Where Do We Go From Here?

by: robert.harding

Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 11:17:49 AM EDT

So who should we go after? Who needs to be targeted? The list is long:

- ESPADA: This is a guy who is a model for why we need campaign finance reform in New York. It would be nice if he obeyed the current laws that aren't as strong as they need to be, but still exist for a reason. He has no morals, he has no ethics and the Republicans are okay with that. Sen. Dean Skelos is quoted as saying that such issues (Espada's campaign finance issues and investigations along with Monserrate's assault indictment) take a backseat to "reform." I'm sorry, but they don't. Espada isn't above the law. And he isn't above the people of this state who voted for a Democratic majority in 2008 only to have it robbed by the power hungry Espada and his sidekick Monserrate.

MONSERRATE: Monserrate has serious legal issues that could lead to him being ousted from office. Again, Skelos doesn't seem to care because of the short-term gain. But Monserrate, if convicted, will be forced from his seat. The case against Monserrate is a very serious matter. Monserrate, along with Espada, shouldn't be a poster boy for reform. The fact that he is one of the faces attached to this attempted coup and the questionable reform legislation that the GOP passed in the aftermath is terrible for New York.

TOM GOLISANO: Golisano was whining awhile back that he was making his legal residence Florida because of high taxation. As I stated at the time, the $5 million Golisano claims to be saving by making his legal residence in Florida is the same amount he put down as a fund for Responsible New York. Now, he is touting his involvement in this backroom deal (the same backroom deals he criticizes and is supposedly against) as reform. This isn't reform. This is a pampered billionaire getting what he wants.

If you think Espada has a hunger for power, that pales in comparison to the hunger for power that Golisano has. Golisano has hospitals named after him. He owns a sports team. He hands out money like it was candy at a parade. He tried to muscle the Democratic majority (the same one he invested in) and he didn't get what he wanted. So now, he has decided to try the Republicans and see if they will budge.

SENATE REPUBLICANS: These 30 senators should be embarrassed that they chose this time - arguably the most important time (aside from the budget) on the legislative calendar - to turn the Senate upside down. They put their political interests ahead of the serious issues and problems this state faces. The 19 million people of New York did not need this. If they weren't happy with losing the majority, 2010 was their chance. Now, we face uncertainty all because the Senate Republicans, on the taxpayer's time, decided that politics was more important than addressing key issues like reproductive health, campaign finance reform, among many others.

We need to go after all of the characters involved. We can target them one at a time or all of them at the same time. Mark my words: Espada will not be representing the 33rd Senate District come January 2011. Monserrate will not be representing the 13th Senate District come January 2011. And the Senate Republicans will be the minority - again.

As for Tom Golisano, I am ready to go to war with the pampered billionaire. He claims he does things in the name of progress and reform, but all that matters to him is power. And power for Golisano comes in the form of spending money and brokering deals such as this one. If Espada is another example of why we need campaign finance reform, then Golisano is another great example too.

All of these individuals and groups need to be targeted. They might think they won in the short-term. But they have a big shock coming to them in the long-term.

Golisano, Senate GOP, Espada And Monserrate Win, New York Loses

by: robert.harding

Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 22:27:04 PM EDT

Florida resident Tom Golisano apparently thinks that he is still relevant in New York politics. This comes only weeks after his big publicity stunt of a move to Florida (where he already had a home anyway), deciding to list his legal residence in Florida so that he could save what he contends would be $5 million in taxes. He whined endlessly about taxes, even though he was stealing the stage from the real victims of high taxation: The millions of middle-class New Yorkers who are feeling the pinch every year they pay their tax bill.

Golisano's involvement in this attempted coup today raises some serious ethical questions. He was right at the forefront during a press conference today and it has been said that he was involved in this all along. Reports have said that this was in the works for months and Golisano was one of the figures involved with it the whole step of the way.

But Dean Skelos and his Senate Republicans also win, although I wouldn't be hoping for Espada and Monserrate to keep their majority in 2010. The Republicans, who were railing against Monserrate for the assault on his girlfriend earlier this year, were more than willing to put that aside as long as it gave them majority. The Senate Republicans were calling for Monserrate's resignation months ago when these charges first came to light. Now, they can call Monserrate one of their own.

