THE "PORK" IN NEW YORK, Thoughts of an older American on Constitutional Government in the USA Options

[Livyjr]

"Now, it's Spitzer the statesman who needs to step forward"

Fred LeBrun, Political Analyst, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, February 9, 2007

Eliot Spitzer, it seems, has a lot to learn about effective governing.

We like our state constitution with its separation of powers.

"In state politics, there's no tiebreaker"

By BENNETT LIEBMAN

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, February 26, 2007

Much of the "inside the Northway" chatter the about the state Senate involves the potential for a Democratic takeover.

With a Democratic win in the Feb. 6 special election for a vacant Senate seat in Nassau County, the tally in the Senate now stands at 33 Republicans and 29 Democrats.

There is the widespread belief that if the Democratic leadership can somehow convince two Republicans to defect, then the Senate will effectively be in Democratic control.

The belief is that with a 31-31 tie, Lt. Gov. David Paterson, would cast all the decisive votes, much as the vice president can break ties in the U.S. Senate.

That belief is not totally valid.

The state constitution does provide that the lieutenant governor "shall be the president of the senate but shall have only a casting vote therein."

The notion of a casting vote is that the lieutenant governor would have the right to break ties.

It would probably not give the lieutenant governor the right to vote to force a tie.

Nonetheless, the Constitution in describing the manner in which a bill becomes a law provides the following:

"Nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature."

This provision means a bill can be passed only when the majority of the members of each house vote for the bill.

The lieutenant governor is not a member of the state Senate.

With 62 members, the affirmative votes of 32 members are needed to pass a bill.

If a vote on a bill is 31-31, it does not pass, and the lieutenant governor is not authorized by the Constitution to vote on the bill.

These are not inadvertent or unknown provisions.

Charles Lincoln's authoritative history of the state Constitution notes that the lieutenant governor's casting vote must be read with the provision "which requires the assent of a majority of each branch of the legislature on the passage of a bill."

"It is obvious that the majority cannot be made up by the addition of the lieutenant governor's vote."

"He is not a member of the senate and legislative power is not vested in him, but in the senate and the assembly."

A similar observation was made by the Temporary State Commission on the Constitutional Convention, which was formed to help educate the State Constitutional Convention of 1967.

The commission advised that the lieutenant governor had enjoyed a casting vote in the Senate since the first State Constitution in 1777.

Nonetheless, "since Section 14 of Article III provides that no bill is to become law 'except by the assent of the members elected to each branch of the legislature,' the Lieutenant Governor's casting vote may only be exercised in matters of legislative procedure."

This, of course, does not mean the lieutenant governor is powerless in the event Senate is deadlocked.

If the number of Republican and Democratic legislators is equal, the lieutenant governor could break ties on matters such as confirmation of gubernatorial appointees, legislative rules, resolutions, adjournments, and the selection of Senate officers.

That would make the Senate Democrats the majority party, able to choose the majority leader, for example.

But on legislation, David Paterson is no Dick Cheney.

The state Constitution gives the lieutenant governor no say on legislation.

If the Senate is equally divided between Democrats and Republicans and senators vote strictly along party lines, no bills pass.

In the matter of New York state legislation, a tie is a tie, is a tie.

Bennett Liebman is coordinator of the Racing and Gaming Law Program at Albany Law School's Government Law Center.

[Livyjr]

"In state politics, there's no tiebreaker"

By BENNETT LIEBMAN

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, February 26, 2007

Nonetheless, the Constitution in describing the manner in which a bill becomes a law provides the following:

"Nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature."

This provision means a bill can be passed only when the majority of the members of each house vote for the bill.

The lieutenant governor is not a member of the state Senate.

The First Constitution, 1777.

The first Constitution of any free people possesses a peculiar interest; especially is this true when, as in the case of New York, the Constitution is the outgrowth and culmination of more than a century of struggle for popular liberty.

Our first Constitution also excites additional interest from the circumstances surrounding its preparation; for it was not framed, as most of the later state Constitutions were framed, to accomplish a peaceful transition from a territorial condition to statehood, and where the authors, with research and deliberation, worked out a plan of government based on the best models.

The framers of our first Constitution worked in the stress of war and revolution and without a model, except as they may possibly have derived assistance from Constitutions of other states, recently adopted, but under which there had been little, if any, actual experience.

Neither was it framed by experienced men of mature years, but by young men reared in luxury, and who had not enjoyed the opportunities of public service and acquaintance with details of public affairs.

John Jay, who is understood to have been the chief author of the Constitution, was only thirty years of age, Robert R. Livingston, one of his colleagues, was only twenty-nine, and Gouverneur Morris, the other, was only twenty-four, when they were appointed on the committee to frame a form of government; yet these wise young patriots exercised a controlling influence in preparing a Constitution which was the fundamental law of the state for forty-five years, and many of whose provisions have been continued without change in all subsequent Constitutions.

The first Constitution was framed, adopted, and put in operation by a congress, or convention, chosen by the people of the colony, and which, after three intermediate congresses, was the successor of the colonial legislature.

The last Colonial Assembly was chosen under writs of election issued January 14, 1769, and returnable February 14.

The assembly met for its first session April 4, 1769.

It continued in session at different times until April 3, 1775, when it was prorogued until May 3, 1775.

It was prorogued at different times afterwards until March 11, 1776, and then again till April 17, 1776, but it did not meet at that time, and never met after April 3, 1775.

Events developing the Revolution were crowding each other rapidly during this period, and, in the absence of an assembly authorized to exercise legislative powers and attend to the affairs of the colony, the people assumed control, and at first by committees, and later through elected congresses, gradually worked out a plan of local administration of the colony, culminating in constitutional government * * *

On the 1st of May, [1775, the] * * * Provisional War Committee * * * requested the people of the several counties of the colony to elect delegates to a Provincial Congress, to meet in New York on the 22d of May, 1775, "to deliberate upon, and from time to time to direct, such measures as may be expedient for our common safety."

This congress met at the time appointed at the Exchange in the city of New York.

It is known as the First Provincial Congress, and it became substantially the successor of the Colonial Assembly, which had met for the last time on the 3d of the preceding April.

This congress, on the 18th of October, ordered an election of delegates by ballot, to constitute a new Provincial Congress, to meet November 14, 1775.

The first congress adjourned on the 4th of November.

The second congress was organized on the 6th of December, and continued its sessions at different times until its final adjournment May 13, 1776.

In April, 1776, an election was held for delegates to constitute a new Provincial Congress, to meet on the 14th of May.

The Third Provincial Congress, owing to the failure of a sufficient number of members to attend, was not actually organized until May 22, 1776.

It continued in session until June 30, 1776.

These congresses had no constitutional sanction, but were expedients resorted to by the people in a great emergency.

The Colonial Assembly, which had existed as a component and essential part of colonial government for nearly a century, had been dissolved.

Government by the people, in the manner so positively asserted in the Charter of Liberties, had apparently ceased, and the rights of the people had reverted to the people themselves.

It should be noted as a significant fact, evincing the deepest patriotism and the most conservative self-poise, that in all this trying period, from the failure of real representative government in the old assembly to the institution of a regular form of government under the new state, there was no attempt by any committee or body of patriots to usurp the recognized rights of the people; but in all cases each delegation to the Continental Congress, and each Provincial Congress, was composed of men chosen, either directly by the people, or by representatives of the people elected for that specific purpose: and the government and administration of colonial affairs exercised by the several Provincial Congresses were strictly representative, and recognized to the fullest extent the right of popular self-government * * *

On the 31st of May the Third Provincial Congress, then sitting in New York, adopted the following preamble and resolutions:

"AND WHEREAS, Doubts have arisen whether this Congress are invested with sufficient power and authority to deliberate and determine on so important a subject as the necessity of erecting and constituting a new form of government and internal police, to the exclusion of all foreign jurisdiction, dominion, and control whatever:"

"AND WHEREAS, It appertains, of right, solely to the people of this colony to determine the said doubt: Therefore"

"Resolved, That it be recommended to the electors of the several counties in this colony, by election in the manner and form prescribed for the election of the present congress, either to authorize (in addition to the powers vested in this congress) their present deputies, or others in the stead of their present deputies, or either of them, to take into consideration the necessity and propriety of instituting such new government as in and by the said resolution of the Continental Congress is described and recommended."

"And if the majority of the counties by their deputies in Provincial Congress shall be of the opinion that such new government ought to be instituted and established, then to institute and establish such a government as they shall deem best calculated to secure the rights, liberties, and happiness of the good people of this colony, and to continue in force till a future peace with Great Britain shall render the same unnecessary."

And

"Resolved, That the said elections in the several counties ought to be on such a day, and at such place or places, as by the committee of each county respectively shall be determined."

"And it is recommended to the said committees to fix such early days for the elections as that all the deputies to be elected have sufficient time to repair to the city of New York by the second Monday in July next, on which day all the said deputies ought punctually to give their attendance."

"AND WHEREAS, The object of the foregoing resolutions is of the utmost importance to the good people of this colony:"

"Resolved, That it be, and it is, hereby earnestly recommended to the committees, freeholders, and other electors in the different counties of this colony, diligently to carry the same into execution."

"Ordered, That the foregoing resolutions be published in all public newspapers in this colony, and in handbills to be distributed in the counties."

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/history/elec...lincoln/pg9.htm

[Livyjr]

NY TIMES

February 26, 2007, 6:16 pm

"The Operative Word: ‘Was’"

By Nicholas Confessore

Joseph L. Bruno, the Republican majority leader, had some unkind words today for David Grandeau, the executive director of the soon-to-expire state lobbying commission and a onetime F.O.B. (Friend of Bruno).

Mr. Grandeau has been hoping for a position with the soon-to-be-created new ethics commission, which will replace, in part, the lobbying commission.

Mr. Bruno did not seem exactly in love with the idea.

Chatting with reporters this morning, Mr. Bruno was asked if Mr. Grandeau was still his man.

“‘Was’ is the operative word, in that I guess I gave him his first real job, back in the private sector, and helped him when he was city manager of Troy, and I guess recommended him for this position,” said Mr. Bruno.

“He has to make his own judgments on how he leads his life."

"And I’m afraid that some people, when they get into a powerful position, that power does things to their capacity and capability to make decisions that are just straightforward and not biased.”

Mr. Grandeau has been relatively active in rooting out violations of the state’s lobbying laws, and has tried to get closed some loopholes in said laws — actions that have not endeared him to the Legislature.

Or Mr. Bruno, it seems.

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...ative-word-was/

[Livyjr]

NY TIMES

February 26, 2007, 3:52 pm

"A New Sheriff in Town"

By Michael Cooper

Albany, which has sometimes been said to have a whiff of the Wild West about it when it comes to issues of ethics, has a new Sheriff.

Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo just named Ellen Nachtigall Biben as a special deputy attorney general for public integrity, where she will be charged with overseeing “landmark initiatives to fight government corruption.’’

Ms. Biben, who prosecuted organized crime and public corruption cases in the Manhattan district attorney’s office, will have her work cut out for her.

The announcement says that her brief will “include a thorough review of approximately 6,000 legislative budget member items, a multi-layered legality review of any further proposed items, and “Project Sunlight,” a statewide Internet database where New Yorkers can examine links between elected officials, campaign donations, lobbyists, special interests, and/or state contracts.’’

2 comments so far...

1.February 26th, 2007 7:14 pm

With respect to young Andrew Cuomo’s alleged “landmark initiatives to fight government corruption” in the State of New York in 2007 …

I myself recall in 1986 his father, then-Governor Mario Cuomo, stating in a Governor’s Approval memorandum for ARTICLE 460 of the New York State Penal Law, which memorandum can be found in the New York State Legislative Annual -1986, at p.236, as follows:

“TEN YEARS AGO, a study by the Joint House-Senate Subcommittee on Investigations estimated the costs of white-collar crime at MORE THAN forty-four BILLION dollars”.

“The incidence of white-collar crime has not abated in the last decade; instead, it has spiraled ever-upward as economic crime has become increasingly profitable and sophisticated!”

“The effects of major economic crime can be devastating: THE WHOLE SOCIETY suffers as crimes against business become crimes against consumers.”

“GREEDY, WHITE-COLLAR PROFITEERS WILL NOT BE STOPPED until we adopt strong measures to stop them!”

And with respect to ARTICLE 460 of the New York State Penal Law, which is entitled ENTERPRISE CORRUPTION, that ARTICLE OF LAW being a part of TITLE X of the New York State Penal Law ….

Entitled ORGANIZED CRIME CONTROL ACT ….

The relevant part of that state law which pertains directly to this discussion in here ….

Is as follows:

S 460.00 Legislative findings.

The legislature (of the State of New York) finds and determines as follows:

Organized crime in New York state involves highly sophisticated, complex and widespread forms of criminal activity.

The diversified illegal conduct engaged in by organized crime, rooted in the illegal use of force, fraud, and corruption, constitutes a major drain upon the state’s economy, costs citizens and businesses of the state billions of dollars each year, and threatens the peace, security and general welfare of the people of the state.

Organized crime continues to expand its corrosive influence in the state through illegal enterprises engaged in such criminal endeavors as the theft and fencing of property, the importation and distribution of narcotics and other dangerous drugs, arson for profit, hijacking, labor racketeering, loansharking, extortion and bribery, the illegal disposal of hazardous wastes, syndicated gambling, trafficking in stolen securities, insurance and investment frauds, and other forms of economic and social exploitation.

The money and power derived by organized crime through its illegal enterprises and endeavors is increasingly being used to infiltrate and corrupt businesses, unions and other legitimate enterprises and to corrupt our democratic processes.

As to how this now-20-year-old law applies directly to CORRUPTION of OUR state government here in New York, a quick perusal of S 460.10 of the New York State Penal Law provides as follows in the “Definitions”:

The following definitions are applicable to this article.

2. “Enterprise” means either an enterprise as defined in subdivision one of section 175.00 of this chapter or criminal enterprise as defined in subdivision three of this section.

Going over to Section 175 of the New York State Penal Law, we have:

ARTICLE 175 OFFENSES INVOLVING FALSE WRITTEN STATEMENTS

S 175.00 Definitions of terms.

The following definitions are applicable to this article:

1. “Enterprise” means any entity of one or more persons, corporate or otherwise, public or private, engaged in business, commercial, professional, industrial, eleemosynary, social, political or governmental activity.

SO ….

