The October 26,2009 Issue of The Capitol

www.nycapitolnews.comVOL. 2, NO. 10 OctOber 2009

Mark Schroeder discusses sound bites and media attention.

Page 19

Some senators see the end of Amigos’ power in Monserrate chaos.

Page 6

Tim Bishop becomes a national target.

Page 9

Rick Lazio Tries Again

an

dr

ew

sc

hw

ar

tz

www.nycapitolnews.com2 OCTOBER 2009 THE CAPITOL

EDITORIAL

Editor: Edward-Isaac [email protected] Editor: David [email protected] Editor: Andrew J. Hawkins [email protected]: Chris Bragg [email protected] Gentile [email protected] Rivoli [email protected] Editor: Andrew SchwartzInterns: Andrew Cotlov, John Dorman, Selena Ross

ADVERTISING

Associate Publishers: Jim Katocin, Seth MillerAdvertising Manager: Marty StronginSenior Account Executives:Ceil Ainsworth, Monica CondeMarketing Director: Tom KellyMarketing Coordinator: Stephanie MussoExecutive Assistant of Sales: Jennie Valenti

PRODUCTION

Production Manager: Mark StinsonArt Director: Mitchell HoffmanAdvertising Design: Heather MulcaheyAssistant Production Manager: Jessica A. BalaschakWeb Design: Lesley Siegel

The Capitol is a division of Manhattan Media, LLC, publisher of City Hall,Our Town, The West Side Spirit, Chelsea Clinton News, The Westsider,New York Press, New York Family and AVENUE magazine.

Editorial (212) 894-5417 Advertising (212) 284-9715Fax (212) 268-2935 General (212) 268-8600

President/CEO: Tom Allon

CFO/COO: Joanne Harras

The Capitol is published monthly.Copyright © 2009, Manhattan Media, LLC

www.nycapitolnews.com

Forethought

Ruben Diaz, Sr. is right: observers and members of the State Senate have been hypocritical in calling for the expulsion of Hiram Monserrate after years of blithely dismissing the bad behavior of other colleagues, including Monserrate’s predecessor, John Sabini.

And yet, the hypocrisy of Monserrate’s colleagues does not absolve him of wrongdoing. He has been exonerated of several more serious charges, but found guilty of others. The judicial system has delivered an explicit verdict.

The public wrangling over Monserrate’s fate demonstrates the need for a clearly articulated set of standards that governs the behavior of elected offi cials and determines whether or not they are qualifi ed to serve. If such a system had already been in place at the time of the verdict, Monserrate’s fate would not be in doubt.

Instead, the leaders of the State Senate have convened a panel to consider whether Monserrate’s indiscretion is suffi cient cause for his removal. The members of the panel, and the conference leader, John Sampson, have not said what sort of standard of behavior the panel will use to judge Monserrate. Neither have they articulated a timeline or outlined the mechanics of the process.

Notably, Sampson and the panel’s chairman, Eric Schneiderman, have not ruled out re-examining the evidence in Monserrate’s case and re-interviewing key witnesses, such as Monserrate’s girlfriend. Such a spectacle would easily be susceptible to backroom dealing and likely distract the Senate for weeks.

It is not the place of the New York State Senate to re-litigate the charges against Monserrate or reopen the case against him. New Yorkers have already witnessed the painful and lurid details of the trial as it wended its way through the court. They should not be subjected to them again.

Instead, the Senate panel should spend its time designing a uniform code of conduct, so that when future members of the Legislature commit crimes or otherwise exercise poor judgment, it will not be up to their colleagues to decide arbitrarily whether they should go.

The panel may decide that felonies are grounds for expulsion, but misdemeanors are not. It may decide that certain classes of misdemeanor are unacceptable, while others are tolerable. It may decide that certain lawful acts are nonetheless offensive and should be grounds for dismissal, as is the case in most other professions.

Those questions are for the Senate to decide, and now is the time to do so. Rules governing the behavior of members now exist only in limited form, and only because they are

expedient, not comprehensive. Had Monserrate been guilty of a felony, for example, he would have been forced automatically to vacate his seat. The question of whether he should be forced to do so after being convicted of a misdemeanor should similarly have been decided long ago.

The Legislature needs clear rules about what is acceptable behavior by its members and what is not. Any action that violates those rules should be grounds for immediate and automatic expulsion. No extraneous panel. No drawn-out inquisition. No onrush of public statements by senators who must consider their re-election prospects.

Because the current guidelines are unclear, members of the Legislature decide who gets to serve with them on a reactionary, case-by-case basis. As a result, political considerations and personal relationships guide the proceedings as much as ethical principle.

There has been a broad consensus among Republicans and Democrats alike that Monserrate should resign or be removed from offi ce. It is a fair question to ask: Would the outcry be so unanimous if Monserrate did not represent an area of Queens that was all but certain to elect a Democrat in a special election? What if he were a marginal Democrat representing an upstate, conservative district? Would so many of his colleagues clamor for his dismissal?

The Monserrate question has now clearly come to dominate the Senate’s attention, and may well turn into another circus akin to the coup that paralyzed state government earlier this year. Even some members of the Senate fear as much.

They fear that the Senate’s lengthy agenda, which includes a $3 billion budget defi cit and the debate over gay marriage, will be hijacked once again by yet another internal struggle. Experience suggests they may be right.

The Monserrate incident is emblematic of a Senate that lurches from one crisis to the next, more obsessed

Better Than Another Committee, Make Some Baseline Standards

with procedural matters and intramural politicking than serving the 19 million New Yorkers its members represent.

The lament for a better and more responsive Albany is a common one. Often these laments come bereft of specifi c measures for how to fi x a clearly broken state government. But the leadership in the Senate can at least take a meager fi rst step by declaring fi rmly and comprehensively the ethical standards its members must meet.


Spurned In Special Election, Faso Weighing Run Against Murphy In 2010Former minority leader raises profi le, considers race for Congress or comptroller

BY SAL GENTILE

Since losing badly to Eliot Spitzer in 2006, John Faso has struggled to fi nd his place in the

Republican Party.He co-founded, along with Ed Cox, the

conservative political action committee New Yorkers for Growth. He ran briefl y for the GOP nomination to fi ll Kirsten Gillibrand’s House seat, losing out to Jim Tedisco. And he toyed with the idea of running for state chairman, traveling to Erie County to meet with party leaders and briefl y appealing to Rudy Giuliani’s inner circle before stepping aside.

Now, Faso, who has been pegged mostly as a potential candidate for state comptroller, is seriously considering challenging Rep. Scott Murphy for the upstate congressional seat that eluded him earlier this year, according to people close to him.

And one of his biggest boosters just happens to be his old New Yorkers for Growth co-chair.

“He would make a superb comptroller, obviously,” said Cox, who was elected Republican state chair in September. “He’s got to make up his mind. He’d also be a terrifi c candidate for the 20th congressional district.”

People who have spoken with Faso describe him as genuinely torn between the two positions, though they caution that he may decide to stay out of politics altogether. What has drawn him to the congressional race, they say, is a mixture of bruised feelings over Tedisco’s bungled campaign and an interest in national issues such as health care and spending. (Faso declined to comment on his future plans.)

“That’s defi nitely something that he’s interested in, that people are interested in him about,” said one person close to Faso and Cox. “I know John cares a lot about national politics.”

