"Gloves come off at the Capitol - Tempers erupt as Spitzer, Bruno engage in 'screaming match' inside governor's office"

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

First published: Thursday, March 15, 2007

ALBANY -- Budget negotiations probably weren't helped much by an expletive-laden blowup Wednesday between Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno.

During the clash, Bruno, a Brunswick Republican, said Spitzer's Democratic ally, Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith, D-Queens, is "so far up (the governor's posterior) he can't see," according to several sources.

Both sides confirmed the altercation, which occurred in Spitzer's office on the Capitol's second floor, but refused to say exactly what was said or what had sparked the exchange.

However, one insider described the clash as a "screaming match," during which both the governor and the senator "lost it."

Another official said Bruno was angry with Spitzer for calling a truce in his TV-ad war with Bruno's health care allies -- SEIU/1199 and the Greater New York Hospital Association -- while continuing to publicly slam the Senate Republicans for restoring Spitzer's Medicaid cuts and adding other spending in their budget plan.

The truce, which started Tuesday morning, ended 24 hours later.

SEIU/1199 and GNYHA put their ads opposing Spitzer's health care budget back on the air.

Spitzer said Wednesday he would follow suit.

Bruno spokesman John McArdle said the conversation "did get heated and was meant to clear the air."

He said Wednesday evening that Spitzer and Bruno "could have left on better terms," and had not spoken since the fight.

Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson said the characterizations from Bruno's office about the exchange were "unfortunate and untrue."

She said Spitzer "urged Mr. Bruno to reconsider using certain language when speaking about his colleagues in the Legislature."

A Spitzer ally said the governor told Bruno he would not "tolerate profanity" in discussing fellow elected officials in his office.

This isn't the first exchange between the governor and a legislative leader to involve salty language.

In January, Spitzer, during a telephone call with Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, R-Schenectady, described himself as a "(expletive) steamroller" who would "roll over you and anybody else."

The relationship between the new Democratic governor and the veteran majority leader was strained this week after the Senate Republicans passed measures to restore the governor's Medicaid cuts, rejected his efforts to redirect funding from hospitals and nursing homes to community-based care, and proposed adding more than $2 billion worth of tax rebates.

Spitzer slammed the Senate Republicans for spending too much, calling them "profligate."

Wednesday's trouble started in the morning when Bruno gave an interview to radio station WROW AM-590, during which he accused Spitzer of "politicizing this whole budget" and said Smith and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver are "joined at the hip" with the governor.

Bruno declined an invitation to debate Spitzer on the radio and rejected the idea that he is "afraid" of the governor.

"I've lived too long to be afraid," Bruno said.

"People don't run me over with steamrollers . . ."

"I haven't been knocked on my ass yet, and I am not going to be by this guy or anybody else."

Spitzer retaliated by refusing to invite Bruno into a pre-news conference meeting with other legislative leaders and the family of a woman who was killed by a convicted Level 3, or highest risk, sex offender in 2005.

Bruno was forced to wait with reporters in the Capitol's Red Room for the news conference, at which Spitzer signed a bill on civil confinement for sex offenders, to begin.

Bruno went into Spitzer's office after the signing, and the fight took place.

Sources said Spitzer made it clear that he was displeased with what the majority leader had said on the radio, but Bruno refused to back down.

Benjamin can be reached at 454-5081 or by e-mail at ebenjamin@timesunion.com.

Budget coming

17 days to the April 1 budget deadline

Developments:

Gov. Eliot Spitzer continued to hammer the Senate Republicans' counter to his budget plan, calling it "colossally misdirected."

Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno credited his conference for fighting Spitzer's new taxes and fees and calling for hundreds of millions more for education and hospitals.

Joint legislative conference committees began meeting to publicly negotiate a legislative budget, but the groups had no guidance from the general conference committee on how much money they could budget for priorities.

Local 1199 of the Service Employees International Union ended its TV ad-war truce with Spitzer after they failed to reach an accord on health care spending.

Today: Joint conference committees will continue discussing differences between the Senate and Assembly budget plans.

http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp...sdate=3/15/2007

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION ....

Comment by John Galt — March 16, 2007 @ 7:58 am

I have been “in here” but a short time, and as an older New Yorker who is a disabled combat veteran, I personally have to salute whomever’s efforts and energy have made this public forum possible, because THIS is what really makes and keeps us “FREE” ….

Free from intimidation …

Free from coercion …

Free from fear …

The stronger using a public forum like this to speak out for those of us who are weaker, or who might have no voice at all, which includes many of the elderly among us, and the disabled, such as myself ….

For years and years and years, we in New York State have been entirely excluded from the “processes” of government here in New York, through coercion and intimidation, at least in Rensselaer County here in the State of New York …

But the problem is not only here, or I would not be in here bothering to make the effort to speak up, and speak out ….

As these continued attacks on segments of OUR citizen body by this “STEAMROLLER” who we are stuck with as governor illustrate, we really do have some quite serious problems here in the State of New York that are directly related to the elevation of POLITICS, i.e., the games that career politicians like “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer and “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno play to hold power, above GOVERNMENT, which Black’s Law Dictionary defines as:

“That form of fundamental rules and principles by which a nation or state is governed, or by which individual members of a body politic are to regulate their social actions”

Where the BODY POLITIC is defined as:

“A SOCIAL COMPACT BY WHICH THE WHOLE PEOPLE COVENANTS WITH EACH CITIZEN, AND EACH CITIZEN WITH THE WHOLE PEOPLE, THAT ALL SHALL BE GOVERNED BY CERTAIN LAWS FOR THE COMMON GOOD”

Each day that this “STEAMROLLER” continues to make his attacks on segments of OUR society here in New York State, and each day that he is egged on in that endeavor by his partisans in the New York State Assembly and Senate is a day that takes us further and further away from, and not towards, good government here in the State of New York ….

Each day that this “STEAMROLLER” continues to proclaim himself as “THE LAW”, and each day that he is supported in this FASLE CONTENTION or ASSERTION by his partisans in the New York State Assembly and Senate is a day that takes us further and further away from, and not towards, the notion that we in fact are “governed by certain laws for the common good” ….

Because when a “STEAMROLLER” like this CORNBURY Spitzer can use the media, and his financial resources, which we common folks do not have, to single us out as objects of derision, or spite, because he chooses to, to advance his own personal political agenda, then there is no longer a “COMMON GOOD” based on common laws left to us ….

And when that “state” is reached, which it has been in my estimation as an older person out here, then we are on the road to serious decline in this state, which is a quite dangerous state of affairs for the weak and weaker among us ….

This “STEAMROLLER CORNBURY” Spitzer is way out of line with what he is attempting to do with all of this ATTACKING that he is doing from the BULLY PULPIT of the Office of Governor, and having been twice wounded in a place where there was NO LAW at all, except that from the muzzle of a weapon in the hands of whomever could shoot first, faster and straighter, I believe this seemingly unstable man from down in New York City is taking us in a very dangerous direction, back to a state of anarchy, where only the strong like him, and “BIG JOE” Bruno and their adherents and disciples and toadies and boot-lickers and such can survive …

And as any schoolchild could tell us, that brings us right on back to about where we were in 1776 ….

And so …

My word this morning to this “STEAMROLLER”, and I do apologize to all of those out there who cannot comprehend words of more than three letters or one syllable, is:

“WAKE UP, CORNBURY, AND GET OUT A COPY OF OUR CONSTITUTION, ALONG WITH A HISTORY OF US AS A PEOPLE IN THIS STATE, CIRCA 1776, AND MAKE A DECISION THIS VERY MORNING AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE REALLY FIT TO TAKE CARE THAT OUR LAWS ARE FAITHFULLY EXECUTED, AS OUR CONSTITUTION DIRECTS YOU TO DO, AND IF YOU FIND THAT YOU ARE NOT UP TO THIS TASK, WHICH WOULD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT MOST COUNTRY PEOPLE OUT HERE NOW BELIEVE, THEN DO US ALL A FAVOR, AND GO BACK TO NEW YORK CITY AND LEAVE US IN PEACE” ….

David Patterson, in our estimation, is more than capable of stepping into the Governor’s office and getting things back to where they belong, or at least he deserves an opportunity to fail, LORD CORNBURY, as you have already done, by attacking us, with your money and power ….

And so ….

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4082#comments

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION ....

Comment by John Galt — March 16, 2007 @ 8:30 am

To all of those out there who whine and complain about posts containing more than about two words of two or three letters each, and one syllable, as an older New Yorker who took an oath to OUR Constitution and then went and did some bleeding in the mud of Viet Nam to defend it, in principle, anyway, what I say is “TOO BAD” ….

OUR Declaration of Independence, which defines who we are as a nation, actually contains a lot of words, and a lot of paragraphs, and it is our duty as American citizens to know that document, regardless of how hard it might actually be to sound out each word …

And OUR state Constitution itself contains a lot of words of more than one syllable, and it too contains a lot of paragraphs …

And it is again OUR DUTY as New York State citizens to know and understand that document, since it in fact is the LAW that keeps OUR society functioning here in this state where I was born, and to which I returned from Viet Nam as a disabled veteran, who had to rehabilitate himself without any “assistance” from the “state” in that endeavor …

When one takes an oath to “protect and defend” something, as common soldiers here in America do, when they step up to the plate and join our military, then it would seem to me, and indeed, I am very “old-fashioned” about this, that they have incurred an obligation to know exactly what that something is, and guess what, all of you who whine and complain about having to sound out big words, that takes effort and exertion on their part …

And if they can do this, common people like me, then what about you?

From whence comes your exemption, in regards this matter of citizenship here in OUR state?

Just curious, of course …

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4085#comments

And getting away from the on-going dialogue in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union ...

And getting back to something looming large on the horizon ....

We have ....

"As subprime crisis deepens, some fight back"

By Jason Szep

Fri Mar 16, 9:00 AM ET

BOSTON (Reuters) - The home loan for Thomas Hilchey and fiancee Robin Crevier started with a "teaser" -- an attractive interest rate for two years with a monthly payment of $1,692 that was well within their budget.

The middle-class couple from Harwich, a village on Cape Cod in Massachusetts, were confident they could keep up with the adjustable-rate mortgage payments to refinance their home and signed papers with subprime lender Ameriquest Mortgage Co.

What happened next swept them into the property foreclosure wave spreading across the United States and sparked one of a growing number of legal fights against lenders such as Ameriquest that specialize in loans to higher-risk borrowers.

When U.S. interest rates rose in 2005, the couple's 5.75 percent mortgage rate swelled to 7.75 percent and monthly payments ballooned to $2,035.

The rate was set to jump to 9.75 percent on March 1, bumping payments up to about $2,750, a threshold that would have pushed them into foreclosure.

But Hilchey and Crevier fought back.

Accusing Ameriquest of deceit and negligent misrepresentation, among other charges, the couple sued the lender, saying its salesman failed to provide documents and disclosures on the loan required by state and federal law.

Across the nation, anger and litigation are growing against the tactics of subprime lenders, who offer easy credit for homes that are turning out to be too expensive for millions of Americans now that mortgage rates are going up.

"If you go in and apply for a mortgage and get approved at 5.75 percent, how many people two years later are going to qualify for the same loan at 9.75 percent?"

"Probably no one, unless you are extremely wealthy," said Bruce Bierhans, an lawyer representing Hilchey and Crevier.

The couple won a first round this month when a Massachusetts judge ordered Ameriquest to halt a $715 monthly increase kicking in from their March payment and refrain from repossessing their property until the lawsuit is resolved.

"I would expect more lawsuits like this," said Boston University law professor Tamar Frankel.

"People are going to lose their homes."

"Are they going to fight?"

"Yes."

"Are there going to be lawyers who will help them fight?"

"Sure."

"The question is going to be: Where will the courts draw the line?"

FIGHTS HARD TO WIN

But such battles are notoriously hard to win, legal experts say, and the odds are stacked in the lenders' favor.

"What happens most of the time is that people are just lied to," said Jordan Ash, director of the Acorn Financial Justice Center advocacy group in St. Paul, Minnesota.

"But if the documents are in order and their signature is on all the papers, there really aren't many ways to fight back."

Mary Beyer, a 52-year-old divorced mother of four from Jenison, Michigan, said she was misled while refinancing her home with a subprime loan she could not afford.

The loan salesman, she said, listed her as employed on the application even though she told him she was out of work and surviving on Social Security payments of just $643 a month.

Beyer, who suffers from chronic asthma and receives disability payments, admits she did not read all of the fine print but said she was desperate for the loan after running out of money to pay her electricity bill.

This month, she was told her home of 20 years would be repossessed.

"I was too trusting when they said I could do this loan," she said.

"Now, every time someone talks about foreclosure or selling it, I get asthma attacks and the lungs just start closing up."

"Everything I've ever done is between these four walls."

Local housing advocates plan to take her case to court.

As a housing slowdown puts millions of subprime borrowers at risk of default, debate is shifting to whether lenders should be required to ensure their loans are suitable for their customers, said Deborah Goldstein, executive vice president of the Center for Responsible Lending.

Some states such as Ohio have called on mortgage lenders and brokers to do more to make sure their loans are realistic.

Maine, California and Minnesota look likely to follow, Goldstein said, noting that federal banking regulators proposed guidelines this month for lenders who issue adjustable rate mortgages to subprime borrowers.

But that is little solace to those being foreclosed.

"There are lots of people who may be trying to fight back in terms of yelling at the company over the phone or writing letters, but people don't necessarily know what to do legally when they are being foreclosed," said Ash.

end quotes

Well, here we are, right back to the Savings and Loan crisis from what?

When was that?

1980's or so?

GREAT BIG BAIL-OUT REQUIRED ...

All these alleged "CONTROLS" put in place so that that couldn't happen again ...

Just like the "CONTROLS" put in place after the GREAT DEPRESSION in the 1930's ...

"CONTROLS" that are really just as BUNCH OF NOTHING ....

Nobody really pays any heed to them ...

They are not enforced ....

They just give the POLITICIANS something to gull us one more time with ....

While in reality, they are giving the ones who are screwing people a nudge and a wink ...

"DON'T WORRY ABOUT A THING, BOYS, IT'LL STAY BUSINESS AS USUAL ..."

Which it has ...

One more time ....

PHONEY CONTROLS notwithstanding ....

And so ...

And by way of some background ....

Savings and Loan crisis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980s was a wave of savings and loan association failures in the United States in which over 1,000 savings and loan institutions failed in "the largest and costliest venture in public misfeasance, malfeasance and larceny of all time."

The ultimate cost of the crisis is estimated to have totaled around USD$150 billion, about $125 billion of which was consequently and directly subsidized by the U.S. government, which contributed to the large budget deficits of the early 1990s.

The concomitant slowdown in the finance industry and the real estate market may have been a contributing cause of the 1990-1991 economic recession.

Background

Savings and loan institutions (also known as S&Ls or thrifts) have existed since the 1800s.

They originally served as community-based institutions for savings and mortgages.

In the United States, S&Ls were tightly regulated until the 1980s.

For example, there was a ceiling on the interest rates they could offer to depositors.

In the late 1970s, many banks, but particularly S&Ls, were experiencing a significant outflow of low-rate deposits, as interest rates were driven up by Federal Reserve actions to restrict the money supply, a move Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker instituted to wring inflation out of the economy, and as depositors moved their money to the new high-interest money-market funds.

At the same time, the institutions had much of their money tied up in long-term mortgage loans that were written at fixed interest rates, and with market rates rising, were worth far less than face value.

That is, in order to sell a 5% mortgage to pay requests from depositors for their funds in a market asking 10%, a savings and loan would have to discount their asking price.

This meant that the value of these loans, which were the institution's assets, was less than the deposits used to make them and the savings and loan's net worth was being eroded.

Under financial institution regulation which had its roots in the Depression era, federally chartered S&Ls were only allowed to make a narrowly limited range of loan types.

Late in the administration of president Jimmy Carter, this range was expanded when the Federal Home Loan Bank Board eased up on some of its restrictions pertaining to S&Ls, specifically to try to remedy the impact rising interest rates were having on S&L net worth.

And it was the status of an institution's net worth that could trigger a requirement that the Federal Home Loan Bank declare an S&L insolvent and take it over for liquidation.

Also in 1980, Congress raised the limits on deposit insurance from $40,000 to $100,000 per account.

This was significant because a failed S&L by definition had a negative net worth and thus would likely not be able to pay off depositors in full from its loans.

Increasing FDIC coverage also permitted managers to take more risk to try to work their way out of insolvency so that the government would not have to take over an institution.

With that goal in mind, early in the Reagan administration, the deregulation of federally chartered S&Ls accelerated rapidly (see the Garn - St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982), putting them on a more equal footing with commercial banks.

S&Ls could now pay higher market rates for deposits, borrow money from the Federal Reserve, make commercial loans, and issue credit cards.

They were also allowed to take an ownership position in the real estate and other projects to which they made loans and they began to rely on brokered funds to a considerable extent.

This was a departure from their original mission of providing savings and mortgages.

Deregulation and other causes

Although the deregulation of S&Ls gave them many of the capabilities of banks, it did not bring them under the same regulations as banks.

First, thrifts could choose to be under either a state or a federal charter.

Immediately after deregulation of the federally chartered thrifts, the state-chartered thrifts rushed to become federally chartered, because of the advantages associated with a federal charter.

In response, states (notably, California and Texas) changed their regulations so that they would be similar to the federal regulations.

States changed their regulations because state regulators were paid by the thrifts they regulated, and they didn't want to lose that money.

This is similar to the concept of a race to the bottom.

In an effort to take advantage of the real estate boom (outstanding US mortgage loans: 1950 $55bn; 1976 $700bn; 1980 $1.2tn) and high interest rates of the early 1980s, many S&Ls lent far more money than was prudent, and in risky types of ventures in which many S&Ls were not competent.

Whereas insolvent banks in the United States were typically detected and shut down quickly by bank regulators, the Congress and the Reagan Administration sought to kick the can down the road by changing regulatory rules so S&L's would not have to acknowledge insolvency and the FHLB would not have to close them down.

One of the most important contributors to the problem was deposit brokerage.

Deposit brokers, somewhat like stockbrokers, are paid a commission by the customer to find the best certificate of deposit (CD) rates and place their customers' money in those CDs.

These CDs, however, are usually short-term $100,000.00 CDs.

Previously banks and thrifts could only have five percent of their deposits be brokered deposits; the race to the bottom caused this limit to be lifted.

A small one-branch thrift could then attract a large number of deposits simply by offering the highest rate.

In order to make money off this expensive money, it had to lend at even higher rates, meaning that it had to make more risky investments.

This system was made even more damaging when certain deposit brokers instituted a scam known as "linked financing."

In "linked financing" a deposit broker would approach a thrift and say that they would steer a large amount of deposits to that thrift if the thrift would loan certain people money (the people however were paid a fee to apply for the loans and told to give the loan proceeds to the deposit broker).

This caused the thrifts to be tricked into taking on bad loans.

Michael Milken of Drexel, Burnham and Lambert packaged brokered funds for several savings and loans on the condition that the institutions would invest in the junk bonds of his clients.

Another factor was the efforts of the federal government to wring inflation out of the economy, marked by Paul Volcker's speech of October 6, 1979, with a series of rises in short-term interest.

This led to borrowing money and paying interest on deposits costing a thrift more than it could make by lending its money as home loans.

Fallout

The damage to S&L operations led Congress to act, passing a bill in September 1981 allowing S&Ls to sell their mortgage loans and use the cash generated to seek better returns; the losses created by the sales were to be amortised over the life of the loan and any losses could also be offset against taxes paid over the preceding ten years.

This all made S&Ls eager to sell their loans.

The buyers - major Wall Street firms - were quick to take advantage of the S&Ls lack of expertise, buying at 60-90% of value and then transforming the loans by bundling them as, effectively, government backed bonds (by virtue of GNMA, FHLMC, or FNMA guarantees).

S&Ls were one group buying these bonds, holding $150bn by 1986, and being charged substantial fees for the transactions.

A large number of S&L customer's defaults and bankruptcies ensued, and the S&Ls that had overextended themselves were forced into insolvency proceedings themselves.

In 1980 there were 4002 S&Ls trading, by 1983 962 of them had collapsed.

For example, in March 1985, it came to public knowledge that the large Cincinnati, Ohio-based Home State Savings Bank was about to collapse.

Ohio Gov. Richard F. Celeste declared a bank holiday in the state as Home State depositors lined up in a "run" on the bank's branches in order to withdraw their deposits.

Celeste ordered the closure of all the state's S&Ls.

Only those that were able to qualify for membership in the FDIC were allowed to reopen.

Claims by Ohio S&L depositors drained the state's deposit insurance funds.

A similar event also took place in Maryland.

The U.S. government agency Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, which at the time insured S&L accounts in the same way the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insures commercial bank accounts, then had to repay all the depositors whose money was lost.

The Federal Home Loan Bank Board reported in 1988 that fraud and insider abuse were the worst aggravating factors in the wave of S&L failures.

The most notorious figure in the S&L crisis was probably Charles Keating, who headed Lincoln Savings of Irvine, California.

Keating was convicted of fraud, racketeering, and conspiracy in 1993, and spent four and one-half years in prison before his convictions were overturned.

In a subsequent plea agreement, Keating admitted committing bankruptcy fraud by extracting $1 million from the parent corporation of Lincoln Savings while he knew the corporation would collapse within weeks.

Keating's attempts to escape regulatory sanctions led to the Keating five political scandal, in which five U.S. senators were implicated in an influence-peddling scheme to assist Keating.

Three of those senators — Alan Cranston, Don Riegle, and Dennis DeConcini — found their political careers cut short as a result.

Two others — John Glenn and John McCain — were exonerated of all charges and escaped relatively unscathed.

Neil Bush, brother of President George W. Bush and son of former President George H. W. Bush, was director of Silverado Savings and Loan when the institution collapsed in 1988, costing taxpayers $1.6 billion.

Neil Bush was accused of giving himself a loan from Silverado with the cooperation of Ken Good, of Good International, although Bush stated it was not a conflict of interest.

In 1989 congress passed the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) and set up the Resolution Trust Corporation to liquidate assets of failed Savings and Loans.

