Update, 4:35 p.m.: The City Council voted 29 votes in favor of extending term limits, to 22 votes against. Each member had the opportunity to explain their votes. Council member James Oddo, who voted against the legislation, wished he had some f-bombs left over and quoted the West Wing: "Quando dio vuole castigarci ci manda quello che desideriamo."/ "When the gods wish to punish us they answer our prayers." (Oddo said he hoped the gods were busy today.)
And here's Mayor Bloomberg's statement:
Today, the majority of the City Council decided to give the people of New York a fuller choice in the November, 2009 election. I believe that was the right choice, and I want to thank Speaker Quinn for her leadership. Those of us who work on both sides of City Hall must now move forward with the important decisions that face us, particularly finding ways to soften the fallout from the economic downturn and balancing our budget as revenues decline. We have a lot of work to do together to get New York through these tough times.And then he went home to count his billions!
Earlier: So far, the City Council has voted to reject an amendment that would have called for a public referendum on term limits, the Times is reporting. The vote was 28 to 22, with one member, James Sanders Jr. of Queens, abstaining on the amendment, which would allow a public say on the decision to extend term limits from two terms to three for the elected positions, including Mayor and City Council.
The Council is now debating the main bill, which would simply abolish term limits without any meddlesome direct "voting" from citizens. Mayor Bloomberg officially started his push for a third term on September 30, and had said term limits could be changed by the Council, claiming it was too late for it to be put on the ballot.
While giving a speech endorsing the bill, council speaker Christine Quinn was booed and jeered from the balcony—which was standing-room only—when she insisted it was "ludicrous" to suggest the bill was the fruit of a "back-room deal." Not only did she claim there had been plenty of transparency during "two, well-attended public hearings, 20 hours of public hearings and a vigorous debate... Support for this bill is broad and deep," she also invoked President Bush. Politicker NY reports Quinn tried to find a positive about her term limits turnabout, "Many of us, myself included, have been highly critical of our president. When facts change, he won’t change his position on different matters."
The Times also reports that most New Yorkers were excluded from the meeting, which was not held in a bigger space despite enormous public interest. Even Gene Russianoff of the Straphanger's Campaign (and the senior attorney with a government watchdog group opposed to the term limits extension) was rebuffed and had to pull strings with council staff members to get up in the balconey: “I was able to get in because of the relationship I have with some people on the staff here. But the average New Yorker would not have fared as well as I did. That’s a problem for the average New Yorker who wants to participate in the process."
Here is NY1's tally of how the members voted. Terms limits had been voted on by NYC residents twice in the 1990s, with voters supporting a two-term limit both times. While billionaire Ronald Lauder poured millions into bringing about the limits, he supports the idea of a third Bloomberg term because of the economic issues facing the city. (Lauder is not so keen about other elected officials getting a third term, though.)




Of course they'll vote to abolish term limits. The billionaire mayor wants his way and he'll get it. Tammany Hall once and always.
Actually, The City Council is afraid that they'll be getting the public P/O'ed so they're considering the Odds carefully.
How was the public able to vote on the term limit issue twice previously? Were they special referendums or were they ballot questions?
the extension is passed 29 for.
NYC City Council - Subverting Democracy since 2008
This is fucking ridiculous.
Bloomberg 2009!
YES
All hail the doge of manhattan!
Oct 23, 2008. The day democracy died in New York. What a disgrace.
Is Fernando Ferrer running against him again?
How is democracy over in New York? If the people don't want Bloomberg to be mayor again they can vote him out.
I don't usually wish ill will to anyone cause I'm a nice guy. (ask my therapist) but I wish bloomberg's daughter get's chris reeved. (and pray to your God, any GOD, deity, cat, shaman and nostradamus) love them horsies.
How is Bloomberg going to get us out of this 'crisis'? by that logic didn't he have seven years to warn us about it? or try to stop it?
What a joke this guy is. so typical of a politician. all these council members should be thrown out on their asses.
he's setting himself up for the 2012 presidential election.
i really hope people see through this crap.
Whether you are for Bloomberg or against him, allowing his name to appear on the ballot next year is NOT a subversion of democracy. That is absurd.
Our elected representatives have voted to pass a bill allowing a candidate to appear on the ballot in next November's mayoral election. That is democracy in action folks. If you don't like him, don't vote for him.
de·moc·ra·cy (dĭ-mŏk'rə-sē) n.