And then there is Pedro Espada Jr. He is touting this as a "coalition government." The only problem with that is the coalition only exists to meet his demands. He benefits most from the coalition: He gets the post he was looking for from the beginning (President Pro Tempore). Again, the Republicans are now siding with someone who has campaign finance fines against him and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is looking into Espada's dealings as well. Why would the Republicans, who are now bragging about the reforms they allegedly passed after taking over today, accept these two on as members? Are they that desperate to be in power that they would throw their morals and ethics out the window and welcome these two in with open arms?

Apparently, yes.

But Espada and Monserrate are the winners here. In my eyes (and many others), they are the villians. They betrayed their party and decided that their own power and glory was more important than the important business this state needs to address in the weeks to come. But they win because they (at least, Espada) got what they wanted: Power. That lust for power was evident early on when the new Senate wasn't even official yet, and Espada and three colleagues, which included Monserrate, were pushing Smith for perks in exchange for their votes. Monserrate broke away from that group, leaving Espada, Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. and Sen. Carl Kruger. But Espada pushed forward, seeking the same seat he was given today by the Senate GOP.

Now, we have the doors locked on the Senate chamber. For all the talk that the Senate Democrats haven't accomplished anything and for all the charges and criticisms that the Senate Democrats have been on the receiving end of since they took control in January, let's see how everyone reacts now that this so-called "coalition government" has led to a shutdown of the Senate chamber. The doors are locked and no one is getting in. This is apparently headed to court, just in time for what many consider the most important time (apart from budget season) on the legislative calendar.

All because a couple of guys don't care about their districts or New York. This is all because they care about empowering themselves, not their constituents. This is about getting their titles, not getting New Yorkers what they need.

The Senate Republicans are willing participants. And this is all being pushed by a billionaire who really lives in Florida now, but still wants to keep his hand in New York politics. This isn't a democracy. Perhaps it never was. But this isn't reform. This is a travesty.

Senate Coup: Smith Says Its Illegal, Republicans Say Its Historic

by: robert.harding

Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 17:18:29 PM EDT

The Republicans have taken back the New York State Senate, utilizing two corrupt Democrats - Sen. Pedro Espada and Sen. Hiram Monsserate - who decided that they would now caucus with the Republicans.

Liz, who seems to be just as confused as everyone else, wrote this report on what happened today:

The Senate Republicans just sent out an urgent media advisory calling all reporters to the Senate chamber "ASAP!" because "an historic change in leadership is taking place at this moment."

You can view the shenanigans it here.

(Or not, since the video steam is now out and on standby, not sure why that is, but it's now playing the canned "welcome" message from Malcolm Smith - I don't know what to call him anymore).

So much for the revolution being televised.

From the press release:

   "An historic change in leadership is taking place at this moment and a new bipartisan, coalition is being established that is bringing real reform to the Senate RIGHT NOW."

Several Senate sources say two Democrats - Hiram Monserrate and Pedro Espada Jr. - are poised to announce that they have decided to cross the aisle and caucus with the Republicans out of anger at Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith.

UPDATE: I strongly urge you to tune in ASAP. Sen. Tom Libous, a Republican from Bringhamton, just removed Albany Democrat Sen. Neil Breslin from the chair presiding over the Senate and replaced him with Sen. George Winner, an Utica-area Elmira Republican.

The vote was 32-30, which means two Democrats are voting with the Republicans.

UPDATE2: The floor fight was over a GOP motion to make Pedro Espada Jr. temporary president of the Senate and Dean Skelos majority leader. - the very deal that Smith originally offered Espada that was rejected by the rest of his Democratic members.

UPDATE3: Apparently, Tom Golisano was on the scene. (Funny, I thought he had moved to Florida). Remember, he played a role in putting together the original leadership deal - the one that fell apart.

An observer in the Senate chamber tells me Skelos was sitting in Smith's chair with a BIG smile on his face and Smith was nowhere to be seen. The chamber has now emptied out and Republicans are talking about electing themselves to committee chairmanships.

Just moments ago, Sen. Malcolm Smith's office sent out a statement that reinforced that Smith is majority leader and called the coup illegal.

"This was an illegal and unlawful attempt to gain control of the Senate and reverse the will of the people who voted for a Democratic Majority. Nothing has changed, Senator Malcolm A. Smith remains the duly elected Temporary President and Majority Leader.  The real Senate Majority is anxious to get back to governing, and will take immediate steps to get us back to work."

There is also a lot being said of Tom Golisano's role in this. Golisano is being credited with helping craft this deal that led to Espada and Monserrate voting for the Republicans and putting Dean Skelos back in as majority leader.