IF an “enterprise” in the State of New York means “any entity” of one or more persons, engaged in “POLITICAL or GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITY”, it would certainly appear that back in 1986, then-New York State Governor Mario Cuomo gave his son Andrew all the tools that Andrew Cuomo can now use to clean this corruption out of OUR government that was identified by the New York State Legislature way back in 1976 ……

Being Governor Cuomo’s son, surely young Andrew Cuomo must be aware of this legacy that his father left to the PEOPLE of the State of New York in the form of this law, and hopefully, young Andrew will have the gumption to overcome some 20 years of inertia here in the state by starting to finally enforce this law against those who are corrupting our government in New York State ….

One can hope, anyway …

— Posted by Livyjr

2.February 26th, 2007 7:42 pm

*** Calls for Investigation ***

Ms. Ellen Nachtigall Biben
Deputy Attorney General for Public Integrity
The Capitol
Albany, NY 12224-0341

Dear Ms. Biben,

We call upon the New York State Deputy Attorney General for Public Integrity to conduct an investigation into the use and miss-use of funds and various political favors benefiting the Westchester Independence Party and the Westchester Independence Club that is chaired and headed by Giulio Cavallo.

The place to start is with the Financial Disclosures of the Party and the Club filed at the Westchester County Board of Elections.

The Independence Club has amassed considerable amounts of money, with none going towards any candidate, and expenditures that appear to be suspect at best.

They do not support Independence candidates!

We have discovered many contributions from candidates from both democrats and republicans alike, but the most glaring and significant ones are the two (2) contributions in October 2004 from the New York State Republican Senate Committee totaling $42,000 to the Independence Club, not the Party.

We also found an expense that included $27,000.00 to North Fork Bank and it was marked “housekeeping”.

The disclosure is filled with American Express bills as well, and all of these expenditures need to be investigated.

This year GOP State Senator Serafin Maltise from Queens has added Giulio Cavallo to his payroll for an estimated $50,000 a year as a part-time consultant for medical and Italian issues.

This only bolsters the fact that the New York State Republican Committee is again attempting to acquire the Independence Party’s endorsement of Senator Nick Spano, a Republican.

How can he be a consultant for medical issues if he is not a licensed medical doctor, or is this a no-show job to curry political favor?

Mr. Cavallo for several years now has used his power and influence to negotiate deals for not only judicial candidates wishing to seek his party’s endorsement for Supreme and County Court other candidates in the county of Westchester.

Mr. Cavallo does this by frequently throwing lavish fundraisers, expecting all candidates, incumbents and otherwise, to not only buy one or two tickets, but at times tables as well.

All the funds raised by these fundraisers go to the Independence Club, not the party.

It is clear that Giulio Cavallo has been acting with dual roles in the Party and the Club.

He also calls himself a medical doctor.

We have contacted the NYS Dept of Education and confirmed that he is not licensed or registered as a medical doctor.

We will ask that the NYS Education Dept conduct an investigation as well.

Respectfully,

THE WESTCHESTER INTEGRITY COMMITTEE

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...-town/#comments

[Livyjr]

"Spitzer adds $18 million in funding to budget plan"

Associated Press

First published: Thursday, February 22, 2007

ALBANY -- Additions to Gov. Eliot Spitzer's 2007-08 state budget proposal would provide more money for Medicaid patients, raises for county prosecutors and funding for computers at private schools.

The additions would include money for:

$1 million to coordinate research and talks to reform the worker's compensation system.

NY TIMES

February 27, 2007, 10:43 am

"Workers Comp Deal Expected"

By Danny Hakim

Gov. Eliot Spitzer, legislative leaders and representatives from the business and labor community are holding a press conference at 1 p.m. and are expected to announce a deal to overhaul the workers compensation system.

This is an issue that Albany has tried to address before, but the governor made it an early priority of his administration.

Two days after the election, he met with Denis M. Hughes, the president of the New York State A.F.L.-C.I.O., and Kenneth Adams, the president of the Business Council of New York State, in a bid to foster dialogue on issues such as workers compensation.

While a recent study by the Fiscal Policy Institute, a liberal policy group, found that businesses were shortchanging the system by $500 million to $1 billion a year, the business community has argued that New York’s workers comp system is more expensive than other states.

6 comments so far...

1. February 27th, 2007 2:36 pm

We should probably expect some sort of cap on the length of continuing benefits to injured employees in exchange for a raise in the weekly loss of income benefits: higher weekly payments for a shorter durtation.

We should also expect a negative reaction from New York unions and organizations representing injured workers as well as a guarded reaction from pro business elements.

— Posted by John D. Grzedzicki

2. February 27th, 2007 3:29 pm

Oh!

— Posted by mark sharkey

3. February 27th, 2007 4:06 pm

it’s about time we get some reform in this arena.

too many people exploit and abuse this system.

There definitely need to be a time limit on the duration of payments made.

There should not be any payments for life and only for exceptional cases, such as incapacitation.

Too many people use this as a retirement but are able bodied and can work.

I am glad Spitzer has seen the deficiency and is addressing it.

There needs to be a serious overhaul which i’m afraid will go far beyond spitzers time.

— Posted by Nadine

4. February 27th, 2007 4:25 pm

How about eliminating WC completely and using the funds to pay for universal health insurance.

Loss of earnings can be administered through the unemployment system.

— Posted by Howard

5. February 27th, 2007 4:37 pm

Deal?

Deal?

What is this-three men in a room again?

I guess some deals are ok and others cry for reform.

Or perhaps the governor now understands the benefits of negotiation vs. confrontation.

— Posted by Capt Clean

6. February 27th, 2007 7:07 pm

On September 21, 2006, Eliot Spitzer met with the New York State Business Council at posh Bolton Landing on Lake George, and this is what he said that night to the members of the Business Council with regard to Worker’s Compensation in the State of New York, which incidentally is guaranteed by the BILL OF RIGHTS of OUR New York State Constitution, section 18 of Article I, and so cannot just be willy-nilly eliminated by popular whim:

“Ken, I look forward to working with you to make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“Over the past six months, I have been laying out a comprehensive plan for economic revitalization.”

“But today, I want to speak about what I believe should be our first priority, and that is making New York companies more competitive by improving our business climate.”

“Now let me just cite some of the other areas in which New York State needs to become more competitive.”

“Workers’ compensation premiums in our state are the eighth highest in the nation, even as the maximum benefit to workers ranks 49th nationally as a percentage of average weekly income.”

“Well, I have a message for you: If I am elected Governor, on Day One of next year we are going to begin to implement an aggressive strategy to reduce the cost of doing business in New York and make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“We will reform our workers’ compensation system to reduce the burden of high premiums while increasing benefits for most workers.”

“Second, we must break the political gridlock that is preventing reform of our broken and dysfunctional workers’ compensation system.”

“What was meant to be an insurance system that provided medical care and simple compensation to injured workers has become a morass that is seen by many workers as putting up unfair obstacles to receiving fair compensation for lost wages, and by many businesses as an increasingly burdensome cost that is forcing employers to leave the state.”

“The maximum benefit under workers’ comp has not been increased since 1994.”

“Both because it is the right thing to do and because it is necessary to build the coalition to achieve real reform, we will increase benefits to most injured workers.”

“But I want to be clear that the end result of our workers comp reforms must be to meaningfully reduce premiums.”

“In order to increase benefits for most injured workers while reducing premiums, our workers’ comp reforms must be bold and far reaching.”

“To really bring our workers’ comp costs in line with other states, we must confront the challenge of reforming our system of Permanent Partial Disability payments.”

“These payments make up less than 12 percent of claims, but they account for almost 75 percent of all costs.”

“All ideas, including caps on benefits for all but the most serious injuries, must be on the table as we bring our program into line with other states.”

“These changes should be accompanied by aggressive rehabilitation and retraining programs, so that workers can get back in the work force.”

“As Governor, I will immediately go to work to build the coalition we need to get this problem solved so that we can once and for all fix this enormous drag on the competitiveness of New York’s businesses.”

http://www.spitzerpaterson.com/main.cfm?ac...&s=spitzer3

That was on September 26, 2006, BEFORE Eliot Spitzer was elected Governor ….

Clearly, five months ago, Eliot Spitzer’s mind was already made up as to what he was going to do to appease the members of the New York State Business Council with respect to Worker’s Compensation ….

AND WHAT ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS ON BEHALF OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO REDUCING WORKER’S COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR PERMANENTLY DISABLED WORKERS IS OF ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER TO THE EMPLOYEES WHO DO SUFFER PERMAMENT DISABILITIES AT THE HANDS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL …

VICTIMS WHO ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS STRIP OF BENEFITS GUARANTEED BY THE BILL OF RIGHTS OF THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION WITHOUT THEM HAVING A VOICE IN THE MATTER ….

And then, curiously on Thursday, February 22, 2007, in an article entitled “Spitzer adds $18 million in funding to budget plan”, the Associated Press reported that “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer was adding $1 million to his budget to “coordinate research and talks to reform the worker’s compensation system” …..

Now that is indeed odd, adding this one million to the state budget on February 22nd of this year to “COORDINATE RESEARCH AND TALKS TO REFORM THE NEW YORK STATE WORKER’S COMPENSATION SYSTEM” when five months ago, Eliot Spitzer was making it quite clear to the New York State Business Council that his mind was already made up on what to do with Worker’s Compensation ….

Which would imply that by September 21, 2006, Eliot Spitzer had already done the necessary RESEARCH to substantiate his plan ….

SO?

Hhhhmmmm….

Where’s the cool million going then?

Into research on how many people are allegedly gaming the system?

In which case, it would seem that the system itself was CORRUPT, and there is where the real savings would come from, cleaning out the CORRUPTION from the Worker’s Compensation system itself, which is what Teddy Roosevelt would have done ….

But then, Teddy Roosevelt was not courting the favors of the New York State Business Council ….

And so …

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...ected/#comments

[Livyjr]

AND WHAT ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS ON BEHALF OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO REDUCING WORKER’S COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR PERMANENTLY DISABLED WORKERS IS OF ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER TO THE EMPLOYEES WHO DO SUFFER PERMAMENT DISABILITIES AT THE HANDS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL …

VICTIMS WHO ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS STRIP OF BENEFITS GUARANTEED BY THE BILL OF RIGHTS OF THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION WITHOUT THEM HAVING A VOICE IN THE MATTER ….

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...ected/#comments

"Workers' compensation reform measure introduced"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

Last updated: 3:21 p.m., Tuesday, February 27, 2007

ALBANY -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders joined labor and business lobbyists -- historically opposing voices in Albany -- to hail a new workers' compensation reform package that will increase benefits for injured employees and lower insurance rates for employers.

The "win/win'' for New Yorkers, as described by Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco and Spitzer, will come at the expense of people who would normally qualify for permanent partial disability payments.

Such workers now get compensation checks virtually forever for such things as bad backs, neck pain or shoulder irritations.

The reform caps the period of time that partially disabled people can collect coverage checks.

"This is a vital first step to reducing costs to businesses in New York State,'' said Business Council of New York State President Kenneth Adams.

He said the Business Council, officials with the AFL-CIO, legislative staffs and Spitzer's aides have worked privately since Dec. 1 to put the deal together.

It should save employers up to 15 percent in rates with substantial savings starting this summer, according to Peter Pope, Spitzer's policy advisor.

Workers would get a new maximum weekly benefit of $500, up from $400, and a new minimum of $100, up from $40.

The reforms and increases are the first since 1996.

Maximums will continue rise over time to $550 in the second year and $600 in the third year, eventually reaching two-thirds of the average weekly wage in New York, about $700.

After that, the benefit will rise with the cost of living.

The reform also includes anti-fraud measures that are expected to save $100 million a year by forcing more employers to pay into the system and prosecuting fraudulent claims.

Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said the legislation for the package will pass soon.

[Livyjr]

"Workers' compensation reform measure introduced"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

Last updated: 3:21 p.m., Tuesday, February 27, 2007

ALBANY -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders joined labor and business lobbyists -- historically opposing voices in Albany -- to hail a new workers' compensation reform package that will increase benefits for injured employees and lower insurance rates for employers.

The "win/win'' for New Yorkers, as described by Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco and Spitzer, will come at the expense of people who would normally qualify for permanent partial disability payments.

Such workers now get compensation checks virtually forever for such things as bad backs, neck pain or shoulder irritations.

The reform caps the period of time that partially disabled people can collect coverage checks.

"This is a vital first step to reducing costs to businesses in New York State,'' said Business Council of New York State President Kenneth Adams.

He said the Business Council, officials with the AFL-CIO, legislative staffs and Spitzer's aides have worked privately since Dec. 1 to put the deal together.

Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said the legislation for the package will pass soon.

"Spitzer's Senate choice wins - Victory in Nassau County for governor's handpicked candidate is a blow to Bruno"

By ELIZABETH BENJAMIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, February 7, 2007

ALBANY -- "I am here as the voice of the people...and my patience with leaders who fail to heed that call has run its course."

For years and years and years, now .....

Going back and back in time .....

Back into the last century ....

And the one before that .....

The 1800's .....

The PEOPLE of the State of New York ....

Have had a problem with CORRUPTION in OUR state government .....

And none of this, of course, is any kind of secret .....

It is more a story that people in other parts of the United States do not know .....

Because it is not happening where they are .....

AND UP UNTIL THIS COMPUTER FORUM .....

It is a story that has received no real media attention ...

THE MEDIA BEING A PART OF THE PROBLEM .....

And so .....

Here we are today ....

In this FORUM .....

And it is indeed a whole new day for those of us up here in the State of New York who have been literally WITHOUT A VOICE these last so many years ....

A VOICE IN WHAT GOES ON IN OUR COMMUNITIES ....

A VOICE IN WHAT GOES ON IN OUR STATE .....

And that is not at all by accident ......

To the contrary .....

IT IS BY INTENT ....

AND DESIGN ....

And so .....

We are without a voice in OUR state government up here for several reasons .....

Which boil down to either two .....

Or one, depending upon how you view the situation .....

AND THAT IS POWER, AND MONEY ....

Which feed each other .....

At least here in the State of New York ....

TO OUR DETRIMENT, THOSE OF US WHO ARE THE TAX-PAYING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, UP HERE IN THIS STATE .....

Those who profess to be OUR assemblymen and state senators up here ......

DO NOT ACTUALLY REPRESENT OUR INTERESTS .....

Partly because of the rules of the New York State Senate and Assembly which vest all of the power in the hands of two people .....

Which stifles any input that WE, THE PEOPLE might have, assuming that we actually had someone in there trustworthy and not already compromised to make input on OUR behalf ....

