Anyone who regularly reads Daily Gotham knows we don't like Vito Lopez, the head of the shady Democratic Party Machine in Brooklyn. That dislike has grown since Vito and his buddy, Dominic Recchia, endorsed a homophobic, grossly unqualified man (who has never even practiced law) for a judicial seat.
I am not going to revisit the many, many reasons Vito Lopez and his machine are distasteful embarrassments to those of us who like our Democrats to be better than the average corrupt Republican.
Instead I want to discuss a question I get asked by some Vito Lopez apologists: If not Vito, then who?
This question has a history. When considering how distasteful Vito is, one must realize that the party boss he replaced was Clarence Norman, a man whose corruption landed him in jail. Vito apologists like to point out that having a party boss who has yet to be indicted is better than what we used to have. In other words, one argument for Vito is that one of the alternatives is a return to those who were part of Clarence Norman's version of the machine.
There are flaws in this argument. First off, I don't fully buy that there is that sharp of a distinction between the older, blacker machine and the newer, whiter machine. Many of the new bosses had their roles among the old bosses. That said, however, the recent Surrogate's race did pit elements of the old machine against elements of the new machine, making the question of "If not Vito, then who?" even more important.
I want to emphasize that I consider this question to be a very poor defense of Vito. "He's better than the worst we could have" isn't really inspiring. But I also want to emphasize that it is a question I am not convinced those who want to reform the system have adequately considered.
One answer would be "nobody." The SYSTEM is corrupt, making it hard for any bunch of bosses to be anything BUT corrupt. Reform the system and get rid of the bosses.
This is not impossible. I need to someday write about Los Angeles politics where an extremely corrupt machine had its ultimate downfall, creating a system so squeaky clear that a friend of mine who grew up in Chicago was shocked when she was unable to find anyone to bribe to smooth the way for some construction work.
That said, reforming the system strikes me as being a long term project. I would love to see a good outline of how this could be done. But for now I think the question of "If not Vito, then who?" is one reformers need to consider.
And since I was first asked, I have been thinking about the answer I would give. There are lots of names that I could wish for...but the vast majority of them can be ruled out either because they couldn't be tough enough to do what it would take to get the job, or they don't have the broad appeal and/or connections for it ever to be possible for them to take over.
The main problem is that anyone who doesn't have at least some connections in all camps is not going to get the job without something major changing, or without involving the old machine remnants. And let's face it. Replacing the Vito Lopez machine with a warmed over Clarence Norman machine sans Clarence isn't a solution.
I had a few conversations with people I know who are idealistic enough to want the change to happen but realistic enough to know that the answer that you can't win exclusively from the reform camp. In the end three names floated to the surface. Two of those names in the end I decided wouldn't work.
Which leads to a single name that I and the others I have talked to can agree on that is someone who COULD do it who would be a considerable improvement over both Clarence Norman and Vito Lopez.
The criteria: someone with the balls to do it, someone with appeal that spans elements of ALL aspects of Brooklyn politics (racially, ideologically and factionally), someone with at least reasonable integrity, and someone who has some charisma and openness so that the party can start looking better than ill-fitting suits and backroom deals.
The name I will float, in fact have floated, will not please some people who read my articles. And some will object that this name currently HAS ties with Vito Lopez. I know this, but I float the name any way because I think it is the best realistic answer to "If not Vito, then who?"
State Senator Eric Adams.
This guy has his in with Vito Lopez's machine, but he also is popular among all the reform clubs and many progressives. He won his election with more than 75% of the vote. That is almost unheard of for a newcomer to politics. He has ties both to the NYPD and the New York Civil Liberties Union. He is well respected among the black community AND can make women in Park Slope and Bay Ridge swoon. He has a rough charisma and pretty much isn't afraid to say what he really means up front. My wife and I first pegged him as a grandstander, and there is some truth to that. But we long ago realized that there is a great deal more to him than that.
Vito Lopez will not be the boss forever. Whether he is politically ousted (something Eric Adams probably wouldn't consider now, but I bet would if it became in his best interests), ousted through legal means like Clarence Norman (and it is well known that there are many who are looking for their chance to do just this...and this will be a big issue in the next Brooklyn DAs race), or eventually retires for health reasons (unfortunately, and I mean that sincerely, Vito does have health problems), the question of who takes over will come up...and it will come up before we can reform the system to any extensive degree.
So I go on record now as saying that, realistically speaking, the answer I have to "if not Vito..." is State Senator Eric Adams. And I dare anyone to tell Eric to know his place and not consider the move. I bet he already has considered the move and is considering when and how to make his move. He has time and it is clear both his potential and ambitions are aiming high. So let's bring it out into the open...
