TOWNS, TOBACCO TOGETHER AGAIN Rep. Ed Towns, long accused of doing Big Tobacco's bidding, is under fire again for allegedly trying to block state legislation requiring that cigarettes be fire-safe. Fire-safe cigarettes are less likely to cause fires if left unattended. But Big Tobacco doesn't want to sell these cigarettes, which burn less hot and put themselves out if they're not being smoked. The industry fears liability issues and lower sales. The tobacco companies have managed to block legislation mandating fire-safe cigarettes for years, despite a successful test-marketing of fire-safe Marlboro in 1987-an effort abandoned until "public pressure builds unduly," according to internal company documents.

Public pressure has indeed built. Cigarettes are now the leading cause of fatal residential fires in the nation. Finally, after three of New York's Bravest were killed in a 1998 fire caused by a smoldering cigarette, the state passed a law with tough new fire-safe cigarette standards. The law, to take effect in January 2003, would likely force tobacco companies to sell fire-safe cigarettes nationwide (given the expense of manufacturing cigarettes specifically for New York). It's the first such law to pass in the United States.

You might guess that Big Tobacco is apoplectic about this. But along comes Towns, who's received $30,000 in campaign contributions from tobacco PACs since 1995 and was described by The New York Times as "one of the industry's most ardent supporters in Congress," with a bill setting what critics allege are weaker federal standards for fire-safe cigarettes, and forbidding states from imposing stronger standards. Such a bill would negate the New York state bill, according to Kensington resident Kevin James, a supervising fire marshal for the FDNY who exposed Towns's bill in a recent Newsday editorial. Towns's office emailed us that without this federal uniformity, "states could establish conflicting manufacturing standards that no manufacturer could meet." "Breaks my heart," deadpanned Jeffrey Wigand.

Who is Jeffrey Wigand? Remember the movie "The Insider" that won Russell Crowe an Oscar? Crowe portrayed Wigand, the former tobacco industry executive who revealed his company's dirty secrets on "60 Minutes." These days Wigand campaigns tirelessly against tobacco for Smoke-Free Kids (www.smokefreekids.org). Asked whether he thought Towns introduced his bill at the request of Big Tobacco, Wigand said while that may be impossible to prove, Towns's arguments mimic those of industry lawyers. "It smells like a rat, looks like a rat," said Wigand, noting Towns's pro-tobacco voting record. "Is it a rat?"

Added the now-legendary insider, "This is an industry that kills 4 million people a year. Why does he want to help them continue doing that?" Wigand noted that fires started by cigarettes kill 1,000 people annually, many of them children, senior citizens, and firefighters. "They should let the New York law go through," Wigand said. "It's going to save lives." Towns's office claimed it is not yet known if New York's bill would set tougher standards than Towns's bill, since the state regulations haven't been written yet. Towns also said his bill, unlike a competing House bill (opposed by Big Tobacco), would ensure the new fire-safe cigarettes wouldn't be any more toxic than the current ones.

Wigand didn't buy it. The tobacco companies "will not put profits before…saving lives and public safety," he said. "They have demonstrated that time and time again." Big Tobacco likes its fast-burning cigarettes because users go through them more quickly, which helps sales, he said. Nor are critics comforted by the provision in Towns's bill trusting fire-safe cigarettes to the Consumer Products Safety Commission, whose three members tend to oppose industry regulation. The Towns email mentioned as well that the congressman sponsored legislation raising standards for fire-safe children's sleepwear. But to James, the Kensington fire marshal, that might sound like a continuation of Big Tobacco's effort to make the world safe for their product, rather than vice versa. Noting the number of fires caused by cigarettes, James said, "Any other product with that kind of track record would be thrown off the market."

But nothing is done "because tobacco has such a stranglehold over Congress," said James. "I think it's crucial that the states have control over this." Towns's suggestion that states could regulate cigarettes out of existence is absurd, noted fire-safe cigarette pioneer Andrew McGuire, because states rely on cigarettes for huge tax revenues. McGuire, who runs the Trauma Foundation in San Francisco, also notes that Towns's bill includes no funding for implementation, while the rival House bill provides $2 million.

BY GEORGE, MARTINEZ TRIPPED BY ANGEL City Councilman Angel Rodriguez's inevitable resignation couldn't have come at a worse time for George Martinez, the last man to run against him. Martinez was in the final stages of his campaign for Democratic leader of the 51st Assembly District when Rodriguez accepted a plea bargain for his attempted extortion of a Red Hook developer. A special election was called, with a 12-day window ending September 10-the day of the primary-to collect 2,700 signatures from registered voters in the 38th C.D. (Sunset Park, Red Hook, Park Slope, Windsor Terrace, Gowanus, Boerum Hill, Carroll Gardens).

