Henry J. Stern
June 15, 2007

Remember Geraldine Ferraro

In Wednesday's column, "There's Good News Tonight", under the subhead "Tales of Unrequited Ambition." we mentioned three female public officials who lost their seats when they unsuccessfully sought higher office.  They were Congresswoman Bella Abzug (1976), Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman (1980) and City Council President Carol Bellamy (1985). Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm was wise to run for re-election in 1972 when her Presidential ambitions failed to materialize.
 
Thursday we received an e-mail from Michael A. Zummo, a court attorney in Queens, who reminded us of another case of this syndrome. Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro, who held a safe seat in western Queens, ran for Vice President of the United States on the Mondale-Ferraro ticket in 1984.  The pair captured only one state, Minnesota. She was suceeded in the House by Thomas J. Manton, who became the Democratic leader of Queens County two years later, after the untimely demise by his own hand of the former Borough President and county leader, Donald R. Manes.  John Sabini, later a city councilman and today a state senator, was interim county leader for eight months in 1985.  You're right, it is basically the same people.

Should Speaker Quinn Limit Campaign Contributions, With One Giant Loophole for Labor Unions?
 
The City Council is considering a measure called campaign finance reform which places strict limits on contributions by contractors, lobbyists and people doing business with the city.  It exempts labor unions, which contribute not only money but volunteers and phone banks.   The sponsor of the bill, Brooklyn Councilman Simcha Felder doesn't like this obvious gap in the bill, but says it is the best that can be passed at this time.  The Bloomberg administration concurs.
 
This is an old political question: if you want a loaf of bread, do you take half a loaf or hold out for the whole thing?   When dealing with appropriations, it is usually wiser to take half a loaf because once the camel's nose is in the tent, the rest of the camel is likely to follow.  (You know our affection for animal analogies.)  The decision on whether to move the bill to passage will be made by Council Speaker Christine Quinn.  It is a close call.
 
Some supporters say that the bill's obvious unfairness will make it easier to lose the labor loophole in 2008, and there are hardly any elections coming up in 2007. We do not see enormous harm in passing the half-measure, but if it is not appropriately amended next year, it should be repealed.  That may not be necessary if the courts knock it out on First Amendment and equal protection grounds.  

Campaign contribution limits are close to the edge of the First Amendment. For example, in Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the Supreme Court held that the amount of money a person can spend on his/her own campaign cannot be limited because that is a restriction on free speech.  However, the contributions of other people, corporations, other businesses or labor unions can be limited reasonably.

In Randall v. Sorrell (2006), the Supreme Court struck down a Vermont law restricting contributions because the limits were considered too low.  The Vermont limits were $200 for the primary and election cycle of candidates for the legislature, and $400 for statewide candidates.   Although it is true that Vermont is a small state in both area and population, the Court felt that these extremely stringent limits were unconstitutional restrictions on freedom of expression by contributors.
Councilmembers are generally toadies to municipal unions for the logical reason that union members who are city employee are the largest and most active interest group among their constituents.  That is not illogical because city employees have a financial interest in a higher budget, under which higher wages can be paid.

Now the unions can be their largest contributors as well.  Local Law No. A law passed in 2005 changed the limit on labor donations from $2500 per union to $2500 per local.  District Council 37, AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) for example has fifty-six locals of varying sizes.  Now each local can give at the office.


The follow up on the “assassinate his ass” mocudrama at the City Council consists of editorials in the Post and the News, both excoriating Viola Plummer, the chief of staff to Councilman Charles Barron,  On June 10, in an editorial titled SEND PLUMMER PACKING, the Post began:

"City Council Speaker Christine Quinn says she’s looking into whether she and her members have the right to fire Viola Plummer, the venomous chief of staff to noxious Councilman Charles Barron for implicitly urging the “assassination” of a Council member…"

“Back in 1984, she was one of the self-styled ‘revolutionaries’ who were charged with plotting violent robberies and jailbreaks in connection with the radical group that staged the notorious 1981 Brink’s heist, in which three law enforcement officers were slaughtered.

“At trial, prosecutors – headed by the then U.S. Attorney Rudy Giuliani – produced testimony by undercover agents, taped conversations and written plans for a jailbreak.  They also displayed weapons – sawed-off guns and Uzi submachineguns seized from Plummer and her cohorts.

“But a jury acquitted the defense on the most serious charges, apparently buying the claim that the trial was a ‘government frame-up’ against legitimate ‘freedom fighters’.

”In the end, Plummer & Co. were convicted only of possessing illegal weapons.

“And then the judge refused them to anything more serious than community service, saying he had a ‘problem’ deciding if they were a legitimate threat as the government insisted, or ‘struggling to liberate the black masses’, as they claimed.

The News, in an June 12 editorial titled WHO IS VIOLA PLUMMER?, leads with:

”Viola Plummer is a self-styled black revolutionary who has found common cause with the cop killers and has been given through the years to irresponsible talk of violence.  And today she is where she doesn’t belong: on the city payroll.”

The News goes on to describe the testimony at her trial, which includes a recording of a leader of the group, Coltrane Chimurenga, instructing Plummer’s son, a co-defendant, in the ways of armed robbery.  "I  want you to say 'Freeze, this is an armed stickup.  Always when you, when you say freeze, you're pointing directly, talking about a kill shot, not at his head, because you might miss it."

This is the sort of material you do not usually see in newspaper editorials on municipal affairs.  Although the jury acquitted the defendants on major charges and convicted them on the illegal possession of weapons, the testimony will give you a  sense of the world in which they lived.  Link to the News editorial here.

The next event on Councilman Barron's calendar is an attempt to rename Gates Avenue on Sunday afternoon, even though the City Council, by a vote of 25-15, refused to add Sonny Carson’s name to the list of honorees.  People who disagree with the Council decision have every right to engage in peaceful protest.  They do not have the right to overrule as a mob the judgment of elected officials.  Brooklyn is neither Dodge City nor the Gaza strip.

We hope the demonstration is peaceful, but from the incendiary language of Mr. Barron and Ms. Plummer, and the threat that he will do by force what he could not do by law, the police should be prepared.  We know that Mr. Barron would not mind a confrontation – Sunday is a slow news day and there will be plenty of cameras at the site.  We hope that no one is injured or arrested, which should be the case if no one brings illegal weapons or otherwise violates the law.


#385  6.15.07  1304wds