subform goes here [New Subform containing lookups to Data Dictionary] Department: Practice Group: Legal Services: Legal Services: Legal Services Subcategories:
Industries: Sector: Sub Sector 1: Description:
Geography: Region: Country:
Offices:
Litigation Practice
Representing Speaker Sheldon Silver and the New York State Assembly
Winter 2002
Download Newsletter
Over the past three years, WGM has spearheaded two historic lawsuits in New York state court involving the constitutional balance of power between the Governor and the State Legislature: Silver v. Pataki and Pataki v. McCall. Steve Reiss is representing Sheldon Silver, the Speaker of the Assembly, in the first case, and the New York State Assembly in the second.
Representing The Speaker The issues in these cases may seem complex, but they involve the basic question of who controls the purse-strings in New York State. The heart of the dispute in Silver v. Pataki involves the Governor’s use of the line-item veto — the ability to strike out portions of a bill instead of approving or vetoing the legislation in its entirety. According to the Speaker, under the New York State Constitution, the line-item veto may constitutionally be applied only to appropriation bills. Yet, during the budget process in 1998, instead of approving or vetoing the non-appropriation bills in their entirety, the Governor used the line-item veto 55 times to remove 70 pages of programmatic provisions.
In June 1998, Speaker Silver, in his capacity as a member and Speaker of the New York State Assembly, sued the Governor in New York state court, seeking a declaration that the Governor may not use the line-item veto to strike out select provisions of non-appropriations program bills, and that the use of the line-item veto against such bills unconstitutionally usurped the Legislature’s power. Rather than addressing the merits of the case, the Governor moved to dismiss the Speaker’s suit, asserting that the Speaker lacked standing to sue. The Speaker cross-moved for summary judgment on the merits of the case. After an initial victory in the trial court on the standing issues, the New York Appellate Division, First Department dismissed the Speaker’s case on grounds of lack of standing to sue. The case went to the Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court.
After hearing extended oral argument from Steve Reiss of WGM and the Governor’s counsel, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, the Court of Appeals — by a six to one majority — reversed the Appellate Division’s decision. In a historic decision, it adopted the Speaker’s rationale that a legislator has capacity to sue to protect the effectiveness of his or her vote; and that a legislator has suffered injury in fact, and therefore has standing to sue, when an allegedly unconstitutional veto nullifies the vote of a legislator who voted in favor of the legislation. The Court of Appeals rejected the Governor’s arguments that a “controlling bloc” of legislators who had voted in favor of the legislation is necessary to maintain such a suit, and that the availability of a political remedy — overriding the Governor’s veto — negated the Speaker’s injury in fact and the Court’s ability to review the constitutionality of the Governor’s conduct. The case is now back before the New York state trial court on the Speaker’s motion for summary judgment.
Representing The Assembly Since the 1998 budget season, the Governor has not attempted to apply the line-item veto to non-appropriations bills. However, in 2001, the Governor took other actions that the State Assembly believes infringes its authority to craft substantive legislation concerning the budget, and that dispute has led to a second litigation in which WGM represents the Assembly.
Instead of presenting appropriations bills to the Legislature that contained only appropriation items, the Governor inserted pages of substantive, programmatic provisions that are normally included in the non-appropriations bills initiated by the Legislature. Such provisions included substantive legislation regarding crucial state programs such as education, welfare and health care. Believing that the State Constitution bars such provisions from being incorporated in the Governor’s appropriations bills, and that initiating programmatic legislation is the prerogative of the Legislature, the Legislature deleted the provisions before passing the Governor’s appropriations bills.
Viewing the Legislature’s actions as encroaching upon his own constitutional executive authority to draft the budget, the Governor sued the Comptroller, the Assembly and the Senate, seeking a declaration that the Legislature had unconstitutionally altered his appropriations bills and that the Comptroller be enjoined from approving vouchers for allegedly unconstitutional appropriations. While the Comptroller moved to dismiss the case against himself, the Assembly and the Senate are responding on the merits to the Governor’s allegations.
The Assembly, represented by Steve Reiss, is currently seeking a declaration from the court that (1) the Governor does not have the right under the New York State Constitution to include substantive legislation in the appropriations bills; (2) that inclusion of such provisions usurps the Legislature’s constitutional powers; and (3) that the Legislature’s conduct with respect to the Governor’s appropriations bills — deleting unconstitutionally void provisions — is clearly within its rights and responsibilities. … Both of these cases will affect the balance of power between the Governor and the Legislature, as well as the manner in which the budget and substantive legislation are created in New York State. WGM is pleased to represent the State Assembly and its Speaker as these issues are played out in the courts.
