Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Monday, May 12, 2014
Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Shtetlopolis
Religious leaders from Rockland County head to Albany Wednesday to escalate
their protest against the Hasidim administering the East Ramapo public schools.
They want Governor Andrew Cuomo to seize control of the district from its
elected board, alleging the yeshiva parents who serve on it are shifting funds from the predominantly minority school system to Jewish religious schools.
Friday, the Department of Environmental Conservation is set to determine just which municipality will be lead agency in a bitterly contested environmental review process in the Town of Monroe. At stake is the annexation of 507 acres of undeveloped land to the Satmar Hasidic village of Kiryas Joel in Orange County. The annexation would increase the nearly 25,000 person community's population by 15,000 and produce new zoning guidelines for the land that would permit construction of a thousand large apartments for big Hasidic families.
Toxic runoff from a battle over a proposed 396-unit Hasidic townhouse
development in Sullivan County is playing a role in a state Department of Human Rights investigation of anti-Semitism in the Pine Bush School District.
The potential influx of Hasidim has local residents demanding changes in state
Education Law to diffuse the ability of new residents to elect representatives
to the school board. They say they want to prevent "another East Ramapo." Earlier this week, village officials opposed to the Hasidim shut down the community's Jewish ritual bath and issued stop work orders for a Kosher restaurant and Judaica store.
The Hasidim are fortified by demographic trends that seem to make their dominance in the region's politics an inevitability- the same trends that agitate those determined to stop them. Population growth in the three exclusively Hasidic Villages of Kaser (Rockland), New Square (Rockland) and Kiryas Joel (Orange) averages 5% per year. The community's leadership has begun planning for the long game, worrying a bit less about beating Hasidic opponents in the short run and more about mapping a long term strategy for how to manage its substantial political clout.
Nonetheless, the rising tide of anti-Hasidic rhetoric (including marches against yeshiva construction) has brought push back from the Orthodox Jewish Public Affairs Council, a new Hasidic watchdog group deploying modern technology and media
savvy in defense of their contra-modern lifestyle. Earlier this month, the council pilloried Rockland County Executive Day for calling employees of Jewish study halls receiving state-authorized child care subsidies
"scammers" who were denying the vouchers to eligible black
families.
The group's attack on Day's divisive rhetoric was backed up by David Greenfield, a powerful New York City councilman from Brooklyn, who said the comments "bordered on anti-Semitism." The significance of Greenfield's statement was clear: the city's Orthodox Jews, which send 100,000 children of their own to urban yeshivas every day, will stand in political solidarity with the suburban faithful.
Religious historians will have better hindsight to understand
today's explosive Hasidic growth rate. Vibrant but
insular communities, the Hasidim replicate the worldview, dress
and social customs of pre-World War II Eastern European religious Jews. Tethered to the leadership of dynastic rabbinic
families, the Hasidim have avoided the intermarriage, delayed marriage and assimilation
that is roiling the larger American Jewish world.
By spreading a protective bubble of cradle-to-grave social services (augmented by taxpayer funds), new synagogues and dense housing where married children can continue to live close to their parents, the Hasidim drown out the cacophony of temptation that can lure the committed from their path. Non-Orthodox Jews may question the virtues of these self-imposed ghettos, but they offer nearly ironclad assurance for the continuation of traditional rituals and the creation of new Jewish families.
The price of this spiritual survival strategy is the fierce enmity of those being displaced by the community's unexpected growth. But another reality, never reported by the media and rarely articulated by Hasidic leaders- is that the Hasidic boom has created some of the region's strongest commercial districts and generated employment for thousands of non-Hasdim.
Orthodox Jewish shoppers from across the
metropolitan area head to Monsey for clothing, appliances and
furniture, generating millions in local sales tax revenue . New wedding halls employ hundreds of workers. Large families drive demand for high quality physicians, health clinics and almost entirely non-Hasidic medical support personnel. Local construction companies, landscapers, engineers and architects remained unusually busy
during the recent real estate crash; the demand for new schools, synagogues and
housing continues to outstrip the supply.
Building permit and inspection fees from the Hasidim are a financial lifeline for the fiscally stressed Town of Ramapo. There is continually increasing demand for commercial office space in Kiryas Joel, where community members are opening businesses close to home. While critics attempt to draw a direct line between rising regional social service costs and the growth of the less affluent Hasidic population, a fair analysis requires measuring the community's economic output as well. And while new synagogues and schools are exempt from property taxes, the loss in revenue is more than made up for by taxable new commercial and residential buildings.
Friday, the Department of Environmental Conservation is set to determine just which municipality will be lead agency in a bitterly contested environmental review process in the Town of Monroe. At stake is the annexation of 507 acres of undeveloped land to the Satmar Hasidic village of Kiryas Joel in Orange County. The annexation would increase the nearly 25,000 person community's population by 15,000 and produce new zoning guidelines for the land that would permit construction of a thousand large apartments for big Hasidic families.
