Koch, 85, is at the forefront of a new effort to clean up the dysfunctional cesspool of state government that is Albany World.
The former "How-Am-I-Doing?" mayor of New York City is organizing a coalition to plan the electoral takedown of incumbent state legislators who block reform. The idea is to elevate candidates who are committed to reform.
Koch correctly sees the entire state Legislature as the problem. Reading his comments to The New York Times, one comes away with the impression that he'd be happy to cashier the whole lot of them if only one could.
"I don't believe the good ones are good enough and the bad ones are evil," Koch told the Times.
Today, ten Democratic County Chairs announced their support for our campaign to succeed Andrew Cuomo as New York State's next Attorney General.
This is the first set of public endorsements from Democratic county leaders for any Attorney General candidate, and I am very grateful for and humbled by their words of support.
The Democratic County Chairs include: Mayor Shawn Hogan (Steuben), Bethany Schumann-McGhee (Montgomery), Keith Ahlstrom (Chautauqua), Judith Baker (Ontario), Mark Bellardini (St. Lawrence), Harold Bush, Jr. (Wyoming), Barbara Hetzel (Allegany), Judith Hunter (Livingston), Kate Lacey (Cayuga) and Carolyn Schaeffer (Yates).
These endorsements come from across New York - including the Southern Tier, Western New York, Central New York, the North Country, and the Capital District - as well as from a diverse set of Democratic leaders, including the longest-serving Mayor in New York State, and the youngest elected Democratic county chair. Next week, I will continue my travels to Upstate New York to discuss my rural agenda.
Our campaign is gaining momentum and we have no intention of slowing down. Having raised the most money during the last filing period, and having earned the first public support from county leaders - I feel we are well-positioned in the campaign for the Attorney General of New York.
In less than two months, the Coffee Party movement has grown to over 100,000 members nationwide. And in three days, National Coffee House Day will officially kick off the movement to reform our political culture in all fifty states.
New York is playing its part in about a dozen fledgling organizations that will meet in the afternoon of Saturday, March 13, 2010. From Downstate to Upstate, the Empire State is set to become one of the hot spots of the movement to cool down the rhetoric so we can once again speak to our common goals as Americans.
I organized the Albany County Coffee Party to make sure Albany itself wasn't left out; within a matter of days, one for the city of Albany sprouted up as well.
But this movement is about more than just one blogger, or one city. A complete list of all the New York Coffee Parties are linked to below the fold. And since this movement is bigger than just one state as well, then if you've just heard of the Coffee Party Movement or are not really sure what we'll be doing on Saturday or what we're about, the video directly below makes it clear and simple:
Looks like fun, huh? Click "There's more" to see if there's a New York Coffee Party organizing in your neck of the woods.
It seems in tough times, when no one thinks the folks now in the Senate are doing a great job, incumbents are having trouble raising campaign cash.
"They are relentless in their calling lobbyists this year, mainly the Democrats in the Senate, and it's unbelievable," a prominent lobbyist with strong Democratic ties told The Post yesterday.
"None of us has ever seen anything like it."
A lobbyist with strong GOP connections said legislators "are all crazed because they're scared of running this year and not having the funds they think they need to do it."
In the initial interview, Calcaterra shared her views on why it's important to have a regulated Wall Street to help Main Street. She also expressed her support for marriage equality, discussed property tax reform and ethics reform.
In her second interview with TAP, Calcaterra provided updates on her campaign, thoughts on the expulsion of Sen. Hiram Monserrate (she called for his resignation in October and, last month, for his expulsion) and her opinion of the ethics reform bill passed by the legislature.
CALCATERRA ON THE CAMPAIGN
"The campaign has done tremendously well very early and keeps gaining steam. We have had great success in our daily engagements with voters of the 1st Senate District. Hard working men and women are paying attention to the issues and are providing a clear and strong indication that voters of eastern Long Island want meaningful change."
"In fact, more residents of the district contributed to our campaign financially than that of my opponent, who is a 34-year incumbent. Interestingly, my candidacy has also drawn the support of admired Americans like Pete Dawkins, a West Point legend, Heisman Trophy winner and former Brigadier General of the U.S. Army and Marie C. Wilson, co-founder of Take Your Daughters and Sons to Work Day, founder of the Ms. Foundation and founder and President of the White House Project. Additionally, our campaign has already begun receiving endorsements from the Women's Campaign Forum, NARAL Pro-Choice New York and the National Organization for Women in New York State, which is also gratifying given how early it is in the electoral process."