Back to Previous Page
Download Newsletter
Over the past three years, WGM has spearheaded two historic lawsuits in New York state court involving the constitutional balance of power between the Governor and the State Legislature: Silver v. Pataki and Pataki v. McCall. Steve Reiss is representing Sheldon Silver, the Speaker of the Assembly, in the first case, and the New York State Assembly in the second.
Representing The Speaker The issues in these cases may seem complex, but they involve the basic question of who controls the purse-strings in New York State. The heart of the dispute in Silver v. Pataki involves the Governor’s use of the line-item veto — the ability to strike out portions of a bill instead of approving or vetoing the legislation in its entirety. According to the Speaker, under the New York State Constitution, the line-item veto may constitutionally be applied only to appropriation bills. Yet, during the budget process in 1998, instead of approving or vetoing the non-appropriation bills in their entirety, the Governor used the line-item veto 55 times to remove 70 pages of programmatic provisions.
In June 1998, Speaker Silver, in his capacity as a member and Speaker of the New York State Assembly, sued the Governor in New York state court, seeking a declaration that the Governor may not use the line-item veto to strike out select provisions of non-appropriations program bills, and that the use of the line-item veto against such bills unconstitutionally usurped the Legislature’s power. Rather than addressing the merits of the case, the Governor moved to dismiss the Speaker’s suit, asserting that the Speaker lacked standing to sue. The Speaker cross-moved for summary judgment on the merits of the case. After an initial victory in the trial court on the standing issues, the New York Appellate Division, First Department dismissed the Speaker’s case on grounds of lack of standing to sue. The case went to the Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court.
After hearing extended oral argument from Steve Reiss of WGM and the Governor’s counsel, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, the Court of Appeals — by a six to one majority — reversed the Appellate Division’s decision. In a historic decision, it adopted the Speaker’s rationale that a legislator has capacity to sue to protect the effectiveness of his or her vote; and that a legislator has suffered injury in fact, and therefore has standing to sue, when an allegedly unconstitutional veto nullifies the vote of a legislator who voted in favor of the legislation. The Court of Appeals rejected the Governor’s arguments that a “controlling bloc” of legislators who had voted in favor of the legislation is necessary to maintain such a suit, and that the availability of a political remedy — overriding the Governor’s veto — negated the Speaker’s injury in fact and the Court’s ability to review the constitutionality of the Governor’s conduct. The case is now back before the New York state trial court on the Speaker’s motion for summary judgment.
Representing The Assembly Since the 1998 budget season, the Governor has not attempted to apply the line-item veto to non-appropriations bills. However, in 2001, the Governor took other actions that the State Assembly believes infringes its authority to craft substantive legislation concerning the budget, and that dispute has led to a second litigation in which WGM represents the Assembly.
Instead of presenting appropriations bills to the Legislature that contained only appropriation items, the Governor inserted pages of substantive, programmatic provisions that are normally included in the non-appropriations bills initiated by the Legislature. Such provisions included substantive legislation regarding crucial state programs such as education, welfare and health care. Believing that the State Constitution bars such provisions from being incorporated in the Governor’s appropriations bills, and that initiating programmatic legislation is the prerogative of the Legislature, the Legislature deleted the provisions before passing the Governor’s appropriations bills.
Viewing the Legislature’s actions as encroaching upon his own constitutional executive authority to draft the budget, the Governor sued the Comptroller, the Assembly and the Senate, seeking a declaration that the Legislature had unconstitutionally altered his appropriations bills and that the Comptroller be enjoined from approving vouchers for allegedly unconstitutional appropriations. While the Comptroller moved to dismiss the case against himself, the Assembly and the Senate are responding on the merits to the Governor’s allegations.