Toxic runoff from a battle over a proposed 396-unit Hasidic townhouse
development in Sullivan County is playing a role in a state Department of Human Rights investigation of anti-Semitism in the Pine Bush School District.
The potential influx of Hasidim has local residents demanding changes in state
Education Law to diffuse the ability of new residents to elect representatives
to the school board. They say they want to prevent "another East Ramapo." Earlier this week, village officials opposed to the Hasidim shut down the community's Jewish ritual bath and issued stop work orders for a Kosher restaurant and Judaica store.
Stop the bloc
Once mostly local disputes, these new flare-ups between the Hudson Valley's Hasidim and their neighbors are ensnaring a growing number of state agencies, placing the region's volatile debate over development, religious freedom and public education at the center of New York politics in a high profile election year. While Hasidim in New York City jockey for political advantage like many other ethnic communities, nasty debate over the community's explosive expansion in Orange, Rockland and Sullivan counties is the dominant story in the region, whose newspapers thrive on exploiting the conflict.
Political operatives aiding Rob Astorino, Cuomo's likely Republican
opponent, have already reached out to the region's locals for advice on how to tap into the anxiety about Hasidic development. Astorino himself has
masterfully exploited anti-housing sentiment as Westchester's County
Executive, balking at a federal court order to permit high density
housing for the poor in the county's most affluent precincts. His 2013 campaign mailings (right) touted his resistance.
Democrats and Republicans have long courted the disciplined strength of the Hasidic "bloc" vote, a reliable ally for governors in political need. In 2007, New Square switched its thousands of votes from the incumbent Republican district attorney to his Democratic challenger after an in-person request to the Grand Rabbi from then-Governor Eliot Spitzer. Republicans hit the jackpot in 1999, when then-Governor Pataki successfully negotiated with Orthodox leaders on behalf of the GOP and held a critical state senate seat for his party. It remains nearly impossible to get elected to the Supreme Court in the 9th Judicial District, which stretches from 85 miles from Yonkers to northern Dutchess County, without the endorsement of Hasidic leaders.
Recent election results make clear that candidates supporting growing Hasidic needs for housing and improved infrastructure risk the wrath of nascent homegrown political parties determined to stop the expansion of the Hudson Valley's 100,000-person strong shtetlopolis.
Voter turnout in Monroe reached presidential election levels last year, as nearly every non-Hasidic voter turned out to support United Monroe, a new political party opposed to the Kiryas Joel annexation. Both candidates for Orange County Executive attacked Kiryas Joel's expansion plans; the sect opted to back Republican Steve Neuhaus who was widely thought the favorite in the race and offered a somewhat less strident critique of the community than his Democratic opponent.
Preserve Rockland, a third party formed by some Democrats to counter Hasidic voting strength, backed Republican Ed Day in his successful county executive bid last year. The party's line captured 12% of the vote in its first electoral outing, which combined with Republican votes to overcome a 2 to 1 Democratic voter enrollment edge. The Democratic candidate, backed by the 13,000 vote strong Orthodox bloc would have won the race but for the third party's endorsement of Day. In Suffern, miles away from the Hasidic areas, the Preserve Rockland candidate for mayor almost beat a popular Democrat.
In March, the incumbent mayor of Bloomingburg, the Sullivan County community with the controversial townhouse project, was defeated by anti-Hasidic forces. The project's developer accused opponents of anti-Semitism and invoked the Holocaust. The FBI is reportedly investigating allegations Shalom Lamm fraudulently registered dozens of yeshiva students to vote in the election by claiming they were village residents despite slim ties to the community. An expected legal tussle over the election in State Supreme Court fizzled when the developer declined to contest the voiding of the allegedly fraudulent registrations.
Hasidim- and Believe 'Em
Once mostly local disputes, these new flare-ups between the Hudson Valley's Hasidim and their neighbors are ensnaring a growing number of state agencies, placing the region's volatile debate over development, religious freedom and public education at the center of New York politics in a high profile election year. While Hasidim in New York City jockey for political advantage like many other ethnic communities, nasty debate over the community's explosive expansion in Orange, Rockland and Sullivan counties is the dominant story in the region, whose newspapers thrive on exploiting the conflict.
Political operatives aiding Rob Astorino, Cuomo's likely Republican
opponent, have already reached out to the region's locals for advice on how to tap into the anxiety about Hasidic development. Astorino himself has
masterfully exploited anti-housing sentiment as Westchester's County
Executive, balking at a federal court order to permit high density
housing for the poor in the county's most affluent precincts. His 2013 campaign mailings (right) touted his resistance.Democrats and Republicans have long courted the disciplined strength of the Hasidic "bloc" vote, a reliable ally for governors in political need. In 2007, New Square switched its thousands of votes from the incumbent Republican district attorney to his Democratic challenger after an in-person request to the Grand Rabbi from then-Governor Eliot Spitzer. Republicans hit the jackpot in 1999, when then-Governor Pataki successfully negotiated with Orthodox leaders on behalf of the GOP and held a critical state senate seat for his party. It remains nearly impossible to get elected to the Supreme Court in the 9th Judicial District, which stretches from 85 miles from Yonkers to northern Dutchess County, without the endorsement of Hasidic leaders.
