen: Gillibrand Trails Giuliani, Pataki In Latest Marist Poll

by: robert.harding

Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 16:38:47 PM EDT

The Marist poll on the U.S. Senate race shows that Gillibrand trails both Republicans, although there are some points to make about the polling numbers against her hypothetical Republican opponents.

Against Giuliani, Gillibrand loses 51 percent to 40 percent. Those numbers aren't too surprising, given Giuliani's name recognition and considering that is pretty much what these polls are all about when they involve someone like Gillibrand who doesn't have the statewide name recognition that Giuliani or Pataki has.

When pitted against Pataki, Gillibrand does better. She still trails 45 percent to 41 percent, but that's not a bad margin against the man who seems to be the more likely of the two opponents. If Giuliani runs for anything, it is looking like he will run for governor. But I think the Republicans are waiting to see what Andrew Cuomo does.

There are some things in these polls that need to be pointed out.

- Gillibrand beats Giuliani in New York City by a larger margin than Pataki. That is a very interesting number. Gillibrand wins 58 percent to 38 percent in New York City over Giuliani and 53 percent to 34 percent over Pataki. I know that it's only one percent point, but since 58 percent of voters are willing to pick her over Giuliani, that's a much bigger achievement than the margin of victory.

- Gillibrand's weakness in the general election matchups is what some might consider her strength: Upstate. She loses upstate New York to Giuliani 59 percent to 33 percent and loses to Pataki 48 percent to 39 percent. Isn't it fascinating that Giuliani loses the city he used to be mayor of by 20 percentage points and yet, wins what you might consider "conservative upstate" by 26 points.

- Democrats supporting the Republican in these polls are also interesting. Of the Democrats polled, 29 percent support Giuliani and 26 percent support Pataki. By comparison, only 13 percent of Republicans back Gillibrand in her matchup with Giuliani and 17 percent support her in a race with Pataki. Could those votes be from Democrats who just don't like Gillibrand or aren't informed about Gillibrand? It is very possible. It's also possible that they are voting for the person they know the most about. In this case, it wouldn't be a shock to have that person (or persons) be Giuliani and Pataki.

- Gillibrand has to build her support among women. Women back Giuliani over Gillibrand 47 percent to 41 percent and back Gillibrand over Pataki 43 percent to 40 percent. You would think that support would be a little higher, especially in a race that would pit her against a man. But those numbers are sitting in the low 40s.

We are about 13 months away from the general election. I'm not too worried about this race. I do worry that she has hit a lull after months of increasing poll numbers. What is clear is that if Pataki is her opponent, she will probably beat him. The numbers don't say it now, but she could beat him today. Giuliani is a different story. Of course, it helps to have a national profile. Some people vote not based on qualifications but who they know when asked in these polls. So when they hear Giuliani as opposed to Gillibrand, it doesn't surprise me that they pick Giuliani.

Gillibrand is still working hard. She has clearly made gains in New York City, where hardly anyone likes Giuliani or Pataki. So if she can build up her base and appeal to those in upstate New York, she will be a tough candidate to beat in 2010.

NY-Sen: Meet Jon Cooper: Still Pondering Run Against Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Mon Sep 21, 2009 at 16:41:51 PM EDT

Last week, I spoke with Cooper about his possible candidacy, his career and why he is interested in running for a seat that was once held by Hillary Clinton, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Robert F. Kennedy.

At first, Cooper dismissed the notion that a former Republican U.S. senator from New York - the same man Senator Chuck Schumer beat in 1998 - would be at a ceremony for Republicans. But, much to his dismay, there D'Amato stood mere feet away from Gillibrand as she was introduced as New York's newest senator.

Cooper makes it clear that he has ideas. He isn't just going to run an anti-Gillibrand campaign, but he can't help but point out her record. He mentions her past ties to Big Tobacco, the 100 percent rating she received from the National Rifle Association and her evolution on numerous issues that could be perceived as politically convenient.

"Her past position (on gun control) was of concern," he said. "There are some people are distrustful of her evolution on this and other issues and are concerned about what they see as flip-flopping and see this as insincere or they question her character. I'm not saying I do. But there are those who do."

For Cooper, however, it is different. He is not yet a declared candidate but he is touting his own record and why, if he were to run, he should be considered a serious contender to Gillibrand.