The Assembly, represented by Steve Reiss, is currently seeking a declaration from the court that (1) the Governor does not have the right under the New York State Constitution to include substantive legislation in the appropriations bills; (2) that inclusion of such provisions usurps the Legislature’s constitutional powers; and (3) that the Legislature’s conduct with respect to the Governor’s appropriations bills — deleting unconstitutionally void provisions — is clearly within its rights and responsibilities. … Both of these cases will affect the balance of power between the Governor and the Legislature, as well as the manner in which the budget and substantive legislation are created in New York State. WGM is pleased to represent the State Assembly and its Speaker as these issues are played out in the courts.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
EDITORIALS Silver prefers secrecy Speaker should lead on camera issue instead of hiding behind ‘the conference’
Updated: 08/06/07 6:42 AM
SAVE EMAIL PRINT POPULAR Digg it del.icio.us + Larger Font Google Yahoo - Smaller Font Is it irony that a bill that would open one important government activity to better public scrutiny and understanding was killed by an uncounted vote in a secret meeting in another government branch? Or is that just the way things work in New York politics?
A long-discussed measure that would have allowed, with appropriate judicial discretion, the video and audio coverage of courtroom proceedings in state courts finally made it through the New York Senate this year, by a 52-7 margin. It was supported by the governor, the state’s top judge, various legal societies and every expert who examined previous experiments and experiences in this state and elsewhere. And, of course, by every media outlet and association. It should have passed.
But then it dropped into a black hole in the Assembly, and was never heard from again. Speaker Sheldon Silver has been assumed to be the immovable object that stymied this irresistible force, but he has avoided any substantive discussion of the issue, allowing his people to say only that his fellow Assembly Democrats didn’t back it.
Of course, we have only the speaker’s word for this, because the party caucus, known by the somewhat judicialsounding name of “the conference,” is secret, off-the-record and not discussed in public. Those who had lobbied for the bill thought they had counted enough noses to be confident that, if ever put to a vote, the bill would have passed easily.
Silver shouldn’t hide behind the excuse that he couldn’t buck his party caucus. He’s supposed to be their leader. He should deal openly with the fear that courtroom cameras will turn what should be somber judicial proceedings into histrionic debates of the sort lawyers engage in daily on cable TV. He should point out that that fear is unsupported by the overwhelming number of states and cases where TV coverage did nothing but good, or nothing at all.
Real courtrooms don’t operate like those in fictional TV shows. At least, they don’t solve everything in an hour, with The Real Killer breaking down on the stand. They generally take a long time to painfully parse the evidence and the credibility of witnesses in a search for the truth or, failing that, resolution.
If the courts do that well, the people in whose name, and with whose money, they operate should see that. If they don’t, well, we should see that, too.
Which is something we have not seen as the Assembly has debated, if it has debated, the important question of whether the people should see the way justice is done in New York.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
As this legislative session expires, it is once again time to consider the impact of a few brave media veterans who have year after year taken on all-comers, no matter how powerful and influential, to make this a better safer State for all those who live here and come here to visit.
Most of the media will not even acknowledge some of our worst legislative scandals exist. They definitely will not recognize the impact exposure of long obstructed legislation by their competition, may play in getting that legislation finally voted on and passed after years hidden in obscurity.
The New York Sun article" How Mr. Silver Manages To Unite Post, Times, O'Reilly, Daily News" http://www.nysun.com/article/34956 is an example of glossing over and facilitating the corruption in our State Assembly. A reader would not understand why so many in the media have recently taken to condemning Assembly Speaker Silver's actions this legislative session.
Silver is paid an undisclosed amount for working for one of the nation's biggest trial-lawyer firms, Weitz & Luxemburg.
"Shelly Silver has done plenty for trial lawyers, he should take his trial-lawyer provision out of this bill and let us protect the women and children of this state from sexual offenders," Pataki said.
The NY Post article of May 17th SILVER'S SHAME http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/68676.htm starts "How many sex criminals are walking the streets because Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Weitz & Luxenberg) cares more about his law firm than he does about crime victims?" And continues.
And the trial-lawyer lobby has no better friend in Albany than Sheldon Silver.
Not for ideological reasons, either.
Since 2002, Silver has been "of counsel" to Weitz & Luxenberg, arguably New York's biggest personal injury law firm. It pays him a salary estimated by those in the know at $1 million a year - or more.
Unfortunately, estimates are all that's available. Silver won't say how much he earns, in fact, he won't release his tax returns. He won't say why he was hired, nor what exactly he does for the firm.
But it's pretty obvious just what Weitz & Luxenberg - and every other tort-law firm - has gotten from Sheldon Silver.
He opposes tort reform in Albany. And that's all it takes to kill reform.