Recent election results make clear that candidates supporting growing Hasidic needs for housing and improved infrastructure risk the wrath of nascent homegrown political parties determined to stop the expansion of the Hudson Valley's 100,000-person strong shtetlopolis.
Voter turnout in Monroe reached presidential election levels last year, as nearly every non-Hasidic voter turned out to support United Monroe, a new political party opposed to the Kiryas Joel annexation. Both candidates for Orange County Executive attacked Kiryas Joel's expansion plans; the sect opted to back Republican Steve Neuhaus who was widely thought the favorite in the race and offered a somewhat less strident critique of the community than his Democratic opponent.
Preserve Rockland, a third party formed by some Democrats to counter Hasidic voting strength, backed Republican Ed Day in his successful county executive bid last year. The party's line captured 12% of the vote in its first electoral outing, which combined with Republican votes to overcome a 2 to 1 Democratic voter enrollment edge. The Democratic candidate, backed by the 13,000 vote strong Orthodox bloc would have won the race but for the third party's endorsement of Day. In Suffern, miles away from the Hasidic areas, the Preserve Rockland candidate for mayor almost beat a popular Democrat.
In March, the incumbent mayor of Bloomingburg, the Sullivan County community with the controversial townhouse project, was defeated by anti-Hasidic forces. The project's developer accused opponents of anti-Semitism and invoked the Holocaust. The FBI is reportedly investigating allegations Shalom Lamm fraudulently registered dozens of yeshiva students to vote in the election by claiming they were village residents despite slim ties to the community. An expected legal tussle over the election in State Supreme Court fizzled when the developer declined to contest the voiding of the allegedly fraudulent registrations.
Hasidim- and Believe 'Em
The Hasidim are fortified by demographic trends that seem to make their dominance in the region's politics an inevitability- the same trends that agitate those determined to stop them. Population growth in the three exclusively Hasidic Villages of Kaser (Rockland), New Square (Rockland) and Kiryas Joel (Orange) averages 5% per year. The community's leadership has begun planning for the long game, worrying a bit less about beating Hasidic opponents in the short run and more about mapping a long term strategy for how to manage its substantial political clout.
The group's attack on Day's divisive rhetoric was backed up by David Greenfield, a powerful New York City councilman from Brooklyn, who said the comments "bordered on anti-Semitism." The significance of Greenfield's statement was clear: the city's Orthodox Jews, which send 100,000 children of their own to urban yeshivas every day, will stand in political solidarity with the suburban faithful.
Religious historians will have better hindsight to understand
today's explosive Hasidic growth rate. Vibrant but
insular communities, the Hasidim replicate the worldview, dress
and social customs of pre-World War II Eastern European religious Jews. Tethered to the leadership of dynastic rabbinic
families, the Hasidim have avoided the intermarriage, delayed marriage and assimilation
that is roiling the larger American Jewish world.By spreading a protective bubble of cradle-to-grave social services (augmented by taxpayer funds), new synagogues and dense housing where married children can continue to live close to their parents, the Hasidim drown out the cacophony of temptation that can lure the committed from their path. Non-Orthodox Jews may question the virtues of these self-imposed ghettos, but they offer nearly ironclad assurance for the continuation of traditional rituals and the creation of new Jewish families.
The price of this spiritual survival strategy is the fierce enmity of those being displaced by the community's unexpected growth. But another reality, never reported by the media and rarely articulated by Hasidic leaders- is that the Hasidic boom has created some of the region's strongest commercial districts and generated employment for thousands of non-Hasdim.
Building permit and inspection fees from the Hasidim are a financial lifeline for the fiscally stressed Town of Ramapo. There is continually increasing demand for commercial office space in Kiryas Joel, where community members are opening businesses close to home. While critics attempt to draw a direct line between rising regional social service costs and the growth of the less affluent Hasidic population, a fair analysis requires measuring the community's economic output as well. And while new synagogues and schools are exempt from property taxes, the loss in revenue is more than made up for by taxable new commercial and residential buildings.
Hasidic leaders say it is inadequate state education aid rather than any sectarian strategy that is responsible for a East Ramapo's troubles.
Avoiding Intimacy?
As the Hasidic population grows, it also faces the broader challenge of whether it will elect its own members to high ranking public positions. An age-old Jewish text, Ethics of Our Fathers, instructs Jews to "avoid intimacy with the government." The Hasidic governing boards of the all-Hasidic municipalities are decidedly low profile. But other Hasidim see public office as a way to both protect their communities interests and, potentially, build bridges to some of the community's present adversaries.
