Democrats Focus Debate on the Mayor
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

In the days leading up to the first debate of this year’s primary season, campaign watchers predicted that the four Democrats vying to unseat Mayor Bloomberg would take the forum as an opportunity to blast their opponents and set themselves apart.
Last night, though, when C. Virginia Fields, Anthony Weiner, Gifford Miller, and Fernando Ferrer stood behind their gray podiums at Lincoln Center, they shied away from attacking each other despite panelists’ repeated attempts at provocation. The candidates saved virtually all of their fire for attacks on their Republican opponent, who is soaring in the polls and faces no primary challenge next month.
The candidates did attack some of Mr. Bloomberg’s individual policies, such as his plan to end the “social promotion” of public school students who fail standardized tests and his decision to strip the Fire Department of command at disaster scenes that are possible terrorist incidents. Most of their attacks, however, were attempts to portray Mr. Bloomberg – a lifelong Democrat who became a Republican shortly before the 2001 race – as a hard-core conservative in the pocket of Republicans in Washington and out of touch with everyday New Yorkers.
Mr. Weiner, a congressman who represents Queens and Brooklyn, referred to the mayor as President Bush’s “Republican friend here at City Hall,” and said that during the Republican convention last summer the mayor was trying to please his “Republican brothers and sisters.” The Bloomberg campaign fired back that during his speech at the convention, Mr. Bloomberg said: ‘We all must recognize that Homeland Security funds should be allocated by threat and no other reason, and I will repeat this message to my fellow Republicans, Democrats, and independents as many times as it takes so we can keep New York safe and secure.”
The Democratic front-runner, Mr. Ferrer, said: “This isn’t about getting into an argument with my Democratic colleagues. Our argument is with Mike Bloomberg. Our argument is a fundamental difference with the way we look at this city as Democrats and the way he looks at this city.”
Mr.Ferrer also said that while he grew up poor in the Bronx and knows what it’s like to work hard, Mr. Bloomberg, a billionaire, knows only about big business.
All of the Democrats bashed the mayor for not forcing the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to use all of the federal funds provided to it to enhance the subway system’s security. Mr. Weiner went further, indicating that as mayor he would constantly challenge the presumption that Albany should have control over New Yorkers’ lives. He suggested that he might try to gain control of the transit system in the city in the same way that Mr. Bloomberg took responsibility for the schools.
“I’m going to fight for more responsibility,” he said.
Ms. Fields called affordable housing the “no. 1 problem in this city,” but she wasn’t alone in calling it a key issue. All the Democrats said housing is a problem and agreed that Mr. Bloomberg isn’t doing the job right.
Mr. Weiner, for example, said: “We now worship at the altar of every big developer who comes to town.” The candidates boasted of their own plans to create more homes for New Yorkers – and Mr. Miller, the City Council speaker, said he has helped rezone areas for “affordable housing” in his current job.
In a “lightning round” when the candidates were supposed to provide simple “yes” or “no” answers, a few differences, though slight, emerged.
The moderator, Dominic Carter of NY1, asked whether Mr. Bloomberg was a better mayor than Mayor Giuliani.
Only Mr. Weiner said Mr. Giuliani was a superior mayor.
Despite that, Messrs. Miller and Weiner said New Yorkers are better off now than four years ago, while Mr. Ferrer and Ms. Fields said the opposite. All four said that if they were as rich as Mr. Bloomberg, they would not spend their own money to finance their campaigns.
All four said they’d like to receive the endorsement of the Reverend Al Sharpton. Ms. Fields gasped “yes” four times.
Only two of the candidates, Mr. Weiner and Mr. Ferrer, said they would ride the subway to work as the current mayor does. Mr. Miller suggested that the subway is a long walk from Gracie Mansion.
All four said that they would keep in place Mr. Bloomberg’s smoking ban, and all four said they had voted for only Democrats their whole lives.
Perhaps the liveliest segment of the debate came during the lightning round when Mr. Carter asked if Mr. Miller, the father of two young boys, would send his children to public school. Mr. Miller became flustered, leaned over the podium, called for his wife Pam in the audience, and said, “We haven’t made that decision.” He complained to Mr. Carter that the question was unfair since his sons are 3 and 4, and he and his wife haven’t yet investigated school alternatives.
Mr. Weiner, a bachelor, said he would, but he added, “I need a wife first.”
Ms. Fields, who is 60 and has no children, said if she did have children, she would choose public schools.
Mr. Ferrer, who has a daughter in her mid-20s, said she graduated from public schools and her children would. In the past, Mr. Ferrer has said his daughter graduated from his alma mater, Cardinal Spellman Catholic High School.
The president of the United Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, who attended the debate, said she encourages her family and friends to send their children to public schools, but she doesn’t think that should be a litmus test for politicians.
At the end of the debate, Ms. Weingarten, who has yet to endorse a candidate, called the debate “refreshing.”
“It was a real debate about the future of New York City, with real concrete, doable ideas about the real problems facing this city,” she said. “I was really impressed with all of them tonight.”
Rev. Sharpton, who was also in the audience, did not pick a winner either.
“It was a bad night for Mike Bloomberg,” he said. “I don’t know who won. I know who lost, Mike Bloomberg.”
Mark Green, the former public advocate who lost to Mr. Bloomberg in the last election after topping Mr. Ferrer in a runoff, agreed there was no clear winner.
“No one stood out because they all did so well,” he said.
As part of the city’s campaign finance system, the candidates are required to participate in two prime-time debates. The first was televised on NY1 last night in English and Spanish. It will be replayed in Mandarin, Korean, and Cantonese. For all that, its audience may be rather small: Last month, the final candidates forum on NY1 was watched in only 10,000 households at a time, the cable station estimated.
The next prime-time debate will be on WNBC a week before the September 13 primary, but another face-off among the candidates is scheduled for this Sunday on WCBS-TV at 11 a.m.