Thus, the firm benefits directly from Sheldon Silver's actions.
It's an appalling conflict of interest.
The North Country Gazette, Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, Ithaca Journal, Long Island Herald, have also earned 'on target ' status and many of the articles that have earned these papers such recognition these past few weeks can be accessed through the North Country Gazette links below, courtesy of Gazette publisher June Maxam. Google Maxam v. Sheriff Larry Cleveland (Ethan Allen, Lake George) to appreciate her record of fighting to expose corruption. http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/061406FewDareSee.html http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/062006BlindEye.html
Read these links and you will appreciate how articles such as Mr. Gershman's New York Sun article facilitate corruption and scandal in our State Assembly. Such journalists are as guilty of facilitating corruption as the Assembly members who year after year re-elect Sheldon Silver to the power of Speaker, knowing he will obstruct these laws as he has every year they have given him the power to do so.
Paul Vandenburgh of the Morning Show and Fred Dicker Live from the State Capitol, both from AM590 WROW, have weighted in with me on Speaker Silver's behavior and which constituency he may be serving since at least 1999. Fred Dicker and Ken Lovett both of the NY Post have never shied away from writing articles, back in the lonely days when few others dared.
Ed Martin, Al Roney and Joe Pagliarulo of 810 WGY have weighted in more recently. These five men are the veteran voices the legislators in the Capital District, their staffers and families hear.
Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity of FOX News came on board in the past 12 months, Bill O'Reilly in particular introduced the nation to Speaker Silver in the wake of the Jessica Lundsford abduction, rape and murder, once his research staff verified Silver's history of obstructing such legislation.
Speaker Silver has managed to hold out for a watered down version of Jessica's law that does away with the mandatory minimum 25 year to life sentence and won a 10-25 to life so there is room for trial attorneys to run up defense bills fighting for a less than 25-year sentence.
Lars Larson is a host on 150+ stations nation wide including WBIX Utica, WHCU Ithaca and WROW Albany on weekends, He takes my calls every First Amendment Friday allowing me to update listeners in the Western and Central part of New York state, on events in Albany.
So many pay so much attention to the relatively trivial antics of Ada Smith, Cynthia Mc Kinney, William Jefferson, and Randy 'Duke' Cunningham. Yet how do they compare for innocents betrayed and exploited, against the victims created because NY criminals were loose and preying in the streets as opposed to still locked up in prison?
Some may argue it is just coincidence so much of the media is suddenly paying attention to Speaker Silver of late and writing about him. But the new media is taking the lead and helping make him an issue. Having their constituents hold his facilitators responsible for ignoring his corruption to elect him the powers of Speaker is the solution to this problem.
Those who struggled for tougher, better laws need to step forward and claim the recognition they are due. The media that ignored and/or facilitated Assembly corruption have their reasons to never recognize any of the heroes of this struggle. As with many feminists who never protested Silver in any public way before this year, our crusading "white collar crime" busting Attorney General who has yet to act more than a month after the NY Post articles on Sheldon Silver's conflict of interests. Many proponents of the public interests turn a blind eye and thus facilitate the corruption.
Those with the strength and character to resist this corruption are sorely needed in the positions held by those entrusted to form public policy and shape public opinion who are no longer strong enough to stand for our most vulnerable against our worst predators, in the face of temptation to sell out.
God bless all of you who were strong despite the temptations, the lack of recognition and the pressures to turn away. We finally made the progress we did this year to make NY a safer better State because so many of you were not weak. 6-25-06
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
ALBANY-- Jessica's Law, which would impose tougher penalties on those who commit sexual crimes against children, further strengthening New York's sexual assault, has been passed by the state Senate.
The legislation is named for Jessica Lunsford, a nine-year-old-girl who was abducted, sexually assaulted and murdered by a registered sex offender living in her neighborhood in Florida. "Jessica's Law" was first signed in Florida last year.
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver praised what he deemed long-awaited Senate action on legislation to impose up to mandatory life maximum sentences for first-time offenders who commit egregious acts of sexual assault. The bill now goes to the governor for his approval.
The legislation provides for up to life sentences for the most heinous sex crimes - those where the perpetrator harmed the victim, threatened the use of a weapon, committed the crime against multiple victims or was previously convicted of a felony sex crime. Adults convicted of serious sex crimes in which the victim is under the age of 13 could spend the rest of their lives in prison, regardless of any other aggravating circumstance.
