Civic Forum:

NYCivic will be hosting a Civic Forum, "The Future of the MTA," on WEDNESDAY, July 15, at 6:30 pm. The talk will be held at the Museum of the City of New York, at 1220 Fifth Avenue, between 103rd and 104th Streets.

Panelists include Councilperson Gail Brewer, Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, Transportation Alternatives Executive Director Paul White, and New York Post columnist Nicole Gelinas. NYCivic's Henry J. Stern will be moderating the event.

Please RSVP by calling 212-534-1672 ext. 3395, or write to programs@mcny.org.

Caroline Kennedy

Would Make a Cool

Lieutenant Governor

By Henry J. Stern
July 8, 2009

Day 30 of the Blackberry Turnover brings smoke signals that the hissy fit in the Senate is close to some kind of resolution, for better or worse. Not every peace treaty is a good one, though. Recall what followed Versailles.

The so-called “Cuatro Amigos,” who have destabilized Albany Democrats for a month now, say that if no agreement is reached by tomorrow (Thursday), they will impose their own solution. If either party accepts their yet unknown offer, it will have 34 votes to put it into effect. It is more likely that the Republicans will accept than the Democrats, since they are a more united and purposeful group, they submit to stronger leadership, and, like the Assembly Democrats, and they want to preserve as many staff jobs as they can. Having controlled the Senate for 43 years, the Republicans have hundreds of hungry mouths to feed. And this is no time to go out and look for work.

Today Governor Paterson speaks at 5 p.m. on the Senate impasse. He would be wise to follow the advice of Citizens Union and appoint a Lieutenant Governor, or announce that he will do so if the Senate fails to organize itself. An imaginative choice for this office would be Caroline Kennedy. Here's why:

First, Paterson owes Kennedy a big one after subjecting her to embarrassment the last time around.

Second, she provides diversity (to him) in race and gender, and what could be as important in today’s political world.

Third, she knows almost as much about state government as Paterson did when he was chosen as Governor Spitzer’s running mate in January 2007. More important, she is likely to surround herself with very capable people. Great staff is a Kennedy family tradition.

Fourth, if history is any guide, the most she will have to do is break ties in the State Senate, which will probably be rare once the current dispute is settled. If by any chance, she should become Governor, she just might be superb.

Fifth, like the Napoleonic rulers in Europe, she has ties to other notable elected officials in the state. Her former cousin-in-law is New York State’s attorney general, and he might feel less disposed to run against both the state’s first African-American governor, whose running mate would be a widely respected woman who possesses both Kennedy and Bouvier DNA. Sadly, only her children share that distinction with her.

Sixth, her first cousin, Maria Shriver, is married to the governor of California, the nation’s most populous state. Although they also have a massive deficit, we are aware that businesses with liquidity issues sometimes merge in the hope that the new combination will carry them through their trials. Sometimes it works.

Seventh, another of her cousins, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, was lieutenant governor of Maryland some years ago. Although she lost her race for governor, she proved that a Kennedy woman could handle the office of lieutenant governor with dignity and grace.

Eighth, she is a graduate of Harvard College AND Columbia Law School, and therefore a potential candidate for New York State Attorney General, if she should come to have a grievance against any other candidate for the position.

When her father, President Kennedy, appointed her uncle, Robert F. Kennedy, as Attorney General of the United States, he was asked by the press why he had done so. He replied that he wanted to give his brother a little experience before he went out to practice law.

Ninth, since Caroline Kennedy withdrew from consideration for the Senate appointment, people have had nothing but good things to say about her. Accepting this position would give all of us a chance to test the sincerity of those who spoke so well of her when their own ambitions were not at issue.

Tenth, although we are guided by Rule 19: “Be kind to man and beast,” we cannot refrain from observing that other prospective Senate tie-breaker, Senator Pedro Espada of the Bronx, apparently has a variety of legal issues, his residence, his poverty program, his HMO, etc. Although he is entitled to the presumption of innocence and we may assume that the numerous allegations are the baseless complaints of political and economic rivals, it will take a great deal of time and money for the Senator to defend himself, and that could detract from the time necessary to break a tie.

Eleventh, and most important, she is a competent and intelligent person, a “wise gringa” who has shown her interest in public service. She would be able to influence other senators and make friends for New York State, which is in urgent need of help. She would be loyal to the state in which she was raised, and which her wonderful mother chose as a home for her family.

Time is short. Governor Paterson will speak late this afternoon. If any of you care to offer any other reasons why, in your opinion, Caroline Kennedy SHOULD or SHOULD NOT be appointed Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York, please let us know as soon as possible, so we can share your thoughts with the public.

StarQuest

#571 07.08.2009 854 wds

NOTE:

NYCivic will be hosting a Civic Forum, "The Future of the MTA," on Wednesday, July 15, 6:30 pm. The talk will be held at the Museum of the City of New York, at 1220 Fifth Avenue, between 103rd and 104th Streets. For more details, or to RSVP, please contact the museum at 212-534-1672 ext. 3395, or write to programs@mcny.org.



Fred Dicker Fed Up
After Thirty Years.
He Perceives Albany
Sinking Into Muck.