"Taking on an entrenched incumbent has always been difficult in New York, and will be this year, but we've gained good traction early which has already proven to be a tremendous help."
CALCATERRA ON MONSERRATE'S EXPULSION
"As a victim of, and witness to, childhood domestic violence, I am far too familiar with how emboldened the abuser gets when he/she gets away with their actions. If Monserrate remained as a sitting New York State Senator, in the eyes of abusers and victims, he did in fact get away with it. His continuation as a sitting New York State Senator could have led to a decrease in domestic violence reporting. A victim's decision to report domestic violence is most often influenced by fear of retaliation from their abuser or a belief that our criminal justice system cannot or will not stop the violence. Then, added on top of that belief was the assumption that Monserrate's actions were sanctioned by those in power, our Albany lawmakers."
"We have a long path to walk before New Yorkers will begin to look toward our state legislature with a sense of gratitude or appreciation, but the expulsion of Monserrate by his colleagues was a significant step along that path. Worth noting is that the Democratic Senate majority had a difficult decision to make, given how closely the Senate is split and the implications that doing the right thing could throw the leadership structure into turmoil. But even with knowing that, they made the right choice and put decency, integrity and the best interests of good government first. That is a welcome step in the right direction for honest government in Albany - and the kind of step that New Yorkers hadn't seen for a long time."
"New York is still in a recession. We have an ever-widening budget gap, 8.9 percent unemployment, children in 16.3 percent of all New York families living below the poverty line, and overtaxed residents who can no longer afford to live here. The New York State Senate has critical work to do and it should not have had to even waste the past few months investigating how to rid the Senate of Hiram Monserrate. However, now that he has been expelled it is time for the Senate to get back to the people's business."
Via Liz, here's a direct quote from Senator Eric Adams that supports the exact point that RebootNY is making about the State Senate.
"I have a news flash: I don't know many elected officials that don't have a credibility problem. And if that becomes a criteria on who can sit in office and who can't, than we're in trouble."
Well, Eric, I have a news flash: Credibility SHOULD be a criteria of who can sit in office and who can't...so what does that mean about office holders? They should be removed?
Cross-posted at RebootNY . Check us out and get involved!
Hat tip to an interesting piece by the New York Times for a thought-provoking dialogue between academics, good government experts, and politicians on Friday. It's important that many people from both sides of the aisle recognize the problems of our dysfunctional government and debate solutions on curing the culture of corruption eating away the heart of Albany.
One person who definitely gets it is Kenneth Sherill, a Professor of Political Science at Hunter College. He writes:
The Legislature's core problems can be solved by changing its members and its rules - and sadly for the many good members, it increasingly seems as if you can't change its rules without changing its members. We need independent, nonpartisan apportionment of districts, serious campaign finance reform, and a liberalization of the rules of each house.
We agree entirely. We know that New York State government has the potential to work. It's worked in the past. New York used to be a model of effective government throughout the country, responsible for some of the brightest government programs around. Through strong leadership and a culture of responsibility, our politicians stood up for us. It's only in the recent era that we the people have been subverted by corruption and dysfunction by those who claim to represent us.
The answer is to kick out the trash currently occupying our state government and elect those who will stand up for our interests. With better leaders, we can change the way the state is governed and promote transparency, efficiency, and fairness. With a fair system of government, we can finally get back to a government that works for the people and responds to our needs.
Gerald Benjamin, a Professor of Political Science at the State University of New York, reminds us that some in the state have been down this road before.
The governance system needs serious fixing, as I've elsewhere argued. But ungovernable? Remember, we used to say that about New York City. No more. We found leaders that could make the city work. Now we have to use this election to do the same for the state. And then follow with the hard work of fixing the system itself.
We can change our state. It starts by booting out those who have failed us and electing those who will pus us first.
In what has got to be one of the longer episodes of foreplay on record, Harold Ford announced today that we won't be favored with an announcement of his purported Senate run until David Paterson stops hogging the limelight.
Playing hard to get, are we, Harold?
If we look back, that run began with the startling Times piece that first alerted a stunned world to this possibility on January 6th.
I'm not comparing myself to Bobby Kennedy by any stretch, but he was opposed by the liberal establishment too," ... "Eleanor Roosevelt was the biggest opponent to him running"
Gack. Bad Eleanor. Oh wait, she was actually dead at the time. Still is, in fact.
And as of today, the newest word from Mr. Ford schedules the climactic moment, will he or won't he, for next week.
