....July 20, 11:33 AM
 
 
   
Albany Session Over, The Damage Continues

NYS Capitol building, the center of Albany action.
By MICHAEL SCHENKLER

We are safe for the moment.

The State Legislature is not in session.

For those of you who have fallen for their public relations claims of reform since the Brenan Commission named them the worst legislature in the nation, you’ve been had.

Cosmetic and surface change has not even scratched the surface of the ugliness that pervades the Albany atmosphere and seems to infest the pores of many who make the trip from the city across the Tappan Zee,

The session is over so that the incumbents who never lose can go out and raise money and campaign for seats that have been so carefully drawn to protect each of them. As the session ended, the noble group scurried to pass oodles of bills that came to them too fast to read and too complex to understand, yet every bill presented by leadership sailed through with blind obedience.

Sadly, several weeks after the end of session, the members, the press, and certainly the citizens have no idea what was done nor what it will cost.

The financial bills had a purpose. The expense budget of our debt-laden state was increased by 9 percent — four times the rate of inflation. The friends of the Legislature were rewarded: the UFT was granted its wish to keep the cap on the number of Charter Schools – in spite of the dire need for education alternatives in our City. Some 52,000 home health day-care workers were granted State benefits – wonder where their union stands on helping the incumbents win re-election?

And since it is an election year, the incumbents had to take care of also looking good to the voters – they enacted a property tax rebate which will deliver checks to homeowners shortly before Election Day. The rebate gives little consideration to financial need and certainly doesn’t address the rising local school taxes which may obliterate the rebates.

The full effect of the Legislative session will not be understood for some time to come. Hidden complex deals that members passed without understanding – or perhaps even seeing – will come to light as the bills fall due.

And the State with the second largest debt – California here we come – will continue to hide, obscure and increase the enormity of the future bill that must be paid by our children. And the elected Legislators will quietly go along to get to get ahead.

Ask them about it.



ALBANY CULTURE

The NY Times, this past Sunday, in an article titled “With Arrests of Legislators, Hard Questions About Power, Perks and Temptations,” raises serious question about the culture in Albany.

It reports that since 2003, about 1 in 10 of the Albany legislators from New York City has been accused of crimes. From Senator Guy Velella’s 1 year prison sentence for conspiring to take bribes related to potential state business to Queens Senator Ada Smith’s not guilty plea for third degree assault, the spectrum of Albany misbehavior has raised eyebrows to say the least.

Prompted by last week’s arrest of Diane Gordon, a Brooklyn Assemblywoman who was caught on tape and charged with conspiracy and receiving bribes, the Times had some legislative heavies speaking out on opposite sides of the issue:

“‘I’m amazed at the brazenness of my colleagues,’” said Lt. Guv candidate Senate minority leader David A. Paterson. He blamed “‘the overall dysfunction of the Albany culture” where, he said, “trust is derived out of deal-making and patronage rather than by trying to establish good government.”

“Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Democrat of Manhattan, seemed unfazed by the cumulative accusations of criminality and volunteered several caveats. ‘A vast majority of legislators are honest,’ he said. ‘We don’t pick our members,’ Mr. Silver said.”

The seven charges against legislators, resulting in three resignations, two guilty pleas, two convictions, one dismissal, Smith’s presumed trial and the upcoming action in Gordon’s arrest, don’t scratch the surface.

They don’t tell the story of the raids on the offices of the once powerful and omnipresent Brian McLaughlin, the backroom deals, the sexual behavior, out-of-wedlock children, the lobbyists’ money or mistreatment of staff which continues to plague the State’s Capital.

No, none of this means they’re all bad.

None of this means your legislator is bad.

However, your guys and gals, spends half a year going up there weekly and do nothing to fix the problem.

Perhaps the system is so broken and corrupt that they feel there is nothing that can be done.

But clearly, they are not part of the desperately needed solution. It must all start with incumbent legislators of goodwill standing up, condemning the Albany culture, behavior, and rule and then demanding change.

Don’t hold your breath.

Michael Schenkler can be reached via this contact form.

 
 
Court: Legislature Should Decide on Gay Marriage

By HENRY STERN

In its 4-2 decision that the NYS constitution does not mandate the recognition of same-sem marriage, the Court majority made it clear that they were not ruling against gay marriage, but that a change of such importance should be made by elected officials, not judges.

There are four possible positions on the issue. One is that same-sex marriage is an inalienable human right, and that the State constitution requires the approval of gay marriage. Two is the opposite position, that gay marriage is an abomination, a violation of nature’s law and God’s law, and that whatever same-sex relationships may be sanctioned by the state, marriage should not be among them. Three is to find there is a rational basis for the distinction between same-sex and opposite-sex marriages, based on biology and history, that the decision in a matter of this nature should be made elected representatives of the people. Four is to support gay marriage, but regretfully conclude that it is a legislative issue.

The court majority, four out of seven judges, took the third course; the two dissenting judges preferred the first. One judge recused himself from the case because his daughter was an activist on this issue. Depending on who sits on the Court of Appeals, the case could be decided either way. Hopefully, this will not become a Roe v. Wade issue, with every prospective judicial nominee facing demands to state his or her position.

We will take the liberty of making certain observations which may be helpful in forming judgments the issue.

1. There is nothing in the United States or New York State constitutions about same-sex marriage or opposite-sex marriage. They were not public issues when the constitutions were adopted.

2. Individual rights have gradually been added to the constitution, by the Bill of Rights, and by subsequent amendments, all approved by Congress and ratified by state legislatures.

3. Individual rights have been added by Acts of Congress over the years. These rights are then judicially enforced.

4. The usual style of judicial decision is not to admit that new rights are being created, but to define it as the interpretation of the statutes or previous decisions which include the rights which are now being provided.

5. We believe that people of the same gender should be enabled to enter into relationships, sanctioned by the state, which include the rights and responsibilities usually associated with marriage. What these relationships should be called is up to the individuals who enter into them.

6. Which rights will be granted or denied at a particular time depends on which judges are deciding the cases, and what their political, judicial and possibly sexual orientation happens to be.

7. When rights are being enhanced, or new rights are being created, the larger the court majority, the more likely it is for the decision to be accepted by public officials and the people of the state.

8. A collateral issue is whether the legislature has been given an opportunity to address the situation.

9. In a multi-layered system of government such as ours (federal, state and local), it may be helpful to look at the decisions of federal courts and other state courts on this issue.

10. If the court is too far ahead of the people, it may create a backlash and diminish public regard for the judiciary. Sometimes it is necessary for the courts to grant rights that legislators are unwilling to bestow for fear of reprisal by voters. In protecting individual rights and freedoms, the courts should meet a higher standard than the legislature. Fourteen-year terms provide more security than two-year terms.

In the last half century, the gay community has made enormous progress in its struggle for equal treatment. Although great legal strides have been made, gay people, particularly youngsters, are often mistreated and abused by others. In considering legislation or lawsuits on this issue, one must remember the context of discrimination which gays and lesbians have endured for centuries. The law cannot force people to like those who are different, but it can require equal treatment for all, regardless of sexual orientation. That is a goal which is well worth pursuing.

Starquest.nycivic.org

Not4Publication.com by Dom Nunziato
Michael Schenkler can be reached via this contact form.