Not Suprisingly, Espada's Very Late Campaign Finance Report Says Nothing

More than seven months after the 2008 election, Pedro Espada finally filed a campaign finance report with the state. He had hurriedly filed after learning prosecutors were about to file criminal charges against him. Despite that belated "compliance," what's in that report is what counts and by looking at what he wrote, there's really nothing there.

From Newsday:

Bronx Sen. Pedro Espada and his campaign committees owe the state Board of Elections roughly $13,500 for filing late. Espada owes about $3,200 of that and told the board the check was in the mail.

The treasurers of his campaign committees are responsible for the rest of the fines and reports, which still haven't been filed.

In his personal filing, Espada says there were no reportable contributions or expenses.

"The check's in the mail," he says. Sure Pedro, we believe you. The fine he owes might never be paid (unless under threat of a judge) but that $3,200 pales in importance to the missing contribution and expense reports. All candidates are required to give detailed accounts of what is taken in and spent so they can be examined by the people they represent (or the watchdogs in the middle). Espada however, could care less about the law and the people it is meant to serve. The fact that that information is missing speaks volumes about what he is hiding. Just one more reason why this criminal needs to be booted from state government (and into state prison).

Bloomberg Dismisses Talk Of Fairness In Campaign Finance

Mayor Bloomberg, with all of his billions and propensity to spend many millions on his campaign, was quick to belittle those that dare question his take on campaign finance. In this year's race, his opponents will all be limited to how much they can spend because they are enrolled in the weak public finance program that we have now. Bloomberg on the other hand will be spending an estimated $80 million or more, akin to $100 per NYC voter. When reporters asked him to comment, he showed his more abrasive side to respond.

From The Gothamist:

When the issue was first posed to him at yesterday's press conference, he snapped back, "I think it’s one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. I can’t quite understand it, so we will come back to you later." When asked why he would need to spend what some are projecting to hover around $80 million to get his message across after seven years as mayor, he responded, "Sometimes—I know you will be shocked by this—sometimes some reporters don’t accurately describe what we have done, or what we will do, so we have to find another venue."

The mayor has a reputation for being generous when it comes to staff bonuses during election season. A policy adviser from the mayor's first successful bid tells the Times he was "shocked" when he discovered $25,000 in his bank account after Bloomberg's victory for what he saw as just a limited role on the campaign. And on top of all-expense paid stays at Four Seasons-level hotels while traveling overseas, the mayor's inner circle of aides have seen hundreds of thousands in bonus money after his victories. While Bloomberg insisted that "there is no campaign at the moment," he has already hired ten high-priced strategists—mostly Democrats, some with past ties to his potential rivals.

A campaign manager for one of those contenders looking to challenger Bloomberg, City Controller Bill Thompson, told Politicker NY, "It is the height of insensitivity to the economic challenges New Yorkers are facing for the mayor to be spending $100 million on a reelection while lecturing them on belt tightening and the need for austerity."

Austerity is one of the many things that Bloomberg lacks. Being in touch with the needs of the average resident is another. So the Mayor will spend tens of millions to tell us why the gentrification and denigration of what was New York City is so good for us. Meanwhile, as most of us suffer through this recession (and quite possibly soon to be depression), the city becomes more and more expensive, driving out the middle class from a metropolis that is desperately trying to retain its diversity and vibrancy in spite of the Mayor.

Another Problem For Monserrate

As if Senator (ugh) Hiram Monserrate didn't have enough on his legal plate already, his campaign team forgot to send in financial statement to the Board of Elections. Of course this is a small problem in relation to his domestic abuse charges. He can probably get away with pulling a Pedro Espada, though Pedro's case is far worse in this regard. Anyways, here's what happened.

From The Daily Politics:

Perhaps he was distracted by his legal problems, but state Sen, Hiram Monserrate has not yet filed his January periodic financial statement with the State Board of Elections. The statement was due at the board on Jan. 15.

Reached by telephone today, Wayne Mahlke, Monserrate’s deputy chief of staff, said he was unaware that the statement had not been filed and promised that it would be within a week. He could not offer an explanation as to why it was late.

Robert Brehm, a spokesman for the state Board of Elections, said board officials usually give candidates at least five days before they send warning a letter about statements that have not yet been filed.

