W.F.P. Dares Albany To Take On A.I.G.

Despite the half-hearted efforts of A.I.G. head Ed Liddy to return some of the bonus money, there will still be taxpayer funds used to make wealthy traders richer. Congress and Barack Obama have delivered a lot of tough talk, but so far they have not done all that they can to stamp out A.I.G.'s greed. So here's an idea care of Dan Cantor of the Working Families Party, have Albany tax every dime out of those bonuses.

From PolitickerNY:

The Working Families Party called today for a 100% state tax on the $165 million in announced bonuses at insurance giant AIG.

"If Washington can't find a way to get this money back, Albany should," said Dan Cantor, Working Families Party Executive Director. "The same people who helped wreck the economy are taking home millions in taxpayer-funded bonuses while classrooms, hospitals and homeless shelters here in New York face billions in cuts. It's disgusting in the extreme. AIG got its bailout. When will working families see theirs?"

Cantor continued: "Opponents of Fair Share Tax Reform like to talk about how much the rich have suffered from the economic downturn. But the real pain of this recession is being felt by millions of hardworking New Yorkers who bear no responsibility for the financial shenanigans that got us into this mess."

"The Governor proposes to balance the New York's budget through devastating cuts that would place the burden almost entirely on the backs of working families. Taxing AIG bonuses and asking those who can afford it to pay a little more in taxes is a far better solution."

Amen Dan! New York needs every spare penny we can find to help balance the budget this year. Further, not only should these bonuses be taken away, the entire wealthy class should be made to pay their fair share. I know Majority Leader Smith and Governor Paterson are sick of hearing about the Fair Share Plan, but until they approve it the working class will continue to fight tooth and nail for it.

WFP And Smith Talk About "Shared Sacrifice" In The Budget

After the Governor released his proposed budget today, plenty of people had a lot to say about all of the fees and oh so many budget cuts. Everyone gets hurt, from Medicare recipients to grade school children, college students and unions. Naturally constituent groups that are directly affected are going to be angry and seek to change what the Governor intends on doing.

Witness Dan Cantor at Working Families Party on the budget:

This is not shared sacrifice. The Governor proposes to balance the budget in an imbalanced way: by raising taxes on the middle class while simultaneously reducing the services we all rely on.

In this budget there's a tax on almost everything. Drinking, smoking, driving, food, health care, going to the movies, downloading music, clothes and haircuts. In total, it's billions in regressive taxes - "nuisance taxes" - that don't add up to a sensible approach.

There is a fair way to end the fiscal crisis. It's called the Fair Share Tax Reform plan. Prudent spending cuts will be necessary. But common-sense and fairness require that we also ask the state's wealthy to carry their fair share of the load. Right now, they don't, and the Governor is asking everyone to sacrifice except those who can most afford to do so.

That's what shared sacrifice must mean, and we hope Albany leaders will see that.

Well speaking of Albany leaders, or at least one that hopes to become Senate Majority Leader President Pro Tempore, Malcolm Smith had something to say as well. Of course, he was more neutral in his response, or so it seemed:

"We applaud the Governor for putting together an honest and courageous Executive Budget. Senate Democrats intend to thoroughly review its proposals and discuss them within our conference. From the Upstate counties to the suburbs of Long Island, Senate Democrats will help lead our state out of the worst fiscal crisis since the Great Depression, by funding a fair budget that will allow us to reduce spending without severely impairing the state's ability to provide essential services. Times are tough and so are the choices we have to make, but any cuts must reflect the principle of shared sacrifice among all sectors as we work together to return our state to fiscal solvency," said Senate Democratic Leader Malcolm A. Smith.

Both Cantor and Smith incorporate the words "shared sacrifice" into their press releases, but does it mean the same thing to each? Cantor doesn't want to see WFP supporters and a progressively-minded budget tossed aside just because of a large money gap to be filled. Hopefully Smith thinks the same thing, though you never know what you'll get with that dealmakerbreaker.