By Henry J. Stern
July 6, 2009

Fredric U. Dicker, the Post’s state editor and the dean of reporters in the state capital, has covered the Albany scene for more than thirty years, long enough to have witnessed the administrations of five governors: Carey, Cuomo, Pataki, Spitzer and Paterson. The next election is November 2010, so Dicker may see a sixth governor before he retires.

Yesterday, Dicker’s column appeared in the opinion section of the Post, under the headline: “ALBANY, I GIVE UP. State Government Has Never Been So Clownish, So Evil, So Irrelevant”. His tone is like the 1976 film “Network”, in which Peter Finch, playing a TV newsman, leans out a window and shouts: “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this any more.” Dicker has occasionally referred sympathetically to Finch and his frustration with the system. Today the journalist channels the actor in his anger.

“Having witnessed the anarchy, chaos and lack of leadership that has engulfed the state Capitol during the past month, I have a painful confession to make.

“I’ve covered Govs. Hugh Carey, Mario Cuomo, George Pataki, Eliot Spitzer and David Paterson and for New York to wind up like this after

35 years of modern leadership, it’s clear to me that my real job has been to chronicle the devolution – the decay and decline – of New York state.

“We’re going backwards, not forwards, and of late we’ve even been falling apart.

“The Empire State – once a beacon of progressive state government to the nation – is on the brink of ruin. And it doesn’t look like anything can be done to stop it.

“In two words: We’re doomed.”

We link to Dicker’s column here, so you can read all of it. You probably should. Dicker provides historical background, and outlines the strength of some notable state leaders and the failure of others, who in some cases betrayed our trust in them.

The column concludes with these sad paragraphs, which bring us from 1995 to the present. We quote:

“Republican Pataki promised s weeping reforms but quickly retreated in the face of a resistant legislature and powerful special interests.

“After 12 years of Pataki, New Yorkers yearned for change, which is why Spitzer’s colossal political and moral failures were such a tragedy.

“Paterson, Spitzer’s unexpected successor, talked like a reformer when he took office in March 2008, but his collapse as a leader has been so sweeping as to be unlike anything seen in the history of New York.

He’s now the least popular governor in the United States.

“Is any more proof needed that New York has gone down the drain?”

Dicker writes of our state’s gloried past, of governors like Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Herbert H. Lehman, Thomas E. Dewey, Averell Harriman, Nelson A. Rockefeller and Hugh L. Carey. They were highly regarded nationally, and all but Lehman and Carey ran for President. New York was a leader in progressive legislation until the Big Sleep set in. The question now is whether or not the state will wake up before it goes bankrupt.



Senators' Strike Continues
Fail Again to Reach Agreement
Impasse Costs NYC $2M a Day



Today the New York State Senate deadlock enters its fifth week. By our count, it is Day 29 since the Blackberry Turnover June 8 coup, which did not involve the use of any force greater than 32 senators raising their hands at the same time. In January, Malcolm Smith of Queens had been elected majority leader by the same razor-thin margin, but he had since given offense to a number of his supporters, and two were all they needed to replace him with someone more malleable to their desires.

In the halls of the legislature, disputes often arise in two areas: 1) jobs, and 2 ) contracts. In each case, demand exceeds supply, and the selection process pleases some and necessarily displeases others. When the leader's tenure hangs by a thread, he may be particularly sensitive to the demands of colleagues, irrespective of merit. But even brigands are frustrated when they are unable to field conflicting demands for the same chunk of the public treasury.

This process of selecting legislative leaders is called majority rule. In a parliamentary body, members of each party choose their leaders. Each member has one vote. In more than one way, the process, as practiced in New York State, resembles a reality TV show. Last month Malcolm Smith was unceremoniously voted off the island and Pedro Espada, with all his legal baggage, was placed in charge of the tribe. The position would make him next in line for the governorship, if Mr. Patterson were to die, resign, become incapacited, or be convicted of a felony.

Should Mr. Espada fail to qualify, the next in line would be Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. He has already indicated he will not accept the office, since it would be a diminution of the authority and influence he presently wields. Fortunately, these scenarios are unlikely to occur; but then who would have foreseen Governnor Spitzer' highly idiosyncratic behavior.

The principle of democracy based on election does not require or guarantee that the person elected be intelligent, principled or honest. It does require that he or she get the most votes counted for hhis or her candidacy. The public employs battalions of police officers, prosecutors, revenuers, FBI agents and narcs to keep them honest, or to catch them if they stray. A good number of public officials have been carted off in recent years, although none has reached the tongluer, the small cart which accompanies the guillotine. Nonetheless, arrests, lawsuits and judicial inquiries are an occupational hazard if your vocation is politics and someone dislikes you sufficiently to pursue a vendetta..

Even Governor Sarah Palin is not immune from those who would injure her reputation or deprive her of freedom. She was not at her ethical best she fired the police commissioner for refusing to dismiss an officer who was a former spouse of one of her relatives. Alaska may have a local method of resolving disputes of this nature, sparing both sides the costs of litigation, including witness fees

It is an aspect of the democratic process, no matter how tainted the new leaders, or the old ones, may be. It is the rule of the majority, even when that majority is temporary or evanescent.

