Herding Cats

Glory Be. Big Three Agree.

Foresee Albany Tranquility

The Post's front-page headline this morning, PIGS FLY, reflected the skepticism and cynicism that some New Yorkers feel at the report that the governor and legislative leaders had agreed on a state budget five days in advance of the April 1 deadline. The Times' headline was predictably more sedate: ALBANY STRIKES BUDGET ACCORD TO CUT SPENDING. The News' block head was HAMMER TIME, a catch phrase used by '80s rapper M.C. Hammer.

There was some wonderment at the timely bipartisan agreement, considering that the Senate is Republican and the Assembly Democratic. In fact, however, it would have been more difficult to reach agreement if both houses of the legislature had been controlled by the Democrats. In that eventuality, the party leaders would have no one to blame but themselves for their failure to submit entirely to the demands of the interest groups who contribute so handsomely to their campaigns. This way, they can blame the opposition party. Rule 18-X-6 applies here: "The Devil made me do it."

The state budget proceedings are generally fraught with misrepresentation by the participants. How can a ten billion dollar projected deficit disappear overnight without new taxes or new borrowing? The mayor and the governor are in direct conflict, as their predecessors have been for over fifty years or more. The worst battles were between two Republicans, Nelson Rockefeller and John Lindsay.

When one consults experts as to who is telling the truth with regard to financial claims, one is told that the two sets of numbers are both accurate, but are derived from different baselines, and therefore impossible to compare.

The possibility remains that the deal will fall apart over the next few days, as each party tries to derive maximum advantage under the frame of reference agreed upon. In that event, the high popularity of the governor in the polls, combined with the low regard shown for the legislature, should give Andrew Cuomo the upper hand over the refractory solons, a number of whom are ethically challenged.

Conventional wisdom has it that the outcome is ordained by the fact that the State Constitution gives the governor great power over the budget. Speaker Sheldon Silver and former Senate President Joseph Bruno tried to amend the State Constsitution in 2007 to give the legislature power over the governor on the state budget, but their plan was defeated at the polls.

Former Governor Paterson had the same authority that Governor Cuomo has now, but did not make the fullest use of it. There are critical theories as to why this was the case:

l. He was unaware that he had power over the budget.


2. He knew he had the power, but was indifferent to making the effort to use it.


3. He knew he had the power, and he wanted to use it, but did not know just how to do so.

4. He didn't want to upset any of the special interests in the Democratic Party, or be responsible for any budget reductions that would impact negatively any of his perceived communities and supporters.


5. He wanted to use it, but was so grateful to the legislature for not seeking to pursue him for various ethical misjudgments that he did not want to ruffle their feathers by a major disagreement over his authority.


6. Not being a friend and mentor of the Chief Judge, he feared the outcome of litigation over the issue.


7. No longer having available the services of Fr. Charles J. O'Byrne, his competent and trusted confidant, he feared that his case would not be adequately or professionally pursued.


8. He thought it might injure the Democratic Party to have a public quarrel of this nature with the Speaker.


9. Any combination of the first eight reasons.

In fact, Governor Paterson did affirmatively make use of his Constitutional authority in 2010. He acted after the April 1 budget deadline expired, by sending continuing resolutions to the legislature which included various budget reductions, some of which affected issues of public policy.

If the legislature failed to approve his resolutions, the government would have to shut down for lack of funds, causing some disruption to the public and in effect locking out state employees. Governor Paterson had success with this tactic, which Governor Cuomo is widely believed to be ready to use again to achieve the reductions and policy changes which he, and a majority of the public, generally believe to be desirable.

At this point, the close of his third month in office, Cuomo is off to a healthy start. "Day One: Everything Changes", the slogan of the Spitzer administration, is in the dustbin of history. By his third month, Spitzer was at war with the Senate and the Assembly. It was a war he was not destined to win.

With regard to Cuomo, so far the public likes what they have seen of him. He has handled himself well, speaking with both force and restraint. He was particularly good with regard to the strange intrusion by the Roman factotem into his private life, a 21st century reprise of a 16th century dispute between a pope and a king.

We don't have enormous confidence in the budget data that any politician offers, although by the laws of probability, some set of figures must be more accurate than others. It is said that the only true news in some papers is the obituaries, and the only true budget reductions come when people are separated from the payroll, or when prisons actually physically close. That has not yet come to pass, and we do not wish unemployment on anyone, especially in these difficult times. It is difficult, however, for ordinary people to figure out how it is that multi-billion dollar budget goals are proclaimed to have been achieved while personnel costs remain largely untouched and pension costs continue to rise.

Meanwhile, it is better to see both parties on good behavior than to watch them snipe. Governor Cuomo deserves credit for, at least temporarily, restoring good manners to the Capitol. We hope he stays calm. Remember, the governor proposes, the legislature appropriates, but the governor has the last crack at what the agencies spend. He cannot add to appropriations, but he can subtract, particularly in the event of financial emergency, which we have been told is the present exigency.

FYI, the California state budget deficit this year is estimated at $25.4 billion. We are not alone.

BTW: Former City and State Comptroller Alan Hevesi's sentencing on a felony conviction was postponed today after Judge Lewis Bart Stone sent the case back for assignment to another judge because of a potential conflict of interest between the judge and Hevesi's lawyer. Hevesi pleaded guilty on October 7, 2010. He had resigned as State Comptroller on December 22, 2006, after a prior conviction for an unrelated felony.

Lastly, for information about herding cats, click here.

The Governor's Speech

Cuomo Warns Legislature

Fiscal Disaster Lies Ahead

Without Sharp Reductions

The new Governor Cuomo delivered his first State of the State message yesterday. I watched the speech and found it credible and constructive. Cuomo seems to be making a conscious effort to get along with the legislature. At the same time, he outlined spending reductions, ethics reforms, independent redistricting and other proposals which have been anathema to the Senate and Assembly in years past.

Politics requires a certain level of optimism, and with a new governor, there is more reason for hope than there has been for many years. The wrenching disappointments of the Spitzer and Paterson administrations are now behind us, the ever-mounting budget deficit is before us. The device of expert panels proposed by Governor Cuomo in his speech will have limited impact in reaching agreements or even postponing the day of reckoning, but to the extent that it brings new people into the mix of decision-making it may be helpful.

I liked the informal approach of Cuomo's PowerPoint presentation in principle, although it was not particularly proficiently executed. That will be cured by staff training or staff upgrading. The governor of 19 million people should have the highest level of technical support when he reaches out to the public.

The substance of the message showed clearly the Governor's awareness of fiscal reality and his willingness to make hard choices. Of course, he didn't get around to specifying those choices precisely; that will presumably come in the budget message next month. What seems clear, today, is that Andrew Cuomo is conscious of how his policy decisions will be perceived not just by New Yorkers, but by people across the nation as well, the potential greater constituency.

It was said that in the French Army, every corporal has a field marshal's baton in his cap. So it is that every governor of New York State dreams of the White House. So far three have made it, Martin Van Buren (1837-41) and the two Roosevelts, Theodore (1901-09) and Franklin (1933-45). Among those who tried and failed in the 20th century are Charles Evans Hughes (1916), Alfred E. Smith (1928), Thomas E. Dewey (1944, 48), and Nelson A. Rockefeller (1960, 64 and 68). George Pataki tested the waters in 2008 and found them frigid, as everyone knew.

Perhaps the most dramatic non-candidacy occurred on December 21, 1991, when Governor Mario Cuomo, whose staff had chartered two planes to fly him and the press corps to Concord, New Hampshire - where he would have paid a $1000 filing fee and announced his candidacy in the Democratic Presidential primary in front of the State House - unexpectedly left the aircraft waiting on the tarmac when he decided not to take flight. That afternoon, Cuomo announced his decision in the New York State Capitol. He said that the Republicans, who then controlled the State Senate, had made it impossible for him to run "for their own purposes". Click here to read a fascinating Times account of that eventful day.

