Last week we re-introduced you to Dick Ravitch, our current lieutenant governor, who is doing his best to put together a budget for New York State. As we were reminded by commenter, Mike, his plan is to borrow, big time. This is how PolitickerNY explains it:
it allows short-term bond issuance so that a gaping budget hole need not be filled this year, and it installs new controls on budgeting with a semi-independent board that must approve the budget and see that spending and revenue are generally in line over a five-year horizon. (This has been the problem of Albany and other governments: spending goes up faster than revenues, so five years out, the state has generally tended to face big gaps).
Underlying this plan is a very big implication: that Ravitch believes Albany cannot bridge the $9 billion gap in the budget this year, offering up the heretofore prohibited practice of borrowing to fill the operating budget.
I, for one, have no understanding of budgets or financing, borrowing or interest or anything involving numbers and $ signs. Mr Ravitch, on the other hand, has a great understanding of economics and a record of pulling economies back from the brink of disaster. He has a plan in mind:
A seemingly more likely possibility is that Ravitch sees this as his one window to reform Albany’s budgeting practices, and by tying it to the current year’s budget is his one and only chance at getting any of his ideas passed. Thus, in this tough election year, he is offering a trade for the Legislature, which presumably wants nothing less than an embarrassing long-running budget impasse. He offers the legislators the ability to get out of their responsibility to balance this year’s budget, and in exchange they must give up certain budgetary powers and controls that they otherwise would never be willing to cede.
Short term goals, long term goals- I say, let’s give him a shot. (If that doesn’t work, we can always get Mike in there to set things to right.)
TAP has a post up from Friday (thank you devtob) regarding a NYT story examining the relationship between NY mayor, Michael Bloomberg and our junior senator, Kirsten Gillibrand. Being closer to the source, they were able to pick up nuances that I had missed. Apparently, the potential contenders for Kirsten’s seat have all been encouraged by Bloomberg’s people.
Check this out:
The Times has always been close to Bloomberg, as is evident again in the story’s lede:
He gripes about her in private conversations with his aides and her colleagues on Capitol Hill. He has yet to take up her invitation to sit down for dinner. And his political team is constantly shopping for potential candidates to oust her.As New York experiences a tumultuous election season, one question is captivating political insiders: Why does Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg so dislike Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand?
The story never really answers that question, because to do so would mean bringing up the issue of Caroline Kennedy’s maladroit candidacy for the appointment.
The story recounts how Bloomberg and his minions have been advising/encouraging several potential Gillibrand challengers — former Bush/Cheney war-flack Dan Senor most lately, but also Long Island Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, Harold Ford, and fellow Manhattan billionaire Mortimer Zuckerman. (Manhattan Rep. Carolyn Maloney’s short-lived, but nasty, challenge is oddly unmentioned, though Bloomberg types worked on that, too.)
So, is this all because of Caroline Kennedy’s failed bid for the senate seat? Is it really all about who the Mayor can keep under his thumb? Is it all about controlling the vote of one senator from NY? I hate to think so, but, politics being what it is, it makes perfect sense.
Does the name Richard Ravitch mean anything to you? We have written on him before, but I don’t think the name is ringing any bells for many of our readers.
Lieutenant Governor Ravitch
The New York Observer has provided us with a brief synopsis on Mr Ravitch called, “The Last (Good) Man Standing”. That title is particularly poignant in view of one scandal, after another removing Democratic public officials from power in New York State.
Mr Ravitch has an extensive history dealing with troubling economic situations. Our state is in dire need of a fiscal repairman. Here is the resume he brings to the job of Lieutenant Governor,
Mr. Ravitch’s reputation as a civic rescuer has a long history. Governor Hugh Carey tapped him from the private sector in the 1970s to save the fiscally struggling Urban Development Corporation. During the city’s fiscal crisis in 1975, he worked behind the scenes to avert municipal bankruptcy. He ran the M.T.A. from 1979 to 1983, bringing the beleaguered agency a new flow of revenues and turning it around from an era marked by derailments and track fires. After the stint in government, he helped turn around the Bowery Saving Bank, and occasionally popped up as a reasonable voice in various public fights, be it the battle over a West Side stadium (he opposed it) or the rescue of the M.T.A. in 2008 and 2009.
It certainly appears that Governor Paterson chose wisely when he asked Dick Ravitch to take on the Lieutenant Governor’s mantel. It wasn’t anything that Ravitch was looking for, but his does seem like a calm demeanor in a sea of economic catastrophe. So, is there hope that New York State can mire through this , bruised, but not broken? Is Ravitch the leader that we need?
He looks at politics as an idealist, a good-government type who believes— despite all evidence to the contrary—that rational policy is within reach, and he deeply respects the value of public service.
