NEW century, new truism: The late Tip O’Neill’s well-worn observation that “all politics is local” no longer rings completely true. As far as New York’s Democrats are concerned, all politics is racial.
That, at least, is the lesson of Mark Green’s crash-and-burn mayoral campaign. Now, as the gubernatorial race heats up, the other lesson to be learned is that New York Democrats never learn their lesson.
After two months of political hibernation (he was the lone state politician who refused even to take a stand on whether Mayor Giuliani’s term should be extended), Andrew Cuomo re-emerged this past week in two forms.
First, he unleashed a broadside against Gov. Pataki’s fiscal policies, sending the clear message that the 9/11 attacks won’t insulate the governor from criticism.
Then, on Friday, The Jewish Week’s Adam Dickter revealed an embarassing Cuomo gaffe: He was caught on tape on Election Night complaining that the Democratic Party had made a “racial contract” between blacks and Hispanics.
Nominating opponent Carl McCall “would be the second installment in that contract, that racial contract, and that can’t happen,” said Cuomo.
Though McCall’s camp was quick to denounce the remarks as “divisive” and “crass,” Cuomo wasn’t at all wrong.
His remarks clearly anticipated the subsequent flap in which state Democratic Chairman Judith Hope demanded that either Cuomo or McCall drop out of the race as the price for party unity and harmony.
Though Hope said “either,” knowledgeable political observers say her statement was clearly aimed at Cuomo – who swiftly rejected it.
For saying publicly what a lot of Democrats were – and still are – saying privately, Hope lost her job.
Democrats have good reason to be concerned: No one knows if the huge Latino voter defection to Michael Bloomberg and the GOP line was a one-time aberration, based on lingering bad blood over the Democratic primary runoff – or the signal of a new electoral trend.
Either way, what’s happened since is the end result of a party that sees New Yorkers strictly in terms of ethnicity and racial blocs. Democratic primary campaigns are now little more than crude ethnic appeals – and the party’s political machinations are all based on purely racial concerns.
Such as the suggestion that Cuomo, a white liberal, step aside in favor of Carl McCall, an African-American, as the only way to avoid a divisive, race-based primary.
Cuomo has good reason to wonder why he’s the one who’s expected to make way. After all, he’s consistently led McCall in the polls among Democrats, and he’s run no worse against Pataki than has his opponent.
He also believes he can overcome any resentment over the fact that he’s challenging a black candidate by citing the fact that he’s the son-in-law of the late Robert F. Kennedy, an icon in the African-American community.
The irony is that McCall is the last candidate who would advance his candidacy on grounds of ethnic entitlement. He’s got a good claim on the nomination based on his decades of public service and the fact that he currently holds statewide office.
Like Cuomo, he’s 32 points behind Pataki in the polls, which suggests that either man would be a sacrificial lamb against the incumbent. But poll numbers – especially artificially high numbers in the wake of a national tragedy – can change very suddenly. And that election is still a year away.
Still, even the biggest of political sea changes will be for naught if the Democrats refuse to look at New York through anything but a racial prism.
Ethnic politics is a losing game – and unless that racial contract Andrew Cuomo rightly fears contains an escape clause, New York’s Democrats could be on the short end for some time to come.