And largely because they simply do not have the time, they tell us, to be looking out for any concerns we might have ......

BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO BUSY RAISING MONEY FOR THEIR NEXT BID FOR THEIR NEXT OFFICE .....

Which brings us back to "PORK" ......

And why "PORK" is as much of an attitude, as it is anything else .....

A "SYMPTOM" of an UNDERLYING STRUCTURAL PROBLEM in OUR constitutional form of government here in the State of New York ......

WHICH HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ONE OF THE MOST DYSFUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENTS IN THE WHOLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA .....

And so .....

"Spitzer adds $18 million in funding to budget plan"

Associated Press

First published: Thursday, February 22, 2007

ALBANY -- Additions to Gov. Eliot Spitzer's 2007-08 state budget proposal would provide more money for Medicaid patients, raises for county prosecutors and funding for computers at private schools.

The additions would include money for:

$1 million to coordinate research and talks to reform the worker's compensation system.

On September 21, 2006, Eliot Spitzer met with the New York State Business Council at posh Bolton Landing on Lake George, and this is what he said that night to the members of the Business Council with regard to Worker’s Compensation in the State of New York, which incidentally is guaranteed by the BILL OF RIGHTS of OUR New York State Constitution, section 18 of Article I, and so cannot just be willy-nilly eliminated by popular whim:

“Ken, I look forward to working with you to make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“Over the past six months, I have been laying out a comprehensive plan for economic revitalization.”

“But today, I want to speak about what I believe should be our first priority, and that is making New York companies more competitive by improving our business climate.”

“Now let me just cite some of the other areas in which New York State needs to become more competitive.”

“Workers’ compensation premiums in our state are the eighth highest in the nation, even as the maximum benefit to workers ranks 49th nationally as a percentage of average weekly income.”

“Well, I have a message for you: If I am elected Governor, on Day One of next year we are going to begin to implement an aggressive strategy to reduce the cost of doing business in New York and make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“We will reform our workers’ compensation system to reduce the burden of high premiums while increasing benefits for most workers.”

“Second, we must break the political gridlock that is preventing reform of our broken and dysfunctional workers’ compensation system.”

“What was meant to be an insurance system that provided medical care and simple compensation to injured workers has become a morass that is seen by many workers as putting up unfair obstacles to receiving fair compensation for lost wages, and by many businesses as an increasingly burdensome cost that is forcing employers to leave the state.”

“The maximum benefit under workers’ comp has not been increased since 1994.”

“Both because it is the right thing to do and because it is necessary to build the coalition to achieve real reform, we will increase benefits to most injured workers.”

“But I want to be clear that the end result of our workers comp reforms must be to meaningfully reduce premiums.”

“In order to increase benefits for most injured workers while reducing premiums, our workers’ comp reforms must be bold and far reaching.”

“To really bring our workers’ comp costs in line with other states, we must confront the challenge of reforming our system of Permanent Partial Disability payments.”

“These payments make up less than 12 percent of claims, but they account for almost 75 percent of all costs.”

“All ideas, including caps on benefits for all but the most serious injuries, must be on the table as we bring our program into line with other states.”

“These changes should be accompanied by aggressive rehabilitation and retraining programs, so that workers can get back in the work force.”

“As Governor, I will immediately go to work to build the coalition we need to get this problem solved so that we can once and for all fix this enormous drag on the competitiveness of New York’s businesses.”

http://www.spitzerpaterson.com/main.cfm?ac...&s=spitzer3

That was on September 26, 2006, BEFORE Eliot Spitzer was elected Governor ….

Clearly, five months ago, Eliot Spitzer’s mind was already made up as to what he was going to do to appease the members of the New York State Business Council with respect to Worker’s Compensation ….

AND WHAT ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS ON BEHALF OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO REDUCING WORKER’S COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR PERMANENTLY DISABLED WORKERS IS OF ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER TO THE EMPLOYEES WHO DO SUFFER PERMAMENT DISABILITIES AT THE HANDS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL …

VICTIMS WHO ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS STRIP OF BENEFITS GUARANTEED BY THE BILL OF RIGHTS OF THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION WITHOUT THEM HAVING A VOICE IN THE MATTER ….

And then, curiously on Thursday, February 22, 2007, in an article entitled “Spitzer adds $18 million in funding to budget plan”, the Associated Press reported that “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer was adding $1 million to his budget to “coordinate research and talks to reform the worker’s compensation system” …..

Now that is indeed odd, adding this one million to the state budget on February 22nd of this year to “COORDINATE RESEARCH AND TALKS TO REFORM THE NEW YORK STATE WORKER’S COMPENSATION SYSTEM” when five months ago, Eliot Spitzer was making it quite clear to the New York State Business Council that his mind was already made up on what to do with Worker’s Compensation ….

Which would imply that by September 21, 2006, Eliot Spitzer had already done the necessary RESEARCH to substantiate his plan ….

SO?

Hhhhmmmm….

Where’s the cool million going then?

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...ected/#comments

And of course .....

That ONE MILLION DOLLARS ....

Is going into someone's pocket ....

TO SEAL THIS DEAL .....

I.e. "Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders joined labor and business lobbyists ...."

Which benefits the NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL AND MILLIONAIRE ELIOT SPITZER ...

At the expense of New York State's working class ...

AND THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WHO ARE THEMSELVES WITHOUT LOBBYISTS ....

TO BUY UP SOME LEGISLATORS FOR THEM ....

AND HENCE ....

HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO REPRESENTATION AT ALL IN OUR GOVERNMENT UP HERE ....

WHERE THE NEW YORK STATE LEGISLATURE IS FOR SALE TO THE HIGHEST BIDDERS ....

AND EVERYONE ELSE GETS TO SIT BY THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, POUNDING SAND ......

AND THAT IS THE WAY THINGS HAVE BEEN IN THIS STATE FOR FAR TOO LONG NOW ...

WHICH IS WHY PEOPLE ARE LEAVING ....

AND THIS THREAD IS NOW RUNNING .....

And so ....

Tuning in on the latest ...

AS TO WHERE THAT MILLION DOLLARS MAY HAVE GONE ....

WE HAVE ....

SOME SMILING FACES ....

And so ...

"Spring Thaw?"

February 27, 2007 at 2:17 pm by Elizabeth Benjamin

Legislative leaders and Gov. Eliot Spitzer were full of praise for each other at this afternoon’s Red Room press conference to announce reform of the workers compensation system - a priority of Spitzer’s on which he began working the day after he was elected.

The deal ends lifetime permanent partial disability benefits for injured workers, which accounts for nearly half the cost of the system but is generated by a very small percentage of claims.

It also as much as doubles benefits to workers in some cases while reducing premiums for employers.

Former Gov. George Pataki tried for years to get a deal on workers comp, but to no avail.

Business leaders complained New York had the highest premiums of any state, which they said was prohibitive to setting up shop here, while labor leaders complained about the nation’s lowest benefits for workers hurt on the job.

Spitzer tapped Ken Adams of the state Business Council and Denis Hughes of the state AFL-CIO to join the negotiations over this seemingly intractable issue, leading to a process in which, according to Adams, “facts and data trumped” ideology and partisanship.

“This is functional Albany,” Adams said.

“This is effective government.”

Spitzer praised the labor and business communities as well as the Legislature for their “remarkabe level of cooperation.”

“My hope is that this will set an example for the resolution of other issues that have languished in Albany for far too long,” the governor said.

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, who hasn’t exactly been seeing eye-to-eye with Spitzer recently, said the “key piece” missing from past negotiations was “leadership.

He credited Spitzer for bringing that to the table.

Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, R-Brunswick, whose conference is under political siege by Spitzer and his Democratic allies, thanked the governor for “helping to bring this together,” and said he has “done a tremendous service to this state.”

Bruno then delivered a mini-stemwinder, saying that the agreement had come because all sides “worked diligently.”

“Not by drawing a line in the sand, not by threatening, but by negotiating in good faith, and compromising,” Bruno continued.

“The process works."

"Balance works."

"Checks and balances work, and when people negotiate in good faith and understand that it can’t all be one way, and you compromise…”

At this point, Spitzer, who was laughing, broke in, saying:

“This is my room, don’t forget that.”

Bruno responded by jokingly putting his fingers in his ears, and said:

“I look forward to working with the governor, the speaker, my colleagues, with this same togetherness, congeniality, to get us an on-time budget with all the adjustments that have to be made.”

Asked later whether all this joviality and complimentary talk was a sign that he no longer has qualms about working with legislative leaders, Spitzer replied that he planned to continue to articulate his views “with clarity on every issue,” adding:

“Let me say this, as I said throughout, from the very first moment, whether Jan. 1 or any date thereafter, the people’s business will get done …"

"We will get it done.”

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/

end quotes

EXCEPT .....

THAT WAS NOT THE "PEOPLE'S BUSINESS" THAT JUST GOT DONE HERE ....

THAT WAS A BUSINESS DEAL ....

OF, BY, AND FOR A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP .....

BY ELIOT SPITZER, JOE BRUNO, JAMES TEDISCO AND SHELDON SILVERS ....

ON BEHALF OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL ....

WHICH DOES NOT REPRESENT THE "PEOPLE" OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR MANNER ....

WHICH AGAIN RAISES THE QUESTION OF WHERE THAT ONE MILLION DOLLARS THAT ELIOT SPITZER PUT INTO A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET IS REALLY GOING ....

INTO WHOSE POCKETS WILL IT LAND?

AND WHAT WILL IT BUY FOR ELIOT SPITZER WHEN IT DOES ....

WHICH ARE QUESTIONS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA NEVER ADDRESSES ....

OR EVEN QUESTIONS ...

NOTWITHSTANDING THAT IT WAS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT INTRODUCED THE ISSUE IN THE FIRST PLACE ...

BY REPORTING ON THE MYSTERIOUS MILLION DOLLARS GOING INTO THE STATE BUDGET ...

FOR A "DEAL" THAT WAS ALREADY DONE ....

AGAIN ACCORDING TO THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA .....

And so ...

[Livyjr]

EXCEPT .....

THAT WAS NOT THE "PEOPLE'S BUSINESS" THAT JUST GOT DONE HERE ....

THAT WAS A BUSINESS DEAL ....

OF, BY, AND FOR A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP .....

BY ELIOT SPITZER, JOE BRUNO, JAMES TEDISCO AND SHELDON SILVERS ....

ON BEHALF OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL ....

WHICH DOES NOT REPRESENT THE "PEOPLE" OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR MANNER ....

WHICH AGAIN RAISES THE QUESTION OF WHERE THAT ONE MILLION DOLLARS THAT ELIOT SPITZER PUT INTO A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET IS REALLY GOING ....

INTO WHOSE POCKETS WILL IT LAND?

AND WHAT WILL IT BUY FOR ELIOT SPITZER WHEN IT DOES ....

And there really is not a lot of mystery there, either ....

As to what BENEFIT Eliot Spitzer is getting ....

BY KOWTOWING AND BOWING AND SCRAPING TO THE POWERFUL NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL ....

FOR WHOM "THE STEAMROLLER" JUST DID A BIG FAVOR ....

And so ....

IT'S NOT ABOUT "THE PEOPLE" ....

OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

IT'S ABOUT ELIOT SPITZER ....

AND HIS AMBITIONS ....

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BE DAMNED ....

And so .....

"The Spitzer Primary"

The Spitzer for President chatter, which I touched on here, gets a bit of new life at the tail end of this article in the Sun about why the governor is undecided about moving up New York's presidential primaries.

Mr. Spitzer could be waiting for other large states to make their move before he proceeds.

By keeping his options open, he also preserves a bargaining chip that could come in handy in his dealings with the national Democratic Party.

Mr. Spitzer, who is widely believed to harbor presidential ambitions, also must be considering the impact an earlier date would have on his own chances in six or 10 years.

"It's not just about Hillary," said a Democratic political consultant, Hank Sheinkopf, who was an adviser to President Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign and also worked for Mr. Spitzer's first successful bid for attorney general in 1998.

"To presume that's how he's thinking about it is wrong."

"He's thinking about it in a larger context."

-- Azi Paybarah

http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2007/02/...er-primary.html

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DISABILITY LAW BLOG

"Insight on Spitzer's New York Workers' Compensation Reform Agreement"

Posted on February 27, 2007 by Troy Rosasco

Over the past few months, you may have noticed a precipitous drop in the number of posts to the New York Disability Lawyer Blog.

However, as Co-Chair of the New York Workers' Compensation Alliance, I've been doing the Albany shuffle along with some of my dedicated colleagues in an attempt to protect injured workers from any disastrous workers' comp reform.

Well - we're in the ninth inning now given Governor Spitzer's press conference today announcing a workers' compensation reform agreement between all the major players at the bargaining table.

It's been a long but hopefully worthwhile fight.

Give New York Governor Eliot Spitzer credit - he played his cards in the workers' compensation reform deal brilliantly and in the process has undone one of the pillars of the original law that was on the books for nearly 100 years - the permanent partial disability pension.

That's not to say that this pillar was not crumbling of it's own weight and didn't need some reforming.

After all, it had been around since the assassination of Prince Archduke Francis Ferdinand!

But like a historic neighborhood that is indelibly disturbed by the need for a three lane highway, it was rather sad to watch, especially for those of us who are a bit nostalgic when it comes to labor history.

The price of progress!

So, who are the winners and losers in the new reform deal?

Aside from the obvious political winners - Governor Spitzer, Assembly Speaker Silver and Senate Majority Leader Bruno - who all seemed to be playing nicely in the rose garden, the winners are as follows:

Injured workers earning over $600 per week, who will now see an immediate potential benefit increase;

Injured workers who will have greater access to real job retraining and rehabilitation;

Injured workers whose authorization for appropriate medical care will be sped up;

Injured workers whose claims will be resolved quicker due to the implementation of the new "Rocket Docket" proposed by the Workers' Compensation Alliance;

Employers who should see a 10-15% decrease in workers' comp premiums;

Honest employers who will no longer subsidize cheating employers due to new criminal employer fraud penalties;

Doctors who often waited months for authorization for much needed surgeries for their patients.

Now, as in any hard fought compromise, the inevitable losers:

Injured workers with permanent partial disabilities who cannot be rehabilitated for other work (i.e. the 58 year old carpenter with no high school degree, among others);

Injured workers earning less than $600 per week;

Dishonest employers who will now face felony criminal charges;

The New York Compensation Rating Board, which will be abolished;

The "Second Injury Fund", which will be phased out of existence;

Any others that we discover once the actual written bill details are released.