See also

Fractional-reserve banking
Tax Reform Act of 1986
Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner, a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the tax consequences of the S&L crisis

External links

FDIC: The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography
The Cost of Savings & Loan Crisis: Truth & Consequences
Classic Financial and Corporate Scandals

References

Inside Job, by Steven Pizzo, Mary Fricker, and Paul Muolo. ISBN 0-07-050230-7
"The S&L Debacle: Public Policy Lessons for Bank and Thrift Regulation," by Lawrence White(1991)
"High Rollers: Inside the Savings and Loan Debacle" by Michael Lowy(1991)
United States v. Winstar Corp., 518 U.S. 839 (1996), a US Supreme Court case to be found on FindLaw.com that gives a concise but useful history of the crisis and the accounting practices that aggravated that crisis.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_Loan_crisis"

"Steamroller Spitzer's tactics may end up working against him"

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

First published: Sunday, March 18, 2007

Spitzer and the state Senate are in full battle over the future of financing health care in this state, and the governor wants to bring the war into your living room.

Again.

"I will take the argument to the people," he calmly told Times Union editors last week.

"And I will stick to the facts."

Ah, yes, the facts.

Each side seems to have a suitcase full of those.

By no means is there general agreement as to what the facts are, which makes it all the more difficult for the public to figure which side to support in this fight.

For example: the Senate, backed up by a prominent health care union and the hospital associations, claims the $1.3 billion in Medicaid cuts the governor wants will cripple hospitals, affect services and cost nursing and other health care jobs.

So the Senate wants to restore much of what the governor proposed cutting.

Nonsense, responds the governor, who claims his plan only impacts hospital budgets one half of one percent.

A negligible amount that they should be able to easily make up with efficiencies and stricter negotiations with insurance companies.

Neither jobs nor services are in jeopardy as a result.

"They have an appealing emotional argument that is not fact-based," Spitzer added, also calmly.

No question it is an appealing emotional argument; the problem is we can't be sure there isn't some substance to it as well.

We just don't know.

The first time Steamroller took his case directly to the people was over the DiNapoli appointment as state comptroller a scant month ago, although it already seems like ancient history.

In retrospect, the Legislature was more right than wrong in that heated debacle -- appointing a comptroller was their job, not his -- but the governor came out the big winner anyway in terms of public perception and public relations.

A Legislature with no credibility got tarred as being dysfunctional when it didn't deserve it.

Lord knows that there are enough times when the Legislature does deserve it, but not then.

But the public and much of the media bought it, and Spitzer capitalized on it.

But there are down sides to that victory that already are coming back to haunt him, and will serve him poorly as he fights the far greater battle ahead.

His tactics, for instance, which are those of an unyielding prosecutor, not a consensus builder, came jarringly to light.

His thin skin showed.

A strategy that personalizes attacks on those who even legitimately disagree with him emerged.

It humbled legislators, but didn't go unnoticed by the public either.

Spitzer relied on a short, blunt message that he pounded home over and over in the DiNapoli affair.

"The Legislature is dysfunctional."

"I am the reformer."

"I am right; they are wrong."

Medicaid, by sharp contrast, is an agonizingly complex that no simple message can touch.

Arguably, nearly everything that's been said by both sides could be true.

My sense is that the governor is far more right than wrong about Medicaid, but will turn out to be the short-term loser anyway.

Radical change is needed with Medicaid, and the right approach is Spitzer's shift to a patient-oriented system.

The Senate is committed to perpetuating the traditional provider-institution oriented system we now have.

Radical change, though, will affect the public as well as the Senate, and that's why Spitzer will be the loser in this round.

I'm not sure the public in the living room is ready to hear about sacrifices during this withering crossfire of facts from which no sense can be made.

Confusion of the moment works against Spitzer's progressive plan.

Too bad.

In addition, he's already poisoned the budget negotiations atmosphere with the Senate by his cocky personal style, and now he has to live with the consequences.

And while he can veto the Senate's version of a budget, Eliot Spitzer will not get everything he wants out of ensuing negotiations.

No governor ever has; no governor ever will.

Which means that regardless of his reformer mantle, and some great progressive ideas, we are apt to see that Eliot Spitzer's first state budget is more than 8 percent bigger than last year's.

That represents neither reform, nor the promised constraint, and is bound to take some of the steam out of his roller.

LeBrun can be reached at 454-5453 or by e-mail at flebrun@timesunion.com.

AP New York

"Cuomo details corruption in student loan industry"

By MARK JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer

March 15, 2007

ALBANY, N.Y. -- Colleges across the country are taking kickbacks from student loan companies and reaping other benefits while making it harder for students to get better deals on their loans, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo charged Thursday.

Cuomo said an investigation he began last month into the $85 billion student loan industry found numerous arrangements made to benefit schools and lenders over the students.

Cuomo said he notified more than 400 colleges and universities nationwide, including all in New York State, to end such deceptive practices.

Cuomo said he is actively investigating at least 100 schools.

Cuomo would not divulge which schools were being investigated, but they include some Ivy League institutions.

Cuomo's office is investigating at least six lenders: the nation's largest student-loan provider SLM Corp., Nelnet Inc., Education Finance Partners Inc., EduCap Inc., the College Board and CIT Group Inc.

"There is an unholy alliance between banks and institutions of higher education that may often not be in the students' best interest," Cuomo said.

"The financial arrangements between lenders and these schools are filled with the potential for conflicts of interest."

"In some cases they may break the law."

Investigators found that many colleges have established questionable "preferred lender" lists and entered into revenue sharing and other financial arrangements with those lenders.

In the process, students have been denied their choice of lender, or faced difficulty using that lender, hurting their chances of getting better loan terms, the attorney general said.

According to Cuomo, investigators found:

_Lenders pay kickbacks to schools based on a percentage of the loans directed to the lenders.

_Lenders foot the bills for all-expense-paid trips for financial aid officers to posh resorts like Pebble Beach and exotic locations.

They also provide schools with other benefits like computer systems and put representatives from schools on their advisory boards to curry favor.

_Loan companies set up funds and credit lines for schools to use in exchange for putting the lenders on their preferred lender lists and offer large payments to schools to drop out of the direct federal loan program so that the lenders get more business.

Tom Joyce, a spokesman for SLM, commonly known as Sallie Mae, said his company was cooperating with Cuomo's office and he denied participating in any of the practices being investigated.

Joyce said preferred lender lists increase competition and help drive down the cost of loans while helping students sort out the complex web of financial aid.

He noted that many private-sector lenders are now offering rates below the rate set by the federal government.

He said Sallie Mae has never paid any kickbacks to schools, nor has it flown financial aid officers to exotic locations.

The company has only flown financial aid officers to places like Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and Killeen, Texas, so they could view the company's student loan processing centers, Joyce said.

George Pappas, spokesman for EduCap, said his company was supporting Cuomo's "effort to investigate these collusive practices."

"We don't engage in any of the practices with student loan departments the attorney general's office is investigating," he said.

Sandra Riley, a spokeswoman for The College Board, said her company, which runs a small loan program, is cooperating with the investigation.

Ben Kaiser, a spokesman for Nelnet, said his company has fully complied with the law and was cooperating with Cuomo's office.

"What I get out of it is parents and students should shop around and try to get the lowest interest rates and we fully support that," said Abraham Lackman, president of the Commission on Independent Colleges and Universities.

"As long as the college is just giving recommendations and not requiring students to use a particular lender, I don't see anything wrong with it."

Lackman said preferred lenders in many cases do offer the best rates.

Cuomo disputed that, saying such lists are deceptive because "the lenders are preferred for the school, not the student."

About 90 percent of students and their families use lenders on "preferred" lists while two-thirds of college students take out loans for college, he said.

Dave Henahan, spokesman for the State University of New York System Administration, said SUNY will participate in Cuomo's investigation, and the school shares the attorney general's concern that parents and students need adequate information about how preferred lender lists are created.

"SUNY supports the Attorney General's call for full disclosure to parents and students with regard to financial aid and lending practices," Henahan said.

"No finding of deceptive or illegal practices has been made against any SUNY campus."

Last month, the attorney general requested information from more than 60 public and private colleges and universities nationwide regarding their student loan practices.

Cuomo's office has prepared a pamphlet to help students make more informed decisions on loans.

It's being distributed to every high school in New York and is posted on Cuomo's Web site.
___

On the Net:

www.oag.state.ny.us.

New York Business.com

"Cuomo warns colleges on lending practices"

By: David Jones

Published: March 15, 2007 - 4:10 pm

New York state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo sent out letters to more than 400 colleges and universities warning the institutions to disclose or end deceptive practices in the $85 billion student loan business.

The notifications come after a five-month investigation uncovered widespread practices of kickbacks and other conflicts of interest.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer began probing financial arrangements between the schools and loan providers last November, while he was still attorney general.

Lenders, such as Sallie Mae, were found to have paid kickbacks to schools in return for getting a certain percentage of loans.

Mr. Cuomo said the AG's office found that lenders had funded all-expense-paid trips for financial aid officers and their spouses to high-end resorts, like Pebble Beach.

"There is an unholy alliance between banks and institutions of higher education that may not be in the students' best interest," said Mr. Cuomo.

"The financial arrangements between lenders and these schools are filled with the potential for conflicts of interest."

A source familiar with the probe said that some schools were getting more than $100,000 in kickbacks.

However the source said that many schools were using the funds as financial aid to attract low income and international students.

The AG said every school in New York state was sent a copy of the warning letter, which cautioned schools to ensure they were abiding by state and federal laws.

In February, Mr. Cuomo formally requested information about lending standards from 60 public and private universities.

That number has now risen to 100.

Besides Sallie Mae, Mr. Cuomo's office has requested information from Nelnet, Education Finance Partners, Educap, the College Board and CIT Group.

Sallie Mae officials said the lender was cooperating with the probe.

"Unfortunately, complaints about lender lists have been raised by a few disgruntled competitors who have failed to achieve market success due to inferior, higher-cost products," said Sallie Mae spokesman Tom Joyce.

Officials at CIT Group said it has been contacted by Mr. Cuomo's office and is cooperating with the request.

http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/apps/pbcs.d...E/70315012/1048

Reuters

"Housing 'nightmare' tarnishes the American dream"

Sunday March 18, 12:37 pm ET

By Emily Kaiser

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Jillayne Schlicke's father used to tell her that mortgage banking was the "highest calling of all" because it involved helping people live the American dream of homeownership.

"I learned how to spell 'mortgage' when I was about 6 years old."

"It was on a flash card," said Schlicke, the daughter of two mortgage bankers and co-executive director of the Ethical Lending Foundation near Seattle.

As a widening crisis over nontraditional and subprime mortgages gone bad threatens to force millions of people out of their homes, Schlicke worries that mortgage brokers are well on their way to overtaking used car salesmen on the list of professions least trusted by consumers.

"We're in ethical chaos in mortgage lending," said Schlicke, who followed in her parents' footsteps and became a mortgage banker and now teaches classes for real estate agents, lenders and consumers on ethical mortgage practices.

"All you have to do is open up your spam (e-mail) bin and you see porn spam, and you see Viagra spam, and you see mortgage spam," she said, adding that the unethical behavior of a small minority of brokers was tainting the entire industry.

"It's going to be a long road to climb out of that gutter."

After the housing market slowed in 2006 and more people fell behind on mortgage payments, the foreclosure stories became front-page news across the United States.

In the last three months of 2006, lenders began foreclosure proceedings on about one out of every 200 mortgages, the highest rate on records dating back 37 years, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Some 1.5 million homeowners will face foreclosure this year, research firm RealtyTrac estimates.

"An American dream has become an American nightmare," said Howard Pitkin, commissioner at the Connecticut Department of Banking.

PAYING FOR THE DREAM

Many people accepted complex mortgages to buy homes that were probably out of reach, but deals such as 100-percent financing and adjustable-rate mortgages that initially carried low monthly payments encouraged excess, critics contend.

"The quality of the loan has everything to do with this crisis," said Josh Nassar, vice president for federal affairs at the Center for Responsible Lending in Washington.

Among the biggest culprits were the so-called "2-28" loans that offered low interest rates and payments for the first two years, but then spiked up.

Many borrowers misunderstood the terms or thought they could refinance, and found themselves stuck with mortgages that they could no longer afford.

Nassar and others worry that the true cost of chasing the American dream is adding up quickly.

They say soaring foreclosure rates will rip apart lower-income communities where a disproportionate number of those loans were written.

A study released this month by a group of fair housing agencies showed that the price of homeownership was often higher for black and Hispanic borrowers.

The groups examined lending in six major cities including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago and found that black borrowers were 3.8 times more likely to receive higher-cost home loans than were white borrowers.

Hispanic borrowers were 3.6 times more likely.

"There's a lot of pain that's occurring and will occur because home ownership was sold at too great a price," said Kevin Stein, associate director of the California Reinvestment Coalition, one of the agencies that worked on the study.

John Taylor, president and chief executive officer of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, said foreclosure not only devastates the homeowner's credit rating, but also tends to lower the value of properties nearby.

"We're not anti-subprime."

"There's a role for them."

"They're important."

"But these exotic, nontraditional mortgages that are designed to strip wealth need to be eliminated," Taylor said.

He wants lenders to restructure loans to help people stay in their homes, and has called on the Bush administration and Congress to amend rules governing the Federal Housing Administration so that the agency could refinance subprime borrowers' loans that are in default.

For many, any changes would come too late.

Almas Sayeed, an economic policy analyst at the liberal policy group Center for American Progress, said borrowers going through foreclosure had little chance of regaining the financial footing they would need to qualify for another loan.

"This promise of home ownership starts to elude families that tried to buy a home, bought into a loan that they really couldn't afford, and once they foreclosed, the possibility of owning a home again is really, really limited," she said.

For further information on the subprime crisis, see (ID:nN14246848).

NY TIMES - The Empire Zone

"Odd World as G.O.P. Seeks More Spending"

By MICHAEL COOPER

Published: March 19, 2007

ALBANY — These are strange days in the capital.

When the Republican-led State Senate called last week for spending more in next year’s budget than did the Democratic governor, Eliot Spitzer, or the Democratic-led State Assembly, newspapers around the state marveled at what one called a political “Freaky Friday” and another termed “Bizarro world,” a nod to the alternate, topsy-turvy universe of Superman and “Seinfeld” fame.

That through-the-looking glass quality was only heightened when Michael R. Long, the chairman of the state’s Conservative Party, wrote a letter to Governor Spitzer in support of his budget, saying, “as difficult as your budget is, what the Republican-controlled Senate is proposing forces me to re-evaluate your proposals.”

Senate Republicans even held two long floor debates to get Senate Democrats to come out on record against more spending for health care and education.

All this has allowed Governor Spitzer — who proposed a $120.6 billion budget that would raise spending well above the rate of inflation, but who is calling for some politically difficult health care cuts — to portray himself as the fiscal conservative.

So what does John Faso, the former Republican assemblyman who ran against Mr. Spitzer last year as the fiscally conservative candidate, make of it all?

“I think that I laid out last year the place where the Republican Party needs to be,” he said.

“We need reform, first of all."

"We need fiscal responsibility and lower taxes."

"I don’t think any of the budget proposals out there meet those criteria.”

“But I got just under 30 percent of the vote,” said Mr. Faso, who has returned to the practice of law.

“I’m not sure New Yorkers at this point really are focused on the fiscal condition of the state in the long term.”

“No one has yet repealed the business cycle,” he said.[/size]

“None of the decision makers seem to be considering what happens if the money spigot slows down."

"That’s my concern with the level of projected spending with all the parties’ budgets.”

To Act on False Claims?

Senate Republicans, meanwhile, are rejecting a proposal by the governor to create a state false-claims act for health care fraud, which encourages employees to blow the whistle on malfeasance.

The Senate argues in its budget report that such an act “would be redundant and unnecessary” because there is already a federal False Claims Act that allows the state to share in half of all fraud recoveries.

But recent federal legislation adds an incentive for states that have their own false claims acts, increasing their share of recoveries to 60 percent from 50 percent — a difference that can amount to tens of millions of dollars.

The provision was inserted into legislation by Senator Charles E. Grassley, above, an Iowa Republican, who has been a champion of false claims acts.

Republicans in the State Senate have argued that such a law would be a gift to trial lawyers, and also point to the fact that the federal government has not recognized many states’ false claims acts, considering them insufficient.

The governor and other Democrats argue that such legislation would bring more fraud cases to light and have said their proposed act is tailored to qualify for increased federal benefits.

DANNY HAKIM

A Push for Clean Energy

There may be some money coming into state coffers next year that no one is accounting for.

Under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a multistate pact intended to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, New York State could be in a position to begin auctioning emissions allowances to power plants in January.

Those auctions could yield more than $250 million a year, officials said.

Now Assemblyman Michael N. Gianaris, below — a Queens Democrat whose long interest in energy policy was heightened after the Con Edison blackout in Queens in 2006 — is calling for that money to be earmarked for energy conservation and clean energy development.

In a letter to Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver that was signed by 25 colleagues, he calls for putting language in the budget to make sure the money is dedicated to energy initiatives, not closing budget holes.

“New York should set a goal of doubling energy-efficiency spending,” Mr. Gianaris wrote.

“The best way to do that would be to invest the proceeds from our sales of emissions allowances envisioned by the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiatives and other emissions allowances back into energy conservation activities.”

MICHAEL COOPER

Generous Judicial Screeners

Glittering legal résumés abound among the 23 people Governor Spitzer appointed earlier this month to five screening committees that will review candidates for the state bench.

Among Mr. Spitzer’s appointments are senior partners at some of New York City’s leading law firms, eminent law-school professors and several retired state judges.

But many of the appointees have another qualification, too.

Ten of them contributed to Mr. Spitzer’s gubernatorial campaign, including the leaders of all five committees, who are selected by the governor.

(Each committee will eventually have 13 members, including members appointed by the state bar association, the leaders of the State Assembly and Senate, the attorney general and others.)

The positions are unpaid.

In total, the appointees contributed about $85,000 — small beer in the current world of gubernatorial fund-raising.

Most of that was given by two of the appointees: Robert A. Bourque, chairman of the First Judicial Department Committee, and Henry B. Gutman, who sits on the second department’s committee.

Both are partners at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; together they gave $68,500 to Mr. Spitzer during the 2006 election cycle.

Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer, noted that Mr. Spitzer’s campaign supporters were motivated by his message of reform, and that those selected for the screening panels were among them.

“It’s not surprising that some of the same people who got involved, spoke out or contributed to Eliot’s reform efforts would be interested in getting involved in his administration,” she said.

NICHOLAS CONFESSORE

"To top legislative staffers go the spoils"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, March 19, 2007

It pays to be a top staffer in the Legislature, sometimes even more than being a lawmaker.

To wit: A shiny black 2006 Crown Victoria, registered to the Senate, is getting used daily by recently installed Finance Committee Secretary Jeffrey Lovell.

And a sharp black 2006 Chevrolet Impala, also registered to the Senate, is regularly getting used by Director of Communications John McArdle.

Besides those perks, Lovell and McArdle got raises in December to $180,000 a year.

Lovell, who made $175,100 when he worked for former Gov. George Pataki, got the increase when he joined the Senate late last year.

When Lovell became better-paid than McArdle and other central staffers, Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno saw to it that other top officials got big raises.

For instance, McArdle's pay jumped nearly 8 percent from $162,000 annually.

He also recently got the state car, bringing the package closer to $200,000 in value.

Senators are paid $79,500 a year, plus a committee or leadership stipend in some cases that can add another $15,000.

A few get the use of a state car.

Others who got raises in December included Ken Riddett, the chief counsel, whose pay also rose almost 8 percent to $180,000.

He retired about two weeks later and is now chief lobbyist for the New York State Trial Lawyers Association, a group Senate Republicans tend to treat with disdain.

Riddett replaced another former Senate GOP lawyer, David Dudley.

No filing on the change appears on the state lobbying commission's Web site, but a spokesman for the trial lawyers group said Riddett made the required filing on time.

Mark Hansen, a Bruno spokesman, said the Senate has 19 vehicles to dispatch to senators and "appropriate Senate staff for use on an as-needed basis."

He would not say who gets them.

Three Assembly staffers are assigned cars, said Bryan Franke, a spokesman for Speaker Sheldon Silver, noting that the benefit must be declared as income for taxes.

Two are from the minority: Rebecca D'Agati, the Assembly GOP's top finance officer, has a 2003 Chevrolet Impala, and Howard Becker, a longtime aide to Minority Leader James Tedisco, has a 2003 Chevrolet Tahoe.

Judy Rapfogel, Silver's chief of staff, has a 2002 Chevrolet Impala.

The Assembly has a total of nine other pool cars, Franke said.

Contributor: Capitol bureau reporter James M. Odato. Got a tip? Call 454-5424 or e-mail jjochnowitz@timesunion.com.

end quotes

Riddett replaced another former Senate GOP lawyer, David Dudley.

Interesting ...

About David Dudley, I mean ....

David Dudley was a politically-connected REPUBLICAN lawyer in Rensselaer County in 1988 whose alleged attempts to allegedly "shake-down" developers in East Greenbush, New York for some GEETUS and MOOLAH allegedly led to a federal HOBBS ACT investigation of WHITE-COLLAR CRIME in Rensselaer County, New York, that was "turned off like a light-bulb" in 1989 when the Federal Bureau of Investigation got too close to the "doings" of "IRON DUKE" Joe Bruno in connection with alleged illegal land sales in Rensselaer County involving the "IRON DUKE", along with MISFEASANCE, MALFEASANCE and GROSS NEGLIGENCE in both the Rensselaer County Department of Health and the New York State Department of Health uncovered by a licensed professional engineer in Rensselaer County who was subsequently BRANDED by the STATE OF NEW YORK as an alleged "DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT WITH POST-VIETNAM SYNDROME THAT COULD MAKE HIM IRRATIONAL" and was UNLAWFULLY CONFINED in the secure mental facility of the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, New York on August 22, 2001 based upon a FRAUDULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER issued to the New York State Police and Rensselaer County officials by a medical doctor at NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC. in Troy, New York, which CORPORATION is a member of the New York State Business Council, to whom New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer is beholden .......

