Political Report: Dirty Little Secrets
Redistricting: How the Albany Fix Hurts Tenants
by Kenny Schaeffer

It is no accident that incumbents are re-elected to the state Legislature at almost a 100% rate. It’s a result of state-of-the-art design. The districts drawn in 1990 have been a huge success, if maintaining the status quo was the goal.

Following Republican State Sen. Roy Goodman’s razor-thin and disputed recount victory over activist Liz Krueger (D-WFP-Green) in Manhattan, every State Senate seat remained with the incumbent party. Only one out of 150 Assembly seats changed hands, in upstate Niagara, where a one-term Republican lost—hardly a torrent of change.

The reason is that the Democratic leadership in the Assembly, in both 1980 and 1990, allowed the Republicans to draw the Senate districts, in exchange for being allowed a free hand in drawing Assembly districts. The only way to fix this is by nonpartisan redistricting, prohibiting consideration of party enrollment and similar purely political factors.

New Yorkers were justifiably outraged by the disenfranchisement of voters in Florida by Bush operatives and the U.S. Supreme Court’s cynical application of “equal protection.” Will we stand idly by while our right to choose our state legislature is similarly denied by a stacked deck?

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver’s response to Gov. Pataki’s state of the state speech on Jan. 3 was ominous, in that he praised the governor, stressing bipartisanship and working closely with the Senate in the coming session. There was little indication of any willingness or ability to fight for anything that is not readily acceptable to the Republicans.

Looking Forward

With the rent and eviction laws due to expire again in 2003, wresting control of the state Senate from the party of George Pataki and Joseph Bruno in 2002 is critical.

Met Council worked with those, like State Sen. Eric Schneiderman, who tried to erode the Republicans’ six-vote majority in the upper house last year. Sadly, some people who should know better, including unions like the United Federation of Teachers, Local 1199 and the state AFL-CIO, worked to re-elect incumbent Republican senators in downstate districts which seemed competitive, as did a few prominent tenant leaders.

We can only hope that when the chips are down in 2002, there can be more unity of purpose among progressive and labor constituencies in trying to defeat the Bruno majority in the state Senate by replacing false friends like Roy Goodman with real friends like Liz Krueger. But that effort will be faced with a “fixed race” if the Assembly is allowed to follow tradition and self-interest in drawing redistricting lines to protect incumbents in both houses.

Mayoral Choices

The Mayor’s race is on, although housing issues have been largely unmentioned after last September’s Habitat for Humanity forum. Mayor Giuliani is reportedly planning to announce a four-year, $600 million housing initiative which will focus by more than 60% on ownership, thus leaving the lowest-income New Yorkers out in the cold, while continuing to transfer city-owned property to speculators. But in his Jan. 8 state of the city speech, he gave little more than a promise to rid his Department of Buildings of crime and corruption. “I regret not doing it earlier,” the “new Rudy” admitted, just as he did last year when the acting commissioner was arrested.

At this point, it seems likely that there will be a runoff the Democratic nomination between Public Advocate Mark Green and Comptroller Alan Hevesi, the Rev. Al Sharpton and Green, or Hevesi and Sharpton. Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer’s chances appear to have plummeted with the stalling of the Ramirez machine in the Bronx, and Sharpton giving more and more indications that he will enter the race.

City Council Speaker Peter Vallone’s campaign has so far failed to catch on any more than his weak campaign for governor in 1998 did, but that could change if he elects to use his considerable campaign contributions to publicize genuinely popular and important actions, for example Intro. 859 [see related story].

Both Green and Sharpton have used their positions to confront corporate priorities and raise and address a range of social issues, while Hevesi has done do somewhat less aggressively. But when it comes to affordable housing, none of them has directly confronted the multibillion-dollar real-estate industry that is a major part of the city’s “permanent government.”

It is up to the housing movement to keep our issues on the front burner. The candidates must be forced to take clear stands on issues of rent regulation, code enforcement, eviction prevention, disposition of city-owned property, and creation of affordable housing. Loud and active tenant participation in the political process over the next 10 months will determine whether they ignore housing issues, as has happened for so many years, or whether the ever-worsening housing affordability crisis—a matter of much more direct importance to millions of New Yorkers than a further reduction in crime—finally gets the attention it deserves.