In this final issue before the Nov. 6 election, it is incumbent upon me to talk about the upcoming vote for our state representatives and its ramifications. Specifically, I am concerned about the outcome for the 53rd senate district in the race between Democrat Rachel May and Republican Janet Burman, and the feeling I get that neither one of them understands the specific issues we face in Madison County.
Let me preface this by reminding our readers that the 53rd senate district is so outrageously ridiculous in its gerrymandering as to be offensive. It covers all of Madison County, part of Oneida County and the city of Syracuse. It looks like a crab claw, in that there is a huge omission from logic in avoiding Fayetteville, Manlius and DeWitt in the district boundaries, instead going around them. The district is a microcosm of the state of New York, in that the more rural areas make up the majority of land mass, but one city takes up the majority of voters.
That being said, both candidates, Burman and May, live and work in the city of Syracuse, and their political viewpoints, from what I have heard and read by them, are either city-centric or state centric. They both talk a lot about statewide issues such as healthcare, the economy, taxes and regulations, from an Albany perspective, as they should, because the senate deals with such issues. They also discuss inner-city poverty, crime, schooling, traffic, etc., again, as they should. But neither one of them has spent more than a modicum of time campaigning in Madison County; talking about Madison County issues, specifically farming and agriculture; or considering issues from Madison County perspectives, meaning the way suburban and rural residents experience and think about economic growth, taxes and regulations, school funding fairness or gun rights.
During the Oct. 18 candidate forum in Cazenovia, when the issue of Madison County receiving — and continuing to receive — its fair share of revenues from the Native American casinos came up, it was clear to me that neither candidate had any idea about the issue or its importance to every town in the county who receives that funding and uses it to cut costs and lower taxes. In fact, May even pronounced that she had no idea what the issue was about, while Burman skirted the issue by just saying she agreed with Assembly candidate John Salka (a member of the county board of supervisors) who gave a detailed answer to the question because he knows what he is talking about.
This is a major issue for the majority of the 53rd senate district, and the fact that neither candidate had any knowledge or opinion about it was concerning in a candidate seeking public office.
Whoever wins this election better make sure they represent all of their constituents, and not just those who live in the city of Syracuse; and the new senator better also be sure to understand they are beholden to the people of the 53rd district — not to the politicians in Albany (or Washington, D.C.) or the power brokers in New York City. I urge our readers to make sure they remind our new senator of this constantly.
One more thing: I would like to thank current Senator David Valesky for the 14 years he has served our district. He always understood the district as a whole and worked hard to improve the lives of all of his constituents.
Interestingly, while Valesky lost the Democratic primary to Rachel May, he is still listed on the Independence and Women’s Equality party lines on the Nov. 6 ballot. During the Lincklaen statue dedication ceremony on Oct. 20, I heard people tell the senator they still planned to vote for him, to which he replied that although he did not encourage such votes, he would not object to it either.
Valesky lost his major party nomination because he was pragmatic and could work across the aisle, something the hard-liners who voted for May disliked. Wouldn’t it be interesting if this virtue saw him reelected on a minor party line? To echo Valesky, this is not something I would object to.
