November 14th, 2005
Now that this campaign is over, City Council is looking to the future — much to the dismay of the Times and the Post.
Both papers weigh in against a proposed measure that would make it easier for city politicians to get multiple campaign contributions from the same labor union. The Campaign Finance Board requires proof that, if a union local wants to make separate contributions from the parent union, it must be able to prove that it is independent. Some locals are; some aren’t. But now City Council is considering a measure that would make it far easier for a local to prove its independence. That “almost meaningless test,” as the Times called it, “would undercut the system” of public campaign financing.
The Post is far harsher, saying council members ” just can’t do enough to suck up to the [labor] bosses.”
But that’s not the politicians’ only sin in the paper’s eyes. The council members are thinking of overturning term limits — a measure the Post says it never liked, but that the voters do. Overall, the editorial says, “New Yorkers may have been voting for responsible government when they re-elected Mayor Mike last week, but no such impulse seems to have informed their choices for City Council.”By Gail Robinson on November 14, 2005, 8:36 am
In category: Governing | Comments Off on Criticizing Council