It was twenty-nine years ago that budget problems obstructed Mario Cuomo's presidential campaign, and those difficulties have only grown in the years that followed. Although there have been years of unheeded warnings that the days of reckoning were at hand, the national recession of the past two years and the continuing spiral in health and pension benefits have brought a number of state governments to the brink of insolvency.

Some cities and counties have been through bankruptcy, but no state has yet defaulted on its sovereign debt. No government wants to be the first to blow, so fiscal reality has been widely concealed by bookkeeping devices loosely described as Enronian. The budget problems that New York State faced in 1992 are dwarfed by the $10 billion deficit the state must deal with today. However, New York is not the worst. The California state budget deficit is expected to be $19 billion in the next fiscal year - and this after seven years with Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was not a weak public figure, as governor.

There is a problem in the governor's plan to enlist groups of stakeholders to recommend policy changes and service reductions. Many of these stakeholders have directly conflicting interests, and it is hard to foresee what they might agree on to suggest to the governor. Cuomo evoked the Berger Commission, ably chaired by Stephen Berger, which recommended hospital closings in 2006. There is enormous local resistance to closing hospitals, or any other state facilities. Whether they are medically needed or not, they are job providers, like the upstate prisons and juvies (juvenile detention facilities) which Cuomo specifically targeted in his remarks.

We think the Governor jumped the first hurdle nicely, with spirit and good humor, showing his desire to bring people together, which is urgently needed. The next test will be his executive budget, which is due on February 1, twenty-six days from today. The deadline for adopting the budget is April l, but that date is rarely met, and no one seriously expects a ten billion dollar gap to be closed in two months.

We enjoyed the spirit and verve of Andrew Cuomo's speech: the young lancer laying out the problem and part of his plan (if there be a plan); the Albany veterans, expressing verbal support and encouragement, the infighting necessarily left for another day and a place outside public view. Nonetheless, Cuomo made real progress, speaking bravely about the fiscal chasm. For a Democratic governor, it was an astounding admission of reality. There were no impractical schemes to tax rich people who, by pressing a button, can move their industries and their income outside the state.

The merger of the Departments of Banking and Insurance is quite sensible. Since the repeal of Glass-Steagall by Congress, the same companies are in both fields. The Consumer Protection Board will find a home in a larger agency. I was in city consumer affairs (first deputy to Commissioner Bess Myerson) in 1970, when the state agency was formed by Governor Rockefeller with Betty Furness, formerly with LBJ's White House, as chair.

A great deal will depend on who is chosen to staff the new State Department of Financial Regulation, but it will give Governor Cuomo a piece of the action in a field otherwise likely to be dominated by the new Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, a man who is as ambitious and as enterprising as his two immediate predecessors, the Governors Spitzer and Cuomo.

Let the games begin.

StarQuest #731 1.6.2011 1075 words

Shameful, Not Criminal

Judge Kaye Flays Gov. Paterson

But Finds No Crime Committed



The domestic violence scandal that enveloped the Paterson administration last February, and led to his withdrawal from the race for a new term, has turned a corner with the release of a 57-page report from former Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye excoriating Governor Paterson for his intrusion into the case and his disingenuous testimony. Judge Kaye also found fault with the Governor and his lawyers' failure to co-operate with the probe as they had promised.

Nonetheless, the report concludes that the Governor's conduct does not warrant criminal prosecution, and with that conclusion we agree. The governor paid a political price for what he did: the destruction of his candidacy. Of course, to most of us, his candidacy was delusional anyway in the face of a challenge by State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. The Governor may have saved himself a lot of money and effort by his early (February 26) departure from the race.

Of course, the Governor's actions could be considered as crimes; obstruction of justice, witness tampering, perjury, solicitation, coercion, misuse of state resources and police, breach of his obligation to provide "honest services" to the people of the state. One could go on listing errors of judgment which could be considered crossing the line into criminal behavior.

On the other hand, Paterson did not succeed in coercing anyone, except for the fact that the witness did not show up in court the next day and the charges were consequently dropped. She has recently renewed her complaint, taking the matter to the Bronx County District Attorney, who has jurisdiction. Perhaps the fresh activity is the result of failure to keep promises which may have been made, but a criminal indictment cannot result from such speculation. The Governor did try to persuade the witness not to say anything bad about him, but there is no accusation either of threatening the witness or offering a specific inducement for her not to testify.

The Kaye report also faulted the Executive Chamber for failure to co-operate fully although they had made a public commitment to do so. One example is the considerable delay in the production of documents, which was attributed to work on the state budget, which by now is 120 days late.

What the report basically consists of is a specific public exposition of the entire dreary affair. The decision not to press criminal charges is a matter of judgment. One of the wisest things a prosecutor can do is know when not to prosecute a case even though the defendant's conduct may be less than exemplary.

The matters not adjudicated - the World Series tickets and the Aqueduct racino - are potentially more serious. We can assume that Paterson was mistaken in his account of the tickets, and did not intend to pay for them unless he had to.

But the billion-dollar Yankees should have had the good grace to invite the Governor and his young son to be their guests at the opening game of the World Series, rather than to have him scramble for admission. If a team charges enough, cadging a ticket to the game could be called grand larceny. The following quatrain, whose author is anonymous, dates back three centuries. It may have some relevance to the issue of ticket pricing.

"The law doth punish man or woman
That steals the goose from off the common,
But lets the greater felon loose
That steals the common from the goose."

As to the Aqueduct racino, that too was not within Judge Kaye's scope of work.

It is the most serious of the three integrity issues, and the main reason that it may not be a crime is because the transaction was not consummated.

There are numerous reasons to object to the plan, among the most sensible is that it is an enormous waste of 192 acres of urban land. Donald Trump once put up a sign on West End Avenue at 61st Street, in front of property he owned at the time. It read: "Respect this land. They're not making any more of it."

The racino scheme deserves an article of its own, which it will receive. Suffice it to say at this time that this is one case in which the ends and the means are equally indefensible, and regardless of who ends up with the contract, the plan itself is for what we believe is an unworthy purpose, and is highly unlikely to bring any significant benefits to the surrounding community, as we should have learned from the example of Atlantic City.

Judge Kaye took over fifty pages to describe a pattern of lies and evasions in an attempt to cover up David Johnson's violent assault on Sherr-una Booker. Anyone who believes she made up the allegations should proceed directly to the Brooklyn Bridge, where a nice man is waiting to sell it to you.

The governor's motive in all this was to try to save his main man. He had previously suffered the loss of former Rev. Charles O'Byrne, who had neglected to file income tax returns for five years. Father O'Byrne, an intelligent and decent man, escaped a prison term but was required to leave the governor's service. He had a different variety of ill luck with regard to David W. (D.J.) Johnson, his body man who advanced in influence over the years.

It would not be in the interest of the state or its people to subject its outgoing governor to a sensational show trial. A similar wise decision was made in the case of Paterson's predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, who could have been tried but was not.

It is a wise district attorney or attorney general who knows when to prosecute and when to leave a case alone. Andrew Cuomo showed wisdom in recusing himself and appointing Chief Judge Kaye, and the judge played a constructive role by demonstrating the governor's misdeeds and then letting him off the hook.

The show is not over. It is now up to District Attorney Robert Johnson of the Bronx to decide whether to prosecute David Johnson for his alleged assault on Sherr-una Booker. If he does, we will follow the trial. We would expect a plea bargain, but sometimes things just don't work out, as in the relationship between Johnson and Booker. One cannot blame Ms. Booker for involving the Governor in this mess; it was his minions, and then himself, who called her with encouragement.