The closest analogue to the June coup in recent legislative history came late in February 1965, when the Republicans, a minority in each house at the time as a result of Senator Goldwater’s landslide defeat, joined with a minority of the Democratic legislators to elect the leaders favored by Governor Rockefeller and Mayor Wagner, who were opposed by the candidates of Senator Robert F. Kennedy. Contrary to what many believe, Kennedy did not win every political battle he undertook.

In this case, the minority Republicans united with the minority of the majority Democrats, and the combined elements group comprised a majority of the whole House and Senate. The wishes of the majority of the majority party (Democrats at the time) were frustrated. Democratic control of the State Senate lasted just eleven months (Feb. 3 – Dec. 31). In November 1965 the Republicans regained the majority, and the power to redistrict themselves into retaining their seats. They held the Senate for 43 years, until January 2009. This year, Democratic leadership of the senate lasted a mere five months, which is slightly less than one per cent of the 43 years the GOP enjoyed the spoils.

But do not despair, gentle reader. As Vivien Leigh says in the last line of Margaret Mitchell’s 1936 novel, which won a Pulitzer Prize in 1937, “After all, tomorrow is another day.” In 1939, the book was made into a major motion picture, starring Clark Gable and Ms. Leigh, which won ten academy awards.

StarQuest

#570 07.06.2009 1303 wds

Senate Stumbles Into Food Fight


By Henry J. Stern
July 1, 2009

Today is July 1, the 24th day of dereliction for the New York state senate. It is also the first day of the city’s new fiscal year (FY 2010). Each level of government has its own unique calendar; the Federal government's fiscal year begins on October 1 and the State's on April 1. The only year that begins on January 1 is the calendar year.

July and August are the only two months named for people: the Roman emperors Julius and Augustus Caesar. The two are long months (31 days each) because they were named for very important people. Augustus was adopted by his great uncle Julius in 44 B.C.E, the same year that Julius’ troubles with the Senate peaked and he was stabbed to death by Brutus, Cassius, et al – on the Ides of March, as Shakespeare has told us. The lesson this teaches us is that even strong leaders can have problems with rebellious Senators.

The latest Albany antics are so lame that one feels somewhat ashamed to be writing about them, as if reporting to the public makes one an accessory to the nonsense. The dailies have done a thorough job in covering the mess. We’ll be brief in our own report, citing a couple of examples before getting into our views on the fiscal crisis.

The Times has an enlightening column on A25, which used to be B1 before consolidation. Danny Hakim is the reporter and BLAME PANIC IN G.O.P. FOR STANDOFF IN ALBANY is the headline. The daily dance is covered by Nicholas Confessore and Jeremy W. Peters on A28, GLIMPSING A G.O.P. PASSER-BY, SENATE DEMOCRATS GRAB THE GAVEL. Yesterday was the silliest day yet for the fragmented senate, because a brief walk across the back of the chamber by Republican Senator Frank Padavan (he was looking for a can of coke) was seized upon by mischievous Democrats who claimed Padavan could be counted as a 32nd member in the chamber, and that the Democratic voting body therefore represented a quorum. The Democrats then passed about a hundred bills 62-0, voting every Republican in the affirmative even though none was present.

Andrea Peyser trashes the Governor in a vitriolic column on p5 of today’s Post. FUMBLES AND BUMBLES OF GOV. PIPSQUEAK. The article is competently written, channeling Maureen Dowd at her most biting. The article’s premise is unfair and its language is strong, but there is a lot of that in politics these days, particularly when one writes about Albany. The governor can be criticized for the failings of the executive branch and for his collapse in March on the state budget, but he has done all he can to bring the senate to its senses, and does not deserve excoriation for his efforts. We would advise the governor to stand as tall as he can.



The Cupboard is Bare. The Appetite is There.
Both Parties Ignore Growing State Deficit
As They Battle Over Senatorial Privileges



There is another, larger issue in this dispute – one that has been largely avoided by the squabbling partisans. New York State is spending much more money than it is receiving through taxes and fees, just like California and New Jersey, among other states. The Legislature, unwilling to raise sufficient taxes to balance the budget or to reduce expenditures through layoffs (which is where most of the savings would have to be) simply resorts to more borrowing and subsidies to pay for current expenses and to fund a construction program (which requires further borrowing).

Although the Federal government has the option of printing money for the Federal Reserve, state officials who did the same thing would be prosecuted for counterfeiting; the state may not operate its own mint. What the state has traditionally relied on is off-budget borrowing by selected public authorities. This is from the Enron playbook: keep the bad stuff off the balance sheet. It works until the house of cards collapses, which with any luck will be after you leave office..

New York relied on billions in Federal stimulus money to alleviate the deficit for FY 2010, whose second quarter begins today. Instead of being used to create new jobs, the stimulus money was used to preserve existing jobs for public employes, maintaining an artifically inflated public sector, and leaving the layoffs to the taxpaying private sector of the economy. The state argues that the result is the same. Is it really? Will subsidizing bloat provide the same stimulus to the economy as the creation of green jobs, the repair and construction of roads and rails, scientific research and technology, etc? Could a reasonable person conclude that we are mortgaging future prospects to serve current needs because we lack the power or the courage to confront the spenders?