More reaction on this to come. Stay tuned.

NY-Sen: Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith Endorses Gillibrand

by: robert.harding

Mon May 18, 2009 at 18:27:37 PM EDT

New York State Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith announced today that he will endorse Gillibrand for U.S. Senate.

"Throughout her career, Kirsten Gillibrand has exhibited the kind of leadership that has yielded results for the people of New York," Majority Leader Smith said. "Senator Gillibrand understands that the hard-working men and women of this state deserve tax relief, quality and affordable health care and every chance to receive the best educational opportunities for their children."

Majority Leader Smith continued, "Her agenda to advance economic development opportunities and revitalize our communities is the kind of vision we need in Washington fighting for us. I have no doubt she will continue to deliver for the people of this state and I look forward to partnering with her, as well as Senator Schumer, Governor Paterson and other legislative leaders as we work to get New York and the nation back on track."

"I am honored to have Majority Leader Smith's endorsement, and I'm grateful for his leadership. Malcolm and I share a strong commitment to turning this economy around and creating well paying jobs all across New York State," said Senator Gillibrand. "Malcolm has also been an effective leader in guiding Democratic victories across the state and I look forward to working together with him to grow our Democratic majority in the State Senate."

This is a big endorsement for many reasons. It puts one of the highest elected Democrats in the state right in Gillibrand's corner and puts one of the highest ranking New York City Democrats in her corner at the same time.

The news of the endorsement comes on the same day that a front page post on Daily Kos makes it clear that Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney could still run, even though Rep. Steve Israel chose not to.

Having Smith endorse Gillibrand this early is big. It puts a strong New York City Democrat in Gillibrand's corner and gives Gillibrand early backing from a key figure in New York politics.

Sen. Malcolm Smith: "This Is Our Time. This Is Our Moment."

by: robert.harding

Wed Jan 07, 2009 at 13:39:09 PM EST

Here are Sen. Smith's official remarks on becoming majority leader:

"I'm honored ...humbled ...and truly grateful for the opportunity to be a part of this new chapter in our state's history.

The fact that I'm standing here is a testament to a new day in Albany:  a day in which we can come together to exercise the kind of leadership the people of New York deserve.

I look forward to working with all of our Republican colleagues on the issues facing New York.

We are one Senate, with a common goal of improving the quality of life for the people of this state and a common purpose of making government more efficient.

Much has been written, said and speculated about this moment - my so-called "defining moment" - and many have asked whether or not I will rise to the challenge of plotting a new course to get New York back on track.   Those questions miss a critical point:  this day is not just about me or even the conference - this is about the millions of people in this great state who want to see unwavering commitment and bold leadership on issues they face in their daily lives.

There are seminal events in our lives where our mettle is revealed, even to us.   The lessons I've learned on the road traveled to get here have left me more determined than ever before to reform the way our government operates.

You can read the rest of Sen. Smith's remarks below the fold.

What is not included in the remarks is what Sen. Smith said about utilizing social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace and also utilizing the blogosphere to reach out to constituents in new ways. The new Senate majority wants to use new media and new technology to include constituents in the process and provide new ways for constituents to reach their leaders.

This is a new era for New York. I look forward to working with Sen. Smith, especially when it comes to my work on the blogosphere.  

Sen. Malcolm Smith Calls On President-Elect Obama To Protect Homeowners

by: robert.harding

Tue Dec 23, 2008 at 19:19:22 PM EST

In a letter to President-elect Barack Obama, Senate Democratic Leader Malcolm A. Smith urged President-elect Obama to include greater federal protection for homeowners to stem the tide of the subprime mortgage crisis.

In part, Smith stated, "it is outrageous for banks to be given taxpayer money without the precondition of assisting homeowners in foreclosure."

Smith added, "The implementation of the second part of the federal assistance package for financial institutions must be contingent upon the establishment of adequate provisions to protect homeowners". He asked President-elect Obama and the New York Congressional Delegation "not to support any further assistance to our financial institutions unless the following conditions are met: 1) banks and other lenders must be required to use a portion of the funding for a temporary moratorium on foreclosures while borrowers are provided the opportunity to renegotiate the terms of their loans; and 2) banks and other lenders must commit that a substantial percentage of the funds they receive will be used to renegotiate mortgages for those already in foreclosure and to avoid foreclosure for those at risk."

You can read the full letter to President-elect Obama below the fold.