And so ...

"NY lobbying reaches $151 million - Influence spending is up, but growth slows"

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

Last updated: 12:08 p.m., Monday, March 19, 2007

Spending on lobbying in Albany reached a record $151 million last year, but the growth of that spending to influence government slowed, the Temporary State Commission on Lobbying reported today.

See story, link to report on the Capitol Confidential blog.

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

"Health care groups lead lobbying spending in Albany"

By MARK JOHNSON, Associated Press

Last updated: 5:02 p.m., Monday, March 19, 2007

ALBANY -- Businesses and special interest groups spent a record $151 million lobbying in Albany last year, the state Lobbying Commission said Monday.

Health care and mental health groups led the way in lobbying expenditures last year, doling out a total of $22.3 million.

They were led by the Healthcare Association of New York State, the biggest overall lobbying spender at $2.23 million.

The Medical Society of the State of New York spent $1.52 million while the Greater New York Hospital Association paid out $1.21 million, according to the Lobbying Commission's annual report.

David Grandeau, the commission's executive director, said that with the current budget battle over health care spending between Gov. Eliot Spitzer and health care groups, the amount spent by those groups is likely to rise even more.

The first installment of broadcast ads lobbying against Spitzer's health care cuts this year cost $4.5 million in just a few days, state lobbying records showed Friday.

After HANYS, Verizon Communications Inc. spent the second most on lobbying -- $2.2 million.

Forest City Ratner Cos., the company behind the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, spent $2.1 million.

The $151 million spent on lobbying in 2006 is up from $149 million in 2005 and $80 million in 2001.

Good government groups said many of the top lobbying spenders are also among the biggest campaign contributors.

They argue that gives the groups even more sway over state government decisions.

The New York State United Teachers union spent $1.7 million on lobbying last year and contributed $1.4 million to politicians.

HANYS spent another $296,000 on campaigns while the Greater New York Hospital Association gave another $500,000, according to data compiled by the New York Public Interest Research Group and the New York chapters of Common Cause and the League of Women Voters.

Monday's report will be the last from the Lobbying Commission.

The agency is slated to become part of a larger Public Integrity Commission under a bill agreed to by Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders.

The new commission will be formed six months after Spitzer signs the bill into law.

The bill has passed both houses of the Legislature.

Separately, Grandeau said Paul Shechtman, appointed by former Gov. George Pataki as chairman of the lobbying commission and the state Ethics Commission, should resign from both positions.

Grandeau said that would let Spitzer appoint a new chairman to the commissions who could head the new combined agency.

Shechtman did not immediately return a call for comment.

"Democrats criticized on budget - Association president says party lining up with Spitzer at expense of health workers"

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

First published: Friday, March 16, 2007

ALBANY -- Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno is on target with complaints that Democrats have turned their backs on the nursing home industry, Carl Young, president of the New York Association of Homes & Services for the Aging, said Thursday.

"Bruno is right on," said Young, who complained that Democrats supported health care cuts in Gov. Eliot Spitzer's budget this week that they had rejected in the past under Gov. George Pataki.

"My question is 'What's changed?' " Young said.

"Are Democratic cuts less hurtful than Republican cuts?"

Spitzer proposes to end cost of living adjustments for rates paid and doing away with an additional Medicaid bonus based on patient mix.

That will reduce public subsidies by $466 million, an average of $700,000 per nursing home, Young said.

A spokesman for Senate Democrats did not respond, although some senators from the minority said they want to deal with the entire budget, not just health care, as they vote on spending.

Young said nursing homes, largely ignored in the fight over Spitzer's health care plans, can only trim staff to deal with funding cuts because payroll is 80 percent of their budgets.

Several homes will close and 6,000 workers will be laid off if Spitzer's plan goes into effect, he said.

"It's not about the nursing homes; it's about the people in them."

"The only option ... is layoffs," he said.

His comments came as the hospital and health care worker lobbies -- staged a large demonstration in New York City against Spitzer's plan.

Bruno, who is pushing to restore $740 million of the $1.3 billion Spitzer wants to shave off the state's health care programs, planned to join the march but canceled due to delays on Amtrak.

Dennis Rivera, president of 1199/SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, said Spitzer is misrepresenting the motivation for his cuts by focusing on hospital administrators' pay.

He said the media campaign against Spitzer, costing almost $1.5 million weekly, will continue.

Starting Saturday, the ads will be paid for exclusively with the collective contributions of the 265,000 SEIU-organized nurses and other workers, he said.

Legislative sources said positive negotiations were under way on health care spending, and that differences in that area may be easier to overcome than on education.

The Senate GOP wants $358 million in extra school funds for Long Island.

Tough negotiations are also expected over tax rebates Senate Republicans desire instead of the tax relief program for middle-income people Spitzer proposes.

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

"Centers get bigger slice of pie - Spitzer's budget plan pleases administrators of community health care programs"

By CATHLEEN F. CROWLEY, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Lost in the furor over Gov. Eliot Spitzer's proposed hospital and nursing home cuts are the "poor little sisters" of the health care system: community health care centers.

"We are certainly enthusiastic about this budget," said Elizabeth Swain, CEO of Community Health Care Association of New York State.

Spitzer has proposed a modest increase for the centers, and they are thrilled.

His spending plan would boost the centers' reimbursement for treating uninsured patients from 16 cents for every dollar spent to 30 cents.

The governor also wants to expand health care coverage to 400,000 uninsured children and 900,000 adults who are eligible for Medicaid.

"It's going to help us an awful lot," said John Silva, CEO of Hometown Health in Schenectady.

"It's going to cover the cost we've been carrying everyday."

Silva estimated 5 percent of his uninsured clients will migrate to Medicaid under Spitzer's plan.

Hometown Health has 24,000 patients and 77,000 patient visits a year.

About 20 percent of the clients are uninsured, 50 percent are on Medicaid and the rest have private insurance.

Uninsured patients are treated for free or pay on a sliding scale.

"We provide almost $2 million a year in either uncompensated or reduced-cost treatment," Silva said.

The federal government pays $1 million toward Hometown Health's deficit.

The rest is scraped together from grants, donations and other sources.

"We are magicians at trying to leverage money, but it's one of the reasons I'm fat, bald and gray," Silva said.

Home health providers also are pleased with Spitzer's proposed budget because he doesn't cut their funding.

The governor's budget maintains home health agencies' cost-of-living adjustment for Medicaid payments and does not cut funding for employee recruitment and retention.

Spitzer also proposed launching several pilot programs aimed at better managing the care of the chronically ill.

"This year, we are pleased with where we are," said Christy Johnston, executive vice president of the New York State Association of Health Care Providers, which represents 500 home health agencies.

The state has 56 federally qualified community health centers that serve patients at 450 locations.

The centers have seen a 54 percent increase in uninsured clients in the past 10 years and struggle to keep their doors open, Swain said.

Community health centers, like hospitals, don't turn away people who are uninsured or on Medicaid, she said.

Private practice doctors, on the other hand, have the choice of serving them or not.

A common problem the centers face is adults who fall on and off Medicaid, a phenomenon called "churning."

Enrolling in Medicaid can take three months and enrollees have to recertify their eligibility every six months, which many forget to do.

Spitzer's plan would reduce churning by extending Medicaid coverage for 12 months, Swain said.

Last week, Spitzer announced his budget dedicated $200 million toward preventive and primary care programs.

The initiatives include nutrition, tobacco and diabetes programs that some community health centers partner with the state to provide.

After several requests from the Times Union, the governor's office released a breakdown of the $200 million that revealed only $29 million of the money is for new initiatives.

The rest is continued funding for existing programs.

Swain and Silva said they are encouraged by Spitzer's ideas, but both said more must be done.

"The primary care system is not the priority in terms of health care funding in this state," Silva said.

"So much money is spent to prop up institutional care in this state."

"We are like poor little sisters."

Silva chalked it up to the powerful influence of hospitals and nursing homes and wondered if Spitzer would be able to sidestep their clout.

The reimbursement system must be revised if Spitzer really wants to shift health care from institutions for prevention and primary care, Swain said.

Primary care is on the low end of reimbursements, and certain prevention programs like diabetes education are not reimbursed by some government health insurance programs.

"Right now, we pay for sick care," Swain said.

"We don't pay for things that make people well."

F. Crowley can be reached at 518-454-5348 or by e-mail at ccrowley@timesunion.com.

Where the money would go

Gov. Eliot Spitzer's proposed state budget dedicated $200 million toward preventive and primary care initiatives, part of his goal of making the state's health care more prevention-oriented than institutionally based.

A detailed list of the programs released by the governor's office shows $29 million of the total amount is for new initiatives, while the rest is continued funding for existing programs.

New initiatives include:

$5 million: Expanded access to cervical cancer vaccines

$5 million: Public education for mammography, colorectal screening, infection control, prenatal care and green cleaning products

$3 million: Childhood lead poisoning prevention

$2.1 million: Prenatal and postpartum home visits

$2 million: Obesity prevention

$1.1 million: Breast and ovarian cancer screening

$250,000: Diabetes Centers for Excellence

$5 million: Nutritional programs

$2.6 million: Emergency contraception education, training and outreach

$2.5 million: System improvements to track contagious diseases like measles and tuberculosis

Funding for existing programs include:

$95 million: Anti-smoking programs

$36 million: Nutritional programs

$20.4 million: School-based health clinics

$18.8 million: Family planning services

$1.5 million: Asthma services

$1.8 million: Diabetes prevention and control

"Big 3 standoff could make budget late - Bruno defends GOP Senate plan"

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

First published: Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Spitzer calls for "real numbers."

"We're at a juncture here," Spitzer said.

"Time is really wasting away ..."

"Now is the time to put real numbers on the table."

The Senate GOP and Spitzer remained billions of dollars apart, Spitzer said at a news conference.

He was joined by Diana Fortuna, president of the Citizens Budget Commission, in sharply criticizing the Senate Republicans' budget plan.

They said it would add $3.2 billion to Spitzer's $120.6 billion plan, wipe out reserves and create a three-year budget deficit of $33 billion.

Spitzer called on Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno to attend a public meeting with other legislative leaders this morning and said Bruno must change his plan substantially.

"We are hoping Sen. Bruno ... and all the other members of the Senate come back to us tomorrow with real numbers, that put us in a range of meaningful discourse," Spitzer said.

The logjam could lead to a late budget, Spitzer said, emphasizing that he cannot bend to Bruno's wishes just to get a deal before the fiscal year starts in 12 days.

Bruno scoffed at the governor's position, suggesting it was posturing, and ridiculed Fortuna's organization as a front for Democrats.

The Citizen Budget Commission, Fortuna said, is a nonpartisan think tank with corporate titans on its board.

"Our differences have narrowed," Bruno said, portraying the situation in a different light than the governor, who said negotiations have gone nowhere.

Bruno said he won't back down from his push to kill more than half the $1.3 billion in health care cuts Spitzer desires and turn back the governor's proposed redistribution of education aid.

He also stands by the Senate Republicans' $2.6 billion plan for rebate checks for all property taxpayers, rather than Spitzer's middle-class tax relief program.

Bruno said he favors an on-time budget, but wouldn't rule waiting out the governor for weeks.

"If it's not done right ... it's not going to be done on time," Bruno said.

"It's up to this governor whether or not he wants to steamroll or if he wants to negotiate."

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver refused to deal with Senate Republicans in conference committees until they offer an affordable budget plan and stop asserting the state has $5 billion more in available funds.

Spitzer said the Assembly Democrats' budget plan is "within the boundaries of wise budgeting" even though he said it would add more than $900 million to his package.

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

About the Citizens Budget Commission

The Citizens Budget Commission is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civic organization devoted to influencing constructive change in the finances and services of New York City and New York State government.

CBC was founded in 1932, a time of great fiscal crisis, when a group of distinguished civic leaders decided to start a research organization that would analyze the City's finances, evaluate the management of City government, report on these matters to its members, and recommend improvements to municipal officials.

In 1984 CBC expanded this analysis to the fiscal affairs of State government.

CBC's pursuit of its mission is embodied in four interrelated roles:

CBC is a watchdog.

The Commission's scrutiny of the efficiency and fiscal standing of government provides a continuous and reliable presence.

"The CBC...is an utterly respectable budget watchdog funded by utterly respectable business people."

"The commission does its best, in its respectable way, to goad and cajole public officials into doing the right thing, fiscally speaking."

The New York Observer

CBC is a research organization.

The most pressing issues facing the City and State are subjected to in-depth study, the results of which are assembled into published reports that include recommendations for improved performance.

"CBC...has credibility as an independent analyst of city and state finances."

"While its 138 trustees...are drawn from the business community, CBC is less a defender of specific business interests than an advocate for lower taxes, balanced budgets and long-term investment in the city's capital needs."

Crain's New York Business

CBC is a monitor of implementation.

Recommending solutions to problems is not sufficient by itself.

The Commission follows up on its suggestions by tracking public officials' progress - or lack thereof - toward implementing change.

"Of all the folks in New York who have taken it upon themselves to second-guess city government, the members of the Citizens Budget Commission do it best."

"The CBC is dedicated to helping City Hall live within its means - a thankless task of late - and its commentary on fiscal matters is generally right on the money."

New York Post

CBC is a disseminator of information.

Shedding light on the problems of City and State government requires getting the word out.

CBC functions as a resource for nonpartisan information on the City and State budgets and the delivery of services to New Yorkers.

The Commission is a ready reference for the news media, other civic groups, the concerned public, and public officials.

"The Commission's biggest priority is restoring people's confidence in the integrity and competence of New York City government."

"Its claim to fame is maintaining a historical record as a civic organization that calls the shots as it sees them."

New York Newsday

http://www.cbcny.org/

Newsday

State/Region

"Former aide denies role in Bruno probe"

BY DAN JANISON

dan.janison@newsday.com

March 20, 2007

ALBANY - Earlier in his career, the state's top lobbying regulator, David Grandeau, served as Sen. Joseph Bruno's trusted counsel, both on a legislative commission and in his private telecommunications business.

Today, the Senate majority leader's friends grumble that, despite their past close ties, Grandeau is responsible for a federal probe that has collected information on Bruno's business interests - including, as it happens, a now-defunct real-estate venture called First Grafton that Grandeau helped incorporate in the 1980s.

"I understand that the senator feels I'm responsible for the investigation," Grandeau told Newsday.

"That is not the case."

"No one can make the FBI do anything."

No charges have been made so far.

The tension has been public for weeks in a city where a governmental clash - even one involving an ethics official and New York's most powerful senator - can have the feel of a family feud.

What is not known is what comes next for Grandeau, 47, a lawyer who has directed the Temporary Commission on Lobbying for 12 of its nearly 30 years.

The commission is finally proving temporary.

Under an ethics law recently enacted by Gov. Eliot Spitzer and the legislature, the commission will merge with the state Ethics Commission.

Joining Spitzer?

Grandeau, who investigated lobbyists in past unrelated cases involving Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Bruno, had said he'd be willing to run the newly combined Commission on Public Integrity.

Reported friction between Grandeau and Spitzer has been smoothed over, officials say privately.

It is unclear when the panel's members, and in turn their staff personnel, will be appointed, or who they will be.

Grandeau, though, said he's interested only under certain conditions.

"It comes down to culture," he said.

"The state ethics commission and the lobbying commission are two very distinct cultures."

"If it will be the culture of the [less aggressive] ethics commission, then I'm not interested at all. "

Last month, Grandeau took a public hit of his own.

An Albany TV station, News10, reported that a local woman lost her $48,000-a-year job at the lobbying commission after being wrongly blamed for leaking word that Grandeau and seven employees were at the Schenectady Curling Club in the middle of the workday.

All were curling on their time off, Grandeau told News10.

He said he cannot discuss personnel matters, but denied the employee, Patti Wade, was fired over the curling matter, as she'd asserted.

A broken bond

In that context, Bruno, 77, was asked following a public appearance whether Grandeau was his man.

"'Was' is the operative word," Bruno told reporters, "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 [lobbying] position. "

Pressed for comment on the Wade firing, Bruno said Grandeau "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. "

For his part, Grandeau says: "I was someone who worked for Joe Bruno, had a lot of respect for Joe Bruno, considered Joe Bruno a close friend."

"What I am today is someone who has no relationship with Joe Bruno ..."

"I'm going to doggedly pursue violations no matter where they lead - even if it's to a former close friend."

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny...enews-headlines

"Public budget talks stall; private talks tackle education, health"

By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press

Last updated: 4:02 p.m., Tuesday, March 20, 2007

ALBANY -- Teddy Roosevelt's massive desk in the Capitol was covered by green felt and Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders who were supposed to negotiate a budget around it Tuesday couldn't help but note that it looked like a poker table.

But nobody tipped his hand.

Although it appeared the year's first public budget negotiation session left them only more entrenched, behind the scenes their staffs were trying to work out a way to settle it all.

And the key, as it is almost every year, is school aid: Senate Republican leader Joseph Bruno wants more aid for some wealthier -- but heavily taxed -- school districts on Long Island and elsewhere while Spitzer -- seeking to drive most increases to high-needs schools -- may be ready to deal, according to officials from all sides briefed on the private talks.

The Senate wants to return to a traditional "shares" system in which large suburban schools receive substantial aid increases based on their enrollment.

The shares help districts in the Senate GOP's Long Island base.

Spitzer is considering providing more aid to some of those schools, but doesn't want to drop his needs-based formula.

Spitzer and Senate majority officials familiar with the private negotiations said that's a key to compromise.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the talks.

Also in the works is a shift in Bruno's position on health care spending.

Bruno had proposed restoring most of Spitzer's nearly $1.4 billion in cuts in his health care reform package but is now considering something closer to the position of the Democrat-led Assembly, which would restore $483 million of Spitzer's cuts.

The Assembly plan keeps most of his reforms intended to direct funding away from hospitals and to at-home and community-based care which Spitzer said is cheaper and better.

Officials from all sides say the Assembly's position appears to be the target for a health spending agreement.

Those two areas could yield partial wins for Bruno and Spitzer, who are at the center of renewed concern that the state budget might not be settled by the April 1 start of the fiscal year.

Bruno wants to add $3 billion to Spitzer's $120.6 billion budget proposal, mostly in rebate checks worth hundreds of dollars to property taxpayers.

The Assembly would add $1 billion to Spitzer's budget, adopting most of his reforms in health care and other policies.

The mood around Roosevelt's desk wasn't conciliatory.

"Fiscal discipline is what we need, hard decisions is what we need to face up to," Spitzer told Bruno.

"And, Joe, with all due respect, I don't think your budget, by increasing spending by $3 billion, did that."

"If we are going to get a budget done, we are not going to pit one school district against another," Bruno said later.

To varying degrees, Spitzer had the support of his lieutenant governor, David Paterson; Democratic Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver; Democratic Senate leader Malcolm Smith and Republican Assembly leader James Tedisco.

"I think it's even," Bruno said of the odds,

"Five of them and one of me."

While the speeches were made -- there was no true negotiation -- Bruno sometimes glanced at the ceiling, once winked to someone in the crowd of reporters and staff, adjusted his tie and rubbed his brow.

During Bruno's response to the governor and his allies, Spitzer grinned as he took notes.

Late in the discussion, Bruno tried to explain his estimate of available funds to spend.

Bruno's number is $4.9 billion, which no other leader agreed with.

Silver smiled and interrupted:

"Sen., we have your number."

"N.Y. Lobbying Commission director accused of personal vendetta"

Associated Press

Last updated: 5:34 p.m., Tuesday, March 20, 2007

ALBANY -- The executive director of the state Lobbying Commission was accused in court papers of offering to settle an investigation into former state Attorney General Dennis Vacco's lobbying firm if the business would find another job for a commission staffer.

Attorney James Crane claims Lobbying Commission Executive Director David Grandeau repeatedly investigated Crane & Vacco LLC in "bad faith" because of "personal animosity" toward him.

Crane made the charges in a response to a lawsuit seeking to force him to testify in an investigation of the firm.

Crane's wife, Constance Crane, is a partner with former Attorney General Dennis Vacco in the business.

James Crane does legal work for the firm and represented Grandeau during his tenure as Troy city manager in 1994 and 1995.

The allegations were reported Tuesday by The Record of Troy.

Grandeau did not immediately return a call for comment.

Crane claims Grandeau offered to settle a 2005 investigation if Crane & Vacco "would hire, or would arrange to have an employment opportunity for Kris Thompson," a former spokesman for the Lobbying Commission.

Thompson, now a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, said he had no knowledge of such an offer.

He said his relationship with Grandeau was "difficult and extremely contentious from time to time."

The commission was investigating the signing of a contract that guaranteed the firm $5.5 million if it won the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma approval to open a casino in New York.

By law, lobbyists cannot agree to deals in which payments are based on the success of a project or legislation.

Crane & Vacco agreed to pay $50,000 to settle the investigation but refused to sign the agreement after Grandeau publicly said he believed a crime was committed.

Crane & Vacco admitted no wrongdoing in the agreement.

Subsequently, Albany County District Attorney David Soares investigated the case, but did not file any charges against the firm.

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION ....

Comment by John Galt — March 20, 2007 @ 8:38 am

ITEM: The Post renewed its call for Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, to reveal his client list and salary at the law firm where he is of counsel.

This “thing” of LAWYER’S OMERTA, the famed “Lawyer’s Code of Silence” with respect to who their “clients” really are, when those lawyers also hold public positions here in New York State that can directly benefit their undisclosed “clients”, be it as town attorneys, or town judges, as in the case of East Greenbush Town Judge Kevin Engel, or as state officials, is very troubling, especially when we are confronted with what appears to be a “back-room” deal between “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer and the New York State Bar Association to turn our state Constitution on its head by turning over the selection of our state Supreme Court justices to the bar association and Eliot Spitzer, himself a rich lawyer with ties to one of the richest “WHITE COLLAR CRIME DEFENSE” law firms here in the USA, a “back-room” deal which was outlined in the TU story “State’s lawyers suggest constitutional amendment - Merit selection of judges expected by 2009″ by MICHELE MORGAN BOLTON, last updated 12:26 p.m., Tuesday, January 23, 2007:

“ALBANY - The 72,000-member New York State Bar Association revealed a legislative package today intended to amend the state Constitution to allow for the merit selection of state judges.”

