The Big Apple Looks to Bypass Democracy

Politicians losing trust in the public?

Two Democratic politicians in the Empire State have introduced a bill to allow the New York City Council to remove a mayor from office with a three-quarters vote, undermining the will of the electorate. This move has all the markings of a politically motivated attempt to dump Mayor Eric Adams while ensuring future mayors walk a thin blue line and act accordingly. Why should a city council, with all but five of 51 seats held by Democrats, decide who the mayor is? Why should anybody besides the 8.5 million people living in the Big Apple have the power to decide who the mayor is?

New York Belongs to Whom?

Ever since federal prosecutors indicted Adams on corruption charges last September, he has faced calls to resign, but the Justice Department ordered prosecutors to drop the case in February. Still, requests for Adams to step down only grew louder. Many New York officeholders wanted Gov. Kathy Hochul to use her power under the state constitution to oust the mayor, yet she refused. Now, State Sen. Jabari Brisport and Assemblyman Harvey Epstein, the two Democrats who proposed the legislation, have cooked up a plan to exclude voter sovereignty to remove Adams.

“NYC is bearing the burdens of a mayor whose administration imploded after he lied and broke the law to take office,” said Brisport when announcing the bill on X. “It makes no sense that we have had to wait around for a governor from Buffalo to make a decision about our city.”

Whose city? What about the millions of people living in NYC who pay taxes and vote? The senator appears to have forgotten how democracy works. Like it or not, New Yorkers voted for Adams. Of course, that was before he was charged with five separate criminal counts, but without giving the electorate a chance to voice its opinion at the ballot box, how would anybody know if the majority of voters think the mayor should be replaced? Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, who has also run into some legal trouble for racking up nearly a million dollars in mortgage debt, would be the interim mayor until after a new one is elected. Maybe New Yorkers prefer an experienced mayor who allegedly committed wire fraud and accepted foreign bribes rather than a guy without mayoral experience who apparently has trouble paying his bills.

Elected but Not Representative

“I knock on wood that New York City is never in this position again, but we might be,” said Brisport, speaking to City & State New York, a media organization. “We have another corrupt person running for New York City (mayor) and who’s currently leading in the polls, and this is important for any time there is a situation where a mayor is acting egregiously, and there needs to be a consequence.”

The senator appears to suggest this bill could be used against Andrew Cuomo if he won the mayor’s office in November, provided he did something “egregious.” Brisport’s assertion here makes the legislation seem more like a control mechanism, something to keep out the riffraff and ensure only people who fit the progressive mold can run the Big Apple. Not to mention, suggesting he might use the hypothetical law to bounce Cuomo out if he won shows a massive distrust in the voters’ rights to elect a mayor. Though the former NY governor resigned under sexual assault allegations, if the electorate chooses him to be mayor, should voters have to worry about whether he will have to pass a progressive purity test to remain in office?

“Those people (council members) are duly elected and should have the power to make those determinations, and that person, the mayor, will have their due process protections, of course, but they should have the power to make that determination,” said Epstein, speaking to City & State.

Okay, but do council members really represent the will of New Yorkers?

Members of the New York City Council are elected through single-seat districts during odd-year elections when turnout is low. “This structure gives special interests like public-sector unions inordinate power to influence elections through their political activities and by getting out their members to vote,” explained John Ketcham in City Journal. “Neighborhood interests like anti-growth homeowners also have an upper hand in single-seat council districts.” In a nutshell, “Many of New York City’s councilmembers don’t reflect the views of their constituents.”

Even if the council were a better representation of the voters, a bill to decide a mayor’s fate without including the electorate that voted him into office seems undemocratic and manipulative.

“As if their records weren’t dangerous enough, Jabari Brisport and Harvey Epstein are smacking democracy in the face and making it abundantly clear that they do not care at all about the will of the voters,” said Kayla Mamelak Altus, Adams’ press secretary. “The nearly 8.5 million New Yorkers who call this city home are the only people who should ever be able to decide who their mayor is, and Jabari and Harvey should be ashamed for trying to usurp the will of the people.”

Americans’ trust in government is already scarce. It seems every six months a new poll is released announcing the public has lost even more faith in elected officials to do the right thing. But now it appears some politicians have lost trust in the public.