Rodriguez knew that Martinez wanted to succeed him, and by resigning when he did, Rodriguez ensured that Martinez would be collecting signatures rather than campaigning in the final, crucial 12 days. Our source also suggested that Rodriguez tipped off his ally Sara Gonzalez, who is running for the seat, so she could gear up her signature-collection effort in advance.

At least that's the theory one observer of Sunset Park politics spun to us. But Jeff Feldman, director of the county Democratic organization, insisted otherwise. "The allegations are inherently baseless," Feldman said. "The timetable was driven by the U.S. Attorney." County, by the way, supports Gonzalez, though that wasn't official at press time. Gonzalez, who chairs Community Board 7, did not return our call to the board.

BROOKLYN REPS SPLIT ON IRAQ Brooklyn's members of Congress are divided on President Bush's plan to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein, the New York Post reported. A poll by the newspaper found Anthony Weiner leaning in favor of an invasion and Major Owens opposed. Nydia Velazquez and Jerry Nadler were undecided. Republican Vito Fossella was strongly in favor, but he almost reflexively supports the president's proposals, so that was no surprise.

Ed Towns was the only one of 20 downstate House members who could not be reached by the Post. Towns either ducked the call, was legitimately unavailable, or wasn't organized enough to respond, given the recent disappearance from his staff of his press secretary, James Harris. Towns's chief of staff, Brenda Pillors, told us Friday she was uncertain of his position on Iraq. Owens told the paper, "Saddam is as bad as the president says, but I don't think an invasion of Iraq would help."

Weiner's comment was: "I believe I'm one of a group of liberals who[m] September 11 did change." It's unclear why that should be, given that no good evidence has surfaced that Saddam orchestrated September 11. But Weiner wouldn't be the first to change his politics based on a single event. Someone once said that a conservative is simply a liberal who's been mugged, and a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested.

FEINBERG STAYING PUT A Democratic Party official told us Brooklyn Surrogate Judge Mike Feinberg is not thinking of resigning six years into his 14-year term, despite a report that he's being investigated by the Office of Judicial Conduct and Daily News articles alleging he approved exorbitant legal fees to friends and political cronies.

Jeff Feldman, executive director of the Brooklyn Democratic organization, which strongly backed Feinberg's 1996 election, said he'd just had dinner with Feinberg and reported, "He is quite comfortable being surrogate, as should all citizens of the borough be comfortable with him being surrogate. There is no basis…to suggest that Judge Feinberg will not continue for the infinite foreseeable future as the surrogate for this county."

But what about the investigation under way? "I don't know anybody in Kings County of any prominence who's not under investigation by one agency or another," Feldman said. Feldman meant that as a defense of Brooklyn politics, but it could certainly be construed more as an indictment of it.

MAJOR OWENS DEFENDS SERVICE RECORD Rep. Major Owens says his district offices' reputation as a poor deliverer of constituent services is undeserved.

Former City Councilwoman Una Clarke, in her unsuccessful challenge of Owens in 2000, portrayed his offices as unresponsive and poorly managed, and she was hardly alone in that opinion. But Owens said he has since improved his operation. "I'm comfortable with the way we've revamped our system," he said. "It's all computerized now." He insisted that even prior to the changes, his constituent services were not deserving of the criticism. "I did a thorough examination…and even then it was unjustified."

NEW COUNCIL DISTRICTS COMING Political gossip-mongers are spreading rumors that Brooklyn could lose one council district in the upcoming redistricting, and a "white" district would likely be the target, given that Mayor Mike Bloomberg owes his election to strong support from Latino voters and figures to protect their districts. Thus, one source speculated, the lines might be redrawn, for example, to pit Mike Nelson against Domenic Recchia or perhaps Bill deBlasio against David Yassky.

That would certainly make for interesting column fodder. Unfortunately, it's not going to happen. Populations have indeed shifted since the current council lines took effect in 1993, but not enough for Brooklyn to lose a council seat. The new districts must each have about 157,000 residents, and a good number of the current districts have more than that, according to Councilman Lew Fidler, head of the borough delegation.

Furthermore, the overpopulated districts are the predominantly white ones represented by Fidler, Nelson, Recchia, Simcha Felder, and Marty Golden. The minority districts, except for Kendall Stewart's, all have fewer than 157,000 people, and would be at risk for elimination if Brooklyn had to give up a seat (which Fidler insists it won't).