So he could see some fines if Mahlke doesn't deliver on his promise, but again, this is the least of his worries. Once his domestic violence case goes to trial, then we'll really get to see some change in Hiram's district, with him being replaced in the Senate and sent to jail for his (alleged) crime.

Not Much Change In Espada's Bronx

While the country is ecstatic for the inauguration of the 44th President, things haven't changed much at all for Senator Pedro Espada. Espada is as arrogant as ever and refuses to comply with the law. He might have a D after his name but is in no way related to the sentiments of Barack Obama. Months after the election that put him back in the Senate, he's still defying campaign laws.

From PolitickerNY:

ALBANY—State Senator Pedro Espada Jr. has missed the deadline for filing a required disclosure report for this political action committee, according to online records. The January periodic report was due on the 15th.

Espada has been in hot water with the Board of Elections for failing to file other disclosure reports around election time and improperly registering his campaign committee. A spokesman for the Board of Elections said last week that Espada had not yet straightened out the earlier discrepancies, and is facing several thousand dollars in fines.[...]

Missing this deadline means Espada has been ignoring financial disclosure requirements for the past several months. He took heat from good government advocates for this before, but there's a certain irony given the current focus of the Democratic conference - in which Espada has a fairly significant role - on reforming the way the Senate does business.

Espada could care less about reform. If anything, he's the anti-thesis of it. The fact that he is participating in the reform efforts is nothing short of scary. Unless he is kept on the outside of that committee, I cannot envision reforms that would curtail the greed and ego of men like Pedro Espada.

Manhattan Judge Indicted For Campaign No-Nos

Ah, another day, another scandal. Nora Anderson was indicted for violating campaign rules today. She hasn't even been able to grab her gavel before the authorities come running after her for breaking the law. It might not be as bad as Blagojevich (not many can top him in these post-Tammany Hall days) but she's certainly no angel.

From The Cityroom:

Nora S. Anderson, who last month won the election for Manhattan Surrogate’s Court judge, was indicted Wednesday on charges that she concealed the source of $250,000 deposited into her campaign account to make it appear as though the payments came from herself.

Prosecutors said that the money, in fact, came from Seth Rubenstein, Ms. Anderson’s boss and campaign adviser, and he, too, was charged in the indictment.

Under election law, Ms. Anderson was allowed to contribute as much money as she wanted to her own campaign account. Outside donors were limited to $33,122.50 for the primary, prosecutors said.

Of course, this is nothing new. The charges were being floated around during the campaign, but she couldn't be stopped before election day. Now at least, something can be done before she's allowed to do real damage.....well, allowed to do more damage to the Surrogate Court here in Manhattan.

If Only The Mayoral Election Could Be Cleaned Up

The way the Mayor and 18 19 Council members (with Vacca flipping) thus far are trying to extend term limits has become a distasteful campaign to many New Yorkers. The maneuvering is very unlike the Mayor that came in eight years ago and a far cry from the man that called a legislative fix to change term limits "disgraceful."

One of the arguments from his side is that the extension gives voters more of a choice but in reality the power of incumbency deters many from seeking office and will shoo away a majority of those thinking about those once-expected 35 empty seats in the Council next year. With the Mayor claiming to spend $80 million on his re-election race, how is anyone supposed to have a chance to compete? Well as Connecticut shows, you can take the money out of the equation.

From The NY Times:

At a time when roughly half the states are seriously considering public financing of campaigns, Connecticut’s initial experience has exceeded the expectations of even its most enthusiastic supporters. Of the 343 candidates running in General Assembly elections, 258 — about 75 percent — are seeking public financing.

“I think that for many reasons, Connecticut has made history this election season,” said Beth A. Rotman, Connecticut’s director of public financing. “We’ve had an unprecedented participation rate for the first elections with voluntary public campaign finance, and we’ve virtually eliminated special-interest money from the elections.”

Connecticut’s experiment with campaign finance reform happened only when it hit bottom. After the resignation of Gov. John G. Rowland in 2004 and a spate of other public corruption cases, with the state’s image moving from “the Land of Steady Habits” to “Corrupticut,” public financing suddenly became something other than a pet topic for good-government types.

