By Jim Geraghty
Monday, August 22, 2022
Ask the typical American outside of New
York City to lay out the differences between Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold
Nadler, and they’ll probably respond, “Who and who?” The two longtime New York
Democrats are competing against each other in a congressional primary on
Tuesday because of a court-mandated redistricting plan.
Even if the person you ask follows
politics, that person will probably be hard-pressed to list differences between
the two, other than that one’s a man and one’s a woman. Both are congressional
Democrats who were first elected in 1992. Both have chaired key committees
during their tenure; Maloney currently chairs the House Oversight Committee,
and Nadler chairs the House Judiciary Committee.
Ideologically, they’re also hard to
distinguish. The American
Conservative Union gives Nadler a lifetime rating of
2.58 out of 100 and Maloney a 3.67 out of 100. Their voting records are largely, but
not entirely, the same: “From
1993 through last year, CQ Roll Call editors have identified 388 House roll
calls as ‘key votes’ that helped define that year’s action. And on 353 of them,
Nadler and Maloney voted the same, while Maloney did not vote on five and
Nadler did not vote on three.” In other words, on the biggest and most
consequential votes, Nadler and Maloney voted the same 90 percent of the time.
Residents of this new Big Apple district
are represented by a progressive Democrat now, and they will be represented by
a progressive Democrat after November. The only real question is which progressive
Democrat that will be.
When you represent a district for three
decades, you get to know the other members of your delegation well,
particularly when their district is nearby. Nadler and Maloney appeared
together at tons of press conferences, ribbon-cuttings, and other events over
the years. They no doubt know each other well and
describe each other as friends.
And yet, this primary battle is about as
nasty as they come.
Allies of
Ms. Maloney whispered doubts about Mr. Nadler’s health. (His aides say his
health is good.) Mr. Nadler’s associates circulated old
news articles about Ms. Maloney’s obsession with
pandas, and suggested that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is officially neutral in
the race, really preferred him.
Nadler called
Maloney gullible:
Nadler
took the moment to attack Maloney on the issue, saying that if her position on
the 2015 deal had been successful, Iran would have developed “a nuclear bomb
with which to threaten Israel and the rest of the Middle East.”
The
congenial tone between Nadler and Maloney at last week’s NY1 debate grew
notably more cutting during the Emanu-El forum. Expounding on the difference of
their records, Nadler called Maloney “gullible enough to believe the
misrepresentations of the Bush administration” and voted in favor of the Iraq
War — a position that Maloney now says she regrets.
In a separate interview, Nadler also
called Maloney’s vote for the Patriot Act “cowardly.”
Maloney argued that
Nadler’s past support for
fellow Democrats accused of sexual misconduct demonstrates he’s just a
fair-weather defender of women’s rights: “Someone who claims to fight for
women’s rights but openly campaigns with a man accused of sexual assault is not
who voters should send back to Washington during an extremely fragile moment
for women’s rights.” She contended that, in the end, New York’s
women can’t count on Nadler and that he’s lazy: “In the interview, she said flatly that Mr. Nadler did not work as
hard as she did, particularly on local issues; accused him of taking credit for
a woman’s work and said residents of one of the nation’s wealthiest, most
liberal districts needed her — not him or Mr. Patel.” (Suraj Patel, who has
unsuccessfully challenged Maloney in Democratic primaries twice before, is
running a distant third in this race.)
Nadler shot back that when Maloney needed
to get something done, she came to him: “She’ll deny it, but I was instrumental
in getting the Second Avenue subway running,” he told New
York magazine. “Carolyn
came to me and asked me to get the funding, and I got it.”
And she suggested that if she loses the
primary, it will be because New York Democratic politics “old boys’
network” abandoned her
and stuck with Nadler:
“There is
an old boys’ network that sticks together and they do not let women in,”
Maloney told NY1 in an interview Tuesday on Manhattan’s Upper East Side. “I was
friends with a lot of males that I worked with on the West Side and now they
won’t even talk with me. They’re all with Jerry, just like glue.”
She has even speculated that if
elected, Nadler would
not serve a full term because of some undisclosed health issue. By Sunday, Maloney was contending that
Nadler is losing his marbles:
I think
that you should read the editorial in the NY Post today. They call him senile.
They cite his performance at the debate where he couldn’t even remember who he
impeached. He said he impeached Bush.
As New York magazine put
it, “Jerry Nadler
and Carolyn Maloney really hate each other.”
Why? Neither one deliberately set out to
end the other’s career in Congress; the redistricting plan that put them in the
same district was handed down by a court. Both of them chose to run in this new
district, instead of an adjacent one, because this is the district where they
live. It’s not like either one can contend that they’re being cheated out of an
illustrious future career in Congress; Maloney is 76 years old, Nadler is 75.
Is staying in Congress for a 31st and 32nd
year worth trying to destroy the reputation of someone you audaciously still
call a friend? Apparently, it is.
If you’re a conservative, this is all
hilarious. Two longtime allies with little to no ideological distinction are
turning on each other with ferocity and venom, turning their primary into a
demolition derby just out of a desire to stay in Congress for a few more years
— years that are extremely likely to be spent in the minority!
But, if you suspect that politics rots
your brain and corrodes your soul, this is rather vivid evidence that the
longer you stay in power, the more you prioritize staying there. In the end,
winning another term is all that matters to these two.
Imagine running against someone you call a
friend who’s been working alongside you for 30 years. You would think that it
would be a relief, not an irritation, to face a potential loss to a friend and
longtime ally who sees the world the same way you do. If you can’t win, better
that the district be represented by someone you trust, a figure you see as
right-minded and who has the right values. Instead, Maloney and Nadler are frothing
at the mouth, denouncing each other as lazy, entitled, gullible, cowardly,
senile, and dishonest.
I have no dog in this fight; I’m not a
progressive, I’m not a Democrat, and I don’t live in that congressional
district. But if I did have a vote, I would select Patel, simply because he’s
never claimed to be or pretended to be friends with either of his rivals.
Maloney and Nadler have demonstrated in recent months that they’re simply
terrible human beings who prioritize winning over the reputation of an alleged
friend and colleague. It would be fitting if both could be sent back into
private life.
No comments:
Post a Comment