No Third Term For Mr. Burns

No Third Term For Mr. Burns

An Equal Shot
By Michael Maiello

Who's running against New York City's Mayor Michael Bloomberg?

Near Union Square in New York City, attached to the "post no bills" barricade in front of what used to be the Virgin Megastore but will soon become a Nordstrom's Rack are four hand-made posters featuring C. Montgomery Burns, the rich old grinch from The Simpsons. "No Third Term For Burns," it says. This is pretty much the extent of the opposition to Mayor Mike Bloomberg's bid for a third term running City Hall.

Bill Thompson, the guy running against Bloomberg, is rarely mentioned by anyone seeking to send Bloomberg packing back to billionaire land. This race is all about Bloomberg vs. himself. Bloomberg is, according to us, the eighth-richest man in America with a net worth of $17.5 billion. He's spent $36 million on the campaign so far and will probably spend more than $70 million before it's over.

His ads are even appearing after videos of people falling off their bikes while doing stunts and throwing bowling balls at cars on the blog Failblog.org. In those spots he attacks the record of his opponent, no doubt doing more for Thompson's notoriety than Thompson has done on his own since being selected as the Democratic nominee in September.

Bloomberg's pitches have also been all over the local television stations. My wife and I get separate campaign mailers from him at least twice a week and sometimes three times even though neither of us has ever voted for him, signed a petition for him or attended one of the fabled Bloomberg Media holiday parties (Mike, if you're going to mail us something, how about an invite?).

Bloomberg is a passable mayor and has drawn praise from pretty diverse sources like Al Gore and Rudy Giuliani. His plans, when he has them, are always big and he's not afraid to fail or to look silly. I'm pretty happy with the trans-fats ban, for example, but I opposed his plan for congestion traffic pricing because I'm pretty sure that a citywide network of surveillance cameras that will monitor who drove to what neighborhoods and when will wind up being abused in some way by the New York Police Department. When Bloomberg tried to bring the Olympics to New York, he was met by objections from the vast majority of New Yorkers. Sometimes he gets defeated, like on the Olympics and congestion pricing, but it doesn't seem to sap much of his power.

The way the law was written while he was in office, Bloomberg shouldn't even be running for a third term. We had, until Bloomberg got the law changed last year, term limits on the mayor's office. But Bloomberg argued that the financial crisis was an exceptional event and that the city needed consistent leadership to get back on its feet. Ironically, this is how Giuliani tried to extend his mayoralty after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. At least Bloomberg's standing is running for re-election.

Well, kind of. If Bloomberg had never mentioned Thompson by name, I might not know who he is. The best way for the average New York City dweller to learn about the opposition is to see a Bloomberg commercial and then look up the other guy. But at that point you've already been told that the other guy is incompetent so why bother?

The real threat to Bloomberg's re-election is apathy. The Democratic primary turnout was low even by the standards of local primaries. On one hand, this is great for Bloomberg because Democrats have no enthusiasm for their candidate, and that should keep opposition turnout low. But Bloomberg's constant mailing, advertising and spending suggests that the mayor fears that people are lukewarm about him as well and that his supporters could forget to show up for the general election the same way (I'm embarrassed to admit) that I forgot about the Democratic primary.

Whether or not Bloomberg gets his third term in what will likely be a low-turnout election all depends on whether or not $70 million is enough to spend reminding the right New Yorkers to show up on the right day. The advertising is the spending we see, but what's really driving the Bloomberg campaign is the spending we don't see: His campaign is buying up demographic data (all campaigns that can afford to, do this, of course) and he's targeting potential supporters by tells as catch-all as zip code and as granular as magazine subscriptions and employment histories.

There's also the theory that what Bloomberg is really fighting are people's attitudes about him and term limits. He could lose if enough New Yorkers think that he's being pushy. I tend not to get worked up about term limits. I think elections can serve that function, and if a majority of people want to be represented by the same guy for generations, I can accept that.

But Bloomberg should have a little more faith in the system--he's not the only man on Earth who can administer New York City's recovery and his "change the law because you need me" argument has to force a voter to question both Bloomberg's ethics and his self regard. I doubt it will cost him the New York mayor's race though. A majority of New Yorkers supported the term limits law as it was written. But they also understand that the mayor really isn't that powerful, and they don't know who the other guy is anyway.

But if Bloomberg has any national political ambitions, this will haunt him. It's one thing to sneak another term as mayor, but nobody who has done that can ever be trusted with the presidency.

Ah well, at least we'll get more bike and running paths.