Sure looks good on paper. I’m willing to go with him.
Ed Koch has decided that enough is enough when it comes to the dysfunctional NYS government. At 85 years young (which just goes to show you that 85 is the new 65) he is launching an anti-incombent initiative in Albany, the New York Times reported yesterday.
“I finally said to myself, somebody’s got to do something,” Mr. Koch recalled. “And if no one else does anything, notwithstanding the fact I’m 85 years old, I’m going to throw myself into it.”
So Mr. Koch is assembling a coalition of powerful civic groups that, starting next week, will plot a purge of the State Legislature by taking aim at incumbents judged to be impediments to change.
“I don’t believe the good ones are good enough,” Mr. Koch said, referring to state lawmakers, “and the bad ones are evil.”
The corruption and waste in Albany’s government is rampant. Certainly, Sheldon Silver is a force with which to be reckoned. I credit Koch for having the fortitude to take on this Herculean task. His timing is right, but he will need, in addition to the groups he is inviting, to engage the netroots of New York State for a powerful, cohesive movement working to establish the change that is so desperately needed.
No matter the challenges, Mr. Koch believes there has never been a more opportune time for such an ambitious endeavor. “There will never be for another 100 years the same kind of environment that we have today that would help us succeed — that is, the disgust people have toward Albany,” he said.
Marist College Institute for Public Opinion has conducted a poll in the wake of Governor Paterson’s announcement that he is suspending his campaign. In the news, we see many who are ready to jump on the “The governor has to go” band wagon including our own junior senator. I think it’s interesting that the people of New York are much more benevolent. Take this response, for instance:
What do voters think about Paterson’s actions when he spoke with the alleged victim leading up to her court appearance? 40% think he acted unethically but not illegally while 18% feel he acted illegally. Just 12% believe he did nothing wrong, and 30% are unsure.
But, is the governor being treated fairly? 55% of registered voters statewide say he is while 36% think he is getting a raw deal.
A significant percent feel his actions were unethical, but not illegal. So, should he be forced from office? New York State voters say “No”:
…most registered voters in New York State — 66% — say they want the governor to finish out his term in office. Only 28% are calling for Paterson’s resignation. 6% are unsure.
As the drama in Albany continues to unfold and more information becomes available regarding the allegations of Paterson’s misconduct, public opinion will be likely to shift. As it stands now, I say we stick with the devil we know instead of the devil we don’t. We need some consistency between now and November/January. Good Lord, we’ve had enough governors for this term already!
We have been writing about the Genesee Valley Regional Market Authority for the past week. Not really understanding the whole story, I took the opportunity today to speak with Bill Mulligan Jr, the current Market administrator to actually validate the information garnered from other sources. Here’s what I learned:
There are 120 acres within the Regional Market and 80 are tied up into 20-30year land leases.
The properties with land leases pay 1.3 million/year in property taxes.
Taxes are payed on the buildings, the land is tax exempt.
There are 1,600 FT and 500 PT people employed by the businesses within the Market.
The GVRMA is the only New York State Authority who operates with a surplus.
Senator Jim Alesi is sponsoring legislation which “helps the state while leaving the Market intact”.
Jim Lawrence wrote this editorial in Sunday’s D&C which somewhat mirrors my take on the Regional Market.
A far more reasonable corrective action should involve members of the Rochester region’s Albany delegation finding a compromise that’s fair to all involved.Remember, 80 acres of the authority’s land is locked down under lease for the next 20 to 30 years. Another 30 acres comprise private roads and parking lots that could become a costly maintenance burden if the state assumed ownership as proposed.
Too, there is no evidence of unscrupulous activity by Mulligan and the authority’s four employees, including his mother. (A comparable authority in Baltimore has 10 employees.)
Let me also point out that the Baltimore authority continually operates at a loss.
My question remains, why take an authority which is an asset and dissolve it while we continue to loose money through the authorities operating with a deficit?
The phrase, “Cutting off your nose to spite your face” comes to mind.
The word “Stupid” comes to mind too.
Can’t we find a compromise, as Jim Lawrence suggests, which allows the Market Authority to remain intact at the same time that we remove the tax breaks which seem to be putting everybody’s panties in a knot?
Former US Congressman and Mayor of New York, Ed Koch decided not to support Governor Paterson, as far as we can tell. Mastering political double-speak, this is what he said (as per New York Daily News, Feb 17):
“And I thought he was living last week in a Kafka-esque situation, where the tabloids were saying he did this, he did that and we base it on a story that the New York Times will run…and I said to myself, ‘I’m going to stand up for him.’”"And when I was asked by a reporter, ‘Are you for David?’ I said ‘yes.’ And she said, ‘Are you for him because of what he’s done?’ I said, ‘No. I am for him, in effect, out of sympathy for his being in a Kakfa-esque situation.’ You can’t do this to people, use rumors to destroy them…But I’m not really for him.”