Here in New York we are about to hit a bottom of our own if the Council passes this awful legislation. Unfortunately the passage of clean elections looks more bleak than the Mayor losing his bid for a third term this afternoon. If the people on his side really wanted to reform the system and give New Yorkers a choice for deciding who they should elect, clean elections would be a tremendous step forward in letting our government represent the people again, instead of the billionaires it caters to presently.

Paterson Tries To Make Nice With The 'Bloodsuckers'

Lawmakers in Albany were extremely upset over the Governor's remarks at an event for the disabled when he referred to the Legislature as bloodsuckers. It was a great line for the crowd and for the most part it was true, but it got plenty of push-back from the State Senate and Assembly that fears another Spitzer hiding within Paterson. Of course our Governor had to do damage control today, but not without a ray of hope for those that are interested in getting the vampire teeth out of the taxpayers and the budget.

From The NY Observer:

After making cover of both city tabloids today after he equated Albany legislators to "bloodsuckers," David Paterson backpedaled at this morning's Crain's New York breakfast and called for campaign finance reform.

This morning, speaking at the Hilton in midtown, Paterson gave more context for the remarks he made yesterday, saying that the culture of Albany allows only "well-heeled" advocacy groups with money and clout to actually win the ear of any lawmaker.

"I don't think my colleagues are bloodsuckers," he said. "What I do think is that, unfortunately, if we adopted the right kind of campaign finance, and we started to take a look at the amount of spending as it impacts the operations of government, that legislators would be empowered to see groups based on the content of their information, and not the resources they're spending in Albany."

Now the Governor's record with campaign finance isn't stellar. He used to espouse the benefits of clean elections, but he was rarely around when the groups that have been fighting hardest for it came to Albany a few months ago. While his statement sounds good on the face of it, the true test is proposing legislation that will get the job done and allow people to run for office (and have a legitimate shot of winning) even if they do not kow tow to the special interests that circle like vultures around the capitol.

Bushie Ambassador Broke The Law For McCain

For some reason, a slew of Republicans have either had no common sense training, or more specifically, never heard of the Hatch Act. The Hatch Act was instituted to protect our American democracy from cronyism and corruption but apparently George Bush and now John McCain are having none of that. Their leadership has inspired people like David Wilkins to break the law to raise as much money for their party as possible.

From The Washington Post:

A Canadian newspaper reported Thursday that Friday's scheduled $100-a-plate luncheon speech by Sen. John McCain in Ottowa was organized in part by U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins, a former South Carolina lawmaker whom President Bush appointed in 2005.

Democrats pointed out the article late Thursday night, and alleged that Wilkins's actions could be construed as a violation of the Hatch Act, which prohibits many kinds of political activities by government employees.

The article in the Edmonton Sun, and an earlier one in the Globe and Mail, says that Wilkins contacted Thomas d'Aquino, the president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, to help set up what they described as a fundraiser before McCain's visit. McCain is scheduled to give a speech at the the Chateau Laurier Hotel and to meet with several Canadian officials.

According to the Sun: "Wilkins had been contacted by the McCain campaign about a Canadian visit, and the ambassador wanted to know if some of d'Aquino's group of corporate chief executives might be interested in meeting the Republican presidential candidate. Almost instantly, d'Aquino jumped at the opportunity."

The Hatch Act circumscribes political activity for government employees. According to the American Foreign Service Association Web site, the State Department's ethics office prohibits fundraising activities for its presidential appointees.

Perhaps Wilkins forgot to take his "appointee" hat off for the fundraiser, or more aptly he forgot to cover up his actions and he got caught. It's a real shame that the event was only for $100 a plate (supposedly just to defer costs of the luncheon) but a fundraiser is a fundraiser and now we have a breach of the Hatch Act. Now Wilkins has to go down....that is if anyone still respects the rule of law around here anymore.

Barack Obama Is Committed To Reform

Not only does Barack Obama inspire people in a way not seen in decades, his ability to stay on message and his actions solidify the great things he says up on stage. Now that he is the nominee, he effectively becomes head of the party and in the same week he is starting to make big changes for the Democratic apparatus. For more than a year he has repeated that he will take no corporate or lobbyist money. Well now neither will the DNC.

