In New York, there's an epic battle among the Democrats for control of Pedro Espada's Bronx state Senate seat. The story is either "crusading reformers challenge corrupt politician" or "the people's champion versus the Big Guys." Not to be a spoiler, but I'm leaning toward the former:
[State Senator Pedro Espada], as bombastic and defiant as ever, has staged a campaign straight out of the populist playbook. During his campaign events, many of them invitation only, he often gives away groceries and school supplies. He frames attacks against him as attacks against Latinos, constantly reminding his constituents, most of whom are Hispanic, that he is the highest-ranking Latino in state government.But Mr. Espada does have political liabilities. The Soundview Health Center, the flagship of the network of Bronx health clinics he founded in 1978 and his longtime power base, lies outside the 33rd Senate district. (Mr. Espada had represented another Bronx district in the Senate before winning his current seat in 2008).
Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo filed a civil suit in April charging him and others close to him with siphoning $14 million from the Soundview network for personal and political purposes. Mr. Espada is also under investigation by the Bronx district attorney’s office about whether he actually lives in Westchester, and by federal prosecutors over the health care clinics.
“He’s a crook, and that covers it,” said Nathalie Lewis, 75, who lives on the Grand Concourse. “I’m not voting for him.
Read the whole thing and start figuring out who's going to play Espada in the movie.
There's a powerful argument for good government that isn't really central to the mainstream discourse on the left right now -- the idea that we need to take a hard look at where our political institutions are dysfunctional and figure out ways to stop the kinds of corruption that creates. The attention on the Citizens United case, furor about the Koch brothers, and rising interest in preventing the abuse of Senate rules are all examples of this mind-set, but no politician or group made this central to their political arguments.
Conservatives have tapped into a disingenuous version of this idea that's little more than gussied-up small-government bias. Part of the Obama campaign's promise was to tap into sentiment, but in governing they've seemed to replace this framework with an emphasis on bipartisan gestures and the occasional "Reinventing Government"-style efficiency proposal. The latter, at least, is part of what is needed, but root-and-branch reform would be a very appealing offer as Democrats look for a way to harness popular disappointment around the country. Adopting this cause would require the Democrats to make hard decisions within their caucus (see the case of Charlie Rangel) but the administration's sporadic efforts to offer populist rhetoric have fallen flat -- the president isn't suited to it -- and it's time to go in a different direction.
-- Tim Fernholz
Photo via Azi Paybarah.