Faso will likely have competition for the GOP nod if he chooses to run. Tedisco, for one, has been publicly fl irting with the idea of another run, and local party leaders say several other possible contenders have begun to emerge. In trying to stick out among a pack of hopefuls, Faso’s connections to the party leadership—and Cox’s relationships with national Republican operatives and GOP fundraisers—would be all the more valuable.

“He’ll get lots of party support with Ed Cox there. Ed will pave the way,” said the person close to Faso and Cox. “They’re linked at the hip.”

Faso has steadily rebuilt his standing in the state party after winning just over a quarter of the vote in 2006. That crushing result was perhaps the main reason county leaders and then-state chair

Joseph Mondello rejected Faso and chose Tedisco instead, despite Faso’s strong local roots (unlike Tedisco, he actually lives in the district and represented a portion of it while in the Assembly).

Faso’s leadership of New Yorkers for Growth has also allowed him entrée

to a circle of wealthy GOP donors and rainmakers centered in Manhattan who could help him catch up to Murphy in fundraising.

“He’s only stronger than he was—in terms of fundraising, in terms of who he knows,” said Carla Kerr, a commercial litigator in Manhattan and a founding director of New Yorkers for Growth. “In

terms of our group being stronger, the resources that he had previously are only stronger now.”

The PAC has also allowed him to distill his conservative message and leave behind the toxic associations with social issues that have come to tarnish

most Republican candidates in the Northeast. His focus on the economy, his supporters say, would make him an especially formidable contender.

“I think John’s a great candidate,” said Michael McCormick, the Dutchess Republican chairman. “John Faso is a great leader in the state and the Republican

Party, and his name should be brought forward.”

Mike Long, the chairman of the state Conservative Party, said Faso could bridge the gap between his party and the GOP, which has hobbled Republican candidates in the past. Long was instrumental in vaulting Faso to the Republican nomination in 2006 over

former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld.

“He lives in the district, he knows the district, and if he decided to seek it, he certainly would be one of the people we would give serious consideration to,” Long said.

Long added that he had broached the topic briefl y with Faso, who said he had not ruled anything in or out for the moment.

In the end, Faso’s greatest advantage in seeking the congressional seat may simply be his personal connections. Whereas most county chairs in the district felt that state and national Republicans had forced them to accept Tedisco, Faso maintains close relationships with most GOP leaders in the area.

And they all seem to hold him in high regard.

“The national committee got involved and none of us locals had any input,” said Sheila Ross, the Otsego Republican chair, adding that things would likely be different with Faso. “We all know John, and everybody likes John.”

[email protected]

“He’s only stronger than he was—in terms of fund-raising, in terms of who he knows,” said Carla Kerr, a Manhattan lawyer and Republican donor, comparing Faso’s current position to 2006.

After losing bitterly to Jim Tedisco for the GOP nomination to replace Kirsten Gillibrand, John Faso is consid-ering challenging Scott Murphy next year.

AN

DR

EW

SC

HW

AR

TZ


BY SAL GENTILE

Before he became the fi rst member of the State Senate to publicly threaten Hiram

Monserrate with impeachment on Friday, Oct. 16, Brian Foley, of Suffolk, called Democratic Leader John Sampson to let him know. Sampson was in China on a trade mission with Senate President Malcolm Smith, so he was half a day ahead.

A weary Sampson asked Foley to hold off.

“I’d like it if you didn’t do it this way,” he said, according to people familiar with the conversation.

Sampson’s reluctance to immediately cast out a senator who had just been convicted of misdemeanor assault against his girlfriend emanated from one source: The Amigos.

State Sen. Ruben Diaz had already publicly threatened Democratic leaders with another round of mayhem if they tried to expel Monserrate. Privately, he and his fellow Amigos, Carl Kruger and Pedro Espada, had appealed to Sampson to stop Sen. Liz Krueger, of Manhattan, from calling for Monserrate’s ouster as well. “Some members did not agree with my tactics,” Krueger said.

She defi ed them, too.The fact that Krueger, a member of the

conference’s liberal faction, and Foley, one of the marginal suburban moderates, were willing to risk intramural dysfunction and invite the wrath of Monserrate’s allies by urging him to resign has been interpreted

by many in the conference as a sign that the reign of the Amigos has come to an end.

“Hopefully the days of any kind of threats are over with,” said Sen. Neil Breslin, of Albany.

If so, some members say, it would herald a new chapter in the life of the year-old Democratic Senate.

“At the end of the day, they don’t have that much leverage anymore,” said one member of the conference who did not want to be named discussing details of private conversations. “I’m not sure if they see it yet, because they’re still quite capable of making the threat that, ‘If I’m not happy, I’m going to do something.’”

But the threat, members of the Senate now say, seems to have lost its force. Foley, Krueger and others went over the heads of the Amigos, proving that they could marginalize the dissidents if the rest of the conference appealed directly to the public and united the disparate factions. At least a dozen more members followed Krueger’s and Foley’s lead.

“I think if enough of us can do this sooner than later, then it will say to the leadership: this is inevitable,” said one senator of overcoming the objections of the Amigos. “Then it becomes a foregone conclusion.”

Such a strategy would have been unthinkable on other controversial issues that have come before the Senate, such as gay marriage. Even that bill’s most ardent supporters were, for a long time, reluctant to call publicly for a vote out of

fear of antagonizing the Amigos.Democratic leaders also seem to be

getting the message. Sampson, according to senators who have spoken with him, has begun to realize that appeasing the Amigos is not worth jeopardizing the rest of the conference—especially marginal members such as Foley, who must appeal to women voters in his re-election bid.

“In an effort to protect one or two, you run the risk of pissing off 30,” said one

member, repeating the case she made to Democratic leaders to consider removing Monserrate. “And it’ll create an avalanche that you can’t control.”

Democrats have also successfully co-opted some of the Amigos’ members and marginalized others. Kruger, for example, wields considerable power as the chair of the Senate Finance committee. And Espada, the subject of at least two ongoing investigations, has several perks as majority leader that he is uneager to lose.

Both have told Sampson that while

they support Monserrate, they are willing to stay out of the fray and let the Senate move forward, according to senators with knowledge of the conversations.

“Pedro Espada has nowhere to go,” one senator said.

(Neither Kruger nor Espada returned calls for comment.)

Diaz, for his part, remained defi ant, insisting the committee to investigate Monserrate was simply an attempt to

tame the Amigos and exact revenge for their role in the coup earlier this year.

“What they are doing is trying to get even with Monserrate for what he did back in June,” Diaz said.

Foley called those comments “insulting and absurd.”

Diaz maintains that there could be considerable consequences for the Senate and that the body could

once again devolve into chaos. “They are opening a Pandora’s case,” he said. “We don’t know what will happen in the future.”

But Diaz conceded that, barring another internal revolt—which he and the Republicans have already foreclosed—there was not much else the Amigos could do to prevent the Senate from moving forward and expelling Monserrate.

“They already did it,” he said, exasperated. “There was nothing we could do to stop it.”

[email protected]

“In an effort to protect one or two, you run the risk of pissing off 30,” said one member, repeating the case she made to Democratic leaders to consider removing Monserrate. “And it’ll create an avalanche that you can’t control.”