“The bar wants an interim judicial selection plan to take effect over the next three years while a merit-selection constitutional amendment is being approved.”

In essence, the New York State Bar Association, which does not in the least represent our interests as state citizens, wants one of its fellow members, “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer to set aside our Constitution with some kind of governor’s writ or decree that will have us getting our state supreme court justices exclusively from whomever this lawyer’s guild chooses to give us, without us knowing anything about whose interests are really being fronted or represented by these judges, who hold considerable power over our very lives, and livelihoods here in New York State ….

In a TU story “U.S. Supreme Court To Review NY Court Case” dated February 20, 2007 at 11:31 am by Jay Jochnowitz, State Editor, Albany, New York Times Union, it is stated:

“Some — including Gov. Eliot Spitzer and the state bar association — have suggested the convention system and judicial election should be scrapped in favor of a merit-based selection process.”

Which takes us to a story about JUDICIAL SCREENING PANELS in the Gotham Gazette entitled “Surrogate’s Court And Why It Should Go” by Gary Tilzer, dated 04 Jul 2005 wherein is stated:

“Though Koch set up panels to screen candidates for judgeships, presumably based on merit, as time went on, the erstwhile reformers became more and more dependent on contributions and support from the machine politicians and the law firms that benefit from Surrogate patronage.”

“Since then, Koch himself – along with other prominent politicians, including former Governor Mario Cuomo — has been the beneficiary of the Surrogate’s Court.”

“Koch, for example, received $77,000 for a guardianship in 2001 and 2002, according to the New York Observer.”

“‘I’m on the list of people who are qualified,’ Koch told the Observer.”

“‘They’re very careful to prevent [the court] from being used as a trough.’”

“Today, every candidate who runs for Surrogate pledges to make ‘reforms’ and end the court’s patronage.”

“Once elected, they do nothing.”

http://www.gothamgazette.com/article//20050704/202/1472

And that takes us to a story from the NY Times “Empire Zone” BLOG entitled “Spitzer Donor Sees Albany as Presidential Test - Skadden Arps lawyer Doug Dunham says that if reforms succeed, Eliot could be the next Grover Cleveland.” by Azi Paybarah, wherein is stated:

“According to one of Eliot Spitzer’s major contributors, the success of the Governor’s reform agenda in Albany could end up being a test run for something much bigger down the road.”

“’I can certainly see him being a really viable contender for President if he’s able to get all these reforms through,’ said Doug Dunham, a major Democratic fund-raiser who is counsel at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.”

“By Mr. Dunham’s thinking, Mr. Spitzer needs to succeed in his plan to flip control of the Republican-led State Senate to the Democrats.”

“He would then be able to push through his agenda of reform, and could in turn parlay that into a successful bid for the White House.”

http://www.nyobserver.com/20070226/2007022…_newsstory2.asp

As to who Skadden Arps is, besides a rich “WHITE COLLAR CRIME DEFENSE” law firm, all one need to do is go to this link, and that information will be available, except we, the citizens of the State of New York, will still be ignorant as to whose interests people like lawyer Eliot Spitzer are really representing when they are deciding the various “state policies” that have such a direct impact on our lives here in New York State, especially when those lawyers like “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer have connections to such a rich “WHITE COLLAR CRIME DEFENSE” law firm like Skadden Arps:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skadden%2C_Ar...eagher_%26_Flom

From this citizen’s point of view, it is past time to end LAWYER’S OMERTA, here in New York State, when lawyers hold public office, especially as local judges, or state supreme court justices, or members of the state legislature, or the position of governor, itself ….

If you want to be a lawyer out there in the world, and keep secret whose money you are taking as a “rented pencil” so be that, have at it …

If you want to come into the public domain, however, FULL DISCLOSURE, first, or stay the hell out ….

We don’t need you, we don’t want you, and that is that ….

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4117#comments

Capital News 9

"Spitzer says good budget more important than on-time budget"

Updated: 3/20/2007 7:15 AM

By: Ryan Peterson

Governor Spitzer said, "Anybody who thinks that somehow the prospect that my first year as governor I would be fearful of having a late budget misunderstands, fundamentally, what my guiding principles as governor are all about."

With the April 1 budget deadline looming right around the corner, Governor Spitzer is standing his ground while both he and the Senate Majority are placing blame on each other for stalled negotiations.

Spitzer said, "There was an opportunity for the Assembly to demonstrate leadership and they did."

"They made hard decisions."

"They moved us in a direction that brought us within fair boundaries of wise budgeting."

"The Senate bill, as I've made clear over the past couple of days, did not do so."

Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno said, "Let's find out if we have legitimate differences or are people just posturing trying to create a crisis in this state."

While the Governor and Majority Leader may not agree on the particulars of the process, they're together on the thought that a good budget is more important than timely one.

Spitzer said, "I in no way will regret having a late budget if it is the only way we can tame the rabid spending that has too often been the storyline here in Albany."

Bruno said, "The most important thing is what the Governor said today."

"What'd he say?"

"He said a good budget, a right budget is more important than an on-time budget."

"I agree with the Governor."

In an effort to move the budget process forward, Spitzer called for a five-way, public meeting with the legislative leaders Tuesday morning.

The Governor hopes all parties involved will come forward with substantially different proposals.

Bruno says, not so fast.

"It'll really be up to this Governor whether he wants to steamroll or whether he wants to negotiate."

"The constitution says the Governor will submit a budget to the Legislature."

"The Legislature will respond to the Governor."

"It's our turn to respond."

"That's what we're trying to do," said Bruno.

Spitzer side-stepped the government shutdown question by saying he's ready to withstand whatever the pain may be in order to get the right budget.

http://www.capitalnews9.com/content/top_st...asp?ArID=207576

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Budget better later than fatter, El warns Senate Republicans"

BY JOE MAHONEY

DAILY NEWS ALBANY BUREAU CHIEF

Tuesday, March 20th 2007, 4:00 AM

ALBANY - Gov. Spitzer warned Senate Republicans yesterday to come back to "the realm of the reasonable" with their spending proposals - or New Yorkers will be doomed to a late budget.

"The prospect of a late budget will not deter me from saying 'no' to those proposals that are simply flawed," Spitzer told reporters as he tried to jump-start stalled budget talks.

"'On time' is important, but getting it right is more important," he said.

With less than two weeks to go before the April 1 deadline, public negotiations are slated to go full tilt this morning at the Capitol after the governor insisted on a sitdown with the four legislative leaders.

Spitzer has been at odds chiefly with Senate GOP leader Joe Bruno (R-Rensselaer), who has defied tradition by offering up the most expensive proposal.

In January, Spitzer proposed a $120.6 billion budget, which would increase spending by more than twice the rate of inflation but was half of recent state budget increases.

The Democrat-led Assembly proposed to keep most of Spitzer's health care spending cuts and education aid increases in its budget, which would boost overall spending by about $1 billion.

The Senate Republican proposal, however, would increase spending an additional $3 billion - but most of it would be in property tax cuts and tax rebate checks that would triple last year's rebates.

Spitzer was backed by Diana Fortuna, president of the independent Citizens Budget Commission, who said the gov's plan was far preferable to a Senate budget that would leave the state facing big deficits.

"The Senate bill takes four giant steps backward," Fortuna said.

Bruno retorted that Fortuna's group was being used as a tool by Democrats.

"We can close a budget within two hours," Bruno said, insisting that a difference of several hundred million dollars is small in the context of a proposed budget of $120.6 billion.

Meanwhile, health care workers union Local 1199 unleashed a new TV attack ad skewering Spitzer's attempt to curb rising Medicaid spending.

The ad features a 94-year-old woman and 97-year-old woman said to be living in New York City nursing homes.

"I voted for Spitzer because I had faith that he would do the right thing," said 94-year-old Anna Rose in the spot.

jmahoney@nydailynews.com

With News Wire Services

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/03/20...r_el_warns.html

WXXI

"Spitzer Won't be Deterred by a Late Budget"

Karen DeWitt

ALBANY, NEW YORK (2007-03-19) Governor Spitzer said for the first time Monday that he's willing to put up with a late state budget in order to get the right budget.

There's less than two weeks to go until the deadline for the state budget, and Governor Spitzer says he's getting very little cooperation from the State Senate.

Spitzer and Senate Republicans have been mired in a fight over health care spending.

The governor wants to cut money to hospitals and nursing homes, saying he wants Medicaid money to go to patients, not institutions.

Senate Republicans have proposed restoring the entire $1.3 billion dollars in cuts.

Spitzer says if what he considers to be intransigence continues, he won't let the pressure to achieve an on-time budget force him to make compromises.

"On time is important, getting it right is much more important," he said.

"Anybody who thinks that somehow the prospect that my first year as governor I would be fearful of having a late budget, misunderstands fundamentally what my guiding principles as governor are all about."

Spitzer says he's willing to tolerate weeks without a state budget, if necessary.

He did not say whether he'd consider shutting down the government, or whether he'd offer extender bills to keep government running, if the budget were late.

Spitzer, saying budget talks have not been "fruitful" up to this point, will hold an open meting with legislative leaders Tuesday morning.

He says he wants Senate Republicans to present to him a new spending plan.

Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno says the Senate is sticking to it's budget plan, and the governor needs to be more willing to compromise if he wants to reach a deal on time.

"That's going to be really up to this governor on whether or not he wants to steamroll or whether he wants to negotiate," said Bruno.

Assembly Democrats have proposed a budget that restores part of the funding that Spitzer wants to cut.

In a statement, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said stalled legislative budget conference committees can not be revived because the Senate "has been unwilling to discuss realistic spending targets".

New York's 20 years of late budgets helped earn the state the designation as the most dysfunctional government in the nation.

Government reform groups harshly criticized previous governors and the legislature for the late budgets.

Now, Spitzer has one of the most vocal critics, the Citizens Budget Commission, on his side.

Diana Fortuna, who is President of the budget watchdog group founded by business interests, says while she isn't happy about the idea of a late budget, she prefers it to a bad budget.

"We had bad budgets happening in the month of August," she said, referring to record late budgets in the 1990's.

"If a few weeks makes for a good budget, and April 1st makes for a bad budget, I would take the wait."

Senator Bruno shot back that the Citizens Budget Commission is biased.

He called them "democrat operatives".

"I know they're joined in places with this Governor to just bash us, which is kind of silly and irresponsible," he said

"In terms of being objective, give me a break."

Senator Bruno had his own supporters at his news event.

A representative from the State School Boards Association said his group supports the Senate education aid distribution plan.

A representative from a nursing home lobby group says his organization backs the Senate plan to restore nearly half a billion dollars in cuts to nursing homes.

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/new...1055735§ionID=1

NY POST

"THE SPEAKER'S DAY JOB"

March 20, 2007 -- Look who's back in the news: Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and his conflicts of interest.

The Post's Carl Campanile reports that three upstate counties - which rely on Silver for state funding - have hired the speaker's law firm to help them recover allegedly overbilled Medicaid funds from drug companies.

The three county governments awarded Weitz & Luxenberg - which boasts that it's obtained $1.3 billion for its clients over the past two decades - a no-bid contract that will pay the law firm 20 percent of whatever it collects.

That could be millions.

Silver has been "of counsel" to the firm for years.

He refuses to disclose what he does for the firm, or his salary.

And this isn't the first time questions have been raised about whether Silver is serving two masters at once.

Last year, Weitz & Luxenberg was forced to pull some online ambulance-chasing ads, offering New Yorkers a "how to" guide on suing the state parks system -for which Silver, as speaker, provides both funding and oversight.

Over the years, Silver has been a one-man roadblock to tort reform.

Just last year, he killed a disability-reform bill affecting city employees that would have saved City Hall millions - at the expense of his fellow trial lawyers.

He enraged Manhattan DA Robert Morgenthau by endorsing the prosecutor's call to lift the five-year statute of limitations on rape charges - without mentioning that his bill also removed the statute of limitations on filing civil lawsuits, another gift to the trial lawyers.

Weitz & Luxenberg insists Silver's ties to the firm are pretty negligible; indeed, partner Arthur Luxenberg told The Post's Campanile that the speaker gets only a "modest advance" on the cases he refers, which amounts to "not a lot" of business.

If true, that raises an obvious question: Why all the secrecy?

If Silver's ties to Weitz & Luxenberg are as innocent as he and the firm maintain, why won't he disclose the details?

The state Public Officers Law directs that no legislator "should have any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect" that substantially conflicts with his public duties.

It even bars lawmakers from giving "the impression that any person . . . unduly enjoys [his or her] favor."

It's Sheldon Silver's obligation to prove that his relationship with Weitz & Luxenberg does not run afoul of the Public Officers Law.

Until he does, New Yorkers have every reason to assume the worst.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03202007/posto...editorials_.htm

end quotes

It's Sheldon Silver's obligation to prove that his relationship with Weitz & Luxenberg does not run afoul of the Public Officers Law ....

EXCEPT ...

In actuality, as the law is applied in New York State, it is not Sheldon Silver's obligation to prove a thing ....

The State of New York has put that burden square onto the complainant, and since the burden can never be met, in the case of a lawyer like Silver, with the LAWYER'S CODE OF OMERTA in place that makes it impossible to know who these lawyers are really in bed with, and whose interests these lawyers are really fronting ....

Well ....

Hey ...

The New York Post editors had to print something, anyway, even if it was dead wrong ...

And so ...

City Hall News

"The Young Turks - How the reformers are changing Albany - and how Albany is changing the reformers"

By Edward-Isaac Dovere

The new, fresh-faced legislators burrow into their coats in the early morning cold and hurry to the train north to Albany.

Lobbyists, well-wishers and other attention-seekers stop by their seats—some resting their hands on the well-worn red Amtrak upholstery, some dipping in for a few minutes to the open spots.

Everyone in the train car, nearly, has business in Albany.

Every one of them knows about Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D) and the reformer ideology he has been trumpeting around the state, and about the public pressure to change the way business is done in the state capital.

When the hangers-on are not talking to the new legislators, they are talking to their more experienced colleagues, or dealing connections and cracking jokes with each other.

“I’m going to straighten out Albany,” one says to another with a laugh on a recent Tuesday, before the first train pulls out of Penn Station.

The other snickers.

“I’ll follow you,” he says, pivoting and heading to his seat a few rows back.

Reform.

A lot of people read a lot of things into the Legislature’s election of Thomas DiNapoli as the new state comptroller.

One thing few noticed: when DiNapoli’s seat is filled—along with the others scheduled for special elections March 27—76 of the Assembly’s 150 members will have first arrived in Albany only since the year 2000.

More people will have first come to the Assembly after the dawn of the 21st Century than before it.

An arbitrary statistic, perhaps.

For a Legislature routinely attacked as needing term limits to flush out the entrenched interests and encrusted legislators, though, the 50 percent turnover has come as a slow and rarely-remarked upon surprise.

On the other side of the Capitol, nearly a third of state senators—20 of 62—are new with the millennium.

Most of the new legislators campaigned their way into the Legislature precisely on promises to change Albany’s status quo, which has for years been targeted by good government groups across the state and across the nation.

To some extent, they have been successful in making changes.

Both the Assembly and State Senate adopted rules reforms in January 2005.

Assembly committee hearings are now more frequent, with committee membership decreased in both bodies to stop attention from being spread too thin and increase attendance.

Conference committees open to members outside the leadership are still rare, but when bills reach the floor, members need to be in their seats to vote on them.

Before, members were automatically recorded as voting yes on everything, unless they entered the chamber specifically to vote no.

Few did then, or at other times.

Reform, said Assembly Member Charles Lavine (D-Nassau), is “much like pornography and beauty: it’s in the eye of the beholder.”

“There’s no question that there’s been a change because there’s new blood, particularly in the Assembly,” said Lawrence Norden, counsel at New York University law school’s Brennan Center.

Norden co-authored last year’s “Unfinished Business: New York State Legislative Reform 2006 Update.”

The report examined the extent to which the 2004 proposals of the public policy institute have been implemented, and to what effect.

These days, from what he reads and from the conversations he has with legislators, Norden speaks of both a new energy and new atmosphere within the two chambers of state lawmakers, echoing a common sentiment about Albany in 2007.

With that, and Spitzer as the new, reform-minded governor after 12 years under his predecessor, the state is at the brink of what Brennan Center executive director Michael Waldman has called a “once-a-generation opportunity to renew government and politics in New York.”

Norden and Waldman are among those watching expectantly for those who charged to the capital as reformers to tear the status quo apart.

Whether after a few months or years on the job, these reform-minded politicians will be doing so with quite the same ferocity they promised and springs in their steps still remains unclear.

To Richard Gottfried (D), Manhattan’s Upper West Side Assembly member whose 36 years in office make him the longest-serving Albany lawmaker (first elected before several of his current colleagues were born), that has a lot to do with false expectations.

Gottfried contended that the openness of the political process in Albany and the ability to influence debates at every level is surprising for newcomers and would be “eye-opening for their constituents,” whom he knows are pessimistic about state government.

When Democrats “dramatically rewrote the rules” after first taking the Assembly majority in 1975, Gottfried said, they oversaw a necessary transformation of the chamber.

Those changes forced bills to be sent to committees, eliminated proxy voting within committees, and enabled bill sponsors to force votes on legislation within committees.

Gottfried is fast to point out that the State Senate did not adopt those changes then, or since.

Gottfried still is not satisfied—he speaks ardently about the need to create a public campaign finance system as a way of making competitive elections more frequent, and thereby, forcing incumbents to be more accountable to their constituents.

But he feels the need for more rules reform in the chamber is not as dire as outsiders think.

The man who sits at Gottfried’s right on the Assembly floor, Charles Lavine (D-Nassau), is one of those people who says he has experienced a perspective shift.

Lavine defeated six-term incumbent David Sidikman in the 2004 Democratic primary as the first candidate backed by Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi’s (d) Fix Albany campaign.

That movement was based on the argument that Albany dysfunction was corroding municipalities through reckless spending and “unfunded mandates” for programs like Medicaid.

After two years of experience, Lavine said, he now realizes that what he “used to read in the papers is not quite the way things really happen,” adding, “the reality is of course what I knew it would be, which is infinitely more complex.”

The Fix Albany campaign has itself gone mostly dormant, with even its website recently going off-line.

Lavine is still after structural tweaks, like enabling bills passed but not signed into law by the end of a calendar year within one session to be debated without being reintroduced (“we probably spend close to a month, give or take, sitting and passing the same darn bills that we had passed a year before,” he said).

He also wants to make the Legislature meet year round.

He admits that his ideas may not match exactly with those of all the others who have helped make “reform” the most popular word for stump speeches and campaign mailers in contemporary New York politics.

Reform, he said, is “much like pornography and beauty: it’s in the eye of the beholder.”

But whatever changes do come, Lavine said, he now realizes they will come slowly.

Even with a “critical mass” of new, reform-minded legislators growing in the Assembly, he said, they first must put in their time, “establishing credibility and then being able to stand up for change.”

“I don’t think there’s any question: the longer that you’re there, the more the way it works makes sense,” said Lawrence Norden, counsel at the Brennan Center.

With its gold-etched committee room walls reaching up to high, carved ceilings hung with ornate lamps, the Capitol can be an imposing place.

First-time visitors regularly get lost, confusing one red stone internal staircase for another.

Even those with a few more trips to Albany under their belts can occasionally be seen doing laps around the corridors, searching for room numbers not always so apparent from the posted signs.

Within that imposing, imperial design is another reality, perhaps best represented by the dorm room-issue wooden tables crowded into the historically restored rooms for committee hearings.

Hearings easily give way to newer legislators eager to make their statements for the record or question those testifying before them.

For those who seek to, quickly establishing a presence among 150 members of the Assembly or 62 state senators is not difficult.

Becoming involved in floor proceedings is not much harder.

Unlike in the United States Senate, there is no tradition of waiting for several months, or even years, before speaking on the floor.

Forcing legislators to be in their seats to listen to these speeches has led to some more colorful and substantive debate.

But Albany insiders are divided as to the efficacy of these reforms.

“There’s perception and there’s reality in Albany,” said State Sen. Kevin Parker (D-Brooklyn), the minority whip, who first arrived in 2003.

“There are some things that seem intuitively right, but they really at the end have a different kind of result.”

Eliminating empty seat voting, many felt, was an absolutely necessary change that would improve the functioning of state government.

Parker said that this failed to fully consider the competing priorities of busy legislators.

“You have committee meetings going on, you have session going on, you’re meeting with constituents,” he said.

“Eliminating empty seat voting has now put us in the position where we’re now stuck on the floor, paying attention sometimes to debates that have no real impact on your district.”

Parker also criticized the intensity of the push to further restrict lobbyist donations to $75 meals, especially in contrast to the recently increased legal limit of $15,000 cumulative between primary and general elections for individual contributions to legislators.

Moreover, he argued that no elected official could really have their opinions swayed by having a lobbyist buy them dinner, and that restricting these meals impedes the political process, which is built on these relationships.

These, Parker said, are some of the dangers to the rhetoric of reform which people soon come to realize after a little time in office.

This is the kind of talk which gets reform advocates anxious.

The Assembly already opted against several rules resolutions sponsored by Minority Leader James Tedisco (R-Saratoga) earlier this month.

These would have eased the process for members outside the leadership to force hearings and bring bills more rapidly to the floor, institutionalized conference committees and given Republicans in the chamber more money for resources and staff.

Though the State Senate has remained quiet on this topic, the Assembly’s majority leader, Ron Canestrari (D-Rensselaer), indicated that there may be more institutional reforms on the docket for the Assembly this year.

The Brennan Center’s Norden is skeptical these will come, or that they will be significant if they do.

“It will be small steps,” Norden said.

“That’s what they did in 2005."

"My guess is that they’ll take a couple more.”

And those, Norden insisted, will not nearly be the “dramatic change” he feels the Legislature requires.

Norden is among those who say that if more reforms are not adopted early in the session, they may not be adopted in the session at all.

As time passes and the chamber’s leather seats become ever more comfortable, he fears that the reformers willing to take up the cause will lose their nerve.