That's elastic enough to stretch into July at least, if he keeps this up.
I'm Eric Dinallo and I'm running for the New York State Attorney General. I wanted to introduce myself to The Albany Project readers by way of an op-ed that I wrote for the Gay City News this past week concerning Marriage Equality and its future in New York.
As a bit of history, during my time as the New York Superintendent of Insurance, I ordered all insurance companies doing business in New York to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples who were legally wed elsewhere even though the right for gay and lesbian couples to marry was being denied by the courts.
As a result of that regulatory action, New York insurers must now provide the very same property, life, and health insurance policies and benefits to those same-sex married couples that are available to opposite-sex married couples under the state's insurance laws.
Unfortunately, Marriage Equality failed to pass the Senate this past year, but the fight is not over. As a former Assistant District Attorney in the Manhattan D.A.'s office and the Chief of the Investor Protection Bureau in the Attorney General's office, I understand the laws and rulings in place here in NY against discrimination. Marriage Equality is, above all, a civil rights issue and I want to share with you how we can turn the tide here in New York to make it a reality.
As a public servant, I feel I have an obligation to protect what is fair and do what is right. As AG, I will fight discrimination wherever it is found. Read the full op-ed after the break:
Via Liz, the Yes We Can [beat the crap out of women and claim victimhood] line, ex-Senator Monserrate's freshly created vehicle to ooze back into office, has filed over 5,500 signatures - far in excess, if valid, of the requirements to get on the ballot in the March 16th special election in the 13th SD.
There is, of course, a statement:
"I am committed, as I have always been, to defend the rights of the voters and never allowing their vote to be disenfranchised. The amount of community support during the past 6 days proves that voters in this district know who best represents them independently from party bosses, political hacks, and Albany insiders."
Now that's all very well and good and, perhaps, just ancient history from the convoluted, unappetizing politics of the outer boroughs. Except it's not. The Queens GOP just unanimously awarded their ballot line to Ms. Sears, who if elected will get vengeance on Queens Democrats by caucusing with the republicans in the Senate. And in a three-way race, as Congresswoman Dede Scozzafava might tell you, a split vote can work wonders.
Presto, an even 31-31 split, and your government, dear New Yorkers, will move from mere dysfunction to outright paralysis. Let the games begin.
[Update]: And it's over. Via Liz, Sears has declined the GOP line. So that's that. Now it's Hiram versus Peralta, given that the GOP won't be able to fill their ballot line.
The Senate is getting a dose of sunshine - Sen. Eric Schneiderman, talking on the Fred Dicker show, mentioned that the transcripts behind yesterday's report on Hiram Monserrate will soon be posted on-line.
More of that, and, who knows, maybe we'll actually get some good government.
...and it seems that Steve Pigeon and Tom Golisano are behind this one as well.
Must read from the Buffalo Pundit on all the details. In a nutshell, but read Alan's entire post:
...Tim Kennedy approached Democratic HQ to ask to run against Stachowski. Lenihan reportedly told Kennedy that he was going to stick with Stachowski and let him decide when he wanted to stop going to Albany. Kennedy then turned to Steve Pigeon and asked for his help to run against Stachowski. Golisano's money was pledged, but Pigeon wanted something in exchange.
Pigeon wanted Kennedy to deliver the legislature to him. Three Democrats to flip so Collins would have his majority. Rumor has it that Pigeon is working on Collins' gubernatorial campaign behind the scenes.
Kennedy delivered Miller-Williams, who is affiliated with Grassroots, which is currently aligned with Pigeon and City Hall, as well as Christina Bove. It is also rumored that Brian Higgins is one of the people behind the scenes brokering this on Kennedy's behalf.
Tim Kennedy, the man who wants Stach's job in the Senate, seems to be the new Pigeon/Golisano/Higgins/Collins owned Pedro Espada.
Just what we need in the State Senate...another Pedro Espada...and more coups about jobs and patronage staff hires.
It just never ends, does it? First, Dodd and Dorgan retire, starting the day off on a bad note, and then, the New York Times reports that Tennessee native, Merrill Lynch banker and newly-minted New York resident Harold Ford, may just throw his hat in the ring against incumbent Senator and Senate newbie Kirsten Gillibrand.
Mr. Ford, 39, who moved to New York three years ago, has told friends that he will decide whether to run in the next 45 days. The discussions between Mr. Ford and top Democratic donors reflect the dissatisfaction of some prominent party members with Ms. Gillibrand, who has yet to win over key constituencies, especially in New York City.