1. A form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
I don't see any contradiction in there. Additionally, there is nothing about mayoral term limits in the U.S. Constitution, the New York State Constitution or the City Charter.
de·moc·ra·cy (dĭ-mŏk'rə-sē) n.
1. A form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them.
The people voted in 93 and 96. That is also democracy sweetie.
Roast these pigs on a stick come next November. DON'T FORGET and don't give into the fearmongering!
don't see any contradiction in there. Additionally, there is nothing about mayoral term limits in the U.S. Constitution, the New York State Constitution or the City Charter.
And hell, if you wanna play that game, there is nothing is any of those about a smoking ban, a trans fat ban, abortion, social security and all the other entitlement programs. Nothing. If you ca find me where in the Constitution it says you can kill a baby after you got it all stuck up in your cooch and now dont want it, Im all ears.
Bloomberg will be running as an independent - I would think he is anyway. At least this way it wouldn't tie up a Republican or Democrat to run as well. If the city doesn't want Bloomberg to win they shouldn't vote for him.
If anything we have been given a choice that we didn't have before. I suggest that everyone make the most of the authority that the Council has just given us and make our votes in 2009 count. I will be paying attention that much more over the next year and am glad that we now have 0 lame ducks in the council down from about half.
Bloomberg wants his 9/11 so he too can become America's Mayor. Anyone who follows how the City Council works and hinges on the decision of the Speaker knows that this bill wouldn't have gone forward if it hadn't already been worked out behind closed doors to pass. But now a lot more people are watching and Quinn and Bloomberg are going to choke on their own poo-poo.
JacqueMehoff: You stay classy.
If anything, these anti-Bloomberg sentiments are a symptom of his success as mayor. The professional complainers that make up a good portion of NYC's population have run out of legitimate problems to complain about, so they make things up.
Keep in mind we don't technically live in a democracy. We live a republic.
Let me preface my statement by saying that I love Mayor Mike and yes, we will have at least 3 options on the ballot since he's an independent.
However, what happened today IS an infringement upon our democractic rights. There should have been a public referendum. (and there would have been a very good chance that Bloomberg would have gotten his way). This backdoor vote sets a very bad precedent. We cannot have politicians change the rules of the game when the end is looming. This is the kind of b.s. that happens in countries that we look down upon (i.e. dictatorships).
Those of you who acknowledge that we don't have to vote for Bloomberg are correct, but you're only half right. Bloomberg's name should not even be on the ballot without him winning a referedum.
Nice. I'll have to save the vote record so I can be certain to vote against the ones who voted for it.
Mind you, our Gov't is NOT a Democracy per se, but rather a Republic, specifically a Representative form of Gov't.
After two referendums, this 11th hour negation of the two referendums is just BS.
thank you, longacre.
me classy to the nth degree.
willllllburrrrrr.
like I said in my earlier posts, I held my contempt for this mayor for too long. just wait til the SHTF,
I got nothing to lose.
horse jumping is a dangerous sport.
damn, this shit is just as wacky as my condo board elections. cut-throat.
Term Limits = Lazy People's Democracy
Vote the bums out!!!!
What's the big deal? Koch was mayor for, like, eons. Term limits doesn't mean we don't get to vote, all it means is he can run again. It's not like they decided to make him Mayor for Life or something - you still get to exercise your right to vote. Sheesh.
Here is a list of the council members who thought it appropriate to thumb their nose at New Yorkers wishes and voted to extend term limits, rather than put it to a referendum.
Christine C. Quinn
Maria del Carmen Arroyo
Maria Baez
Leroy G. Comrie Jr.
Inez E. Dickens
Erik Martin Dilan
Simcha Felder
Lewis A. Fidler
Helen D. Foster
Alan J. Gerson
Sara M. Gonzalez
Robert Jackson
Melinda R. Katz
G. Oliver Koppell
Miguel Martinez
Darlene Mealy
Michael C. Nelson
Domenic M. Recchia Jr.
Diana Reyna
Joel Rivera
James Sanders Jr.
Larry B. Seabrook
Helen Sears
Kendall Stewart
James Vacca
Peter F. Vallone
Albert Vann
Thomas White Jr.
