Today, the Working Families Party has begun a push to use the video in order to call for clean elections.

Strasburg's candor is unusual. People like him usually learn to stay in the shadows. But we owe him our thanks. In the words of Bob Dylan, "money doesn't talk, it swears." And Strasburg is just telling it like it is.

There's a better way. It's called Voter-Owned Elections, with public financing. In this system, eligible candidates raise small contributions from individuals, and then receive public matching funds. Big money would not vanish, but it would mean less.

And we'll save taxpayers a lot of money when politicians no longer dole out sweetheart subsidies and tax loopholes to their corporate donors. 

(Is it a coincidence that Verizon spent $1.2 million in political donations and then got $614 million in government subsidies? We think not.) 

Fortunately, Governor Cuomo has publicly endorsed the idea of Voter Owned Elections with public financing. But it's up to us to give the proposal momentum and make sure the decision-makers in Albany know we're serious.

Please help us recruit 50,000 supporters to push for a Voter Owned Elections law this year. Our state can't afford to wait another day.

Cuomo has said he is supportive of publicly financed elections as part of a larger ethics push. The Daily News reported today that Shelly Silver has signed on to an ethics bill, however no mention was made of a clean elections law.

In the Rochester mayoral race, Democrat Tom Richards, who was favored to win the race all along, squeaked to victory with just 6 percentage points to spare, over the WFP's Bill Johnson.

Coming in with 8 percent of the vote--enough to have put Johson over the top--was the Green Party candidate, Alex White.

(Richards, the Democrat, got 11,952 votes, or 48.99 percent. Johnson, the WFP candidate, got 10,307 votes, good for 42.25 percent. And Alex White, the Green, got 2,133 votes, or 8.74 percent).

"Had they been with us, that would have been great," WFP Executive Director Dan Cantor told me.

TJ Helmstetter, a spokesman for the WFP, was more forceful in his chest-thumping.

"Polling had Richards up by nearly 30 points at the start of race, so closing it to 6 is testament to the WFP's focus on doing the unglamorous but essential work of talking to voters about issues," Helmstetter emailed me. "It helped balance the spending advantages that the Democrats had and countered Richards narrative of 'inevitability.'"

Helmstetter went on to say, "We understand the frustration in African-American and labor circles that the Green Party chose to endorse another candidate. We support the freedom of parties to endorse whomever they choose, but from our point a view, a unified WFP-Green-Independence ticket would not only have produced a major upset, but also would have sent a clear message to Democrats that pro-corporate candidates are a liability."

In the second special election, the Democrats and WFP backed the same candidate, Sarah Anker. The Green Party didn't field anyone, and Anker won by about 220 votes, with 356 votes coming from the WFP line.

"In a close election like this one, we've once again demonstrated the power of the Working Families Party endorsement," said Suffolk County WFP co-chair Michele Lynch.

Conversely, it underscores how problematic an election can be when the left-leaning Green Party fields their own candidate, who, most likely, siphons votes away from the WFP candidate.

Politically, the WFP and Green Party agree on many of the same issues--taxing the rich, expanding entitlement programs, protecting labor rights--but they differ in important, strategic ways.

The WFP is a labor-backed outfit dedicated to bringing the Democratic Party back to their progressive roots. The Green Party has a philosophy of mounting their own candidates, in an effort to form a viable third party.

One WFP source said the Green Party is "on the outside, throwing stones. We have a seat at the table."

After the 2010 governor's race, which determines permanent ballot positions for political parties in New York, the WFP moved up from Row E to Row D (after they grudgingly endorsed Cuomo). But the Green Party, who went with the surprisingly compelling Howie Hawkins, got more than the 50,000 votes needed to establish a permeant ballot line, landing them on Row F.

So, the WFP moved up, and so did one of their main rivals. And it shows.

One political operative who asked not to be named, said that for the WFP, "It's like one step up and two steps behind."

The president and CEO of the company that publishes City Hall News, Tom Allon, told me Dovere "joins a long line of distinguished journalists who have started their careers at Manhattan Media" including Jim Rutenberg, Andrew Jacobs and James McKinley.

Dovere was, for many, the face of that publication, writing (at length!) about, for example, the Working Families Party and previewing the would-be Senate candidacy of Steve Israel.