Last September, Rabbi Israel Hager, one of the
community's most influential rabbinic figures, urged his followers not to back a fellow Hasid for Mayor of Spring Valley, a hotbed of ethnic politics with
a growing though not yet dominant Hasidic vote.
As the Hasidic population grows, it also faces the broader challenge of whether it will elect its own members to high ranking public positions. An age-old Jewish text, Ethics of Our Fathers, instructs Jews to "avoid intimacy with the government." The Hasidic governing boards of the all-Hasidic municipalities are decidedly low profile. But other Hasidim see public office as a way to both protect their communities interests and, potentially, build bridges to some of the community's present adversaries.
Last September, Rabbi Israel Hager, one of the
community's most influential rabbinic figures, urged his followers not to back a fellow Hasid for Mayor of Spring Valley, a hotbed of ethnic politics with
a growing though not yet dominant Hasidic vote.
Hasidic leaders also
ambushed the 2012 campaign of Aron Wieder (right), a Hasid who ran for the State
Assembly in a new barbell shaped district connecting Hasidic population
centers in Rockland and Orange. The Hasidic leadership in Orange County backed Wieder's non-Jewish rival and rabbis in Wieder's home base in Rockland kept most of their followers home. They were not ready for New York's first Hasidic state legislator.
But it's only a question of time before Wieder or another Hasid carries his community's torch to Albany- a prospect that would have seemed impossible to both the lonely rabbis who brought their followers to the mostly vacant Hudson Valley more than 50 years ago and the farmers that greeted them.
New York can't afford twenty years of civil strife in this economically critical region, where officials hope a replacement for the aging Tappan Zee Bridge and planned megacasinos spark an economic surge.
Healthy growth doesn't take place in civil war zone and state leaders can ill afford to avoid the region's challenges entirely because of its fratricidal politics.
Perhaps the bridge New York most urgently needs to help build is not across the Hudson River, but between the diverging communities that inhabit the valley that abuts it.
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
5 Nuggets from Today's Siena Poll
Siena College released a poll of New York voters this morning, just as Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino is warming up his very underdog campaign against popular Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Here's what I found interesting:
1. Ghost of Mario- Andrew Cuomo has fully exorcised the ghost of Mario and shaken the political baggage with moderate voters that could come from being the son of one of the country's most eloquent liberal voices. 61% of all New York voters call Cuomo a moderate or conservative. But avoiding the caricature of a big government progressive carries a price with some elements of the Democratic base- 13% of Democrats call Andrew Cuomo a conservative, including 24% of African-American voters. But a primary from the left against Cuomo is a fool's errand, Astorino is taking hard right positions on social issues and left-of-center voters will stick with the pro-choice, pro-gun control incumbent. Cuomo has deftly kept himself popular and in the center, maximizing his leverage with Democratic interest groups in Albany while remaining a palatable moderate with whom Republican voters permit their senators to do business.
2. Nobama- But Cuomo's relationship with moderate and conservative voters could go south quickly if he bear hugs President Obama. Obama is a massive political liability upstate, where voters disapprove of him by a 58% to 39% margin. Even in the suburbs- which Obama won handily in 2012- voters are evenly divided on the President's performance, with 48% rating Obama unfavorably compared with 47% viewing him favorably. Expect Astorino and NY Senate Republicans to try to nationalize their campaigns with messages blasting Obamacare, while Cuomo and state Democrats try to keep the conversation about New York. Cuomo, by virtue of being a governor, will win this argument, but it spells trouble for Democrats running for Congress (see #3).
3.House of Bad Cards- Democrats need to hold congressional seats like the one Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney wrested from Hudson Valley Republican Nan Hayworth in 2012. This poll is not only a clear warning sign for Maloney, but also shows obstacles for Sean Eldridge's attempt to knock of GOP Rep. Chris Gibson and should cause pause by Congresswoman Nita Lowey. The bloom is off the Obama rose in the Hudson Valley. Maloney needs to distance himself from the President to get re-elected while raising records amount of cash from uber-liberal donors. Expect Hayworth to plaster the northern portions of this district with pictures of Maloney and the President. Eldridge, whose Facebook-founder husband Chris Hughes ran Obama's digital campaign in 2008, faces an uphill battle to knock off Rep. Chris Gibson, who has styled himself as moderate in the radical GOP house and tended to the local concerns of his sprawling 11-county district. Eldridge's bio makes no mention of his partisan leanings and refers to him as an "independent." Lowey is facing an ideologically charged challenge from Chris Day, an Army vet whose father was just elected the Rockland County Executive. Day, like Hayworth and Gibson, will also attempt to link his Democratic opponent to the damaged-Obama brand. He'll add a harsh critique of the President's Israel policy that can resonate with this district's hawkishly pro-Israel voters. Lowey is well-liked and favored to win, but she needs to gird for battle. Her campaign website hasn't been updated since August 2013.