Senators Read End Of Amigos’ Control In Moves Against MonserrateModerate-liberal alliance undercuts dissident leverage, changing power dynamics

AN

DR

EW

J. H

AW

KIN

S

AN OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNOR DAVID PATERSON

THIS COVERS THE DISCONTINUATION OF THE SALES OF UNTAXED CIGARETTES IN NEW YORK, THEREBY INCREASING STATE REVENUE AND ALSO REDUCING

THE FUNDING OF CRIMINALITY AND TERRORISM.

Dear David Paterson:

While some have suggested that you not run for re-election because your approval ratings predict a loss for you and the party, we believe this projection is premature. The unusual circumstance of your assumption of offi ce and the subsequent global economic chaos that continues to burden the citizens of New York shrouds your achievements, contributing to an inappropriate disregard of a life spent successfully in public service. You are a fair-minded, standup public servant.

We think that an opportunity exists to help counter the widespread belief that corruption and self interest rules in Albany. While you cannot single-handedly bring about economic recovery, we believe that you can help change public opinion regarding the caving of Albany to special interests. The opportunity lies before you in enforcing existing state laws that control the collection of cigarette taxes.

Our association represents licensed cigarette tax stamping agents and has a great stake in the furtherance of tax collections and the integrity of law enforcement. We commend you and the tax department for this past month’s state run sting, set up to snare black market cigarette dealers that wound up being a magnet for criminals with businesses in gun-running, child prostitution and drug dealing. There is evidence of ties to terror organizations. Almost all untaxed cigarettes illegally sold in New York originate from our state’s Native American stores. Counterfeit tax stamps have no purpose without obtaining unstamped packs of cigarettes to illegally apply the stamps to.

Native American sales to non-tribal members occur mostly from internet sales and bulk sales to criminals who pick up and then resell to street merchants and to complicit retailers. The sales of these unstamped cigarettes results in lost tax revenue at our time of need and creates street crime; cheap cigarettes sold to minors; unfair competition to license paying bodegas and other retailers and wholesalers; the closing of tax-paying businesses; lost jobs and furthermore the funding of terrorism. But perhaps the most pernicious effect of this policy is the increasing lack of respect for the rule of law and the integrity of our leadership.

We understand that you have inherited a conundrum born in the opportunistic politics of your predecessors. Daily, New Yorkers read more news of the damage caused by the continuation of this policy and want to know why. The federal courts opine harshly on the parochial decisions coming out of our state courts.

The declared rationale for this policy of forbearance has been the same since the 1997 uprising in the aftermath of the United States Supreme Court decision. Past administrations have tried to convince critics that by enforcing the law that Native Americans will resort to violence. It is remarkable and unfortunate that our leadership could conceive of such a facile excuse for partnering with latent criminality. It is worse for representatives of your administration to suggest that the monetary cost of enforcement under those threats would not be cost effective. Can the special interests of the few who have made fortunes in these past 15 years be more important than the 18 million New Yorkers whose welfare you pledged responsibility for?

The solution is simple: Begin collecting the $1.6 Billion of annual revenue that is missing from our tax base by issuing the tax free coupons to the tribes as decided by our state court and require that

all cigarettes be tax stamped.

Sincerely,Arthur H. KatzExecutive Director Arthur Katz has been the Executive Director of the New York Wholesale Marketers and Distributors for over twenty years and is a retired New

York City Deputy Police Inspector.

Please visit our website at: NYUpInSmoke.ORG

Notice: On Tuesday, October 27, 2009 at 10:30 A.M. there will be a public hearing regarding the sale of untaxed and unregulated cigarettes in New York by the New York State Senate Committee on Investigations chaired by Senator Greg M. Johnson. The location is as follows: Manhattan Community College at the Richard Harris Terrace Building located at 199 Chambers Street, New York, NY.


The publication for and aboutNew York State Government


BY DANA CHIVVIS, SELENA ROSS, AND

REBECCA TEITEL

For years, hungry seniors in Canarsie would chain shopping carts fi rst thing in the morning to

the door of the local Jewish Community Council’s soup kitchen, hoping to secure their places in line.

But last year, Rabbi Avrohom Hecht had to start telling some of the needy that he could not help them, after a check for a small grant from the Assembly never arrived.

Hecht tried in vain for months to fi nd out what happened to the money. The reason, he found: local Assembly member Diane Gordon had been convicted of corruption and sent to prison. And when Gordon gave up her seat, the district was expected to make sacrifi ces too, according to other Assembly members who inquired about it in Albany. Gordon’s member items were not coming, and the community center would have to give up on its promised $10,000, the legislators said.

The center’s experience is part of a longstanding pattern: member items are often revoked or indefi nitely frozen when an Assembly member’s future is uncertain or a seat is left empty.

The process of denying member items is one that befuddles many in the Assembly. Nobody knows where the money ends up, and Speaker Sheldon Silver’s offi ce has repeatedly defl ected calls from constituents, legislators and the press for a full explanation or even an acknowledgement of the practice.

“Once the member is gone, the money is gone,” Assembly Member Alan Maisel said he was told when he called the Ways and Means committee last year on behalf of a group in Gordon’s district. “That’s the rule.”

And it is not just scandal that causes member items to disappear. Michael Bragman’s constituents appear to have

lost most of their member items after his failed 2000 coup against Silver. In 1996, a six-fi gure grant for the development of the Brooklyn Bridge Park that had been arranged by Assembly Member Eileen Dugan also went missing after she died of cancer while in offi ce.

Community leader Tony Manheim says he has met with a member of Silver’s legal staff to fi nd out what happened to that park grant. He remembers being told that the item was “lost” in the budget. After a period of time, the grant was eventually found.

Joan Millman, who took over Dugan’s seat, raised the issue once she got to Albany.

“I was told it was not available to me,” she remembered.

Brian McLaughlin lost his member item allowance in 2006 while under investigation for corruption. Most recently, former Assemblyman Tony Seminerio was stripped of his member items earlier this year when he was indicted for taking bribes, leaving several tiny organizations in his eastern Queens district facing chaos or closure.

Among them is the One Stop Richmond Hill Community Center. Simcha Waisman, the center’s president, said that he expected to close the center within weeks. The predicament of One Stop, which has received member items from multiple legislators for years, has inspired several local politicians to seek the

reinstatement of some of the grant.But according to those who spoke to

him about it, Silver was resolute in private discussion that he would not clear a cent of the money.

“He wanted me to reach out and compile my own list of member items. I explained to him the fact that our community is an in-need community,” said Michael Miller, who won Seminerio’s seat. “He again stressed that I should compile my own list in the coming year.”

In cases of corruption, Silver has said that member items are frozen for further

investigation. This is what he said to Assembly Member Inez Barron, who spoke to him about Gordon’s grants after winning her seat in 2008.

More than a year later, however, the money for that district still had not appeared.

Silver’s spokesman, Dan Weiller, said that each situation is handled

“on a case-by-case basis.” Requests for further information about the grants in question were not answered.

Political insiders speculate that Silver’s motivation for stopping the money is simply that with the members gone, the grants will not do anything to help them politically.

“There’s no benefi t to them any longer,” said one legislative staffer.

The closed-doors budget process enables Silver to make unilateral decisions about who gets how much money and whether, and when, it gets paid. Laura Seago of the Brennan Center for Justice explains that only a new legislative statute would curb this power.

“He’s taking advantage of a silence in the law and a general abuse of authority in the budget process,” said Seago. “The Legislature is sort of hesitant to hold him to the rules.”