"I have, many times over the years, took stances that might not have been politically popular with my constituents but I believed it was the right thing to do," he said.

As an openly gay and happily married man, Cooper is the father of five children he and his spouse Rob have adopted. He has served 10 years on the Suffolk County Legislature and currently is the majority leader for the legislature's Democrats. He lists two key pieces of legislation as highlights of his career. He wrote the first law banning the use of hand-held cell phones while driving in the country. Since then, a number of states (including New York) have adopted such laws. In addition to that, Cooper also authored legislation that banned the sale of ephedra. That effort led to the federal government imposing a ban on the dietary supplement.

Jobs and the economy is an area that Cooper knows all too well. Cooper is running the family business, Spectronics Corporation, in Westbury. He said that while he is on the corporate side of things, he also is very much pro-labor and supports workers.

In the 2008 presidential primaries, Cooper backed an underdog named Barack Obama. Cooper was the first elected official from New York to endorse Obama and went on to be the Long Island chair of the Obama campaign. He said that, at the time, people asked him if he realized the political risk he was taking. Cooper said he had supported Hillary Clinton in the past but once he met Obama, he was sold. It was through the Obama campaign that Cooper met many grassroots organizers, some of whom are now aiding him in his exploratory efforts and organizing meet and greets throughout the state for people to meet him. Cooper was in upstate New York this weekend meeting voters in Buffalo and Rochester and will be back in upstate New York again, especially if he decides to run.

Cooper knows that he has a long way to go. He realizes that Gillibrand has millions in her bankroll. He realizes that she has received nearly every county chair's endorsement to date. But one thing he references to is that Obama was counted out too. No one thought Hillary Clinton could be beaten. But with the greatest grassroots campaign ever, Obama pulled it out in the primary and won the general election.

A vast majority of Obama organizers and activists that Cooper worked with in 2008 are urging him to run and are supporting him. Democratic clubs have urged him to run. Progressives are supporting him. And while he says he isn't comparing himself to Obama, the comparisons are glaring.

"The party establishment, for the most part, quite understandably is falling in line behind our Democratic incumbent senator regardless of how she got to that office," he said. "But she's the incumbent Democrat now and I expect most of the political establishment to back her. But a lot of the grassroots leaders that had been early supporters of Obama seem to be lining up behind me or at the very least, urging me to run so that we will have a choice, which is what this is all about: Offering Democrats in New York State a choice."

While Cooper doesn't have a full slate of issues on his platform yet (understandable at this stage), his platform stresses the importance of economic development, pushes for progressive values and support of the environment and the fight for health care, consumer protection, gun safety and middle class tax cuts.

So when will we know whether or not Cooper is running? He says by the end of the year he will have a decision. He is testing the waters right now to see just how much support he has and what the response is statewide. I spoke with him over the weekend and he seemed to be very pleased and excited by the response in Buffalo and Rochester. So we'll see just how far he is willing to go and if he is going to make an upset bid for the U.S. Senate.

NY-GOV: President Obama Is Right: Governor Paterson Should Not Run

by: robert.harding

Sun Sep 20, 2009 at 09:50:03 AM EDT

The reaction here at TAP and in New York has been mixed. The views range from agreeing with the President to concerns about the President's involvement in New York politics.

In order to understand why the President would do this, we need to look at the big picture. In 2006, we took back the Governor's mansion and that gave Democrats the upper hand in legislative manners: The governor was a Democrat, the Assembly was still ruled by Democrats and the State Senate wasn't too far off. In 2008, Democrats took over the New York State Senate, only to have that disrupted in a matter of months by Republicans and Pedro Espada Jr. looking for more power. Espada eventually came back, giving Democrats the Senate again.

The reality is that, in 2010, we could go back to what we had before the gubernatorial and state senate wins. We could go back to having a Republican governor and a Republican state senate all because of who is at the top of the ticket in New York State.

The poll numbers show that Governor Paterson is not in a strong position to run for re-election in 2010. His approval rating at the end of August was 32 percent. That is a quick decline from where he was at in late January, when his poll numbers stood at 54 percent and an even more dramatic drop from the 60 percent favorable ratings he had in late 2008 and early 2009. We are a year out from the Democratic primary (if one does take place) and we are less than 14 months away from the general election. Unless Paterson makes a huge turnaround (which, at this point, is unlikely) he is not in a position to be a strong candidate for governor.

