Whither Rudy?
New York’s own Florida.

Mr. George is an editorial writer for the New York Post.
September 28, 2001 8:55 a.m.

emember when the Florida election was the Story of the Century?

That was before September 11, 2001. Seventeen days later, the aftershocks continue.

All now ask, "Whither Rudy?"

And, "Whither Rudy's legacy?"

Those are the questions New Yorkers want answered. But no one really knows what the final result will be.

A sort of answer was presented after Tuesday's disaster-delayed primary election. On the other hand, for some, the results themselves qualify as a disaster.

With the two most liberal candidates, Public Advocate Mark Green and Bronx Borough President Fernando "Freddy" Ferrer, making the runoff election, Democratic voters have selected, respectively, Rudy Giuliani's longest-lasting political foe and the candidate who most explicitly ran against the Giuliani years.

Green is an attention-getting perennial candidate who has in the past run for Congress, governor and Senate. In '93, he won the public advocate race. Through the blessings of New York City's odd charter, the advocate position — basically a taxpayer-funded gadfly and "ombudsman" — is second in line to the mayor. Had Rudy actually run for and won the Senate race against Hillary Rodham Clinton, liberal Democrat Mark Green would become mayor.

That's one reason why the New York Post's editorial page has consistently called for either scrapping the advocate office — or at least changing the order of succession.

As it happened, the media-savvy Mark Green, creatively used the office to increase his own profile. A liberal Democrat technocrat, he is, it has been said, "Al Gore — without the personality."

Meanwhile, Groucho-Marx look-alike Freddy Ferrer ran on a platform vowing to bring together the "Two New Yorks." By this, he meant to portray himself as the champion of the "New York" that somehow missed out on the boom of the Giuliani years. The inference was obviously to the city's black and Latino populations. Ferrer never explained how the 1400 less murders (the difference between 1993 and 2000 murder rates) didn't disproportionately benefit those same minority groups.

Ferrer was clearly and unapologetically the "anti-Giuliani," demanding a stronger surveillance on the cops, endorsing the belief that racial profiling was a serious problem for the NYPD.

Something odd happened in the few weeks coming up to the September 11 primary. Al Sharpton, fresh out of the federal lock-up (he got 90 days for protesting/trespassing on Vieques) endorsed Ferrer. After trailing the pack for most of the summer, Ferrer moved up in the polls. The huge health-workers union came out for him. Days before the primary, Ferrer caught Green — inching a point or two ahead in some surveys.

Then, all hell broke loose.

The primary was canceled because of the 9-11 Attack.

Not only were the candidates not able to continue campaigning in the days following — out of obvious decorum — they were forbidden from doing so because of New York City's bizarre campaign-finance rules. The campaign-finance board said that because the rules said the primary season ended September 11, candidates couldn't spend extra money for the rescheduled election date.

Remarkably though, the people came out to vote on Tuesday. The turnout was the highest since 1989. Score one for democracy (if not for Democrats and their choices). Ferrer came out on top, edging Green by three points. The very next day, third-place finisher, the relatively conservative City Council Speaker Peter Vallone endorsed Ferrer

On the Republican side, millionaire Mike Bloomberg (who was a Democrat until about a year ago), beat the estimable Herman Badillo (a liberal Democrat in the 60s, who became a reformer relatively conservative Republican). While Badillo might be more ideologically consistent than Bloomberg, the fact was he had no chance against the billionaire willing to spend whatever was necessary to win. Given the challenges facing New York now (rebuilding the financial district and trying to convince businesses not to relocate permanently), Bloomberg might actually have a chance. But, the fact is, he's a newbie. Thus New Yorkers are faced with a choice between one of two liberal Democrat hacks and a liberal Republican-come-lately.

Which brings us back to, "Whither Rudy?" Wednesday, the mayor declared that, if the three remaining candidates all agreed, he would serve an additional three months, to provide as seamless a transition as possible in what remains a defacto state of emergency for the city. Giuliani hinted that if there wasn't unanimity amongst the candidates, he would drop the plan and instead try to get the city's term limits law overturned.

As it happens, Bloomberg and Green agreed on Thursday to the extended transition period. Ferrer has refused. And so, the stage is set. Rudy may have a real say on what his complete legacy will be.

Large black-on-white posters saying, "RUDY GIULIANI FOR MAYOR" already began appearing a week or so ago (paid for by "GRATEFUL CITIZENS OF NEW YORK").

Who knows where it all ends? Conservatives have to be of two minds on the thought of a Giuliani third term (as opposed to an extension). It goes without saying that Giuliani — even before September 11 — was one of the greatest mayors New York has ever had. Following Attack Day, his calm demeanor and straightforward leadership put him into the realm of the politically untouchable. In temperament, experience, and ideology, he is head-and-shoulders above any of his wannabe successors. But all that aside, conservatives have to be mindful of precedent.

In the context of New York City and state law, the governor and the legislature have the power to fiddle with city elections in all manner of ways. Citing extreme circumstances, Governor George Pataki (with the legislature's approval) could have suspended the primary and elections for three, six, or twelve months as late as a week ago. But he chose not to (there is some speculation that Pataki — up for reelection in 2002 — didn't want to offend Latino Democrats).

The hot rumor is that Giuliani may be able to get himself on the Conservative Party line, and then win office as an independent. It is not impossible for the state politicians to pass a law that throws out city term limits. However, with the primary now having transpired, this would be a case of "changing the rules in the middle of the game."

Sound familiar, fans of Florida 2000?

New York City voters have twice endorsed term limits (at one time, most national conservatives were pro-term limits). Even today, polls show voters not wanting term limits over-ridden — even though those same voters would vote for Giuliani were he on the ballot. On top of that, anybody want to guess what Freddy Ferrer and Al Sharpton would say if the rules got changed just when it looked like the city might be about to elect the first Puerto Rican to City Hall? One might expect lawsuits aplenty as well, of course.

New York City may be getting ready to sail into dangerous waters that have nothing to do with another terrorist attack.