Occasionally, although he has never

Occasionally, although he has never said so publicly, Silver has admitted to inquiring Assembly colleagues that he is indeed the sole arbiter of what happens to the frozen discretionary grant money.

said so publicly, he has admitted to frustrated Assembly colleagues that he is indeed the sole arbiter of the money. Since that power is not offi cially vested in the speaker, Blair Horner, of the New York Public Interest Research Group, said he was baffl ed to hear that Silver had told anyone he possessed it.

According to Horner, Silver should not have the ability to freeze grants, especially ones that already exist on paper, but should share control over the process with the attorney general’s offi ce, the comptroller and state agencies.

Otherwise, the speaker is acting independently in a way that highlights the fact that no one is in a position to hold him accountable.

“I think it’s a dangerous place for him to be,” said Horner.

In 2007, Horner worked for the attorney general’s offi ce to create Sunlight NY, a website where the public can fi nd information about each member item paid in a given year. But a spokesman said that the attorney general does not play a role in tracking or regulating the Assembly’s internal decisions about the allocation of its member item budget.

Despite the lack of investigation from outside, the speaker’s office and the Ways and Means Committee have faced repeated protest about freezing member items over the last two years. Maisel and Barron have looked into it, as have Nettie Mayersohn and other members of the Queens delegation. Even State Sen. Joe Addabbo has asked his staff to try to track down Seminerio’s portion of the member items budget.

Despite the growing uproar, the speaker and his staffers are keeping their lips sealed about whether, and why, they continue the habit.

“The only folks who can give you an answer on that are us,” said Weiller, when asked why Gordon’s grants had not arrived. “And frankly, on this we are not going to comment.”

[email protected]

The Case Of The Missing Member Items, Assembly EditionWhen scandal or death takes a politician, needy non-profi ts must suffer from want of funds

THE CAPITOL OCTOBER 2009 9www.nycapitolnews.com

BY SAL GENTILE

Stephen Flanagan’s strategy worked.

The 55-year-old Suffolk businessman and conservative activist wanted to prove to the world that his congressman, four-term Rep. Tim Bishop, could be defeated, despite scant interest from national Republicans.

So Flanagan and his group, the Conservative Society for Action (CSA), whose 3,000 members meet monthly in a rented American Legion hall in West Islip, hatched a plan to attract national attention to the district and lure credible candidates to the race.

They swarmed Bishop’s fi rst summer town hall meeting in June, mobbing him as he arrived and then chanting epithets inside. Police had to be called to escort the congressman from the event.

Footage of the protest spread like wildfi re across the Internet and cable news. The National Republican Congressional Committee circulated the video among its donors. Conservative activists across the country mimicked the strategy, fanning a national phenomenon.

And suddenly Bishop, who won by healthy margins in each of the last four elections, became a target.

“We did target him for removal, and we felt that the fi rst step was to create a vulnerability. That’s when we came up with the town hall protest concept,” Flanagan said. “The hope at that point was that, once it became clear that he was vulnerable in his position, it would attract a wider fi eld of candidates and fi nancial support going forward.”

Now, the unrest Flanagan’s group has stirred on the normally sleepy East End has attracted national attention from Republican and Democratic leaders, who see Bishop’s seat as one of a few dozen that could help shift the balance of power in Washington. The contest has also become a national bellwether for the relevance of the right-wing agitators and the ability of national Republicans to channel widespread frustration into electoral success.

“That put a spotlight on the district that had not been there before,” said David Wasserman, the House editor at the Cook

Political Report, which has tagged Bishop’s district as a possible swing seat. “Republicans did some more prying into this district to try and gauge whether it was a sort of one-time-only thing, or whether skepticism toward Democrats is more widespread.”

Republicans in Washington and Suffolk say they found the latter, and as a result Flanagan and his allies have secured all of what they wanted and more: a credible

Republican candidate, fi nancial backing from wealthy GOP patrons and, at last, the interest of the national party.

Randy Altschuler, a Wall Street entrepreneur and Republican bundler, has emerged as the early favorite among local activists and GOP operatives in Washington, who believe he can meet the all-important benchmarks that determine a candidate’s credibility: endorsements, infrastructure and cash.

“With Randy, it changes the dynamic completely,” said Assembly Member Phil Boyle, who has managed several Republican congressional campaigns in Suffolk. “This is Tim Bishop’s worst nightmare.”

Altschuler has also demonstrated considerable progress toward a crucial benchmark many of his predecessors

have promised to meet but failed: At least $2 million in cash-on-hand, the minimum the NRCC prefers to see before committing to a challenger. Altschuler’s campaign announced earlier this month that he has already collected a quarter of that, much of it from his own pocket.

“There’s been a lot of positive support from the national party,” Altschuler said.

An NRCC offi cial confi rmed that Altschuler had met with Republicans in

D.C. and that, so far, his campaign had reached or exceeded each of the benchmarks national GOP operatives had laid out for him.

“He is impressing people in the fi rst district and he’s

generating signifi cant momentum,” said the offi cial. “He’s put up some impressive numbers and an impressive infrastructure.”

Altschuler’s campaign is being run by Chris Maloney, a veteran of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and a former aide to the NRCC, who has helped Altschuler build a sizeable ground operation and

connections to party offi cials in Suffolk and D.C.

Altschuler has engendered valuable goodwill among local lawmakers and activists by loaning his 100 or so volunteers out to their campaigns. His team hopes that strategy will help him avoid the problems that have plagued upstate Republican congressional candidates Jim Tedisco and Dede Scozzafava, who have suffered from the perception that they were forced upon their districts by national Republicans.

“My team has gotten involved with a lot of local races,” Altschuler said. “You have to show that you’re invested in the local party.”

But some Republicans remain hesitant to embrace Altschuler because of his Wall Street background. During the presidential campaign, when Altschuler served as a bundler for John McCain, reports emerged that a company he founded, Offi ceTiger, had helped outsource American jobs to India. Democrats have already promised to make that a central theme of their attack ads, which has given some local Republicans pause.

“There’s a lot of this coronation going on,” said one Suffolk Republican who has stayed out of the race. “I think he probably has a consensus of support, but there are people who are concerned.”

Those people are instead turning to an alternative candidate, George Demos, a former Securities and Exchange Commission lawyer who worked on the investigation of Bernard Madoff. But Demos was late in announcing his candidacy, has raised only a paltry sum and has been outpaced by Altschuler in winning endorsements and assembling a campaign operation.

John LaValle, the Suffolk Republican chairman, said that would make catching up very diffi cult for Demos.

“Randy Altschuler has clearly established his ability to raise funds, and in addition to that he’s put together a very solid campaign team,” LaValle said. “We’ll see how George proceeds.”

What Demos lacks in money and infrastructure, he hopes to make up in grassroots energy. Demos is a member of Flanagan’s group, the CSA, and has already courted the organization’s members on several occasions for their endorsement.

But so has Altschuler, which Flanagan and his cohorts take as evidence of their growing infl uence.

“I think they know that we’re responsible for taking the fi rst step,” Flanagan said of the candidates. “Our message is clear: If you don’t represent us, we’re going to come after you.”

[email protected]

“This is Tim Bishop’s worst nightmare,” said Assembly Member Phil Boyle.