President Obama is a smart man. He is also a political genius. He sees New York as an important piece to the Democratic Party. His involvement in the U.S. Senate race is well documented. He has tried to clear the field for Senator Kirsten Gillibrand so that she can run a strictly general election campaign instead of having to run a possibly damaging primary election that would leave her vulnerable for the general.

In the case of Paterson, he sees the opposite.

He sees a candidate who is weak and would not serve the party well in a general election. He sees a candidate that is not well received in this state and is not someone New Yorkers support. Trying to support him for governor would be tough, not only for Obama and national Democratic leaders, but also for leaders in New York at the local and state levels.

On Paterson's end, he has made some missteps in forging a good relationship with the Obama administration.

From the New York Times:

In addition, the relationship between Mr. Obama and Mr. Paterson has been shaky, dating to the governor's selection of a replacement for Hillary Rodham Clinton, who resigned from the Senate to become secretary of state. White House officials had received assurances from Mr. Paterson that he would not pick Kirsten E. Gillibrand, then a little-known Democratic congresswoman from a heavily Republican district outside of Albany, according to a prominent Democrat who discussed the matter with a senior White House official.

The White House and Democratic House leaders were concerned that her sudden departure from the House would give Republicans a prime opportunity to reclaim the seat. Aides to the president conveyed those concerns to the governor, according to Democrats who have discussed the matter with Mr. Obama's aides.

In the end, Mr. Paterson selected Ms. Gillibrand anyway, infuriating White House officials and Democratic leaders in Washington. Making matters worse, the governor also publicly snubbed Caroline Kennedy, a close personal friend and ally of Mr. Obama's, who announced in December her wish to be chosen as Mrs. Clinton's replacement, but then withdrew her name from consideration in January, citing personal reasons.

The concerns of Obama aides deepened last month, when the governor, speaking on a radio talk show in New York, suggested that criticism of him was racially motivated and that Mr. Obama would soon suffer similar attacks. Mr. Obama's advisers, who have long sought to defuse the issue of race, found the comments inflammatory and expressed their displeasure directly to the Paterson camp.

As it stands right now, Paterson doesn't give New York Democrats the best chance to win in 2010. While I don't think he will drag down the whole ticket, including congressional candidates in upstate districts that will be running for re-election next year, I do think he will have a negative impact on state senate candidates specifically. In order to turn that around, we will need a different candidate at the top of the ticket. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo would be a great option. But Paterson, at this moment, is not our guy.  

NY-Sen: Tasini Campaigns In Ithaca; Cooper Challenges Gillibrand On Public Option

by: robert.harding

Mon Aug 31, 2009 at 22:06:54 PM EDT

Jonathan Tasini was in Ithaca over the weekend campaigning and raising money. Ithaca (and Tompkins County) was where Tasini performed best in upstate New York. In 2006, Sen. Hillary Clinton defeated Tasini in Tompkins by 828 votes. The final tally was Clinton 2,849 to Tasini's 2,021.

Despite massive disadvantages in name recognition and fundraising, Tasini thinks the economic crisis and state government meltdown have left people more open to his brand of change than they've ever been. Tasini was in Ithaca Sunday campaigning and fundraising.

"The political machine in this state does not work for the people. The political machine in this state works for the politicians and the careers of politicians, and people are fed up with that," he said.

...

Prior to accepting her Senate seat, Gillibrand worked for the tobacco and gun industries, and she is "awash" in money from special interests, Tasini said.

Tasini's contributions are all from individuals, while almost $700,000 of Gillibrand's are from political action committees, including hospitals, insurance companies, financial services and the natural gas industry, according to the FEC database.

If elected, Tasini said his top priorities would be strengthening the labor movement through widespread unionization; rewriting free trade policies to protect workers as well as corporations; and raising taxes on corporations and couples making more than $351,000 rather than "borrow(ing) from the Chinese."

On health care, he supports single-payer government insurance by opening Medicare to everyone.

A possible challenger, Suffolk County Legislator Jon Cooper, tried to push Gillibrand on health care reform. Specifically, he challenged her on her support of a public option.

Jon Cooper, a local Long Island official who may be the only elected official remaining to challenge Kristen Gillibrand, sends out an email today that shows how the approaching midterms polarize the debate.