CORRECTIONS

As a number of our readers pointed out, there was a typographical error in our article, "Albany Mulls Sale of Wine…" The first sentence in the sixth paragraph shoud have read: "This issue is clearly presented in Governor Paterson's proposal to allow the sale of wine in supermarkets, on payment of a licensing fee to the state." We erroneously typed 'liquor stores' instead of 'supermarkets.' Of course, wine is already sold in liquor stores. We thank Allen Bortnick, Joe Jansen, Arthur Engoron, Ed Silberfarb, Jonathan Piel, Mary Ann Jones, Jeffrey Sussman, Bill Foote, Ernest Rubenstein, and Kenneth Adams, who called or emailed us to bring our attention to the slip of the pen (or the fingers).

Also in yesterday's article, we erroneously reported that Trader Joe's sells wine in its New York stores. That was based on eyeballing their 14th Street store, which appeared to sell wine. In fact, like any other supermarket or grocery store in New York State, Trader Joe's is not allowed to sell wine in its stores. In 2006, however, Trader Joe's was granted a liquor license for a separate wine store (138 East 14th Street) immediately adjacent to its then-newly opened Union Square location (142 East 14th Street). Since current state law only permits one liquor license per owner, corporate or individual, Trader Joe's has been unable to replicate this scheme at its 12 other stores in New York State. Thanks to Adam Greene, Mary Ann Jones, Roger Herz, Teresa Hommel, Jim Grossman, and Judy Bliss for pointing out our mistake.

Wine is Fine, Liquor is Quicker

Albany Mulls

Sale of Wine

In Groceries



We often complain about laws or conditions that we believe are wrong or unjustified. Sometimes we ask how these conditions are allowed to continue, when the injustice of the situation is relatively apparent.

The answer to that question is often simple: the forces that benefit from the injustice have more influence in the legislature than those who suffer because of it. There are numerous situations in which a law or a regulation benefits a small number of people or businesses at the expense or to the detriment of the general public. Those with a specific interest in particular situations hire other people, known as lobbyists, to influence the legislature on their behalf.


Now lobbying is a legitimate industry, protected to some extent by the First Amendment rights of individuals and now, of corporations. It also professionalizes contact with lawmakers, which many people just do not know how to do.


The problem is that lobbyists have a tendency to monopolize access to legislators. Ordinary people, without the time or resources of a lobbying firm, often have a hard time getting through the door. They find it necessary to hire a professional in order to be heard. Also, lobbyists bring money, in the form of campaign contributions from their clients, which create a general feeling of good will in the recipient toward the donor. That is human nature, and if a legislator did not appreciate contributions he would be considered arrogant, indifferent and ungrateful. If he responded only to contributions, he would be corrupt, but that is a difficult matter to prove.


It is true that both sides to a controversy can hire lobbyists, and equal contributions by people with opposite interests can level the playing field for legislators' favor. Unhappily, the general public interest is less likely to organize itself than a specific commercial group, which is likely to have a direct financial interest in the particular piece of legislation.


This issue is clearly presented in Governor Paterson's proposal to allow the sale of wine in grocery stores, on payment of a licensing fee to the state. The governor sees this as a way to increase revenue, and he estimates that the tax will raise between $147 and $300 million in the next two years. The fee would rise for stores with larger total sales, so large supermarkets would have to pay more. Thirty-five states currently allow the sale of wine in supermarkets, and according to a February 22, 2010 poll conducted by the Siena Research Institute, New Yorkers support making our state the 36th to do so by a margin of 58 per cent to 39 per cent.


As even the most casual sommelier knows, New York State is a producer of wine, particularly in the Finger Lakes area. If wine could be sold in more places that would presumably help the agricultural portion of the New York State economy. Upstate needs all the economic stimulus it can get, and the increase in the sale of wine would benefit vineyards in the Finger Lakes region, among others.


The people who would lose under the governor's proposal are the owners of liquor stores, which now have a monopoly on the sale of liquor, although they can, and do, also sell wine. There are over a thousand independent liquor stores in New York State, many of which are so-called "mom and pop" stores, although we do not see too many moms selling liquor.

Opponents of the bill say it will hurt their business, and it probably will. If people can buy wine at supermarkets, they will have the advantage of convenience as well as a lower markup.

At least one union objects, as well. According to a press release from the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), circulated on the New York State Liquor Store Association's website, "This bad idea will force more than 1,000 stores to close across New York State - and that will mean the loss of hundreds of jobs for union members who sell and deliver to these stores. Fewer stores mean fewer delivery jobs and fewer sales jobs for our union members, both upstate and in the New York City region, since Big Box stores have their own networks already."

A winery owner makes a different argument against the bill. He says that liquor stores are not allowed to be open 24 hours, must pay their bills within 30 days and are subject to State Liquor Authority inspections. He sees teenage supermarket clerks selling wine to teenage drivers late at night, a scenario where car crashes and fatalities are predictable. The force of those objections is weakened by the fact that supermarkets are already allowed to sell beer on payment of a license fee to the state. Teenagers can get drunk on beer, and often do.

Wine has a far higher alcohol content than beer, although the percentage of alcohol in each product varies from band to brand. During the Prohibition Era in the United States, 1920 to 1933, the sale of beverages with over .5 per cent (half of 1 %) alcohol was forbidden. Prohibition was adopted by the 18th Amendment to the Constitution in 1920, and repealed by the 21st Amendment in 1933.

Constitutional amendments require ratification by three quarters of the state legislatures. New York State was the 43rd to ratify prohibition (it had taken effect at the 36th ratification, since there were 48 states in the Union from 1912 to 1959). New York was the 9th to ratify repeal, which indicates greater enthusiasm for the wets than there was for the drys. Even today, some Midwestern and Southern counties prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages. Thirty-three states have laws permitting local option on this issue.


Another example of competition between business interests was the law forbidding the sale of yellow margarine in New York State. In 1886 New York and New Jersey prohibited the manufacture and sale of yellow colored margarine. That law remained on the books in New York until 1952, with consumer advocates supporting its repeal and upstate Senators resisting.


Wisconsin and Minnesota, both agricultural states with numerous cows, were the last to repeal their laws preventing the sale of yellow margarine, Minnesota in 1963 and Wisconsin, The Dairy State, in 1967.


The general public interest, it seems to us, would be furthered by the availability for sale of wine in supermarkets. That is the law in 35 states. Trader Joe's sells wine in its New York stores; it is apparently not considered a supermarket.

Red wine is now considered healthful because it contains resveratrol, and observers point to a relatively low rate of heart attacks in France, where a great deal of wine is consumed. The health argument has not, as yet, been seen as influencing the decision on the issue.


The margarine war is a historic example of commercial interest using the law to injure their rivals and promote their own interests. The wine in supermarkets issue is current. Legislators will make their decision on the basis of political and economic considerations. Unfortunately, many will decide on the basis of how these factors affect them personally, rather than on how they affect the general public. That is Albany dealing with a substantive issue.

To Catch A Thief

Budget Deadlock - Day 110



Albany Democrats, Paterson

Ignore Bloomberg and Kelly,

Limit Use of Stop and Frisk




In most places, state legislatures enact laws which assist local authorities to prevent crime or catch criminals.

New York State is an exception.

The New York State Senate and Assembly, with the signature of Governor Paterson, have enacted a law to prevent the Police Department from using information in its own database as leads in the investigation of violent crimes.