Preparation of the FY 2011 budget begins in a few months, and the governor’s budget proposals will go to the legislature in January. Will a similar stimulus package be in place by then? That is highly unlikely, but since 2010 is an election year, another bailout is possible. With all the money the Federal government has spent to fatten banks and save automobile companies, the states can argue for their place to receive handouts, especially if the relief comes from bills that has been printed and coins that have been minted for the occasion.

The voters will decide in the November elections next year whether they want the spiral of spending to continue. They may very well do so and the Republicans' artificial Senate majority could easily collapse.

Meanwhile, the state, like its legislature, is divided. On one side, there are millions of taxpayers: people with earned or unearned income, workers, homeowners, corporations doing business in the state, and visitors who shop in our stores.

On the other hand, there are millions who are net tax receivers, even though some are also taxpayers. These are public employees, pensioners and prospective pensioners, people on Medicaid (Medicare is funded entirely by the federal government), food stamps, or unemployment compensation, and beneficiaries of other government assistance. Hospitals and their patients, and non-profit educational institutions are exempt from real estate taxes.

When reckoning public expenditures, don’t forget the sums paid to the thousand or so plaintiffs who sue the State every year. The State, however, has one enormous advantage over the City of New York. If one sues the state, the case goes to the judges of the Court of Claims. If one sues the city on a similar issue, the case goes to a jury which knows the state has deep pockets. The state will not give the city equal treatment in defending lawsuits because of the power of the trial lawyers, whose wishes are law in the Democratic-controlled New York State Assembly. That is a major reason why the City pays over 500 million dollars a year in tax dollars to pay judgments and settle cases.

The recipients of state funds for salaries, pensions and benefits are generally not freeloaders. Many supply essential services in exchange for their compensation, which was much lower years ago than it is today. Other public employees add to the quality of life, and make New York a more attractive place to live and work. It is fair and reasonable for employers to defer some compensation to provide pensions for those late in life. The problem is that many noble programs have been taken to wretched excess, for the simple reasons that the tax-recipients are more numerous, better organized and more effective in lobbying than the taxpayers. That is how the balance of power works in New York.

The political aspect of the state's fiscal problem is complicated by the reality that financial conservatives are often social and religious conservatives, rejecting proposals to protect human rights, fight discrimination wherever it occurs, expand gay rights, secure women’s right to control their bodies, etc. The Republican Party has drifted rightward; the idea of a Nelson Rockefeller or Jacob Javits as Republicans is an anachronism. Looking at the picture, geographically, the Republicans today appear to have written off the Northeast and much of California. The voters, particularly young people, who reject conservative social attitudes, will vote Democrat and elect people whose fiscal decisions are often made by lobbyists on behalf of the tax receivers. Both ends work against the middle, and the result is polarization.

This is not a scholarly presentation, but we have tried to describe the heart of the matter. Moderates in both parties are reviled, even as people are willing to vote for moderate candidates – if they can survive the polarized nomination process. This has led to the rise in bloc voting in Congress and the legislature, and the increasing limits on the capacity and ability of senators and assembly members to cast independent votes. Most of them don’t want to be independent, because it requires some familiarity with the issues to make judgments. Those who do understand what is happening often do not dare to deviate from the party line, since they would jeopardize their committee chairmanships and their lulus, and possibly face expensive primary challengers, supported by organized tax receivers.

The Senate dispute, now in Day 24, is a symptom of the malaise that pervades the legislature. One of the few solutions I’ve read on the subject is outlined in a column by former Mayor Edward I. Koch, which he published on one year ago. In it, he proposes the creation of a new reform party, in the same vein as the state Democratic reformers of the 1950s and 60s. Write to us if you'd like a copy. His suggestions make enormous sense. The problem, however, is the issue raised in the classic Rule 17-C: “Who will bell the cat?”







StarQuest

#569 07.01.2009 1616 wds

Time Pressure Mounts
On Senate Squabblers
As Deadlines Approach



By Henry J. Stern
June 29, 2009

It’s Monday afternoon, Day 22 of the State Senate stalemate. The current impasse follows the Republican coup on June 8, in which new leadership was elected and installed before Democratic staff members turned off the lights and the microphones in the Senate chamber.

There is a June 30 deadline on some legislation, including mayoral control of the schools and tax increases, so it is possible that there will be some action today or tomorrow. But the two parties are still divided over the apportionment of the spoils, the six-figure staff jobs that are dispensed by the Senate majority leader.

The protracted dispute has reduced confidence in state government to a new low. It was five years ago that the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School first said that New York State had “the most dysfunctional legislature in the country.” The Spitzer and Paterson administrations have not checked the downhill slide, which culminated in this month's coup, or putsch, depending on which side you're on.

The legislators' squabble may have helped the 31% popularity of Governor Paterson, who has received some credit for criticizing both sides, including the senators from his own party, his colleagues for 22 years. So far, however, his efforts have only amounted to words, and there is some feeling that that is how the intervention will remain: verbal..

So far, the courts have rightly refused to take jurisdiction of the disputes within the legislative branch. "As luck would have it" (Rule 17-A), the legislature has denied the judges a pay raise for the last eleven years, not even granting cost-of-living increases. During that time, the consumer price index has risen 36% in the New York metropolitan area, so their real income has been substantially reduced.

