Senate Dems Finally Agree On Something For The M.T.A.

With less than four weeks before the M.T.A. introduces the doomsday fares and service cuts, the Senate Democrats have finally agreed on something, even if it doesn't address the systemic problems embedded within the transit authority. Last night Majority Leader Malcolm Smith was able to announce his "victory" within his caucus.

From The Daily Politics:

The tolls are still out. The 34-cent/$100 payroll tax, graduated so Dutchess, Putnam and Orange counties pay less (25 cents/$100), is in. The $1 taxi drop-off fee is back to 50 cents, with 25 percent of the revenue generated going to pay for debt service on MTA capital projects through 2011, but not for upstate and Long Island roads and bridges.

One sticking point: The Senate Democrats want school districts in the 12-county MTA service area to be "held harmless" from the payroll tax, and it's unclear whether that means relief would come on the front end (by not charging the districts at all) or the back (by reimbursing them after the fact).

They also want an assurance that districts will be held harlmess in perpetuity - regardless of how the state's economic circumstances change.

Protecting the schools sounds good, preventing a drastic fare hike at the end of the month is definitely good but looking ahead, this short-range plan is nothing but a cheap political fix. And of course the Majority Leader takes the first "hit" of victory by chiding his fellow Democrats for not going along with his plan back in March:

"Basically, I won't say all of you, but a number of people, basically indicated they thought that was the wrong thing to do," Smith said. "In recent stories I think there's been some discussion about some merit to that."

"...Obviously, if you had adopted my plan back in March, we wouldn't be here," the majority leader said later. We tried to tell everybody back then, but we all...were told we were wrong. Things have come full circle."

Nothing has come full circle Mr. Smith. All you have is this moment and if anything, is a pyrrhic victory for the M.T.A. This deal, and the deal back in March was done for the sake of political expediency, not for the long-term health of New York's mass transit system. This is still the wrong thing to do, but sadly, it seems this is the best you can do.

Why The Employee Free Choice Act Is Necessary

Center for American Progress put together this little spot to explain exactly why we need EFCA legislation. The fact is, unionizing a workplace is extremely difficult in this day and age, where after years and years of anti-union bills have passed through Congress at the behest of their Corporate America donors.

GOP Should Listen To Scarborough, Stop Hatin'

Joe Scarborough may be a Republican, but at least he's one that has the ability to look at the party and shake his head in shame. Joe has been out of Congress for a few years now and without someone like John Boehner to boss him around, he can see that the whole fear card isn't working out too well for what was once the Grand....Old Party.

From RawStory:

In an appearance Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press, Scarborough offered Ronald Reagan as a model of temperamental moderation, saying, “We need to be conservative, but like Reagan. … We can’t scare little kids.” On his own MSNBC program the next day, he emphasized again, “They’ve got to drop the hate.”

“If you know you’re right, then why be angry?” Scarborough asked calmly. “I do a radio show, and a lot of callers that call in expect me to scream and yell and say I hate President Obama. Being against his policies, for some reason with a lot of people in the base that’s not enough. They want you to hate the man.”[...]

“If you’re mature enough,” Scarborough continued,” you realize Barack Obama doesn’t hate America, I don’t hate America — we just have different views of how to make America a better place And if you look at history over 250 years, that’s worked out pretty well.”

The problem though Joe, is that too many Republicans that have made it into office aren't mature. They'd rather stoke the fears of people and make them believe that the other side hates America, and blah blah blah. GOP leaders get caught up in this hysteria and run with it, never hesitating to look back and take stock of the damage they do with that violent rhetoric. It ends up with people feeling like their states should secede from the union. That isn't just wrong, it's insanity.

Transit Advocates Say Nay To Paterson's Plan

Paterson may be happy that the new 1% payroll hike (and that's it) plan might have enough support to pass, but that doesn't make transit advocates happy in the least. The Ravitch Commission recommendations have been thrown by the wayside in Albany, and political expediency is the name of the game now. Unfortunately, so too does a real solution for the woes of the M.T.A.