“I don’t think there’s any question: the longer that you’re there, the more the way it works makes sense,” he said.

Reform Meets Reality: A Case Study

Legislation which established civil confinement for sex offenders—which had been kicking around Albany in some version or another since 1993—was recently fast-tracked to passage after a deal between the governor and legislative leaders.

The bill was put before the Assembly immediately after a bill to change state workers’ compensation laws, negotiated in a similar deal.

The perceived closed-door genesis of the deals over those bills has drawn the ire of some rank-and-file members like Assembly Member Adriano Espaillat (D-Manhattan), who felt the deliberations should have been more inclusive.

Espaillat is himself a sponsor of the bill, but complained that he was not included in the final negotiations over it.

Undercutting any claims of reform, he argued that Spitzer, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan) and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno (R-Rensselaer) were still behaving like “three men in a room,” the common shorthand slur for Albany dysfunction.

“I have never seen anything worse,” he said, addressing a lunch meeting of the Continuing Care Leadership Coalition shortly after the deals were announced, insisting that he felt a complete lack of transparency and involvement.

Espaillat voted for civil confinement.

Fellow Manhattan Democrat Daniel O’Donnell, who spoke at length on his reservations about the bill, did not.

“We rush to judgment and do what we’re told,” he said, explaining his vote to his colleagues.

“Well, folks, I’m not going to do what I’m told.”

O’Donnell was one of 19.

While no match for the 127 backers, this group did include several senior, more institutionalized members who seemed surprised to be among the nays.

Among the 19 was Brooklyn’s Vito Lopez (D), who said that he felt compelled to vote against the legislation due to the lack of a sunset provision.

He insisted this might have been added had the bill gone into committee sometime between coming out of the leaders’ negotiation room and appearing on the Assembly floor.

Fears of how the new laws might disproportionately affect his poorer constituents struck him.

“For the first time in 23 years—and maybe that’s the benefit of being here—I’m going to change my vote and vote no,” he said.

Eyeing the button on his desk, he hesitated until all but a few others had voted, then rose to speak again about why he could not support that version of civil confinement.

The chair translated the speech into a vote against the bill.

Fellow Democrat David Gantt (Monroe), first elected in 1983, followed Lopez’s lead in voting against the bill after listening to the floor debate.

Though the decades-long streak since a bill was voted down on the floor continues, if not for the 2005 changes, which required them to be in their seats to vote, Lopez and Gantt might well have simply been counted as voting yes.

Most reform advocates would likely see this as a victory, though the legislation still passed overwhelmingly.

Certainly, this moment can be read as a demonstration of the power of having people in their seats for debates, though most of the legislators spent the hour of discussion chatting with each other, eating bananas or fiddling with Blackberries and giggling at emails, more than looking up at and listening to the debate.

—Edward-Isaac Dovere

To many outside observers, that is at the root of legislators’ decision to flex their collective muscle in appointing a new comptroller, beating back Spitzer’s attempts to strong-arm them.

Most Assembly members insist that this should not be read as a contradiction of their reform efforts, and moreover, that it should not be read as a demonstration of a stranglehold by Silver over his conference, whom they say was forced unwillingly into the conflict with Spitzer by his conference.

“You can’t look at that as a litmus test for reform,” contended Assembly Member Karim Camara (D-Brooklyn).

Camara first came to office in a 2005 special election to fill the seat then-Brooklyn Democratic Leader Clarence Norman was forced from on his way to prison.

He strongly identifies himself as a reformer.

He was one of five relatively new city-based members who recently agreed to self-imposed restrictions on campaign fundraising modeled after those adopted by Spitzer and Lt. Gov. David Paterson (D) at the beginning of the year.

While identifying himself strongly as a reformer, he said, “I’m not interested in reform just for the sake of reform."

"I’m interested in reform that can help the people that I represent.”

He calls his vote for DiNapoli a pragmatic decision.

“I liked Martha Stark a lot,” Camara said, referring to the New York City finance commissioner who got just 56 votes, compared to DiNapoli’s 150.

“She just didn’t have the support or the votes."

"So if I’m thinking about what’s best for my district—do I support a candidate who has no chance to win, or do I support another candidate who I believe is qualified and have access for another three and a quarter years?”

Trading votes for support, not picking fights when the battles have clearly ended—these are staples of ambitious, effective politicians in any legislative body.

And for those who seek it, the possibility of personal gain, whether through more member items headed to a district or leadership stipend lulus tacked onto the salaries, is there as well.

(“It’s not something that’s said,” confided one Assembly member. “But if someone wants to sell his or her vote, I’d be shocked if there’s no way to do it."
"It’s been going on in democracy since the day we had democracy.”)

Brian Kavanagh (Manhattan), who beat incumbent Sylvia Friedman last year just months after she won a special election for the seat, also voted for DiNapoli.

Central to Kavanagh’s campaign was a charge that Friedman had cozied up with Silver and the encrusted establishment between taking office March 1 after winning a special election and their Sept. 12 Democratic primary.

He also campaigned on a message that Albany needed to institute reforms which had proven successful in the city, like the campaign finance system and redistricting reform.

Kavanagh said that after 20 years of late budgets, having them done on time the past two years (time will tell if this year’s will follow suit, and how much larger it will be than last year’s) show the power of reformers to change the structure, as does the more open process of finalizing the budget and the recently-passed ethics bill.

Still, he feels the Legislature must be made more transparent as a route to crafting more effective policy, and to rooting out corruption.

Success, however, meant a careful, deliberative effort to bring all his colleagues around to that same realization, and keeping a good relationship with leaders.

He called his current relationship with Silver “cordial.”

“Being a reformer, which I do consider myself, is not about making yourself in the wilderness,” he said.

“It’s not about standing entirely outside the system.”

Looking to change the system is not mutually exclusive with looking to reap the benefits from working well within the system until those changes come, Kavanagh said.

“I want to do both.”

http://cityhallnews.com/cover1_031207.html

"Deal floated on health spending - Spitzer aboard plan for cost-of-living boost and an end to tax for hospitals, but downstate groups object"

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

First published: Wednesday, March 21, 2007

ALBANY -- Gov. Eliot Spitzer and the Healthcare Association of New York Tuesday floated a potential settlement to the health care funding wars that would add about $300 million to Spitzer's budget.

Although the deal was unacceptable to a downstate hospital group and its union allies, some parties in the negotiations saw the proposal as a positive step.

A handshake on health care spending could advance other areas of the budget, although Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno was holding firm to his conference's demands for greater education funding to ensure Long Island's traditional share of school aid.

Bruno also was touting the need for an across-the-board tax rebate program not tied to income levels, as Spitzer's STAR expansion program is designed.

As for the health care deal, some parties were optimistic.

"We've continued discussions with the Assembly, Senate and governor and we are close to a conceptual agreement," said William VanSlyke, a spokesman for HANYS.

"But the devil's in details."

People apprised of the deal said the plan calls for providing hospitals 75 percent of the 2.5 percent cost-of-living increase they have been counting on.

Spitzer has proposed no increase and a freeze on rates paid hospitals and nursing homes.

The deal would be worth $136.5 million, half from the state and half from federal aid for hospitals.

Also, Spitzer would agree to let the gross receipts tax on hospitals expire, as scheduled, at the end of this month, saving hospitals $136.9 million.

Spitzer had proposed extending the tax and freezing rates as part of his $1.3 billion in cuts to the industry.

A deal with hospitals on providing an inflationary rate hike likely would lead to one for nursing homes, too.

Spitzer still could declare victory because he would hold to his policy of redirecting Medicaid funds to hospitals based on the actual number of Medicaid patients they care for.

Kenneth Raske, president of the Greater New York Hospital Association, said he is aware of HANYS' meeting with Spitzer's aides.

The plan, he said, would benefit upstate hospitals more than downstate ones.

The Assembly Democrats' budget plan, which restored all of the cost-of-living adjustment and killed the gross receipts tax, would benefit downstate hospitals by tens of millions of dollars more.

Jennifer Cunningham, a lobbyist for Local 1199 of the Service Employees International Union, said downstate hospitals would lose $110 million if HANYS' plan replaces the Assembly Democrats' proposal.

"HANYS does not speak for 265,000 health care workers of 1199," she said.

The HANYS deal takes $24 million that would normally be used for graduate medical education, largely in New York City hospitals, and redirects it upstate.

The HANYS plan would be about $74 million less expensive than the Assembly plan and much less costly than the Senate's proposal to restore more than half the cuts Spitzer seeks, a source familiar with the deal said.

News of the talks came amid little other progress on the budget.

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith, Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco and Bruno met publicly with Spitzer on Tuesday morning.

Spitzer and Silver said Bruno's budget plan adds $3.2 billion to the governor's $120.6 billion budget proposal and wrongly assumes the state will have nearly $5 billion more in available funds for budgeting.

"Five billion dollars is not real," Silver said.

Bruno said Senate Republicans historically have been better at estimating revenues.

He complained that conference committees now under way have been a joke because Bruno, Silver, Smith and Tedisco haven't met to set guidelines on spending.

"They've been playing ring-around-the-rosy," Bruno said in an attempt to get the leaders to meet with him.

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

"Environmental post left in limbo - Grannis backers say GOP dragging feet on nomination"

By BRIAN NEARING, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, March 21, 2007

ALBANY -- The political slow dance over Alexander "Pete" Grannis, Gov. Eliot Spitzer's nominee for Environmental Conservation commissioner, will continue a few more steps.

On Tuesday, the Senate Environmental Conservation Committee took the unusual step of questioning Grannis, a longtime Democratic assemblyman, and then adjourning without a vote.

Grannis' supporters in the environmental community cried foul, claiming Senate Republicans were deliberately foot-dragging as part of a battle with the Democratic governor.

Committee Chairman Carl Marcellino, who hinted his committee might not be able to meet again with Grannis until next week, denied any such motivation at the end of the 90-minute hearing.

Five senators on the 14-member committee questioned Grannis, and "we didn't have time to finish," said Marcellino, who said he was forced to cut short the hearing because of a budget committee that afternoon.

"This is no reflection on the vote."

"We will reschedule."

Spitzer's office declined comment.

But some at the packed hearing, which drew several hundred people, were vocal in their displeasure.

It is uncommon for a Senate committee to take more than a single day for a confirmation hearing.

He already had been put on today's Senate Finance Committee agenda.

"This is ridiculous."

"They are playing politics with a very important position," said Robert Moore, executive director of Environmental Advocates.

"They have had weeks to schedule this meeting."

"A lot of people traveled to be here."

Since Grannis was nominated by the governor in January, the Manhattan lawmaker has come under fire from sportsmen who consider him anti-hunting, which he denies.

During the hearing, Grannis took questions on topics including global warming, New York City's control around land in its upstate reservoir system, and all-terrain vehicles and snowmobiles in the Adirondack Park.

He sparred briefly with Sen. Elizabeth Little, R-Queensbury, who asked whether the state needs to create more ATV trails in the 6-million-acre park.

Grannis said he was concerned with the "destructive nature of misuse" of ATVs.

"People who buy these are often highly abusive of the environment."

Grannis also disagreed with Little that the state, which owns about half of the park, has acquired too much property and was stifling economic growth.

He said local communities should focus on creating development plans that would "concentrate" future development around existing towns and hamlets.

Grannis said the top issues facing the department are rebuilding staff lost under former Gov. George Pataki, when the DEC workforce shrank by one fourth, and spearheading the state's response to global warming, which he called a "threat that hangs over the entire state, nation and world."

He favors the proposed Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which involves nine northeastern states and would limit emissions of carbon dioxide.

A lawmaker since 1974, Grannis has been a member of the Assembly's Environmental Conservation Committee and pushed such issues as the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the original bottle bill, and brownfield cleanup and revitalization.

He authored the state's 1989 Clean Indoor Air Act and its 2003 amendments, which banned smoking in most public and work places.

Brian Nearing can be reached at 454-5094 or by e-mail at bnearing@timesunion.com.

AP

"New YorkLobbying Commission director denies vendetta in Vacco case"

March 21, 2007, 10:39 AM EDT

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) _ The executive director of the state Lobbying Commission on Wednesday denied allegations that he offered to settle an investigation into former state Attorney General Dennis Vacco's lobbying firm if the business would find another job for a commission staffer.

Attorney James Crane claims Lobbying Commission Executive Director David Grandeau repeatedly investigated Crane & Vacco LLC because of "personal animosity" toward him.

Crane made the charges in a response to a lawsuit seeking to force him to testify in an investigation of the firm.

"The guys in the black hats always think the guys in the white hats have a vendetta against them," Grandeau said.

"The only vendetta I have is to enforce the Lobbying Act."

Crane's wife, Constance Crane, is a partner with former Attorney General Dennis Vacco in the business.

James Crane does legal work for the firm.

Crane claims Grandeau offered to settle a 2005 investigation if Crane & Vacco "would hire, or would arrange to have an employment opportunity for Kris Thompson," a former spokesman for the Lobbying Commission.

Thompson said he had a "difficult" relationship with Grandeau.

Grandeau said he does not recall making such an offer, but if he did, it was "done in a jocular way."

The commission was investigating the signing of a contract that guaranteed the firm $5.5 million if it won the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma approval to open a casino in New York.

By law, lobbyists cannot agree to deals in which payments are based on the success of a project or legislation.

Crane & Vacco agreed to pay $50,000 to settle the investigation but refused to sign the agreement after Grandeau publicly said he believed a crime was committed.

Crane & Vacco admitted no wrongdoing in the agreement.

Grandeau is now seeking to force James Crane to testify about campaign contributions related to the lobbying firm.

And getting to the heart of what this particular thread is really all about ....

"Scandal a blow to faith in the system"

By JAY BOOKMAN

First published: Tuesday, March 20, 2007

"I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney for political reasons," Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee two months ago.

If you want to understand how a pretty minor story -- the removal of eight U.S. attorneys by the Bush administration -- has somehow metastasized into a major controversy, that statement by Gonzales is your Rosetta Stone.

It opens the door to the three levels of scandal in this story, ranging from relatively minor to potentially grave and earthshaking.

Let's start with the relatively minor.

In his statement to Congress, Gonzales acknowledges it would be wrong to remove prosecutors for political reasons.

It is so wrong, he tells Congress, that he would never, ever do such a terrible thing.

And yet he did.

Since that statement, the evidence has become overwhelming that some, if not most, of the attorneys were ousted for political reasons, with considerable input from the White House.

One of the eight, for example, was removed as U.S. attorney in Arkansas despite glowing performance reviews.

Why?

So an aide to White House political adviser Karl Rove could get the job.

Now, that's not a huge scandal.

Such decisions, even if made on a political basis, are clearly within a president's prerogative.

They do bring into question the judgment of those who would treat one of the most important jobs in federal law enforcement like a mere political plum, but they do not explain why this scandal threatens the careers and reputations of some of the most powerful people in Washington.

To understand that, you have to step to the next level:

By denying any political motive or involvement by the White House, Gonzales and other Bush officials lied to the U.S. Senate.

That has angered politicians of both parties, leading at least two Republican senators to demand Gonzales' resignation.

It's almost funny -- Congress, which has allowed itself to be lied to, stonewalled, ignored and ridiculed by the administration for six years over issues fundamental to government, finally gets upset at how it's treated and it's over something like this.

The third level of this scandal is by far the most troubling and explosive, and also the least understood.

It goes to how and why those eight prosecutors were selected for replacement despite the fact most were Bush appointees who had conducted themselves well as U.S. attorneys.

John McKay, a well-respected Republican lawyer ousted as U.S. attorney in Seattle, says he may have been tagged for removal because he fended off unethical demands from Republican leaders to pursue charges of vote fraud against Washington Democrats, even though those charges were groundless.

"There was no evidence, and I am not going to drag innocent people in front of a grand jury," says McKay, who suggests a special prosecutor may be needed to determine the full extent of this scandal.

David Iglesias, the equally well-respected Republican ousted as U.S. attorney in New Mexico, believes that he, too, was removed because he ignored pressure from fellow Republicans to indict Democrats just before the 2006 elections.

Iglesias has told Congress he felt pressured by phone calls from a U.S. senator and congresswoman; barely a week after the election, his name was added to an internal list of attorneys to be removed.

The most troubling case may be that of Carol Lam, a U.S. attorney from San Diego who put Duke Cunningham, a Republican congressman from California, in federal prison on corruption charges.

On the day the Los Angeles Times reported that Lam was also investigating U.S. Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the powerful head of the House Appropriations Committee, a top Justice Department official sent an internal e-mail to the White House, complaining about "the real problem we have right now with Carol Lam," suggesting a replacement be found quickly.

Any implication that a U.S. attorney's employment depends on his or her willingness to protect a president's political allies and persecute his enemies strikes at the heart of public confidence in the system.

In Georgia, for example, defenders of former state Sen. Charles Walker, a top Democrat now serving a federal prison term, have long argued he was the victim of politically motivated prosecution.

That's not the case; Walker was guilty and got what he deserved.

But in some quarters, this scandal will be seen as lending credence to Walker's claim, and that's unfortunate.

Jay Bookman writes for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. His e-mail address is jbookman@ajc.com.

I have just had a lengthy e-mail conversation with an editor at the Albany, New York Times Union on this issue of "FAITH IN THE SYSTEM" .....

And up this way, I do not know of anyone who has any faith at all in "the SYSTEM" ....

Whether that be the federal government, which has become synonymous with "SHODDY" and "SLIPSHOD" and "DISHONEST" and "UNTRUSTWORTHY" ....

Or the state government here in New York State, which is and has been known as CORRUPT for some long time now ...

Or with local government, which is controlled by the political parties for their own benefit ....

And that discussion with this editor had to do with the Albany Times Union "clipping" the news so that the people who rely on the Albany, New York Times Union for their news, which are the majority of the people in this area where I am corresponding from .....

Are getting an incomplete story, intentionally, as a part of the editorial policy of the Albany, New York Times Union ....

Up here, based on that editorial policy ....

Certain politicians involved in certain activities inimical to the public interest, and specifically, to the public health and well-being, do not get talked about in the pages of the Albany, New York Times Union, which is one of the chief reasons that this thread is running ....

To track that process along as it is happening ....

Which brings us back to my opening post in here, about translating discussion in a forum such as this down to some type of positive action at the local level, when a forum such as this is not well known, or is not known at all, at that local level ....

So that people remain unaware of what is going on in their own communities because the main newspaper has a CODE OF SILENCE in place, when it comes to certain news and certain politicians .....

That is one of the reasons that older people up this way tell younger people to leave this state and never look back ....

Because nothing will ever change when it is the news media themselves who are promoting ignorance ....

Instead of attempting to inform ....

And to uncover abuses by elected officials that put the public into jeopardy ....

Which is what the e-mail conversation with the Albany, Times Union editor was about ....

And so ....

Ever since the beginning days of OUR America, the power of words and the power of the "press" have been "issues", in and of themselves ....

And they remain so, right on down to our present times, as this recent business with "Scooter" Libby revealed ....

And generally, the argument goes in favor of "freedom of the press", meaning the media .....

"THE MEDIA CANNOT BE RESTRAINED, OR OUR FREEDOM WILL BE THREATENED" goes the mantra .....

But will it be, really?

OR DOES MANIPULATION OF THE NEWS AND OUTRIGHT DISSEMINATION OF PROPAGANDA THROUGH THE NEWS MEDIA THREATEN OUR FREEDOM EVEN MORE?

That is one of the underlying issues that this thread seeks to consider ...

Since it is in fact at the heart of WHERE we are right now in the State of New York ....

With a corrupt, dysfuntional government that does not protect US, the citizens, from much of anything at all, and especially from itself, as this above "letter" to the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union from a member of our community up here in New York State reveals ....

And this exchange with this editor of the Albany, New York Times Union that I reference right above here stems directly from a response to that "John Galt letter", as we call it, that was itself posted in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union as follows:

Comment by topo gigio — March 13, 2007 @ 9:05 pm

It appears that Mr. Galt is referring to Paul Plante.

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/4715/pl...etnamvetwc5.jpg

This was before my time.

But admittedly, it’s an interesting story.

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4050#comments

Now, stepping over into the twin realms of "ethics" and "fairness", or as FOX NEWS calls it, "FAIR AND BALANCED", as it applies to this e-mail conversation that I had with this Albany, Times Union editor ....

When this topo gigio made this post above here in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union on March 13, 2007 at 9:05 pm ....

Did topo gigio then "open a door", as it were, to some discussion on the contents of the article itself, which has a direct link to it that is now a part of the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union that anyone anywhere here in America, or the candid world, for that matter, can follow to read the article itself, which is from the same Albany, New York Times Union newspaper, dated January 10, 1988?

As citizens of this state up here, it is our collective belief that yes, indeed, by bringing the article itself into the present web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union, that topo gigio, who is unknown to us, did in fact "open up the door" to discussion of the contents of that very article ....

And here is where the present controversy with the editor of the Albany, New York Times Union begins .....

Or began, anyway ....

When this editor from the Albany, New York Times Union CENSORED a reply from John Galt concerning this very Albany, New York Times Union article from January 10, 1988 AND HOW WHAT IS STATED IN THAT ARTICLE FROM NEARLY TWENTY YEARS AGO IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO what is going on in the State of New York today, in terms of the excessive costs that we property tax payers have to bear for treating sick people through our state MEDICAID program, on top of the property taxes that we are paying for a county health department, that in the words of the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION in a March 16, 1989 Report based upon a review of substantial evidence, concluded:

According to [name deleted], the results of the State's investigation were that New York State laws were not being followed by the Rensselaer County Health Department, Rensselaer County laws were not being followed by the Rensselaer County Health Department, and there was very little 'enforcement activity' even in the face of illegal sales.

According to [name deleted], the object of any county health department (in the state of New York) is to protect the public, and not to facilitate developers, or development.

In the case of Rensselaer County, it appears that the Rensselaer County Health Department was in business to facilitate developers and development rather than to protect the public!

Now, I do not know about anyone else out there, but up here, out in the country, anyway, I suppose it could be said that we are a conservative crowd, perhaps somber, and maybe some would even call us dour, although that might be misplaced ....