The bill was sponsored by Senator Eric Adams and Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, who represent Brooklyn districts where robbery, assault and rape are serious problems. Adams, a retired police officer, once headed One Hundred Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care. One would think that they would be particularly concerned with the apprehension of criminals who prey on their constituents. The predators, however, also include constituents.

Predictably, the New York Civil Liberties Union calls the database a "virtual police lineup of millions of completely innocent black and Latino New Yorkers". We are not surprised at the views of the NYCLU, who consistently oppose any measure considered helpful to the authorities. The group is not as concerned with the right of citizens not to be attacked, robbed or raped, in favor of the robbers and rapists’ interest in avoiding apprehension and punishment for their violent, sometimes fatal, assaults.

It depends on what kind of society one wants to live in. I value personal security, for myself, elderly parents, spouse and children. I would not mind being stopped and frisked if that would result in a safer community. Stop and frisk is usually employed for a reason, and that need not be criminal behavior at that instant. How do you know whether someone is carrying a gun unless you can check him and find out?

The Daily News and the Post have both editorialized on the subject. The News, on July 15, urged Governor Paterson to veto the bill in BE A CRIMESTOPPER, DAVE. Its lede: "The NYPD has an investigative tool that produced at least 170 arrests over the past 18 months, including for 17 murders, 36 robberies, 11 shootings and 7 rapes. It is a roaring public safety success -- and Gov. Paterson must guarantee its survival." Click here to read the well-reasoned and detailed editorial.

The Post, on July 16, in BEGGING FOR MORE CRIME, made this point: "[The bill's sponsors] pretend the database is racist -- or an intolerable infringement on privacy rights. In fact, the info it contains, and the steep drops in crime, have benefited minority communities in particular."

Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Ray Kelly, appealed to the governor for a veto. The mayor's comments were reported in an article by Celeste Katz and Adam Lisberg, BLOOMBERG: I DON’T LOSE ON STOP-AND-FRISK - CRIME VICTIMS DO. Click here to read an op-ed by Commissioner Kelly on the subject.

The Governor signed the bill on July 16, and issued a signing statement, along with comments by the bill's sponsors. We quote his words:

"In a democracy there are times when safety and liberty find themselves in conflict. From the Alien and Sedition Acts to the Japanese internment camps during WWII to the Patriot Act, we have experienced moments when liberty took a back seat. And each time, hindsight made our errors clear. Today, we have an opportunity to set the scales of safety and liberty in balance before we lose something we can’t get back…"

We did not know until reading Governor Paterson's words that, in his mind, the Patriot Act was an historic error. The United States Senate approved the Act, 98-1, on October 25, 2001, six weeks after 9/11. Was everyone but Russell Feingold mistaken? Perhaps the Governor or his amanuensis will enlighten us as to how "hindsight made our errors clear" with regard to the Patriot Act.

It is noteworthy that every one of the 32 Democratic state senators voted to prevent the use of the electronic stop and frisk database, while all 29 Republicans opposed restricting it. (To see how your State Senator voted, click here. For your Assemblymember, click here.) Also, all five candidates for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General supported the bill. If you can find a Democrat who agreed with Mayor Bloomberg, Commissioner Kelly, the News and the Post, please advise us.

Someday soon technology will alleviate the frisking part of the encounter. But that would not satisfy its opponents, who would inhibit any contact with potential assailants that did not result in an immediate arrest. In a way, the issue here depends on with which group the observer identifies: predator or prey. The great majority of New Yorkers are not predators, but many are afraid, to a greater or lesser extent, depending on where they live or how old they are, of becoming prey. These are the people whose views are not heard or listened to by most members of our dysfunctional Legislature.





StarQuest #690 07.20.2010 802 words

HOT AIR: Albany, NYC, Syracuse

Budget Deadlock - Day 99

Heat Wave - Who Invented Air Conditioning?



Barrett, on Albany Strife,

Criticizes Paterson Vetoes

As Unjustified Pessimism

On Funding of Medicaid



A great deal of what has been going on in Albany for years is confusing to most people.

Media reports shed some light on events, but do not reveal the motivations of the actors.

One person who is more often right than wrong, and has perceptions that many others lack, is Wayne Barrett, a senior editor at the Village Voice, who has been covering politics for almost 30 years.

He has been writing about the budget crisis for the last week, and is particularly critical of Governor Paterson's veto of 7,000 bills.

What it comes down to is that all factions of both parties are acting in what they believe is their own partisan interest. The result has been deadlock, with the possibility of a descent into chaos as time goes on and the money runs out.

Rather than rewrite what Barrett and his team of researchers have discovered and explained, we want to link directly to his Village Voice articles and blog.

We recommend it for your weekend reading, if you have the opportunity. You should read what Barrett has written before coming to your own judgment on the budget. Among the titles of his most recent articles are: "David Paterson Vetoes His Way to Tabloid Glory", "David Paterson, After Letting St. Vincent's Die, Rescues a Harlem Hospital From His Old District", "David Paterson Shadow-Boxes Himself; Press Awards Him TKO", and "Mike Bloomberg Draws Praise for the Same Budget Decisions That Reap Tabloid Ridicule for Shelly Silver".

This does not mean we agree with every point Barrett makes, but his observations are an important part of a discussion, as the months pass is becoming too complex for many people to follow

One conclusion most New Yorkers have drawn by now is distaste for all the combatants and their self-serving manipulation of facts and events. But the remedy for this situation is harder to discern.

HEAT WAVE SPURS US TO LOOK INTO STORY OF AIR CONDITIONING

This week will be most remembered for the heat wave that struck the northeast. The degree of discomfort experienced by New Yorkers varied with the availability of air conditioning in homes, offices, subways and buses.

For us at New York Civic, it was a new experience to leave a relatively pleasant office, go out on Park Avenue South to find a place to eat lunch, and be struck by a blast of hot, dry air, making us feel as if we were in a new milieu, more like a sauna than a steam room.

It made one reflect on what New York would be like if we had this heat every day - think of summer in Phoenix, Arizona and similar locations. How dependent we are on climate, and how limited in range our comfort level has become, were among the thoughts that crossed my mind while my co-workers and I sweltered, knowing we simply had to hold out until we reached the Curry Express on East 29th Street, just east of Lexington Avenue, in Little India.

BTW, we recommend the place highly. Delicious (to us) food at very reasonable prices.

A CENTURY OF ARTIFICIALLY COOLED AIR

Who invented air conditioning, anyway? When and where did it come into use? The inventor was Willis Haviland Carrier, who founded the eponymous company.

Carrier was born in 1876 in Angola, New York, a village on Lake Erie, which was named after the sub-Saharan African nation, then a Portuguese colony, which at that time was being visited by Quaker missionaries from Angola, NY. The lakeside village still exists; its population was 2,266 at the 2000 census. The nation's name sounds Angola-Saxon rather than African, but in fact, it is derived from the Bantu kingdom of Ndongo, whose word meaning king is "ngola". You didn't know that.

Carrier studied mechanical engineering at Cornell, graduating in 1901. He went to work at the Buffalo Forge Company, in the heating division, and reasoned that if forcing air through hot coils would warm a room, using cold water in metal coils would cool the room. The company sent him to help a client in New York.

On July 17, 1902, the first air conditioner began operating at the Sackett-Wilhelms Lithographing & Publishing Company in Brooklyn. Carrier obtained a patent for his invention in 1906. It was designed to humidify or dehumidify air. In 1914, he and six other young engineers formed the Carrier Engineering Corporation which, despite being beset by financial problems brought on by the Wall Street Crash of October 1929, survived the Great Depression and moved to Syracuse, NY. Carrier died in 1950, and the company was acquired by United Technologies (formerly General Dynamics) in 1979, and its headquarters moved to Farmington, CT.