4. Maybe I Inhaled too Deeply- Last week, I looked at a Quinnipiac College poll that showed NY Democrats favoring legal marijuana by a 65 to 31 margin and predicted legalization by 2016. Today's poll shows Democrats opposed 49 to 46. I think that is mostly because of the way the questions were worded: last week's poll referred to legalizing "small amounts" of weed and generated wide support while today's poll put no limit on the quantity and revealed markedly less enthusiasm. While Siena shows independent voters favoring legal weed by 10 points, the mixed data demonstrates why Cuomo and other state leaders are reluctant to enter the haze on the issue. Maybe Hillary doesn't need to light a pipe after all.
5. Downballot Democratic Blues- Eric Schneiderman has landed multiple front-pages as New York's attorney general, leading the national conversation on foreclosure settlements and presiding over high-profile drug busts. Nonetheless, he remains a total unknown to many voters, including 63% of voters in the politically crucial suburbs. Both Schneiderman and Comptroller Tom Dinapoli, the other statewide official seeking re-election this year, received favorable ratings only in the high-20s. The New York Times recently profiled Schneiderman's clash with Cuomo and DiNapoli and the governor have tangled as well. But neither official appears able to stand on their own as a statewide candidate in a year with ear-ringing political noise and both will swallow their pride and hoist hands with Cuomo to smooth their way to victory.
Here's what I found interesting:
1. Ghost of Mario- Andrew Cuomo has fully exorcised the ghost of Mario and shaken the political baggage with moderate voters that could come from being the son of one of the country's most eloquent liberal voices. 61% of all New York voters call Cuomo a moderate or conservative. But avoiding the caricature of a big government progressive carries a price with some elements of the Democratic base- 13% of Democrats call Andrew Cuomo a conservative, including 24% of African-American voters. But a primary from the left against Cuomo is a fool's errand, Astorino is taking hard right positions on social issues and left-of-center voters will stick with the pro-choice, pro-gun control incumbent. Cuomo has deftly kept himself popular and in the center, maximizing his leverage with Democratic interest groups in Albany while remaining a palatable moderate with whom Republican voters permit their senators to do business.2. Nobama- But Cuomo's relationship with moderate and conservative voters could go south quickly if he bear hugs President Obama. Obama is a massive political liability upstate, where voters disapprove of him by a 58% to 39% margin. Even in the suburbs- which Obama won handily in 2012- voters are evenly divided on the President's performance, with 48% rating Obama unfavorably compared with 47% viewing him favorably. Expect Astorino and NY Senate Republicans to try to nationalize their campaigns with messages blasting Obamacare, while Cuomo and state Democrats try to keep the conversation about New York. Cuomo, by virtue of being a governor, will win this argument, but it spells trouble for Democrats running for Congress (see #3).
3.House of Bad Cards- Democrats need to hold congressional seats like the one Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney wrested from Hudson Valley Republican Nan Hayworth in 2012. This poll is not only a clear warning sign for Maloney, but also shows obstacles for Sean Eldridge's attempt to knock of GOP Rep. Chris Gibson and should cause pause by Congresswoman Nita Lowey. The bloom is off the Obama rose in the Hudson Valley. Maloney needs to distance himself from the President to get re-elected while raising records amount of cash from uber-liberal donors. Expect Hayworth to plaster the northern portions of this district with pictures of Maloney and the President. Eldridge, whose Facebook-founder husband Chris Hughes ran Obama's digital campaign in 2008, faces an uphill battle to knock off Rep. Chris Gibson, who has styled himself as moderate in the radical GOP house and tended to the local concerns of his sprawling 11-county district. Eldridge's bio makes no mention of his partisan leanings and refers to him as an "independent." Lowey is facing an ideologically charged challenge from Chris Day, an Army vet whose father was just elected the Rockland County Executive. Day, like Hayworth and Gibson, will also attempt to link his Democratic opponent to the damaged-Obama brand. He'll add a harsh critique of the President's Israel policy that can resonate with this district's hawkishly pro-Israel voters. Lowey is well-liked and favored to win, but she needs to gird for battle. Her campaign website hasn't been updated since August 2013.4. Maybe I Inhaled too Deeply- Last week, I looked at a Quinnipiac College poll that showed NY Democrats favoring legal marijuana by a 65 to 31 margin and predicted legalization by 2016. Today's poll shows Democrats opposed 49 to 46. I think that is mostly because of the way the questions were worded: last week's poll referred to legalizing "small amounts" of weed and generated wide support while today's poll put no limit on the quantity and revealed markedly less enthusiasm. While Siena shows independent voters favoring legal weed by 10 points, the mixed data demonstrates why Cuomo and other state leaders are reluctant to enter the haze on the issue. Maybe Hillary doesn't need to light a pipe after all.
