News Copy, New York

Former Conservative Leader Endorses Democrat in Staten Island Congressional Race: Two Strong GOP Candidates In 13th

Curtis Sliwa was ranting yesterday about Staten Island Borough President James Molinaro endorsing Democrat Mike McMahon over Mike Allegretti and Mike Grimm, two powerhouse Republicans ready to take back the 13th Congressional District from the Democrats.

Sliwa's right to be bent out of shape.

This doesn't make sense.  Just when you think the GOP and the Conservative Party had a sure thing, something contrarian like this happens.

Congressional Quarterly had the story on this reversal of fortune.

Molinaro's endorsement, which McMahon also won during his first congressional run in 2008, helps bolster the Democrat's independent credentials as he seeks re-election in the traditionally Republican 13th district. The district was one of just a few in New York to vote for John McCain over Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election.

McMahon also won the backing of Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) in his 2008 race, and irked Democrats by returning the favor and endorsing Bloomberg for mayor last fall.

"I think he's done a good job, he's represented the people of the district," Molinaro told local NY1 News. "And that's what he has to do and he went down there to do that. So I think he should be rewarded with another term."

NY1 had the videotape about Grimm and Allegretti.

Rudy Giuliani just endorsed Mike Grimm.  Former Staten Island Borough President and Congressman Guy Molinari is aggressively supporting Grimm.  Allegretti worked for New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg but to his credit is not relying on that connection.  Both Allegretti and Grimm had nearly $300,000 at the first of the year -- and have more now.

Finally, Staten Island and parts of South Brooklyn are more conservative and Republican than most spots in the Northeast (certainly than most regions of New York).  This is a Republican seat.

Two well-funded Republican candidates running for Congress in its only true conservative Republican area -- and Molinaro endorses the Democrat?  And Molinaro has served as a Conservative leader in Staten Island.  He was once vice chairman of the New York State Conservative Party!

Keep ranting, Curtis.  Something's very wrong in Richmond County.

News Copy will be getting the inside word on this race soon enough. 

Urban Elephants Poll: Is Abortion The Next "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" For The Republican Party?

Urban Elephants, a website for New York City Republicans, has been feuding lately over abortion.

So they polled.  I found the wording a bit insulting to true conservatives.

Is there room for a strong faction of pro-choice conservatives in the Republican Party?

Yes, we need to embrace the "big tent" on social issues.

No, we need to maintain a strict litmus test to keep the Party socially conservative.

Pro-choicers can join the Party they just need to keep quiet on social issues.

That last alternative could be as rudely coined the "don't ask, don't tell" option on abortion, with nearly a quarter of those polled (20%) on Urban Elephants supporting an intolerable political muzzle on pro-abortion Republicans.

Madness.

Nearly 60% support supported this rhetorically deceptive "big tent" option and only 21% opposed a strict litmus test on social conservatives.

Why can't these knuckleheads accept calling each other liberals and get over it -- rather than pretending to be conservative?

Only 60 have voted so far at http://www.urbanelephants.com.  It's primarily a five borough crowd on Urban Elephants and its own litmus test does not always resemble the mainstream Republican Party.

What started the feuding was an open discussion on Nan Hayworth in the mid-Hudson Valley's 19th Congressional District -- though not just over abortion or the 19th.  Republicans have felt like orphans under Bloomberg and there are measurable concerns that they will get even less attention in 2010.

Meanwhile, Urban Elephants columnist Raquel Okyay identified a healthcare PAC, the Americican Medical Group Association (AMGA) that involves her husband Dr. Scott Hayworth and many donors from his Mount Kisco based medicial facility.

There is not much unusual about this PAC, except that is giving 81% of its monies to Democrats.  At least one official from the NRCC described such a PAC and such distribution of PAC dollars to the political party controlling Congress as "pretty normal" (it does seem pretty normal for D.C., actually).

Okyay came to her own conclusions.