And one of our chief characteristics is that WE REMEMBER ......

Which probably comes from the fact that life in the country is more simple and basic than life in the cities, or suburbs ....

And those of us who grow things or heat with wood HAVE TO REMEMBER .....

Because to grow something, you have to know when to plant it, and to plant something, you have to know when to plow the ground, and to know when to plow the ground up here, you have to have some kind of recollection of what you and your neighbors did last year, and the year before that and on and on and on ...

And to heat your home with wood, you have to remember this year how much wood it REALLY did take last year, and then you have to remember how bad last year's winter really was, etc. ...

And so ....

With respect to this Albany, New York Times Union article from January 10, 1988, entitled "Developers see a zealot in new county health officer" by Laurie Anderson, a staff writer for the Albany, New York Times Union at that time who, upon information and belief, subsequently quit the Albany, New York Times Union in DISGUST at what she was being required to do by her "bosses" at the Albany, New York Times Union as a "condition of her employment" there ....

We do in fact remember those times very well .....

AS A DIRECT ASSAULT ON US, AND AS A DIRECT ASSAULT ON THE VERY NOTION OR CONCEPT THAT THE STATE OF NEW YORK, THROUGH OUR STATE CONSTITUTION IN SECTION 3 OF ARTICLE XVII, HAS AN OBLIGATION TO THE PROTECTION AND PROMOTION OF OUR HEALTH, BEFORE THE PROTECTION OF THE PROFITS OF THE CORPORATIONS WHO BUY AND SELL OUR STATE GOVERNMENT UP HERE EVERY DAY, AS IF IT WERE JUST ANOTHER COMMODITY ON THE MARKET, WHICH IT IS IN FACT:

§ 3. The protection and promotion of the health of the inhabitants of the state are matters of public concern and provision therefor shall be made by the state and by such of its subdivisions and in such manner, and by such means as the legislature shall from time to time determine.

And so ....

To be continued ....

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION

Comment by John Galt — March 23, 2007 @ 6:33 pm

John Galt thinks this was one of the most incredible exercises in democracy that he has seen in his lifetime ….

This is like the forum of Rome in here in the latter days of the Republic, before it all went up in flames in a civil war that many in Rome never saw the other side of …..

Had cooler heads prevailed back then, well, whoever does really know ….

But John Galt knows that when voices are stifled ….

Out come the weapons, and when the weapons come out, it might be a long time before peace reigns again ….

And so ….

The wise among us resort to measures like this, voicing our thoughts and opinions in an open forum such as this, which serves as a safety valve on society ….

And so …

In concluding, I did present the editor with what I perceived to be an issue, that being his independence, and I must say that my hat is off right now to the TU and its staff, all included ….

My faith was restored today, in this newspaper as an institution of civilization, here where we all live our lives ….

This is something that we country folks will tell our children and grandchildren about, that we were alive today in OUR America to see such a thing as this happen …

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4157#comments

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION ....

Comment by John Galt — March 23, 2007 @ 8:03 am

At the risk of further infuriating those in here who like posts to be of as few words as possible, I would start off by quoting directly from the BILL OF RIGHTS of OUR state Constitution, which goes back in time, to a time when perhaps we were not so free as we are today, although that assertion is very much open to debate in here, right now today:

“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.

§ 8. Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions or indictments for libels, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged as libelous is true, and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquitted; and the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the fact.”

Now, as a simple country person who has studied our state history extensively, starting right in kindergarten on the first day of school after the close of WWII, when the teacher, a woman, told us children in no uncertain terms that we were not there to fool around, to the contrary, we were there to learn WHAT it was that we were a part of, and what it was that we were to inherit, and maintain, and not destroy, in the spirit of those who shed some blood to give us OUR collective liberty here in NYS in the first place, I hold those words in OUR NYS BILL OF RIGHTS to be OUR organic law anywhere in the state of New York, 24/7, be it “in here”, in CYBERSPACE, or “out there”, wherever that may be …

And it must be noted that in the language of OUR BILL OF RIGHTS, which George W. Bush cannot strike down in his capacity as OVERLORD OF EVERY POSSIBLE THING THAT THERE IS OR MIGHT BE IN OUR LIVES, the “right” of the citizen to speak freely, AND TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE for that speech before a JURY of his or her peers is held to be paramount, BEFORE that of the “press”, or as it is called today, the “media” ….

Which as the editor points out, might cause some problems in this new venue, where in large part, we have some degree of anonymity ….

And this brings us to the question raised: “I haven’t reached any conclusions about this, but I do wonder whether a laissez-faire approach to moderation fosters engagement, or hurts it.”

The obvious answer to that is that there is NO ANSWER, only conjectures and opinions, of which there will be a multitude, I am sure, because that is what life is, here in New York State, “out there”, be it in a coffe shop, or a convenient store parking lot, or wherever …

Most people that I talk to about BLOGGING say that they do not bother with even trying to follow it, because most of the comments are so undecipherable or arcane or couched in such an esoteric, thick dialect of gibberish that it is a waste of time to even “tune in”, and truthfully, they may have a point …

However, my reply is that the “baby then goes out with the bath water”, and by default, by not participating, they are the losers …

The alternative, then, is to come in here and risk attack, but how is that any different than making a statement in public and being attacked, perhaps physically?

I was in Viet Nam when that Calley dude was brought up on charges for My Lai, and it happened that I was standing near a bunch of officers who were grousing that such a thing should never have happened to an officer in the US Army, and my reply as an infantryman to them was that Calley deserved the treatment that we would give to a chicken-killing dog back home, because officers like him got grunts like us killed in retaliation, and if a major had not walked into the room when he did, who knows what the increase in American KIA’s would have been in that situation …

And so it goes …

Here in NYS, I let the NY Constitution BILL OF RIGHTS be my guide, and when asked about this by younger people, I give them an actual copy of OUR Constitution, and I ask them to spend some time pondering just the PREAMBLE, and if they don’t like god, or GOD, cross out that part, so that it reads:

“We The People of the State of New York, GRATEFUL FOR OUR FREEDOM, in order to secure its blessings, DO ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION.”

When newspaper editors, or the “media” start censoring us, as just might be the case in here with respect to an issue that topo gigio raised by bringing in what may well be a biased and contrived TU article by staff writer Laurie Anderson from January 10, 1988 that relates directly to the high property taxes that we older country folk are being forced to pay TODAY for a county health department that state health Commissioner Dr. David Axelrod determined was corrupt back in 1986, along with excessive MEDICAID costs to treat sick people, and further property taxes that subsidize developers by making us have to pay for the “improvements” to subdivisions that our laws stated were theirs to bear, then a question arises as to whether or not we might be back-sliding, here in NYS, with respect to the BLESSINGS OF FREEDOM that are discussed in the PREAMBLE to OUR state Constitution ….

As an older citizen, I have to wonder what type of conflict of interest might be at work in here, where the Hearst Corporation, parent of the Times Union, is itself a member of the NYS Business Council with whom “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer met with at Bolton Landing on Lake George on September 21, 2006, while still attorney general, with a duty to OUR Constitution, to inform the members of the NYS Business Council, including the Hearst Corporation that the “STEAMROLLER” intended to make NYS the best place in the world to do business ….

OUR Constitution goes back to the Declaration of Independence, and since that time, it has in fact been amended several times, and with respect to health and protection of the environment, especially, along with Worker’s Compensation, those amendments have been BECAUSE OF ravages caused to us, our health, and our environment, BECAUSE OF BUSINESS ….

And BUSINESS has not been happy about this, which is what this TU article by staff writer Laurie Anderson from January 10, 1988 provided to us in here by topo gigio is really all about ….

And it is what is contained in that article that brings us right square into the times that we are in right now, out here in the country, anyway, WHERE OUR VOICES are not heard, outside of a BLOG like this, or thankfully, a BLOG like COMMONGROUNDCOMMONSENSE, where we country folk are given the freedom to discuss these issues of importance to ourselves, WITHOUT THE SPECTER of CORPORATE CENSORSHIP that might in fact be lurking in here ….

My thoughts, anyway ….

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4157#comments

Well, it's now the "DAY AFTER" this continuing "experiment in democracy" which is going on ....

Not only in here, but also in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union ......

And being "slow" as we countryfolks are in our various deliberations about this or that ...

We older folks up here are still pondering and contemplating what has gone on in the last few days, both "in here", in this thread, in this forum ....

As well as in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union ....

With respect to the actual CENSORSHIP of comments made by John Galt in the web-edition of the Heart Corporation-owned Albany, New York Times Union concerning the contents an article published in the pages of the Albany, New York Times Union back in January of 1988 ....

Which news item from nearly twenty years ago was made relevant to "THE CLIMATE OF FEAR, RETRIBUTION AND RETALIATION" which exists in the State of New York today ....

By the fact that another poster in the web-edition of the Albany, New York brought that article into the on-going discussion in that forum by posting a link to that article, which now brings it to the attention of the "world-at-large", since the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union is now available to anyone, anywhere, thanks to the same miracle of the internet which similarly makes this thread available and accessible to that same world ...

And as I in particular am a "slow thinker", it is taking me some time to develop this "line of thought" ....

So I ask for some patience on the part of those who might read this words ....

But right now, the "point of departure" for this line of our thinking up here stems from these following words printed in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union yesterday morning by that individual, Jay Jochnowitz, the State Editor of the Albany, New York Times Union since 2000 ...

Who according to his short "bio" in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union is a "Long Island transplant ... Ironically, has issues with authority ... In spare time, pretends he's a cowboy."

From JJ: This and several other comments below mention the anonymity issue.

I should have been more clear on why I injected that point.

I have no desire or intention to remove anonymity from the blog.

I raised it only to lay the foundation for the point that anonymity frees some people of any sense of responsibility for what they say.

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4157#comments

And there I shall rest, for the moment, anyway ....

To develop this train of thought on "SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY" BY THE "MEDIA" ITSELF a little further ....

Since this train of thought has to do directly with the HARM that the Albany, New York Times Union, and other "news media" have been able to do to the lives and livelihoods of individuals who would not "TOE THE PARTY LINE" up this way, and serve as POLITICAL WHORES ....

Instead of professional engineers ....

As the law of this state required them to do ....

And so ...

And staying with this on-going experiment in democracy that is happening both in here, and in the web-edition of the Albany, New York Times Union ....

We have ...

Comment by Beavis — March 24, 2007 @ 1:20 pm:

Please kill the comments.

If people want to be heard, have them take the time and effort to create their OWN blog.

They should generate the content, then take the hits from the peanut gallery.

JOHN GALT REPLIES:

With respect to “killing the comments”, that sounds very much like what George W. Bush and his crowd of societal fringe elements here in America are trying to do, which has “THE JUDGE”, Bert Gonzales, in a bit of controversy right now, along with Bush-judge Gary L. Sharpe in the federal Northern District of New York .... …

But that is a different story, in a different place, in a BLOG all its own, with over 38,000 hits now .... …

And so ... …

More to the point, with respect to this concept of a PEANUT GALLERY in here which many posters, including this Beavis above here, seem to be pushing, John Galt is reminded of what John Galt’s kindergarten tacher told him and the rest of the class right in the opening minutes of the first day about what it means to be an “American” .... …

And it must be considered that this was in 1950 or so, right after WWII, when most if not all adults knew some or many from that war who were either outright dead, and so were missing from society at that point, or who were maimed, forever .... …

And we children were told, and I never forget this, especially today, when no one is “authorized” to speak, about anything, and we are getting lied to, in the pages of the NY Times, by “press poodles” like Dame Judith Miller ....

Was that all of these dead people no longer among us, and all these maimed people who were right there for everyone to see in the small community where I was from, got that way by going over to Germany to fight a man named Hitler ....

And the key thing that she told us, which back then was supposed to differentiate an “American” from a “German” was that Americans were individuals who thought for themselves, and that OUR school system EXISTED TO FORCE THAT PROCESS, to make us into individuals who had to think for themselves, since “GROUPTHINK” was not going to be relied on, either there, or out in the world into which we would soon enough be going, to get us along ...

So that unlike Germany, America could never have a Hitler, because we were individuals with minds of our own, who could never be gulled, en masse, into giving up our individual thought processes to a dictator like Hitler ....

OR ANY DICTATOR, OR “STEAMROLLER” OF OUR CONSTITUTION AND OUR RIGHTS .... …

Each of us had to do that for him or herself, THINK BEFORE DOING, and that was why we were there, to start that process, right then and there, that day .... …

And what she told us about Hitler and these Germans, is that Hitler was able to become a dictator and suspend law, and was able to do all of the things he did that caused our people to have to go over there to fight and die to stop him, was because some 80 MILLION GERMANS constituted one great big “hive mentality” that let him do just as he pleased, so long as he did it to others, and not to them ....

A great big PEANUT GALLERY, is how I recall her putting it ....

Where everyone says “YES, MASTER”, when the master speaks ....

And yes, as I recall the kindergarten teacher telling us, one of the very first things this Hitler did was to “kill the comments”, by the simple expedient of killing anyone who would comment .... …

Which proved costly, and inefficient, compared to how the Russians did things, by simply locking the commenters up in GULAGS as mental patients ...

Which is the approach that “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer has opted to take in NYS today ....

Something for which he has in fact already received approval from Bush-judge Gary L. Sharpe in the federal Northern District of New York ..... …

But as I said, that is the subject of another BLOG, in another place, and any PEANUT out there who wishes to go and have at it with the contents of that BLOG is indeed welcome ....

Chew into it all you want ... …

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...mp;#entry700104

Call it untrue .... …

Call it libel .... …

Call it whatever chimes the chimes on your clock for you ... …

That is what we disabled veterans fought for, after all .... …

YOUR LIBERTY, not your freedom .... …

And so ....

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4157#comments…

"Winners, losers in Spitzer's health proposals"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, March 25, 2007

Q: What does Gov. Eliot Spitzer want?

A: Spitzer wants to control the growth of the cost of Medicaid, which grew 54 percent between 2000 and 2005.

His proposal still increases Medicaid funding, but only by 1.7 percent.

The $47.6 billion Medicaid budget would be made up of $17.5 billion from the state, $7.1 billion from local government, and $23 billion from the federal government.

Spitzer's plan curbs growth by freezing the reimbursement rates and reducing work-force payments to hospitals and nursing homes.

Spitzer's proposal also reduces reimbursement rates to pharmacists, collects more money through fraud investigations, and taxes hospital and nursing home revenues.

Spitzer's plan would expand Medicaid coverage to more people.

He aims to add about 400,000 uninsured children to Child Health Plus by expanding eligibility from 250 percent of the Federal Poverty Level to 400 percent.

He'd also add 900,000 adults by streamlining the Medicaid application process.

The governor says his plan will begin to re-orient the health system toward primary and preventive care.

Q: Who loses?

A: Hospitals and nursing homes would lose $423 million.

The average hospital would see a $1.2 million reduction and each nursing home would lose about $700,000.

Also, for every dollar the state cuts, the hospitals and nursing homes lose a federal dollar.

Pharmacists would lose $240 million.

Q: Who wins?

A: Medicaid patients and uninsured children and adults.

Spitzer's plan would cut the number of uninsured by half.

Many of those people already are eligible for Medicaid but failed to file the right paperwork.

Hospitals that serve the most Medicaid patients would see a small financial boost.

Community health centers and home health providers would receive more money for serving uninsured patients.

Spitzer also added $29 million for health screening programs for cancer, diabetes, obesity and lead poisoning.

Middle-class taxpayers also benefit because some of the savings would be used for targeted tax cuts.

Schools, too, gain from the plan because some of the savings go to increases in school aid.

Q: Why does New York spend more money on Medicaid than other states?

A: New York offers more Medicaid services than most states, a strategy that maximizes the dollar-for-dollar match from the federal government.

Insiders actually have a verb for it, saying that New York "Medic-aids" services in pursuit of that federal match.

The U.S. government mandates that states offer a dozen Medicaid services, and states have the option of providing about 20 additional services.

New York offers almost all of those optional services including extended drug coverage, home health care and dentistry.

Other potential contributors to high Medicaid costs are labor costs, an older population and longer hospitals stays.

Q: What's at stake for union and health care workers?

A: Hospital and nursing home leaders predict Spitzer's proposed cuts will cause massive job losses, service reductions and possibly closings.

The Greater New York Hospital Association estimates Spitzer's plan would result in 5,700 hospital layoffs and 9,100 nursing home layoffs.

Spitzer disputes that.

Spitzer's plan to eliminate $61 million from the worker recruitment and retention program will affect the ability of hospitals and nursing homes to pay for raises and training for jobs that are in high demand, like nurses, pharmacists, and X-ray technicians.

Q: Why does the Senate majority oppose Spitzer's plan?

A: Senate Republican leaders assert New York nursing homes and hospitals can't take any more cuts.

Hospitals already have the second lowest profit margins in the nation.

The Republicans proposed a budget that restores $241.1 million to hospitals and $230.4 million to nursing homes.

Q: "Medicaid dollars should follow Medicaid patients," according to Spitzer. What does that mean?

A: The administration identified several programs that distribute Medicaid money to hospitals and nursing homes regardless of whether they serve Medicaid patients.

For example, money for worker recruitment and retention is paid based on the size of a facility's staff, not Medicaid caseload.

Spitzer wants to end this practice, which will most likely favor urban hospitals that serve more Medicaid patients.

Critics argue that 70 percent of Medicaid money pays for the care of the sickest 20 percent of Medicaid patients, showing that most Medicaid money already follows the patients.

So far, Spitzer has targeted $61 million of work-force funds and $36 million for training medical residents who no longer exist, the so-called "phantom GMEs."

Q: Who are the phantom GMEs?

A: The state pays $1.5 billion annually to train new doctors under the Graduate Medical Education program.

About 10 years ago, according to the Healthcare Association of New York State, the state asked hospitals to reduce the number of medical residents trained, to avoid a national oversupply of doctors.

As an incentive, the state said it would continue the GME payments even if positions were eliminated.

Consequently, some hospitals have no residents, but receive GME money.

Spitzer wants to terminate those payments, saving $80 million.

Hospitals in New York City are hit particularly hard by the cut.

Q: How would Spitzer's plan affect non-Medicaid New Yorkers?

A: All patients may feel the pinch if hospitals and nursing homes lay off workers and reduce services.

Hospital CEOs say they will turn to the privately insured to make up losses they may suffer under Spitzer's cuts.

Indeed, the administration hopes hospitals and nursing homes can squeeze more money out of private insurers who garner more than $1 billion in profits annually.

Spitzer said his insurance superintendent will not allow commercial insurers to pass the rate hikes on to consumers.

However, the superintendent doesn't have that power yet.

Spitzer has proposed legislation to give the insurance superintendent prior approval of rate changes for health insurance.

Q: Are hospitals and nursing homes already underpaid?

A: Everyone agrees that government reimbursement rates for Medicaid-covered services are out of date.

Providers shift money from profitable services to subsidize losing enterprises, like obstetrics, gynecology and primary care.

New York's nursing home industry says it loses $25 a day for every Medicaid patient, which quickly compounds because 76 percent of nursing home patients are on Medicaid.

For every Medicaid patient treated in an emergency room, the hospital receives $125, whether the patient had a sprained ankle or a heart attack.

Other services, like cardiac procedures, may be overpaid.

Spitzer's administration says plenty of hospitals with heavy Medicaid loads are financially strong, so it's an issue of good management.

Still, Spitzer agrees the rates are "out of whack," and he said he will form a panel to review and update reimbursement rates over the next year.

Hospitals say it's unfair to cut their budgets before correcting the rates.

Q: Does this plan cut any money from HMOs and private insurers?

A: Yes.

Spitzer's plan freezes the Medicaid inflation rate for private insurers -- just like the hospitals and nursing homes -- for $200 million in savings.

Observers note that most private insurance plans don't participate in Medicaid because it's unprofitable, so this freeze affects mostly nonprofit plans that ventured into the Medicaid market and a handful of for-profit insurers.

Spitzer also proposes charging private insurers a higher "covered lives assessment."

The assessment is a fee for every individual insured by the plan.

The increase means an additional $75 million to the state, for a total assessment of $850 million.

Q: Won't the 400,000 new children and 900,000 additional adults bust the system?

A: The hospital industry supports the expanded coverage, but also warns that it will increase Medicaid costs.

Between 2000 and 2005, enrollment in Medicaid rose by more than 1 million people, a 54 percent increase; during the same period, the state Medicaid budget grew 54.5 percent.

The counter-argument is that new enrollees are young and healthy, and therefore not as costly.

The administration expects enrollment will increase gradually over several years.

To pay for the new enrollees, Spitzer would allocate an additional $45.3 million in the first year, $131.6 million the second year, and $167.8 million the third year.

Q: Would Spitzer's budget change how people seek health care?

A: In theory, fewer poor people would use hospital emergency rooms for minor health problems because more of them would be insured under Spitzer's plan.

But to fully shift the orientation of health care to a preventive/primary-care focused system, health care providers say patients must be educated to see their doctor regularly, and to spot problems early and seek treatment.

Also, providers say the state must increase the reimbursement rates for primary and preventive care to make the shift economically attractive.

Medicaid reimbursement rates for primary-care providers have not changed in 15 years.

Consequently, many private doctors choose not to treat Medicaid patients.

Q: Is the governor addressing the cost of prescription drugs?

A: New York spends nearly $2 billion annually on prescription drugs, and Spitzer's plan would reduce drug costs by $240 million by lowering the reimbursement rate paid to pharmacists for drugs prescribed to Medicaid patients.

To ease the cuts to pharmacies, the state would increase the dispensing fees for generic drugs, but the state pharmacy association says that barely puts a dent in the loss to pharmacists.

The association says small, independent pharmacies pay higher costs for medicines than chains and mail-order pharmacies and would suffer greatly from the lower reimbursement rates.

Last year, 221 pharmacies closed in New York state.

Spitzer also has proposed expanding the preferred drug program to negotiate better rebates from drug manufacturers.

Q: Does Spitzer's plan address Medicaid fraud?

A: Yes.

The governor's budget adds $4.8 million for 157 new staff in the Medicaid Inspector General's office, including 100 fraud investigators.

