Search
Why I'm Running
[Ladies and gentlemen, Dan Squadron. Welcome.]
There has been much talk in my race for State Senate about being a true progressive. To help inform the debate over the next 26 days, I wanted to lay out my progressive vision and why I believe it will make a difference in this district and this state.
In my lifetime, progressive values have been on the retreat. The idea of an active government with the power, and the responsibility, to expand opportunity and strengthen a communal good has too often led to watered down compromises or been represented by a banner carried in defeat.
In New York State at this moment we have the opportunity to change that. I believe that the State Senate can lead the charge, but only if it is truly Democratic and truly progressive, in the broadest sense of the word.
As with all ideological questions, there are a couple of litmus tests in being a true Democrat -- among others, these include a belief in reasonable government intervention, government's role in major civic institutions, progressive taxes, and limits on the place of religion and religious edicts in public life and law.
Just so, today there are litmus tests in carrying the mantle of a true progressive -- among others, these include opposition to the war in Iraq from the outset, support of same sex marriage, and opposition to the weakening of choice rights.
In my race, my opponent and I are on the record on the same side -- the progressive side -- of all these definitional issues.
So, on some basic level the question has come down to one of credibility. And though no one claims that any of these issues has been my opponent's "signature" issue over his 30 years in office, some bloggers (even some who do not have a professional relationship with my opponent) believe it is enough that he has consistently checked the right boxes as State Senator.
To me, that is not enough.
I do not think that simply being on the right side of these issues will create true progressive change; over the last generation, we have lost too much ground -- on effective opportunity-expanding public assistance, access to healthcare, the fair distribution of wealth, an expansion of civil rights and equality of outcomes.
I believe that true progressivism must go beyond merely agreeing on these issues, to present grand visions of the power of government -- ideas like universal access to government support for families from before a child's conception through college; grand public works that reinforce government's role in our lives; energy and environmental policies that prioritize individuals and the planet over powerful corporations; affordability that expands the ability of people to live lives of true opportunity.
I believe that true progressivism depends on a government that reflects progressive values, values that are consistent with expanding fairness and opportunity: transparency instead of government secrecy; the needs of regular people instead of special interests; a voice for a diffuse many instead of a concentrated few.
And I believe that true progressivism requires a commitment to progress, a belief that things can be better and a willingness to take risks to make them so. In my career -- admittedly far shorter than my opponent's -- I've tried to do just that, and I believe the effort is well worth the attacks against the imperfections of outcomes, the dedicated people with whom I've worked but sometimes disagreed, or me. I remain hungry for true progress, which is why I'm running.
Those of us who believe in government's power must not just fight for the issues we care about, we must also fight for a government that works, that we can be proud of, and that has the capacity to affect the fundamental changes we today so desperately need.
On these measures of progressivism, and of turning a progressive vision into a reality, my opponent and I differ greatly. It is this progressivism, which I believe leads to all the other issues we care about, on which I hope to succeed in this race.
One final point, and Bouldin has made it better than I can: I hope to win because I do believe that a victory will help push New York State government and this district toward true progressive change. I hope to do it in the best way possible -- by taking no corporate, PAC or lobbyist money; by making no deals that will handcuff my ability to vote my conscience; and by trying to get more people involved in an office and a primary that too many normally sit out -- but I do hope to win.
And if I can, if it's posssible to defeat a 30-year incumbent in a system that is rigged to make the powerful unassailable, it will be a true progressive victory.
admission
so he admits there is no difference between him and marty connor on progressive issues. some of us remember when progressives called themselves liberals, guess he is too young to remember that. what he doesn't get is that when you run against an incumbent you have to make the case that he or she has stark contrasts, all dan seems to be is younger. hardly a rationale for running.
and as for his contributions, he has collected thousands from special interests, and very wealthy donors, and let's not forget the WFP, which is totally dependent on the special interest pacs he claims to reject.