"... It’s easy to make the assumption that husband Hayworth is more than just supportive of abortion rights but actively works to defend it by raising money to fund pro-abortion candidates – not very different from a Planned Parenthood PAC – and by association links candidate Hayworth with the powerful abortion lobby."

AMGA is based in the state of Washington, with donors who primarily come from New York, who either work for Hayworth's Mount Kisco Medical Group or practice comparable medicine in the tri-state area (including some of Hayworth's inidvidual donors).

Hayworth's husband defended himself last night.

"I am indeed the CEO of the Mount Kisco Medical Group (MKMG). I don’t perform abortions. I have in my years as an OB-GYN delivered more than 2,000 babies. MKMG is not an abortion clinic."

The list of Democrats receiving money from this PAC includes Nita Lowey, Chuck Schumer, Rahm Emanuel, Patty Murray and many other liberal healthcare advocates to make the American Medical Group Association seem like Obama-lite.

Hayworth claimed no control over the PAC.

"While I am honored to be involved with the American Medical Group Association, (AMGA) I do not sit on the PAC Board, which is a separate entity. I have no control over whom the PAC chooses to support. I am not in the business of raising money to support ‘pro-abortion’ candidates."

But as the NRCC diplomatically explained, the whole idea of such a PAC is to influence the Democrats (the party in control) -- particularly powerful liberal Democrats -- and Hayworth's many employees and associates signed on without much difficulty.

While it may not be a purely pro-abortion PAC, a more serious issue might be what healthcare policies have been supported and opposed by AMGA -- particularly in a year where patients and doctors have been thrown about like chess pieces by Democrats and Republicans alike.

It's Lauder's Fault: Term Limits

He's been a benefactor to the causes of the Conservative and Republican parties for years, so it's ironic how term limits reform in the five boroughs may have now been slayed by its creator Ronald Lauder.

That's David Rockefeller between Lauder and Michael Bloomberg, joined by a former governor of New York who incidently became a walking argument for term limits during too long a tenure in Albany.

The New York Times reported on Lauder's change of heart but this wasn't an overnight switch.

The debate against term limits in deference to experienced lawmakers goes back to Congressman Henry Hyde's stirring speech on the floor of Congress in opposition to this one aspect of the Contract With America reforms that had been shepherded in by then House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

I will be curious how the New York State Conservative Party will respond, since term limits has been one of its steadfast principles for over two decades now (with Lauder's help).

The New York Post has weighed in on this one, "Run, Mike, Run" -- since the financial sky is falling and Mayor Mike is New York City's municipal "master of the universe" when it comes to fiscal limits.

In its front-page article on Tuesday, The Post reported that Mr. Lauder described the extraordinary need for Mr. Bloomberg to stay on as “a one-time event.” He told The Post he had come to his decision after much difficulty because of “my love of the city and my belief in the people running it.”

But Lauder, who spent over $4 million dollars for referendums in 1993 and 1996, added that if an extra term was extended for the Mayor, it should be extended for everyone.

Bloomberg Wants Third Term

The New York Times calls it "The Limits of Term Limits"

"Term limits are seductive, promising relief from mediocre, self-perpetuating incumbents and gridlocked legislatures. They are also profoundly undemocratic, arbitrarily denying voters the ability to choose between good politicians and bad, especially in a city like New York with a strong public campaign-financing system, while automatically removing public servants of proven ability who are at a productive point in their careers."

Mike likes being mayor, reported NY1 and the Associated Press.

I don't like term limits either -- but it sure was fun seeing the political machines scurrying around to find new blood every few cycles.  It was good for the political parties but a shame to show good experienced lawmakers the door.

Dan Janison of Newsday took a more skeptical view.

"The Bloomberg camp and the Council were cooking up this coup well before the plunges of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman, Merrill, AIG or WaMu. What will Bloomberg do about a recession from City Hall, anyway? Hike property taxes? Sell computer screens to watch the next Dow crash?"

Elizabeth Benjamin of the New York Daily News blog, The Daily Politics, reported New York City Councilman Bill de Blasio saying that "the people" and not the Council or the mayor should have the final say on term limits.