Teddy Roosevelt - excuse me... Eliot Spitzer! - chocks up one more win on the scorched earth reform path.

http://www.disabledworkerlaw.com/2007/02/a...form-agreement/

[Livyjr]

"Deal reforms 'broken' workers' comp system - Spitzer, Legislature unveil changes to boost benefits, cut costs for businesses"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

ALBANY -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders Tuesday joined labor and business lobbyists -- historically opposing voices in Albany -- to hail a new workers' compensation reform plan that will increase benefits for injured employees and lower insurance rates for employers.

The "win/win" for New Yorkers, as described by Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco and Spitzer, will come at the expense of people who would normally qualify for payments for their "permanent partial disability."

Such workers now get compensation checks virtually forever for such things as bad backs, neck pain or shoulder irritations.

The reform caps the period of time that partially disabled people will be able to collect coverage checks.

Spitzer said the law will be applied prospectively to allow current recipients to continue receiving compensation.

Further, partially disabled people will continue to receive lifetime medical services and get training to help them return to work.

The state could also intervene to be reclassify such people as hardship cases.

"This is a vital first step to reducing costs to businesses in New York state," said Business Council of New York State President Kenneth Adams.

He said the savings could be enormous, particularly by reducing the years of benefits to partially disabled people.

They make up 11 percent of the 76,000 annual workers' compensation cases each year, but represent 75 percent of the costs to the system, said Elliott Shaw, the Business Council's government affairs director.

Adams said the Business Council, officials with the AFL-CIO, legislative staffs and Spitzer's aides worked privately since Dec. 1 to put the deal together.

It should save employers up to 15 percent in rates, with substantial savings starting this summer, according to Peter Pope, Spitzer's policy director.

Workers would get a new maximum weekly benefit of $500, up from $400, and a new minimum of $100, up from $40.

The reforms are the first since 1996, while the benefit increases are the first since 1992.

"The last increase I got was 1992 when my payment went from $180 in 1991 to $215 in 1992 and it's been at that since," said Frederick Curtis, 62, a former New York City correction officer.

Spitzer said the weekly benefit for injured workers will increase significantly, although the formula for each class of worker will be spelled out in legislation.

"That's very, very positive."

"It's what I'm looking for so much."

"That's fantastic," said Curtis.

He said he suffers from post traumatic stress disorder stemming from an assault at Rikers Island in 1978 by an inmate.

He said he moved to Norfolk, Va., because it's more affordable on his fixed income.

Maximum payments will continue to rise over time -- to $550 in the second year and $600 in the third year.

In year four, two-thirds of the average weekly wage in New York will be the maximum.

That equates to about $700 currently.

After that, the benefit will rise with the cost of living.

Legislative leaders and AFL-CIO officials said the deal will improve New York's business climate while helping those who get hurt on the job.

Tedisco, R-Schenectady, said he was so impressed with the reform deal that he characterized Spitzer's first two months of office as an amazing success.

"Gov. Spitzer deserves a lot of credit for bringing together disparate groups and leaders to agree on a truly significant ... reform," he said.

Bruno, R-Brunswick, said the achievement this "reform" illustrates what can happen if the governor is willing to partner and compromise with the Legislature.

"This agreement is about jobs ..."

"More jobs, more opportunities," said Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan.

The reform also includes anti-fraud measures that are expected to save $100 million a year by forcing more employers to pay into the system and prosecuting fraudulent claims.

Bruno and Silver said the legislation for the package will pass soon.

The last reform, banged out by Gov. George Pataki more than a decade ago, could not be followed up by the Republican governor despite great demand by employers.

"This is a demonstration of functional Albany," said Adams.

The legislation includes new programs to get workers prompt medical treatment to prepare them to return to work and measures to allow the state to shut down and penalize employers who lack workers' compensation insurance.

The state insurance superintendent will be required to make sure insurers pass on savings and reduce premiums, starting in July.

Spitzer is also directing Insurance Superintendent Eric Dinallo to improve data collection, design a smoother hearing process to cut down on lawsuits and hasten treatment for injured workers, and create better medical guidelines and law judge training.

"This agreement not only addresses some of the most pressing needs and concerns of injured workers, but immeasurably improves a system long believed to be broken beyond repair," said Denis Hughes, president of the AFL-CIO.

James M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

end quotes

IT IS INDEED INTERESTING ....

THAT NO QUESTIONS ARE BEING RAISED ....

ABOUT THE "EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES" IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

THAT ARE CAUSING PEOPLE TO BE PERMANENTLY DISABLED AS A RESULT .....

TO MAKE NEW YORK STATE THE "BEST PLACE TO DO BUSINESS IN ALL THE WORLD" ....

NEW YORK STATE GOVERNOR ELIOT SPITZER AND THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL .....

HAVE SUCH MODELS TO DRAW UPON ....

FOR "WORKER'S RIGHTS" ....

AS MEXICO ....

SAIPAN IN THE MARIANAS ISLANDS ....

SRI LANKA ....

MYNMAR ....

INDONESIA ....

CHINA ....

All of whom Spitzer intends to match ....

When it comes to BID-NESS interests in the State of New York ....

WHERE THE COMMON PEOPLE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO VOICE AT ALL ....

SINCE THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO BUY ONE ....

AS THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN ....

WHICH IS HOW IT SHOULD BE ....

ACCORDING TO "STEAMROLLER" SPITZER ....

AND THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL ....

TO WHOM THE "STEAMROLLER" BOWS AND SCRAPES ....

BECAUSE HE NEEDS THEM LATER ON ...

WHEN HE MAKES HIS BID FOR PRESIDENT OF AMERICA ....

AND GOD HELP US COMMON FOLKS HERE IN OUR AMERICA THEN ...

And so ....

[Livyjr]

On September 21, 2006, Eliot Spitzer met with the New York State Business Council at posh Bolton Landing on Lake George, and this is what he said that night to the members of the Business Council with regard to Worker’s Compensation in the State of New York, which incidentally is guaranteed by the BILL OF RIGHTS of OUR New York State Constitution, section 18 of Article I, and so cannot just be willy-nilly eliminated by popular whim:

“Ken, I look forward to working with you to make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“Over the past six months, I have been laying out a comprehensive plan for economic revitalization.”

“But today, I want to speak about what I believe should be our first priority, and that is making New York companies more competitive by improving our business climate.”

“Now let me just cite some of the other areas in which New York State needs to become more competitive.”

“Workers’ compensation premiums in our state are the eighth highest in the nation, even as the maximum benefit to workers ranks 49th nationally as a percentage of average weekly income.”

“Well, I have a message for you: If I am elected Governor, on Day One of next year we are going to begin to implement an aggressive strategy to reduce the cost of doing business in New York and make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“We will reform our workers’ compensation system to reduce the burden of high premiums while increasing benefits for most workers.”

“Second, we must break the political gridlock that is preventing reform of our broken and dysfunctional workers’ compensation system.”

"Deal reforms 'broken' workers' comp system - Spitzer, Legislature unveil changes to boost benefits, cut costs for businesses"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

ALBANY -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders Tuesday joined labor and business lobbyists -- historically opposing voices in Albany -- to hail a new workers' compensation reform plan that will increase benefits for injured employees and lower insurance rates for employers.

Adams said the Business Council, officials with the AFL-CIO, legislative staffs and Spitzer's aides worked privately since Dec. 1 to put the deal together.

"This agreement not only addresses some of the most pressing needs and concerns of injured workers, but immeasurably improves a system long believed to be broken beyond repair," said Denis Hughes, president of the AFL-CIO.

"EVEN THOUGH ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1989 ..."

"ABOUT ONE YEAR THEREAFTER ...."

"THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS SUCCESSFULLY ARGUING IN THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT THAT:"

"The combination of a GENERALLY OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT and a specific triggering event causing psychiatric disability HAS LONG BEEN RECOGNIZED AS A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR A FINDING OF ACCIDENT UNDER THE (NEW YORK STATE) WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW."

When we up-state folks hear New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer talk about .....

"Reform of our broken and dysfunctional workers’ compensation system ...."

Or when we hear Denis Hughes, president of the AFL-CIO .....

Talk about ....

"A system long believed to be broken beyond repair ...."

Our attention is immediately drawn ....

To a thick file in the public records up here in Joe Bruno's personal fiefdom of Rensselaer County in the State of New York ....

A thick file of public records in the Matter of Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer v. Rensselaer County Department of Health in Worker's Compensation Court right here in the State of New York ....

A case which the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer won .....

By stipulation ....

For permanent partial disability .....

After the New York State Worker's Compensation Review Board in New York City ruled in his favor on August 14, 1991 ....

Based upon the BEDROCK LAW in the State of New York that:

"The combination of a GENERALLY OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT and a specific triggering event causing psychiatric disability HAS LONG BEEN RECOGNIZED AS A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR A FINDING OF ACCIDENT UNDER THE (NEW YORK STATE) WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW ....."

The permanent partial disability in question stemming directly from an assault on the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer by a back-hoe operator in the Town of Sand Lake in Rensselaer County on 07/29/88 .....

That almost decapitated the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer ....

And resulted in a rapid decline in his health that has caused him to never work again in the capacity of an associate public health engineer in the State of New York ....

For which permanently-disabling injuries suffered at the hands of the County of Rensselaer, which is Joe Bruno's COUNTY, the Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer was finally awarded Worker's Compensation benefits of $150 per week in or about 1991, after being out of work without an income due to this rapid decline in health after October 12, 1988 .....

A period of some three years ....

Without any income ....

Because of an assault .....

On his person, as the local health officer in Rensselaer County, enforcing the provisions of the New York State Public Health Law ....

And as there is one document in that file in particular which speaks directly to what New York State Gover Eliot Spitzer is referring to when he calls the New York State Worker's Compensation Court system "broken and dysfunctional" ...

I find it instructive at this point in this discussion to quote directly from that letter .....

ESPECIALLY AS ANY RESEARCH ....

That New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer, or Joe Bruno, or James Tedisco or Sheldon Silver or Ken Adams of the New York State Business Council or Denis Hughes, president of the AFL-CIO .....

Might have done ...

Into the question of HOW the New York State Worker's Compensation court system is DYSFUNCTIONAL ....

Would have had to consider the points raised in this very document ....

WHICH IS AN OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

AND WHEN YOU ARE READING THIS LETTER ....

KEEP IN MIND THE FACT ....

BEYOND THE FACT THAT THE AUTHOR OF THIS LETTER WAS SUCCESSFUL IN PROSECUTING THIS CASE ....

OF PERMANENT DISABILITY DUE OF A CAMPAIGN OF PSYCHOLOGICAL HARASSMENT AGAINST HIM ....

BY THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER ....

THAT RESULTED IN THE BACK-HOE ASSAULT ....

THAT IT IS THIS "CLASS OF PERSON" .....

THAT ELIOT SPITZER AND JOE BRUNO AND JAMES TEDISCO AND SHELDON SILVER AND KEN ADAMS AND DENIS HUGHES ....

HAVE CUT OUT OF HAVING ANY ELIGIBILITY FOR WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS ....

IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

UNDER ELIOT SPITZER'S NEW SCHEME OF THINGS ...

And so ....

Without further ado ....

Worker's Compensation Board
180 Livingston Street
Brooklyn, New York 11248

ATTN: REVIEW BOARD

RE: Rebuttal of Carrier's Correspondence; April 2, 1991
Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer V. Rensselaer County Health Department

Gentlemen:

I am the CLAIMANT in the above-captioned Worker's Compensation case.

Please accept this letter as the CLAIMANT'S response to the carrier's (Lawyers for the insurance carrier for the Rensselaer County Department of Health) letter of April 2, 1991 CONCLUDING THE THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED WORKER'S COMPENSATION CASE SHOULD REMAIN CLOSED.

THE CARRIER'S CONCLUSION THAT THE CASE SHOULD REMAIN CLOSED IS MADE IN ERROR, AND IN LIGHT OF THE FACTS IN THE RECORD IN THE INSTANT MATTER, THE CONCLUSION IS UNFOUNDED.

As the carrier notes, there were in fact several hearings scheduled in the matter.

However, while the hearing dates were set, a REVIEW OF THE RECORD will reveal that on three separate occasions, there was no actual opportunity for a hearing afforded to myself.

Further, the carrier is in error in stating that THREE SEPARATE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES were of the opinion that no evidence had been proffered to allow the case to go forward.

At the initial hearing on or about April 4, 1990, I appeared pro se before Administrative Law Judge Mary Elizabeth Dunne.

At that time, Judge Dunne advised me that the initial paperwork filed in support of my claim would need to be buttressed with additional medical evidence to establish a prima facie case PURSUANT TO WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW.

At the second hearing on or about May 20, 1990 I was still acting pro se.

At that time, I presented Judge Dunne with a letter from Dr. Lawrence Kolb.

CONTRARY TO THE CARRIER'S ASSERTIONS, AND DESPITE THEIR QUITE VOCIFEROUS AND VOCAL OBJECTIONS, JUDGE DUNNE RULED THAT THE LETTER FROM DR. KOLB, WHEN TAKEN TOGETHER WITH THE OCTOBER 12, 1988 MEMORANDUM FROM RENSSELAER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR KENNETH VAN PRAAG TO RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO REFERENCING MR. VAN PRAAG'S CONCERNS FOR MY HEALTH, AND THE OCTOBER 13, 1988 LETTER FROM MR. VAN PRAAG TO NEW YORK STATE REGIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR DR. IAN LOUDON REFERENCING THE FACT THAT MR. VAN PRAAG HAD AFFORDED ME A LEAVE FOR HEALTH REASONS DID IN FACT CONSTITUTE PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW; AND JUDGE DUNNE RULED FURTHER THAT IT WAS A CASE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL HARASSMENT.

AFTER JUDGE DUNNE MADE THOSE DECISIONS, SHE WAS REMOVED FROM MY CASE FOR REASONS THAT WERE NEVER MADE CLEAR TO ME.

THE CASE WAS THEN ALLEGEDLY TRANSFERRED TO ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE KIRIN MOLLOY.

On or about July 9, 1990, I was scheduled to appear before Judge Molloy to begin giving my testimony.

WHAT TOOK PLACE INSTEAD WAS A NEGOTIATING SESSION BETWEEN THE CARRIER AND THE JUDGE WHEREIN IT WAS AGREED THAT MY CASE WOULD BE DISMISSED.