Compare and contrast
Squadron's point (which we all get) is not that he and Marty Connor state different views on the issues. His point (which you seem to have missed) is that Connor hasn't actually done anything about it, while Squadron claims he will. That's a huge difference. It's the difference between a Chuck Schumer, who talks the progressive talk, voting to approve Michael Mukasey, and most Democrats on the committee voting against him.
Welcome
I am siding with Connor this year for reasons I have outlined elsewhere. But welcome to DG. Certainly happy to have you post and make your case.
What has marty done for 30 years?
I mean, beside leading the charge to repeal the commuter tax? Has he championed repeal of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, which devastate minority communities across the state? Has he pushed for closing half-empty upstate prisons which waste hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars a year that could be used to reduce our bloated state budget? Or has he spent his time guaranteeing his incumbency by arranging state funding for groups (Satmar in Williamsburg) that repay the favor by coming out full force for Connor? That's what I think of as legalized bribery.
What is the rationale for another two years of Marty Connor? Squadron is too young? -- to me that means energy, passion and idealism. Maybe it's because Squadron worked for someone whom you don't like? Well, Connor has worked for good guys and bad guys -- whoever foots the bill!
Marty Connor has been unaccountable to his constituents for too long. He's had his chance to act on his progressive principles, but he's been too busy using his political office to make a living.
You people call yourselves progressives, liberals - please!
I cannot believe that you guys are actually defending Marty Connor. This is ridiculous. The guy is a creep, and he does NOTHING to help advance the progressive cause.
Yes, so the guy says he supports many of your issues and may vote on them if and when they actually come up for a vote. But what has he done to make it happen? He's just giving lip service to these issues because the 25th SD is fairly progressive. He does what it takes to get elected, PERIOD. My god, you ought to be able to figure that out.
Look, Connor used to be the Minority Leader, and he was DEPOSED by his colleagues who then elected David Paterson. He didn't just step down to spend more time with the family, OK? He was ineffectual as Minority Leader so they replaced him, OK? He's INEFFECTUAL! Duh! He's just along for the ride. For 30 frigging years! Enough already.
And you want to know just how progressive Connor is? Well, let me tell you. I heard him say at a local Democratic club meeting shortly after the 2006 primary that he was so proud of the support he had received from the LGBT community. Little do they know what Connor was doing behind their backs. I will tell you because I saw it.
On the Friday before the September 2006 primary, I saw a mailing from Connor that turned my stomach. On the front of this glossy piece was a picture of several teenagers, all Hispanic and mostly male, with the caption "Aren't these children worth saving?" And inside Connor talks about how he had sponsored legislation to protect kids from pedophiles. It was immediately obvious what Connor was trying to do. You see, his 2006 primary opponent, Ken Diamondstone, is openly gay.
Now, Connor didn't name his opponent in this piece, but he didn't have to. But you must understand that this was a targeted piece that he didn't want most of us to see. I have lived at the same address, and have been a registered Democrat, for nearly 25 years. Yet this mailing, unlike all the other Connor mailings, was not addressed to me, nor to any other tenant in my building - except one former tenant who had a surname that looked Spanish.
Do the math, people. This targeted mailing was sent primarily to the Latino communities in the Lower East Side and South Williamsburg. After all, all the kids in the picture were Hispanic, and most were boys. Doesn't Connor care to protect white kids or black kids or Asian kids? And aren't the victims of pedophiles usually girls? Don't you see the pattern here? These are communities that the Connor campaign thought would be uncomfortable with a gay senator. Great, so let's scare the hell out of them, right?
So maybe some of you are thinking, so what! Candidates send targeted mailings all the time. No big deal, right? Nobody really gets hurt, right? Wrong. A few months after this mailing, I was looking for a roommate and I interviewed a guy who wanted to move out of the Lower East Side. He was gay, in his mid-30s, an actor from the Midwest. He wanted to move because he was afraid to live at his current address. He had been harassed by the neighborhood kids because he was gay, and because he was small in size and thus an easy target.
One night he was really scared. A bunch of teenage boys, mostly Hispanic, chased him down. He got away, but...he was terrified. He knew then that he had to move to another neighborhood. And do you know when this incident happened? You told me it happened during the weekend after Labor Day. That was the exact weekend that Connor's mailing went out, the weekend before the primary.