Sen. Malcolm Smith On Paterson's Proposed Budget

by: robert.harding

Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 14:24:26 PM EST

Here is a statement from Sen. Malcolm Smith on the release of the budget:

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

That is a very diplomatic statement. Obviously, the Legislature will have its own opinion of how these cuts will factor into the final budget. But Paterson's budget is a starting point. Hopefully the finish is a lot better than the product is now.  

Sen. Smith Confidently Says He Will Be Majority Leader, Will Have 32 Members

by: robert.harding

Fri Dec 12, 2008 at 14:55:03 PM EST

Liz is reporting that following a long meeting today, the New York State Senate Democrats will be behind Sen. Smith and support him for majority leader come January. In fact, Smith seems very confident that he will be in that role and have 32 members in his corner January 1.

Following a roughly two-hour meeting in which about two dozen of the 32 Senate Democrats participated, Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith emerged from 250 Broadway and confidently declared to reporters:

   "I want to be real clear about the fact that despite the rumors, the members (are) very united, and we're going to move forward with the majority come January. We will have 32 come January."

When pressed by NY1's Josh Robin about how he plans to get to the magic 32 votes necessary to be elected majority leader (and maybe also temporary president of the Senate) on Jan. 7, Smith replied:

   "We have 32. We've got 29 members now, we'll have 32 by January."

What that means exactly remains to be seen. Does that mean that a deal could be made (again) with the "Gang of Three"? Or does it mean that a few Republicans might join in supporting Sen. Smith?

It's tough to say because members of the "Gang of Three" seemed to indicate that they had suspended their support of Sen. Smith because of the deal that was, according to the three "Gang" members, reneged upon by Smith.

What appears to be clear is that there won't be a coup attempt, at least for now. Smith will have the support of the caucus he has at this point, which totals 29 members, including himself. He needs three more. Where he gets those three will be fun to watch over the next few weeks.

Let me also add that the Senate Democrats should make up their minds. Rumors like the ones today about a coup attempt do not help the cause, no matter who started them or originated from. The Senate Democrats should decide now whether they want Malcolm Smith as the leader (it seems they did that today) and what kinds of deals they are willing to make to ensure that come January 1, they are sitting in the majority.

This is too important to screw up. I would like to see a Democratic senate in January. I do not, however, want to see a Democratic senate that reached that point by caving to three pseudo-Democrats who voted for Smith because he gave them some goodies. That's not how this majority should be achieved. We need to stay true to our principles.  

Malcolm Smith Did The Right Thing

by: robert.harding

Wed Dec 10, 2008 at 15:26:58 PM EST

This is a good day for Sen. Malcolm Smith. Here's why:

- You can never allow three people to have what they want and then turn to the rest of the group and say that they can have what's left. That is what happened with the Senate Democrats. It would be like having the three biggest eaters in your family at the head of the line for Thanksgiving dinner. There needed to be common sense in the process. If these three senators need to be persuaded to vote for a Democrat, then they don't deserve the attention.

- The ball is now in Ruben Diaz Sr., Pedro Espada Jr. and Carl Kruger's court. What they do now isn't as a gang, but rather as individuals. If they choose to vote for a Republican majority leader, they will no longer be senators in 2010. They might think differently, but I think they will be gone. And I will help make sure that happens.

- This line in Sen. Smith's press release was a direct shot at Diaz: "Furthermore,  real reform cannot and should not ever include limiting the civil rights of any New Yorkers. Those issues must be part of the legislative process." Like I have said time and time again, Diaz has the constitutional right to vote "no" against any bill that advocates for marriage equality. No one is preventing him from voting no. But to try and negotiate a bill off the table isn't democratic, nor is it Democratic.

- Let's face it: The original deal was a jab at many Democratic senators, especially for upstate senators. Sen. Bill Stachowski deserves to be chair of the powerful Finance Committee. Hopefully now he will have that opportunity.

- This whole process does, however, raise some serious questions about Sen. Smith's ability to lead. He needs to be strong and, when necessary, forceful. Even if that means being in the minority for another two years, never throw away your principles for leadership and power. It seemed to me that Sen. Smith had his eyes on being the most powerful man in the Senate and was willing to make a deal with anyone. But then when he had to go back and answer to the other 28 Democrats, they let him know how bad of a deal it was. It was a wake up call and hopefully he learned a great lesson.