At that point, I interjected and requested an opportunity to speak to the issue.

I pointed out to Judge Molloy that pursuant to Public Health Law section 10, the October 13, 1988 letter from Rensselaer County Director of Public Health Kenneth Van Praag to New York State Regional Public Health Director Dr. Ian Loudon was PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE of what was contained therein in ALL courts and places.

I pointed out further to Judge Molloy that the October 12, 1988 communication from Mr. Van Praag to Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono WAS AN OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORD, and would also be PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE given the provisions of CPLR 4520.

I REQUESTED OF JUDGE MOLLOY AN EXPLANATION AS TO HOW HE COULD SIMPLY DISMISS OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT RECORDS WHEN THOSE RECORDS BECAME INCONVENIENT, SUCH AS IN CASES LIKE MINE.

AT THAT POINT, JUDGE MOLLOY LITERALLY THREW HIS HANDS IN THE AIR, AND DISMISSED HIMSELF ON THE SPOT, STATING THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN POLITICS IN RENSSELAER COUNTY AND DID NOT WANT TO GET INVOLVED.

THE CARRIER'S CONTENTION THAT JUDGE MOLLOY RULED AGAINST MY CLAIM IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

Subsequent to the recusal of Judge Molloy, the matter was transferred to Judge Meader.

A hearing was scheduled for August 13, 1990.

The hearing notice furnished to myself clearly noted the purpose of the hearing as "FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE RECORD."

On August 12, 1990 I received a telephone call from the Worker's Compensation Bureau in Menands requesting me to come into a conference with Judge Meader on that day, as opposed to August 13, 1990.

I arranged transportation down to Menands and was informed upon arriving by Judge Meader himself that due to some unfortunate error, I wasn't able to be afforded an opportunity to testify as originally scheduled, and I would have to wait for another opportunity.

The next scheduled date for me to testify wasn't until October 5, 1990.

I arrived early for my 10:30 A.M. appointment AND I SAT IN THE FOYER UNTIL APPROXIMATELY 12:20 P.M., at which time Judge Meader apologized profusely to me about scheduling errors, and such things, and again I was informed that I would have to wait for another appointment.

The next appointment was scheduled for December 13, 1990.

The purpose of the hearing as listed on the EC-16 form that I received in the mail is clearly indicated as "TESTIMONY OF CLAIMANT".

WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE SCHEDULED TIME, IMMEDIATELY JUDGE MEADER ATTEMPTED TO CANCEL THE HEARING, AND HAVE IT RESCHEDULED FOR ANOTHER LATER DATE.

At that time, my attorney, Mr. Brendan Quinn, strenuously objected on the record, stating that the hearing was scheduled, and I was, and had been for some time, fully prepared to testify as to the facts in the case.

THE CARRIER THEN LOUDLY BEGAN TO PROTEST ABOUT THE INJUSTICES THAT WOULD COME ABOUT AS A RESULT OF MY TESTIMONY, AND REMAINED INSISTENT THAT JUDGE MEADER MUST AT ALL COSTS NOT ALLOW ME TO TESTIFY.

AT THAT POINT IN THE PROCEEDING, JUDGE MEADER THREW HIS HANDS IN THE AIR, CRYING "YOU LEAVE ME NO CHOICE", AND WITH THAT, HE DISMISSED MY CASE.

FOR THESE REASONS, THIS CASE SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.

CONCLUSION

THIS CASE SHOULD BE RE-OPENED ON A FINDING OF PRIMA FACIE MEDICAL EVIDENCE.

Respectfully submitted,

[Livyjr]

And as of this morning .....

The "PORK-O-CRACY" in the State of New York appears to be quite alive .....

And doing very well for itself ....

As it feels it should ....

After all ....

PUBLIC SERVICE ....

SHOULD NOT BE ABOUT SERVING THE PUBLIC ...

RATHER ...

IT IS ABOUT GETTING INTO THE PUBLIC'S PANTS POCKETS ....

AND LIVING HERE ....

Making your own life better ...

At their expense ...

Like rats in a farmer's corn crib ....

Or weevils in the flour ....

And so ....

"Lifetime perk draws scrutiny - Lawmaker says members of state boards may have erred in giving themselves health coverage benefit"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 26, 2007

ALBANY -- Board members of two state agencies charged with helping create affordable housing in New York voted last year to use state funds to give themselves and their spouses lifetime health insurance, according to board members.

The six-member Housing Finance Agency and the eight-member New York State Mortgage Association boards gave themselves the benefits as a payback for service, said former Sen. Howard C. Nolan, an appointee of the comptroller's office to the SONYMA board.

He said the benefit seemed reasonable given the unpaid service board members provide the state, and the need to "attract quality people."

However, a lawmaker who oversees public authorities said the benefit may be an illegal bonus for board members who are not supposed to be compensated.

"It's an apparent violation of the laws creating SONYMA which do not permit compensation," said Assembly Corporations Committee Chairman Richard Brodsky, D-White Plains.

Brodsky said he was unaware of the health benefit vote until a reporter told him about it this week.

He promised his committee will be "looking at it very seriously."

Nolan said the boards voted for lifetime health insurance.

"A lot of people won't serve unless they get a touch of the hat," said Nolan, who represented Albany County in the Senate.

"State perk called illegal - Cuomo says health insurance giveaway by two housing agencies shows need for reform"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, March 1, 2007

ALBANY -- Two public agencies have been illegally paying for health care benefits of directors who are supposed to serve the state without compensation, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said Wednesday.

In a legal opinion that could have wide ramifications, the first-term Democrat said in a 10-page letter that the agencies have no legal right to pick up the premiums for board members and that the deals are null and void.

He determined that contracts entered into by the State of New York Mortgage Agency and the New York State Housing Finance Agency violated civil service law.

Cuomo said the boards went beyond their authority in reimbursing retired board members for personal and family insurance policies and paying premiums for current board members.

Although the opinion is specific to the two housing agencies, it could also affect other public authorities that are paying for members' health insurance.

At least one other, the Power Authority of the State of New York, is believed to be paying premiums for board members, said a state official who did not want to be identified.

A spokesman for the Power Authority did not return a call.

Cuomo's aides said he would have to examine each agency's enacting legislation to be sure that any such deals are also illegal but added that all were created under similar terms.

His aides said he is reviewing the practices of all public authorities and views the new ruling as a springboard for a statewide application of the opinion.

Cuomo's review arose after the Times Union reported in January that the two housing agencies' board members voted to provide themselves lifetime health insurance.

The vote, first taken in 2005 and reaffirmed in 2006, followed a practice the boards embraced in 1998 of providing current board members life insurance coverage.

The two authorities, Cuomo said, not only broke the law, but misinterpreted a law against compensating board members.

"New Yorkers are demanding reform, integrity and accountability from government agencies across the board," Cuomo said.

"This is another example of why we need to bring openness and accountability to public authorities."

The letter went to Justin E. Driscoll, the counsel for the two public authorities.

Driscoll advised the boards it was appropriate to have their insurance premiums picked up by the state agencies.

He did not return a call.

His new boss, Priscilla Almodovar, who was appointed by Gov. Eliot Spitzer to run the agencies charged with providing housing for low- and moderate-income New Yorkers, said she sought the ruling from Cuomo and is pleased at his prompt response.

"The practice will now end," she said.

"All the other authorities are on notice."

Former Sen. Howard Nolan, one of the SONYMA directors who voted for the lifetime health insurance, said the votes came after lawyers for former Gov. George Pataki and the housing agency provided guidance.

"Our counsel and the previous governor's counsel said it was legal," Nolan said.

"It was a situation where Gov. Pataki essentially cleared this."

Almodovar did not know exactly how many members have been getting health insurance or the cost to the agencies.

She said she thought it was three retirees and three current members.

The retirees' premiums came due in February and she put a stop to their payment beforehand, she said.

Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, D-Westchester County, chairman of his chamber's oversight committee on public authorities, said he is looking at several local authorities "which may have run afoul of related legal restrictions."

"We are doing a review of all the authorities," he said.

M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

end quotes

It would not be surprising if George Pataki allowed a state agency to violate state law .....

It would not be surprising at all ...

Because that is the essence of politics up here ....

One hand ....

In this case Pataki ....

Washing another ....

Those members of these boards who will not serve ...

Without the "TOUCH OF THE HAT" ....

Politics is about being owed favors, after all ...

A lot like it was in kindergarten ....

For the rest of us ....

Who grew up .....

When we got out of high school ....

Unlike the politicians ....

Who keep kindergarten there with them, forever ....

And so ...

[Livyjr]

NY TIMES

"Spitzer Cuts Budget Request by Panel That Polices Judges"

By WILLIAM GLABERSON

Published: February 28, 2007

There is growing agreement in Albany that New York State’s town and village courts are in need of help after decades of neglect, meager financing and inadequate training of the justices, many of whom do not even have a high-school diploma.

There also is widespread agreement that one bright spot has been the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

Despite years of budget cuts, the commission has provided the only meaningful oversight for the state’s 2,000 town and village justices, disciplining or removing them when they ignore the law or violate people’s rights.

So some state officials were startled to discover that Gov. Eliot Spitzer, in his first budget proposal, had rejected a commission request for a substantial increase in financing.

“They need more attorneys, and they need more investigators,” said Helene E. Weinstein, the Brooklyn Democrat who is chairwoman of the Assembly’s Judiciary Committee.

Her Republican counterpart on the State Senate Judiciary Committee, John A. DeFrancisco of Syracuse, said he had proposed that the Legislature provide a big increase in the commission’s budget.

The judicial conduct commission, which investigates complaints against all state judges, handles twice as many cases as it did when it was created in 1978.

Yet its current staff of 28 is fewer than half the 63 it had at the start.

Last year, the agency’s eight lawyers handled 1,500 complaints across the state.

Rejecting the commission’s request for a $2.2 million increase in its $2.8 million annual budget, Governor Spitzer’s proposal would add just $22,000 for the next fiscal year.

The commission says that is not enough to cover rising rent and other costs.

“We’ve initiated a dialogue with them to determine their funding needs,” said Jennifer Givner, a spokeswoman for the governor, though she acknowledged that the time allotted for the governor to alter his proposal ended last week.

The Legislature could grant the judicial conduct commission’s request, though it could get lost among multibillion-dollar battles over issues like health care and education financing.

In most years, the commission has not fared well with the Legislature, in part because there is no strong lobby for increasing the policing of the state’s judges.

But even the State Magistrates Association, made up of town and village justices, has said the state may need to examine whether the commission has enough financing.

“The commission is the check and balance,” said Edward G. Van Der Water, a justice in Van Buren, N.Y., who is a vice president of the association.

Concern over town and village courts, or justice courts, has mounted in the past year as news articles and state investigations have turned up evidence of ill-trained justices and ill-equipped courts.

The state’s chief judge, Judith S. Kaye, has asked the Legislature for $50 million over the next five years to upgrade the courts, and a commission she appointed is studying the system.

The Commission on Judicial Conduct says that its backlog of disciplinary cases is growing and that it is having difficulty investigating all the complaints it receives.

The commission’s seven investigators spend much of their time proofreading legal transcripts because the money to hire stenographers disappeared long ago.

Robert H. Tembeckjian, the commission’s administrator, said cases against judges at all levels were taking longer to resolve because of staff shortages.

Most of the commission’s time, he said, is spent reviewing complaints against town and village justices.

Many of those investigations have led to serious accusations, and 130 town and village justices have been removed from office or resigned while facing disciplinary charges during the commission’s 29-year history.

“Without adequate resources to deal with all the legitimate complaints against town and villages justices,” Mr. Tembeckjian said, “there isn’t as effective oversight as there should be.”

In response to questions from a reporter, an official in the Spitzer administration suggested that the governor’s aides had not been persuaded that the commission needed more resources.

“We are awaiting justification to show that the need is there,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Mr. Tembeckjian said he was surprised by that response because he had provided extensive documentation to budget officials and had not been asked for more.

“I have been advised by the governor’s office that I should turn my attention to the Legislature,” he said.

Some of those who had urged Governor Spitzer to grant the commission’s request said growing concerns about the fairness of the justice courts made it essential to increase the agency’s resources.

Victor A. Kovner, chairman of the Committee for Modern Courts, an independent group that lobbies for improvements in New York’s judicial system, said it was important for the credibility of the entire court system that the judicial monitoring agency receive adequate money.

With increased questions about the town and village courts, he said, it is critical that New Yorkers have a strong agency to monitor those courts.

“Among the things that are important to address shortcomings in the town and village courts,” Mr. Kovner said, “is an adequate system of review of complaints.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/28/nyregion...amp;oref=slogin

end quotes

As this thread has shown, however ....

A KEY TO ELIOT SPITZER'S POLITICAL POWER ....

IS HAVING JUDGES AT HIS BECK AND CALL ....

WHO WILL BEND AND TWIST THE LAW ....

AND WHO DON'T HAVE ANY COMPUNCTIONS ....

ABOUT TOSSING OUR RIGHTS ....

RIGHT INTO THE TRASH CAN ....

And so ....

AFTER FOLLOWING THIS THREAD FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS ....

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...mp;#entry693012

WHO OUT THERE ....

WOULD BE SURPRISED ....

THAT ELIOT SPITZER ....

IS STRANGLING THE REVIEW OF MISCONDUCT BY JUDGES ....

HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

WHERE THE ESSENCE OF POLITICAL POWER ...

IS BEING OWED FAVORS ....

BY THOSE WHO ARE BEHOLDEN TO YOU ....

ESPECIALLY JUDGES ....

WITH THE POWER OVER OUR LIVES ....

THAT THEY NOW HOLD ....

THANKS TO ELIOT SPITZER ....

AND THE UNLAWFUL "PSYCHIATRIC TAKEDOWN" ....

THAT ALLOWS ELIOT SPITZER ....

TO "REMOVE FROM SOCIETY" .....

ANYONE AT ALL ....

AT ANY TIME ...

WITH JUST THE FLICK OF HIS FINGERS ....

IF HE PERCEIVES THEM TO BE ...

A "THREAT" ....

TO HIS "POWER" ....

And so ...

[Livyjr]

"Doubt cast on Bruno's leadership - Federal investigation could be problem for Senate majority leader when lawmakers vote on top post"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, December 22, 2006

ALBANY -- Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno's hold on his leadership post may be slipping.

Privately, Senate officials are beginning to discuss the possibility of a different leader Jan. 3, when the vote on the powerful, $121,000-a-year post is scheduled.