GOP Knight Aims To Check Democrats’ BishopConservative anger attracts national attention, fi nancial backing to district

AN

DR

EW

SC

HW

AR

TZ

For the fi rst time since 2002, Rep. Tim Bishop has a credible Republican opponent.


Rick Lazio Tries Again

By David Freedlander

ASPECTER HAUNTS RICK LAZIO.

It hovers at the Women’s Republican Club, a plumy, gilded gathering hall near Rockefeller Center in Manhattan, a posh place where the walls are lined with oil paintings of past club presidents. Lazio is slated to appear at a candidate’s night there hosted by the Manhattan Young Republicans club. A nor’easter has blown in, and outside the city is cold and dark and wet.

Lynn Krogh, president of the Young Republicans, introduces Lazio, specter and all.“I’m personally very excited about this race,” she says. “Regardless of who else gets into this

race, I’m personally very excited about this race, and as someone who has worked in the executive chamber, I am looking forward to seeing you”—she catches herself—“or, at the very least, a

Republican in the executive chamber in January, 2011.”Lazio has not been seen by most New Yorkers for nine years, not since his 12-point drubbing by Hillary Clinton in

2000. His mistake then, he and many believe, was that he dropped out to give the stage to Rudy Giuliani, only to have America’s mayor return the favor and abandon the race himself with only fi ve and a half months to go.

But while he disappeared to most of the world, he did not to the Young Republicans. He regularly attended their annual dinners and even hosted it one year as part of his steady presence on the rubber chicken circuit. He may not have been basking in the limelight, but he has, in a very unusual way, been laying the groundwork for another run.

Lazio launches into a story about his fi rst run for Congress against an 18-year incumbent whom he ended up defeating handily. Early on, the campaign was going poorly, and a friend of his, a dinosaur hunter, sent him a picture of a dinosaur bone with the words “P.M.A is the key” written on the back.

“Positive Mental Attitude,” Lazio explains.A woman standing in the back Googles on her BlackBerry “How old is Rick Lazio?”Fifty-one is the answer. His famously boyish face now framed with fl ecks of gray, at the age when most people

make their fi rst statewide run, Lazio is mounting an improbable comeback for his second, with close to a decade in the corporate world in his pocket and the foibles of 2000 still on everybody’s mind. Little Ricky, as Maureen Dowd so devastatingly capped him, is all grown up.

Ask Lazio what he learned from the race in 2000, and he has a ready answer: “Stay at the podium,” he says with a laugh.

He is referring to that fateful moment in his fi rst debate with Clinton—covered by the international media and moderated by Tim Russert—when he walked across the stage brandishing a sheath of papers for Clinton to sign that would restrict both candidates from raising soft money. He ended up losing by a wider margin than anyone had expected.

Before that race, Lazio was considered one of the bright lights of the Republican Party. He was young, a fi scal conservative and social moderate elected by large margins in a swing suburban district. He shot up the ranks of congressional leadership, eventually becoming deputy whip and assistant majority leader.

By the time then-Gov. George Pataki shoved him out of the race to make room for Giuliani, he was fully ready to go.

He did not take great care to hide his feelings about the decision.

“I am the better candidate. I am ready to get into this race,” he said fl atly at the time. “But I am doing right now what is in the best interests of the Republican Party.”

And now, as Lazio makes the case that he is the man who should lead Albany, all anyone can talk about is whether he will be forced aside again by Giuliani.

History is supposed to repeat itself, but not this neatly.

“Lazio’s problem back then was that he was seen as everybody’s second choice,” says one political operative close to both Giuliani and Lazio. “That’s his problem now, too. It’s really hard when everybody sees you as the second choice.”

Ask Lazio what else he learned from 2000, and he has another ready answer: “Start earlier.”

“Every campaign makes mistakes,” he said in a midtown Manhattan diner over a lunch of iced tea and plain rice pudding, “and you want to make them early,

AN

DR

EW

SC

HW

AR

TZ


before everybody is watching—and then when you go down the homestretch, you want to have a well-oiled machine.”

Lazio fi rst started reaching out to state Republicans around the beginning of the year. Back then, Gov. David Paterson was still, at least by comparison, somewhat popular and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo was not yet at the level of just being assumed to be the next Democratic nominee.

Part of the motivation, people close to the Lazio campaign say, was to scare out Giuliani, to force him to reveal his intentions, and, if he dithered, to secure enough money and institutional support to crowd him out of the race.

“He was working the back rooms and I think he heard everybody say, ‘Let’s wait and see what Rudy does,’” said one Republican operative. “I think he made a conscious decision to change that strategy and try to go out there and take a higher profi le and get some earned media.”

It has been slow going. The campaign has secured one endorsement so far: Suffolk County chair John Jay LaValle, local poobah of Lazio’s home turf.

Lazio hauled in $40 million in a matter of months in 2000, and his supporters say they think Lazio can bring in the big bucks again. But they remain stifl ed by the perception that Giuliani may still jump in the race.

That may not be the only problem. Lazio is counting on having the same kind of support he enjoyed in 2000. But he is missing the fact, many Republicans say, that the magic that year was not in him, but in the fact that he

was running against Hillary Clinton, back when she was the right wing’s archenemy and a carpetbagger to boot.

“We could have put a fucking donkey up there and raised $40 million,” said one GOP operative who worked on the campaign. “The problem Rick is going to have is that the money you raise to run for governor comes from law fi rms and real estate interests, and those guys will be with Andrew if Rudy isn’t running.”

Republican strategists say Lazio needs $2-3 million by the end of the year.

The campaign said they expect to have at least $1 million by then.

“Rick Lazio’s challenge right now is to convince funders that he has a chance,” said one Republican. “And if he doesn’t raise money early, it will only compound the problem.”

And Giuliani supporters say that no matter how well Lazio does in the early going, the Mayor could jump in as late as the spring and become the immediate frontrunner.

“Any poll has us crushing him,” said one. “I don’t care if he has all 62 county chairs. The minute Rudy gets in, they all jump on board with him.”

Privately, many Lazio supporters do not think that Giuliani will run, but still, they seethe that Lazio’s ambitions may be thwarted by the same guy again. They look at Giuliani’s heavy-handed involvement in the intra-party struggle to pick the next chair—a struggle Giuliani lost—while other statewide contenders stayed neutral as proof that Giuliani is not serious. According

to one lawmaker close to Lazio, Giuliani has privately expressed to Lazio that he is unlikely to run again.

Then they read the coy statements Giuliani has made in the press and scratch their heads.

“The quotes in the paper don’t seem to be in line with what he has said privately,” said a Lazio supporter. “He can always change his mind, but their belief is that he is not going to do it.”

Many of the GOP faithful fi nd themselves tired of the Giuliani song and dance.

“Republicans are fooling themselves if they think Rudy Giuliani is running for governor,” said Conservative Party chairman Mike Long, who is close to Lazio. “If he were serious about it, he would have to be in the mix right now, and he is not.”

In an odd way, Giuliani’s will-he-or-won’t-he dance is helping Lazio, since other prominent Republicans including Erie County executive Chris Collins, Staten Island district attorney Dan Donovan and Long Island Rep. Peter King are all waiting for Giuliani to make up his mind, and have indicated that they will only run if Giuliani does not.

But not Lazio.“Rick has grown and learned a lot in the last 10 years.

And one thing is: if you feel strongly about something and you have the right message, you don’t wait on what other folks are doing,” said one campaign aide. “We decided what we were early, and we decided to go ahead.”