About a dozen high-profile Democrats have expressed interest in backing a candidacy by Mr. Ford, including the financier Steven Rattner, who, along with his wife, Maureen White, has been among the country's most prolific Democratic fund-raisers.
There are plenty of interesting things in the Q poll released today that I have already covered and plenty more that will be covered.
The subject of marriage equality was brought up in the poll and deserves its own post, mainly because there are a few key factors at play that affect the support (or opposition) for marriage equality.
The Q poll found that 47 percent of New Yorkers support marriage equality and 46 percent oppose it. There are a small percentage of individuals - seven percent - who don't know or have no opinion on the issue.
Support for marriage equality in the Q poll has fluctuated slightly this year. In May, support and opposition to equality were even at 46 percent. In June, however, that increased to 51 percent (a majority of voters) saying they supported marriage equality with 41 percent opposing.
This Q poll breaks it down to where the support and opposition come from. And the three major factors at work are age, education and income.
AGE
The most support for marriage equality in terms of age falls in the obvious category: Young people ages 18 to 34. This is where 58 percent of respondents said they support marriage equality while only 37 percent oppose it. This isn't surprising, as these numbers are in line with what we have seen in other states where marriage equality is a hot-button issue.
Even though that younger generation is where strong support lies, there is support for marriage equality in the 35 to 54 age group. More respondents - 48 percent - support marriage equality than those who oppose it (45 percent). This age group, like in another states, is considered the turning point.
When the question is asked of those over 55, the support for marriage equality decreases significantly to 37 percent with 56 percent opposing equal rights.
Therefore, there is a strong conclusion to make: The younger a person is, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. Or to go the other way, the older a person is, the more likely they are to oppose marriage equality.
INCOME
Who knew that one of the factors at work in the marriage equality debate is income? But that's exactly what the Q poll tells us.
In the category of those making under $50,000, 42 percent said they support marriage equality while 51 percent said they oppose it. Support became stronger in the $50,000 to $100,000 population with 46 percent supporting marriage equality and 48 percent saying they opposed marriage equality.
The greatest support for marriage equality comes from those making over $100,000. A strong majority of these individuals - 59 percent - said they support marriage equality while only 34 percent said they opposed it.
The conclusion to draw from the poll is a clear one. The greater a person's income, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. The lower the person's income, the more likely they are to oppose marriage equality.
EDUCATION
The education of voters plays a big role in where they stand on certain issues and who they vote for, what party they support, among other things. This is a fact we have known for some time. You can tell a lot by a voter just based on one question: Do you have a college education (or more specifically, a college degree)?
The Q poll found that there was opposition to marriage equality among those without a college education. In this group, 52 percent of those surveyed said they opposed marriage equality and 41 percent said they supported it. Those numbers aren't bad, although they do reinforce the point about education and politics.
It should be no surprise that those with a college education supported marriage equality (59 percent) in huge numbers compared to those who opposed it (35 percent).
The more education a person has, the more likely they are to support marriage equality. Education has a huge impact on this and, I might argue, that the college experience opens your mind up to a diverse audience. On a personal level, I didn't have any friends among the LGBT community in high school (at least at the time). But in college, I encountered many people, including those who lived in a nearby room or went to the same classes as I did that were a part of the LGBT community.
CONCLUSION
I have made other conclusions pertinent to the individual subjects, but there is also one conclusion to draw from this poll that couldn't be made in the other areas. This issue is highly complicated. For progressives, we see this as a cut-and-dry issue. We should grant equality to everyone, not just a certain group and we should not let outside influences (i.e. religious leaders) tell us otherwise. I know that African Americans have opposed marriage equality efforts. How soon they have forgotten their own plight and their own efforts to gain equality. Religious leaders forget the beginnings of our country, when this nation was founded by a large group of those seeking religious freedom. If equality was important to them (and presumably still is), it should be important to us all. If we don't live by that guiding principle, we fail to live up to our founders who said in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
We must not forget those words. They are not reserved for one group over another. They are reserved for everyone who calls this country home and who deserve to be treated with the proper respect and afforded the same rights as everyone else.
In today's Q poll, the New York State Legislature has its worst approval and disapproval rating of all time. The legislature's approval rating of 17 percent is the worst it has ever been and the disapproval rating of 72 percent is also a record. When you consider the all-time best approval rating in the Q poll for the legislature is 34 percent, 17 percent doesn't seem that bad. But with 72 percent of respondents disapproving of the job the Assembly and Senate are doing, it is hardly a good thing.