The Carrier Dome, Syracuse's indoor arena, is the largest domed stadium of any college campus. It received a naming gift of $2.75 million from the Carrier Corporation, in addition to $15 million in state funds during Hugh L. Carey's campaign for re-election in 1978. You may observe that the name Carey is part of Carrier. The arena opened in 1980 and is still in use today. Despite its name, the Carrier Dome is not air conditioned.

Pension King Is College Prexy

Biggest Dipper Hits the Spot

$541,037 + Fringes, That's Alot

Thrice as Much as Paterson Too

SUNY Albany is Good for You

The man receiving the highest public pension in the State of New York is at the same time a state university official, earning a salary which is even larger than his extraordinary pension.

On Wednesday, The Empire Center released a list of the 100 retirees receiving the highest public employee pensions in the State of New York. Topping the list was George M. Philip, who retired on November 7, 2007 after 36 years at the NYS Teachers Retirement System (NYSTRS) with an annual pension of $261,037. That sum is $55,453 per year more than the second highest pensioner in the state received.

Philip started at NYSTRS in 1971 as an information representative and was promoted frequently by the agency, eventually becoming both executive director of the fund - one of the 10 largest public retirement funds in the nation, with more than 400,000 members and managed assets of $105 billion – and its chief investment officer. Serving in these dual roles for 12 years until his "retirement" three years ago, Philip was paid a combined salary of $379,600 – more than twice the $179,000 Governor Paterson earns.

The $261,037 annual pension is calculated on the basis of his final combined salary at NYSTRS, which was $379,600. The pension is received on top of the $280,000 salary he gets for his current position at the State University. Philip, who received both his B.A. (1969) and M.A. (1973) from SUNY-Albany, was appointed head of his alma mater after serving 18 months as the university’s interim president. Philip, who does not hold a Ph.D. degree as most university presidents do, also received a J.D. degree from the Western New England College School of Law in Springfield, Massachusetts. SUNY-Albany does not have a law school.

Philip enrolled in the Employee Retirement System on September 1st, 1969, though it is not clear from Philip's bio on SUNY-Albany's website what he did between his graduation from college in 1969 and his joining NYSTRS IN 1971. From 1970-1976, during the latter years of the Vietnam War, Philip found a place in the New York Army National Guard, but a representative of the New York State Division of Military & Naval Affairs said that Philip would not be eligible for a state pension based upon his service. He did not re-enlist when his six-year term expired. Mr. Philip is also on the board of directors of U.S. Airways Group and First Niagara Financial Group, according to Forbes.com.

When we called Mr. Philip's office to ask to speak to him, we were referred to the college's media office, which told us that he had declined to comment. That is understandable. He could, however, defend his compensation. If he ran the retirement system honestly and competently, without outside income or placement agents, he would be worth what we paid him. He chose not to speak.

His selection as the university's president was the result of an unusual situation. The popular president of SUNY-Albany, Kermit L. Hall, died tragically on August 13, 2006 at the age of 61 while swimming with his wife (who survived) near their summer home in Hilton Head, South Carolina. In 1992, Hall was one of five Americans who served on a board that studied and released documents pertaining to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, according to The New York Times.

The names Kermit and Hall both appear as members of the extended Roosevelt family; Kermit was a son of Theodore Roosevelt, and Anna Rebecca Livingston Ludlow Hall Roosevelt was the mother of Anna Eleanor Roosevelt, who married Franklin Delano Roosevelt on March 17, 1905. The wedding date was set so that the bride could be given away by her uncle, Theodore, whose office was in Washington but who traveled to New York for the ceremony. Eleanor Roosevelt, the bride, had a brother named Hall Roosevelt.

After the untimely death of Kermit Hall, the provost, Dr. Susan Herbst was designated as officer in charge of SUNY-Albany. Dr. Herbst resigned in October 2007 to become executive vice chancellor and chief academic officer for the university system of the State of Georgia. Mr. Philip was then chosen as Interim President, a title Dr. Herbst did not receive, in which capacity he served for eighteen months before the trustees of the State University of New York promoted him to the presidency on June 16, 2009.

We do not know whether Mr. Philip is worth $541,037, plus fringe benefits. We wonder whether any other university deans or scholars were available for the presidency of SUNY-Albany during the three years the position was left vacant after Dr. Hall's untimely passing. We believe that what happened here was perfectly legal under existing statutes. An attempt to modify the pension could well be unconstitutional, or at least one could find a federal or state judge (all prospective pensioners) to decree so.

We do question whether during a time of cutbacks and layoffs, individuals should receive such substantial lifetime payouts from the State of New York. We question whether Mr. Philip was named president because of his academic credentials, or because he was an insider who knew the people who counted. We ask how many people he helped, properly, in his positions at the Teachers Retirement System. Who helped him?

The presidency of a major division of the State University, located in the capital of the Empire State, should be a position sought by the ablest people in the academic world. Is the major domo of the Teachers Retirement System the best New York can do? Should his/her horizon be broader than Albany?

We come to no conclusion on the merits of Mr. Philip, or of the practice of double dipping on this grand a scale. We think these matters need serious thought. We encourage you to consider them. If you have specific information, please let us know promptly so we can advise our readers. If you have opinions, send them to us for our website.

Enjoy the weekend.

Monday is the first day of summer.

Paterson Channels Polonius

Albany Skirmish

Over Borrowing

Day 78 without a state budget.

78 is the speed of some old records, in rpm, the atomic number of platinum, and the number of chromosomes in a dog's DNA (39 pairs). We have 23 pairs.

We have not written since last week about the state budget and the contortions now under way as the legislature and governor try to reach agreement. It is not clear how hard they are trying, but we believe they are making a serious effort to come to terms. Governor Paterson's threat to shut down state government alarms incumbents who do not want to be blamed for any of their constituent-contributors not receiving their paychecks.

In the last months, the courts have shot down the governor's planned furloughs and layoffs as part of the judiciary's ever-expanding sense of its own responsibilities (see Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission). It was a Federal judge who ruled, in Donohue v. Paterson, that the governor could not impose a four-day work week, pursuant to the next to last prohibition of Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution. For those of you who may not recall the section, we reprint its relevant first paragraph:

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any title of Nobility."

In the past, Speaker Sheldon Silver has won many political battles by delaying a decision until the last minute, and then making a proposal which could not be refused. He is the most proficient politician in the Albany swamp, and his skills should not be underestimated. Some of his strength comes from the fact that he is responsive to his base (the Democratic Assembly caucus) and tries to protect his members, although a few of them are felons.

Silver is responsible for two major appointments made by the governor: Lieutenant Governor Richard Ravitch and Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman of the Court of Appeals. Both men are competent. Judge Lippman persuaded a bare majority of the Court of Appeals to sustain the appointment of LG Ravitch, a decision that may well have been in the public interest, although it would probably not have been the correct answer in a law school examination.

The decision certainly blindsided Attorney General Cuomo, who took the opposite position, but he has recovered nicely. He awaits the opportunity to choose Judges of the Court of Appeals himself, and will use his wits to avoid being boxed in by nominating committees which substantially limit his power of appointment by minimizing the number of papabili from whom he must choose.

The story today was that Governor Paterson said he would rule out borrowing, which is in direct contrast with the Ravitch plan, which calls for two years of borrowing, limited by the imposition of strict fiscal controls by a financial control board. If Paterson sticks to his guns, more layoffs will be required.

We expect some sort of flim-flammery to be proposed, which means borrowing billions from somewhere without calling it that. Raiding the pension funds is one possible scheme, vaguely justifiable because it is the swelling pension funds which got us into this trouble in the first place. Any more state borrowing, however, will further increase the interest on the public debt, which must be paid before one begins to provide for vital services like police, fire and education.

