If you had ventured, say, at New Year's, to entertain the possibility that in 2008, Eliot Spitzer would resign in disgrace after being caught in a hooker sting, that Joe Bruno would be retiring, and that Hillary Clinton would not be this year's Democratic nominee, you would have been dismissed as mildly eccentric even by blood relatives. But here we are, and now, you can add one more improbable occurrence to this year of the unexpected: Tom Golisano is going to spend literally millions of dollars to shake things up in this state by targeting incumbent legislators. That's potentially an earthquake. The New York Sun (a rightwing fishwrapper characterized by bad writing, a rightwing editorial slant they don't even the decency to try to hide, but one redeeming virtue, their stubborn opposition to Speaker Shelly Silver) today speculates that among Golisano's targets may be Silver himself.

Mr. Golisano, a three-time gubernatorial contender who is forming a PAC to spread his wealth to candidates across the state who pledge their support for his movement against Albany's establishment, is considering bankrolling an effort to topple Mr. Silver, the longest-serving Democratic speaker in state history. The possibility that one of New York's wealthiest residents, a sharp-tongued, politically unpredictable businessman who has a history of saturating the state airwaves with his self-financed political ads, may target Mr. Silver has provoked some concern within the speaker's political operation, according to a knowledgeable source.

There's even a rumor that Golisano may be looking at Marty Connor's seat, where the incumbent is facing a spirited challenge from newcomer Daniel Squadron. Having had a conversation about upstate economic development with Squadron myself, I'd suggest it might be worthwhile for Golisano to have the same. In short, another layer of volatility has just been added to a political scene already being cast into new alignments by this year's unexpected developments. Determining Golisano' intentions has a quality normally associated with reading tea leaves, but this much seems clear: the Rochester billionaire seems intent on demanding something the incumbent-protection racket in Albany is at great pains to avoid, namely accountability, responsiveness and that dirtiest of concepts, results. Results, meanwhile, concrete steps to move this state forward with a unified issues agenda, remain elusive in our two-person legislature. That's probably the strongest argument to be made against Roger Stone's insipid argument about what he terms 'checks and balances', here; for our purposes, the check provided by the anachronistic hold on the Senate by republicans is a check to getting anything at all done. The conditions in Rochester, Buffalo and elsewhere north of Westchester underline that point: what have decades of republican representation achieved for these regions? There remains the challenge of representing upstate in the government of the state as a whole. On that subject, coincidentally, it's worth pointing out that the politically highest-ranking upstater, if you will, is NYSDC Chair June O'Neill. The Democrats would be well-served by highlighting our approaches to the systemic economic crisis that's paralyzing most of this state, and by throwing resources into upstate campaigns. It's true enough, we could take a Senate majority just with seats in Queens and Long Island; but this and remains one state, and we can't move this diverse state forward economically and politically if northern and western New York feel left out of the decisions that affect our common future.