Still, few really believe him.During Lazio’s eight-city statewide kickoff tour, he was


asked repeatedly at press conferences if he would drop out of the race if others got in.

“I am not only in this race,” he said in a typical exchange after the campaign kickoff announcement in Albany. “But in it until the end.”

Lazio is in an odd bind; he believes there is about a one-in-three chance that Paterson is the Democratic nominee. But as Paterson sits on approval ratings in the low teens and Democrats wait for Cuomo to make his move, political professionals say Paterson staying in the race is the number-one thing that can derail Lazio’s quest to the Republican nomination. If Paterson does become the nominee, then a host of prominent Republicans, including Giuliani, Pataki, or Florida billionaire Tom Golisano could rush to face him and knock Lazio aside.

“People like winners,” said one GOP operative close to Giuliani but who says he likes Lazio personally. “People say Rick is great, but he is a loser. There isn’t much stomach right now for a guy to get 18 points.”

Right now, Lazio trails in polls to Paterson, a fact that the Lazio campaign attributes to his low name recognition. But Lazio’s name ID is one of the reasons his supporters think he should run again, since it gives him a leg up against a fresher face. More worryingly for Lazio supporters is that he does not fare that much better than Collins, whose statewide name recognition is close to zero.

Lazio has been considering his options, and clearly, the best one is to end up squaring off against Paterson. If he does, he said, the message is simple: Paint the governor as erratic. Let voters know that even President Barack Obama does not think Paterson should be governor. Point to the circus Albany has become in the past year, and say, “See what this governor has wrought!”

Lazio has already been trying out the message.

“There were a lot of people who were hopeful with his rhetoric, and they see him say we can’t afford any more taxes, we’ve got to change the way we do business in Albany, and then he signs a budget which is one of the worst budgets New York has ever had,” he says. “You are sending a message that New York is no longer open for business. He says things many of us agree with from time to time, but his follow-through is inadequate.”

The odd thing about a potential Cuomo-Lazio match-up—besides the fact that they are both 51-year-old

Italian-Americans who look remarkably alike—is how different Cuomo’s path to the governor’s race is from Lazio’s.

Cuomo also failed miserably in a bid for statewide offi ce in the beginning years of this decade. In his aborted 2002 race for governor, he managed to anger virtually every core Democratic constituency.

Afterwards, his marriage to Kerry Kennedy ended with highly publicized revelations that she cheated on him. His political obituary was written, the power of his famous name salted over.

But Cuomo immediately set to work methodically plotting his comeback. He stayed involved. He met with donors and Democratic bigwigs one by one. And then, the next chance he got, he snatched a lower, intermediate prize.

And now Cuomo fi nds himself leading the sitting governor in polls by 50 points. He has used his perch to become a media

darling and a national spokesman for hot-button fi nancial issues. His offi ce has been a sober, effi cient, counter-example to the governor’s tenure.

Lazio has had plenty of his own chances to get back into the game.

In 2002, Washington Democrats tried to get him to run for his old House seat.

Many think he would have won easily, but he demurred. In 2006, state Republicans practically begged him to run for attorney general, but again he declined. Offers to run for the county executive of either Nassau (which would have required a conveniently timed move of his own) and Suffolk came up as well, but Lazio turned them down too.

Friends say he was chastened by the 2000 loss. But though he sat back for a while, no one really thought he was done. He was just waiting, they say, for the right time.

He made a pile of money working for

JP Morgan Chase, but he has left himself open to criticism that he was basically a lobbyist for investment bankers at a time when respect for Wall Street is at an all-time low and his likely opponent made his name by exposing banker’s malfeasance.

Lazio said that he has stayed involved in various boards and causes, especially around the issues he worked on in Congress, namely housing and the environment.

Indeed, he was recently a special guest at the Long Island branch of the League of Conservation Voters’ Champions

of a Greener Nassau County Cocktail Party. The honor, though, did not come because he has been a particularly active champion of their work, said Marcia Bystryn, executive director of the group.

“Frankly, we don’t know him that well,” she said. “I think he’s terrifi c, but we have not been working closely with him while

he was at JP Morgan Chase.”So there is the easy attack line:

if Cuomo tries to paint Lazio as an absent public fi gure and part of Wall Street corruption, Lazio will try to paint Cuomo as the caricature of a cigar-chomping, backroom politician

and try to hang Albany around his neck.“Andrew has been at the heart of

Democratic politics in Albany for the past 25 years,” he says. “To believe that he is going to be a change agent, and lower taxes and take on the special interests, is not credible.”

When Lazio ran against Hillary Clinton, he was criticized in certain quarters for making the race all about her and carpetbagging, and not enough about his record. This time around, Lazio has less of a record since all of his legislative achievements are more than a decade old. But he has already brought back

Arthur Finkelstein, the famous brass-knuckles tactician whose credits include helping elect Jesse Helms, founding Stop Her Now, a 527 committee dedicated to derailing Hillary Clinton’s presidential ambitions, and popularizing the use of the word “liberal” as a political slur.

The strategy under development is to get under Cuomo’s skin in an effort to bring out the once notoriously hotheaded politician. By contrast, genial Rick Lazio will look like the right, even-keeled man for the job.

“If Andrew Cuomo is the nominee, it

will be a very different Andrew Cuomo out on the campaign trail than people see now,” Lazio said. “He’ll be a candidate. He’ll have to take positions and be under pressure. There are unexpected things that happen in the course of a campaign. How people respond to that matters. History is replete with early favorites that fi zzled.”

Democrats are dubious.“He would be better off playing the

nice guy role. He can do, ‘Aw shucks, I’m just out here running hard’ pretty well,” said Democratic consultant Kyle Kotary. “You don’t want to get into a street fi ght with Andrew Cuomo. He’s bigger, he’s stronger, he’s faster, and he hits harder.”

Lazio hopes that his time away from politics will be seen as a strength.

“I’ve been a dad, I’ve raised two daughters, I’ve spent time with my wife, I’ve raised a family,” he says. “What do you want in government? People that have had no life, or people that have had a life experience in the broadest sense so when you create a rule or a law or policy, you understand how it affects them?”

The political ranks are fi lled with people who got rich before turning to public service, but for the most part they

In an odd way, Giuliani’s will-he-or-won’t-he dance is helping Lazio.

AN

DR

EW

SC

HW

AR

TZ


were entrepreneurs, not government affairs specialists for international fi nancial concerns. Some Republicans wonder why Lazio did not try to have President George Bush appoint him to a commission to tout when he goes before voters again.

The upside is that Lazio is one of the few Republicans who do not have ties to former president George Bush. And his campaign is using his time away from government to position Lazio as the “change” candidate of big ideas, and he talks a lot about wholesale structural reforms like adopting a unicameral legislature and calling for a constitutional convention.

This is all part of a new message: Lazio as the citizen politician, stepping forward because he is heeding the call. The ineffectiveness of state government led him to leave the comforts of a happy corporate life, he said, and he can no longer accept anything but a complete and fundamental reordering of Albany. He wants to, in essence, blow up state government and start over.

“The unicameral legislature is a game changer,” he says. “How do you fundamentally rethink the structure of government? We need to look through our government and ask what we would do if we had to build it from the bottom up.”

He thinks that his time away from Albany will enable him to work with the Legislature in a way that others have been

unable to, and that his time in Congress gives him insight into how legislators think.