Paterson's problem is somewhat mitigated by the fact that President Obama, Governor Schwarzenegger and many other public officials have the same difficulties. The national debt today is about thirteen trillion dollars, or $13,000,000,000,000. We left off the number of cents so as not to appear to exaggerate the number of zeroes (12).

The problem at all levels of government, in many countries around the world, is that public expenditures exceed revenues. This can lead to devaluation of the currency, which makes debt less burdensome, and at the same time destroys people's savings. New currency was issued in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (Pyongyang), and resulting public dissatisfaction led to the execution (by the regime) of two officials held responsible for the decision, and the demotion of others.

Living in a more gracious and gentle system, our economic blunderers go off to academia and think-tanks of like-minded souls. They are replaced by others whose views are just different enough to convey a sense of change. The first TARP program was enacted under President George W. Bush and Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, former chairman of Goldman Sachs.

When Mr. Bush was asked why he had approved such a substantial bailout in view of his generally conservative economic views (but not practices, he was a mega-spender), he replied in effect that he did not want to go down in history as being President of the United States when the economy collapsed completely. The shade of Hoover was in his mind, and that was an image he urgently desired to avoid, and for the most part successfully did, although the subprime crisis and market collapse took place in 2008, and led to the defeat of the McCain-Pain ticket.

Every cloud has a silver lining.

Sticks and Stones

Rogue Senators

Trash Governor

In War of Words.

'Thugs', He Calls

Espada and Diaz.

Day 71 without a budget. There are 71 characters on a standard English keyboard, not counting upper and lower case characters twice.

The situation in Albany changes from hour to hour, as insults are hurled back and forth between several senators and the governor.

Two Daily News articles do justice to the situation: Bill Hammond's PEDRO & SKELOS STAR IN 'CHAOS' 2, in yesterday’s News, reminds us of Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, except that Hammond is funnier. Reading the column, you should be outraged, but you may also be amused.

The story is followed up in today's News in an article by Glenn Blain and Kenneth Lovett of the News' Albany bureau. Headlined POLS SLING MUD AS STATE TILTS TOWARD CHAOS, the story begins:

"Pro wrestling would kill for the vindictive, no-holds-barred story line unfolding in the state Capitol. Sens. Pedro Espada and Ruben Diaz teamed up against Gov. Paterson yesterday in a budget battle featuring personal jabs as subtle as sledgehammers.

'We cannot let an unelected, lame-duck governor that no one in the state wants to actually decide this [budget] by himself in a piecemeal fashion,' said Espada, miffed over the spending cuts Paterson has tucked into short-term emergency plans."

Then Espada went for the knockout by referring to Paterson's despair over the ongoing attorney general probe of his contact with a domestic violence victim.

"Rev. Diaz and I were the first ones to visit Gov. Paterson in his mansion when he was stretched out on a psychiatric sofa, unable to lift himself to come to work."

Quickly, [Espada] added: "We don’t want to resort to name-calling."

Paterson, likewise, pulled no punches in unleashing his own barrage of insults.

He dismissed the two Bronx Democrats, both of whom threatened to shut down the government over budget disputes, as irresponsible rogues and blackmailers.

"I'm not going to respond to any threats, any thug activity," Paterson said. He didn’t mention the two senators by names, but his targets were unmistakable."

We at New York Civic cannot predict how these angry Democrats will feel tomorrow. The Republicans so far have been no help, seeking only to portray the Democrats as incompetent to manage the senate or adopt a budget. This Republican strategy plays into the hands of Espada and Diaz by making them necessary parties to a budget agreement. As successor to Joe Bruno, who resigned because of legal problems, Skelos should be working with Paterson. However, he resents being excluded whenever he is not needed, and he wants desperately to regain the senate majority the Republicans lost in 2008 after forty-three years in power. He doesn't know what strategy to follow, but he should remember that Newt Gingrich was blamed for the last federal government shutdown, in 1995-96.

The issues are likely to be resolved, but not before the last minute. So far the parties are playing a game of 'chicken', expecting the other to back down or to agree to a face-saving compromise. Returning to the movies after Bill & Ted, we note than in Rebel Without a Cause, one of the competing cars went over the cliff. The same dramatic conclusion ended the story of Thelma and Louise, except that they were in one car.

Actually, a government shutdown for a brief period might not be so bad. It could show us some of what we could get by without. Besides, state employees are not nearly as essential as city police, fire, transit and sanitation workers. It is not in the state workers' interest for the public to find that out.

Cuckoo Coupday

$125 Billion Spent,

What Do You Get?

Another Year Older

And Deeper in Debt

Day 69 without a budget - en francais, soixante-neuf.

The Battle of the Budget continues, with both the Senate and the Assembly acting as if time were on their side. Time does seem to be working to help Governor Paterson, who has included budget reductions ("poison pills" to the spenders) along with the weekly extender to keep the state operating without an approved budget for FY 2010-2011, which began on April 1, 2010, almost ten weeks ago.

The political issue at play is who will be blamed if the government, at least the part of it that does not affect public health and safety, shuts down. The last such near-death experience took place with regard to the federal government from November 14 through November 19, 1995 and from December 16, 1995 to January 6, 1996. The cause was a dispute between President Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich over whether the legal limit on the national debt should be increased.

For the government to be able to pay its bills, the debt limit would have to be raised. Gingrich, the fiscal conservative, refused to do that. As a result, federal offices were closed nationwide and many functions involving the public could not be performed. The public blamed Gingrich and the Republicans for the shutdown. In January 1996, the Republicans relented and raised the debt limit to $5.5 trillion. BTW, today the national debt exceeds $13 trillion.

In the current budget war, Governor Paterson is likely to increase the pressure by including additional budget cuts in the weekly extension legislation. Under this strategy, the Senate and Assembly would either have to swallow the cuts or take responsibility for shutting down the State, which would displease, among others, the employee unions upon whose generosity the legislators feast to the tune of millions of dollars each year, and on whose phone banks the solons rely should anyone have the impertinence to oppose their candidacies for re-election.

Today marks the first anniversary of last summer's inglorious Senate putsch, in which Senator Pedro Espada, Jr., President and CEO of Soundview Health Network, and his sidekick, former Senator Hiram Monserrate, joined with 30 Republican senators to take control of the 62-member body. Monserrate redefected to the Democrats a week later, but Espada hung on for a full month, returning only when promised the Majority Leadership that he desired. One year after his successful insurrection, Senator Espada said today that he might not vote for another extender because he wanted the budget agreed to this week. The governor's cuts to the State's health budget also have an adverse effect on the Senator's business, Soundview. If Espada does not provide the 32nd Democratic vote, the state will again be on the brink of a shutdown.

Espada's co-conspirator, Monserrate, gained for his return to the fold the chair of the Committee on Consumer Affairs, to which his colleagues had been reluctant to elect him while he was awaiting trial for slashing his girlfriend. He was subsequently convicted of a lesser charge, expelled from the Senate, and defeated 3-1 for re-election to his old seat. Espada is currently the target of a lawsuit by the State Attorney General and the subject of a Federal investigation, but so far neither proceeding has resulted in a judgment.

The Senate in 2010 is close to anarchy. Since the 30 Republicans will support nothing, even if they had previously promised to, all 32 Democratic votes are needed to pass anything. For example, the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA), which died in the Judiciary Committee. Every Democrat supported it except Senator Rev. Ruben Diaz, Sr., father of the Bronx Borough President, Ruben Diaz, Jr. No Republican supported it, even though two were said to have previously indicated that they would. Rev. Diaz is acting out of his religious convictions; he has always opposed legislation to help gays. Several of the Republicans are acting out of their political convictions, that it is better to show that the Democrats are unable to run the Senate than it is to help bisexual and transgender(ed?) New Yorkers.