So, the governor is in a “Kafkaesque” situation, therefore Koch responds with a Kafkaesque statement? Apparently Koch believes that Paterson will withdraw his candidacy.
“…I will not be with him when he makes his announcement. And I wish him well, but I believe he will step down no matter if he announces next week and that the pressures of the president and others will provide a position for him elsewhere, because as Carl makes the point, you have to worry about the party. And all these people think they’re gonna be dragged down.”
Koch must be listening to a different fellow than we heard speak on Saturday. I believe that David Paterson’s closing statement went something like,
“I’m black, I’m blind and I’m still alive and running for governor of New York.”
Pedro Espada, the downstate N.Y. Senator and last man standing in the Gang of Four Three TwoOne stand-off last year, says that Attorney General Cuomo is picking on him for political reasons and and engaging in prosecutorial misconduct.
What’s the problem? Espada is CEO of a non-profit chain of health clinics, and contracted its cleaning services to a for-profit company he owns. There is also a question about whether the entities secretly covered some of his campaign expenses, a violation of NY campaign law. A hearing is scheduled next week.
The office says in court papers that it has found evidence of potential fraud, violations of state election law, state law regarding nonprofit groups and state labor law, as well as potential tax liabilities. The investigation by Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo is focused on Mr. Espada’s role as chief executive of the Soundview HealthCare Network, a Bronx-based group of tax-exempt health clinics.
The court filing says that Soundview has a contract with a for-profit management company, Soundview Management Enterprises L.L.C., that is controlled by Mr. Espada, allowing him “effectively to siphon off and otherwise divert money from Soundview for Mr. Espada’s own personal and political benefit.”
Evidence collected by Mr. Cuomo’s office, the filing says, suggests that money paid by Soundview to the management company was also used to “pay Mr. Espada’s campaign expenses, including printing, campaign office rent and personnel costs.”
Espada has a long track record as a self-serving opportunist. His campaign committee has been cited numerous times for violations and failure to file reports. Last year he was the pivotal player who held up the state’s businesses for weeks in the attempt to bring Republicans to back to power in the NY Senate. Espada switched from Democrat to Republican and back again.
82-year old State Senator George Onorato will not run for re-election this year. Onorato voted against marriage equality last year, and part of the reason for his stepping aside is equality advocates threatening to field a primary candidate against him.
That leaves 7 other Democratic State Senators who voted against equality last year.
Looks like there’s one candidate already thinking of running in his place — Assemblyman Michael Gianaris.
One Senator at a time. A threat of a primary is the way to go.
Senate Democrats were anxious to prevent a primary between Onorato and Gianaris, but just as interested in harnessing the assemblyman’s prodigious fund-raising skills for their upcoming battle with the GOP for control of the chamber.
Gianaris, 39, was elected to the Assembly in 2000. He raised more than $2 million for a short-lived state attorney general run in 2006 and was the state Democratic Party’s finance chairman in 2006.
Gianaris is someone who can bring the money in and a supporter of marriage equality. Way to go, Queens! (How can you be from a place called, “Queens” and not support gay marriage?)
Kirsten Gillibrand may face primary challenges for her seat in the U.S. Senate. This morning the NY Times reported that Harold Ford Jr is considering a try at the seat.
Mr. Ford, 39, who moved to New York three years ago, has told friends that he will decide whether to run in the next 45 days. The discussions between Mr. Ford and top Democratic donors reflect the dissatisfaction of some prominent party members with Ms. Gillibrand, who has yet to win over key constituencies, especially in New York City.
…
Mr. Ford, the son of former Representative Harold Ford Sr., moved to New York in late 2006 after losing a bitter battle for the Senate. During that race, the Republican Party ran an ad, criticized for its racial overtones, that featured a white actress who said she had met Mr. Ford at a Playboy party.
“Harold, call me,” she said coyly in the ad.
Ford is a moderate centrist who seems to have money behind him. The NY Times reports that 20% of contributions in his 2006 Tennessee campaign came from New York.
And then there’s this guy: Jonathan Tasini, a grass roots candidate who is a progressive. He is also in the race and is a strong advocate of Single Payer health care, ending the war in Afghanistan, LGBT equal rights, and more. Either way, it doesn’t look good for Kirsten… and we didn’t even get to the Rupublican challenger yet. Bye, Kirsten.