What's more likely is that 15,000 Latinos in Ridgewood, Queens will be drawn into Diana Reyna's underpopulated Williamsburg/Bushwick district (or possibly Erik Malave Dilan's Cypress Hills/East New York district). That would become Brooklyn's one two-borough district, the maximum number allowed. Thus, Jimmy Oddo's district would have to lose its Brooklyn component-40,000 Dyker Heights and Bath Beach residents. Thanks to suburban sprawl, Oddo's Staten Island neighborhoods gained enough population to make up the difference.

Also look for the 38th District (Sunset Park, Red Hook) to lose white residents in Park Slope, Boerum Hill, or Windsor Terrace and gain quite a few Asians, who now have a big presence west of Green-Wood Cemetery. It will remain largely Latino. (A new council member will be elected November 5 to replace the disgraced Angel Rodriguez.)

NELSON, GOLDEN GRANDSTAND ON GRAFFITI Councilmen Mike Nelson and Marty Golden are sponsoring a resolution to ask Albany to upgrade graffiti vandalism from a misdemeanor to a felony. A resolution is simply a statement, not a bill, so Nelson's and Golden's measure is meaningless-strictly an act of grandstanding that probably won't go anywhere in the council and certainly won't spur Albany to change any laws.

But besides that, making graffiti a felony wouldn't inspire wayward youths to give up their markers and spray paint. It would simply punish the few who are caught more severely, forcing them to answer "yes" to the question "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" on every job application they fill out for the rest of their lives. It might also cause them to fall behind in school or even drop out. It's logical to conclude that young graffiti vandals might quit their habit rather than risk messing up the rest of their lives. But young graffiti vandals are not logical-otherwise they wouldn't be scribbling hideous tags on other people's property in the first place. Surely Nelson and Golden are aware that the harsh punishments of the Rockefeller drug laws did nothing to stem drug use in New York, but did cost taxpayers a bundle, break up families, and destroy a lot of people who otherwise might have become productive citizens. Lawmakers are now trying to undo these laws.

So why would the two councilmen propose a similar approach to graffiti? Nelson acknowledges that his resolution was "borne out of personal frustration." Which is why it is said you should never make an important decision when angry. Graffiti is an anathema, so Nelson and Golden (who's running for state Senate) might curry some favor with voters with their resolution. But it's a waste of time and wrongheaded in its approach. It costs as much to arrest, prosecute, and imprison a felon for one year as it does to employ a public school teacher, who is more effective anyway in steering kids to positive activities.

Borough Politics Archive

2002
September 9 column.
September 2 column.
August 26 column.
August 19 column.
August 12 column.
August 5 column.
July 29 column.
July 22 column.
July 8 column.
July 1 column.
June 17 column.
June 10 column.
June 3 column.
May 27 column.
May 20 column.
May 13 column.
May 6 column.
April 29 column.
April 22 column.
April 15 column.
April 8 column.
April 1 column.
March 25 column.
March 18 column.
March 11 column.
March 4 column.
February 25 column.
February 18 column.
February 11 column.
February 4 column.
January 28 column.
January 21 column.
January 7 column.

2001
December 10 column.
December 3 column.
November 19 column.
November 12 column.
November 5 column.
October 22 column.
October 1 column.
September 6 column.
September 4 column.
August 30 column.
July 23 column.
July 2 column.
June 25 column.
June 11 column.
May 28 column.
May 21 column.
May 14 column.
May 7 column.
April 30 column.
April 23 column.
April 9 column.
April 2 column.
March 26 column.
March 19 column.
March 12 column.
March 5 column.
February 26 column.
February 19 column.
February 12 column.
February 5 column.
January 29 column.
January 22 column.
January 15 column.
January 8 column.
January 1 column.

2000
December 25 column.
December 18 column.
December 11 column.
December 4 column.
November 27 column.
November 20 column.
November 13 column.
November 6 column.
October 30 column.
October 23 column.
October 16 column.
October 9 column.
October 2 column.
September 25 column.
September 18 column.
September 11 column.
September 4 column.
August 28 column.
August 21 column.
August 7 column.
July 31 column.
July 24 column.
July 17 column.
July 10 column.
June 26 column.
June 19 column.
June 12 column.
May 15 column.
May 8 column.
April 24 column.
April 10 column.
March 13 column.
March 7 column.
February 21 column.
February 14 column.
February 7 column.
January 31 column.
January 24 column.
January 17 column.

1999
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
November 25 column.
November 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.