Now I cannot prove a direct cause and effect here, but come on, people. Connor's not a true progressive. He says he's proud of his support from the LGBT community, but he obviously doesn't give a crap about them, or anybody else. Marty Connor is concerned about only one thing, and that's Marty Connor.
And folks, it's not just about issues. It's also about character, and I don't know how you can possibly think that Marty Connor could pass a character test. The guy's a pig.
And I really think that some of my fellow liberal progressives are being a bit narrow-minded on this race. This knee-jerk reaction against anybody associated with Chuck Schumer is absurd. I don't always agree with Schumer, but overall he's a pretty damn good senator. His vote on Mukasey? Do you honestly think this administration is capable of nominating anybody better? Really? Where have you been hiding the past 7-1/2 years?
So if you're really a true liberal progressive, then you shouldn't be defending or supporting Marty Connor. Thirty years in office is long enough, especially for a hack. We need to get rid of him. Dan Squadron will be a vast improvement.
Ummm...yeah...
I do call myself both a progressive and a liberal. As are most of my political connections, most of whom are leaning towards Connor. And I might add that according to Marty Connor's campaign site, many progressive and liberal organizations and individuals support him, including Lambda Independent Democrats, Stonewall Democrats, and Gay and Lesbian Independent Democrats. I also happen to respect the Congressional reps Jerrold Nadler (impeachment aside) and Nydia Velasquez, who are both generally considered liberal, and have endorsed Connor. I also respect State Senators Eric Adams, Velmanette Montgomery and Thomas Duane, all of whom are generally considered liberal and who have endorsed Connor.
Now when it comes to Daniel Squadron's endorsements, I would say that although there are some progressive endorsements, there also is Michael Bloomberg (NEITHER progressive NOR liberal) and Chuck Schumer, who I respect quite a bit (as I have written before) but would not call progressive or liberal.
So please don't get all holier than thou on us. We can very definitely differ on candidates in primaries without calling eachother's "progressive qualifications" into question. If anything, when Bloomberg (who in 2006 was the largest individual donor to Tom DeLay's extremely conservative PAC) supports someone, it may not be a deal breaker, but it does raise a red flag.
Mole333 is a "regular" -- whadja expect?
SO, if Mole333 is on the IND exec board, and IND is Marty's club, why WOULD he support Connor's opponent? That would stop the gravy train to IND's favorite charities! Marty (and Joan) send money their way, and the bottom-feeders dutifully come out to IND endorsement meetings to help them get re-elected. Nice racket you have there!
Mole, were you on the IND exec board two years ago when that board manipulated the date of their endorsement meeting so as to avoid losing the IND endorsement to Diamondstone? If so, how could you claim you're "Independent" or a "democrat"?
Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...
Wow...what a completely ignorant statement. Ah, I love it when people spout off without knowing what they are talking about. I am curious...where were you that night because if you had been involved at the time I suspect you wouldn't have brought it up.
No, I wasn't on the board yet. But you know what? Most people know about that event because I wrote about it. You go ask Diamondstone about my coverage of that incident. I believe Diamdondstone was relatively pleased and Connor came off rather badly. I took lots of shit for it but stood by it. And yet I am still preferring Connor, who I have criticized in the past, to Squadron, and if you want to alienate the entire reform movement in Brooklyn (I am also involved with DFNYC and CBID) by attacking me, be my guest. I suspect Squadron won't be happy of you unite the reform movement against him.
This one is priceless!
You cannot be serious.
I'm one of the people mole recruited into IND in an effort to overcome the inertia at that club, and you really have no idea what you're talking about. It will be a cold day in hell before you or I meet someone else as focussed on empowering the left wing of the Democratic Party as mole is.
A major factor that needs to be considered in backing any insurgent candidate in this city is whether you'll be happy with him or her for a long, long time to come. That's why I set the bar higher for challengers than for incumbents: it's going to take a lot of my personal time, sweat and money to depose any incumbent, so I want to be sure that the replacement is worth it, not someone I'm going to be just as unhappy with in two years as I am now with the incumbent. Squadron hasn't gotten over that bar for me; I'd rather settle for two more years of Marty Connor and the potential of a challenger we'll be happy with for the inevitable long haul.