The bill would create the crime of "Predatory Sexual Assault." Under the bill, Class B felonies of first degree rape, first degree criminal sexual act, first degree aggravated sexual abuse and first degree course of sexual conduct against a child would be elevated to a newly-created crime of Class A-II felony, carrying a prison term of 10 to 25 years to life, where one of the following aggravating factors was present:
The defendant caused serious physical injury to the victim; The defendant threatened the use of a "dangerous instrument;" The defendant committed the crime against multiple victims; or The defendant was previously convicted of a sex felony. Additional provisions would provide for the same life sentences for child sex offenders in cases in which the victim was under the age of 13 and the defendant was 18 years old or older.
In addition, those convicted of the new crimes of Predatory Sexual Assault and Predatory Sexual Assault Against a Child would be required to register under the Sexual Offender Registration Act ("Megan's Law"). 6-23-06
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
District 3: Pete King (R)* Bill Corrigan (Independent) - Business Consultant
District 4: Carolyn McCarthy (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 5: Gary Ackerman (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 6: Gregory Meeks (D)*
District 7: Joe Crowley (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 8: Jerrold Nadler (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 9: Anthony Weiner (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 10: Ed Towns (D)* - (Campaign Site) Hakeem Jeffries (D) - State Assemblyman & Attorney
District 11: Yvette Clarke (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 12: Nydia Velazquez (D)*
District 13: Vito Fossella (R)* - (Campaign Site) Steve Harrison (D) - Attorney, Community Activist & '06 Nominee Michael McMahon (D) - NYC City Councilor Domenic Recchia Jr. (D) - NYC City Councilor
District 15: Charlie Rangel (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 16: Jose Serrano (D)*
District 17: Eliot Engel (D)*
District 18: Nita Lowey (D)* - (Campaign Site) David Prunier (Independent) - Internet Consultant, Community Activist & '06 Candidate
District 19: John Hall (D)* - (Campaign Site) Greg Ball (R) - State Assemblyman, Businessman & USAF Veteran Joe DioGuardi (R/C) - Ex-Congressman, Accountant & Frequent Candidate Kieran Michael Lalor (R) - Iraq War Veteran, Teacher & Conservative Activist Andrew Saul (R) - Businessman, Federal Thrift Investment Board Chair & Community Activist
District 20: Kirsten Gillibrand (D)* - (Campaign Site) Morris Guller (D) - Retired Stockbroker, Peace Activist & '04 Candidate John Faso (R) - Ex-State Assembly Minority Leader, Attorney, '06 Governor Nominee & '02 State Comptroller Nominee Betty Little (R) - State Sen., Ex-State Assemblywoman, Realtor & Ex-Teacher Roy McDonald (R) - State Assemblyman & Ex-Saratoga County Supervisor Jim Murphy (R) - Saratoga County District Attorney & Law Professor Michael Rocque (R) - Army Veteran John Sweeney (R) - Ex-Congressman & Ex-State GOP Executive Counsel Alexander "Sandy" Treadwell (R) - Ex-State GOP Chair & Ex-Secretary of State Richard Wager (R) - NYC Mayoral Aide, Real Estate Broker & Ex-Police Officer John Wallace (R) - Real Estate Broker & Retired Police Officer
District 21: Mike McNulty (D)*
District 22: Maurice Hinchey (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 23: John McHugh (R)*
District 24: Mike Arcuri (D)* - (Campaign Site) Ray Meier (R) - Ex-State Sen., Ex-Oneida County Executive, Attorney, Army Veteran & '06 Nominee Mike Sylvia (LIBT) - FedEx Courier & '06 Nominee
District 25: Jim Walsh (R)* - (Campaign Site) Matt Driscoll (D) - Syracuse Mayor Dan Maffei (D) - Ex-Congressional Aide, Businessman, Democratic Activist & '06 Nominee
District 26: Tom Reynolds (R)* - (Campaign Site) Jack Davis (D) - Manufacturer, USCG Veteran & '04/'06 Nominee Jon Powers (D) - Iraq War Veteran & Teacher
District 27: Brian Higgins (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 28: Louise Slaughter (D)* - (Campaign Site)
District 29: John "Randy" Kuhl (R)* - (Campaign Site) Eric Massa (D) - Retired Naval Officer, Ex-Aide to Gen. Wesley Clark & '06 Nominee
America First Party of New York State Conservative Party of New York State New York State Constitution Party New York State Democratic Party Green Party of New York State Independence Party of New York Integrity Party of New York State New York State Integrity Party Liberal Party of New York Libertarian Party of New York New York State Republican Party New York Right To Life Party School Choice Party Socialist Party of New York Socialist Workers Party of New York
Pansexual Peace Party - The PPP is a generally left-wing party that has yet to field any candidates -- they don't take themselves too seriously -- and, oh yeah, and the PPP is founded on Wiccan (i.e., witchcraft) roots. Check out the PPP platform plank on sexual issues, which carries the title: "Sex is Good! Sex is Great! Yea, Sex!" The PPP site also contains a short but harsh anti-libertarian essay. To date, the PPP's political activities seem confined to printing some PPP t-shirts and bumper stickers. Jimi Freidenker is the founder and "Chairentity" of the PPP.