His governing philosophy is managerial moderate Republicanism. He favors civil unions, but not gay marriage. He wants Rockefeller Drug Law reform, but not as far as this Legislature went. He does

not want new taxes, or an MTA bailout or new spending. He is pro-environment, pro-civil rights. He wants a leaner state government, one that plans for the future instead of lurching from crisis.

“The reason I felt like I was elected 2-1 in a swing district is because people felt I had balance,” he says. “People looked at me and said, ‘Here is a guy who is willing to make the diffi cult decisions on spending, who was creating jobs, who was working with the other side, who is not hyper-partisan and who has a social conscience.’”

Republicans are a dwindling minority in New York State, but Lazio’s supporters think a national wave, fed by revulsion with Obama and congressional Democrats, and a throw-the-bums-out attitude towards Albany will give them a bump. His supporters think his similar

demographic profi le to Cuomo’s will neutralize part of the attorney general’s base. The campaign is counting on pulling out a quarter of the vote in New York City, running heavily in Queens and Staten Island, and eking out wins in Westchester and Erie Counties. They think they can get double-digit victories on Long Island—

even if they do not do as well there as they did in 2000, if they run 2-1 in the remaining upstate counties, they project a narrow, 51-49 victory.

And perhaps more importantly than anything he can do for himself, they think he might be

able to buoy a few State Senate candidates in Nassau and Suffolk just enough to help with the 2010 last-chance effort to retake the majority.

“If you look at any people that have reached the highest offi ce, all of them have been defeated at some point. Bill Clinton ran for attorney general and lost—but you know what, he thought about what happened to him on the campaign trail and the issues and came back and made the case to the people of Arkansas, which was appealing enough for them to return him to offi ce. And the same for both Bushes. Barack Obama ran for Congress and lost. So you know, it’s a long history of people that have come up short at some point in their life.”

This is, of course, pretty elite company. But if Lazio pulls off one of the most improbable comebacks in

political history, he will be a Republican governor from a large Democratic state, and be considered a national Republican leader. Stranger things have occasionally happened in politics. Many of them have occurred in New York these past few years.

And he is already looking the part, shaking off the dust.

At the Columbus Day Parade in New York City earlier this month, Lazio, who had not marched in a big city parade in nearly a decade, leapt right back into the fray, waving and smiling as a campaign aide frantically tried to stay ahead of him, passing out “Lazio for New York” campaign posters to the few people who would take them.

“What are you running for?” a parade-watcher shouted.

“Governor!” Lazio answered back. “Next year!”

In front of St. Patrick’s, he greeted Archbishop Timothy Dolan.

“Make sure you come back for St. Patrick’s Day!” he said.

In front of the Pierre, he fi nally caught up to Mayor Michael Bloomberg for a photo op.

Near the end, around the Metropolitan Museum, Lazio found himself alone in the middle of Fifth Avenue. Cuomo and Paterson were somewhere, either further ahead or further behind. Giuliani was nowhere to be seen. A long, empty stretch of Fifth Avenue lay before him.

Rick Lazio kept walking.

Ask Lazio what he learned from 2000, and he has a ready answer: “Start earlier.”


BY GARRY BROWN

As a result of growing concerns about climate change, along with justifi able fears about high

energy prices and fossil fuel shortages, we fi nd ourselves at an important crossroad in terms of fi nding a way to meet future energy needs.

Fossil fuels—oil, natural gas, coal—provide about 50 percent of New York’s energy supply. Fuel prices are low right now, but that will undoubtedly change, especially when the economy improves. If fuel prices spike, so will electricity prices.

Given this reality, we could choose to do nothing. We could allow electricity consumption and dependency on out-of-state fossil fuels to increase; we could spend billions to build fossil fuel power plants to meet demand. That option, however, would simply forestall the inevitable.

Wisely, New York’s chosen to take a different path. Rather than sit on the sidelines, we’ve embarked on a game-changing plan to improve energy effi ciency, further develop renewable energy resources, and rationalize our electric system through demand-side management techniques and new technological innovations, like the smart grid.

First and foremost, we must make investments in our homes and businesses to reduce electricity use; second, we must invest in new renewable energy facilities, such as wind farms and solar power plants, to increase the amount of electricity we get from renewable sources; and third, we must improve the overall effi ciency of the electric grid.

Like the new trend in agriculture encouraging people to eat locally produced foods, we should encourage people to save energy and use locally produced energy, in an environmentally

sound manner.Seen another way, we can spend $1

to buy out-of-state energy supplies, or we can spend $1 to hire workers and obtain material to improve effi ciency, reduce consumption and build renewable power sources. That simple yet powerful equation is at the core of Gov. Paterson’s clean energy agenda and New Economy plan to create jobs and position New York to lead in the innovation economy.

With efforts now underway, New York is fast becoming a leader in the research, development, demonstration and delivery of renewable energy and clean, effi cient energy technologies. Currently, more than 34,000 New Yorkers work in jobs related to clean energy. New York now ranks fi fth in the nation for such jobs, and more jobs are on the way.

As part of this groundbreaking initiative, the state Public Service Commission has directed $470 million to be spent annually for energy effi ciency—an investment that will be roughly doubled by private sector matches. The energy effi ciency investments, managed by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and six major electric and gas utilities, will be directed at single- and multi-family homes, commercial buildings and industry.

Much can be gained by becoming energy-effi cient. One study estimated

New York could potentially save one out of every seven kWh through energy effi ciency. If we were to attain just one-third of that potential savings, it would yield more than $2.9 billion in net benefi ts over the next fi ve years.

In addition to energy effi ciency efforts, renewable resources are also being targeted. Recently, the governor announced $92 million would be invested to develop new renewable energy projects—an impressive sum that will attract hundreds of millions of dollars in private sector investment.

Investments tied to energy effi ciency, renewable energy and new innovations will spur demand for engineers, electricians, plumbers, pipe and steam fi tters and HVAC installers, as well as wind turbine builders, solar panel manufacturers and installers, construction companies and a host of other related businesses.

While these investments are indeed substantial, they pale in comparison to the estimated $200 billion New Yorkers will spend on energy through 2015. With this commitment to invest in our future, not only will we lower greenhouse gas emissions, but we will also create much-needed employment opportunities, and that’s good for all concerned.

Garry Brown is Chairman of the New

York State Public Service Commission.

BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER MICHAEL GIANARIS

Deadly explosions. Random electrocutions. Week-long blackouts.

While it is diffi cult to predict the location and time of the next Con Edison disaster, one thing is certain: these calamities will continue until we reform this unaccountable monopoly so that safety, quality service and fair, affordable rates become its priorities.

Con Edison’s failures are well known to its customers. Whether it is the nine-day blackout that devastated my neighborhood in 2006, the 2007 steam-pipe explosion in midtown Manhattan, the numerous stray voltage electrocutions, or this year’s gas explosion in Floral Park that killed Ghanwatti Boodram, a 46-year-old wife and mother of three, Con Edison’s failures have fatal and serious fi nancial consequences for its victims. Unfortunately, rather than accept responsibility and work to prevent future disasters, Con Edison instinctively withholds information to avoid blame and fi nancial liability. To add insult to injury, Con Edison uses its failures to argue for even higher rates (even though we already pay some of the highest in the nation), while simultaneously giving

record dividend hikes to its investors.This cycle must be broken. In theory,

Con Edison should be kept in check by the Public Service Commission (PSC), a government agency entrusted with regulating the monopoly and approving rate-hike requests. In practice, Con Edison enjoys little stringent regulation, while the PSC rubberstamps its rate requests with few real concessions.