It is difficult to determine from the course of events over the past two years whether the Democrats or Republicans are more qualified to lead the State Senate. Since we do not endorse or recommend candidates for public choices, we would not normally make choices between individuals or parties. This year we feel understanding for our readers who will have to make those choices on Primary Day, September 14 in New York State, and Election Day, seven weeks later on November 2. We hope that candidates for state office, incumbents and challengers alike, commit to a program of legislative reform, transparency, strong ethics codes and honest redistricting by an impartial commission. The next weeks will give us an idea of how many will promise to support specific legislation in this area.

Candidate Andrew Cuomo has asked all Democratic candidates to subscribe to this program. We would ask Republican and other party candidates for public office in New York State to make similar commitments. We do not view reform as a partisan issue. Our observation is that partisanship is often an impediment to reform because it requires legislators to be subservient to party leaders, rather than rely on their independent judgment on the issues. Party leaders make decisions on what they believe is best for their party rather than for the State of New York or the general public.

Where Have All the Dollars Gone?

Cuomo: A Man With a Plan,

But Where Is the $10 Billion

We Need to Balance Budget?

Day 62 - New York State without a budget

This week appears to be devoted to the Republican State Convention, which should divert some of the parties from considering the overdue state budget. Meanwhile, Governor Paterson is said to be working on a plan for massive layoffs, to take effect January 1, 2011. The reason he gives for not making the effective date July 1, 2010 is that he promised the unions there would be no layoffs in 2010 in exchange for their agreement not to oppose Tier 5, which reduces pension benefits for new employees of the state. Under a decision of the Court of Appeals, once the state employs a person, it is obligated never to reduce his pension rights and privileges, no matter what the state's financial condition may be.

The problem the governor has is that the federal court having invalidated his furlough plan, and with the unions insisting he keep his word on layoffs, there is really no way to reduce state expenditures substantially until after he leaves office on December 31. That is about seven months from now, and it is questionable how the state’s bills will be paid in the interim, considering current levels of revenues and expenditures.

It is possible that when the state runs out of money it will issue scrip, as Governor Schwarzenegger did in California. The scrip was redeemable for cash once revenues came in and the fiscal gap was bridged.

Now that Attorney General Andrew Cuomo has announced his candidacy for governor, we assume he will answer questions about his fiscal plans. Actually, we believe that he was quite right not to answer those questions in advance of his long-awaited declaration, which came the Saturday before the Democratic convention via a 21-minute video. By getting into the mix sooner, he would simply have alienated part of his base, whatever he would have said. Releasing a plan would also have exposed the reality that, not being in office, there is nothing he could do to implement it.

DIGRESSION: WHY TWEED? The symbolism of holding his announcement press conference in front of the Tweed courthouse on Chambers Street eludes us at this point. In his video, Andrew Cuomo said that "Albany's antics today could make Boss Tweed blush." Although it is a distinction for a man to be mentioned in a political announcement 132 years after he died in the Ludlow Street jail, the reference cannot be considered as favorable. In fact, the old New York County Courthouse was never formally named for Tweed.

When its demolition was proposed 36 years ago by Mayor Beame to make way for a mall leading north from City Hall to a new towering Municipal Building, a committee was, inevitably and justly, formed to save the building, chaired by Paul O'Dwyer and Brendan Gill. Congressman Ed Koch was a member of the committee, and when he became mayor in 1978, the matter was settled. The cost of restoring the old building ended up close to $90 million, which was eight times what it had cost the city to build it initially over the twenty years (1861 to 1881) it took to complete. Of course, that cost comparison does not provide for a century’s worth of inflation, but to put it in perspective, the courthouse cost one and one half times as much as the United States paid for Alaska, a contemporaneous purchase.

While the building evolved from eyesore to historic treasure, it was given an informal name to honor the man who had made the most money from its construction. In fact, so egregious were the kickbacks collected by Tammany Hall, that after Boss Tweed was convicted in November 1873 of 204 of the 220 charges brought against him in an unfinished room of the Courthouse, the public's outrage was severe enough to bring construction of the courthouse to a near standstill for five years.

BACK TO THE FUTURE: The substance of Cuomo's financial plan appears to be fine as far as it goes. It does not, however, resolve the problem of what to do about the near $10 billion deficit in this year’s budget or the impending $12 billion in Fiscal 2011, which begins in just 303 days; that is, 365, one year, minus 62, the days this year's budget is late.

Meanwhile, we have heard nothing from the Republicans as to how they would balance the budget, or at least move in that direction. We watch and wait while the political parties contemplate what actions they can take which will give the least offense. Meanwhile, the governor relies on his promise to the unions to take no action while he is still in office. We can understand his reasoning: Cuomo wanted to be governor and so he pushed me out; let him solve the problem of the deficit.

Meanwhile, the longer it takes to start cutting, the deeper the cuts will have to be. The problem has been evident for years, but neither party in either house has taken the initiative. The Senate Democrats, in fact, want to initiate a property tax rebate which would cost the state almost a billion dollars. Albany lives in a "la cage aux folles" of its own making. As the days pass, it digs itself deeper and deeper into a financial abyss.

We'll check back in a few days. But we don’t expect the ice to break before then. The show continues to go on, but what will be the denouement?

The Lion and the Fox

Cuomo Selects Duffy,

Rochester Career Cop,

Twice Elected Mayor,

As His Running Mate

Day 58 - without a budget

Readers of this blog know that for the last several years, our reports on New York State government, particularly its legislature, have conveyed a pathetic picture. Some legislators are now convicted criminals, another is being sued by the Attorney General, some are under investigation, and it would be no surprise if other miscreants are found who have so far escaped the attention of law enforcement authorities.

We have repeatedly stressed the need for a stringent code of ethics, stricter regulation and full disclosure of outside employment, an independent redistricting commission and fiscal responsibility, starting with a balanced state budget. We have not seen progress in any of these areas.

A mild ethics bill, which would have been a starter for reform, was passed by both houses but vetoed by Governor Paterson on February 2, ostensibly on the ground that it was not strong enough. Since the bill had passed by overwhelming margins, it was assumed that the veto would be overridden. However, the Senate Republicans, who had voted for the bill, chose to sustain the veto, so now there is no ethics bill, but everyone can claim that they voted for it. To us, this is classic Albany hypocrisy.

That is why it was such a pleasant surprise to hear Andrew Cuomo's remarks to the convention accepting its nomination. You can link to them here.

He came out for every reform we have advocated, denounced the legislature as having lost the people's confidence, and demanded fiscal responsibility without imposing additional taxes. Signs posted at the convention announced the "New Democratic Party". It is clear that Andrew Cuomo is running against the Spitzer-Paterson years as well as the legislature.

His partner in this undertaking will be Mayor Robert Duffy of Rochester. Cuomo's selection of Duffy as his running mate for lieutenant governor has met with general approval. On the basis of press reports and a Google search, Duffy appears to be highly regarded. A career police officer, he rose through the ranks to become chief of police in 1998, a position he resigned in 2005 to run for mayor. He received 72% of the vote that year and was unopposed for re-election in 2009.

Duffy has a reputation as a strong leader, unafraid to take on public employee unions. He sold the money-losing fast ferry service across Lake Ontario to Rochester for $30 million. He is now engaged in a struggle with the United Federation of Teachers with regard to his effort to take over the public school system, similar to the fight that Mayor Bloomberg successfully waged in New York City.