The judges filed a lawsuit in the state courts, alleging that their salaries have effectively been diminished by the Assembly's linking them to the salaries that legislators receive for part-time positions. The lawmakers have practically unlimited opportunity to earn outside income, and are not required to report it publicly except in the broadest categories

Those of you who have traveled this road with us over the last three weeks generally join in our conclusions, as far as we can tell from your responses to these e-mails. They are:

The senators are looking out for personal and partisan interests rather than the benefit of the public.

They show little regard for editorial or other criticism, because they believe they are safe from reprisals in their comfortable, gerrymandered districts and long-term mailing privileges.

There are no other senators who have demonstrated unique talent for leadership, although it is likely that some of them are more able than their behavior has demonstrated.

The media have made the two senators in the middle, Espada and Monserrat, particular targets of abuse. Although both men are facing serious legal issues on other matters, the result of their Albany somersaults may, in the long run, not be as injurious as it appears to some. It may be helpful, in the long run, to reveal the legislators for the self-serving clowns that a number of them may happen to be.



As to how to extricate state government from its self-crippling stalemate, the legislators will probably do it by themselves if and when they feel sufficient financial pressure. We cite Rule 23-B: “Money talks…” (The reason this rule is numbered 23-B and not 10-M is that it has an unwritten predicate. Anyone who desires enlightenment can e-mail us and receive an immediate, confidential response.)

Although many New Yorkers think the senators are acting foolishly, and no one has anything good to say about the circus that has now run for three weeks, there is not yet a sense of immediate urgency on the part of the general public that anything dreadful is actually happening.

It is widely believed that legislators usually do more harm when they act wrongly than when they refrain from any action. There is an old saying: “No man’s life, liberty or property are safe when the Legislature is in session.” It is attributed to Judge Gideon Tucker and Mark Twain, among others. If said recently, it might be Yogi Berra and Woody Allen.

You can find those words posted in some offices along with another old chestnut: “A lawyer’s time and advice is his stock in trade,” usually accompanied by a drawing of Abraham Lincoln, who is said to have written that aphorism on an envelope after finishing the Gettysburg Address. The latter saying is displayed as advice to the public not to seek free legal services under the guise of social conversation.

There are remedies for the present standoff, some more forceful and jarring than others. We will propose them in a few days, thus giving the legislature a last chance to correct the situation themselves. The judges have been similarly considerate, and they must be presumed to be wiser than we, if not that much wealthier.

Give the boys time to work it out the old fashioned way, by cap and trade, now that a deadline (Tuesday midnight) should be hanging over their heads as the psychodrama plays out. We did not contemplate, however, that mayoral control of the New York City school system would end up being held hostage in an unrelated dispute.

New York’s incumbent protection laws effectively diminish voters’ opportunity to hold legislators accountable for their conduct. No effective reform of Albany is possible until the people have a real chance to turn the scoundrels out. If they had that opportunity, many current legislators would act more responsibly and creatively. In the current state of affairs, their party leaders can punish them for thinking for themselves but the voters cannot. In that situation, where do you think their primary allegiance will lie?

We await reports of today’s antics, but hold out the hope that the relentless advance of the calendar may stimulate the solons to legislsate, in order to avoid further embarrassment to the state and to themselves.

BTW, Rule 9-I (“I’ll be back”) is a popular culture version of the words spoken by General of the Army Douglas MacArthur on March 20, 1942, as he left the Philippines just ahead of an advancing Japanese army. “I shall return,” said the General, and he did, just as the Terminator did – to blow up a Los Angeles police station in James Cameron’s T1 epic.

Does art imitate life, or vice versa? We look at the Legislature as if it were floating in a twilight zone, somewhere between the ineffective interbellum League of Nations of the 1930’s and Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, home to the Queen of Hearts and the Mad Hatter, whose deliberations, described by Lewis Carroll in 1865, are evocative of the proceedings we have witnessed in Albany in June 2009.

StarQuest

#568 06.29.2009 1131 wds

Follow NYCivic on Twitter

For up-to-the-minute updates from StarQuest, follow NYCivic on Twitter. We will be tweeting at least once daily.

Protracted Dispute Undermines Justice and Injures State; Giuliani Speaks Up

As the Senate Impasse enters Day 17, conveying a pathetic portrait of New York State unable to govern itself, we turn our attention to the matters piled up and awaiting action by the evenly divided legislature.

They include an extension of mayoral control of New York City schools; a variety of tax increases, including a one-half percent in the sales tax, which will bring the total rate paid on purchases in the City to nine per cent; same-sex marriage, which has ignited the most fervent approval and disapproval; and several hundred bills which are usually adopted by both houses close to the end of the legislative session. Some of the bills have important financial consequences to cities and other localities, and others face a June 30 deadline for legislative action.

