Rumors are swirling that there is a schism behind the scenes over whether the Erie County Conservative Party should endorse Byron Brown, the front runner for Buffalo’s mayoral election in 2005.

It is a classic conflict --– should the party adhere to its well- known political ideology, or court favor with the presumptive winner, and (hopefully) guarantee a place at the patronage table.

Instead of exclusion -- a likely scenario, since Conservative ideology is not likely to find favor in a Brown administration, it is argued, by some in the party, that supporting a winning candidate – even one who is opposed to the ideals of the party  -- is better than supporting an, ideologically, sympathetic candidate who is likely to lose.

Last week, the Erie County Independence Party, led by local chairman Anthony Orsini,  gave its endorsement to Brown. Orsini makes no bones about the fact that picking a winner is the best policy for the party he leads. But the Independence Party does not have the same deeply entrenched and established political philosophy as the Conservative.  It has been facetiously suggested that the Independence Party has no ideals except to make “ ‘I’ deals.”

Perhaps the same is true with “Conservatives” locally.  Indeed, critics of the “endorse the winner,” doctrinaire suggest that the local party is in danger of becoming a laughing stock, as well as surprising political observers when the rank and file Conservative voters turn off- party, and cast their votes for the Republican candidate.

The Conservatives may find, if they endorse Brown, that they will have accumulated the lowest- ever ballots in a Buffalo mayoral election.

This, however,  should surprise no one. After all, Brown is far from Conservative.  Consider:

• The Conservative party is opposed to a woman having an abortion. Brown is pro- choice, and supports spending tax dollars to fund abortions for “needy” women.
• The Party opposes affirmative action, arguing it discriminates against people because of race and gender.  Brown, the former director of the Erie County division of Equal Employment Opportunity, strongly supports affirmative action.
• The Party supports the Boy Scouts of America decision to ban homosexual members. It supports legislation that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.  Brown publishes on his web site that he won the “Buddies’ Friend to Buffalo’s Gay and Lesbian Community Award” in 1997.

1. §         The Conservative Party opposes “Big Labor” taking “forced union dues from New York workers…and giving it to liberal operatives who are … conservative policies.” Brown accepted both the endorsement, and those same “forced union dues” indirectly through contributions from “Big Labor.”
2.        
3. §         The Party is opposed to “efforts to bar law enforcement agencies from utilizing any effective law enforcement techniques, such as profiling, on grounds of political correctness.” Obviously, Brown supports such laws.

The party supports the restoration of the death penalty, and legislation to end parole for all convicted felons. Brown strongly opposes.

 

Of course, ultimately, the local Conservative party members must vote their conscience. Perhaps more than any other party, the NYS Conservative Party was established to promote a defined political ideology. The local party’s endorsement of Brown – a candidate almost completely alien to their ideology, may doom them politically as non- idealists – and potentially relegate them to non- relevance --just another group of political grabbers- indeed the very type of opportunists that their party was formed to oppose.

 As Michael Long, New York State Chairman of the conservative party urges, “the Conservative Party must serve as the conscience of New York.” 

If the local party endorses Brown for the safe bet of supporting a presumptive winner, who, if elected, will likely work against the very ideology of their party, they nullify their claim to be anything at all. 

On the other hand, if they endorse the candidate who most closely mirrors their ideals, in this case, most likely, Kevin Helfer, they may affect the outcome of the election -- and potentially help shape the political landscape more nearly toward their own cherished ideals.

Even if they endorsed someone who shared their ideals, but was defeated by a more liberal candidate, the Conservative Party would show the kind of courageous leadership that political parties, whether big or small, should adopt to restore integrity to a political system that could descend to the sewage level of endorsing a candidate opposed to their ideals, because he is going to win.

Isn’t that what most Conservatives joined their party to oppose?