albany gets back to work - or why state government really doesn't need more power

After a five-week standoff between Republicans and Democrats (two Democratic defections left both parties with 31 members, an evidently untenable situation in state politics) in the New York Senate, the legislature returned to work yesterday. What brilliant compromise led to the resumption of government during the worst economic crisis this country has seen since the Great Depression? None. Instead, one of the idiots who defected in the first place, Pedro Espada, Jr., returned to the Democratic fold. The best part? In the new leadership structure, Mr. Espada will serve as majority leader. (Don't worry, that might not actually mean anything in state politics. But apparently it was enough to convince Mr. Espada to return the Democrats rather than face marginalization a proposed power-showering agreement between one Democratic faction and the Republican party).

The debacle in the New York Senate is merely the most vivid recent illustration (the very fact that Sarah Palin managed to be elected governor of an entire state was probably enough for me) of why transferring more power to the states might not be the brilliant idea Republicans make it out to be. (Or, you know, used to make it out to be until they discovered the wonderful uses of a large government, like unlimited military spending). Throw in Governor Sanford's mysterious week-long disappearance (later, he admitted, due to an affair with an Argentinian woman) and Governor Palin's puzzling resignation (as far as anyone could gather from her rambling speech, the perseverance of the military inspired her to step down in the face of adversity, or at least in the face of bad press and the prospect of being a lame duck governor) and it's a wonder anyone could support shifting more power to this set of politicians. The federal government is not, obviously, the model of brilliance and efficiency (but, then again, as we've all learned in recent months, neither is the private sector), but it is increasingly clear that it remains far superior to state legislatures, at least in terms of marginal functionality.

The New York Senate Seat

When Carline Kennedy withdrew from consideration for the soon-to-be-vacated New York Senate seat, I was somewhat skeptical of her alleged personal reason for withdrawal (initially reported to be concern for the health of her uncle, Ted Kennedy). Her nose-diving popularity and general mishandling of a political situation where she began as the far-and-away front-runner seemed a more likely cause. Furthermore, the whole gendered concept of her withdrawing because of her uncle's health generally irked my feminist sensibilities (can anyone imagine, say, Bill Clinton abandoning political aspirations under such circumstances?). So, you can imagine my delight in discovering that, apparently (according to such laudable and reliable sources as gawker and rightpundits.com), her "personal" reasons for withdrawing concerned her affair with New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger. Hopefully, she wasn't relying on this affair to receive decent press coverage). While the fact that our female politicians are now engaging in at least some level of morally ambiguous extra-marital sexual relations in an attempt to match their male counterparts may gave some hope to feminism, it is important to keep in mind the fact that this would never (unless it was publicly revealed by an outside source) be the cause for any man to step down from consideration of political office (it didn't seem to bother John Edwards during his latest failed presidential bid).