But Allon said his outlet is already planning to "expand our coverage of city and state politics" with new initiatives in the coming weeks and months.

Update: Dovere emails his contacts, saying, "We’ve broken news, gained an increasingly large following, and won our fair share of awards. And though I know I’ve personally caused quite a bit of trouble for a number of the people getting this email, I’ve enjoyed working with all of you."

Now the Republicans want to control the news. In fact, House Republicans announced a vote for TOMORROW to cut all federal funding for National Public Radio.

[skip]

The GOP’s latest misguided priority would defund NPR while still protecting taxpayer funding for Big Oil, despite record profits and record gas prices.

We can’t let this outrage go unchallenged. Republicans and their right-wing media backers are gearing up for this fight, and they’re hoping grassroots Democrats like you will stay on the sidelines.

They know NPR plays a vital role in providing quality news programming -- from rural radio stations to in-depth coverage of foreign affairs. If the Republicans had their way, we’d only be left with the likes of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin to dominate the airwaves.

In New York, the Working Families Party is also trying to raise money off gather signatures from noting they're under attack from the media, thanks to Rupert Murdoch and the New York Post. [corrected]

Cuomo adviser Phil Singer sent out a statement this afternoon saying that the campaign would not submit his name for the WFP convention this weekend on account of "several open issues that need to be considered," adding that the campaign would "revisit" the issue in September. Without Cuomo on the WFP line, the party would face big trouble, as it would need 50,000 votes in the governor's race to keep its ballot line going forward (a heavy lift for an unknown candidate).

Here's the full statement from Singer:

"The Working Families Party Convention is this weekend and we will not be submitting Andrew Cuomo's name for the nomination. There are several open issues that need to be considered, including but not limited to an ongoing Federal investigation as well as policy and procedural issues.  We will revisit the question in September at which time there will be more information available."

The union-dominated WFP will presumably find a new candidate to carry its flag, though WFP spokesman Dan Levitan sent out a statement suggesting the party would not close the door on Cuomo:

"Andrew Cuomo has informed us that he will not be submitting his name for nomination at our convention.  We expect the party's State Committee will be nominating the best available candidate to stand up for working men and women and the party that represents them.  If the occasion arises, we will of course revisit this decision."

This is good news for the big business and real estate worlds, which generally are opposed to the WFP. Cuomo has taken a rather business-friendly tone lately in his policy plans, and the other party endorsement he took aside from the Democrats is the line of the Independence Party, which has been working with the real estate industry and other business groups.

The report offers neither a condemnation nor exoneration of the WFP's past. Most notably, Kaye declined to take a retrospective look at the labor-backed party's actions in the 2009 city campaigns with subsidiary Data Field Services. The report deferred to an ongoing investigation by the U.S. attorney, leaving questions of impropriety unsettled.

"We recognized the need to avoid any interference, or even the appearance that our work might interfere," the report says. "As a result, this Report makes no findings relating to the past conduct of WFP, DFS or their personnel. Instead, this Report formulates recommendations that WFP and DFS might consider on a going forward basis."

The report and the federal investigation came after the WFP took heat for a structure it set up in last fall's campaigns in which some candidates the party endorsed paid a company called Data Field Services for campaign services such as organizing. The structure attracted allegations that Data Field Services was under-charging, effectively giving off-the-books donations to campaigns (WFP has denied this, and a lawsuit over the campaign of Councilwoman Debi Rose on this issue yielded a settlement in which Ms. Rose's campaign had to pay an extra $8,525 to Data Field Services--not a giant sum).

Ms. Kaye's report doesn't comment on this, but in recommending changes to the relationship between WFP and Data Field Services, it suggests that the general concept of the relationship, assuming Data Field Services charges market rates, is a proper one.

The recommendations include suggestions that DFS not work for campaigns until it has a formal contract, that it settle on hourly rates for services provided to campaigns and receive an outside opinion to advise that the rates are at market value.

The WFP endorsed the recommendations.

The full report is here.

So New Yorkers for Growth--a pro-business P.A.C.--is out with an early spot attacking the attorney general for not investigating the Working Families Party (via Daily Politics).

As with his investigation of Mr. Paterson, Mr. Cuomo seems content to let Judith Kaye handle it. The W.F.P. hired Ms. Kaye in November to review its accounting.