I've been Schumer's constituent and supporter in one office or another for about 30 years, and I've become so unhappy with him these last six years that I'm hoping for a serious primary challenger next time he's up for re-election. The last thing I want is someone ensconced in Brooklyn for decades who will strengthen his power base.
Connor vs Squadron
Being on the IND Exec Board doesn't mean you rubber stamp things. I'm the Chair of the Board and I have never rubber stamped anything or asked the board to. We discuss everything and if you'd have ever been to one of our meetings you'd know that.
As for supporting Marty Connor, he is the best candidate in this race. It's that simple. Squadron has been endorsed by Schumer and Bloomberg. What does that tell you about being the progressive in the race. He's lived in the neighborhood a very short amount of time and like David Yassky, seems to have moved here simply to run for office.
And anyone who writes that Marty Connor has done nothing in the past 30 years is just ignorant. You can disagree with him, but making things up is a bit silly.
Honestly, Kenn...
...I have major issues with IND that long predate this fight.
What are you doing, for example, to remain or for that matter become relevant to young voters? Why is it that whenever I go to a club meeting, I'm the youngest person in the room, even as I'm going on forty? What are you doing, what is IND doing, to open up the Democratic Party to young people, new immigrants, minorities, and the new demographics that communicate primarily via the web? How are you reaching out to the huge influx of new residents in your district?
When I look at Democratic clubs, with the partial exception of the LGBT entities, what I see are a bunch of very familiar people who have known one another for decades sitting around, debating trivial points of order, rehashing ancient and carefully nursed feuds that nobody but those involved gives a rat's ass about, and then going out to petition for the same old cast of characters year in and year out. Meanwhile, entire new generations and demographics have no one to turn to to get engaged, and why? Because at some level, those new folks scare the insiders, who have no freaking clue what to do with them. I suspect that's part of what's going on with Squadron's candidacy among the comfortable insiders, by the way; too young, too uncomfortable.
There's an entire new universe of people that are engaged with, say, MoveOn.org or Daily Kos. So what are you doing to engage them, Kenn? What do you say to them? Why are you relevant to them? Do you even know what I'm talking about?
I have been invited on several occasions by several people to join IND. I've always politely but firmly rejected the idea out of hand. Why? because I have better things to do with my time. Why am I wrong, Kenn?
Well
This is precisely the role I took in IND which landed me in trouble (the very incident that a certain blogger tries to pin on me even though I was on the other side) but then also got me on the board.
Your characterization of the club scene in Brooklyn is largely correct. Ironically, the club that most fits your description is not even IND, but CBID, and yet they are the one who is most aware of the problem and at least talks about fixing it. And it is the club that most often represents the core support for some of your own favorite candidates. Yet they have the oldest average aged membership, it seems (with one of their best and most active members recently dying in his 80's).
But what replaces the clubs on the local level. You mention some national groups like MoveOn...they don't help up elect judicial candidates. If Progressive Majority would expand to NYC they would be helpful on the local level, but no other group does so. So then we come to groups like DFNYC and NDM. Well, I have done my best to get those groups balancing the clubs in Brooklyn, but in my area the experiments failed. It was impossible to get people active. In that sense, the clubs are far more effective than DFNYC and NDM in Brooklyn. They do voter reg, they do GOTV not just on primary day (like the machine) but also on election day particularly if there is a Republican to defeat, and they do outreach at street fairs. As to registering new residents, they do that when they petition because we carry voter reg forms with us and if we run into someone who just moved, we offer them a voter reg form. It is NOT enough, but it is the main force doing it. Those old fogies are registering voters in train stations (shout out to Ted in particular). Those old fogies are petitioning for candidates the machine won't do the footwork for. I have managed to bring fellow quadragenarians into the sexta-octogenarian clubs. Individual DDDB folks did wonderful work bringing in pre-quadragenarians into the sexta-octogenarian clubs.