Like what I and many others have said, the income tax needs to be dealt with so that the rich shoulder more of the burden and not just with fees on luxury cars and what not. Paterson addressed those concerns by saying that the most a tax on the wealthy could do was fill $6 billion out of the total $15 billion deficit. Even if that is correct, six billion is still a large chunk of cash and would eliminate the need to make so many cuts and add an even larger amount of ridiculous fees. Perhaps the Governor should sit down with Cantor and bring along Smithjust so both elected men know what the true meaning of "shared sacrifice" is.

Albany Empties Of Legislators But Budget Problem Remain

A lot of video was taken, copy written and flashbulbs of cameras used in Albany this week but nothing substantive happened in terms of the budget before the whole special session was called off. Republicans may be happy they stopped Paterson this week, but the problems for New York state continue. Now that the cuts have been held off, many are trying to add their two cents to the equation before the budget is balanced next year. Robert Harding is right on with his "Cap, Cut or Tax". At a H.R. 676 rally last week I heard one speaker get the crowd going with a slogan that went something like this:

"There's no budget crisis! There's a distribution crisis!"

Before anyone screams "socialist!" at me take a breath and remember that taxes redistribute wealth, so to the conservatives out there reading this, take a breath and listen to what Dan Cantor has to say about the crisis.

From The NY Daily News:

Yes, prudent spending cuts in state spending are a necessity - that much is undeniable. But so far, the governor is asking working families to shoulder the entire burden of the budget deficit alone, while taking any income tax increase on New York's many millionaires off the table.

That is not acceptable. Not after the richest New Yorkers have seen billions in tax cuts that have slashed their income tax burden in half over the last 40 years. Not when asking those who can most afford to contribute a little more in taxes could easily prevent many of the most painful cuts being talked about in Albany.

Opponents of a tax on millionaires repeat the mantra that asking the wealthy to pay a modest increase in income taxes would drive them out of the state. But all the evidence and recent experience says that simply isn't so.

In 2003, following the economic downturn caused by the 9/11 attacks, the national recession and the burst of the dot-com bubble, New York relied on modest increases in income tax rates on the wealthy to help close its budget gap. The state employed a temporary top rate of 7.25% for single filers with incomes over $100,000 and 7.7% on income over $500,000.

The rich did not leave the state. Instead, the economy rebounded and the number of high income New Yorkers continued to grow.

And they won't leave in 2009 if we pass this tax. Then Albany needs to get their act together and make the state tax system more progressive. For far too long the rich have skated by relatively easy while the largest strain has been on the poor and middle class. The 26,000 millionaires in New York aren't going to all get up and move to New Jersey or wherever. The great majority will stay put and stay in the Empire State because it is here where they have made their money. Millionaires don't just rake in their cash by themselves, it is done based on a network of people and public services. Now it is time for them to pay their fair share, so that we can all survive and do well and not just the very wealthy.

Mr. Cantor, Silver Is No Kennedy

Dan Cantor is a great guy and does a lot for progressive values here in New York. Though as he points out, no politician is perfect and he screwed up by trying to compare Sheldon Silver with the liberal lion Ted Kennedy. Mr. Cantor, I am sorry but lending Teddy's good name to one of the three men in the room up in Albany is just ridiculous.

From The NY Observer:

Sometimes the candidate who'll fight for working families is a challenger, sometimes it's an incumbent who's been doing it for years. Think about Teddy Kennedy if you want the best example of such a person at the national level.

Time after time, on the crucial fights of the day - Silver has been the most important leader standing up to right-wing corporate power. He beat back Republican attempts to end rent regulation, slash public schools, and reduce access to healthcare coverage. He actually believes that the government has a role to play in making sure everyone has a decent shot in life. That's not trivial.

Just last session, he led the way on legislation to create a paid family leave program, to expand affordable housing, to cut taxes on working families and raise taxes on millionaires, and to create a public campaign finance system that would finally end the dominance of big money in Albany.