From Politico:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is moving on two fronts to make transparency a linchpin of his campaign, opening his fundraisers to reporters and clamping down on the Democratic National Committee’s fundraising from Washington insiders.

The moves, announced on his second full day as the party’s de facto presidential nominee, are designed to drive a campaign message of change versus more of the same, aides said.

His likely opponent, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), closes his fundraisers to the press.
Beginning last night, Obama will open all of his fundraisers to at least a pool reporter, who will share the information with the rest of the press corps.

Beginning Thursday, the DNC will no longer accept checks from federal lobbyists or political action committees, mirroring the strict standard Obama adopted for his presidential campaign.

Now that is change I can believe in. McCain is his usual secretive self, desperately masking who he really is and the policies and modus operandi that conflict with his "maverickness." Besides, it wouldn't do McCain much good to follow Obama on the openness factor because he survives on insiders. Obama on the other hand has the support of millions of donors and supporters that make his a true people-powered campaign.

Paterson Patronizes NY Reform Efforts

Wow, there's only nine more days left on the New York legislative calendar! It is already June....where'd the year go? Well, it was full of scandal, that's for sure...forget all the local NYC stuff, we had the Spitzer debacle, Diane Gordon's illegalities, trooper-gate and so on. So with all of this craziness, you'd think this might be a good year for campaign finance reform and opening up the business of Albany to those that send legislators up there. Wrong.

Of course David Paterson was supposed to champion our cause of reform. He was all for it as a State Senator. So what has he done? He issued a press release in lieu of reform groups showing up in Albany yesterday. If you were one that took the time to go up, down or across New York to work for a more open state government, how would you feel?

From The NY Times:

“These issues are not new to the governor; the role of governor may be, but he now needs to stand up and act like a governor,” said Dick Dadey, the executive director of Citizens Union, who lamented that the legislative session was coming to “an abysmal end” with “no real progress on reform.”

Blair Horner, the legislative director of the New York Public Interest Research Group, said of the governor, “It’s his job to get things done.

“The people of New York don’t send elected officials to Albany to hang out. They send them here to solve problems.”

He added, “If this were a report card, the report card would be an F.”

The news conference comes as the governor continues to struggle to pull his administration together and form his own agenda, leaving the legislative session to wind down with what critics have said are precious few accomplishments.

The order for state agencies to observe gay marriages consummated in other statesm but beyond that I can;t think of much he has done in his first year. Sure, he's new to the Governor's Mansion, but certainly not to Albany. Shame on Paterson for not doing more to clean up a state government that is known for its corruption and cronyism.

Paterson's Campaign Finance Reform On Shaky Ground

Albany is Albany is Albany. Sigh.

What do I mean by that? Well it seems that despite everything surrounding the exposés of corruption in our state capitol, nothing promising is happening to alleviate our problems. Our new governor seems resigned to do absolutely nothing to help campaign finance reform on its way except for placating the groups that put boots on the ground to persuade our legislators to do what it takes to clean Albany. This morning the Times Union rightly smacks Gov. Paterson for continuing on the same big-money path as everyone has before him.

From The Times-Union:

Now here's the new governor, David Paterson, affable in a way his predecessor wasn't, and possessing of political skills that his predecessor lacked. Mr. Paterson might be able to actually set an example. He just might have what it takes to get Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno to agree to the tougher campaign finance laws that Mr. Spitzer fought for, to no avail.

Instead, Mr. Paterson is putting out the word that $10,000 limits aren't for him as he begins to raise the tens of millions of dollars that running for governor is likely to cost him come 2010. He's sticking to the absurdly high limit of $55,900 that New York's farcical campaign finance laws allow.

"In order to compete on a level playing field he will adhere to the limits that are set under current rules," says Jonathan Rosen, a spokesman for the governor.

Translation: Raise the white flag. No more reform for us, at least not until 2011. What counts now is political survival.

Oh, Mr. Paterson may yet come out with a campaign finance reform proposal before the legislative session wraps up. He might feign indignation when it somehow fails to pass. But the governor's commitment to even beginning to reduce the corrupting influence of big money on state government is suspect when he runs away from a measure that Mr. Spitzer had voluntarily adopted without having to fight for legislative approval. That Mr. Paterson is not Mr. Spitzer isn't always such a flattering comparison.

