Surprised? I didn’t think so – after all, Scott Brown has raised epic amounts of money from Goldman Sachs and other denizens of Wall Street.
You might be a bit more surprised to hear that the really, really rich guy in question is New York City’s mayor, Michael Bloomberg, who announced yesterday that he is backing Brown. Bloomberg, a billionaire and no. 12 on Forbes’ “Richest People in America” list, has a long history as a political maverick, having belonged at one time or another to both major political parties and now self-styled as an independent. His endorsements over the years have been weirdly eclectic, ranging from Alan Khazei in 2009 to Meg Whitman (the eBay millionaire who ran for CA-Gov) in 2010.
His explanation for endorsing Brown, however, rings hollow. According to Bloomberg’s spokesperson,
The “biggest reason” the mayor decided to support Brown was the senator’s opposition to the National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act, which would allow gun owners to carry concealed weapons across state lines.
I mean, that’s fine – the “Reciprocity Act” is horrendous legislation, and good for Brown for opposing it. But just a few days ago Brown spoke out against reviving the federal assault weapons ban, a position that frankly makes no sense for someone who supported a similar ban at the state level. Bloomberg favors a federal assault weapons ban, and in the wake of the Aurora shooting insisted that the presidential candidates “stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it … because this is obviously a problem across the country.” He also published an op-ed proposing a strategy for moving stricter gun control measures through Congress.
And yet he’s backing Brown, who opposes pretty much any additional congressional action on guns (recall that after Congresswoman Giffords was shot, Brown said he was “not in favor of doing any additional federal regulations with regard to any type of weapons or federal gun changes”), simply because Brown is against a truly extreme, profoundly anti-states’-rights measure that obviously Elizabeth Warren would also oppose?
I don’t buy it. I think it’s pretty clear what’s going on here: IMHO, Bloomberg cares even more about Wall Street than he does about guns, and right now Wall Street hates and fears nobody more than they hate and fear Elizabeth Warren. Bloomberg may have left his day-to-day work in the financial sector for City Hall, but he hasn’t forgotten who made him the 12th-richest person in the country.
To paraphrase, you can take the banker out of Wall Street, but apparently you can’t take Wall Street out of the banker.
UPDATE: Mayor Bloomberg has explained that he is backing Brown even though Brown is “not good on guns generally.” So that would seem to remove pretty much any doubt about what’s really going on, though of course Bloomberg won’t admit it publicly.
whosmindingdemint says
from Bloomberg to Wall Street (a mere few blocks) I am concerned about the potential voter fraud here in the Commonwealth that could result if the armani suits decide to dress up as dead people, or worse, poor people and cast an illicit vote or to for our Senator Dreamy McHandsome. What then?
danfromwaltham says
Impressive endorsements by Brown. Former Mayor Ray Flynn, former Worcester Mayor Konnie Luke’s (both Democrats), America’s Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and now Bloomberg. Shows just how independent Brown really is.
Not too long ago, Obama and Bloomberg had breakfast together. Me thinks Obama wants his endorsement, no?
Now, if Menino endorses Brown, or nobody, that will be the nail in the coffin for Warren, we all agree, right? Of course, she can fly in Matt Damon, Barbara Streisand, and Jon Bon Jovi.
stomv says
HR's Kevin says
I am sure that you are not especially influenced by endorsements by outsiders. Why do you think anyone else will be.
whosmindingdemint says
Though this may not carry all the weight that endorsements from the former mayor of Worcester, former mayor of Boston, former mayor of NYC and Wall Street’s favorite mayor, it is an endorsement for financial prudence and consumer protection. We can all agree on that, right? But I suppose a Cosmo endorsement can go a long way…
mski011 says
Mike Bloomberg has a commendable position on gun control and other issues. It is not a surprise he is too cuddly with Wall Street, but what is disconcerting about his endorsement of Brown is how much it betrays hsi other positions.
His claim of Brown’s support for Gun Control is garbage. Indeed, both the Boston Globe and the Springfield Republican called Bloomberg out for this hypocrisy. Shamefully, the New York Times missed this critical detail in the story.
However, other causes are hurt, too. Bloomberg, as much as anybody, fought hard for marriage equality in New York. Indeed, he looked forward to the wedding of a close aide of his after the law passed. Bloomberg continues the fight in opposing DOMA. However, Brown, whose position is difficult, but not impossible to parse, is more than content to leave married gays and lesbians up a creek without a paddle where the federal government is concern.
Maybe Bloomberg missed the nuance in his less-than-thought-out veil he dropped over his Wall Street-centric reasons for the endorsement. It can be hard to see, sometimes. Brown seemed to fall on the side of Tom Menino where Chick-Fill-A is concerned, saying Massachusetts has laws prohibiting the kind of discrimination the company’s CEO espouses. Of course Chick-Fill-A would have to adhere to the state’s anti-discrimination laws. That is not the concern. It is the efforts its CEO undertakes to undermine the rights of other Americans.
Indeed, Brown has shown no interest in passing ENDA, which would protect all Americans from bigotry and not just in Massachusetts. If he wanted to stand up for something, that would be it, not an empty proclamation that Chick-Fill-A needs to follow the law. Mumbles Menino may be a lot of things, but I think he can see the difference there and would be no less unimpressed.
whosmindingdemint says
“This guy has saved a lot of lives in New York City, ’cause if that law had been passed, it just would have been chaos,” Bloomberg said.
“He’s not good on other things that I would like. He’s not good on guns generally, but this was something that was really critical, saving a lot of lives, and that’s what I think you should give support to, people that do the right thing.”
Apparently, being real good on Wall Street is the “right thing.”