A major negative flowing from the 17-day tieup is the justified impression it gives that New York’s government is in disarray. An unstable regime is not one into which investors desire to place capital, because they will have no certainty as to what future legislators will do to their ventures. Money favors predictability, not instability. New York already suffers from high tax rates and high costs of doing business, and an unpredictable government, subject to palace coups, is another good reason not to start or expand a business in New York State.
Considerable damage has already been done to the state’s reputation, even if the dispute is soon resolved. The spectacle of lawmakers acting like unruly children, scrambling for position, has been widely photographed and broadcast. Even though we have known, and reported to you for years, the fact that the legislature is dysfunctional, the general public and out-of-staters were not aware of that as clearly as they are today.

Another disappointment is the absence of achievement by the Senate in the five months preceding the June 8 coup. The fact that the body is so closely divided made it more difficult to pass legislation, but the leadership should have turned to bi-partisanship much earlier, and not fired hundreds of people solely because of their party affiliation, even if that is the reason they were hired in the first place. There is a substantial difference in quality among employees, and by considering only political sponsorship as a basis for employment, the Democrats did a substantial disservice toward decision-making on the merits. Let us make it clear that the Republicans are no better, but since the Democrats were in charge, they had the power at the time to raise standards, which there is no evidence they attempted to do.

Governor Paterson continues to make strong statements and then retreat under pressure. He has spent a quarter-century in the legislature; it has practically been his only job since he graduated from law school. His greatest achievement was displacing Senator Martin Connor as minority leader in December 1992. It was interesting today to see Connor, who is highly regarded for his legal talents, particularly in election law, advising the Democrats on the senate floor.

The drama, now in its third week, will soon play out. Today the parties are back in Judge Thomas McNamara’s courtroom. This time the Republicans have moved to compel the Democrats to physically yield the rostrum to them. On June 16, the same judge threw out Democratic motions on the case, declining to become involved in the internal problems of a co-equal branch of government. We will see whether he sticks to that position, or whether he decides enough time has passed, and that the matter is now ripe for resolution.
Judge McNamara will be unable to decide the rostrum motion without considering many other issues, which will take time to resolve. At any rate, the Democrats’ original case is currently before the Appellate Division, so it would be perfectly reasonable for the judge to refer this case to the same higher court considering the basic issue of which party, if either, commands a Senate majority. It seems that neither faction has the needed 32 votes.

The temptation is great to let the parties “stew in their own juice,” as my late father used to say. It is hard to see why the judiciary, denied a pay rise all these years by the legislature, should choose sides between the two political parties, neither one of which has delivered for them. Meanwhile, isn’t it outrageous that the legislators get a $160 allowance for each day they are called into session, even if they accomplish nothing?

The tragedy in Iran shows how many people value freedom and democracy, even when it costs them their lives.

The farce in Albany shows how many public officials value their own privileges and prerogatives more highly than they do the opportunity to perform the public service for which they were elected.

RUDY GIULIANI OUTLINES REFORM AGENDA

P.S. The current crisis illustrates the need for greater reform than any of the current combatants are likely to provide or support. There is, however, an excellent op-ed piece in today's Times, by former Mayor Rudy Giuliani. We don't want to condense it, because we think it is worth your reading the entire article. Link to it here. It will be interesting to see what, if any, reaction there will be to the Giuliani article. We find it a striking and comprehensive call for change in state government. It begins with a Constitutional Convention, which would have to be called by the state legislature. It is highly unlikely that the incumbents will do anything to limit their power or their pensions. The voters would have to elect new state officials in 2010. Ultimately, the rule is power to the people, but it is a long and winding road to bring it there.

#567 06.24.2009 953 wds

(originally published 6/24/09)

State Senate Sputters as Solons Switch Sides and Supplant Senator Smith

We have spent a lot of time – and words – describing the classically dysfunctional legislature in Albany. Yesterday, the lid blew off the pot as two Senators, each with unresolved legal issues, switched control of the body from Democrats to Republicans.

As might be expected, the local tabloids used yesterday’s events as grist for today’s headlines. Our favorites were the Post’s cover story MUTINY AT THE MADHOUSE by Fred Dicker and Brendan Scott, and Newsday’s FROM COUP TO CUCKOO, written by Dan Janison.

Janison’s lede sets the stage for the drama upstate:

“For those learning of it downstate, this struck like lightning.

Word of the parliamentary coup’s early moments in the Senate chamber in Albany yesterday smacked or reports from a foreign n capital under siege, complete with descriptions of rooms going dark and TV feeds cut off and a mob scene in the hallway.”

Then, from Dicker and Scott:

“An unprecedented revolt sparked by two renegade Democrats yesterday ousted Majority Leader Malcolm Smith and returned Republicans to power in the state Senate, rocking the Capitol and dealing a sever blow to Gov. Paterson.

“Thirty Senate Republicans were joined by scandal scarred Democrats Pedro Espada Jr. of The Bronx and Hiram Monserrate of Queens to form a majority in the 62-member chamber. The action came on an unexpected motion by Republican Sen. Thomas Libous of Binghamton.

“Libous stunned the Senate chamber when he rose and announced a resolution naming Espada the new Senate president.

“The motion also restored Senate Minority leader Dean Skelos (R-LI) to the post of majority leader.

The historic maneuver left Senate Democrats, who in January took the majority for the first time since 1965, slack-jawed and powerless.”