Shelly Silver isn't perfect - no politician is. But those bills could become law next year if the State Senate flips, and Shelly's leadership is there to get it done. (more on why the WFP endorsed Silver)

Now Silver isn't all bad, he has done some good things in over three decades. He is a Democrat of course. Yet when you look at the grand scheme of things, Silver is a reinforcement of the status quo in Albany where nothing gets done. Silver may have led the way on the legislation mentioned above, but for the most part bills die in the Assembly overwhelmingly not because of the will of the Assembly but because Silver says so. He has an enormous amount of power based on the arcane and anti-Democratic rules of the legislative body. He has and will do anything to hold onto that power and that is why all candidates are working so hard now before election day, one for the status quo and the others that fight for the change we so desperately need.

Silver certainly can fight, but more so like a hyena than a lion.

The Case For Shelly Silver?

The Working Families Party is a great asset in New York. They fight hard for progressive issues in Albany, even if many do not succeed (thanks in part mostly to Joe Bruno). Dan Cantor leads that fight as their Executive Director and has done a lot of good in that post. Unfortunately the ways of Albany may have clouded his vision just a little bit. He has come out in favor (though short of a WFP endorsement) for Shelly Silver's re-election.

From OpenLeft:

The reason is simple: on every one of the issues noted above, and others that are unmentioned, the most reliable force in state politics for progressives over the last decade has been the Assembly Democrats led by Silver. He may be among the more uncharismatic politicians in world history, but it would be folly to mistake his lack of glitter for a lack of nerve.

Context is important. Over the 12 long years of drought otherwise known as the Pataki Administration, when the Governor and the Republican Senate Majority Leader (Joe Bruno) would combine to offer ever more right-wing answers to New York's problems, only Silver had the backbone to say no. Unlike some Democrats at the federal level, he refused to blink. He was an obstructionist of the best kind - holding out, month after month and year after year - not only standing in the way of the right, but forcing Pataki and the Senate to make concessions to the left.

His batting average has not been perfect - nobody's is. But he prevented more harm and accomplished far more good than anyone could have expected during an era when Democrats were a minority party among Albany's power centers.[...]

He then goes on to talk about a number of issues that Silver has been helpful on, such as laws to help unions, thwarting the Pataki Administration and boosting the minimum wage. The millionaire's tax proposal is also noted, but Cantor conveniently forgets that Silver went along with Governor Paterson and Joe Bruno in scraping it. Then there's this:

Put this all together and I just think that an attack on him from the left is, well, intellectually shallow and politically naive.

The real reason more good progressive legislation - public financing of elections is one such piece, and there are many others - the real reason these do not see the light of day in New York State is not because of legislative "dysfunction" but rather because of Republican intransigence. They disagree with us, and the Rs still have control of the Senate floor.[...]

Paul Newell and Luke Henry are running principled campaigns, and they have every right to do so. Primary challenges are not just appropriate, they are healthy. They keep everyone on their toes, and that keeps democracy vital. I urge the netroots to meet with tenant and union leaders, with the public financing of elections crowd, with LGBT advocates. If that happens, and you're still persuaded that Silver deserves the attacks that the corporate press heaps on him, so be it.

Here Cantor completely contradicts himself. How can two challengers run against Silver and be both "intellectually shallow and politically naive" while at the same time, "are running principled campaigns and they have every right to do so" go together even if they are four paragraphs apart? Well Cantor is right on that last one, Newell and Henry have every right to challenge a Speaker that has been in office for over thirty years, hides what he makes and what he does at his other job and abides by a system of government where he is one of three people that makes decisions for our state.

I salute Dan Cantor for all of his progressive activism, but using words such as "shallow" and "naive" is not something we do to fellow progressives unless they truly deserve it. Newell and Henry want to change the system, Sheldon Silver is the system.