5. Downballot Democratic Blues- Eric Schneiderman has landed multiple front-pages as New York's attorney general, leading the national conversation on foreclosure settlements and presiding over high-profile drug busts. Nonetheless, he remains a total unknown to many voters, including 63% of voters in the politically crucial suburbs. Both Schneiderman and Comptroller Tom Dinapoli, the other statewide official seeking re-election this year, received favorable ratings only in the high-20s. The New York Times recently profiled Schneiderman's clash with Cuomo and DiNapoli and the governor have tangled as well. But neither official appears able to stand on their own as a statewide candidate in a year with ear-ringing political noise and both will swallow their pride and hoist hands with Cuomo to smooth their way to victory.
KEHD4XBWF4QD
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Hillary Needs to Inhale
If she wants to win, Hillary needs to inhale.
22 years after Bill Clinton famously explained away his marijuana use at Oxford by saying "I didn't inhale", Quinnipiac College released a poll yesterday showing that Democrats in the home state he adopted with Hillary favor legalizing small amounts of recreational pot by an overwhelming 65%-31% margin.
The margin among New York voters aged 18 to 29? 83% to 14%.
With some already wondering aloud if the 66-year old former First Lady is too old to mount a presidential campaign in 2016, the glass ceiling crasher's frontrunner status could evaporate quickly if younger voters find her on the wrong side of a clear generational divide on a high-profile issue.
The Clintons saw that movie in 2008 when young
voters favored hip Barack Obama (and his well documented pot smoking) over Hillary by 20 percentage
points, delivering him both the Democratic Party's nomination and the
presidency. Hillary's high profile hoisting of a shot of whiskey at Bronko's Restaurant and Lounge in Crown Point, Indiana snagged her a one point win in that state's primary but she lost voters there under 40 by 19 points. The Clintons don't make the same mistake twice.
Obama was never as much of the edgy cultural leader as his supporters dreamed him to be- witness his painful "evolution" on gay marriage-- but on legal weed the President has become positively nonchalant. He told the New Yorker's David Remnick last month that smoking pot was a vice no different than cigarettes or alcohol. The Democratic Party's leader clearly doesn't think law enforcement should be wasting its time policing adults getting high; his administration just permitted banks to maintain accounts for marijuana dispensaries.
So any Democrat looking to generate buzz with the 14% of Democratic
voters that the Pew Poll says are under 30 can stand out from
the crowd by endorsing legalized marijuana, now. It's a particularly appealing tactic
for Hillary, who can make it clear she's not running for grandmother-in-chief
with one decisive policy stance.
But the marijuana debate is not just a generational rift; it has a strong racial dimensions as well.
According to the FBI, blacks are three to four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites, despite toking at the same rate. The racial disparity in the enforcement of marijuana laws is serious and inescapable; in fact, it is only a matter of time before the courts could find it a discriminatory violation of the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause.
The leading cause of disruption in the black community today is a prison system that holds too many African-American men for too long. Leaders increasingly discuss how the community's progress is stunted because of the more limited employment opportunities for men with arrest records for possession of a small amount of weed.
If Hillary doesn't back legalization, she will nonetheless need to squarely address the impact of current drug policy on the black community and offer alternatives of her own. But modest, federal criminal justice reforms will not break through the noise from the legalization movement or meaningfully reduce the state prison incarceration rate for those arrested.
A majority of Latinos support legalization too, even though a 2013 Pew study said they are less likely than either whites or blacks to have tried the drug.
Of course, the winner of the Democratic Primary still needs to pass through November on the way to The White House. A CNN poll found only 36% of Republicans support legalization. But 59% of politically independent swing voters nationwide back legal weed, suggesting it won't be a major issue for a Democrat in the general election. And voters of all parties can quickly become keen to the tax revenue that would be generated by legal pot.
So far, Hillary has shown little interest in puffing her way to the presidency and neither have her rivals. Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, another potential candidate, was dubbed "buzzkill in chief"by the Huffington Post last month for calling marijuana a gateway that leads to the abuse of other drugs. 56% of New York Democrats polled disagree with him, including 68% of all voters under 29.
You can't make history if you are on the wrong side of it.
22 years after Bill Clinton famously explained away his marijuana use at Oxford by saying "I didn't inhale", Quinnipiac College released a poll yesterday showing that Democrats in the home state he adopted with Hillary favor legalizing small amounts of recreational pot by an overwhelming 65%-31% margin.
The margin among New York voters aged 18 to 29? 83% to 14%.
With some already wondering aloud if the 66-year old former First Lady is too old to mount a presidential campaign in 2016, the glass ceiling crasher's frontrunner status could evaporate quickly if younger voters find her on the wrong side of a clear generational divide on a high-profile issue.
