|
This belongs to you. Take it back...
legislation 
Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 09:43:23 AM EDT
|
|
While we've all been busy watching the "oil spill live cam", a similar uncontrolled discharge has been taking place in Washington, DC
In this case, however, it's lobbyists that are spilling all over the landscape as the House and Senate attempt to merge their two visions of financial reform.
They're trying desperately to influence the outcome of the conference in which House and Senate negotiators have been engaged; this to craft the exact language of the reconciled legislation.
There's an additional element of drama hovering over the events as eight House members, including one of the most vocal of the Republican negotiators, face ethics questions related to this very bill.
The best part: if you're enough of a political geek, you can actually watch the events unfold, unedited and unfiltered, from the comfort of your very own computer.
So far, it's been amazing political theater, and if you follow along I'll tell you how you can get in on the fun, too.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1039 words in story)
|
|
Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:12:05 AM EDT
|
|
So we are now finding out the answers to some of our questions about which members of Congress actually represent We, the People...and which ones represent, Them, the Corporate Masters.
We have seen a Democratic Senator propose a policy that would put people in jail for not buying health insurance and a Democratic President who has taken numerous public beatings from those on the left side of the fence for his inability to ram something through a group of people...and yes, folks, the entendre was intentional.
But most of all, we've been asking ourselves: "why would Democratic Members of Congress who will eventually want us to vote for them vote against something that nearly all voting Democrats are inclined to vote for?"
Today's conversation attempts to answer that question by looking at exactly how money and influence flow through a key politician, Montana's Senator Max Baucus-and in doing so, we examine some ugly political realities that have to be resolved before we can hope to convince certain Members of Congress to vote for what their constituents actually want when it really counts.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 994 words in story)
|
|
Tue Sep 01, 2009 at 08:53:14 AM EDT
|
|
Late last week, Governor David Paterson announced that he had signed 68 bills into law and vetoed another 14 bills that he felt would save the state money. Actually, the total savings was estimated at $5.4 million.
Of that "savings", $2.25 million of that would have gone to the creating of a War of 1812 Bicentennial Celebration Commission. The commission would have been used to promote War of 1812 sites in New York. Whether it is up near Lake Champlain and Plattsburgh, where a key War of 1812 battle took place, or Old Fort Niagara that was captured by the British in 1813 only to be returned to the United States at the end of the war.
As a lover of history and tourism, I find it very discouraging that the governor, citing the current economic crisis, would veto a bill creating such a commission. Is the initial price tag high? Maybe. Paying $2.25 million is a lot of money, but in the grand scheme of things, it's a tiny amount when comparing that payment to the whole budget.
If there is one thing I have learned about New York, it is that we don't promote our history and we don't promote the crown jewels that we have. For such a small investment, the state (and local businesses) would see a great reward.
From the Buffalo News:
The state's War of 1812 historic sites already conduct programs and host re-enactments, Paterson said. He encouraged existing boards as well as state and local agencies to work together to promote commemorative events.
Supporters of the commission say Canada has already put money into planning for the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812.
"They see the economic and cultural benefits," Emerson said. "So much of the War of 1812 happened here. The ball has been dropped, and it's extremely embarrassing."
Without the right planning, a hodgepodge schedule of events could give short shrift to heritage tourists like Michael and Marilyn Zepf of Chicago, who visited Old Fort Niagara in Youngstown on Saturday.
"They're already getting short shrift," Michael Zepf said of historical sites across the country.
Over the years, the two have visited historic battlefields and other historic sites across the country, even traveling along the Lewis and Clark trail and Route 66 to learn more about the country's history.
What do they too often find? Reduced hours. No brochures. Closed facilities. Few tours.
During the past two weeks, the two drove along the Great Lakes Seaway Trail, from its northernmost point at Massena to Youngstown.
Nowhere along the trail could they find a guidebook with information about the War of 1812 sites they visited.
...
Robert Emerson, executive director of Old Fort Niagara, sat on a state commission created to commemorate 250th anniversary events for the French and Indian War.
Thousands of visitors pumping millions of dollars into local economies have come to upstate historic sites since 2005 - including more than 2,300 who gathered in Youngstown over the July Fourth holiday weekend to re-enact six battles over three days.
Some $75,000 in commission funding helped organize Old Fort Niagara's re-enactment, which led to $1.8 million spent by visitors during that weekend, Emerson said.
"It's a $75,000 investment with a $1.8 million return," Emerson said. "I think that's very good."
Mr. Emerson is correct. It is very good.