From PolitickerNY:

ALBANY—Even if it is palatable enough to pass both houses of the legislature, the plan to bail out the M.T.A. that David Paterson formally unveiled this weekend is not getting a warm welcome from the alliance of labor leaders and transit advocates that pushed firmly for the Ravitch plan. They write, with charming understatement, that the plan "may not" adequately address the system's capital needs.

"The current worsening of the MTA's finances combined with the difficulty of passing new sources of revenue in election years, like next year, adds up to a very real threat," say Kevin Corbett and Bob Yaro, the co-chairs of the Empire State Transportation Alliance, in a letter sent to Paterson and legislative leaders Friday. "As members of the business, civic and labor community, we call on the state's leadership to act on a final package that responsibly and adequately provides a long term source of funding for the transit system's rebuilding needs. Now is the window of opportunity. The future health of the transit network and the region itself depend on the state meeting these long term needs."

The problem though, is that state senators' idea of long-term is election day of next year. They could care less whether or not the health of the M.T.A. improves, so long as their constituents re-elect them (and their contributors are made happy, which is part of the whole "re-elect" thing) again and again. Meanwhile, New Yorkers will have to deal with an increasingly expensive and less comprehensive mass transit system.

Jane "The Warrior" Harman

There's nothing like a YouTube clip that has a politician to be claiming something she's not, especially when the politician is George Bush apologist and constitutional disgrace Jane Harman:

Paterson Gives Hotel Labor A Leg Up

Perhaps it was backlash from challenging the unions during the budget process, the flubbing he gave them during the LCA gathering or his dismal poll numbers but Paterson decided to do something good for unionizing in New York's hotel industry last week.

From The NY Times:

Gov. David A. Paterson has issued an order making it easier for labor unions to organize thousands of workers at some of New York’s largest new hotel and convention center projects, including hotels in Niagara Falls and at the Belmont Park racetrack in Nassau County and the expansion of the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in Manhattan.

The directive, which was signed on April 24 and issued on Friday, will require the operators of projects that receive assistance like loans, tax breaks or property leases from state agencies or public authorities to obtain “labor peace” agreements with unions seeking to organize their workers.[...]

The new rule signifies a major victory for Unite HERE, the hotel and restaurant workers union, which has been pressing Mr. Paterson and his predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, to issue the directive for more than a year. The move also gives Mr. Paterson, who is struggling to shore up his political base and improve his poll numbers, a chit with unions that have been close to Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, his most likely rival in a Democratic primary.

“What the governor is basically saying with this order is if the state has a proprietary interest in a hospitality project, we need to take steps, just like any responsible private investor would, to forestall the possibility of any future disruption to revenues to the state associated with those projects,” said Neal Kwatra, the director of political and strategic affairs for the New York Hotel and Motel Trades Council, which represents about 30,000 hotel workers, primarily in the city.

With just a quick signature of the Governor's pen, hotel workers got a huge boost out of Albany. Employee Free Choice legislation is having difficulty in its passage nationwide but here in New York our government must respect and encourage the labor movement so that workers are given the chance to stand up against employers who look to get the lowest labor cost that they can. Now if Paterson can stop mocking the unions and stand in solidarity with them, then we can really get things done.

The Patricof Family, One Cog In The Corrupt City Apparatus

Walking on the streets of New York City, it is nearly impossible to miss the orange envelopes marring the windshields of parked cars from Lower Manhattan to Riverdale and from the Westside to Little Neck. What most people do not see, except for those that wish to contest their fines, are the parking judges that determine whether to drop, reduce or leave the fine as is. One of these judges is Allan J Patricof and he is makes more than any of his fellows on the "parking" benches. If you're wondering why, all you have to do is ask his wife Rochelle, who determines salaries for the court.

From The NY Times:

According to city records, the judge, Allan J. Patricof, earned $110,472 in 2006, the same year that city investigators found that he had submitted time sheets for some hours when he was not at work. Mr. Patricof is married to Rochelle Patricof, the deputy finance commissioner.

Mr. Patricof’s earnings were $20,000 more than any of the other 145 administrative law judges who hear ticket cases for the agency. In 2007, Mr. Patricof earned $84,687.24, also more than any other parking judge.

The department said it had yet to calculate how much the judges earned in 2008. It has said the deputy commissioner does not have a role in overseeing the hours assigned to parking judges.