And at least one Republican member is already talking publicly about a switch now that Bruno is being investigated by a federal grand jury.

"He's been damaged and this ongoing investigation will impair his ability to lead," said Sen. John Bonacic, R-New Paltz, according to the Times Herald-Record online.

"He should step down as majority leader, even if it's temporarily, until the cloud is removed."

end quotes

"BIG JOE" Bruno, the "IRON DUKE" of Rensselaer County in the CORRUPT REPUBLICAN EMPIRE of New York .....

Chose for himself .....

The role of ALPHA WOLF ......

In the REPUBLICAN PACK of wolves up here ......

And now .....

Maybe the "IRON DUKE" is getting a bit weak .....

And as always ...

There are younger wolves watching .....

And waiting .....

And soon ...

They are going to make a run at "BIG JOE" ......

Teeth flashing in the moonlight .....

SNARLING .....

SNAPPING .....

As they tear the carcass of the "IRON DUKE" to pieces .....

So that someone else can assume his mantle .....

Direct all that CASH FLOW into their pocket .....

Instead of his ....

And so ...

February 28, 2007

"Pawn to king four"

With Democrats threatening to snatch the majority in the state Senate for the first time since the 1960s, embattled GOP Leader Joe Bruno has just made a very provocative decision -- appointing Brooklyn Dem Carl Kruger as chairman of the Social Services Committee.

Bruno has repeatedly "flipped" Democrats to his party in recent years, and has reportedly tried to woo Kruger in the past.

But Kruger immediately declared that he would not change parties or sit with the Republican conference.

And, in a joint press conference with Senate Democratic Leader Malcolm Smith, said he still wants to see Smith ascend to majority leader "sooner rather than later."

Apart from the higher stipend that goes with the chairmanship, Kruger denied receiving any inducements from Bruno.

"There was no quid pro quo," he said.

"I made, nor was I asked to make any commitments."

"... I'm a Democrat."

"... We're going to do everything we can to achieve a majority, whether it's now or in 2008."

Bruno boasted that his cross-party appointment was a historical first and portrayed it as a gesture of bipartisanship and reform.

"The politics are over and we are governing," he said.

He said he hoped others would "stop playing games, stop daydreaming, stop hallucinating and govern."

This was a veiled reference to efforts by Smith and Gov. Spitzer to put Democrats in charge of the Senate -- by getting Republicans to either switch parties, take jobs in the Spitzer administration or retire.

But Smith insisted that Bruno "is about to lose his leadership."

"We're playing a little chess game, here," Smith said.

Bruno "made a move and we're going to make our moves as well."

"... As much as he's saying this is about dreaming, reality starts as a dream."

http://blogs.nydailynews.com/dailypolitics..._to_king_fo.php

[Livyjr]

And a bit more news ....

About how the PORK-O-CRACY operates .....

Up here ....

In the CORRUPT EMPIRE .....

Of NEW YORK .....

Where it is "GO ALONG TO GET ALONG" .....

Or ...

"LEAVE YOUR INTEGRITY AT THE DOOR ..."

"IF YOU WANT TO PLAY THE GAME ..."

"GET YOURSELF SOME BOODLE ..."

"IF YOU'LL JUST MAKE NICE TO THE PEOPLE OF QUALITY ..."

"YOU KNOW ..."

"GIVE THEM A TOUCH OF THE HAT ..."

"AND THEY WILL GIVE YOU SOME CANDY IN RETURN ..."

From out of OUR pockets, of course ...

THE TAXPAYERS .....

Because that is what we are here for, after all ....

TO BE THE "CASH COWS" .....

OFF OF WHICH THE WHOLE HOGS ....

OR "PORKERS" .....

FEED ....

And so ....

"Owning up to health perks - Two agencies acknowledge providing coverage to board members despite state rules"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, March 2, 2007

ALBANY -- The state Power Authority and Thruway Authority acknowledged Thursday the public is paying tens of thousands of dollars a year for health insurance for current and former board members who are supposed to serve without compensation.

The revelation came the day after Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said it's illegal for authorities to reward uncompensated directors with such perks.

His analysis focused on the New York Housing Finance Agency and the State of New York Mortgage Agency, which provided active board members dental and health coverage.

Last year, they also added retirees with 10 years of service, but halted the payments after a Times Union story in January.

Priscilla Almodovar, the head of the two housing authorities, said she stopped the perk for active board members, too, as a result of Cuomo's legal opinion.

Cuomo's aides suspected the ruling would apply to most public authorities, although a review of other agencies is incomplete.

Spokespersons for the Power Authority and Thruway Authority said their executives are trying to figure out if Cuomo's determination applies to their boards.

Betsy Graham, of the Thruway Authority and Canal Corp., said three of the seven board members of the combined Thruway/Canal Corp. board make use of the perk, for family coverage: Chairman John Buono, Nancy Carey Cassidy and Jeffrey Williams.

One retiree, John Riedman, who left in December after serving since 1999, uses it.

Graham did not know the cost.

Brian Vattimo, of the Power Authority, said one of the six board members uses the health coverage benefit, at a cost of $12,000 annually for the family coverage.

One retiree's health insurance is picked up, Vattimo said.

He would not release the names, saying the information is private.

The benefits, he said, could date to 1957.

He and Graham said the authorities believed the practice was allowed under a 1999 state Ethics Commission ruling.

The costs can add up.

HFA and SONYMA say they've paid $630,000 since 1998 for health and dental coverage for eight of the 15 current board members.

[Livyjr]

Worker's Compensation Board
180 Livingston Street
Brooklyn, New York 11248

ATTN: REVIEW BOARD

RE: Rebuttal of Carrier's Correspondence; April 2, 1991
Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer V. Rensselaer County Health Department

Gentlemen:

I am the CLAIMANT in the above-captioned Worker's Compensation case.

Please accept this letter as the CLAIMANT'S response to the carrier's (Lawyers for the insurance carrier for the Rensselaer County Department of Health) letter of April 2, 1991 CONCLUDING THE THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED WORKER'S COMPENSATION CASE SHOULD REMAIN CLOSED.

THE CARRIER'S CONCLUSION THAT THE CASE SHOULD REMAIN CLOSED IS MADE IN ERROR, AND IN LIGHT OF THE FACTS IN THE RECORD IN THE INSTANT MATTER, THE CONCLUSION IS UNFOUNDED.

As the carrier notes, there were in fact several hearings scheduled in the matter.

However, while the hearing dates were set, a REVIEW OF THE RECORD will reveal that on three separate occasions, there was no actual opportunity for a hearing afforded to myself.

Further, the carrier is in error in stating that THREE SEPARATE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES were of the opinion that no evidence had been proffered to allow the case to go forward.

At the initial hearing on or about April 4, 1990, I appeared pro se before Administrative Law Judge Mary Elizabeth Dunne.

At that time, Judge Dunne advised me that the initial paperwork filed in support of my claim would need to be buttressed with additional medical evidence to establish a prima facie case PURSUANT TO WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW.

At the second hearing on or about May 20, 1990 I was still acting pro se.

At that time, I presented Judge Dunne with a letter from Dr. Lawrence Kolb.

CONTRARY TO THE CARRIER'S ASSERTIONS, AND DESPITE THEIR QUITE VOCIFEROUS AND VOCAL OBJECTIONS, JUDGE DUNNE RULED THAT THE LETTER FROM DR. KOLB, WHEN TAKEN TOGETHER WITH THE OCTOBER 12, 1988 MEMORANDUM FROM RENSSELAER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR KENNETH VAN PRAAG TO RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO REFERENCING MR. VAN PRAAG'S CONCERNS FOR MY HEALTH, AND THE OCTOBER 13, 1988 LETTER FROM MR. VAN PRAAG TO NEW YORK STATE REGIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR DR. IAN LOUDON REFERENCING THE FACT THAT MR. VAN PRAAG HAD AFFORDED ME A LEAVE FOR HEALTH REASONS DID IN FACT CONSTITUTE PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW; AND JUDGE DUNNE RULED FURTHER THAT IT WAS A CASE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL HARASSMENT.

AFTER JUDGE DUNNE MADE THOSE DECISIONS, SHE WAS REMOVED FROM MY CASE FOR REASONS THAT WERE NEVER MADE CLEAR TO ME.

THE CASE WAS THEN ALLEGEDLY TRANSFERRED TO ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE KIRIN MOLLOY.

On or about July 9, 1990, I was scheduled to appear before Judge Molloy to begin giving my testimony.

WHAT TOOK PLACE INSTEAD WAS A NEGOTIATING SESSION BETWEEN THE CARRIER AND THE JUDGE WHEREIN IT WAS AGREED THAT MY CASE WOULD BE DISMISSED.

At that point, I interjected and requested an opportunity to speak to the issue.

I pointed out to Judge Molloy that pursuant to Public Health Law section 10, the October 13, 1988 letter from Rensselaer County Director of Public Health Kenneth Van Praag to New York State Regional Public Health Director Dr. Ian Loudon was PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE of what was contained therein in ALL courts and places.

I pointed out further to Judge Molloy that the October 12, 1988 communication from Mr. Van Praag to Rensselaer County Executive John L. Buono WAS AN OFFICIAL PUBLIC RECORD, and would also be PRESUMPTIVE EVIDENCE given the provisions of CPLR 4520.

I REQUESTED OF JUDGE MOLLOY AN EXPLANATION AS TO HOW HE COULD SIMPLY DISMISS OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT RECORDS WHEN THOSE RECORDS BECAME INCONVENIENT, SUCH AS IN CASES LIKE MINE.

AT THAT POINT, JUDGE MOLLOY LITERALLY THREW HIS HANDS IN THE AIR, AND DISMISSED HIMSELF ON THE SPOT, STATING THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN POLITICS IN RENSSELAER COUNTY AND DID NOT WANT TO GET INVOLVED.

THE CARRIER'S CONTENTION THAT JUDGE MOLLOY RULED AGAINST MY CLAIM IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

Subsequent to the recusal of Judge Molloy, the matter was transferred to Judge Meader.

A hearing was scheduled for August 13, 1990.

The hearing notice furnished to myself clearly noted the purpose of the hearing as "FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE RECORD."

On August 12, 1990 I received a telephone call from the Worker's Compensation Bureau in Menands requesting me to come into a conference with Judge Meader on that day, as opposed to August 13, 1990.

I arranged transportation down to Menands and was informed upon arriving by Judge Meader himself that due to some unfortunate error, I wasn't able to be afforded an opportunity to testify as originally scheduled, and I would have to wait for another opportunity.

The next scheduled date for me to testify wasn't until October 5, 1990.

I arrived early for my 10:30 A.M. appointment AND I SAT IN THE FOYER UNTIL APPROXIMATELY 12:20 P.M., at which time Judge Meader apologized profusely to me about scheduling errors, and such things, and again I was informed that I would have to wait for another appointment.

The next appointment was scheduled for December 13, 1990.

The purpose of the hearing as listed on the EC-16 form that I received in the mail is clearly indicated as "TESTIMONY OF CLAIMANT".

WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE SCHEDULED TIME, IMMEDIATELY JUDGE MEADER ATTEMPTED TO CANCEL THE HEARING, AND HAVE IT RESCHEDULED FOR ANOTHER LATER DATE.

At that time, my attorney, Mr. Brendan Quinn, strenuously objected on the record, stating that the hearing was scheduled, and I was, and had been for some time, fully prepared to testify as to the facts in the case.

THE CARRIER THEN LOUDLY BEGAN TO PROTEST ABOUT THE INJUSTICES THAT WOULD COME ABOUT AS A RESULT OF MY TESTIMONY, AND REMAINED INSISTENT THAT JUDGE MEADER MUST AT ALL COSTS NOT ALLOW ME TO TESTIFY.

AT THAT POINT IN THE PROCEEDING, JUDGE MEADER THREW HIS HANDS IN THE AIR, CRYING "YOU LEAVE ME NO CHOICE", AND WITH THAT, HE DISMISSED MY CASE.

FOR THESE REASONS, THIS CASE SHOULD BE RE-OPENED.

CONCLUSION

THIS CASE SHOULD BE RE-OPENED ON A FINDING OF PRIMA FACIE MEDICAL EVIDENCE.

Respectfully submitted,

NY TIMES

February 27, 2007, 10:43 am

On September 21, 2006, Eliot Spitzer met with the New York State Business Council at posh Bolton Landing on Lake George, and this is what he said that night to the members of the Business Council with regard to Worker’s Compensation in the State of New York, which incidentally is guaranteed by the BILL OF RIGHTS of OUR New York State Constitution, section 18 of Article I, and so cannot just be willy-nilly eliminated by popular whim:

“Ken, I look forward to working with you to make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“Over the past six months, I have been laying out a comprehensive plan for economic revitalization.”

“But today, I want to speak about what I believe should be our first priority, and that is making New York companies more competitive by improving our business climate.”

“Now let me just cite some of the other areas in which New York State needs to become more competitive.”

“Workers’ compensation premiums in our state are the eighth highest in the nation, even as the maximum benefit to workers ranks 49th nationally as a percentage of average weekly income.”

“Well, I have a message for you: If I am elected Governor, on Day One of next year we are going to begin to implement an aggressive strategy to reduce the cost of doing business in New York and make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“We will reform our workers’ compensation system to reduce the burden of high premiums while increasing benefits for most workers.”

“Second, we must break the political gridlock that is preventing reform of our broken and dysfunctional workers’ compensation system.”

“What was meant to be an insurance system that provided medical care and simple compensation to injured workers has become a morass that is seen by many workers as putting up unfair obstacles to receiving fair compensation for lost wages, and by many businesses as an increasingly burdensome cost that is forcing employers to leave the state.”

“The maximum benefit under workers’ comp has not been increased since 1994.”

“Both because it is the right thing to do and because it is necessary to build the coalition to achieve real reform, we will increase benefits to most injured workers.”

“But I want to be clear that the end result of our workers comp reforms must be to meaningfully reduce premiums.”

“In order to increase benefits for most injured workers while reducing premiums, our workers’ comp reforms must be bold and far reaching.”

“To really bring our workers’ comp costs in line with other states, we must confront the challenge of reforming our system of Permanent Partial Disability payments.”

“These payments make up less than 12 percent of claims, but they account for almost 75 percent of all costs.”

“All ideas, including caps on benefits for all but the most serious injuries, must be on the table as we bring our program into line with other states.”

“These changes should be accompanied by aggressive rehabilitation and retraining programs, so that workers can get back in the work force.”

