A Moot Point: Final Thoughts on the 2008 Election Symposium

Robert Magee, Staff Writer, RMagee@albanylaw.edu

     Today, Albany Law School was host to the Election 2008 Symposium. It was the product of collaboration between no fewer than 11 of Albany Law School’s politically oriented student groups, from the OUTLaws to the ALS Republicans, brought together by the Albany Government Law Review’s own Ali Chaudry.  The symposium’s presence, ensconced in the third floor of a law school situated in the capital of state in which participation in presidential politics has been a futile act for as long as most of us can remember was a poetic exercise in democratic innovation.

     The premise of the symposium was that local politicos would stand in for the McCain and Obama campaigns to talk with the local polity about The Issues as a means of facilitating a discussion about who to vote for next Tuesday or (more likely) the fleshing out of our existing decision. 

     The opportunity to do so is a rare one in a state like New York which has been spared (or denied) down and dirty presidential politicking.  Those few occasions in which the national campaigns appear in the state occur in sterile and predictable settings.1  Even this most momentous, long, tumultuous presidential election has pitched and heaved just beyond New York’s boarders in Pennsylvania2 or, during the primaries, New Hampshire.3

      New York’s persona non grata status is conferred upon it by the Electoral College.  The college itself is the product of compromise.  As a political invention, it is the product of the Constitutional Convention’s foundational controversy over whether population or mere statehood should determine representative power in the national government.4  As a compromise to reality it was an alternative to the “extreme inconveniency [and] the considerable expense, of drawing together men from all the States for the single purpose of electing the Chief Magistrate.”5  To further confuse its purpose, the Electoral College was originally proposed on June 1, 1787 by James Wilson of Pennsylvania as a plan to divide states into districts which would appoint an elector to vote for the President as a means of cutting out state participation in presidential elections altogether.6 Continue reading “A Moot Point: Final Thoughts on the 2008 Election Symposium”

Faso and Brooks Stand in for McCain and Obama

  Robert Magee, Staff Writer, RMagee@albanylaw.edu

     The Election 2008 Symposium was rounded off by a panel consisting Tracey Brooks, representing the Obama Campaign, and John Faso, representing the McCain Campaign.  They weighed in on energy and economic issues on a panel hosted by Alan Chartock

     Both Brooks and Faso bear impressive resumes in New York politics within their respective parties.  Ms. Brooks surrogacy for Barack Obama was illustrative of election issues passed as she was once the regional director for Senator Clinton and worked heavily for Clinton during Clinton’s campaign. Faso was the Republican challenger to the ill-fated Eliot Spitzer.  Chartock himself is something of a giant in New York politics as president and CEO of WAMC/Northeast Public Radio. 

     As a nation The Issues for this election have been presented, debated, vetted, presented again, killed and then resurrected over and over.  With any idea, there is always the possibility that something new will be said, but the length of the 2008 Presidential Election and the desperate pitch it has meticulously cultivated since last winter faced Faso and Brooks with an uphill battle if they were planning on doing so tonight. Continue reading “Faso and Brooks Stand in for McCain and Obama”