The future of the New York State Senate is uncertain. With these three senators out on their own island, we don't know who will be in the majority come January 1.  What is clear is that the "Gang of Three" won't be supporting Malcolm Smith anytime soon. That might mean two more years in the minority for the Democrats, but at least we get to keep our dignity.  

"Gang Of Three" Deal Falling Apart; Might Be A Dead Deal

by: robert.harding

Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 22:51:35 PM EST

Malcolm Smith's deal with the Gang of Three is crashing down around his ears, and the renegade trio is accusing him of renegging on significant portions of the power-sharing agreement in the wake of displeasure from his members over how much he gave away to end the leadership stalemate.

...

Attorneys for the two sides have been negotiating back and forth throughout the day with little to show for it. There was supposed to be a big announcement tomorrow by Smith, but that appears to be off for the moment.

Within the last hour, Espada told The Times he is "tremendously dismayed and disappointed" by reports in recent days that the majority leader's post will perhaps not have any real responsibilities attached to it, adding that this has led him to "suspend my support for Malcolm Smith as leader."

If you share my opinion that throwing this deal out and letting the "Gang of Three" vote for whomever they want (even if it's a Republican) is the way to go, then this news is good news. But if you are Sen. Malcolm Smith, you can't be happy.

From Smith's perspective, he was in a lose-lose situation. Putting the "Gang of Three" aside, Smith would have to go back to the rest of his caucus (a total of 28 senators) and give them the scraps of what the "Gang of Three" left behind. That was never going to go over well and, as we found out over the weekend, it didn't.

But with the "Gang of Three", Smith made a deal too good to be true. He promised Sen. Pedro Espada Jr. the majority leader's post and promised to make the post relevant and more powerful than it has been in the past. As we can read above, Espada sees the deal as dead mostly because he does not see what, if any, powers he will have as majority leader. As a result, Espada has now held off on his promise to support Smith.

For Sen. Carl Kruger, the second part of the "Gang of Three", he has held off on saying anything on this until tomorrow. He isn't as upset as Espada is, but he isn't saying much. We will see what tomorrow brings.

More on the flip.

Could The "Gang Of Three" Deal Fall Apart?

by: robert.harding

Sat Dec 06, 2008 at 00:06:38 AM EST

According to Liz, that big deal made with the "Gang of Three" might come to a screeching halt tomorrow if some Democratic senators have their way.

I have spoken to several Democratic lawmakers now who employed words like "blowup" and "disgrace" to describe what might happen at the closed-door conference (the former characterization and the deal Smith struck with the Gang of Three (the latter), which senators who stuck by Smith and helped him fight for the majority consider giving away the store to the renegade threesome - two of whom have longstanding GOP ties.

There are a number of problems here, not the least of which is the fact that if the now-tenuous deal blows up, it will send the Senate Democrats back to the drawing board, return the chamber to leadership-free limbo and perhaps drive the trio back into the arms of the Republicans, at least in the short term.

Some Democrats say even staying in the minority for another session is preferable to giving away the store in a deal that empowers the Gang of Three. A few took particular offense at the idea that control of legislation would rest in the hands of Senator-elect Pedro Espada Jr. as vice chairman of the Rules Committee.

The reasoning behind this is that sooner or later, given the aged GOP conference and the demographics of the state, more seats are going to end up being won by Democrats. The year that everyone should really be concerned about is 2010, because that's when the Senate that will control the next round of redistricting will be elected.

I am going to propose this: If these three won't vote for a Democratic leader without deals, then let them vote for Dean Skelos. Then those three can go back to their Democratic districts in 2010 and explain to them why they voted for Dean Skelos over Malcolm Smith. That should be the bargaining chip here. There is no reason to cave to these three opportunists. Let them walk and explain to their voters in 2010 why they voted for a Republican state senate when their voters sent them to Albany to be part of a Democratic senate.

Yes, I am saying I would rather be in the minority for the next two years than to cave to the thugs who want to rob us and create their own "Gang of Three Men In A Room." Then we could have a real shot at getting three TRUE Democrats to replace the traitors and then build our majority throughout the state, including upstate where we made serious gains this year and on Long Island where there might be another seat or two to grab in 2010.

If Malcolm Smith wants to be a leader, he needs to show some fortitude. This deal is not only bad for Senate Democrats, but it is also bad for him. He needs to realize that and for the good of the caucus, I hope he will realize that before tomorrow's meeting.  