If the state wants to cut the deficit, they are going to have to look at ways of bringing in revenue. Cuts alone aren't going to work and that has been proven, even though Paterson continues to think that he can cut the deficit away.
That is where tourism dollars can come in. Events like this can bring in a lot of money, not only for local businesses, but for the state through sales tax. If you promote it and use it right, then you will see the benefits. But when you veto something like this, it is a very narrow and wrong-headed thing to do, especially when it could bring in millions of dollars over a two or three year period.
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Wed May 27, 2009 at 11:56:03 AM EDT
|
|
The New York State Senate announced yesterday that the Senate Ethics Committee will be holding three public hearings throughout the state.
Here is the information on those hearings:
Thursday, May 28, 2009
10:00 AM
250 Broadway 19th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Friday, May 29
11:00 AM
Erie County Legislature
92 Franklin Street 4th Floor
Buffalo, New York 14202
Tuesday, June 2
11:30 AM
Room 124 State Capitol
Albany, NY 12247
If you wish to testify at these hearings, here is some more information that will assist you:
Persons who wish to attend or testify at any of the hearings should call Ben Brodsky at 212-298-5540, and fill out and return the attached reply form via fax at least two days prior to the hearing date. The Ethics Committee will accommodate as many witnesses as possible, and encourages the submission of written testimony, which will considered and made part of the hearing record. Written testimony should be e-mailed no later than two days prior to the hearing as an attachment in any common format to: bbrodsky@senate.state.ny.us.
Witnesses are requested to keep their oral testimony to no more than five minutes in length and to bring 10 copies of their prepared statement to the hearing.
In order to meet the needs of those who may have a disability, the New York State Senate has made its facilities and services available to all individuals with disabilities. Accommodations will be provided for individuals with disabilities upon reasonable request to afford such individuals access and admission to Senate facilities and activities.
Questions about this hearing may be directed to Ben Brodsky at 212- 298-5540.
This is a great opportunity for citizens to take part in the legislative process as the Senate takes up legislation regarding ethics reform.
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 15:16:21 PM EDT
|
|
The Governor's office just sent out a press release touting the 171 vetoes by Governor David Paterson as a savings to taxpayers of New York.
It's an interesting way of looking at these vetoes, even though Governor Paterson admits that he did veto some projects that were good projects, but during this financial crisis New York is in, he wasn't about to sign some of these pieces of legislation into law.
Governor David A. Paterson has saved taxpayers $531.7 million over the next two years by vetoing bills that would have added significant costs to the State budget after it was enacted in April without identifying spending reductions to pay for them. In addition to preventing unaffordable growth to the State General Fund that would exacerbate next year's projected multi-billion dollar budget gap, the 171 vetoes he has issued since June will save money for local governments, as well.
"These tough fiscal times call for tough decisions," said Governor Paterson. "While I have signed hundreds of bills into law that will help improve the lives of our citizens in the areas of education, health care and public safety, I felt it was absolutely critical to veto bills that increased taxpayer costs beyond what we can afford in these challenging times."
Governor Paterson added: "Many of the bills I vetoed are worthy projects with laudable goals. But in the face of this current fiscal crisis, we must begin immediately to adjust our budget priorities to reflect the new economic reality we must confront."
Last week, Governor Paterson vetoed 39 bills. The bills that were vetoed ranged from a bill that would adopt smart growth principles to a bill that would prohibit "direct contact between a big cat and a member of the public." There were some good, some bad and some odd pieces of legislation that were vetoed.
This certainly is a more positive way to look at a veto. Some legislators might look at it from the perspective that their legislation got shot down. Governor Paterson is looking at this from the perspective that we are saving taxpayer dollars by not signing anything and everything that comes across his desk. That's a great way to spin it and a great way to identify these vetoes during these tough economic times.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Mon Jul 30, 2007 at 12:06:19 PM EDT
|
( - promoted by phillip anderson)
(From Amy Traub at DMIBlog)
At the beginning of the month, I wrote an op-ed for the Albany Times-Union challenging the conventional wisdom that the year's legislative session was largely a failure. I pointed out that on issues important to most current and aspiring middle-class New Yorkers, Albany has made significant progress: hundreds of thousands of low-income kids are becoming eligible for state health insurance, underserved schools are finally getting resources they've needed for decades, and new groups of employees are eligible to organize themselves for a fair deal at work. I argued that by minimizing these substantial policy victories for ordinary New Yorkers, we risk feeding into dangerous myths that nothing of substance is ever accomplished in the state capitol.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 484 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|