The W.F.P. responded by requesting that the attorney general investigate John Faso--who as Azi points out, was one of the founders of New York for Growth--for his role as an advisor in the defunct Aqueduct deal.

In those days, New York’s Independence Party was a quirky, shoestring operation—and in many ways it still is. But now, for the first time, it’s trying to professionalize and show that it stands for something more than simply being a third-party alternative at a time when the country is sharply split.

Not surprisingly, the party’s new push is tailored perfectly to its source of newfound cash. Business groups are pouring money in, partly as a reaction to the rapid rise in influence of the pro-labor Working Families Party. Mayor Michael Bloomberg ran part of his enormously expensive reelection campaign through the party, and the Real Estate Board of New York has tentatively embraced the organization to run candidates that will be friendly to business interests.

And next month, for the first time ever, Mr. MacKay plans to hire staff: a full-time fund-raiser and an executive assistant. The highlight of Mr. MacKay’s new standing will come in early July, when he hopes to conduct a few private screenings of a 48-minute documentary showing what went right, but mostly what went wrong, with the independent presidential campaign of Ross Perot. The goal, Mr. MacKay said, is to show the film to a number of influential people (billionaires, celebrities, etc.) in the country and convince one of them to run for president in 2012.

It’s a serious undertaking for a party that has seemed, at times, less than serious.

“There’s no one in the Independence Party who’s normal,” said Frank Morano, a party state committee member from Staten Island. “Everybody is a bit eccentric, a bit odd, a bit colorful—and not in a negative way,” he said. “Mostly in a very entertaining and positive way.”

Party leadership is split into two factions, the result of a legal battle over who had the authority to allow nonmembers to run on the party’s line—arguably the most powerful tool they can offer. On one side are Mr. MacKay and his state committee, on the other side is the city organization.

The best known New York City party member is probably Lenora Fulani, who has run for president and who once made a brief alliance with conservative Pat Buchanan.

Among Ms. Fulani’s allies are Fred Newman, the founder of what is called “social therapy.” Mr. Newman is 75 and in a wheelchair, and during an interview with NY1 in 2005, he said he did not object to therapists having sexual relationships with their patients.

Mr. MacKay’s allies are only slightly less colorful. Mr. Morano, for instance, takes to writing public declarations every now and then, imploring well-known citizens to run for office—Lindsay Lohan, for example.

Another, Bob Kumar, once faked his own kidnapping (something he shares in common with Mr. Morano’s employer, radio host Curtis Sliwa).
The Independence Party has seen riches before. After Mr. Perot, billionaire Tom Golisano, who founded PAYCHEX and co-owns the Buffalo Sabres NHL team, used the party to run for governor three times.

In all three of his mayoral campaigns, Mr. Bloomberg ran on the Republican and Independence Party lines. With financing from Mr. Bloomberg, the city party printed fliers, staged rallies and manned phone banks. Mr. Bloomberg, who is not registered in any party, but has been held up as a model by the Independence Party, has not been shy about opening his wallet. He gave $1.2 million to the state party last year and $400,000 to the city organization, the party said.

(Newfound riches, of course, can come with questions. The Manhattan district attorney has begun looking into a $750,000 payment made to a firm run by consultant John Haggerty from an Independence Party account that received a $1.2 million donation from Mr. Bloomberg. Mr. Bloomberg has been unusually mum on the topic.)

“Doing the job is what [being] independent is all about,” Bloomberg said at an Independence Party rally. “It is about pragmatic problem solving, not partisan warfare.”

In addition to Mr. Bloomberg’s support, the Real Estate Board of New York has tentatively embraced the party as a way to counter the influence of the labor-backed Working Families Party, which demonstrated enormous influence in the 2009 elections.

The new plan, according to numerous executives familiar with discussions, is to dump money into a third party that can cross-endorse a set of candidates who espouse a few general beliefs that have a Reagan-esque ring to them: low taxes, fiscal restraint and limits on government regulation on issues such as rent regulation.

The backers of the effort, which is not fully formed and is still under discussion among REBNY members, see 2010 as a key year, and REBNY president Steven Spinola has said he hopes to raise $5 million.