Sen. Malcolm Smith Committed To Upstate

by: robert.harding

Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 20:24:03 PM EST

Senate Majority Leader-in waiting Malcolm Smith reaffirmed the Senate Democrats' support of upstate New York by promoting their slogan, "One New York", and the uniting of this state that has long been intentionally divided by Republicans seeking to hold onto certain seats by trying to divide us as two separate parts.

Sen. Smith authored this op-ed talking about what Senate Democrats will do in the majority to help upstate.

As the leader of the incoming majority in the New York State Senate, I want to send a strong, clear message: Senate Democrats are committed to upstate.

We're committed to listening to the families, business owners, elected officials and community leaders who know upstate best. We're committed to empowering upstate Democratic senators and helping them deliver for their communities. But most importantly, we're committed to making all of state government work for upstate New York.

For too long, the upstate economy has languished as state government dysfunction blocked opportunities to respond in a powerful, coordinated fashion. In the last four decades, the Republican majority in the Senate not only blocked sensible solutions to our economic challenges, but actually promoted failed policies that drove up property taxes and drove away jobs.

That is just the first part of the op-ed. The rest is a good read. Some Republicans will always believe that "downstate Democrats" don't know a thing about upstate. I beg to differ. But in this op-ed, Sen. Smith presents his case why Senate Democrats will be better for all of New York, including upstate.

The rest of the op-ed below the fold.  

If Ruben Diaz Sr. Is A Democrat, Why Isn't He Backing Malcolm Smith?

by: robert.harding

Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 16:45:33 PM EST

But I found these quotes to be rather intriguing from Sen. Diaz in a Buffalo News story about his membership in the "Gang of Three":

"I have not committed myself to anybody, and my position as an ordained minister and a pastor will not allow me to support any would-be leader that will bring gay marriage to the Senate floor," he said in a statement.

"This is nothing new. Mr. Smith and all my colleagues have known my position for more than a year. That does not make me a Republican. Where is it written that in order to be a Democrat you have to support gay marriage? And where is it written that if you do not support gay marriage you are not a good Democrat? I have always been a Democrat. I remain a Democrat, and I will continue to be a Democrat. A Democrat who rejects gay marriage and abortion based upon my beliefs," he added.

Okay, so we have known the position, as I mentioned above. It isn't a secret that this is where Sen. Diaz stands. But if he is such a good Democrat and is remaining a Democrat and will continue to be a Democrat, why is he playing these games? Something tells me that this more than just the marriage equality issue. The man who hopes to be majority leader, Sen. Malcolm Smith, has said that the budget and fiscal crisis will be the priority. So this seems to be an attempt to get something out of the deal.

Sen. Diaz can tell the world that he is a Democrat. On paper, he is. No one said being pro-choice or pro-marriage equality was a prerequisite for being a Democrat. Sen. Darrel Aubertine, who received support from all over the state when he won a special election in late February, is anti-choice.

So we have an array of opinions and views in the New York State Senate. But the difference is that Sen. Aubertine isn't playing games. He isn't trying to threaten the Democrats with voting for Dean Skelos if they vote on a certain issue. Sen. Diaz has a vote in the Senate, does he not? He can exercise that vote in opposition.

In any event, Sen. Diaz, you are at the end of your Senate career. Enjoy it while it lasts. In 2010, you will be done.  

Mysterious Robocalls Targeting Sen. Malcolm Smith, Education Funding

by: robert.harding

Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 21:56:57 PM EDT

The reader pointed out two key facts:

(1) The reader lives in Oswego County, which obviously isn't in Sen. Smith's district.

(2) There was nothing at the beginning or end of the call that identified where the call originated from.

I won't disclose who the reader is, but they did say that they have a family member who lives in the house that works in education. One might conclude that these calls are targeting educators or those who are tied to education, whether they are school counselors, superintendents, principals, etc.

The number that the call came from was 1-603-214-3698. I "Googled" the number and it came back that it matched some numbers associated with telemarketing calls. So it more than likely is just a random number being used to make these calls.

I would think that this is the Republicans or one of their groups that are conducting these robocalls. The reason for targeting Sen. Smith could be to try and say that you don't want the Democrats to have the majority in the New York State Senate because they will cut education funding. This has been a Republican talking point and source of dueling between the GOP conference and Democratic conference recently.

If you have received one of these phone calls, feel free to pass along your story: robert.harding22@gmail.com.

UPDATE: Another reader from Oswego County passed along a message saying that they received an identical robo-call targeting Sen. Smith and mentioning education. He, too, works in education. And like the call that started this discussion, no identification was given.