On the opposite page, Dicker’s headline CLUELESS LEADERSHIP DIDN’T SEE IT COMING, says a lot. His lede:

“The historic and breathtaking coup that apparently ousted Senate Majority Leader Maclolm Smith yesterday was set in motion three weeks ago – but it was six months in the making.

"The foundation was laid in December when the ‘Gang of Four’ reengage Democrats repeatedly played political footsie with shell-shocked Republicans who had just narrowly lost their Senate majority for the first time in 43 years.

"The flirtation heated up in the following weeks – but not because of anything done by the Republicans and “Gang” members.

"The major factor was the ham-handed and embarrassingly chaotic leadership by the Queens-based Smith hand other leading Democrats, including Deputy Majority Leader Jeff Klein of The Bronx, that angered and alienated Senate Republicans.

Most importantly, it led key ‘Gang’ members Pedro Espada Jr. of The Bronx and Hiram Monserate of Queens to decide to jump ship, several insiders said last night.”

Dicker goes on to detail the various failings of the Democrat-run Senate, which greatly reduced the number of Republican leadership positions, staff allotments and member items (“pork”), polarizing the Senate and creating a near-crippling partisan impasse. By not tackling the state’s growing budget problems, Democrats also alienated at least one of their key advocates, former gubernatorial candidate Tom Golisano, whose support first helped secure Democratic victory in the fall and then aided the GOP coup yesterday.

A Post editorial, MALCOLM’S JUST DESSERTS, also takes issue with ex-Majority Leader Malcolm Smith for his ineffectual leadership.

“Light a candle for Paterson, please.

“For New York, also.

“Not that Smith didn’t richly deserve the ouster.

“Joining forces with morally malleable folks like Monserrate, Espada and the two other so-called ‘Gang of Four’ Deomcratic senators – Carl Kruger and Ruben Diaz Sr. – was to invite disaster.

“Well, the coup was itself final proof – as if any was needed – that Smith couldn’t lead the Senate in any constructive direction.

Or in any direction, for that matter: New Yorkers can rejoice in his departure, if that turns out to be the case.”

Under the p4 Daily News headline 2 DEM FLIPS SET ALBANY ABLAZE, Bill Hammond writes:

“Coup plotters have always rationalized their devious plots as necessary to realize the will of the people.

“The Republican-led junta that seized control of the state Senate yesterday was no exception.

“‘This is a new beginning for New York State,’ propagandized on e of the Democratic turncoats that made the coup possible, Bronx Sen. Pedro Espada. “A new beginning of bipartisan government, a new beginning of real reform.”

“What a crock.

This was a GOP power grab, plain and simple.”

Hammond also points to the key Democratic players in the drama.

“Any talk about fixing Albany is the thinnest of cover stories.

“No secret conspiracy involving the likes of Espada and Queens Sen. Hiram Monserrate – two of the least reputable pols in Albany – can claim to be a reform movement.

“Monserrate is fighting a felony indictment charging him with slashing his girlfriend in the face with a broken glass.

“Espada has a long history of unethical and illegal behavior. Current violations include living outside his east Bronx district, in Mamaroneck, and refusing to disclose who financed his latest campaign.

Why Skelos would trust Espada and Monserrate is obvious: They were willing to join him. The only question is what goodies they extorted.”

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE STATE SENATE

This is far from the first conflict over which political party would organize the senate, select the committee chairs and staff members, dole out member items, redistrict the state to keep themselves in office, and take advantage in every conceivable way as their status as the majority, including the refusal to consider bills submitted by minority members.

The Republican Party had ruled the Senate since January 1966, a period of forty-three years and several lifetimes in politics.

Before that, the Democrats had been in power for just one year, 1965, and their leader, Joseph Zaretzki, had been elected by Republican senators, voting en bloc with a minority of Democratic senators. This unusual outcome came after a five-week impasse, with neither of the Democratic factions able to secure the necessary votes to elect a Senate majority leader or an Assembly speaker.

The stalemate was broken by an alliance formed by two powerful figures from different parties: Governor Nelson Rockefeller, a Republican, and New York City Mayor Robert F. Wagner, a Democrat. The Governor and the Mayor, both of whom had remarkable paternal ancestors, united to oppose the Democratic county leaders in New York City, who had three years earlier, under the leadership of Carmine DeSapio, tried to dump Mayor Wagner. The candidate of the Democratic bosses, State Comptroller Arthur Levitt, Sr., lost the 1961 Democratic primary to Wagner. That was a turning point in the city’s political history and a major blow to the Democratic machine, which had exercised considerable power in the five counties since Mayor LaGuardia left office at the end of 1945.

Democratic control of the 1965 senate came only because of Lyndon Johnson’s landslide victory over Barry Goldwater. That ended a generation of Republican rule, which resumed in 1966. During the ‘70s and 80s, the Senate had respected moderate Republican leaders like Warren Anderson of Binghamton, leader from 1973 to 1988, and Ralph Marino of Oyster Bay, leader from 1989 to 1994.

In 1994, Marino was deemed insufficiently enthusiastic about freshman senator George Pataki, the Republican candidate for governor. In his two years in the senate, Pataki had taken conservative positions at odds with fellow Republicans, who at the time were a tad more liberal than they are today.