Pot Party - The Pot Party is exactly what you'd expect -- a bunch of marijuana legalization advocates ("mandate pot growing") ranging in age -- seemingly -- from late teens to middle aged. In fact, their current tag line seems to be: "A movement to pretty much legalize marijuana." One profile of a Pot Party leader boasts that he won High Times magazine's "Bong-of-the-Month" Award. Unlike the denials of a certain recent national politician, these people quite obviously, proudly and regularly inhale. No real candidates fielded to date (but they did endorse an unsuccessful candidate in 2000 for the Green Party's nomination for US Senator from California). They also seem to be actively involved in an online fantasy government entitled the USA Parliament (official description: "A coalition of US voters based on votes cast, where 1/100th of the votes cast elects one of the one hundred members of parliament"). The party currently has state chapters formed in California, Illinois and Virginia.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
One Democrat's perspective on life in the Town of Dryden « School news, crime news | Main | Consolidate? » August 03, 2007 New York State power and authority I know there's a New York Power Authority, but this isn't about electrical energy - it's about the concentrations of political power that New Yorkers take for granted.
New York's "Three Men in a Room" style of governance concentrates power in three people - the Governor, the State Senate Majority Leader, and the Assembly Speaker. Only one of those, the governor, is directly elected, while the other two come to their power from houses elected by gerrymandered districts, supported by rules that give them control over both the flow of legislation and the perks that other legislators receive.
It's been like that for a long time, though perhaps it got worse when the Senate and Assembly decided to let each house draw its own district lines without interference from the other. The Republican party controls the Senate, and the Democrats the Assembly, and the result has been paralysis for decades.
I was hoping that Eliot Spitzer might break that paralysis. His hard-charging style had worked as attorney general. Unfortunately, he too seems trapped - by Majority Leader Bruno and Assembly Leader Sheldon Silver, but also by his own approach to power. In two separate scandals, we have cases where an aide threatened a Public Service Commissioner's career to get what he wanted in energy policy, and Troopergate, where aides used the State Police to find out about Senator Bruno's trips to leak it and hopefully weaken him. (Unfortunately, in this context, it gets lost that Bruno perpetually used state aircraft for purposes that have very little to do with state government.)
It seems that Spitzer has fallen headfirst into the classic Albany story: get things done by applying the power of your office by whatever means necessary. There's not a lot of interest in democracy in Albany, at least not the kind that involves public involvement in decisions, but there is a lot of interest in making things happen.
Much as I hate to say it, I have similar fears for my own party, the Democrats, when we finally take over the New York State Senate. Unless the demographics change drastically, even Joe Bruno's willingness to bend the usual rules in his favor can't last forever. At some point there will be a Democratic majority in the Senate. Will they fall into the same power trap as the Assembly and (alas) the Governor? I wish I had more faith in the system, but watching minority Senate Democrats share a party with majority Assembly Democrats (with the opposite dynamic on the Republican side) doesn't give me a lot of hope.
I'm not quite ready to give up on New York State government, but I think it's time to start looking for options that break out of the usual "seize power and make a change" story in New York. I'm not yet sure what that would be, but I'm afraid it's probably going to mean electing people willing to sacrifice their own power in favor of changing the way New York State runs. There's aren't nearly enough of those people, they're rarely politicians, and voters often don't like that storyline - but I don't see other options that are likely to work.
Posted by simon at August 3, 2007 06:45 PM
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