The governor proposes legislation that creates a False Claims Act to encourage whistleblowers to reveal fraud and receive a percentage of what the state recoups.

He also wants legislation that would create a Martin Act for health care, similar to the law that gives the state attorney general power to investigate the securities industry -- a power Spitzer used as attorney general to go after corporate fraud.

Spitzer estimates the anti-fraud initiatives would save the state $104 million next year.

-- Cathleen F. Crowley

"Bruno Flacks Up in the City - The Senate majority digs in to hold on"

By Azi Paybarah

The Republicans in the State Senate are down to a three-seat majority, and most indications are that it’ll be a matter of time before they lose control altogether.

So where is the party of upstate and the suburbs choosing to make what may be its last stand?

New York City, of course!

Of the Senate Republicans’ four regional offices, only the one in New York City was running with a one-person press operation.

But this month, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno hired two New York City–based assistants and is looking to bring on at least one more.

The Senate majority’s director of public affairs, Lisa Black—who was until recently the sole press staffer of the New York office—confirmed the new hires, and described the increased presence in the 250 Broadway office as an attempt to raise the profile of the four Senate Republicans up for re-election in 2008.

Despite a 5-3 partisan registration disadvantage in the five boroughs, Ms. Black pushed back firmly against the idea that she was operating in enemy territory, citing in particular the long service of veteran Senators Frank Padavan and Serphin Maltese of Queens.

(The other two G.O.P. Senators in the city are Andrew Lanza of Staten Island and Marty Golden of Brooklyn.)

Ms. Black said that the new staff would be tasked with direct outreach, attending neighborhood-association meetings the party might have missed in the past and helping the city’s four Senators promote themselves with things like “teacher-appreciation” events.

There’s another benefit to the having additional help in Mr. Bruno’s New York office, which has a view of City Hall.

“I can literally look out and say, ‘Oh, they’re doing a press conference there.’”

And then, she said, they can respond.

You may reach Azi Paybarah via email at: apaybarah@observer.com .

This column ran on page 8 in the 3/26/2007 edition of The New York Observer.

http://www.nyobserver.com/20070326/2007032..._newsstory4.asp

The New York Observer

"Reported Investigation is News to Diaz"

I just got off the phone with state Senator Ruben Diaz, Sr., who is reportedly the subject of a federal investigation into voter fraud, along with his son, Assemblyman Ruben Diaz, Jr.

Which was all news to the elder Diaz.

"I don't know anything about it."

"They haven't contacted me yet."

"Nobody has called me."

"Nobody has contacted."

"So, I know as much as you do," he said when reached by cell phone just now.

"I have tons of enemies out there trying to get me."

"Because of my position."

"You know, I've been outspoken on certain issues, like gay marriage, abortion."

"All those things."

"I might create enemies."

He continued.

"But to me, this is a political hit."

"I don't know what they're talking about."

I asked him whether he thought the investigation was initially targeted at him or his son.

"My son is a clean guy."

"He's a candidate for borough president."

"I mean, he's not running."

"He's one of the candidates that's been mentioned."

"And you know, me, I've been outspoken in the state Senate."

He went to say, "So, what's going on, I don't know."

"The FBI hasn't contacted me yet."

-- Azi Paybarah

http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2007/03/...ws-to-diaz.html

"Weekend budget talks close gaps as deadline nears"

By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press

Last updated: 2:42 p.m., Sunday, March 25, 2007

ALBANY -- With the state budget due in a week, negotiators for Gov. Eliot Spitzer and the Assembly and Senate majorities failed to reach critical agreements by Sunday afternoon.

Closed-door talks were scheduled to resume through Sunday, although all sides agreed even a deal early in the week might not leave enough time to print budget bills and approve them in both chambers to pass an on-time budget.

The budget is due Sunday, April 1.

Despite apparent breakthroughs Friday night, negotiators were again bogged down Saturday and Sunday on issues that were being negotiated as a package.

That means there is no agreement on one issue until there is agreement on all, said officials close to the governor and the legislative majorities.

"Our concern has been and continues to be a fair and equal distribution of school aid and property tax relief for the most taxed residents in the country and health care restorations to prevent the pain and suffering of the (Spitzer) budget proposal out there now," said John McArdle, spokesman for Republican Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno.

"Staffs are still talking and we continue to press for open conference committees."

There was no immediate comment from spokesmen for Spitzer or Democratic Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.

The Legislature has passed on-time budgets in the last two years after 20 straight years of missed deadlines.

Late budgets create fiscal uncertainty for school district officials and delay funding for nonprofit groups that run social service programs.

Three key negotiation issues remain:

--How many suburban schools on Long Island and elsewhere will get greater increases in aid despite Spitzer's plan to direct far more of the funding increases to high-needs urban schools;

--How to distribute more than $1 billion in property tax relief;

--How much aid should be "restored" to hospitals and nursing homes to ease Spitzer's health care reform.

All sides acknowledge room for compromise in the key areas.

Specifically, Spitzer last week said he is more committed to driving property tax relief to middle class families than he is to how it is done.

That means he is open to the Senate Republicans' proposal for rebate checks sent directly to taxpayers rather than Spitzer's original plan to increase funding for the state's property tax-mitigating STAR program.

Spitzer may also be open to changes in his school funding program so that wealthier but highly taxed school districts on Long Island get more than his minimum increase of 3 percent, according to a Spitzer official close to negotiations.

The Senate GOP wants to add $538 million for these schools, most of which are in the conference's Long Island power base.

Senate Republicans who have fought Spitzer's $1.4 billion cut in the $45 billion Medicaid system may end up accepting some of Spitzer's reforms if he agrees to phase in his program so big hospitals and nursing homes don't face immediate 1 percent to 5 percent cuts in state aid.

Spitzer proposed a $120.6 billion budget in January.

That's an increase of 7.8 percent -- more than twice the inflation rate.

His plan also includes what he calls reforms to permanently curb Albany's overspending and kowtowing to special interest groups, especially powerful lobbyists in the health care industry.

Spitzer and legislative leaders have since agreed to updated revenue forecasts that provide another $575 million to work with.

The Assembly's Democratic majority proposes a $121.2 billion budget.

The Senate's Republican majority proposes additions that Spitzer's Division of Budget say add up to $3 billion.

But Senate Republicans say that by their accounting, they are adding $1 billion.

"Mining Medicaid"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, March 26, 2007

Viewed from one perspective, Governor Spitzer's attempt to reduce Medicaid spending by $1.3 billion through a mixture of cuts and curbs in the program's growth is a necessary, if painful, first step toward overdue reform.

But from another perspective, the $1.3 billion represents a modest savings in a program that is rife with fraud and abuse.

Putting a stop to it could yield much more than $1.3 billion -- indeed, as much as 10 times more.

One way to combat cheating on a large scale would be for New York to follow the lead of other states and enact a False Claims Act, which gives citizens an incentive to blow the whistle on fraud.

Yet for reasons that are difficult to fathom, Senate Republicans stand in the way.

New York's Medicaid is a $46 billion program, and growing.

But how much of that total represents legitimate health care expenses, and how much fraud or abuse?

In 2005, The New York Times and other media looked into the question and came up with some stunning answers.

For example, James Mehmet told the Times that fraud accounts for 10 percent of the state's Medicaid expenditures each year.

He should know.

He was once the state's chief investigator for fraud and abuse.

Then there are the questionable claims for services that, in Mr. Mehmet's estimate, account for 20 to 30 percent in wasteful Medicaid spending each year.

Add it all up and it comes to a staggering $18 billion -- way more than the $1.3 billion Mr. Spitzer hopes to save.

As a former state attorney general, Mr. Spitzer is well aware of the scope of Medicaid fraud in New York.

But cracking down on Medicaid abuse only goes so far.

Despite the praiseworthy efforts of such state agencies as the Office of Substance Abuse Services, which posted a string of successes last year under the leadership of former Rensselaer County Executive Henry Zwack, government alone can't solve the problem.

It needs the help of citizens who are willing to blow the whistle when they see instances of abuse.

A state False Claims Act, which Mr. Spitzer seeks, could yield big savings because it allows the state to receive 50 percent of all money recovered.

(In New York, the state and counties each share 25 percent of the costs of Medicaid, with the federal government picking up 50 percent.)

But Senate Republicans continue to insist that such a law is duplicative.

They point to a federal False Claims Act that already permits states to collect a 50 percent share of all funds recovered.

A state law, they argue, would merely be a gift to the trial lawyers lobby.

Nice try, but it won't wash.

In truth, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has taken steps to encourage states to enact their own False Claims Act legislation by raising the amount of funds that they can recover to 60 percent from 50 percent.

And with $18 billion at stake, that's an incentive New York can't afford to refuse.

And with respect to why people in the State of New York are very unwilling to "blow the whistle" up here on government fraud and corruption ....

We have, from the WEB-EDITION of the Albany, New York Times Union, as follows:

Comment by LuLu — March 24, 2007 @ 8:56 am: Mayor - point of fact - personal attacks and lies have been posted a here after someone “outed” the blogger who was being attacked and lied about.

That is why it matters.

Comment by topo gigio — March 13, 2007 @ 9:05 pm: It appears that Mr. Galt is referring to Paul Plante.

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/4715/pl…etnamvetwc5.jpg

This was before my time. But admittedly, it’s an interesting story.

Comment by John Galt — March 25, 2007 @ 4:20 pm: JOHN GALT REPLIES: We don’t know if the post above here by LuLu about the “outing” refers to this second post by topo gigio, but on the off-chance that it does, we would ask your indulgence to be heard on this matter, as well, since we, the people out here in Rensselaer County are directly affected by this matter of what happened to Paul Plante in 1988, and again on August 22, 2001, when Paul Plante, an honorably discharged, decorated disabled veteran was in fact “seized” and taken into custody in the emergency room lobby of the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, and was locked in the secure mental facility on the tenth floor of the Stratton VA Hospital like a wild animal, based on a fraudulent involuntary psychiatric commitment order issued to Rensselaer County officials by a medical doctor at Samaritan Hospital in Troy, who had never even laid on eyes on Plante, who himself was nowhere near the Samaritan Hospital, nor had he even been, at the time this doctor issued this fraudulent involuntary commitment order, which by law, can only be issued after a doctor has taken a history of the potential mental patient, and has actually conducted a comprehensive physical and mental examination to confirm a diagnosis, and a need for treatment in a secure facility …

For some long time now, because of what happened to Paul Plante, first in 1988, and then again in 2001, we, the people out here in the countryside have been without a voice to be heard in the halls of OUR government, which really is not ours, at all …

And because of what happened to Paul Plante on August 22, 2001, specifically, we have been stripped of our right “peaceably to assemble and to petition the government, or any department thereof” pursuant to section 9 of the BILL OF RIGHTS of our NYS Constitution, including the NYS Department of Health, the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation and the Office of Professional Discipline of the NYS Department of Education by FIAT, because by having Paul Plante declared to be mentally ill and dangerous by this medical doctor at the Samaritan Hospital in Troy on August 22, 2001, 8-22-01, what the State of New York has done is to destroy Paul Plante’s credibility as a licensed professional engineer, forever, and without Paul Plante and his expertise as our witness, we are simply out of court, because you can’t go to court without evidence, and to have evidence, you need corroboration, and investigation, which has to be done by a licensed professional engineer in the State of New York, by law ….

And so …

If we countryfolks were to be asked about it, our opinion of what topo gigio has done by bringing the name of Paul Plante into this forum, out in the open, as it were, in connection with the Albany, New York Times Union article from January 10, 1988, entitled “Developers see a zealot in new county health officer” by TU staff writer Laurie Anderson that one pulls up on topo gigio’s link, in our simple way of looking at life, we would have to say that what we think of as DIVINE PROVIDENCE guided topo gigio to that particular article, out of all of the articles about that period of time in our collective history up here in NYS …

And our reasoning is this …

If one were to take a step backwards, and dispassionately take a look at where we all are right now in the State of New York as the OMEGA, the other end, as it were, or outcome, or aftermath, perhaps, of something that came before, the ALPHA, in our estimation, having “been there”, all of us, through this whole period of time, carefully and quietly watching, the ALPHA would start right exactly there, with the publishing of that Albany, New York Times Union article from January 10, 1988, entitled “Developers see a zealot in new county health officer” by Laurie Anderson ….

And the specific sentence in that article, which serves as a sort of ROSETTA STONE to understand the times that we are in right now, with this BIG PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS in the State of New York, is as follows:

“Plante is involved in several fierce feuds with developers, the most public of which involves (Stephen) Anderson, WHO IS ATTEMPTING TO RALLY the (Rensselaer) county legislature, (REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L.) Buono, AND THE STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO MAKE PLANTE MORE COMPLIANT.”

MAKE PLANTE MORE COMPLIANT ….

COMPLIANT: ready or disposed to comply; SUBMISSIVE

So …..

According to an authoritative source in the State of New York such as the Albany Times Union is, or so we take it to be, in this specific instance of these above words by Laurie Anderson which were in fact published AS FACT by the TU on January 10, 1988, AS OF January 10, 1988, which was ten (10) days AFTER Plante, in his capacity as a health officer in the Rensselaer County Health District, was supposed to begin enforcement of the provisions of the Rensselaer County Municipal Public Health Services Plan pursuant to Title 1 of Article 6 of the NYSPHL, Stephen Anderson, a land developer in Rensselaer County, WAS ATTEMPTING TO RALLY REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO AND DR. DAVID AXELROD, THE NEW YORK STATE HEALTH COMMISSIONER, “TO MAKE PLANTE MORE SUBMISSIVE” ….

And we would submit that the road from those times to where we all are right now in the State of New York, with this health crisis, and high property taxes for which we get nothing in return with regard to public health protection, starts right exactly there ….

With the publishing of those very words by the Albany TU on January 10, 1988 ….

And we countryfolks out here are very grateful to topo gigio for retrieving this very article and it is our collective belief that in doing so, topo gigio, who we do not know, has done us all here in the State of New York a great public service by providing a direct link to that very article, especially since our own efforts to locate this same article out in the aether of CYBERSPACE had to date been a failure ….

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4164#comments

For anyone just stopping by in here ....

This thread is an "experiment in democracy", just as this COMMONGROUNDCOMMONSENSE FORUM is an experiment .....

And just as OUR America, itself, is really an on-going experiment ....

A "living labratory", as it were ....

And what we are "viewing" in here, right now, to be blunt about it, is "DUELING BLOGS" ....

CAN COMMON ORDINARY AMERICAN CITIZENS WITHOUT "MEANS", WITHOUT WEALTH AND POWER, MAKE A DIFFERENCE, FOR THE BETTER, HERE IN OUR AMERICA?

And being older folks, largely, we who gather in here collectively believe that answer is YES ....

Although to be truthful, it is very hard work indeed, and probably it is not for the faint-hearted ....

But then ....

What ever really is?

And so ....

We don't worry about the faint-at-heart, ourselves, for it is our belief system as military veterans, many of us, anyway, that the stronger have a duty of sorts to the weaker, so we don't mind the extra burden, especially since most of us in here are "doing it for our children and grandchildren", in the first place, and the youngest of them cannot even speak yet ....

And so ...

In a lot of ways, what we are attempting to do in here is akin to a couple of people out in a small rowboat lassoing the anchor of a passing aircraft carrier, and then rowing like hell to pull that aircraft carrier ninety degrees from the course it was previously on, and then towing it into port, where it can then be cut up and sold for scrap, so that we can finally have some peace in OUR land, up here ....

And according to the way we countryfolks see life, the only reason that it can't actually be done, is that people tell themselves that it can't be done ...

And so ....

As engineers say, and hopefully others, as well: "The merely difficult, we accomplish right now; the truly impossible just takes a few more minutes to accomplish, once we set our minds to the task" .....

And so ....

Right now, in addition to using this thread to INFORM and EDUCATE and NOTIFY ....

We are also using it as a sort of OVERSIGHT on the Hearst Corporation-owned Albany, New York Times Union BLOG SITE ....

And to be truthful, we are using it as a GOAD, as well, with respect to this issue of CORPORATE CENSORSHIP and PROPAGANDIZING that goes on in the pages of the "BOSSES' RADIO" as we countryfolks call it up here ....

The other day, after one of the members of OUR community was in fact denied entry to the BLOG of the Albany, New York Times Union, we informed the editor that now, we countryfolks HAD OUR OWN NEWSPAPER, here in COMMONGROUNDCOMMONSENSE, where we can operate within the bounds of decency and a kind of self-imposed decorum, WITHOUT THE FEAR OF BEING STIFLED, OR CENSORED, because we choose to use OPPROBRIUM to embarass our public officials up here who stray far, far outside the bounds that OUR New York State Constitution sets for them ....

And what we said, in essence, was MAKE A CHOICE ....

CENSOR US IN YOUR CORPORATE BLOG, IF YOU WILL, BUT BE ADVISED, THEN, THAT WE ARE GOING TO USE OUR "CITIZEN'S RADIO" IN HERE TO TELL ALL THE CANDID WORLD LISTENING IN ABOUT THAT CENSORSHIP, AND WHY IT IS OF IMPORTANCE FOR US TO INDEED TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE TO THE CANDID WORLD ....

And a LOGJAM broke ....

Just like that ....

Way back in the beginning, when the future of this nation of OURS was not all that secure, or guaranteed, just as it is right now, and always, for that matter, people in OUR America, small as it was back then, and in New York State, as well, knew violence and death and destruction very well, because in truth, that is how we began life as a "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" ....

And as any rational combat veteran can tell you, THERE JUST HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY ....

And outside of force of arms, and cold steel, and automatic weapons, and such, EMBARRASSMENT and OPPROBRIUM are about all there really are ....

IF USED INTELLIGENTLY ....

WHICH IS PART OF WHAT THE "LIVING EXPERIMENT" HERE IN OUR AMERICA IS REALLY ALL ABOUT ....

Which is why "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" is so important, not only here in OUR America, but in the CORRUPT EMPIRE of NEW YORK, especially .....

And so ...

To be continued ....

"Spitzer's school BMI plan borders on tyrannical"

Letters to the editor, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, March 26, 2007

Gov. Eliot Spitzer wants New York schools to grade our kids on their body mass index, BMI.

Kids who have too high a BMI to please the government will get a poor grade.

Kids the government classifies as physically acceptable will get good grades.

This idea teeters on the edge of sanity.

It is none of the government's business whether my son has a high BMI or not.

Whether he eats well or not, whether he exercises or not, is a matter of my parental responsibility, as are things like teaching him to speak well and to be polite and compassionate.

My son's BMI is too high to fit into the governor's physical conformity norm.

In the eyes of Gov. Spitzer, he is not an ideal kid and should be punished with a low grade.

Try explaining the logic in this to a kid who is not only a consistent high honors student, but also a successful athlete who is advancing rapidly in his sport.

He is in much better shape than most of the kids in his school.

But because his ancestors were all big and stocky -- the skinny ones did not survive the harsh climate where we come from -- Gov. Spitzer wants to punish him with a low grade.

When my son heard about this idea, he called the governor "a control freak."

He hit the nail right on the head.

Ideas of enforced physical conformity have been practiced before, in a country six time zones east of New York.

The results were disastrous.

Perhaps the governor should give that some thought before he takes his BMI grade idea any further.

He should also consider the risks of an epidemic of eating disorders among our kids.

After all, that is the only way most kids will be able to comply with the anatomic standards in Gov. Spitzer's dream world.

SVEN R. L.

Saratoga Springs

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story...sdate=3/26/2007

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION ....

Comment by topo gigio — March 25, 2007 @ 10:23 pm:

On another matter…lying seems to be the modus operandi for the Bush administration.

Libby lied (and got convicted), Gonzales lied (and hopefully will soon be fired), the administration lied about Tillman to get some mileage out of the football connection, they lied about WMD’s, Rice lied about a lot of things IMHO, Cheney has been lying since the day he was born, Rumsfeld was so arrogant that he even believed his own lies, Bush is either lying or most likely is incredibly stupid as he tells us to just give it a little more time in Iraq for things to “work”.

Actually, lying to the American people has been the way of our government for quite a while now (Nixon lied, Clinton lied though about non-governmental stuff, Ollie North lied).

It certainly is a sad state of affairs that this is what the U.S. has come to represent — a pack of liars.

Cheery, huh?

Comment by John Galt — March 26, 2007 @ 8:51 am:

topo gigio, if one goes back and reads Miracle at Philadelphia by Catherine Drinker Bowen, an authoritive little work about the 1787 federal Constitutional Convention, one actually finds your sentiments echoed in there, by the delegates to the federal Constitutional Convention, many of whom were classically-educated, and so, had extensive knowledge of the Roman Republic, the Roman Empire, and the Greek states which existed before Rome ...

And there was much argument, or debate, among those delegates, as to how to “get around” exactly what you are talking about, and their conclusion was that there really is no solution to what is in reality, HUMAN NATURE, or perhaps, human impulses, when people are confronted by POWER, and GREED ....

And in his Meditations, Marcus Aurelius, the Roman Emporer, also discusses this topic of lying among people in positions of power, at length ....

And it still comes back to CHOICE, FREE WILL, and the inner strength of character of the individual ...

Which is why freedom of speech and freedom of the press was deemed to be so important here in the “UNITED STATES” of America ....

This America that we are the inheriters of rose out of flames, death and destruction, and as any rational combat veteran, if that is not an oxymoron, can tell you, there just has to be a better way ....

And what came out of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, as an alternative, was OPPROBRIUM ....

POINT THE FINGER AT THEM, PULL DOWN THEIR PANTS IN PUBLIC, EMBARRASS THE BE-JAYSUS OUT OF THEM ....

And that is about it, which really brings us right into this present moment, and why an OPEN, UNCENSORED BLOG like this is so important to us common citizens out here in the countryside, where, because of isolation, our voices are never heard ....

America was created as an experiment, NOT A GUARANTEE, if one recalls Ben Franklin’s words on the subject, anyway, and that experiment fails when we all don’t give a damn, anymore, because everybody is lying, in the media, in the government, everywhere ...

Yes, indeed, it can be, AND IS, for us older folks, anyway, VERY DEPRESSING ....