On Monday he said that campaign finance reform was too expensive. When good government groups came to Albany the next day to demand change, he appeared at the end of the day in order to endorse a bill in the Assembly this year in order to change/compel the Senate to pass reform as well. And in the very same week, he is making sure there will be plenty of money for him to run for (re-)election in two years time. There is no reason for a $55,900 limit unless you are taking campaign cash from rich lobbyists and those that are looking to personally benefit from such an enormous contribution.

Shame on you Governor Paterson! If you think you will get away with the status quo in this fashion, I have a lot of people who will be committed to pressure you until you sign a real campaign finance reform bill.

Reform Day Sweeps Albany

Yesterday dozens of us from across the state converged on our state capitol to demand reform from our lawmakers. We went in wanting an independent body to determine redistricting, new ethics reforms (so needed), rules reform (so that the leadership no longer holds all the power) and campaign finance reform. Everyone was excited, even our own leader Susan Lerner who was beset with the flu. Those of us who joined in from Democracy for New York City and Citizen Action were particularly engaged with the campaign finance portion and we sported our union-bug buttons and posters accordingly.

Heading up there we were well aware of Governor Paterson saying that campaign finance was probably not going any this session. Granted he is still finding his way up there as the new chief executive in Albany, so we thought he just needed some help in doing so. After a carbilicious breakfast of muffins and scones, we heard reform-laden appeals from Minority Leader Malcolm Smith, Comptroller DiNapoli and my favorite, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. He spoke with the most passion and has shown his commitment with such works as Project Sunlight.

After the speakers and a boxed lunch, we all headed to the long security lines to go lobby the legislators that agreed to meet with us. Time was exceedingly short since every single visitor had to go through the checkpoint with only one line operating and the guards were especially vigilant with all the little old ladies milling about.

Our first legislator was Senator Eric Schneiderman (D-Bronx). Eric has been an incredible fighter for progressive causes. Unfortunately his outspoken attitude has gotten him into trouble with the leadership. Thankfully for all of us, that is why we were there, to fight on the behalf of elected officials that stand up for things that are right instead of what the powers that be consider the right thing to do.

Next our group met up and went over to Assemblyman Dinowitz's (D-Bronx) office. He wasn't around, so we spoke with his legislative aide, who didn't seem to know much. Maybe he was new at his job, who knows? The one thing he did know was the fight over congestion pricing. You could tell by his tone and language that it was nice for his office not to have voted, despite being vocally opposed (being in the north Bronx and all). For some reason though, he couldn't argue that elected officials are held accountable in the best way by showing their support for their beliefs by voting one way or another. That is the way it should be, despite the way the majority caucus may feel at times. That is why we need rules reform.

Last but not least, we sat down with my very own Assemblyman, Brian Kavanagh (D-Manhattan). There was no need to lobby him, he already passionately believes in what we are doing and ran on those ideals when he came to Albany two years ago. He told us that because of the strict leadership, junior members get a paltry $70,000 for their entire staff. How is it that these members can do constituent work when the senior members are getting $500,000 to $700,000 a piece? It doesn't work, and it shows Albany is broken. Change is desperately needed in our capitol. By keeping up the fight, talking to your neighbors and most certainly your legislators, that determination will eventually win the day.

And before you write this off, on our way back to NYC, we heard that the Governor himself spoke in favor of a campaign finance bill in the Assembly. He knows it is doomed in the Republican-controlled Senate this year, and that is why it would make an excellent stand for us to show New York it is time to take back the Senate to pave the way for true reform in the Empire State.

President Bush Blasts McCain's Campaign Finance Doubletalk

He said it, not me:

How Many Scandals Is McCain Involved In?

Well so far there are not one, but two. Unless you haven't seen just a smidge of political news in the last week or so, you know of some blonde that he might or might not have been ethical with. In regards to the blonde, it doesn't matter if he slept with her or not. The real issue is that he did favors for her as a lobbyist, that is, by Mr. Anti-Lobbyist. He's not really a 'maverick,' it is more like he is a real slick bastard who has gotten away with looking clean for far too long. Yet there is more than just lobbying going on in McCain's universe. The Iseman scandal just looks really bad, the other one is criminal.