“As Governor, I will immediately go to work to build the coalition we need to get this problem solved so that we can once and for all fix this enormous drag on the competitiveness of New York’s businesses.”

http://www.spitzerpaterson.com/main.cfm?ac...&s=spitzer3

That was on September 26, 2006, BEFORE Eliot Spitzer was elected Governor ….

Clearly, five months ago, Eliot Spitzer’s mind was already made up as to what he was going to do to appease the members of the New York State Business Council with respect to Worker’s Compensation ….

AND WHAT ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS ON BEHALF OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL WITH RESPECT TO REDUCING WORKER’S COMPENSATION BENEFITS FOR PERMANENTLY DISABLED WORKERS IS OF ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER TO THE EMPLOYEES WHO DO SUFFER PERMAMENT DISABILITIES AT THE HANDS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL …

VICTIMS WHO ELIOT SPITZER INTENDS STRIP OF BENEFITS GUARANTEED BY THE BILL OF RIGHTS OF THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION WITHOUT THEM HAVING A VOICE IN THE MATTER ….

And then, curiously on Thursday, February 22, 2007, in an article entitled “Spitzer adds $18 million in funding to budget plan”, the Associated Press reported that “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer was adding $1 million to his budget to “coordinate research and talks to reform the worker’s compensation system” …..

Now that is indeed odd, adding this one million to the state budget on February 22nd of this year to “COORDINATE RESEARCH AND TALKS TO REFORM THE NEW YORK STATE WORKER’S COMPENSATION SYSTEM” when five months ago, Eliot Spitzer was making it quite clear to the New York State Business Council that his mind was already made up on what to do with Worker’s Compensation ….

Which would imply that by September 21, 2006, Eliot Spitzer had already done the necessary RESEARCH to substantiate his plan ….

SO?

Hhhhmmmm ….

Where’s the cool million going then?

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...ected/#comments

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

We The People of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our Freedom, in order to secure its blessings, DO ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE IV - Executive

Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in the governor, who shall hold office for four years; the lieutenant-governor shall be chosen at the same time, and for the same term.

§ 2. No person shall be eligible to the office of governor or lieutenant-governor, except a citizen of the United States, of the age of not less than thirty years, and who shall have been five years next preceding the election a resident of this state.

§ 3. The governor shall communicate by message to the legislature at every session the condition of the state, and recommend such matters to it as he or she shall judge expedient.

The governor shall expedite all such measures as may be resolved upon by the legislature, and shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed.

§ 7. Every bill which shall have passed the senate and assembly shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the governor; if the governor approve, he or she shall sign it; but if not, he or she shall return it with his or her objections to the house in which it shall have originated, which shall enter the objections at large on the journal, and proceed to reconsider it.

If after such reconsideration, two-thirds of the members elected to that house shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent together with the objections, to the other house, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered; and if approved by two-thirds of the members elected to that house, it shall become a law notwithstanding the objections of the governor.

In all such cases the votes in both houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the members voting shall be entered on the journal of each house respectively.

If any bill shall not be returned by the governor within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him or her, the same shall be a law in like manner as if he or she had signed it, unless the legislature shall, by their adjournment, prevent its return, in which case it shall not become a law without the approval of the governor.

No bill shall become a law after the final adjournment of the legislature, unless approved by the governor within thirty days after such adjournment.

If any bill presented to the governor contain several items of appropriation of money, the governor may object to one or more of such items while approving of the other portion of the bill.

In such case the governor shall append to the bill, at the time of signing it, a statement of the items to which he or she objects; and the appropriation so objected to shall not take effect.

If the legislature be in session, he or she shall transmit to the house in which the bill originated a copy of such statement, and the items objected to shall be separately reconsidered.

If on reconsideration one or more of such items be approved by two-thirds of the members elected to each house, the same shall be part of the law, notwithstanding the objections of the governor.

All the provisions of this section, in relation to bills not approved by the governor, shall apply in cases in which he or she shall withhold approval from any item or items contained in a bill appropriating money.

http://www.senate.state.ny.us/lbdcinfo/senconstitution.html

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

We The People of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our Freedom, in order to secure its blessings, DO ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE III - Legislature

Section 1. The legislative power of this state shall be vested in the senate and assembly.

§ 10. Each house of the legislature shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and publish the same, except such parts as may require secrecy.

The doors of each house shall be kept open, except when the public welfare shall require secrecy.

§ 12. Any bill may originate in either house of the legislature, and all bills passed by one house may be amended by the other.

§ 13. The enacting clause of all bills shall be "The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows," and no law shall be enacted except by bill.

§ 14. No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon, in which case it must nevertheless be upon the desks of the members in final form, not necessarily printed, before its final passage; nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature; and upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereof shall be allowed, and the question upon its final passage shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the ayes and nays entered on the journal.

§ 21. Sections 15, 16, and 17 of this article shall not apply to any bill, or the amendments to any bill, which shall be recommended to the legislature by commissioners or any public agency appointed or directed pursuant to law to prepare revisions, consolidations or compilations of statutes.

But a bill amending an existing law shall not be excepted from the provisions of sections 15, 16 and 17 of this article unless such amending bill shall itself be recommended to the legislature by such commissioners or public agency.

§ 22. Every law which imposes, continues or revives a tax shall distinctly state the tax and the object to which it is to be applied, and it shall not be sufficient to refer to any other law to fix such tax or object.

§ 23. On the final passage, in either house of the legislature, of any act which imposes, continues or revives a tax, or creates a debt or charge, or makes, continues or revives any appropriation of public or trust money or property, or releases, discharges or commutes any claim or demand of the state, the question shall be taken by yeas and nays, which shall be duly entered upon the journals, and three-fifths of all the members elected to either house shall, in all such cases, be necessary to constitute a quorum therein.

http://www.senate.state.ny.us/lbdcinfo/senconstitution.html

NY TIMES

"Deal Reached on New York Workers Compensation"

By DANNY HAKIM and STEVEN GREENHOUSE

Published: February 27, 2007

ALBANY, Feb. 27 — Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders announced a deal today to overhaul the state’s workers compensation system, forging consensus in an area that had eluded Gov. George E. Pataki’s efforts for years.

Mr. Spitzer said the deal, which he reached with legislative, business and labor leaders, would improve New York’s business climate by reducing the cost of the system to business.

Some manufacturers complain that premiums cost them more than $2 an hour for each worker.

The deal would impose a new limit on the number of years that some injured workers receive weekly benefits, and by creating a fee schedule for drugs, laboratory tests and prosthetic devices used in workers compensation cases.

]Mr. Spitzer said the cost savings from these and other changes would allow premiums to be reduced by 10 to 15 percent, saving businesses several hundred million dollars a year.

At the same time, the maximum weekly payment to injured workers, which have not been increased in more than a decade, would roughly double within four years, to roughly $800, or two-thirds of the average weekly wage.

The ceiling now is $400 a week.

The changes are meant to repair a system that is among the most expensive in the nation, but which pays some of the lowest benefits.

And they represent a significant victory for the governor, who gained a substantial deal despite his frequently contentious relations with the Legislature during his first two months in office.

Mr. Spitzer announced the agreement in Albany today after intensive talks with representatives of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, the State Business Council and the State A.F.L.-C.I.O.

“This is a remarkable win-win situation for both workers and employers,” Mr. Spitzer told reporters today.

“The whole system has become ossified and unresponsive, and despite the dissatisfaction with which it is viewed by all sides, gridlock has prevailed until today.”

The overhaul plan will almost certainly become law because it has the support of both legislative leaders and the governor.

“This agreement not only addresses some of the most pressing needs and concerns of injured workers, but immeasurably improves a system long believed to be broken beyond repair,” said Denis Hughes, the president of the union organization said in a statement.

Kenneth Adams, president of the business council, said the deal “is a big win for improving our economic climate, especially upstate.”

New York’s workers compensation system has been called an unfathomable mess for years because its benefits were so meager — replacing less than half the average weekly wage — despite its high cost.

The goal in most states is to replace two-thirds of a worker’s earnings before injury.

To reduce fraud, New York State officials will be given the power to halt construction projects and shutter businesses where workers compensation coverage is not provided for all employees, and will make the intentional misclassification of workers as independent contractors to avoid paying premiums a felony.

The size of the anti-fraud squad in the workers compensation system is to be doubled.

Legislative leaders hailed Mr. Spitzer’s leadership in getting the deal done so quickly.

“Over the years, reforming the workers compensation system has been an increasingly difficult puzzle to solve, because we were missing a key piece of that puzzle, leadership,” said Mr. Silver, who has already bitterly feuded with Mr. Spitzer over how to fill the vacant post of comptroller.

“Now we have the leadership we need, leadership from the governor, leadership from labor, leadership from the business community,” Mr. Spitzer said.

James Tedisco, the Republican minority leader of the Assembly, said, “When you have good leadership, and you have leadership that says, ‘We want everybody’s ideas, opinions, we’ll return to your calls, we’ll listen to your ideas’ — boy, you’re going to have big success.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/nyregion...amp;oref=slogin

[Livyjr]

NY TIMES

"Deal Reached on New York Workers Compensation"

By DANNY HAKIM and STEVEN GREENHOUSE

Published: February 27, 2007

ALBANY, Feb. 27 — Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders announced a deal today to overhaul the state’s workers compensation system, forging consensus in an area that had eluded Gov. George E. Pataki’s efforts for years.

Mr. Spitzer said the deal, which he reached with legislative, business and labor leaders, would improve New York’s business climate by reducing the cost of the system to business.

Mr. Spitzer announced the agreement in Albany today after intensive talks with representatives of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, the State Business Council and the State A.F.L.-C.I.O.

“This is a remarkable win-win situation for both workers and employers,” Mr. Spitzer told reporters today.

“The whole system has become ossified and unresponsive, and despite the dissatisfaction with which it is viewed by all sides, gridlock has prevailed until today.”

The overhaul plan will almost certainly become law because it has the support of both legislative leaders and the governor.

“This agreement not only addresses some of the most pressing needs and concerns of injured workers, but immeasurably improves a system long believed to be broken beyond repair,” said Denis Hughes, the president of the union organization said in a statement.

Kenneth Adams, president of the business council, said the deal “is a big win for improving our economic climate, especially upstate.”

Legislative leaders hailed Mr. Spitzer’s leadership in getting the deal done so quickly.

“Over the years, reforming the workers compensation system has been an increasingly difficult puzzle to solve, because we were missing a key piece of that puzzle, leadership,” said Mr. Silver, who has already bitterly feuded with Mr. Spitzer over how to fill the vacant post of comptroller.

“Now we have the leadership we need, leadership from the governor, leadership from labor, leadership from the business community,” Mr. Spitzer said.

James Tedisco, the Republican minority leader of the Assembly, said, “When you have good leadership, and you have leadership that says, ‘We want everybody’s ideas, opinions, we’ll return to your calls, we’ll listen to your ideas’ — boy, you’re going to have big success.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/27/nyregion...amp;oref=slogin

NY TIMES

March 2nd, 2007 7:37 am

With respect to the “BIG” Worker’s Comp deal just “STEAMROLLED” through OUR legislature by Eliot Spitzer and the New York State Business Council ….

It would seem that your comment ….

“At the same time, the maximum weekly payment to injured workers, which have not been increased in more than a decade, would roughly double within four years, to roughly $800, or two-thirds of the average weekly wage ….”

Is a bit premature and is actually unsubstantiated by any underlying facts to support it ….

And in support of my statement, I refer to a story by James Odato in the Albany, New York Times Union for Wednesday, February 28, 2007, entitled “Deal reforms ‘broken’ workers’ comp system - Spitzer, Legislature unveil changes to boost benefits, cut costs for businesses” ....

Where “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer is quoted as follows:

“Spitzer said the weekly benefit for injured workers will increase significantly, although the formula for each class of worker will be spelled out in legislation.”

As you word-smiths likely know, “WILL BE” implies something “not yet done” ….

And in this case, Eliot Spitzer makes it incandescently clear that in the ACTUAL CASE of what any individual employee in the State of New York might get from Worker’s Compensation in the future …

IS PRESENTLY AN UNKNOWN ….

THAT WILL DEPEND UPON WHAT “CLASS” THAT WORKER IS PUT INTO BY THE NEW YORK STATE LEGISLATURE ….

When it finally comes up with the actual legislation that is being touted by “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer and the New York State Business Council as a “done deal” ….

For them …

And this comment is buttressed by a similar comment in the New York State Disability Law BLOG in an article entitled “Insight on Spitzer’s New York Workers’ Compensation Reform Agreement” at ....

http://www.disabledworkerlaw.com/2007/02/a...form-agreement/

Where the author makes the clear and unequivocal statement as follows with respect to who the ACTUAL LOSERS in the working class are going to be, once that legislation is actually written at some future time, WITHOUT ANY INPUT WHATSOEVER from the victims of industrial accidents and diseases and other workplace injuries:

“Any others that we discover once the actual written bill details are released.”

Call me old-fashioned, which I am, but I think a lot less HYPE and a little more factual reporting on what is actually going on in OUR government here in New York State would be a lot more beneficial in the long run to us citizens out here who do rely upon newspapers like this for some of our information, anyway ….

That portion of it that seems not to be based upon actual fact ….

But instead …

Upon PROPAGANDIZING for CULT FIGURES like Eliot “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer ....

Or as he is known up here in the countryside, LORD CORNBURY up from New York City to view his possessions and holdings, including the colonial assembly ….

Which is his to do with as he pleases …

PROVISIONS OF OUR NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION TO THE CONTRARY BE DAMNED ….

And so …

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...kers-comp-deal/

[Livyjr]

Call me old-fashioned, which I am, but I think a lot less HYPE and a little more factual reporting on what is actually going on in OUR government here in New York State would be a lot more beneficial in the long run to us citizens out here who do rely upon newspapers like this for some of our information, anyway ….

That portion of it that seems not to be based upon actual fact ….

But instead …

Upon PROPAGANDIZING for CULT FIGURES like Eliot “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer ....

Or as he is known up here in the countryside, LORD CORNBURY up from New York City to view his possessions and holdings, including the colonial assembly ….

Which is his to do with as he pleases …

PROVISIONS OF OUR NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION TO THE CONTRARY BE DAMNED ….

And so …

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...kers-comp-deal/

The First Constitution of the State of New York, 1777.

The first Constitution of any free people possesses a peculiar interest; especially is this true when, as in the case of New York, the Constitution is the outgrowth and culmination of more than a century of struggle for popular liberty.