The punch line of the email:

   As you know, I strongly believe that any meaningful health care reform must include a government-run public option. That's why I was greatly concerned by phone calls I placed last week to all six of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's district offices. Staffers at each office advised me that Senator Gillibrand is willing to consider supporting alternatives to the public option, such as health insurance co-ops.

On both sides, the public option is becoming a potent primary wedge, which isn't exactly a spur to rational debate.

Thanks to Ben, I have included the full e-mail below the fold.

Cooper's approach is an interesting one, given Gillibrand's stated support of a public option. She can consider alternatives all she wants, but her stance is in strong support of a public option. She hasn't wavered from that.

On Tasini, it is hard to take him seriously when he goes to virtually the only place in upstate where he stood a chance in 2006. He needs to go elsewhere if he wants to be considered a serious candidate. Right now, Dr. Scott Noren seems to be a more serious option than Tasini, who ran against Clinton in 2006 on a platform of holding her accountable for her Iraq War vote (which is a nice idea, but hardly something to run a U.S. Senate campaign on).

Cooper has the right idea. Cooper has said that he is going to travel to upstate and visit Democrats in places like Buffalo, Rochester and Syracuse. Tasini should be doing the same, but that has yet to happen.

NY-Sen: Congressman Massa's Endorsement Of Gillibrand Not "One Of The Last"

by: robert.harding

Sun Aug 23, 2009 at 21:02:13 PM EDT

Massa announced his endorsement of Gillibrand late last week. In reporting the endorsement, Joe Spector over at LoHud posted about Massa's backing of Gillibrand:

As one of the last members of the New York House delegation to back Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's election next year, Rep. Eric Massa, D-Corning, announced today that he will back the junior senator.

A quick education for Mr. Spector. The New York House delegation has 29 members, 26 of which are Democrats. Of those 26 Democrats, 14 have endorsed Gillibrand. Massa isn't "one of the last" members of the New York congressional delegation. Is he one of the latest members to endorse? Yes. But there are 12 other members of the New York House delegation who have yet to endorse.

Here is the list of those who have endorsed:

   * Congressman Michael Arcuri (NY-24)
   * Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
   * Congressman Eliot Engel (NY-17)
   * Congressman John Hall (NY-19)
   * Congressman Brian Higgins (NY-27)
   * Congressman Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
   * Congresswoman Nita Lowey (NY-18)
   * Congressman Eric Massa (NY-29)
   * Congressman Michael McMahon (NY-13)
   * Congressman Gregory Meeks (NY-6)
   * Congressman Scott Murphy (NY-20)
   * Congressman Ed Towns (NY-10)
   * Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
   * Congressman Anthony Weiner (NY-9)

This is the list of New York Democratic House members who haven't endorsed Gillibrand:

- Congressman Gary Ackerman (NY-5)
- Congressman Timothy Bishop (NY-1)
- Congressman Joseph Crowley (NY-7)
- Congressman Steve Israel (NY-2)
- Congressman Dan Maffei (NY-25)
- Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
- Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (NY-4)
- Congressman Jerrold Nadler (NY-8)
- Congressman Charles Rangel (NY-15)
- Congressman Jose Serrano (NY-16)
- Congresswoman Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
- Congressman Paul Tonko (NY-21)

I see bigger stories than Massa's endorsement here. None of the House members from Long Island have endorsed. Three upstate members - Maffei, Slaughter and Tonko - have not endorsed.

The biggest story? Some of the most prominent members of the delegation haven't touched the race. The aforementioned Slaughter, one of the most powerful members of the House, hasn't endorsed. Nadler hasn't endorsed. Rangel hasn't endorsed.

But what is the media focused on? Whether or not Massa, one of the few freshmen members of the delegation, has endorsed. Even with their focus on it, they managed to drop the ball and consider his endorsement "one of the last" when it was one of the first 14 of 26.  

NY-Sen: Serrano Says He Won't Challenge Gillibrand; Won't Endorse Yet

by: robert.harding

Mon Aug 10, 2009 at 11:32:23 AM EDT

Add Rep. Jose Serrano to the list of House Democrats taking a pass on 2010 primary challenges to their former colleague, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.