From AmericaBlog:

When John McCain's campaign was strapped for cash John McCain opted into the campaign financing system by requesting certification that he was eligible to collect federal money. As the New Hampshire primary approached and John McCain was broke he took material advantage of the system by using the promise of matching funds to borrow money to keep his campaign afloat. And he took advantage of a rule that gives candidates who take public financing automatic ballot access on ballots in several states. (Governor Dean estimated that he spent 3 million dollars in 2004 getting on ballots in states because he had opted out of the public financing system. )

Once John McCain had taken advantage of the system by gaining ballot access and securing a campaign saving loan, he won the New Hampshire primary and became the apparent nominee of the Republican Party. He then sent a letter saying that he was opting out of the primary process and claiming that the FEC is now impotent to stop him.

If John McCain is forced to stay in the matching system he will only be allowed to spend $56 million dollars before the Republican convention in September. As of the end of January John McCain had already spent $49 million dollars meaning that today he's either close to the cap or over the amount of money he can spend during the primary.

What does it mean for John McCain? It's yet another issue where John McCain tries to legislate one way and do something completely different. In this case it has to do with campaign finance issues. As Brad Smith, the former Republican FEC commissioner noted, if McCain drops out of the system the FEC will subpoena McCain, and his staff during and their records to determine whether they violated the law. If they're found to be in violation of the law they can be fined up to $25,000 and they can be jailed for up to five years.

Hmm, McCain certainly does not want to spend another five years in jail, even if it would be an American jail. Well Howard Dean has taken the first step to figure out what is happening, by filing a complaint against the maverick with the Federal Elections Commission. McCain was trying to hedge his bets before his campaign reignited in New Hampshire. Unfortunately for him, hedging that bet is against the law.

So much for Mr. Campaign Finance.

Lobbyists And Developers Claim Racial Bias In Campaign Finance Reform

This poor minority pictured to the right is fighting to make a difference here in New York City. James Bopp Jr. is sick and tired of a new law that prohibits poor lobbyists and real estate developers from being able to exercise their freedom of using endless amounts of cash speech so that they can help elect candidates that support their views. Speaker Christine Quinn is in the target sight of these victims after she passed a law that was instituted to clamp down on special interest money's effect on elections here. Now James, who has already fought back Vermont's attempt at kicking corporate interests out of their government is in town to support the rights of all the poor developers, you know, derelicts like Bruce Ratner and Donald Trump.

From The New York Times:

A lawsuit financially backed by the business interests and others was filed Monday in federal court in Manhattan against the City Campaign Finance Board, which enforces the campaign finance system. The suit charged that the limits violated free speech and equal protection provisions of the Constitution and discriminated against minorities.

The law, which has been called one of the toughest in the nation, aims to diminish the influence of special interests on city campaigns. It reduces by more than 90 percent the amount that those who do business with the city can contribute, to $400 from $4,950 in a mayor’s race, for instance, and to $250 from $2,950 in City Council races.

And what was Mr. Bopp's premise for the lawsuit?

In an unusual tack, Mr. Bopp claimed that New York’s limits would make it more difficult for minority candidates to run, because they tend to come from poorer areas where their neighbors cannot contribute, so they must turn to business interests for donations.

“When minority candidates run, their natural constituency is their neighborhoods and their neighbors,” Mr. Bopp said in a telephone interview.

“And the unfortunate reality is that the minority population is on average in the lower socioeconomic level and less able to contribute, so minority candidates have to rely — I am told by activists here, consultants — that they tend to rely disproportionately on contributions from outside of their district, and in particular, business interests. So that this would disproportionately affect them.”

Aww how nice of him to care about minorities like that, especially when the interests he represents are the principle factor in driving up rent across the city that ultimately forces many minorities out of New York. Some experts though doubt his sincerity.

Richard Briffault, a law professor at Columbia University and an expert on campaign finance law, said the lawsuit appeared to be a “stretch,” particularly the aspects claiming racial discrimination.

“It’s going to affect everybody,” Mr. Briffault said. “There’s no evidence that Hispanics or African-American candidates are particularly dependent on lobbyist donations than white candidates.”