After Bill Owen’s win in NY’s 23rd Congressional District, the Republicans have set their sights on winning 3 seats back from Democrats who had unseated Republicans in the 2008 elections. From yesterday’s D&C:
Owens’ win followed three Democratic victories a year earlier in the Southern Tier, the Rochester-Syracuse area and the New York City borough of Staten Island, districts previously represented by Republicans.
As a result, Republicans now hold just two of the state’s 29 House seats and neither Senate seat.
But that will change in 2010, the National Republican Congressional Committee says.
NRCC officials are spotlighting an ophthalmologist from Westchester County, the mayor of Corning and a businessman from Eastern Long Island as the party’s best bets for regaining congressional seats next November.
It’s pretty sad when the GOP has to pin it’s hopes on the likes of the Mayor of Corning, Tom “I’m not a politician” Reed. Ignorance reigns in the Republican party, but we Homo sapiens are not a smart bunch, and you know every trick in the tea-bagging, birther, 9-12ing book will be used to unseat our progressive congressman in the 29th. So, put on your boots (although waders might be more appropriate) and prepare to do battle.
“I think he’s clearly showed he’s popular and has always wanted to be governor, and I think he senses thinks it’s his opportunity.”[sic]
Not that this is any big revelation, as I think most of New York believes he is going to run (even though we ran this post back in June) but to have the beginnings of a confirmation from Sheldon Silver makes it more of a reality.
“Where I will be, let’s talk in June,” Silver said, noting this was not an outright endorsement of Cuomo.
Cuomo drew accolades from one member of RT when he came to town. Although I’ve never seen him speak, or followed him closely, I certainly admired his father and usually, Tree…….Apple, you know?
“I want to do what’s best for the Democratic Party,” Silver said. “I want to elect members of Congress, members of the Assembly, Democratic members of the Senate, and I want the strongest ticket possible out there in order to do that.”
But, call me crazy, I still admire Governor Paterson and feel he has been dealt a terrible hand-unwinnable in more ways than one. He can only play the cards he’s been dealt. That being said, (Did I really just write that?) the polls don’t give much hope for his chances against anybody. So, my hope is that he will ultimately make a graceful exit as Cuomo steps in for the good of the party. We need a strong presence in the Governor’s mansion.
New York Post reports that Governor Paterson hired a private dick, er, opposition researcher — the same one who dug dirt on Obama two years ago — to give Andrew Cuomo a going-over:
“Legum is the guy who did a lot of the opposition research work on Obama, and now Paterson’s people are outsourcing that kind of work on Cuomo to him,” said the source, who demanded anonymity.
…
Legum confirmed that he had been hired by Paterson’s campaign but, when asked to describe his job, insisted, “I really can’t talk about that now,” and hung up the phone.
…
Several Democratic insiders said they doubted Legum could find any new damaging facts on Cuomo, who has been heavily scrutinized for some three decades as an aide to his father, former Gov. Mario Cuomo, as federal housing secretary, as a 2002 candidate for governor, as a 2006 candidate for attorney general and, since 2007, as a statewide office holder.
Thanks to D&C columnist Denise-Marie Santiago for nailing N.S. Senator James Alesi on his “no” vote on equal marriage
…. ultimately, that vote came down to one thing. “Politically, you never vote for a bill that’s going to fail,” he says.
Huh?
“Let me rephrase that,” he continues. “Politically, a highly controversial bill should not be voted on when it’s going to fail.”
He blames the governor, for pushing the issue at a time when most voters are concerned with keeping their jobs, wanting money in their pockets, paying fewer taxes.
What about courage?
“I live in a political world …” he says. “It’s not about courage.”
Joe Bruno, formerly Majority Leader of the New York Senate and currently defendant in a political corruption trial, reminds us that he was merely a part-time legislator and entitled to make a living by collecting consulting fees from those who wished to do business with the state.
I had a right as a part-time legislator to conduct business. That was no secret. I talked about it. I spoke about it. It was on my financial statements. So what’s going on here, I think, is that people don’t understand that a businessperson has a right to do business-some people don’t understand that, hopefully the jury does-as a part-time legislator, just like lawyers can lawyer, farmers can farmer.
As leader of the NY Senate, Bruno received over $120,000 per year for his “part-time job” as one of NY’s three men in a room. Now retired, he draws $95,000 in state pension for his part-time service to New York state . Prosecutors allege that Bruno received $3.2 million between 1993 and 2006 from five individuals or groups that had or were pursuing business with state agencies or the Legislature.
in the Gang of 
who is a progressive. He is also in the race and is a strong advocate of Single Payer health care, ending the war in Afghanistan, LGBT equal rights, and more. Either way, it doesn’t look good for Kirsten… and we didn’t even get to the Rupublican challenger yet. Bye, Kirsten.
“I...