David Yassky
I have emailed all of them, saying that if they don't care about my vote, then they will not get mine, ever, for any office. NYers have a long memory and these politicians should remember that.
marroyo@council.nyc.gov, baez@council.nyc.ny.us, comrie@council.nyc.ny.us, emdilan@council.nyc.ny.us, felder@council.nyc.ny.us, fidler@council.nyc.ny.us, foster@council.nyc.ny.us, gerson@council.nyc.ny.us, gonzalez@council.nyc.ny.us, jackson@council.nyc.ny.us, katz@council.nyc.ny.us, koppell@council.nyc.ny.us, martinez@council.nyc.ny.us, darlene.mealy@council.nyc.gov, nelson@council.nyc.ny.us, recchia@council.nyc.ny.us, rivera@council.nyc.ny.us, sanders@council.nyc.ny.us, seabrook@council.nyc.ny.us, sears@council.nyc.ny.us, vann@council.nyc.ny.us, twhite@council.nyc.gov, yassky@council.nyc.ny.us
Christine C. Quinn, Inez E. Dickens, Diana Reyna , Kendall Stewart, and
Peter F. Vallone, Jr did not list their emails on the City Council site.
-Will
#10, democracy is over because the City Council basically thumbed their nose at the electorate, saying that their legislation overturning the public vote was worth *more* than a public referendum (or TWO referendums, in this case). This is disgusting.
Disgusting. Quinn's been awful for years, but I was actually reasonably ok with Bloomberg. Too bad he didn't have the class to go out gracefully.
I'd vote for a cardboard cut-out before I vote for Bloomberg, now, no matter what ticket he runs on.
#28, Koch was the mayor for 3 terms. NYers voted to limit terms from 3 to 2 in 1993 and re-affirmed in 1996. You're missing the point. We're having our rights taken from us. We should have voted, not the City Council.
Yes rolltide darling, the people voted in 93 and 96. I know that. The people vote every year. The best thing about democracy is that it is flexible. It shifts with the will of the people. We are not living in 1996. 12 years later, the people as represented by their elected officials want something different. The fact that public opinion on term limits is so schizophrenic only highlights the paradox - we cannot ultimately vote to limit our own voting authority.
In my opinion, term limits, whether enacted by public referenda or not, essentially inhibit the will of the people by forbidding an otherwise eligible candidate for office. Regardless, public referenda are not permanent laws. In fact none of our laws are permanent decrees as we have a common law system. The State Supreme Court has upheld that state constitution allows representative bodies to overturn public referenda. If you don't like that, you can draw up an amendment to the state constitution to make voter referenda only able to be overturned by another referendum or by the Supreme Court. Get to work.
Also rolltide, I wouldn't look in the constitution for information on smoking bans, trans fats, abortion, etc. The constitution grants the state and city elected bodies authority to enact such laws, but does not specifically describe those laws. If you have a problem with those laws, you may have been in the minority of opinions when your elected officials enacted them. You may be suffering from the democratic principle of the "tyranny of the majority." How do you propose to resolve that?
In my opinion, term limits, whether enacted by public referenda or not, essentially inhibit the will of the people by forbidding an otherwise eligible candidate for office.
Then you'd approve of a third term run for George W. Bush?
jackdonaghy, you got it.
The Issue isn't Term limits, it's the negation of Two Referendums. I have no problem with another Referendum, but I have a big problem with the mayor and his allies doing this so late in the game AFTER a referendum can be scheduled.
I'll keep that list handy on Election day.
I would approve of a vote for a third term for any president, yes. I have no problem with George W. Bush being on the 2008 presidential ballot. He would lose by possibly the largest margin U.S. history, but as far as I'm concerned, he can go ahead and knock himself out.
Can't you smell the desperation of Bloomberg? He has nowhere to go. He hasn't distinguished himself in any way in the last seven years and he's afraid he'll end up like Ed Koch trying anything to get the attention back on himself. It's sad really that he puts his ego before the concerns of the citizens.
News Flash: If you don't want a third term of Bloomberg, then DON'T VOTE FOR HIM.
The people saying that voters can just elect someone else seem to ignore the fact that incumbents have massive advantages. The only way to really lose as an incumbent is to really screw up, like Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, Alphonse D'Amato and Ed Koch did.
Because the deadline for a referendum had passed, the City Council elected to punt the issue to the voters in the next general election. Of course I agree a new voter referendum to overturn the old referendum would have been a better way to go. Regardless, the City Council can still legally overturn any referendum they choose. It is an understandably unpopular move, but they can do it. In this case, they overturned a referendum that just sends the decision back to the voters next Novemeber, which really isn't that big a deal. Unless of course you hate Bloomberg so much that you would prefer people not be allowed to vote for him.