There have been numerous meetings of the inner circle of REBNY membership about the longer-term strategy, and leaders are searching for both full-time staffers for the effort and part-time consultants. (Former Bloomberg campaign manager Bradley Tusk, for one, has interviewed as a potential consultant and made a presentation to members.) [Clarified]

Mr. MacKay bristles at the notion that his party is synonymous with any one particular industry in the business community, which is what his counterpart in the labor-backed Working Families Party, Dan Cantor, is saying. Mr. Cantor even has a nickname for Mr. MacKay’s organization: “The Landlord Party.”
Mr. MacKay doesn’t appreciate it.

“When he talks about landlords, he’s probably referring to our relationship with business groups,” Mr. MacKay said. “There are business groups all over the state that are coming to us,” he said. “The LIA is a group that we’re working with and talking with, constantly. Certainly they don’t have anything to do with landlords,” he said, referring to the Long Island Association, a business membership organization.

“We’re the party of business,” continued Mr. MacKay. “We’re proud to say we’re the party of small business. Half the jobs in New York State are created by small business, and we would love to be known as the party of small business,” he said.

But not the party of big business?

“The party of business. ‘Business’ is not a dirty word in our book. But small business are what we’re attracting,” he said.

“We’re getting a dialogue together with businesses, and we’re attracting more voters who are concerned with business and economic issues, and fiscal responsibility,” said Mr. MacKay. “And they’re looking at both major parties and not seeing that, but it’s a dialogue.”

“The Independence Party is a counterbalance to the Working Families Party,” said a real estate executive familiar with the plans. “They don’t care about social issues, they care about business issues.”

The rise of the WFP in last year’s city election has only strengthened the resolve of business groups looking for an alternative. (Mr. Bloomberg, for his part, has in the past butted heads with WFP members.)

On June 5, the party’s executive committee will hold its convention in Albany to select their nominees for statewide office. In years past, they’ve often endorsed candidates from other parties; now that they have more support, there’s an even greater chance they will be able to put up their own.

Currently, the Independence Party stands in good position to be the strongest third-party organization in New York, something they’ve never before had a shot at.

“In Frank’s case, he sees this as an opportunity to take this to that level,” said Mr. Morano. “To be more credible, not a third party, but a third major party. His desire to partner with Bloomberg, Golisano, REBNY, RSA [Rent Stabilization Association] is motivated not by anything untoward, but to see party building, to the extent that the Independence Party can be a party that competes with Republicans and Democrats.”
apaybarah@observer.com, ebrown@observer.com

Schulman ran for City Council in Forest Hills, but lost to former City Council member Karen Koslowitz. Schulman is being represented by Jerry Goldfeder, a campaign finance expert at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan.

Goldfeder said his client received the subpoena this morning and is cooperating fully.

UPDATE: Also representing Schulman is Joel Cohen, a former federal prosecutor, who is also at Stroock.

"We welcome this inquiry," said Dan Cantor, the head of the Working Families Party, in a public statement. He said the probe will prove "[o]ur work has complied with both the spirit and letter of New York City’s Campaign Finance Law as well as all relevant state and federal election laws, tax and not-for-profit corporation laws."

I called the office of public advocate-elect Bill de Blasio, who receieved crucial help from the W.F.P. during the primary, to ask if he had gotten a subpoena too. A spokesperson confirmed that he had.

"Like many campaigns that purchased D.F.S.’s services, we have received requests for information from the U.S. Attorney’s office," said de Blasio spokeswoman Rebecca Katz. "We will be cooperating fully with their inquiry.”

It looks like de Blasio was the highest-level official to be subpoenaed. Comptroller-elect John Liu didn't use the W.F.P., and the organization was split over whether to back Bill Thompson for mayor. The W.F.P. did also bring more than half a dozen new City Council members to victory.

During the primary, de Blasio's opponents tried sinking his candidacy by raising questions about the W.F.P.'s practices.

In September, challenger Eric Gioia sent de Blasio a letter complaining about "the secrecy and obfuscation regarding your campaign's relationship with the WFP and its affiliated entities."

More recently, the party has come under scrutiny for allegedly floating city campaign rules on spending and reporting requirements.

The W.F.P.'s treasurer, Mike McGuire, abruptly resigned from his position in September when he and the party were unable to reconcile "the differing views" of his role. A lawyer for McGuire said he is not aware of his client being contacted by federal authorities.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's office declined to comment on the subpoenas.