"Non-partisan" ain't neutral

by: simonstl

Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 13:57:17 PM EDT

People who've followed my postings are likely aware that I'm not a fan of Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton for many reasons. I've voted against her endorsement by the Tompkins County Democratic Committee, criticized her on a variety of issues, and been, well, less than polite at a few public forums. The last thing I really want to do on a normal day is republish Lifton press releases.

Every now and then, though, something so infuriating comes up that the only right response is to republish a Lifton press release:

Lifton Campaign Challenges Opponent to Engage in Fair Debate, Reveal Actual Party and Anti-government Group Affiliations Publicly

The campaign of Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton has been approached by Ms. Kelly Kheel, who initially represented herself, on Sept. 8, as follows:

I am hosting a Meet the Candidate night in Tompkins County, NY. This is a non partisan forum. We plan to send invitation (sic) and moderate the event. The date is Sept. 25 at 7 pm. Mr. Reynolds has agreed.

Thank you for your consideration.
Cordially,
Kelly Kheel

The Lifton campaign made repeated efforts to work with Ms. Kheel to agree to a time, format and location that would allow Assemblywoman Lifton's participation in a forum. Repeated requests for information about Ms. Kheel's "group" were responded to with minimal or misleading information. Eventually, the Lifton Campaign was able to discover, through on-line research, that Ms. Kheel's group is 912 TEA CTCNY. Reading the information on their website, at http://www.meetup.com/912Tea-Party-Patriots-Tompkins-County-NY/ , reveals that many of their 66 members reside outside of the Cortland/Tompkins area that they purportedly represent. Their current headline reads "We Surround Ithaca." The web page also reveals that Assemblywoman Lifton's opponent has been an active member of this group since April 14, 2010, although this information is not included on his campaign website, nor did Ms. Kheel mention that Mr. Reynolds was a member of her group in her correspondence with the Lifton campaign until we brought this fact up with her.

The Lifton Campaign challenges Mr. Reynolds to be open and above-board with the public about his true party affiliations. On the Tea Party group's website, his member page identifies him, in his own words, as a "Reagan republican Cheif Financial Officer," and he has also represented himself to the media as a Republican. Yet, while he is the Republican nominee for Assembly, his Board of Elections records identify him as a registered member of the Conservative Party. He has made public challenges to our campaign to engage in large numbers of debates, and then apparently encouraged the organizers of a group he is a member of to misrepresent itself as an impartial entity and set up a rigged "forum" in which the group leader acted as moderator.

Fair play and honest public discourse are the cornerstones of our democracy. The Lifton campaign challenges her opponent to engage in honest dicussion, in truly impartial forums, of the actual issues facing NYS government. We also challenge Mr. Reynolds to explain how he would uphold the Constitution of the State of NY if he accepts the 4th principle of Ms. Kheel's group: "The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government." Would he be willing to uphold NYS laws? Is his goal to become a NYS Assembly Member, or to spread the anti-government message of the TEA Party?

That's not an invitation to a debate - it's an invitation to an ambush. Dryden's had some contentious debates in the past, probably peaking in 2007 at Varna. I'll admit that I felt ambushed by some of the extremely right-wing questions, not to mention false claims - but at least the moderators of those events actually were neutral.

The first of the 2007 debates was moderated by the League of Women Voters, and the next two were moderated by WHCU host Geoff Dunn. Dunn makes a point of registering as a blank and of taking political signs only when he can signs from all sides - I don't know what his personal politics are, but he does an excellent job of keeping them out of the way when running a debate.

I worry that few undecided voters actually show up at debates, and there seems to be a regular battle to stack the audience with supporters. That said, stacking the moderator as well as the audience goes way way way outside of anything I'd recognize as decent politics.

If this is the kind of change the Tea Party folks want to bring to politics, we have some major problems before we even get to actual issues.

(Cross-posted with minor changes from Living in Dryden.)

Redistricting: how-to and how-not-to

by: simonstl

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 11:22:24 AM EDT

Since folks are already moving on to redistricting conversations, today might be a good day to post this.