The Clintons saw that movie in 2008 when young
voters favored hip Barack Obama (and his well documented pot smoking) over Hillary by 20 percentage
points, delivering him both the Democratic Party's nomination and the
presidency. Hillary's high profile hoisting of a shot of whiskey at Bronko's Restaurant and Lounge in Crown Point, Indiana snagged her a one point win in that state's primary but she lost voters there under 40 by 19 points. The Clintons don't make the same mistake twice.Obama was never as much of the edgy cultural leader as his supporters dreamed him to be- witness his painful "evolution" on gay marriage-- but on legal weed the President has become positively nonchalant. He told the New Yorker's David Remnick last month that smoking pot was a vice no different than cigarettes or alcohol. The Democratic Party's leader clearly doesn't think law enforcement should be wasting its time policing adults getting high; his administration just permitted banks to maintain accounts for marijuana dispensaries.
But the marijuana debate is not just a generational rift; it has a strong racial dimensions as well.
According to the FBI, blacks are three to four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites, despite toking at the same rate. The racial disparity in the enforcement of marijuana laws is serious and inescapable; in fact, it is only a matter of time before the courts could find it a discriminatory violation of the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause.
The leading cause of disruption in the black community today is a prison system that holds too many African-American men for too long. Leaders increasingly discuss how the community's progress is stunted because of the more limited employment opportunities for men with arrest records for possession of a small amount of weed.
If Hillary doesn't back legalization, she will nonetheless need to squarely address the impact of current drug policy on the black community and offer alternatives of her own. But modest, federal criminal justice reforms will not break through the noise from the legalization movement or meaningfully reduce the state prison incarceration rate for those arrested.
The Clintons have worked
tirelessly since 2008 to repair strained relationships with some black
leaders from their epic battle with the country's first black president. Reopening the wound would be politically fatal to the Clinton campaign. Blacks are 19% of the Democratic primary electorate and much
more likely than whites to favor legalizing marijuana, according to a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.
A majority of Latinos support legalization too, even though a 2013 Pew study said they are less likely than either whites or blacks to have tried the drug.
Of course, the winner of the Democratic Primary still needs to pass through November on the way to The White House. A CNN poll found only 36% of Republicans support legalization. But 59% of politically independent swing voters nationwide back legal weed, suggesting it won't be a major issue for a Democrat in the general election. And voters of all parties can quickly become keen to the tax revenue that would be generated by legal pot.
So far, Hillary has shown little interest in puffing her way to the presidency and neither have her rivals. Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, another potential candidate, was dubbed "buzzkill in chief"by the Huffington Post last month for calling marijuana a gateway that leads to the abuse of other drugs. 56% of New York Democrats polled disagree with him, including 68% of all voters under 29.
But as Hillary hits the speaking circuit, lines up fundraisers and ponders her presidential
pursuits, she should also turn on some music, pack a bowl and post the picture to Instagram.
You can't make history if you are on the wrong side of it.
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
Earthquake in Albany, Tremor in Jerusalem
There was a political earthquake in Albany yesterday and its
tremors reached Jerusalem.
In 1992, Jewish voters and other strong supporters of Israel
flocked to Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign after the then-Secretary of
State Jim Baker snarkily told a congressional panel that Israel’s prime
minister should “call him” if he was serious about peace. Republican candidates for Congress, already
tied to the floundering first Bush administration, spent the campaign
distancing themselves from Baker’s testimony.
A bill to penalize organizations at New York universities
that participate in academic boycotts of Israel was yanked from consideration
by the State Assembly’s Committee on Higher Education at the last minute. When I served in the Assembly, bills were
rarely placed on committee agendas unless they were certain to pass; even when
we discovered technical errors, the bills would often be passed in committee
and amended later on.
But this bill is different: it had already passed the state senate 56-4, directed its ire at enemies of Israel in a state where
Jews are 10% of the population and was sponsored by the Speaker of the
Assembly, Sheldon Silver, who wields an absolute veto over what bills the
chamber considers.
Bills opposed by the Speaker never see the light of a
legislative day; bills sponsored by the Speaker pass easily and never receive
the sunlight of scrutiny.
But this bill, which had already been watered down from a
tougher draft that would have financially penalized the universities rather
than just the groups aiding the boycotts, disappeared from consideration under
pressure from the state teacher’s union and two left-wing legal groups.
Capitol watchers were stunned because of what it might say
about the Speaker’s influence over the committee (no change- it remains
intact). But supporters of Israel are
floored because of what it says about the state of Middle East policy in
American politics. And it says a lot.
Disappearing Albany bill shows shift in support
for Israel
When Israeli officials speak about fighting attempts to delegitimize the Jewish state through academic and economic boycotts, they hardly think they
need to start with New York’s Democratic Party.
Most Democrats, in New York and across the nation, are pro-Israel. They support military and foreign aid. They roundly and genuinely condemn terrorist
attacks. They sign on to congressional
letters circulated by the influential American-Israel Public Affairs Committee
(AIPAC).
And many Democrats regularly support symbolic bills, like
Silver’s anti-boycott legislation, which has more impact in declaring the
state’s affinity for Israel than in depriving publicity-hungry anti-Israel
campus groups of meaningful funding.
