There was an Op-Ed in Sunday's City Section - here - that astonishingly hasn't yet received the rich, full-throated mockery it deserves. It will, however, because while it seemingly flew under many radars, it was a topic of discussion last night; so allow me to commence the mockery of just one aspect of it. Others will likely do more and say more.

The piece in question is by Richard Brodsky, Assemblyman of Westchester, who has been leading a lonely fight to restore some measure of respect to the legislature after the DiNapoli meltdown. Brodsky, of course, was one of the supporters of his colleague, blissfully unaware of the 69% mandate for change given to Governor Spitzer, the disgust of ordinary New Yorkers for business as usual, and contemptuous of the binding agreement worked out between the new governor and the old Assembly about the procedure of picking a new Comptroller. This piece is the latest in a series of apologias by Brodsky, who seeks to defend the legislature against accusations of being “dysfunctional,” “corrupt” and “ineffective”. Brodsky seems to think it's just a P.R. problem. It's not. It's systemic.

Let me just vivisect one paragraph, in the hope that others will do more:

In fact, the Legislature’s record is a good one. A lot depends on how you measure success. A successful legislature will do three things well: pass laws; provide ordinary people access to power and enable them to influence decisions; and, most important, check abuse of executive power.

That is, with all due respect, self-serving bullshit. Read on.

Brodsky admits that the legislature has been less than adept at passing laws. What he fails to mention is that the prime role of a legislature is to be an effing legislature: hold hearings, have open floor debates, the occasional contested vote, empower its members, be responsive to citizen concerns. And there's the rub: under the strong-leader system, that's just not happening. Sure, if you go to Albany, you'll meet legislators on every street corner; but that's not going to help you, because these legislators can't independently do a damned thing. New York State legislators lack the crucial power of agency; without the OKs of Silver and Bruno, what can they do?

Nothing, is the answer. So, sure, if you re-define success to mean something other than it ordinarily means, the state Assembly isn't the dysfunctional, lapdog failure it is. I'm sure they hold very decorous roll calls, too; but the meat of it, the 'representing the people' part, is what's not working in Albany, and no amount of buck-passing Op-Eds or moving of goal-posts can change that, until we have real reform in Albany, end the vise-like grip of the leadership over the two houses, and make the legislature a real deliberative body. Until that happens, the numerous fine individuals in the legislature will justly be considered little more than poodles.

Problem is, poodles don't get a lot of respect. Even if they write Op-Eds in the New York Times.