At the beginning of the year, Norman Adler sold his ownership stake in Bolton St. John’s to his partners, entering what he calls his “semi-retirement” period. But he has not disappeared just yet, keeping on several high-profile lobbying clients and consulting with several politicians, including five Republican state senators.
He took a break from his still-busy schedule to talk about what prompted the decision to retire, the end of the pay phone and handshake era of politics, and how to score a good political quote.
What follows is an edited tran scri pt.

The Capitol: So, how have you taken to retirement or semi-retirement?
Norman Adler: This is more semi- than it is retirement, but we’re getting there.

TC: Why retire now?
NA: Well, you know, I’ve always said, and I’ve been in this business a long time, and my mother was in this business before me. … And my mother always said, and I’ve always said it too, that politics is really a young man’s game. I know there are some old lobbyists, but things change all the time, and I’m not just talking about new administrations, I’m talking about technology and new approaches and the things like that. And unless you’re prepared to continually change and adapt with them, at some point along the way, you’re singing a song and nobody’s listening, and I don’t want to get there. But more importantly, I always said, I’ve always loved politics, it’s always been fun. So I said to my wife, “When I get up one morning and say, ‘This is not fun anymore,’ I’m gonna leave.” And I got up one morning about a year and a half ago and I said, “I don’t want to go to work.” And I never had that feeling before.

TC: So you decided to sell?
NA: We had a couple of offers to buy the firm. … And then I thought, when I decided the time had come to do this I said, you know, I’ve got these employees, they’ve made a lot of money for me, and they ought to have the opportunity to make money for themselves. So, I said to the employees, “You guys want to buy the firm? I’ll give you favorable terms, we’ll spread out the payments over a number of years, and, you should do this.” And so it took them awhile to get their act together, but they did, and they bought the firm, and they own it, but then they said one of the conditions was that I had to stay on as a consultant and I said I’ll agree to do it for ’08 and then let’s talk when we get towards ’09.

TC: Do you think politics has changed more rapidly in the past few years than they had previously?
NA: In my political lifetime, politics is, it’s less collegial and less congenial. It’s much more sharply partisan. The technology has been good in some ways. There’s much more transparency in the system because of what you guys do and bloggers and 24-hour news stations, the internet and everything, which has got some advantages and some disadvantages. But it’s also become more intrusive.
I remember being in Albany and waiting outside the telephone booth with 25 dollars in quarters in my pocket so I could call back the clients; when things got hot, racing back and forth from the Senate to the Assembly chamber. Now you have this, you have walkie-talkies, you have Blackberries, you have all kinds of stuff giving you instant information—which is frequently instant misinformation.

TC: A lot of people feel that there has been more turnover among elected officials in the past few years. Do you agree?
NA: You’ve got some that have been around a long time, but most of the high-quality ones, except the ones that work for the speaker and the majority leader are, generally, they’re in and out because they find other things to do. It’s more—maybe you get older and you think things were better—but a deal used to be a deal. And for a number of years now at the Capitol, I think largely because of George Pataki, but other factors as well, you got a deal, and then it fell apart, you got a deal and it fell apart—a handshake wasn’t good enough.

TC: How do you think Spitzer not being in office will effect that?
NA: Big advantage. Paterson’s got to get his sea legs, and clearly he doesn’t have them yet, but he comes from a pretty good political family and he’s a very bright guy and he’s been in the legislative process. Mario Cuomo was contemptuous of the legislators, George Pataki was the outside guy when he was a legislator. … This is not true of the governor. He was a legislator for many, many years, and even though he was in the minority, he knows the drill, and I think it will mean, I still think there’s going to be major differences of opinion on stuff and contests for offices and control, but I think it’s going to be at a different level.

TC: You have consulted for Assembly Democrats and Senate Republicans. Did that ever cause problems?
NA: No, in fact, it was just the opposite. Since both houses and both parties understood that I talked to the other side from time to time, I could act as an intermediary or as a conduit.

TC: But as a Democrat, has helping out people who do not share your views ever been a personal conflict?
NA: There are criminal lawyers who do not support murder, kidnap and robbery, and yet they represent people that do. There are CPAs who don’t have sympathy for the business practices of some of their high-powered clients, but they do. I have always separated out, as best I could, I’ve tried as best I can to separate out my own predisposition.
TC: So it is all business?
NA: Part of it is a business, although I’ve come to, I don’t work long for people I don’t like, because the politics is not where the money is. So if I don’t care for you, either I won’t take you or I’ll do the one race and then say, “I’m not interested anymore.”

TC: You are a favorite for political reporters to call on for a quote.
NA: Sure, because I use seven words or less.

TC: You often manage to get a good turn of phrase in to your quotes. How much do you think about how you will say what you say ahead of time?
NA: A lot. Now it isn’t always true. … Sometimes a reporter will call you and they’ll be doing a story—either it’s the story and it’s an interesting angle, or it’s something where it’s not one of the mainstream stories and then, of course, I haven’t had a chance. But sometimes I’ll carry a quote around in my head for a couple of weeks and to pick the right reporter who I think will play the quote. And sometimes something will just pop out.

TC: Your mother often factors into your quotes.
NA: Well, my mother was, if you talk to the old timers who were around when my mother was around, they will tell you that my mother was one of the true characters of New York politics and one of the really smart political people. And growing up in a family with somebody who for a number of years made a living off of politics, you learn a lot of stuff that you don’t have to be taught in school.

TC: Do you think being around so many years has been an advantage?
NA: We’re in the beginnings of what I think is going to be a replication of the ’70s …  having seen that, it’s like, “been there, done that,” and it’s a lot easier to apply some of the rules. On the other hand, because the times they are a-changing, if you merely apply those rules, you’re an idiot, because things are not the same, they’re different. Different personalities, different relationships, a different nature of the federal system than there was before—so you’ve got to kind of temper one with the other, and it’s very hard to do.

TC: So this is a good moment to be starting to make your transition out?
NA: I think it is. I think it’s a good moment. I think especially with a new governor coming in, a new administration coming in, some changes, I think we’re going to see changes in some of the legislative leadership in the next two or three years, maybe even a shift of power in the Legislature. I was a lot more sure of it before Spitzer’s inglorious exit than I am now.    
Direct letters to the editor to editor@nycapitolnews.com.