There are so many problems with this situation and they aren't all centered on the Patricof's.

First of all, both Allan and Rochelle each need to be fired and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Unless he's a true workaholic, those hours he billed are just a little bit unbelievable. The next most busy judge billed 381 hours less. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduct what Patricof was up to. The fact that he got away with it and that is wife is Deputy Finance Commissioner aren't hard to put together, and neither will it be for a jury.

Then there's the system that must be considered. The department denies the deputy commissioner plays a role in overseeing hours. That's a crock of the foulest smelling shit I've ever heard. She may not have officially signed off on his time sheet but an indirect connection isn't hard to find. For the department to try and deny it shows just how they feel about New Yorkers' intelligence and knowwithall about how the city works.

As for the Conflict of Interests Board.....for them to approve of Mr. Patricof to be in this position considering where Mrs. Patricof sits, is completely proposterious. I don't think they could find a conflict of interest if it slapped them in the face and hit them upside the head.

Sestak's Reponse To Specter's Switch Is Spot On

Arlen Specter's change in party has made for a considerable amount of news. Part of that story was the support of many within the Democratic establishment without really examining what Specter is going to bring to the party. Joe Sestak, a congressman that had already been considering running against Specter (before the switch) was on CNN yesterday and he when presented with a question about Specter being a good Democrat, responds with a question:



That should be on the minds of Democratic Pennsylvania primary voters next year when Arlen asks to be on the ticket as one of their own. Specter probably believes that his defection entitles him to be nominated as a Democrat in the primary, but Pennsylvania Democrats are not about to simply bow down in his presence.

A 4th Grader Does A Better Job Than The Traditional Media

Misha Lerner may only be in the fourth grade, but he is years ahead of many who consider themselves professional journalists. Throughout most of this decade, the press was reticent to ask tough questions of Bush Administration officials, especially those who were high up and had been involved with making the United States into a country that tortures, even if the glorious leader denies it. What only a few press credentialed individuals have done, so too has Bethesda, Maryland's young Misha Lerner.

From The Washington Post:

Then Misha Lerner, a student from Bethesda, asked: What did Rice think about the things President Obama's administration was saying about the methods the Bush administration had used to get information from detainees?

Rice took the question in stride. saying that she was reluctant to criticize Obama, then getting to the heart of the matter.

"Let me just say that President Bush was very clear that he wanted to do everything he could to protect the country. After September 11, we wanted to protect the country," she said. "But he was also very clear that we would do nothing, nothing, that was against the law or against our obligations internationally. So the president was only willing to authorize policies that were legal in order to protect the country."

She added: "I hope you understand that it was a very difficult time. We were all so terrified of another attack on the country. September 11 was the worst day of my life in government, watching 3,000 Americans die. . . . Even under those most difficult circumstances, the president was not prepared to do something illegal, and I hope people understand that we were trying to protect the country."

It's too bad that Misha couldn't do a follow-up question, because not only did Rice lie to Misha about breaking the law, she used the horrible tragedy of September the 11th to reinforce a terrible justification for torturing other human beings. Misha was only two years old when it happened, but I hope he understands (or his parents make mention of it to him) that you can't trust all grown-ups, especially those that have worked for George W. Bush.

Same-Sex Marriage Passage Will Have To Be A Bipartisan Affair

When Governor Paterson decided to throw same-sex marriage legislation onto the State Senate this year so that they take a vote on it, many advocates were not happy about having to face a possible losing vote. Yet the governor, desperate to take attention away from his disastrous budgeting abilities wanted senators to take a stand, saying that the issue deserved a vote whether it be up or down. A few weeks later and the movement is closer than ever to having New York join Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and of course, Massachusetts. The only problem is that in the narrowly-held Democratic State Senate, a few conservative Dems don't believe in equality and that means a few good Republicans must be found.

From NY Magazine:

So who might those votes come from? Alan Van Capelle, executive director of Empire State Pride Agenda, suggests four of the seven Democrats in the “nay” camp are actually movable: Senators George Onorato of Astoria, William T. Stachowski of Buffalo, David J. Valesky of Oneida, and Shirley L. Huntley of Jamaica. In 2007, Van Capelle says, Democratic Assembly members like Joe Lentol opposed the bill initially but ended up voting for it. “So we know that when we do the work that needs to be done, which includes giving the facts and telling our stories, people can change their minds.”

