We have had two weeks of smug selfrighteousness about the dysfunction in the state Legislature. Maybe it is time to admit the Legislature is merely representative of a dysfunctional New York state. The so-called "crisis" all started when a bipartisan coalition formed a new majority in the state Senate. There was hardly a "coup; a majority of the members of a legislative body meticulously followed the rules of that body and elected new leadership. There is a word for this: It is called "democracy." Democracy is sometimes messy, and there has never been any guarantee that everybody will like every result. But dysfunction we have. Hours after the so-called "coup," Gov. Paterson stormed into the first of what seems to be an endless series of increasingly bizarre press conferences, and rather than show leadership he threw a temper tantrum. The legality of a majority of senators electing new leadership by resolution is pretty unambiguous; that is exactly how it was done all the way back in June 2008. For petty partisan reasons, the governor did not like this result, and rather than work to calm things he chose to inflame them while adding his own measure of chaos and confusion. Now we come to the governor calling "special" sessions of the Senate that even his own lawyers admit serve no point, and threatening to kidnap members of a coequal branch. What may be most troubling is that this is greeted by neither outrage nor derision from press and public. Of course we have dysfunction, but the dysfunction in the Legislature is merely a reflection of the dysfunction of the state. The fault, dear New Yorkers, lies not in our senators, but in our selves.
The recent events in the New York state Senate should have all residents gravely concerned. While I can admire a senator who on occasion votes with the opposition party when his conscience says “they are right!”, to change sides after election is just plain wrong. If the action is not illegal, it is at least a moral affront to the people who elected them to office. Citizens voted for them because they wanted to be represented by persons loyal to their party principles. Many probably dug into their pockets to contribute hard-earned money to an election campaign in order to say, “I support you because you represent what I stand for.” Then the voters were betrayed! For whatever their reason, conscience or personal gain, they are telling the voters, “Thanks for the help and money in putting me here, but your opinions don’t count anymore. I am here and now I can do what I want — just for me!” If a representative truly believes that he must change party affiliation, the following steps should be demanded by the voters. Resign from office. Return all campaign contributions. Apologize to the campaign workers who helped get him to offi ce. Take his chances that the voters will still want him in the next election — running on the opposition’s ticket. Anything less is a violation of the trust placed in him by the voters.
When the elected officials betray the people who elected them by not following the wishes of we the people the official can do whatever he/she feels is right and switching parties is one of them, it's done all the time.
The longer they fight, the safer we are. Look, we're already saving tax money. If only they wouldn't get all the money as soon as this entire situation was ironed out.
Editorial: DiNapoli pays senators what they're worth Monday, July 6, 2009
What’s going on — or not going on — in the state Senate is beyond parody and beneath contempt. These so-called leaders are not only bringing humiliation upon themselves and their chamber, their inaction is undermining state government’s ability to function and having real, painful consequences for the governments, institutions and people of New York state. Why can’t these senators do the basic job they were elected to do? And why, if they do not, should they be paid? Many average citizens have been asking that question, and last week they were joined by someone with a little more status and clout: state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli. As a former assemblyman himself, DiNapoli is well aware that the Legislature is a separate branch of government and it's legally and constitutionally problematic when the executive and/or judicial branches try to intervene. You may remember, at the beginning of the whole sorry affair, a judge was asked by the Democrats to stop the Republican coup, and he wanted no part of it. But DiNapoli also said, in a statement released last Thursday, that he is the state’s chief fiscal officer and has a responsibility to taxpayers to protect their interests. And their interests are being harmed. DiNapoli calculates the total fiscal impact of Senate inaction at $2.9 billion, split between local governments, New York City and the state, in lost revenue from various taxes, fees, federal payments, etc., that need the Legislature’s approval to continue. DiNapoli had already stopped processing senators’ per diem and travel vouchers, totaling $560,000 as of last week. Now he says he will start the process of withholding senators’ pay...........>>>>................>>>>..........http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/jul/06/0706_edit1/
Peter King was video tapped by a TMZ camera commenting on Michael Jackson’s death and the media. He is a possible Republican challenger for the seat held by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.
Guess his chances of that just went down the crapper, eh?
Vivat Jesus Knights of Columbus, Fourth Degree In Him, all things are possible
Two Democratic senators walk out, saying power struggle must end Tuesday, July 7, 2009 The Associated Press
ALBANY — Two New York senators have walked out on fellow Democrats minutes after a Republican-led faction claimed more Democrats will join them Thursday if the monthlong standoff in the Senate isn’t resolved. Democratic Sens. Hiram Monserrate and Ruben Diaz had no comment beyond saying the power struggle must end, they aren’t abandoning the Democratic conference, and they’ll talk about their role on Thursday. They left the chamber as Democrats sought to open a regular session today.........>>>>..........>>>>..........http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/jul/07/0707_walkout/
ALBANY -- Gov. David Paterson has selected veteran businessman and public servant Richard Ravitch to be New York's lieutenant governor, making history and ensuring controversy.
Ravitch, 76, was most recently the author of a much-lauded report on fiscal and organizational problems afflicting the Metropolitan Transit Authority, which he chaired between 1979 and 1983. He previously worked on urban development issues, including a stint as a member of President Lyndon Johnson's administration. He has served in a number of state commissions under governors dating back to the administration of Hugh Carey; he lost a Democratic primary run to David Dinkins to become New York City mayor in 1989.
Paterson's unprecedented move is sure to be contested in court by state Republicans, who call the idea unconstitutional. Paterson's choice would also place him at odds with Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who on Monday agreed that the action would violate his office's reading of the state Constitution and public officers' law.
Senate Democratic leaders Malcolm Smith and John Sampson praised the governor's move in a joint statement. "Extraordinary times call for extraordinary action. ... Today, the constitutional issue of succession to the office of Governor has been settled, removing a major stumbling block to our negotiations," they said.
Senate Republican Leader Dean Skelos, in a videotaped response, briefly dismissed the governor's move as unconstitutional -- and didn't even mention Ravitch's name -- before moving on to a broad-based attack on what he described as Democrats' free-spending, high-taxing ways.
All day Wednesday, a short list of candidates was hotly debated around the state, with leading names including former state Chief Judge Judith Kaye, outgoing Syracuse Mayor Matt Driscoll and Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi.
The lieutenant governor is first in the line of succession if the governor is absent or incapacitated, and presides over the Senate -- both are disputed issues in the month-old Senate stalemate. The post has been vacant since Paterson replaced Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who resigned in March 2008.
Paterson has asked broadcasters statewide to carry a 5:01 address "on the current Senate stalemate and its impact on all New Yorkers."
Paterson's unprecedented move is sure to be contested in court by state Republicans, who call the idea unconstitutional. Paterson's choice would also place him at odds with Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who on Monday agreed that the action would violate his office's reading of the state Constitution and public officers' law.
Aren't most of these people lawyers? Aren't ALL of these people suppose to KNOW the law? Didn't Paterson get legal advice before he did this? WTH? What a total embarrassment.
Logged