This is how the approval/disapproval rating breaks down:
- Only 24 percent of Democrats and nine percent of Republicans and approve of the job legislators are doing in Albany. Disapproval among Democrats is at 64 percent while Republican disapproval stands at 81 percent. Independents are in the middle, with 16 percent approving of the legislature and 74 percent disapproving.
- Men have a more negative view of the legislature than women. Only 10 percent of men approve of the legislature's work and 81 percent disapprove. Women are up slightly with 23 percent approval and 64 percent disapproval. Among races, white respondents only gave the legislature a 12 percent job approval rating while giving an 80 percent disapproval rating. The legislature received a 37 percent approval rating from black respondents and a 48 percent disapproval rating among the group. Hispanics were also a little more positive, with 30 percent approving of the legislature's job and 49 percent disapproving.
- The regional numbers show that the legislature isn't too well liked in any area of the state. The numbers in New York City are the best - 22 percent approval/64 percent disapproval - and it only gets worse from there. In the suburbs, the legislature has ratings of 15 percent approval/77 percent disapproval. Upstate is the worst (as expected) with 14 percent of upstate approving of the legislature's job and 77 percent disapproving. The urban areas of upstate gave the worst numbers of all, with only nine percent approving and 81 percent disapproving.
- When respondents were asked how satisfied they are about the direction of things in New York State, those numbers are also all-time lows. Only two percent said they were "very satisfied" and 22 percent said they were "somewhat satisfied." Three-quarters of respondents said they were either somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied (37 percent said somewhat, 38 percent said very).
- There is more support for a wage freeze than layoffs. Two-thirds (68 percent) of respondents said they would support a wage freeze while only 44 percent said they would support layoffs for state employees in an effort to balance the state budget.
- Even with such high disapproval ratings, two percent of respondents said they would rate the state legislature as the best in the nation with 27 percent saying that the legislature is "among the best." With 43 percent saying that the legislature is among the worst and 15 percent saying that the legislature is THE worst, those numbers are somewhat better than the disapproval ratings given earlier in the survey.
- There is strong support for a constitutional convention. A majority of respondents - 63 percent - said they would support a constitutional convention. Only 21 percent would oppose such a convention.
- Respondents would rather have an independent nonpartisan commission to draw districts than allowing the legislature to do so. Nearly three-quarters of respondents - 73 percent - support an independent commission over allowing the legislature to draw the lines.
The 2010 election season is upon us and one of the most interesting stories will be the fight for the New York State Senate. Democrats hold on to a narrow majority (32 to 30) and Republicans are going to put up a huge fight to retake the upper house.
This fight for the Senate will have many battlegrounds and one of those battlegrounds will be Long Island. And for Regina Calcaterra, the 1st Senate District will be one district where the incumbent will face a serious challenge.
Calcaterra is a corporate fraud lawyer who has been involved in a number of high-profile cases, including the fraud cases involving Merrill Lynch and WorldCom. She has protected the pensions of employees whose futures are threatened by the fraudulent actions of Wall Street.
She also is the Democratic candidate challenging Republican Senator Kenneth LaValle in the 1st Senate District.
"In 2008, there was only one candidate on the ballot for the state Senate's First District - a 32-year incumbent who had experienced only nominal opposition during his entire tenure," Calcaterra said. "With so much at stake in state government, and with growing dysfunction in the Legislature, I decided to run for the seat in next year's election."
Calcaterra's childhood is, in itself, a profile in courage. She experienced homelessness and poverty growing up and credits a certain group of people with making her the person she is today.
"Through the help of very hard-working people in government - teachers, social workers, librarians, police officers and even crossing guards - we got through it," she said. "They inspired me to take the path that got me here today, through public school, college and law school, and convinced me that government can absolutely do a better job than we see today."
Calcaterra took time to answer questions submitted via e-mail about her candidacy, where she stands on important issues and provided a general idea of what her platform will look like.
QUESTION: You make it a point on your website to list "Prosecuting Wall Street, Protecting Main Street" as, if I may presume, a priority. As it pertains to your district, why is protecting Main Street a high priority while ensuring that Wall Street is regulated?