Way back in October, I posted about a forum on redistricting held by Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton and featuring Assemblyman William Parment and former Tompkins County Legislator Mike Lane.

I posted audio and some of my handouts then, but I had the audio transcribed, and then spent a fair amount of time cleaning up the transcription. I think it's accurate now, but of course, if you find something wrong, please let me know.

The transcript seemed to be too long for the extended text, so here it is.

The key piece for me is Parment's saying:

Telling tales out of school. Perhaps the press could ask us, “Well, did you consider voter enrollments?” And I say no. Or, they say, “You mustn't consider voter enrollments.” And no, we won't consider voter enrollments.

And we didn't. We considered voter performance. We don't care how people enroll. And if you ever looked in rural… New York State… you know… that everybody that's a rural Republican doesn't vote that way. And the same is true in the cities where you have heavy, heavy Democratic component, and not everyone votes that way. So the only thing we're interested in is voter performance, not voter enrollment.

Most of the rest of it is less surprising, but in case you were wondering about the criteria legislative leaders use to gerrymander districts, registration is apparently not their focus. Much of the rest of Parment's talk illustrates the other constraints that help determine how districts are drawn. I suspect Mike Lane's comments will be popular here, but the Assembly members' response to his suggestions for independent redistricting - heck, any change to the process whatsoever - was less than encouraging.

If you can manage to read to the end, it's worth the trip. If not, hopefully it'll prove useful as reference. (And I wish I could find Assemblyman Parment's handouts - sorry!)

Bloodsucking legislators?

by: simonstl

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 07:17:16 AM EDT

I know it's the day after the primary, and everyone's excited (for better or worse) about that, but there's still some action in Albany. Governor Paterson's initial remarks:

Mr. Paterson, a former state senator, uttered the "bloodsuckers" line as he was telling a joke about what he saw as the hypocrisy in the way some of his colleagues treated advocates for groups like the disabled.

"There were legislators who I used to think practiced their own versions of being Count Dracula in that they would be very nice to the advocates when they came to Albany," Mr. Paterson said in a speech to a group of activists for the disabled at an Albany hotel. "By 5 o'clock, the sun would go down, and they'd go back to who they really are: a bunch of bloodsuckers."

And his clarification:

"I didn't say that my colleagues were bloodsuckers. I said that there were certain people who listened to advocates, and as soon as they left and, you know, it got dark, were acting in that way - like Count Dracula - because they really didn't care."

The Daily News takes the Dracula reference and runs with it. They also explore it in an editorial.

Legislators of both parties seem to be very sad that the Governor isn't kind enough to their always-to-be-highly-respected branch. First he calls legislators back into session from "vacation" to address potentially huge fiscal problems. Then he suggests that some legislators might be hypocritical, pretending good will while really just waiting for the advocacy bus to leave Albany.

I don't know, though - despite the choice of metaphor, this doesn't sound remotely Spitzerian to me. (And at least he's not suggesting that the Democrats are for sale.)

Update: And NYCO's take on it is also fun. Duels? Hmmm... Albany's had some interesting times.

Dredging up a trucking trainwreck in the 125th

by: simonstl

Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:20:04 AM EDT

It's been a very up and down week for Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton.

On the bright side, she announced $2 million for dredging Cayuga Inlet, addressing an expensive problem that had been getting worse for a long long time.

On the other, she generated headlines like "Assemblywoman Lifton irritates garbage truck task force, others" because of an event she held where she was would be "facilitating a meeting with the Upstate New York Safety Coalition Task Force to discuss the ongoing issue of trucks hauling solid waste on two-lane state highways".

It sounds like the meeting didn't quite go as planned. Her Republican fellow legislators asked why she wasn't joining them in sponsoring legislation that would "designate the state Department of Transportation as the truck-routing agency that would have the authority to designate what routes trucks can travel."