Serrano, a 35-year veteran public official from the Bronx who said back in May that he would consider taking on Gillibrand if no one else was willing, told me yesterday he isn't willing to risk his seat to do so

But Serrano remains concerned about the process by which Gillibrand was plucked from relative political obscurity by Gov. David Paterson and the subsequent "pressure" to which would-be contenders like Reps. Steve Israel and Carolyn Maloney were subjected to clear the field for her next fall.

"No, I'm not running," the congressman said during a telephone interview. "But I was not pleased with the selection, and I'm not pleased with the style and the pressure on Maloney and everyone else to get them out."

"I've been in office 35 years...I've never seen this type of pressure to get candidates out of the way. The White House, the vice president, the senator (Chuck Schumer). This was incredible."

"Here we are, and it looks like she's going to get a clear ride. Very few times in politics do you get to be that lucky, and there's no other way to say it but 'lucky.'"

There is the perception that President Barack Obama and other Democratic leaders have forced out the rest of the field. The only representative you could say was "forced out" was Congressman Steve Israel, who chose not to run after talking it over with President Obama.

When Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney announced she would not run on Friday, it was clear that she came to that decision on her own. While there may have been pressure, that pressure has been applied for months. Her decision not to run wasn't based on that pressure. Her decision not to run was based on some of the same reasons why Serrano won't run: Doesn't want lose seniority for congressional district in the House and doesn't want to start as a junior member in a new house.

The line about Gillibrand being selected from "relative political obscurity" made me chuckle. Gillibrand, while only a one-term congresswoman from an upstate district, has been a prolific fundraiser. Also, since when are you in "obscurity" if you are a member of Congress? Maybe you don't have the profile that someone like Sen. Chuck Schumer does. But it's not like Gillibrand was an unknown in political circles. Gillibrand raised nearly $4.5 million in 2008 for her re-election campaign. That was nearly as much as Israel, Maloney and possible Republican challenger Peter King combined. I don't like using money as a key indicator, but being able to raise that kind of money from an upstate district says a lot about her political credentials.

It looks like the push is still on for a Democratic primary. I wish the focus would shift from finding an opponent to taking a serious look at the job Gillibrand is doing as our senator.

NY-Sen: Maloney's Statement On Decision Not To Run For U.S. Senate

by: robert.harding

Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 12:03:32 PM EDT

Richard Fife just passed along this statement from Maloney which gives us a good idea of why she decided not to run.

In seriously assessing a Senate Campaign, I have been inspired by all the calls of support I have received from a broad array of people from all over the state and encouraged by my strong showing in the polls.

However, these are unique times with unparalleled challenges and running for the Senate is a full time job.  Giving up for a critical period of time, the things I do best-passing legislation, working on the issues, serving New Yorkers would put politics before policy for the next year and a half.  

Working this past week to provide meaningful health care reform and to advance important legislation to help those who lost their health because of 9-11 attacks, which would bring more than $11 billion to the city of New York, brought into sharp focus the importance of the work we are doing in Congress and of what is at stake for the nation.

The right decision for me and the people I represent is to stay in the House of Representatives and use the leadership positions I hold, including Chair of the Joint Economic Committee, to get things done.

I make this decision, not because I fear a tough political fight, but because I love one. In this Congress, we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to enact meaningful health care reform, restore the trust and confidence in our financial systems, and  take a step toward a clean energy future.

We can do all this and more, but not without a mighty effort that deserves all my focus and all my energy. I welcome the challenge of shaping those bills and passing those reforms.

I look forward to working with Senators Schumer and Gillibrand and the NY delegation on behalf of our constituents, the State of New York and the American people.

I thank my family, friends and supporters for their confidence in me throughout this process. I may not be entering the race - but I will never leave the fight.

As I stated earlier, we all benefit from having Carolyn Maloney in the House. We also benefit greatly from having Kirsten Gillibrand in the Senate. Maloney has been a strong representative for those in her district and for all of New York. She will continue to be a critical piece of our congressional delegation.

NY-Sen: Maloney Reportedly Out

by: robert.harding

Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 11:32:37 AM EDT

From the New York Times:

A person close to Mrs. Maloney, a Democrat from Manhattan, said she made her decision not to run after days of agonizing over the fact that running meant she would have to leave her current job at a point when she had significant seniority in Congress.

"It's been a tough decision for her," said the Maloney associate who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter.