CALCATERRA: Our current economic downturn might have been avoided had regulators been more vigilant and those on Wall Street were held to higher standards of transparency and honesty. Big companies like WorldCom and AIG took investment dollars from the pensions of hard working people like cops, firefighters, teachers and other civil servants. My job as a corporate fraud lawyer is to fight to get that money back so those hard-working people or taxpayers aren't out hundreds of millions, or even billions, of dollars. I have done this effectively on behalf of retirees and New York's taxpayers.
It shouldn't stop there, though. We've learned many lessons from what happened on Wall Street to cause the economic meltdown and a lot of it can be applied to Albany. Quarterly agency and authority budget reporting, certified audited year end agency financial statements, investigations that include legislative subpoena power, and agency head accountability can get government to work effectively again for everyone.
Q: After the defeat of marriage equality, you appeared at a pro-marriage equality rally. Your opponent, Senator LaValle, voted against the bill along with the whole Republican conference. Is it safe to say that you would be a "yes" vote for marriage equality? Why do you support marriage equality?
CALCATERRA: I will vote for marriage equality without hesitation. I do not believe in "separate but equal" treatment of any group in society, as Sen. LaValle proposed with favoring civil unions over legal marriage. I also believe we should not discriminate against families - - any families, any children - - for the reasons marriage equality opponents like Sen. LaValle suggest.
Q: Property tax reform has been an issue in the past that is still largely unsettled. Governor Paterson and other advocates have supported a property tax cap that would cap taxes at a certain percentage rate. Others have supported a circuit breaker, which would set your tax rate based on the money you make. Do you support either of those proposals or do you have other ideas for property tax reform?
CALCATERRA: Long Island has a deep problem with property taxes that can't be solved overnight. A major step toward fixing high property taxes has been taken by allowing voters the option of consolidating local government and getting rid of some unnecessary special benefit (and tax) districts at the local level. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo proposed that legislation last year, the Legislature passed it and Gov. Paterson signed it into law. It is unfortunate that Sen. LaValle voted against this measure; the first step toward reducing property taxes is reducing waste and redundancy in local government. Residents now have that opportunity in spite of Sen. LaValle's opposition.
If these efficiency and consolidation measures do not address the problems in the near term, a property tax cap should be part of the discussion. However taxpayers must be assured that schools and localities would receive adequate funding so it does not have the effect of forcing school districts to fire teachers, or municipalities to lay off law enforcement officers.
The ultimate tax cap is the voters' ability to hire new legislators who will force government to be efficient and effective.
Read more from Calcaterra about reform and analysis below the fold.
"The state ethics and disclosure laws make it much harder for law enforcement to investigate and prosecute public corruption involving state officials,'' Baxter said. "There's just so little transparency in the legislative process that it takes an enormous amount of time and effort to uncover what really happened."
--snip--
Baxter said the Justice Department normally would defer to local or state prosecutors in cases of public corruption involving state and local government. But he said the structure of the state Legislature and the rules the elected officials created have made such referrals difficult.
--emphasis mine--
Should legislators be nervous?
Federal authorities who oversaw the prosecution of Joseph L. Bruno said they will continue to investigate allegations of corruption within the state Legislature, and that the FBI's resources for such cases have more than doubled in recent years.
--snip--
"It really is the state Legislature," Pikus said of where they are focusing. "The bureau understands that in any government form of the legislature there's going to be some allegations of wrongdoing and we are constantly on the outlook for that. I have the agents now, very experienced agents, working on information that's come to us and we're taking a look at it."
Liz reported today that Senator John Sampson has initiated a "top-to-bottom" review of staffers within the New York State Senate. According to Liz's piece, some layoffs are ongoing and will continue through the New Year.
This comes after a report from Jimmy Vielkind saying that Sampson has already cut loose some Republican holdovers as well as staffers hired on by Senator Malcolm Smith.
If the hiring of Melanie Hartgraves at the Governor's press office is any indication, the problem with New York State isn't the number of staffers but rather the qualifications of these staffers. If you hire someone just as a patronage hire to serve in a role that pays them well and aren't very qualified for, then you are creating a problem, not a solution. We need more solutions and less problems in Albany.
Sampson is right to conduct this review, but it needs to be done within reason. Bringing the ax down for the sake of bringing the ax down won't do anyone any good. Cuts do need to be made, but don't cut yourself into a situation where you lack staff to get the job done.
Calcaterra is a corporate fraud lawyer who has been involved in a number of high-profile cases, including the fraud cases involving Merrill Lynch and WorldCom. She has protected the pensions of employees whose futures are threatened by the fraudulent actions of Wall Street.