U.S. Senator Al D’Amato was the deus ex machine of the Pataki candidacy. Pataki and D’Amato both wanted Marino out, and the Republican conference, following their wishes, elected Senator Joseph Bruno of Saratoga as Majority Leader of the Senate in 1995. Bruno stayed for fourteen years, resigning both as leader and senator in the summer of 2008, while being pursued by Federal authorities who subsequently indicted him for fraud. The Republicans selected Dean Skelos of southern Nassau County to succeed Bruno, and Skelos became majority leader yesterday as two Democrats switched sides to support him.

Another bit of information: The year ending in 1 is the most important year to control either house of the legislature. That is because it is the year that follows the decennial United States census, on the basis of which district lines are supposed to be redrawn to maintain equality of population between districts, a requirement of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court. How the lines are drawn is a matter of political artistry, with each party seeking to adopt lines most favorable to them.

That is why in the Assembly, where Democrats have consistently drawn the lines, there are 109 Democrats to 41 Republicans, a margin of about 2.6 to 1. In the Senate, where Republicans have drawn the lines since the 1930s, they controlled the body except for the Democratic sweeps of 1964 and 2008.

THE MERITS OF THE DISPUTE – THE INTEGRITY OF THE RIVALS

There is little in the way of merit that divides the contestants in this quarrel over spoils. In order to win the votes of the so-called four amigos, Malcolm Smith and the Democrats made a series of commitments, some of which they did not keep. Two of the amigos, who have legal problems of their own doing, conspired for two months to turn back control to the Republicans, who they believe are more likely to keep their word.

Certain Democrats do not keep their word, 1) because they do not remember what they have said; 2) because it has become inconvenient; 3) because their promises are illegal and therefore unenforceable; and 4) because they believe that anyone foolish enough to trust them deserves the lesson he will receive from having done so.

Some newspapers and naïve TV reporters have called the amigos ‘turncoats’. We don’t believe that is justified by the facts here – public officials rebelling because promises, probably illegal ones, were unkept. Of course, the pain might have gone over to the highest bidder even if every promise was kept to the letter. There is no moral high ground here.

We just don’t know enough to divide moral culpability among the conspirators. Simply because people slash the throats of women, claim false residences, misuse poverty funds and fail to file spending reports does not necessarily mean that they cannot in turn be mistreated by others. (Indeed, they might claim that the unfairness with which they were treated by others led to their actions, for which they are being pursued by other minions of justice.)

For city residents, there is important legislation which may be jeopardized by this coup. One example is continuing mayoral control of the school system, which with all its distortions, petty injustices, extensive advertising and self-serving propaganda, appears to be more effective at educating children than the anarchy which preceded it. There appears to be a consensus that mayoral control should be tweaked but not broken. Hopefully Mayor Bloomberg’s co-operation with Senate Republicans will help accomplish the public good of extending the period of unitary responsibility for the school system by an elected official answerable to the public.

Of course, in cases like this, one doesn’t know what will happen from day to day as activist judges occasionally stick their noses into quarrels which are none of their business. We would tend, however, to trust the Court of Appeals on this one, more than we trust them on the effort to unilaterally increase their own salaries. It is right and fair that judges should receive higher salaries; it is not right that they should confer these benefits on themselves. There are, of course, other benefits than salaries. How much is it worth to have everybody stand up when you enter a room, not to have to worry about clients and their wishes, and hearing all the lawyers that surround you act is if you are very wise.

Interestingly, it was the Queens County Democratic organization that dumped incumbent Senator John Sabini in 2008 in favor of Monserrate. At that time the decision was not unreasonable, since Monserrate was getting closer each year and could well have won anyway. The district is primarily Latino and there is a paucity of Latino elected officials, in part because of geography; their homes are spread around the city more than they are concentrated in particular districts, as is more often the case with African-Americans. Sabini was given a fine job as head of the State Racing and Wagering Commission. Nor did anyone at Queens County (we imagine) anticipate Monserrate’s violent response when the woman (not his wife) who was visiting his apartment had something in her purse which gave him occasion for him to express his displeasure by striking her with a broken glass. She has dutifully withdrawn her complaint, but there are photographs of her injuries, and statements she made at the time she was injured.

CAN ANYTHING BE DONE?

Our last article (#562, 6/5/09) raised this issue, but did not answer it. A woman wrote in to say that she was discouraged that we did not recommend any corrective action. One reason for that is that, if you want to change the system, you have to play by the rules that the incumbents have written to protect themselves. People with substantial wealth have the opportunity to challenge the system, using part of their money to buy the media recognition that defines importance in today’s culture. In past crises, and when government was corrupt, outsiders organized to combat Tammany Hall.

The formation of the City Club (1892), the Municipal Arts Society (1893), and Citizens Union (1897) were part of an age of civic participation. Today the City Club lies prostrate, its assets sequestered, its members leaderless. But the other two are alive and well. They do not, however, focus on corruption, nor do they savage incompetence. They are valuable for what they do, and deserve support.

When Commissioner Gordon (not Parks nor Davis) shines his searchlight into the night sky, who else in Gotham will come to the aid of the forces of justice?

#563 06.09.2009 2327 wds