If those four come around, only two Republicans will be needed to pass the measure—though lobbyists hope for more. “Nobody wants to be the one person to change the vote,” said Marriage Equality New York head Ron Zacchi. The current legislative session ends June 22, so there’s still time for persuading. Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith has said already he won’t let the measure hit the floor unless the votes are there.

Two Republicans immediately come to mind. Senator Thomas P. Morahan of Rockland County told the Times through a spokesman that he’s “not going to come out one way or the other,” which supporters view as promising. And though Senator Kemp Hannon of Nassau County told the paper that he’s inclined to oppose the bill, he added that it “deserves serious consideration.” To lobby groups, that’s the definition of “movable.” (Several others have yet to say anything about their positions.)

If a Republican can't commit to saying no on the matter, that is definitely a good sign. With the Republican leadership allowing members to vote their conscience and not to party loyalty, it is open season for citizens to lobby their senators so that they vote the morally correct way. Northeast Republicans, at least what is left of them, realize that trying to act like their southern and western compatriots in the GOP is a losing proposition up here. So instead of legislating with thoughts of hate, intolerance and bigotry, they have a chance to do the right thing and spread equality to same sex couples that only want the same rights that straight couples have. This shouldn't be a partisan issue, it is a moral one and because of that, a bipartisan affirmation of this bill would be a wonderful thing.

Why Are Churchgoers More Likely To Support Torture?

That is the question asked in a recent poll, and reiterated by CNN's Jack Cafferty. He gets quite a few responses that are all over the board but the one I agree with most comes at the 2:35 mark. "All radicalized forms of thinking lack innate tolerance," is a quote that anyone who doubts the findings of the poll should consider. Not all churches (or any house of worship) preach against tolerance but there are plenty that do, and that is one of the many reasons why torture has become accepted by far too many people in our society.

Will Obama's Pragmatism Show Up On The Supreme Court?

In five months the next term of the Supreme Court will be in session and Justice Souter will no longer be on the bench. Within that amount of time, President Obama will have chosen his replacement with the consent of the Senate and conservatives will have something new to complain about at Fox News, Republican press conferences and the rightwing blogosphere.

The likelihood of a liberal dreamboat such as Justice Albert Gore is far less than slim, much closer to "not a chance." No, the President is a pragmatist and the writing has been on the wall long before Barack went to Washington. Now politics plays a role in all of this too, so Obama will choose someone that is not going to get many complaints from what is left of the moderate conservatives (like Republican Democratic Senator Arlen Specter) or even the typical Republican Senator that is to the right of Specter but to the left of say, someone like Jim DeMint. That is why I think Esquire nailed it several months ago before Obama was elected President.

From Esquire Magazine:

If Obama becomes president, his first nominee to the Supreme Court will likely be Sonia Sotomayor. As a Hispanic woman with 16 years of court experience, Sotomayor would slay two of the court's lack-of-diversity birds with one swift stone. "These are criteria that matter these days. Even Laura Bush was disappointed that her husband didn't name a woman to replace Sandra Day O'Connor," says Mark Tushnet, the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Harvard. And because Sotomayor has a reputation for staying behind the scenes and sits on a federal bench known for its centrism, it's likely that she would be able to garner a two-thirds majority in the Senate, even if the Democrats only control an estimated 55 or so seats. Plus there's an insurance measure if the nomination gets too politicized publicly: Sotomayor was appointed to the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in 1992 by President George H. W. Bush. Says Tushnet, "If you're a Democratic strategist, you can gin up ads that say, 'She was good enough for George H. W. Bush. Why isn't she good enough for Mitch McConnell?' "

Now there are even more Democrats in the Senate, making confirmation far easier when you have Merkley, Hagan, Franken (hopefully soon) and other more liberal newbies who will support the President while their predecessors might not have. However, that partisanship might not even get much play with someone like Sotomayor (even if the nominee isn't ultimately her). Republicans would love to rail against hardcore liberal, but chances are, Obama won't give them the opportunity.