Login Friday Feb 03, 2012
Follow the Blogs
of the Empire Page's
Exclusive Columnists:
See new posts automatically when you subscribe to an RSS feed of your favorite columnist.
Interview with Dan Lynch, talk radio host
January 13th, 2010
Dan Lynch is somewhat of a renaissance man -- novelist, former newspaper columnist and editor and talk show host. A decade ago he came close to being elected to the NYS Assembly. We wanted to know what Dan and his listeners think about the current political scene in Albany and NYS.
Empire Page: You've been doing talk radio for quite a while now and you often talk
about NYS issues. Judging from the calls you get on NYS government
what's the mood of the public today versus 10 or 15 years ago? Are
people paying more attention and are they getting angrier?
Lynch: My listeners -- most of whom are conservatives and not terribly fond of government to begin with -- are vastly more hostile to the state's political establishment than they used to be. As far as they're concerned, chickens are coming home to roost and all the listeners' worst fears are being realized. They expect service cuts and tax increases. They're appalled at the conduct of all the state legislators of both parties -- especially by the venality and irresponsibility of the State Senate Democrats. The polls show that sentiments along those lines have permeated the entire citizenry in New York, regardless of political orientation. There's a ferocious anti-incumbent mood in the air. New Yorkers always have displayed what to me is a disturbingly high level of appreciation for the extenuating circumstance when it comes to the politicians of this state. For the moment, anyway, that seems to have changed.
Empire Page: In the past anger at politicians has dissapated at election time in part because voters don't perceive their local legislator or Congress member as being the problem. In some cases incumbents run without opposition or have been gerrymandered into districts where they have a huge enrollment edge. Come November 10, 2010 do you think we'll see a very different set of people in charge in Albany?
Lynch: Given the one-sided nature of the enrollment in most districts and the low turnout in the one-sided, urban districts in particular, probably not. Bear in mind, however, that state legislators are used to a 98 percent re-election rate. A dip in that rate to even as lofty a level as 85 per cent would unnerve them and, possibly, spark some long overdue reform. A decade ago, I ran against an incumbent Assemblyman who had a 2-1 enrollment edge. In the end, I got 47 per cent against a three-term incumbent -- a fairly good showing despite opposition from powerful people even in the party I ran for -- even though I'd never run for anything before. That happened because voters were beginning to figure out that the guy they had in that seat was a conspicuous part of the problem. In the next comparable election, he was thrown out. Voters can be disturbingly partisan and inattentive, but they're not really as stupid as the professional politicians would like to believe.
Empire Page: I agree, but that said, if you could tell voters across the state one thing that you wish they understood better about New York's political system, what would that be?
Lynch: This state would be a better place in which to live and make a living if the average citizen understood the following:
- Political parties are less
important than the quality and character of people who hold office.
- The
system under which government in this state operates -- i.e., the state
constitution -- needs drastic revision.
- Politicians respond to pressure
groups because the pressure groups are interested enough to involve themselves
in the process, whereas ordinary citizens are more interested in the NFL or
"Desperate Housewives," and everybody pays for that generalized lack of
attention to the process and the people in it.
All the problems of democracy could be solved by more citizen involvement in that democracy. No better example of that exists than New York State, a hotbed of corruption and political venality quite literally for centuries now. My best advice to people fed up with the way things work or don't work here -- get off your ass.
Empire Page: If you were setting the agenda for a constitutional convention, what would be the three changes you'd most like to see made?
Lynch: My top three changes would be:
- Placing reapportionment responsibilities in the hands of an independent redistricting commission that would draw legislative and congressional districts without regard to party considerations. Such a commission would be constitutionally obligated to focus on congruity and district cohesion rather on party enrollment.
- Merit selection of state court judges rather than election. Voters have no reasonable way to determine a candidate's fitness for the bench, but a Missouri-style independent judicial commission would.
- For my third priority I'm torn between a constitutional requirement that would provide citizens with total, detailed disclosure of all outside income by legislators and key members of the executive branch, a recall provision for all elected officials and some limited form of initiative and referendum that would give voters direct say over key public policy matters.
Lynch: The governor's plan goes too far and, at the same time, not far enough. Term limits are antidemocratic. Voters should have the right to decide who they want to represent them. What voters are entitled to, however, are public, quarterly reports from statewide elected officials, legislators and high-level executive branch appointees on who pays them outside income, how much and for what. Anyone unwilling to comply for any reason -- lawyers, for instance -- would be barred from serving.
Leave a Reply