Just noticed:
"12 years later, the people as represented by their elected officials want something different."
IvoryJive, You sure about that? Without a Referendum, how would you know what the majority of the people wants?
I can't because the deadline has passed. But why should we have a referendum to overturn a referendum preventing an election? Let's just have the election and cut out the middleman.
Maybe Giuliani should run against him now.
I think Bloomy also wants to make a mayoral term 20 years to avoid this messy problem again. When do we get to vote for a robot mayor?
Ralph 2008.
By voting in favor of the term limit extension, the City Council have created more problems for the city and themselves than they can ask for. Oh, boy. This isn't over yet. There's more to come.
New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr. issued the following statement today following a vote by the New York City Council on term limits:
Today’s vote is an affront to New Yorkers. It says that their votes and their voice do not matter, that bullying and heavy-handed threats are more powerful than democratic ideals.
I am saddened that our Mayor and majority of City Council members have put individuals before principles. Today our government chose to empower itself rather than the people it serves.
Despite the rising tide of opposition to a Council vote, and in the face of a public poll that showed nearly 90 percent of New Yorkers wanting the issue put to a voter referendum, our City Council decided to turn its back and close its mind. This is a sad day for New York.
No one should listen to anything that Thompson has to say on this matter. Or Weiner, De Blasio or anyone who works in albany where they've never heard of term limits. They are all too self-interested to be believed.
Anyone who claims that democracy - let alone the representative democracy that has served us well for a few centuries - has failed us is just using scare tactics to make people believe that the sky is falling. Its not, and nothing has changed except that those who oppose their incumbants will get to vote them out and those who support their incumbents will get to vote for them again. All that has changed is that voters have to make one more choice where they previously had a law to make it for them, for better or worse. So to Thompson, Weiner and all the chicken little's out there, shut up and go vote in 09.
Republican or not, James Oddo is the f'n bomb.
Gregory56 - You're wrong about that. They all would lead and do what's best for the city. None of them would pull the nonsense Bloomberg does. I'm embarrassed for the city after what happened today.
Up next: Campaign spending cap for NYC mayoral races!
sad state we are in. to have the same people vote on an issue they would and did personally gain from.
thats like me telling my boss i dont want a raise. imagine that.hah
they should all go to hell. the sooner the better. bloomie stuffs.
How many City Council members would have voted for this if it did not directly benefit themselves? 23 of the 35 council members who are at the end of their second term voted for the bill. Only 6 out of the 16 first term council members voted yes. So few voted for it because it will not benefit them, the word on the street is that first term council members will not be allowed to run for three terms. This is self-dealing and it is illegal, hopefully Bloomberg has not bought the courts too.
#32
The city council is supposed to represent the 'people' so 'you' did vote. If you have an issue with the way they voted, take it up with your city council official...
Jaquemehoff #11...It is really sick to wish harm to Bloomberg's kid...that just shows that you have no respect for human life. You can hate Bloomberg till the cows come home, but leave his kid out of it...she didn't do anything wrong except be born into privledge and wealth...maybe you are jealous of everything she has been given and will continue to get...just a thought...
If you don't want him as mayor....DON'T VOTE FOR HIM....DUH!!!!!!!!!!
here's another one,
I hope he get's caught up in that Bermuda Triangle storm that just sidelined another billionaire.
now who's sick????? iz dat bettr? am I jealous
ummmmm. durrrrrrrrrrrr. that ole jealous excuse is played out. his life is not worth more than mine.
willllllburrrrrrr.
I am left wondering what ever happened to his honor's run at a national job. There was much talk about Bloomberg's next step not so long ago, when Rudy was stumping in Iowa.
Methinks he looked at his options and decided it was better to change the rules in NY than to seek another job.
I am left wondering what ever happened to his honor's run at a national job. There was much talk about Bloomberg's next step not so long ago, when Rudy was stumping in Iowa.
Methinks he looked at his options and decided it was better to change the rules in NY than to seek another job.
donpaulo, all that talk was rumor. He said he wasn't interested. He said he likes being mayor of NYC. Hey, at least he only gets paid $1 a year.
he knew he won't be liked,
remember how the FDIC didn't like his "girlfriend" for the job.
he's a bully through and through.