Lifton protested that the DOT was opposed, and that the bill wouldn't pass constitutional muster. Democratic U.S. Senator Schumer's representative at the meeting, however, disagreed:

"I do have to respectfully disagree in terms of the constitutionality component," she said. "We've done a lot of vetting and truck agencies absolutely can be created. There are states where they exist. The key element is that reasonable access is afforded because that is where we get into some of those interferences with clauses. As long as that's done we have every assurance that there is precedent constitutionally to do so."

The DOT doesn't seem so clear in its opposition, either:

Skip Carrier, a public information officer at the DOT, said the department has not taken a position yet. Carrier was not at the meeting.

"We're looking at the legislation and are reviewing it," he said. "We haven't taken a position on these bills yet."

Lifton's current position seems to be that a "blue-ribbon commission" is needed to further study the issue.

So, what do you think? Is this a case of a Democratic Assemblywoman doing a properly cautious job, or a case where a legislator doesn't want to push on a Democratic conference (and maybe the Governor) who'd prefer to keep trash rates down?

[Sorry, Robinia - this was just too richly conflicted a story to pass up.]

Redistricting conversation

by: simonstl

Wed Oct 10, 2007 at 18:30:39 PM EDT

I don't have enough time to write a real story yet, but if anyone wants to listen to a two-hour session on redistricting, I've posted the audio (42.7MB MP3) from an event this afternoon and may eventually get a transcript.

Assemblyman William Parment, who chaired the 2002 Assembly redistricting, talks for most of it, with varying levels of interestingness. A lot of it feels to me like running out the clock, and ducking and dodging points that might be genuinely troublesome if addressed - but at the same time I think what he says makes pretty clear what a broken process it is. Former Tompkins County Legislator Michael Lane speaks up for reform and independent redistricting, and Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton plays host.

I also brought some handouts, and I'll get more online soon.

I'll have more soon, but wanted to get that out into the world. Local elections are a massive distraction right now.

Update: The transcript is now available.

Do you know how your legislator voted today?

by: simonstl

Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:44:53 PM EDT

[Cross-posted from Living in Dryden. I'd love to see people across the state write their legislators about this. It seems awfully simple.]

It's possible that I'm missing something, but I've looked and asked and not found any sign that roll calls for votes on bills are available online for either the New York State Assembly or the New York State Senate.

Redistricting is "complicated"

by: simonstl

Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 10:23:54 AM EDT

On the opinion page of today's Ithaca Journal, Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton has a guest column that should be remembered for years to come as a classic case of how to argue for inaction. She says she's "interested" in an independent commission, but apparently dreads the details of how it would work as "the devil is in the details."

She only comes vaguely close to acknowledging that having Republicans draw the lines for the State Senate and the Democrats draw the lines for the Assembly is a really really truly horrible idea, one that ensures that legislators turn over their seats mostly when the leadership, not the voters, want them to go:

Bipartisan systems have often been a check on corruption, as in our electoral system, which is run in a bipartisan fashion. On the other hand, it runs the danger of bias toward maintaining the status quo.

Praise the current system first, then back off slightly with a comment about the status quo. The piece is brilliantly short, long enough only for her to express her concerns about solutions without ever expressing whether or not there might possibly be a problem. Bringing Assemblyman Parment, who chaired the effort creating the current lines for the Assembly, in for a visit, certainly doesn't sound like she thinks that there may be a problem.

Amazing - and depressing. It may be a "complicated issue", but it wouldn't take a perfect solution to make matters a lot better than they are today.

Assembly member talks with community, Cortlandville

by: simonstl

Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 17:36:26 PM EST

(Cross-posted from Living in Dryden. At least it didn't seem very scripted.)

I worry that I may be a werewolf. Or something similar. There's no fur, there aren't any extra fangs or even howling, but listening to state legislators argue that New York State government - or at least their house of it - runs just perfectly well punches my adrenaline to new highs and makes it hard not to sputter. I may be a pacifist, but that doesn't mean I'm always nice.

So, okay, here are the highlights of Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton's presentation this afternoon at the Cortlandville Fire Hall:

• The new budget offers both more funding for schools and more accountability for education results, including accountability for state agencies.