Yes Professor Briffault, it is a stretch, those laws are a good first step in combating the problem with money and elections. Of course Speaker Quinn could have gone a different way, but that is something we are working on as well. Eventually we will have clean elections in the city and throughout the state, it is only a matter of time.

Campaign Finance Deal Struck In Albany Today

With all the craziness down here in midtown Manhattan today, a little bit of common sense made its way through at the State Capitol. I'll emphasize the 'little bit' part. The deal hardly accomplished anything, leaving campaign contribution limits high. The limits will fall to some degree and there will be more requirements mandating donors to open about who they are, but something tells me Albany will still be wide open for 'business' after everything is signed by Spitzer.

From The New York Times:

Senate Republicans had initially resisted any campaign finance measure. Many Republican legislators expect the governor and the Democratic Party to aggressively back challengers against them next fall and had argued against any plan that would make it difficult for them to raise money against a wealthy candidate.

But the plan unveiled today leaves intact the ability of the real estate developers — steadfast supporters of the Republican Party — to give vast sums to candidates through their limited liability companies.

“This is a very good beginning and moves us back into the ballpark of campaign finance reform,” said Barbara Bartoletti, legislative director of the League of Conservation Voters in New York State.

Russ Haven, legislative counsel for the New York Public Interest Research Group, said: “Considering where we’ve been stuck at for a generation, it’s a move in the right direction. But clearly there’s an unfinished agenda.”

An unfinished agenda indeed. I want to see clean elections brought into the fold. That would be serious reform for New York. The problem is that we still have too many corrupt politicians that want everything to stay the same while making it look like there is change. We need more progressive elected representatives so that New York can finally represent New Yorkers and not three men in a dark room making deals.

Spitzer's Shaming Campaign?

The Governor isn't looking so hot these days. A brutal war between him and the State Legislature has erupted over his no-holds-barred approach to combating the status quo up in Albany. The effect of the strategy has been a lot of gridlock and fighting, especially with Senate Leader Joe Bruno. Apparently compromise isn't on the table from Eliot's perspective. On this summer break, he is going into the districts of Senate Republicans to shame them into reforming business as usual.

From The New York Sun:

The administration hopes to use the added political pressure on Mr. Bruno and his conference as leverage to force him to cooperate with the administration's agenda, including enacting tighter campaign finance rules. "The fourth man in the room is the fact that Bruno's majority is under siege," a top adviser to Mr. Spitzer said. The Republicans now hold 33 seats in the Senate to the Democrats' 29.

The escalation could begin as early as this week. Mr. Spitzer has plans to visit the local districts of a number of Senate Republicans and make speeches singling out the lawmakers for blame — a "shaming tour" similar to his trips around the state in February, during which he attacked Assembly Democrats for defying him by choosing one of their own members, Thomas DiNapoli, to fill a state comptroller vacancy.

Obviously Spitzer has no fear in using this strategy since the last time around in the spring. The question is, will it work. Taking back the Senate from the power-hungry hands of Joe Bruno would be a decisive victory, but there is no chance of it until at least the next election cycle in 2008.

Another problem for Spitzer is that there are many Democrats that disapprove of his politicking and policy proposals as well. Eliot's solution is probably to get rid of those Democrats in the primaries. I am all in favor of a reformer in the Governor's seat and I agree that old, corrupt Democrats need to go just as badly as the old corrupt Republicans. Yet so far nothing has really come to pass so that New York receives the reform it so desperately deserves.

Double-Standard McCain

John McCain used to head the "straight-talk express" when he ran against George Bush in 2000, but now we all know he sings a different tune. Like many other GoOPers, his words and actions are full of hypocrisy. He'll preach one thing and do the opposite. Although his pet project now is to satisfy Wall Street with the question of 'illegal immigration,' he was long known for trying to reform campaign finance. He still rails against the system in his speeches, speaking out against how money influences politics and how there are too many lobbyists in Washington. So do his actions mesh with his words on that?

From The Huffington Post:

"Too often the special interest lobbyists with the fattest wallets and best access carry the day when issues of public policy are being decided," McCain asserts on his web site, declaring that he "has fought the 'revolving door' by which lawmakers and other influential officials leave their posts and become lobbyists for the special interests they have aided."