MoveOn.org has done nothing in Brooklyn (though Joy (of CBID) and I (of IND) did host a MoveOn.org volunteer in 2006 who did massive phone banking for Congressional races around the country). Daily Kos folks, even in NYC, never set foot in Brooklyn when they have a get together. I for one have engaged national organizations repeatedly regarding the crap that goes on in Brooklyn. None are interested. Not even the key electeds that are in charge of major organizations (e.g. Chuck Schumer) have shown any interest in defeating the Noach Dears let alone the Marty Goldens of Brooklyn. To give credit where credit is due, even though Diane Savino endorsed Noach Dear (she regrets it, she says) and Dominic Recchia, she also is one of the ONLY people willing to target Marty Golden.
So, I have personally done what I could to find alternatives to the clubs. Nothing has worked so far. So Joy and I work within the clubs and it has been within the clubs that we have had our biggest impact (Daily Gotham aside). So, if you want an alternative, show us the people on the ground petitioning, doing voter reg, campaigning for the non-machine candidates, and doing GOTV on BOTH primary AND election day here in Brooklyn. So far no one but the clubs are doing this on a regular basis. You can criticize a clearly strange system, but unless there is a replacement, the only alternative right now is the machine.
So what DID Marty do in the last 30 years, Kenn?
Oh, and Mole, are you threatening to "alienate the entire reform movement in Brooklyn" because of an anonymous blogger's assertion that your position on the IND Board is linked to your endorsement of Marty Connor, one of IND's two pillars of patronage and members' item largesse? Am I hitting a nerve? Do I detect a sissy hissy fit in the works?
I'll tell you what an IND endorsement is worth -- 38% of the vote. That's what IND-backed incumbent Marty Connor got in the 2006 election against Ken Diamondstone, with Marty's whole family, Joan, and the whole IND exec board working hard for their boy. Pretty pathetic.
BTW, are you implying that IND is a reform club? CBID may have some claim to espousing a reform agenda, at least some of the time, but IND hasn't been a reform club since Joan Millman slipped into the sainted Eileen Dugan's seat. And LID has moved heavily in that direction as well, sad to say. But maybe if you all tell each other how important you are, and how "progressive" you are, you'll all feel better.
As for Squadron not being worthy of IND support because Schumer endorsed him, PUH-leeze tell me if IND endorsed Schumer in his last run? If so, does that make IND "not progressive" too? Can't have it both ways.
All the hack elected officials have dutifully lined up to endorse Marty because they are worried that, if Marty falls, they may be next. All these jokers are interested in is getting re-elected every two years -- a bunch of gutless wonders. As the NY Times has editorialized, they should ALL be swept from office. G-d willing, Marty will be the first to go, but not the last.
It's time we had someone represent us in Albany who, rather than SAYING how much they'll do some day soon, actually pushes for reforms like repealing the Rockefeller drug laws, public financing of political campaigns, etc. WHERE HAS MARTY BEEN ON THESE TRULY PROGRESSIVE ISSUES????? He has the most seniority of ANYONE in the Democratic conference -- WHERE HAS HE BEEN????? WHAT HAS HE DONE???
Again, please tell us what Marty has done in the last 30 years. Kenn? Mole? Hel-LO?
No
I am suggesting that the anonymous blogger who should have known better, should realize that I led the opposition to the incident that anonymous blogger (who REALLY should have known better) referred to, and yet still was accepted the following year onto the board of IND. So I am suggesting that the very people who Squadron may want to impress in Brooklyn are the very ones I stood up for when IND disenfranchised them. If you are aware of that incident it is probably because I publicized it quite powerfully...as you might know if you read what I wrote and linked to. Since you clearly didn't, you are coming off uninformed and, with all due respect, really pretty foolish.