Our first Constitution also excites additional interest from the circumstances surrounding its preparation; for it was not framed, as most of the later state Constitutions were framed, to accomplish a peaceful transition from a territorial condition to statehood, and where the authors, with research and deliberation, worked out a plan of government based on the best models.

The framers of our first Constitution worked in the stress of war and revolution and without a model, except as they may possibly have derived assistance from Constitutions of other states, recently adopted, but under which there had been little, if any, actual experience.

Neither was it framed by experienced men of mature years, but by young men reared in luxury, and who had not enjoyed the opportunities of public service and acquaintance with details of public affairs.

John Jay, who is understood to have been the chief author of the Constitution, was only thirty years of age, Robert R. Livingston, one of his colleagues, was only twenty-nine, and Gouverneur Morris, the other, was only twenty-four, when they were appointed on the committee to frame a form of government; yet these wise young patriots exercised a controlling influence in preparing a Constitution which was the fundamental law of the state for forty-five years, and many of whose provisions have been continued without change in all subsequent Constitutions.

The first Constitution was framed, adopted, and put in operation by a congress, or convention, chosen by the people of the colony, and which, after three intermediate congresses, was the successor of the colonial legislature.

The last Colonial Assembly was chosen under writs of election issued January 14, 1769, and returnable February 14.

The assembly met for its first session April 4, 1769.

It continued in session at different times until April 3, 1775, when it was prorogued until May 3, 1775.

It was prorogued at different times afterwards until March 11, 1776, and then again till April 17, 1776, but it did not meet at that time, and never met after April 3, 1775.

Events developing the Revolution were crowding each other rapidly during this period, and, in the absence of an assembly authorized to exercise legislative powers and attend to the affairs of the colony, the people assumed control, and at first by committees, and later through elected congresses, gradually worked out a plan of local administration of the colony .....

Culminating in constitutional government ......

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/history/elec...lincoln/pg9.htm

Amendments to the First Constitution

The Convention of 1801.

The Constitutional Convention of 1801 had its origin in differences of opinion concerning the proper construction of 23 of the Constitution, which provided for a Council of Appointment.

The section is as follows:

"That all officers other than those who, by this Constitution, are directed to be otherwise appointed, shall be appointed in the manner following, to wit:

The assembly shall, once in every year, openly nominate and appoint one of the senators from each great district, which senators shall form a council for the appointment of the said officers, of which the governor for the time being, or the lieutenant governor, or the president of the senate (when they shall respectively administer the government), shall be president, and have a casting voice, but no other vote; and, with the advice and consent of the said council, shall appoint all the said officers; and that a majority of the said council be a quorum; and further, the said senators shall not be eligible to the said council for two years successively."

This council was an important part of the state government until abolished by the Constitution of 1821, which took effect on the 31st of December, 1822.

The council, therefore, existed more than forty-five years; and while it has gone into history, probably never to return as a feature of our constitutional machinery, it played such an important part in the early history of the state, especially its political history, that it should receive here more than a passing notice.

The first constitution-makers had not gone very far in the direction of choosing officers by popular election.

Most of the officers were chosen by appointment; and we shall see, as we note the development of our constitutional system, how slowly the theory of elections by the people made its way.

The framers of the first Constitution treated this subject from the point of view of their own experience, and also in accordance with the custom of that time.

GOVERNOR JAY'S SPECIAL MESSAGE.

Governor Jay sent a special message to the assembly on the 26th of February, 1801, and the same message to the senate on the 27th, in relation to the Council of Appointment, reciting the differences which had existed between the council and Governor, not only during his own term, but during the term of his predecessor, Governor Clinton.

Governor Jay claimed that under the Constitution the governor had the exclusive right of nomination.

Some members of the Council of Appointment claimed a concurrent right of nomination.

This the Governor denied, and in this message he recommends that it be settled in some way, either by a declaratory act of the legislature, or by judgment of law.

CONVENTION RECOMMENDED.

On the 6th of April the legislature passed an act recommending a convention for the purpose of considering the question of the construction of 23 of the Constitution, and also that part of the Constitution relating to the number of members of the senate and assembly.

The first Constitution did not contain any provision for its own amendment, nor for calling future constitutional conventions.

The legislature of 1801 could not absolutely direct that a convention be held, but passed a law recommending a convention for the purposes therein mentioned.

This act, chapter 159, authorized and proposed the election of delegates to a convention to consider two features of the Constitution ....

Namely, that relating to the number of members of the senate and assembly, and the section relating to the Council of Appointment.

It will be observed that the people were not given an opportunity to express their judgment on the question of holding a convention.

While the bill was pending an amendment was once agreed to in the assembly giving this right, but later it was abandoned, and under the law the people were only given power to elect delegates.

The people, who might have objected to such a convention, had no opportunity to express their objection, except by declining to vote for delegates, and this meant nothing, for the persons who received votes as delegates would be entitled to sit, if regularly chosen, even if the majority of the people had been opposed to a convention.

We shall see in the next chapter that a bill passed in 1820 for a convention, without a previous submission of the question to the people, was vetoed by the Council of Revision on objections prepared by Chancellor Kent, then a member of the council.

In this opinion he calls attention to the act of 1801, and distinguishes it from the act then under consideration on the ground that it conferred on the delegates power to determine two questions only; one of which, that relating to the Council of Appointment, was one of construction, and not of amendment; but he expressed the doubt whether a convention called to change the legislature was constitutional unless previously authorized by the people.

Chancellor Kent, then an associate justice of the supreme court, was a member of the Council of Revision in 1801, but he and Chancellor Livingston were both absent when the convention bill was presented to the council, and it does not appear that there was any objection to it.

In addition to the question relating to the construction of § 23, the act conferred on the Convention power to consider that part of the Constitution "respecting the number of senators and members of assembly, and to reduce and limit the number as the Convention may deem proper."

The senate was originally composed of twenty-four members, and the assembly of seventy members, and provision was made for an increase in each branch at stated periods, until the maximum should be reached, which was fixed at one hundred senators and three hundred members of assembly.

The increase in membership had apparently been more rapid than was at first anticipated.

Governor Jay, in his speech to the legislature at the opening of the session, which began November 4, 1800, called attention to this increase, and recommended a convention to consider the question of the number of members of the senate and assembly.

This seems to have been the only recommendation on the subject, and it is probable that a convention would not have been called at that time for the sole purpose of considering the number of members of the legislature; but when a convention seemed necessary to settle the controversy over the Council of Appointment, the subject of the legislature was included.

At that time the senate had increased to forty-three members, and the assembly to one hundred and twenty-six members.

THE CONVENTION.

The Convention at once addressed itself to the task committed to it, and completed its labors on the 27th of October.

The result of its deliberations appears in five paragraphs, four of which relate to the legislature; one, the last, determines the construction of the disputed section relating to the Council of Appointment.

The amendments permanently fixed the number of senators at thirty-two.

The assembly was given one hundred members, and provision was made for a possible increase to one hundred and fifty, by additions to be made after each census.

The principal subject of consideration was the construction to be given to article 23.

A motion for a construction of the article giving the senators the exclusive right of nomination was defeated by a vote of 93 to 6.

A motion to give the Governor the exclusive right of nomination was defeated, but the journal does not give the vote.

The resolution of the Convention as finally adopted declares that under the "true construction" of the article "the right to nominate all officers other than those who, by the Constitution, are directed to be otherwise appointed, is vested concurrently in the person administering the government of this state for the time being, and in each of the members of the Council of Appointment."

This resolution was adopted by a vote of 86 to 14.

Daniel D. Tompkins voted in the negative; and twenty years afterwards, in the Constitutional Convention of 1821, he referred with apparent self-satisfaction to this vote.

The large vote in favor of the resolution is explained by the fact that each of the two great political parties of that day had committed itself in favor of nominations by the members of the council - the Federalist, in the winter of 1794, and the Republicans, in 1801.

It has already been noted that the convention which framed the Constitution had given this provision a different construction, but in the partisan struggle for power at the beginning of the last century the opinions of the authors of the Constitution seem to have been overlooked or ignored.

Under the construction given by this Convention the council became a powerful and sometimes a very objectionable political machine, and at the time of its abolition, twenty-one years later, it wielded a patronage including nearly 15,000 officers, with an aggregate salary list of one million dollars.

It often dispensed patronage with a high hand, making appointments and removals at will; it reduced the dignity and responsibility of the governor, so that, instead of being the chief executive of the state, he had only a casting vote in this appointing body, and only one fifth of the power of making nominations.

The plan of this council, as devised by Mr. Jay, was reasonable; and if it had been administered as intended, it might have continued as a permanent feature in our Constitution.

We have adopted, as a substitute for this plan, the confirmation of the governor's appointments by the state senate, where confirmation is required at all, and have given the governor the absolute power of appointment without confirmation, in a large number of cases.

Mr. Jay's plan contemplated a joint responsibility for appointments, to be shared by the governor and the legislature, by providing a council composed of four senators, distributed geographically through the state, with power only to confirm or reject nominations by the governor.

The whole legislature was charged with a duty and responsibility in the matter by requiring the assembly to choose the council from the senators, thus directly or indirectly bringing both branches of the legislature into cooperation with the governor in making appointments; but the efficiency of the plan was destroyed by the construction given to the article by the Convention of 1801.

The evolution of this council, and its final destruction, without a dissenting vote, by the Convention of 1821, shows that even the cohesive power of patronage as a political force must yield to higher principles of constitutional government when it is discovered that the dispensing of such patronage by an unrestrained and irresponsible body is inimical to the best interests of the state.

[pages 596-612]

The Historical Society of the Courts of the State of New York
140 Grand Street, Suite 701
White Plains, N.Y. 10601
phone: (914) 824-5717

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/history/elec...incoln/pg11.htm

[Livyjr]

NY TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

March 2nd, 2007 5:11 pm

If one were to come up to the hinterlands of civilization outside of New York City in “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno’s personal fiefdom of Rensselaer County …

And one were to conduct a sort of “WORD ASSOCIATION” poll by presenting a native up here with three words, in this order, to wit:

“Eliot Spitzer ….”

“STEAMROLLER …”

“Civil Confinement …”

The native would most likely respond by saying “YOU’RE DAMN RIGHT HE WOULD …”

And away they would go …

And the poll would be over ….

Just like that ….

End of conversation ….

And if you were to then describe that scenario to another local, a waitress in a coffee shop, say …

And ask why that was ….

What the waitress would tell you is that the term “CIVIL CONFINEMENT” is a very sensitive subject up this way ….

FORCED INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC CONFINEMENT ….

Which was used as a “state-sponsored” TOOL OF REPRESSION ….

On August 22, 2001 ….

Right here in “BIG JOE” Bruno’s personal fiefdom of Rensselaer County in the State of New York …

Against a New York State licensed professional engineer …..

Who was getting his nose into the wrong place ….

By conducting an investigation into how a politically-connected engineer from East Greenbush, New York with the local judge as his private attorney was obtaining Rensselaer County Health Department approvals for land in Rensselaer County that did not meet the applicable codes ….

On August 13, 2001, this engineer showed a videotape of the alleged wrongdoing to the Rensselaer County Public Health Director …..

And on August 22, 2001, Rensselaer County officials retaliated by securing a PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER for the engineer from a medical doctor at a local hospital in Troy, New York, SIGHT UNSEEN …..

Which resulted in the engineer being taken into custody as a DANGEROUS MENTALLY-ILL person at the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, New York ….

Where he was incarcerated in the secure mental facility based upon what was a fraudulent psychiatric commitment order ….

And that was that ….

No more investigation ….

And when this engineer tried to protest this false imprisonment in violation of his civil rights in federal district court for the Northern District of New York ….

“STEAMROLLER” Spitzer was right there in opposition ….

Protecting the doctor who issued the bogus PSYCHIATRIC INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT ORDER ….

By having this engineer’s suit simply tossed out of court as being groundless ….

AFTER one of Spitzer’s assistant attorney general’s buried some evidence and testimony entered by another of Spitzer’s assistant’s in Rensselaer County Supreme Court in connection with this same matter ….

So when the common folks hear of “STEAMROLLER” Eliot Spitzer “doing deals” up here with people like “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno, in whose personal fiefdom this PSYCHIATRIC TAKE-DOWN went down ….

They begin to quake and shudder within their boots ….

And with good reason ….

Considering what happened to that engineer ….

And so ….

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...nction-no-more/

[Livyjr]

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

As Revised, with Amendments Adopted by the Constitutional Convention of 1938 and Approved by vote of the People on November 8, 1938.

As Amended and in Force January 1, 2002, but with November 2003 results included

ARTICLE V - Officers and Civil Departments

Section 1. The comptroller and attorney-general shall be chosen at the same general election as the governor and hold office for the same term, and shall possess the qualifications provided in section 2 of article IV.

http://www.senate.state.ny.us/lbdcinfo/senconstitution.html

According to the New York State Constitution .....

The sole qualifications for COMPTROLLER of the State of New York ....

Have to do with residency .....

And minimum age .....

AND THAT IS THAT ....

ACCORDING TO THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION ....

HOWEVER ....

We never hear any mention of that ....

In the DIATRIBES ....

And SCREEDS ....

From the EDITORIAL PAGES .....

Of the HEARST CORPORATION'S Albany, New York Times Union ....

Decrying the constitutional right of New York State Assemblyman Thomas DiNapoli .....

To be voted in as New York State COMPTROLLER ....

So long as he is over thirty years old ....

And has lived in the State of New York for five years before his election ....

And so ....

"Shame on Silver, Bruno for comptroller choice"

Letters to the Editor, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Saturday, March 3, 2007

Like so many others, I am baffled by the selection of a thoroughly unqualified person to be the new comptroller.

Not only does he have no experience in finance, he has no education in finance, except maybe Accounting 1 and 2.

I went back to school at the age of 37 to get a bachelor's degree in business with a concentration in finance.

Graduating six years later, and more than $70,000 in education debt, I would never be considered for such a position and I am more qualified.

Perhaps we should follow what the Legislature does and do away with the requirement of an education to get a good paying job.

That would certainly eliminate the debt incurred by real professionals in the work force.

Shame on Assembly Speaker Silver and Senate Majority Leader Bruno.

I would not vote for them if I could.

Would they buy my vote?

About $70,000 should do it.

JOHN S.

South Westerlo

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story...wsdate=3/3/2007

end quotes

A man who would sell his vote ....

For $.70 ......

Or $70,000 ....

Is a man who is himself for sale ....

And so ...