But then, it always has been, and our own history right here in this area tells us that it has been worse, much worse, and yet, we still have prevailed to get through those times, which many of us lived through, and still recall, JE ME SOUVIENS, as the Quebecquois might say ....

And so ....

Us older countryfolks out here were taught way back when that OUR Declaration of Independence was really an OPEN LETTER TO THE CANDID WORLD, telling that CANDID WORLD that this is where we are right now, and this is why it is unsatisfactory to a “civilized people”, so this is where we are going, and that was back in 1776 .....

And this is now 2007, and to us, this BLOG, and others, still serve as OPEN LETTERS TO THE CANDID WORLD, in the same spirit that the original Declaration of Independence was .....

And we older folks out here are using that opportunity to tell the CANDID WORLD where it is that we have gotten to, in the intervening period of time, WHICH IS ALWAYS A MATTER OF PERCEPTION AND OPINION, and what is perceived to be good about it, as well as what is perceived to be wrong, or just plain bad ...

And so ....

Does that type of “venting” to the CANDID WORLD really solve anything?

Whoever does really know, topo gigio, but at least back in 1776, it did get a ball rolling, sort of, anyway,and here we still are, today ....

And so .....

As combat veterans, we were taught to attack right into the heart of that which was attacking you, and by God, or god, some of us got to be pretty good at that .......

And the sharpest weapons that there ever will be, sharper than the finest sword, ARE WORDS, topo gigio .....

And we are not at all afraid to use them in that fashion, if need be .....

Nor are you, from what I can see, anyway .....

And in an intelligent manner, which is an example to all of us, out here in the countrysside, anyway, since us older folks are into “intelligence” and “candor” as a more sure way to survive life than lying is, since lying to yourself in the fall that you have enough firewood to last a long, cold winter is not going to get you far, if in fact, all you have is a little pile of kindling wood ....

And so .....

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4164#comments

The Bergen Record

"PA spends millions of commuter dollars on arts"

Sunday, March 25, 2007

By DAVID A. MICHAELS
STAFF WRITER

The Port Authority spent $25 million for the preservation and redevelopment of the Seventh Regiment Armory.

The Port Authority has spent almost $100 million since 2003 to subsidize elite New York City cultural institutions and real-estate developments -- projects that strayed from the bi-state agency's mission to improve transportation in the region.

Much of the money came from New Jersey toll payers and PATH riders, but it went to dance studios and an expensive venue for jazz on Manhattan's West Side, a parking garage that may be used by luxury condominium owners in Brooklyn and the renovation of a former nightclub into a Broadway theater.

[u]The payments were administered by the Empire State Development Corp., whose former chairman, Charles A. Gargano, simultaneously served as vice chairman of the Port Authority.

The money was included in a special fund solely controlled by Gargano's boss, former New York Gov. George E. Pataki.

Gargano said the projects helped boost the economy and tourism in the port district, which includes all or part of nine New Jersey counties and eight New York counties.

But former authority employees and scholars -- and even the authority's own top spokesman -- said investments in cultural groups did not square with its core mission to improve regional transportation and even went beyond the agency's license to promote economic development.

"A lot of the projects that have been funded should not have been funded," said Louis J. Gambaccini, a former assistant executive director of the Port Authority and a former New Jersey transportation commissioner.

"They are falling into a very common political trap," Gambaccini said, adding that such projects could be helpful in the short term but dilute the authority's ability to carry out "mega-projects" that improve regional transportation.

Stephen Sigmund, the authority's chief spokesman, also said the grants did not fit the agency's mission.

"They were a product of a bad political deal," Sigmund said.

"It has led to spending in some places that arguably is not the mission of the PA."

The authority did not publicly disclose the list of projects, provoking criticism from lawmakers.

The authority's 2007 budget, which the agency's leaders praised for its transparency, listed only a single number for each special fund -- its total budget.

"This is done in secret," said Richard L. Brodsky, the chairman of the New York State Assembly's Committee on Corporations, Authorities and Commissions.

"One doesn't know why one museum gets [a grant] and another museum doesn't get it."

"They are subject to concern that they are pet projects for people in power."

The Record obtained a partial list of the grants from the authority, then received more complete records from the development corporation.

An examination of those records and interviews revealed:

The agency spent $16.4 million for museums, $25 million to redevelop an armory on the city's East Side, $10.15 million for a visitor center and plant research facility at the New York Botanical Garden, and more than $8 million for New York City libraries.

The authority paid $4 million for neighborhood offices for the Empire State Development Corp.

The offices were shut down earlier this month because they "essentially weren't being used," a spokesman for the development corporation said.

Gargano signed the agreement that directed the grants on behalf of the development corporation at the same time he was a fiduciary of the Port Authority, a potential conflict of interest that reduced the incentive that the authority's money would be put to good use, according to experts in ethics and corporate governance.

Fund stems from feud

The special fund was created seven years ago, after Pataki and former Gov. Christie Whitman ended a paralyzing feud over which state reaped more from the Port Authority.

Their compromise allowed the port to move forward with a $200 million cargo facility for the Maersk Sealand company at Port Newark-Elizabeth, a project viewed as benefiting New Jersey.

In exchange, New York got $250 million for its new fund.

Anthony R. Coscia, the authority's chairman who has moved the agency toward a stricter focus on transportation, declined to comment about individual grants; Coscia, who is from New Jersey, was not on the board when the fund was created.

"These funds were created at a time when the two states could not find common ground on regional needs, and hopefully those times are behind us," Coscia said.

Gargano said all of the grants were made to deserving organizations.

The money went to good causes, he said, because the public benefits from New York's cultural institutions.

Gargano left the development corporation in December but remains vice chairman of the authority.

"We tried to support those projects where the organization was committed, and where they raised the bulk of the money and we filled the gap," he said.

David Catalfamo, a spokesman for Pataki, acknowledged a long-running debate about the authority's role in economic development.

"But no matter where you stand on that issue, these quality projects are all clearly within the broad charter of the authority's mission of enhancing the economic vitality of the port district," Catalfamo said.

Gargano's key role

The organizations that received grants were chosen by Pataki and his aides, Gargano said.

But Gargano had a deep role in the fund's creation and its use, according to interviews and records.

He negotiated with Lewis Eisenberg, who was Port Authority chairman under Whitman, to end the stalemate and create the fund.

Gargano then voted twice, with other authority commissioners, to create and certify the fund.

Gargano also signed the master agreement in December 2003 that reserved the $250 million for the development corporation.

The projects required the approval of the authority's executive director, but former commissioners said his approval would have been perfunctory, because he was a Pataki appointee and the authority had agreed the money would be spent at the governor's direction.

Several former commissioners and experts in ethics and corporate governance said Gargano's dual positions presented a possible conflict of interest.

"It creates the appearance that these things are being selected on grounds other than the kind of criteria that the Port Authority ought to use," said Richard C. Leone, a former Port Authority chairman who is now president of the Century Foundation.

Gargano said there was no conflict because his dual roles both promoted the economic vitality of New York.

"Everything the Port Authority does is to help the economy grow in the region," he said.

But Diane Swanson, an associate professor of business administration at Kansas State University and chair of its Business Ethics Education Initiative, said the arrangement raised questions about whether Gargano could be objective.

"There is no incentive for the money to be used as efficiently as possible," Swanson said.

"What this raises is a lack of proper oversight and control of public money, because the system of checks and balances is either not in place or is in question."

Stretching the mission

Some of the organizations that received grants said they did not know that the money came from the Port Authority.

"We went to the governor of New York state and asked for his help on both of those projects," said Karl Lauby, a spokesman for the New York Botanical Garden, which received $10.15 million for a visitor center and a plant research laboratory.

"Where the state gets the money is their decision."

The state also looked to the Port Authority to fund the preservation of a historic building it owned on Manhattan's East Side.

The authority awarded $25 million to the Seventh Regiment Armory Conservancy, selected by the development corporation to manage the armory.

And the authority funded the development corporation's neighborhood offices, created as a resource for local businesses.

They were closed this month.

"They were very much underused," said development corporation spokesman A.J. Carter.

"Even the busiest of the community network offices averaged 1½ walk-ins a day."

The authority committed $4.3 million to a real estate project near downtown Brooklyn.

The money included $2.3 million to build a parking garage for the Brooklyn Academy of Music's cultural district.

Joe Chan, a former city official who now runs a partnership that oversees the cultural district, said the garage would benefit the authority by encouraging use of mass transit.

Its planned location is near many subway lines.

The garage could be used by residents of a new condominium tower, although the partnership has not decided how many spaces would be reserved, officials said.

Jameson W. Doig, a professor of public affairs at Princeton who wrote a history of the Port Authority, said he did not doubt the importance of such projects, but did not see why the authority should fund them.

The authority's mission statement, published on its Web site, does not mention "economic development."

It stresses the need for "transportation and port commerce facilities" that strengthen "the economic competitiveness of the New York-New Jersey metropolitan region."

Governors and their appointees began stretching the authority's mission to include real estate in the 1960s, when the authority built the World Trade Center.

It went even further in the 1970s, when the local economy was at its nadir and the authority built projects such as the Teleport in Staten Island, an office park that has several empty buildings and loses millions of dollars a year.

"Economic development began to be misused as soon as it was championed," Doig said.

E-mail: michaels@northjersey.com

* * *

Port Authority's financial grants

Grants from the Port Authority's special fund for New York transportation, economic development and infrastructure:

• Construction of a new building for the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater: $1 million

• Rose Center for Earth and Space at the American Museum of Natural History: $6.5 million

• New dance studios, dressing rooms, offices and public areas for the Ballet Hispanico: $1 million

• Parking garage for the Brooklyn Academy of Music's cultural district: $2.3 million

• Planning and design for the Brooklyn Public Library of Visual and Performing Arts: $2 million

• A new Brooklyn Children's Museum: $1 million

• Construction of the Bronx Library Center and technology for it: $6.15 million

• Development and staffing of several Empire State Development Corp. community offices to provide assistance to local businesses: $4 million

• Purchase of the Farley Post Office Building and conversion to use as a train station: $128 million*

• Improvements to the Guggenheim Museum and its technical services building: $500,000

• Creation of the Chelsea Cove segment of the Hudson River Park: $2.36 million**

• Construction costs for Jazz at Lincoln Center's Frederick P. Rose Hall: $3.5 million

• Redesign of a plaza and hall at Lincoln Center: $250,000

• Expansion and renovation of the Museum of Modern Art: $5 million

• Purchase of building for the Museum of Arts & Design: $1.5 million

• Rehabilitation of building for the National Lighthouse Museum: $1.9 million***

• Salaries for curators and improvements at the Bronx Zoo, Brooklyn Botanic Garden and other gardens and aquariums in New York City: $6 million

• Renovation of building facades in New Rochelle's downtown: $250,000

• Construction of a visitor center and plant research laboratory at the New York Botanical Garden: $10.15 million

• Renovation of Studio 54 for the Roundabout Theater: $300,000

• Preservation of the Seventh Regiment Armory: $25 million

• Construction of two piers on the West Harlem Riverfront: $4 million

Source: Empire State Development Corp. records. *Project scheduled to receive other Port Authority funds for a total of $145 million. **Project received other authority funds for a total of $10 million. ***Project has not yet received its funding.

http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=e...UVFeXk3MTAwMDc4

Siena Research Institute
Siena College, Loudonville, NY
www.siena.edu/sri

For Immediate Release: Monday, March 26, 2007
Contact: Steven Greenberg at 518-469-9858

Siena New York Poll:

"Spitzer Support Slides; Still Strong?

Loudonville, NY – After millions of dollars have been spent attacking and defending his budget proposals, Governor Eliot Spitzer remains popular with New York voters, although his favorable rating has fallen from six-to-one positive to three-to-one positive in the last month, according to a new Siena (College) Research Institute poll of registered voters released today.

“While Spitzer continues to earn strong public support, the budget battles are moving some New Yorkers from the pro-Spitzer column to the anti-Spitzer column,” said Steven Greenberg, Siena New York Poll spokesman.

“His favorability rating is down 12 points in the past month, while his unfavorable rating is up eight points."

"There has been a similar shift in his job performance rating.”

Less than half of voters – 47 percent – think he’s doing an excellent or good job, down from 58 percent last month, while 39 percent think he’s doing a fair or poor job, up from 24 percent.

“Spitzer is spending some of the political capital he earned in his record victory,” Greenberg said.

“He’s taken some hits but voters continue to show support and they’re not ready to knock him down.”

For the first time since the November election, New York voters are no longer optimistic about the direction of the State.

They are now evenly divided with 37 percent saying New York is on the right track and 37 percent saying it is headed in the wrong direction.

Downstate voters remains optimistic, while upstate voters are – like before the election – much more pessimistic.

This SRI survey was conducted March 19-22, 2007 by telephone calls to 622 registered New York State voters. It has a margin of error of + 3.9 percentage points. For more information, please call Steven Greenberg at 518-469-9858. Survey cross-tabulations and frequencies can be found at: http://www.siena.edu/sri/results/2007/07_Mar_NYPoll.htm

Siena Research Institute
Siena College, Loudonville, NY
www.siena.edu/sri

"In Fight Over Spitzer Tax Plan, It’s Loophole vs. Incentive"

By PATRICK McGEEHAN
Published: March 26, 2007

Executives of big companies doing business in New York knew they were in trouble as soon as Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s budget director invoked the l-word.

To balance the state budget, the governor’s office has proposed closing what it says are loopholes that corporations have used to reduce their tax bills, in some cases for decades.

Eliminating them would increase the state’s corporate tax revenue by about $400 million a year, according to the governor’s estimates.

But many business leaders say there are no loopholes to close.

They argue that the governor is taking aim at established tax practices used as incentives to companies that operate in New York.

The business leaders also point out that Mr. Spitzer pledged not to raise taxes.

Of course, he never said he would not tighten loopholes.

Paul E. Francis, the governor’s budget director, said closing loopholes that are used almost exclusively by a small group of corporations is “good tax policy.”

Some people involved in budget negotiations in Albany said they believed that Gov. Spitzer might propose lowering the overall corporate tax rate — now at 7.5 percent — in a deal to tighten the loopholes.

Mr. Francis declined to comment on that possibility.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and other New York City officials have warned that the governor’s proposals could hurt the city’s robust economy.

City business leaders also have been plotting their strategy.

“What I’ve heard is that no single change in the tax structure is going to cause a company to fold up its tent and leave New York,” said Kathryn S. Wylde, chief executive of the Partnership for New York City, a coalition of large employers.

“But it’s their judgment of what kind of tax policy and what business environment New York is going to have that drives those decisions.”

Companies in New York City face state and city tax rates that together exceed 17 percent, the highest in the country.

The practices that the Spitzer administration wants to alter or prohibit have helped reduce that tax bite.

Mr. Francis said many businesses had learned to exploit tax loopholes so well that they might be paying too little.

He pointed to one bank that complained that the governor’s proposals would more than double the taxes it pays the state.

If that is true, Mr. Francis said, then some banks are using loopholes to reduce their state taxes to less than half of the 7.5 percent rate.

Allowing them to do that is not fair, Mr. Francis said, because “most corporate taxpayers in New York are companies that don’t take advantage of these kinds of sophisticated tax-minimization techniques.”

Though the changes would not apply to all companies, business leaders say they would affect the city’s biggest employers.

The proposed change that worries them the most would require those employers to file a combined tax return in New York for out-of-state subsidiaries that buy, sell or trade goods and services with each other.

That could mean paying more in state taxes.

The Spitzer administration estimated that such combined reports would bring in an additional $215 million annually, but members of the Partnership for New York City said that estimate was “wildly low.”

Until now, companies have not had to file combined reports to New York as long as these intercompany transactions were conducted at fair-market prices, not at steep discounts that may inflate the profits of sister companies in states where taxes are lower.

Most states allow separate reporting of income by companies, as New York has.

But 17 states, mostly in the West, use a different standard.

They require combined reports for all companies that are part of a “unitary” business — those with a shared purpose and ownership, like all the regional units of a national retail chain.

Fearing that companies have evaded significant amounts of tax, more states have considered switching to a unitary approach, said Joseph Crosby, legislative director for the Council on State Taxation, which represents large corporations.

The West Virginia Legislature has approved a switch, and Massachusetts is considering one, Mr. Crosby said.

“Every year we see half a dozen legislatures propose this, but it usually fails,” Mr. Crosby said.

“It seems like there is some renewed interest now, and these cases may set the tone.”

Officials of the Spitzer administration have said that the changes they are proposing would not amount to adoption of a unitary system, but business leaders disagree, saying that would be the effective result.

The change would alter the business environment that has existed in New York for more than 60 years, said Peter L. Faber, chairman of the committee on taxation and public revenue at the Partnership for New York City.

“All the way back to 1945, New York has held out its refusal to adopt a unitary tax system as an inducement to headquarters companies to locate here,” said Mr. Faber, who is senior counsel at the law firm McDermott Will & Emery.

With this change, he said, “you could have a company with an out-of-state subsidiary that has no operations in New York but sells to New York customers, and that company could be dragged into a New York tax return.”

Corporate executives are concerned not only about the administrative burden of more complex tax filings in Albany, but also about the possibility that the state will claim they owe it considerably more than they have been paying.

Mr. Faber said the reporting change was less of a concern on Wall Street than among media, consumer products and real estate companies, among others.

“Of the proposed loophole closings, this one certainly had the broadest impact and was framed as having the worst potential implications for the economic development objectives of New York State,” Ms. Wylde said.

But Mr. Francis was unmoved by predictions that corporations would relocate — which he called a “red herring” — because of the reporting change.

“The reality is that California hasn’t done too badly, nor has the Western United States in attracting economic growth,” Mr. Francis said.

Ms. Wylde said she had heard complaints from some large media companies about another of the proposed loophole closings.

That one would force companies to report income from some productions, like movies and TV shows, that are exempt from federal tax.

The state estimated that it would take in about $30 million a year from that change, but the members of the Partnership for New York City said the additional revenue would be much higher, Ms. Wylde said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/26/nyregion...amp;oref=slogin

NY Post

"MAKING APRIL FOOL OF SPITZ - GOV. SPITZER Headed for late budget."

March 26, 2007 --

'GOV. Steamroller" is on the brink of suffering his second major defeat - and this one will be his biggest yet.

Sources close to Gov. Spitzer, a self-described "f- - -ing steamroller," said that after a weekend of on-again, off-again staff meetings, there appeared little likelihood that a budget agreement would be in place by the April 1 start of the state's fiscal year.

Some senior Democrats privately blamed Spitzer's aggressive attacks on Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno (R-Rensselaer) for making an on-time budget virtually impossible.

"The steamroller went up against the boxer, and the boxer punched back hard," said a source close to Spitzer, referring to Bruno's success as a champion pugilist in the Army.

Delivering an on-time budget in a state that hasn't had one for 20 of the last 22 years was a key Spitzer promise during his campaign last year, a symbol, he said, of his determination to end state government's notorious dysfunction.

Sources with firsthand knowledge of the situation said Spitzer had underestimated Bruno's willingness to battle the new governor over his plans to cut Medicaid and shift school-aid funding away from Long Island, a key base of Republican power.

"Shifting school aid from Long Island is like asking the Senate Republicans to commit suicide."

"Did Spitzer really think Joe would agree to that?" a senior state Democrat asked.

Oddly to many, Spitzer so far has held only one public budget meeting, at which he delivered several nasty digs at Bruno's budget plan, thereby hardening Bruno's determination to resist him.

One source said a bitter backroom confrontation between Spitzer and Bruno earlier this month had also strengthened Bruno's determination to battle the governor.

"Joe sees Spitzer as a bully and has concluded that, like a lot of bullies, Spitzer will back down if you fight back," the source said.

Spitzer suffered his first major defeat early last month, when the Legislature picked a new state comptroller over his objections.

*

Some Assembly Democrats are grumbling that Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver - who for the past 12 years under Republican Gov. George Pataki was the leading figure of his party - hasn't established a strong enough presence at the Capitol this year.

"Shelly seems to be in a bunker and doesn't have a plan for the Assembly Democrats," a well-placed source said.

The Manhattan-based Silver, after years of battling Pataki, has remained largely in the background, deferring to Spitzer and refusing to engage in public budget debates with Bruno, who repeatedly has challenged him to do so.

*

Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco (R-Schenectady) is lining up support for former Mayor Rudy Giuliani's presidential run - even as Senate Republicans remain neutral.

Insiders say Bruno is waiting for Mayor Bloomberg, who has poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into Senate Republican campaigns, to make up his mind about running as an independent before deciding whether to endorse Giuliani's bid.

fredric.dicker@nypost.com

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03262007/news/...c_u__dicker.htm

NY POST

"IT'S ELIOT'S MOVE"

March 26, 2007 --

With just six days to go before the start of the new fiscal year, and with no state-budget deal in sight, New Yorkers are about to see just what their new governor - Eliot "The Steamroller" Spitzer - is made of.

Will he settle for a business-as-usual budget - brokered with special interests to the detriment of the Empire State and its beleaguered taxpayers?

Or will he take command of the process - making it clear that if New York does not have a good budget on April 1, it will have no budget at all?

That is, will he shut state government down - and place the blame where it belongs, at the feet of obstructionist legislative leaders?

At the moment, the principal obstacle is Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, who is obstinately insisting on spending $3 billion in make-believe money above Spitzer's own 9 percent hike in outlays.

And no Bruno, no budget.

What next?

Spitzer has three choices:

* Bow to Bruno, putting the state's long-term solvency (and his own legacy) at dire risk.

* Kick the can down the road, extending talks and missing the April 1 deadline - just like in the bad old days.

* Or shut down state agencies - arguing, correctly, that an administration cannot without a budget in place.

If Spitzer hopes to make good on his vow to fix Albany - to "change everything" - his choice is clear:

He must close down New York government.

Tell state employees they're out of work.

Ready the pink slips, as then-Gov. Pataki did in '95.

Tell New Yorkers who depend on state services that, absent a budget, they're out of luck; the services can't be paid for.

And tell them, too, to blame Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno (and Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver) for the mess.

Let's face it: As critical as this fiscal fight is, there's far more at stake than the 2007-08 state budget.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03262007/posto...editorials_.htm