So IND is worth 38% of the vote? That is pretty damned good for a single club! I personally think you overestimate them. But please...try researching into who I am and what I have done in the past. You want to attack me, fine. But I don't think it furthers your cause in the slightest. I suspect it will seriously backfire given that the people you are referring to as being disenfranchised by IND in 2006 were defended (and in some cases recruited) by myself. Probably not the people you want to alienate. Try reading what I linked to above so you may realize you are losing this battle through sheer ignorance. And I personally think you are hurting yourself attacking Joan. When I talk to people in the district, I am frequently told to thank her for certain specific things she has done for her constituents. She may not be a strong leader, but she is the epitome of a constituent based politician who goes to bat for any constituent who asks for her help. I suspect you may be out of touch with her district perhaps because of specific issues (I can guess which one and I probably agree with you on it).
Puh-leeze. Try considering who you are talking to before you attack. Because you are making claims so silly it shows nothing but your ignorance. I am reasonably sure both Diamondstone and Squadron are rolling their eyes at your attacks on me. But ask them. See what they say.
So what DID Marty do in the last 30 years...
"So what DID Marty do in the last 30 years?"
It's actually a silly question because in 30 years he's done quite a bit. You can argue that he hasn't done enough, or spoken out about an issue, but to write that he has done nothing is just silly, foolish, not true and so on.
But first let me just state that although I am Chair of IND's Board, I am writing for myself, not as Chair and not on behalf of the club.
Marty has spoken out on gay and lesbian issues. He believes that marriage should be legal for all adults, gay, lesbian and others (that would be me).
He has fought to get Brooklyn Bridge Park funded and built. I do not believe that apartments should be in the park under any circumstances. I am not writing about that, just the funding. If you back up 4-6 years, I don't believe anyone would question Marty about the park. And there's more, but I do not work for Marty Connor, so that's not my job.
As for Dan Squadron, I don't think he's to young. I don't want to take a chance on another former Schumer boy. He doesn't have much of a track record in our area. I just don't know what he'd do in the Senate. And once you're there, you're there for a long time.
I will probably not respond to other anonymous writers because I believe if you're going to write, you should use your name (or initials). Hiding behind an anonymous post is cowardly imho.
Progressive, shmogressive
A lot of the name-calling here is rather pathetic. Everyone's trying to claim the mantle of a true "progressive." Who cares? For some people it means sticking it to the yuppies so that they fund housing for the poor (but somehow it doesn't matter who they go to bed with to achieve their noble work for the people.)
Both Squadron and Connor would be far superior to any Republican candidate, but they both seem to favor our Bloomberg-Real Estate-post-Industrial complex.
In the end, I find Mole the most convincing, since he has pointed out that Squadron, while he is a bit of an unknown, does support Mayor control over the schools. Not only do I disagree with that, but I think it shows Squadron's support for the same back-room government that Albany is so famous for.
And, yeah, IND can be a bunch of fogies cultivating ancient grudges, but that's what the blogging world is turning into. We're all drawing such deep lines in the sand. (An aside: at least IND has a record of getting people to work on election day, which is better that DailyGothams' record, at least so far).
In the end, I'm going to sit out the race. I don't really like either candidate, so there are more important things to do with my life... like write about how I have more important things to do with my life.
But I do have to say, it's really funny for anyone to call Mole a "regular."
Why create a Democratic Primary this year?
It seems to me that after this election when Connor wins, there are going to be alot of people asking what was gained from having a Democratic Primary in this district when there were so many other races that should have been a priority for progressives in NYC and the rest of the state. If the Democrats don't take back the State Senate, will Squadron be partly to blame? It just seems like all of us, as Democrats, should be focused on defeating Republicans this summer more than any summer, not other Democrats.
Let me just say
Although I am supporting Connor this time around, I don't think it a waste to see challenges like this. I noticed that Charles Barron's challenge to Ed Towns in 2006 really seemed to improve Towns' voting record, and Squadron's challenge to Connor has done wonders in improving Connor's speaking out on important issues. I have found Connor's voting record very good overall (with a handful of exceptions) but always found him a bit too cynical to be inspiring when he speaks out on progressive issues. He is doing a much better job of presenting the progressive case with Squadron challenging him. Challenges don't always have to work to have an effect.