Introducing himself at the State convention on Thursday, Duffy affirmed his commitment to Cuomos reform goals and asserted that he was ready to fight. I relish the opportunity to take on the challenges facing our state, said Duffy. You can watch Duffy's speech here.

The question we ask ourselves is: Is this too good to be true? Is it possible to have a reform-minded governor who is also of sound mind and has shrewd political instincts? We are reminded of the concept of 'The lion and the fox.' This was the title of a biography of Franklin D. Roosevelt by James McGregor Burns published in 1956. Professor Burns's source was the Florentine philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), who wrote, in The Prince,

"A prince must imitate the fox and the lion, for the lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves."

Andrew Cuomo has roared like a lion, and raised the hopes of New Yorkers, many of whom as opinion polls show, hold their government in contempt. But in Albany, he will be dealing with a skulk of foxes, and he will have to protect himself and his program from the bites and snares of those who are responsive to nurturing lobbyists, obedient to legislative leaders, and desirous of remaining in their gerrymandered districts.

Cuomo's commitments fall into two categories: those that are cost-free and those that are expensive. Reform of the ethics rules and an independent redistricting commission would be difficult to obtain, but they have trifling economic impact. When one tries to balance the budget without imposing new taxes, and place a cap on increases in local property taxes, that leaves a gap in revenue on both the state and local levels. A freeze on state spending, desirable as it would be, will not close that gap.

New York State has been spending more than it has taken in for years, and while the cumulative deficits have been concealed by one-shot revenues, the alteration of payment schedules, and other bookkeeping devices, the day of reckoning is not only at hand but past due.

The candidate has not yet told us what he would cut, but there is a Willie Sutton (not to be confused with Willie Horton) answer. When asked why he robbed banks, Sutton is supposed to have said that he did so because that was where the money was. The big money in the state budget is in Medicaid and education. If there are major cuts, these areas will be impacted.

The Medicaid program is known to have been exploited by substantial fraud and waste. The difficulty, of course, is finding out just where the fraud and waste is, and being able to prove it. That requires vigorous enforcement, and more serious penalties, including prison, for those caught cheating.

In education, we know that some teachers are very good and others are bad. The problem is that it is very difficult to treat teachers differently based on their competence. Also, ability and interest change over the years, sometimes for the worse. This is not to say that teachers, in general, are responsible for students' learning difficulties. We remember from our childhood those teachers who were helpful, kindly, and, in some cases, inspiring. But one should be able to get rid of the bad ones without years of litigation.

Even if every bad teacher retired today, however, there would still be resource issues, questions of class size and costly special education mandates. Hard choices will have to be made between competing needs.

A governor who commands respect, who makes first-class appointments, who decides issues justly and wisely, who is judicious in his public statements, and who maintains a high standard of personal conduct, will have much more influence and gravitas than one whose behavior can be faulted, who is vulgar or crude in speech or manner, whose remarks are intemperate or inappropriate, and whose appointments smack of favoritism, nepotism or cronyism.

We had high hopes four years ago for Eliot Spitzer. We were disappointed. Our hopes for David Paterson were more modest, but they were also unfulfilled. The Pataki Administration pitched three balls. Spitzer & Co. struck out twice. Andrew Cuomo is now at the plate. When he tries to do the right thing, he will find enemies on and off the field.

We do not know how the contest will end, but we do know that, this time at least, the forces of reform are at bat. Armed with knowledge of the failures of the past, they go forth to battle for the future.

The Book of Andrew

Cuomo's Plan for New York:

Restore Trust, Accountability

Our article Friday evening predicted some reform positions Andrew Cuomo was likely to take when he announced his candidacy for governor.

We were pleased and surprised Sunday to read of his support for the entire reform agenda, and his intention to ask candidates for the legislature to commit themselves to his proposals. It is more productive to seek promises from candidates than from incumbents.

The idea of starting a campaign with a 224-page book of proposals is both novel and striking. It lays out an agenda for action in many areas which is unprecedented. It dwarfs the research efforts of other candidates. It shows that his people are familiar with, and have proposals to deal with, long-standing issues.

To those of us who follow state politics, the news appears too good to be true. But only time will tell how much impact a strong governor will have on the dysfunctional legislature. Our high hopes four years ago at the inauguration of Eliot Spitzer were dashed by the convergence of Spitzer's arrogance, intransigence and vulgarity.

David Paterson was overwhelmed both by his own errors and indecision, and by defenders of the status quo who did not share his goals. Cuomo, if he is elected, will be the third governor in a row to attempt to govern in fact as well as under the law. The first two sadly failed.

We will watch and wait. The hopes of civic organizations, reformers and good government groups ride with candidate Cuomo and his promises. Some of his proposals can be implemented directly by the governor. Others require legislative approval. We believe that Cuomo means what he says. We hope that he has the strength and courage to carry out the reform program he is supporting.

There is substance as well in his plans; no new taxes, a freeze on state employees' salaries, fiscal responsibility, consolidation of agencies and downsizing of government. One practice that should end is the imposition of unfunded legislative mandates on cities and counties. Another is the adoption of pension sweeteners by the legislature after unions have bargained collectively and reached agreements with local governments.

New York State was once a leader in government. Laws first passed here were adopted in other states. We were a national model. In the last decade, however, state government has fallen into disrepute. The culture in Albany today is one of favoritism and greed. The legislature has been accurately described as the most dysfunctional in the United States. The Senate is a house of anarchy and the Assembly a house of tyranny, although its members voluntarily submit.

2010 offers an opportunity for change. We cannot wait until January 2011 for "Day One. Everything Changes." We must think of Day One as May 22, the day the Cuomo crusade was launched.? We will get a sense how much he can accomplish even before the election.

The first major decision will be the choice of a candidate for Lieutenant Governor. We do not believe a background in politics should be a prerequisite for this position. Neither should it be a disqualification. The choice should not be made primarily on the basis of gender, ethnicity or geography, although those factors should not be ignored. One factor which was not apparently considered in 2006 was the ability of the candidate to govern, in the event his/her services in that role should be required.

In the recent past, governors have not had much luck in filing this position on the ballot. One lieutenant governor, Al DelBello resigned in the middle of his term because he felt he had nothing to do.? Two others, Mary Anne Krupsak and Betsy McCaughey (Ross) became alienated from their governors and ran against them.? Both women lost.

For this year, Cuomo may be seeking a different kind of nominee.? If he does so, it would be wise.

Ken Lovett of the Daily News reported Sunday: "A source close to Cuomo seemed to send [a] signal last week when he [said], 'This will not be a political pick.? It's about whether this person has competence and integrity and whether he or she is ready to be governor if something should happen.'"

If Lovett's source is correct, that would be good news.? It would also set a precedent in the selection of a lieutenant governor.? By the time you read this, the choice will be made and may have become public.? It will be the first test of Andrew Cuomo's judgment and the qualities he values.?? All New Yorkers should join us in hoping for the best.

THE UPRISING CONTINUES

On a parallel track of seeking pledges of support, Sam Roberts reported in today's Times on the activities of New York Uprising: GROUP FOR IMPROVING ALBANY SENDS PLEDGES TO CANDIDATES.? His lede: ?

"A civic coalition seeking to improve how Albany governs is asking incumbents and candidates for state office this year to pledge publicly to back strict fiscal controls on state spending, stronger ethics and financial disclosure regulations, and a nonpartisan system for drawing legislative and Congressional districts.

"The coalition, called New York Uprising, will not formally endorse candidates, but will publicly recognize those who signed with 'a sign of approval'?

"Former Mayor Edward I. Koch, who was instrumental in creating the coalition, said he believed those who signed would honor their commitment. If they renege, Mr. Koch said, 'we will be hounding them.'"

StarQuest #672 05.24.2010 897wds