Almost every Democrat in the State Senate backed the bill.
But on the flashpoints in the Middle East debate
today—academic and economic boycotts of the Jewish state and harsher sanctions
on Iran to stop its march to nuclearization—there is an unmistakable and
growing divide. Democrats and the
interest groups that fire the party’s base and fill its coffers are moving away
from global pro-Israel talking points.
The political shift is dramatic and consequential.
Bill and the Bubbe express
In 1992, Jewish voters and other strong supporters of Israel
flocked to Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign after the then-Secretary of
State Jim Baker snarkily told a congressional panel that Israel’s prime
minister should “call him” if he was serious about peace. Republican candidates for Congress, already
tied to the floundering first Bush administration, spent the campaign
distancing themselves from Baker’s testimony.
In 2000, the Bubba express turned into the Bubbe express, as
legions of Jewish grandmothers flooded Florida polling sites to support Al Gore
and running mate Joe Lieberman, the first Jew nominated on a major party ticket
and an observant one to boot (we know how that turned out). There was no shortage of pro-Israel speeches
at the party convention that year; we feasted on an endless supply of LA’s best
kosher deli in Lieberman’s private skybox at the Staples Center. It was such a proud Jewish moment, I called
my mother. Joe took the phone to accept
her “mazal tov.”
A few months prior, I had helped organize a private coffee for
Jewish women who were reluctant to support Hillary Clinton’s New York Senate
bid after her infamous kiss with Yasser Arafat’s wife. If elected, she pledged to be “the pro-Israel
leader” in the Senate. And she kept her word. If there was daylight between Senator Clinton and the pro-Israel agenda
during her eight years in office, I never found any.
But the center of gravity in the Democratic Party on
American policy in the Middle East is shifting- and fast.
How a little move can become a movement
Today, Hillary Clinton is backing President Obama’sopposition to new Iran sanctions, to the delight of more liberal Democratic
primary voters and the consternation of many pro-Israel Democrats who believe
the Iranian regime will never cease its efforts to acquire nuclear arms to use
against the Jewish state. Bill DeBlasio,
New York’s new progressive mayor and a pro-Israel stalwart, is under fire from some
Democratic party activists for telling AIPAC activists that “part of my job description
is to be a defender of
Israel.”
And yesterday in New York, the teacher’s union- one of the Democratic
party’s largest donors- publicly stood up to one of the most powerful
legislative leaders in America on anti-boycott legislation, raising questions
about academic freedom even though the bill would have zero impact on academics. The union’s statement opposing Silver’s bill even
justified academic boycotts for “issues of public concern” and contained not a
single word of support for Israel’s universities, the most academically free in
the Middle East and among the most open institutions in the world.
Support for Jerusalem as Israel’s capital was dropped from
the 2012 Democratic platform by the Obama Administration and restored by a
staged voice vote from the party’s convention floor that no one seriously
believes pro-Israel forces won.
Two years ago, when Israel strategically bombed Gazan
military targets in response to ceaseless rocket fire from Hamas terrorists,
74% of Republican voters polled supported the Jewish state’s self-defense. Only 40% of Democrats backed Israel.
And yesterday in New York, the teacher’s union- one of the Democratic
party’s largest donors- publicly stood up to one of the most powerful
legislative leaders in America on anti-boycott legislation, raising questions
about academic freedom even though the bill would have zero impact on academics. The union’s statement opposing Silver’s bill even
justified academic boycotts for “issues of public concern” and contained not a
single word of support for Israel’s universities, the most academically free in
the Middle East and among the most open institutions in the world.
I support Palestinian statehood. I am among the many Jews anxious to end a
military administration of the West Bank that places Israeli soldiers in dens
of terror, sometimes forcing ugly choices between survival and humanity. But I also know that the Israeli people have
repeatedly sued for peace and received a verdict of terrorism, hatred and
isolation from the Arab world. Global
Jewish memory is still keen to the intellectual and social boycotts in 1930s
Germany that ripened the windows for Kristallnacht.
Democrats seeking nomination for President in 2016 can
enhance the chance for peace by strongly making the case for America’s enduring
partnership with Israel. Its trade unions, nationalized health care and strong environmental laws mirror
what we Democrats seek for our own country.
Or Oval Office aspirants can echo the rhetoric of our
party’s extreme elements and slowly retreat into the boycott-laden
double-standards of Israel’s adversaries.
Israel’s government can either cling to an outdated fantasy
of robust bipartisan support or make Israel’s case to liberal Democrats who are
identifying more strongly with Palestinian aspirations than Israel’s multiethnic
resilience and embracing a narrative that sees Israel as a permanent Goliath
rather than an imperfect democracy struggling to retain its values in the
Middle East's quicksand of terrorism and political disintegration.
Otherwise, Democratic voters’ support for Israel can
disappear as quickly as Silver’s anti-boycott bill, and one small vote in
Albany will look like a giant step forward for Israel’s enemies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)