In actual practice, at least two of McCain's top advisers fit precisely the class of former elected officials he criticizes so sharply. On March 7, 2007, McCain named ex-Texas Representative Tom Loeffler, who has one of the most lucrative and influential practices in the nation's capital, as his campaign co-chair. In the same month, McCain named former Washington Sen. Slade Gorton, now a heavyweight lobbyist, as his honorary chairman for Washington state.

Loeffler's client list includes PhRMA, the drug industry association; Southwest Airlines; Toyota; and Martin Marietta. Gorton represents, among others, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp., Weyerhaeuser and Fidelity National Financial.

The list of McCain's lobbyist/advisers goes on and on in the HuffPo report. None of this is really surprising, but it needs to be called out. It is far past the time to let Republicans get away with their rampant hypocrisy. Whether it involves 'moral values,' campaign finance or any other issue, the free ride is over.

Taking Control Away From Developers In New York Is An Uphill Battle

It is hard to argue that money in politics as it is today is harming us here in New York and across the country. Our new Governor has vowed to fight the influence of big money, even after accepting gobs of it in his race to win the gubernatorial election last year. One of the specific problems is the amount of money given to politicians from developers. Despite limits of $5,000 from corporations and $150,000 from individuals, people like Leonard Litwin get around these limits by setting up multiple L.L.C.s, enabling Litwin to give a million dollars to both parties in last year's cycle.

Who is Leonard Litwin? Listed in Forbes 400 most wealthy Americans, this real estate developer in Manhattan has contributed to many campaigns in order to get access and get his way when it comes to greasing the wheels of the New York political system. He purposefully stays as obscure as possible, shying away from the limelight in order to keep his business dealings going at full speed.

So what do we do about the problem? The money goes everywhere. A contribution that is accepted and spent by a candidate is always subjected to scrutiny, Democrats and Republicans alike. Nevertheless, Spitzer is talking tough and the Republicans are fighting him tooth and nail.

From The New York Times:

Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who raised more money from L.L.C.’s last year than any other state official, swore off them after the election and is now proposing to ban them as part of an overhaul of the state’s campaign finance laws. He and others have argued that L.L.C.’s have made the state’s contribution limits essentially meaningless. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and other city officials have moved to restrict donations though L.L.C.’s for city candidates.

But the governor’s proposal has met stiff resistance from Senate Republicans, who have reaped big money from limited liability companies. That is in part because real estate developers are especially generous to Republicans in Albany.

Take, for instance, Mr. Litwin. Since last year, Mr. Litwin; his firm, Glenwood Management; and affiliated L.L.C.’s have given a total of $155,000 to campaign accounts maintained by the Senate Republican leadership. They also gave to 23 of the State Senate’s 33 Republicans.

Now the Republicans are stalling. Despite the bipartisan giving, it is the Republicans that get the majority of the money and consequently fight the most to keep the status quo. I'm sure there are some Democrats up in Albany that are on the side of Joe Bruno's crew. That is even more reason for us to fight for change at the ballot box next year to not only take the Senate back, but to fight for progressive candidates that can sweep out the garbage with D's next to their names as well.

Al Franken Knows We Need Publicly Financed Elections

People who are sick of how much money is involved in politics know we need a drastic change to the way campaigns operate. Except for field operations and dealing with the media, the great majority of "time" resources is dedicated to calling for money, meeting people for money and doing whatever it takes to finance the campaign. Al Franken lamented on this process today at the Huffington Post. Who would know more about it than a candidate running for office?

From The Huffington Post:

As a candidate for the U.S. Senate here in Minnesota, I've become painfully aware of the role money plays in politics.

For instance, according to my staff, I'm not supposed to write anything without mentioning that our grassroots campaign needs the support of great progressives like YOU and asking you to click here and chip in a few bucks so I can take on the Republican attack machine.

See? That kind of thing totally distracts the reader from my point, which is this: If you ever wonder whether we really need public financing of elections in this country, try running for office. You might think I spend most of my time kissing babies or shaking hands or having serious policy debates in which my sparkling wit and superior knowledge of the issues combine to sweep audiences off their feet.

Read the rest of the diary to get more of Al's wit and wisdom, including another link to send him a few bucks in his race against Coleman. Who knows, if we get enough people like Franken elected to the Senate we might have a chance to enact real change when it comes to money and politics.