Mrs. Maloney's decision potentially clears the path for Ms. Gillibrand, who Gov. David A. Paterson picked to fill Hillary Clinton's vacant seat in January, for the Democratic party's nomination in the race for United States Senate next year.

The reality is that Maloney is a key member of the New York congressional delegation and losing her in the House would lose us everything she has worked hard for. Much like losing Congressman Steve Israel would have cost us a key political figure and a key member of the delegation, losing Maloney to the Senate, where she would have been one of, if not the junior member of the upper house.

But the signs were there that this wasn't going to be a good move for Maloney. She made it known on more than one occasion that she would announce her candidacy only to delay such an announcement. Her delay made today a possibility. Because with every announcement to push her candidacy back came speculation that maybe she just wasn't interested in running for a seat that would have her starting all over again in a new house.

I also think that today is a win for Gillibrand. There are obvious reasons, but also some not-so obvious reasons. Maloney had been pushing some talking points against Gillibrand that tried to paint Gillibrand as this conservative upstater who wasn't worthy of representing a state that is more progressive than the congressional district Gillibrand once represented. Gillibrand has made it a point since being named the junior U.S. senator to raise her progressive profile and show that she has always had the progressive credentials critics have questioned.

In the end, those talking points didn't gain any traction. They were all debunked by what Gillibrand is doing in the U.S. Senate.

We need our best leaders in Congress. A Gillibrand-Maloney primary would have robbed us of two great women who are in great positions to better New York. Gillibrand is a rising star in D.C. and will continue to serve the best interests of New York. Maloney has been a key leader in D.C. for many years and has been behind some key legislation, including the recent credit card reform bill, that has left a great mark on our state and country.

We need them both in Washington D.C. There was no need for them to fight it out. We need both where they are right now to serve our best interests.

NY-Sen: New York City Media's Bias Against Senator Gillibrand Must End

by: robert.harding

Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 14:18:06 PM EDT

In the six-plus months since her appointment, very little has changed from that aspect. In recent days, Jason Horowitz of the New York Observer has authored two columns (here and here) that paint Gillibrand as a political opportunist and as a puppet for the all-powerful Sen. Chuck Schumer. Liz Benjamin also played along today, using a post about Rep. Jerrold Nadler's endorsement of Manhattan DA candidate Richard Aborn to point out that Nadler has yet to endorse Gillibrand. Of course, he hasn't endorsed Rep. Carolyn Maloney either, but that's not how the point was framed.

This approach by members of the New York City media is becoming so blatant that it is really hard to take them serious, especially if this ends up being a legitimate primary with no possible candidates but an actual candidate in Rep. Maloney running against Sen. Gillibrand. They have treated Gillibrand as an outsider and even though we are all New Yorkers (as in the state), Gillibrand is not a "New Yorker" (as in the city).

I am a supporter of Gillibrand's. That I will disclose. Those who write for some of the above publications have read here in the past and will continue to read in the future. My message to them isn't that they kiss Gillibrand's feet and paint some fake picture of her. All I am asking for is balance. There needs to be a level of equality in their reporting. The continued "criticize Gillibrand" approach is getting tired. It is one thing to criticize an elected official where criticism is necessary. But it's another to pile on just because you don't know too much about them other than they aren't from your city.

Again, I'm not looking for special treatment. All I am looking for is a level of fairness and balance. There have been certain opinions of Gillibrand that aren't necessarily written, but are shown in the writing approach of these reporters. Sen. Schumer has been the beneficiary of plenty of positive media coverage from New York City publications in the past, but they have also critiqued him just the same. That same principle can be applied to Gillibrand, but we have yet to reach that point.

Is it the New York City media being disappointed that it was Gillibrand and not media darling Caroline Kennedy that was appointed to the seat? Possibly. And since Kennedy received just as much (if not more) media coverage than Gillibrand when Gillibrand's appointment was announced, it's hard to debate that point.

But that was a long time ago, at least in political terms. Caroline Kennedy is an afterthought at this point. We have a possible U.S. Senate primary and we have a senator that New Yorkers are trying to get to know. It is the media's responsibility to fairly distribute the news to show New Yorkers (whether in upstate or downstate) what their senator is doing or isn't doing. So far, that isn't being done.

We deserve better from our journalists. It's time we got the full story instead of the story they want to tell us about Sen. Gillibrand.