Following the blackout that brought my neighborhood to a standstill, I led a taskforce of energy experts that recommended critical reforms to force Con Edison to be more responsible and accountable to its customers. I introduced 11 bills to enact these recommendations, including proposals to provide for competition in the industry, remove Con Edison’s absurd immunity from negligence lawsuits and increase governmental oversight of the utility.

As the sole supplier of electricity in New York City, Con Edison can take its customers for granted with no signifi cant consequences for its failures. Anyone who has taken a basic economics class knows that capitalism thrives when competition drives corporations to perform under threat of losing business to a competitor. Absent this threat, Con Edison has proven

it cares more about shareholders than customers. It is time to consider creating a competitive marketplace that will force Con Edison to improve or lose business.

Compounding the problem is the fact that, unbeknownst to most people, Con Edison enjoys immunity from negligence lawsuits, which is why it was able to get away with compensating victims of the 2006 blackout, who suffered through sweltering heat in the dark for over a week, with a measly $100 credit toward their bills. Businesses forced to close,

some never to reopen, were brushed aside with little or no compensation for their losses. Con Edison must be held responsible for its failings just like other companies that cause harm. Its immunity from negligence suits must be removed.

Finally, the PSC must become a true regulatory body. Rather than abetting Con Edison’s abuse of its customers, the PSC must get tough with the utility and force it to act responsibly. Should Con Edison fail to deliver quality service, the PSC must take action through fi nes and denials of rate-hike requests. I proposed one way of moving the PSC in the right direction—requiring one of the PSC Commissioners to be a consumer advocate who would represent the interests of the public, not the utilities. It is critical that we take steps like this to put the “public” back in the Public Service Commission.

Clearly this unaccountable monopoly is either unwilling or unable to take steps needed to make New Yorkers safer. We must enact reforms to force Con Edison to change, for all our sakes.

Assembly Member Michael Giana-

ris, a Democrat representing parts of

Queens, is a member of the Consumer

Affairs and Protection Committee.

ISSUE FORUM PUBLIC UTILITIES

Con Edison Must Be Reformed To Avoid Future Disasters

Clean Energy Jobs In New York’s Economic Future


ISSUE FORUM PUBLIC UTILITIES

BY REP. STEVE ISRAEL

Whether you are paying Con Ed, the Long Island Power Authority or National Grid, and

whether you owe $60 or $6,000 each month, you probably think your utility bill should be lower. And you’d be right: New Yorkers pay the third highest electricity bills of any state in the country.

For years the government and our public utilities have urged us to make energy retrofi ts on our homes and businesses so we can lower our bills and “go green.” Unfortunately, the economics don’t always add up. Spend $20,000 now to insulate and add solar panels and save $1,500 every year on your energy costs. In 20 years, you might come out ahead—but what if you sell that property in fi ve years? And how many people can actually afford a $20,000 solar panel today? What if you need that money for an unforeseen emergency? The upfront costs for energy retrofi ts just don’t seem to make economic sense.

New Yorkers need a way to get effi cient that comes with immediate savings instead of a fi nancial setback.

That’s why I’m introducing legislation in Congress to make viable an option called “Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Bonds.”

A PACE bond is a small municipal bond where the proceeds are loaned

to residential and commercial property owners to fi nance energy retrofi ts. Property owners repay the loan over 20 years through a small annual assessment on their property tax bill. With little to no upfront cost for the property owner, the energy savings—estimated between 20 and 40 percent for most projects—are immediately realized. The loan is attached to the property, not the owner, and transfers with the property if it’s sold.

My legislation, which was included in the House-passed climate change bill, will jump-start PACE Bonds by authorizing the Department of Energy to provide 100-percent loan guarantees for the participating municipalities, eliminating risk and expanding PACE Bond programs nationally. We also need action on the state level to make PACE Bonds available to all New Yorkers, and I’m working with Gov. David Paterson and our state leadership on a plan.

Not only do PACE Bonds have environmental and security benefi ts—reducing carbon emissions, cutting our dependence on foreign oil and decreasing overall energy consumption—they also have the potential to be a major economic

stimulus. Buildings account for about 40 percent of total U.S. energy consumption, and those ineffi ciencies cost us $350 billion per year. Nationally, it is estimated that there is at least $500 billion in energy retrofi t work to be done.

New York is particularly well suited to take advantage of the economic benefi ts of PACE Bonds. Here in New York, we have an older building stock that would benefi t enormously from effi ciency retrofi ts. We have a fi nancial community to engage in the municipal bond market. We have clean technology businesses that would create green jobs with the new demand for their services. And we have environmental concerns that PACE Bonds would help address.

We all still have to pay our utility bills, but if we work on solutions like PACE Bonds, property owners can maximize effi ciency, reduce carbon emissions and fi nally start saving money.

Rep. Steve Israel, a Democrat rep-

resenting parts of Nassau and Suffolk

counties, is a member of the House Sub-

committee on Energy and Water Devel-

opment.

PACE Bonds Can Help Lower New York’s Energy Costs

A Day To End The “No Date” ExceptionGarth v. Town of RichmondDecided by: Court of Appeals, Oct. 15

New York’s top jurists this month eliminated a technicality that municipalities have used for decades to stop taxpayers from challenging property assessments.

In 2006, Leonid Garth disputed the Town of Richmond’s tax on his real estate property. One portion of the form asked Garth to fi ll in a date and time that a judge would hear his claim. However, because of a judicial vacancy in Richmond, the county clerk told Garth he could not schedule the hearing yet and Garth should just “leave the date blank.” He did—a decision that rewarded him with three years in court.

At his fi rst hearing, Richmond’s Board of Assessment asked the judge to dismiss Garth’s claim because of the blank date. The trial court denied this, but the Appellate Division reversed, holding that the failure to write in the date rendered Garth’s claim “jurisdictionally defective.” Indeed, there are numerous reported cases over the past 30 years in which New Yorkers have had their tax challenges dismissed for “no date.”

Calling the Appellate Court’s decision “unduly harsh and contrary to historically liberal” rules for tax proceedings, the Court of Appeals sided with Garth. The court held that, from now on, the failure to write in the date does not render tax petitions invalid. The ruling was based

on the “longstanding view” that “the taxpayer’s right to have his assessment reviewed should be defeated by a technicality.”

In a nod to common sense, Chief Judge Lippman said, “We are hard-pressed to see how the assessing authority will suffer any prejudice as a result of the failure to include a return date.”

Furnishing DeceitCaspian Realty v. Town of Greenburgh Zoning BoardDecided by: Appellate Division, Second Dept., Sept. 29

In 2000, Caspian Realty wanted to build a two-level furniture store in the town of Greenburgh. It applied for building permits, submitting drawings of a 6,200-foot showroom with a storage cellar. Because the cellar was not for retail space, Caspian had to build only 33 (as opposed to 62) parking spaces. During the construction, building inspectors observed Caspian fi nishing the cellar and adding showroom-like components such as carpeting and moldings.

Suspicions were confi rmed when the store opened with two fl oors of showroom.

The town filed zoning charges against Caspian, which promptly applied for a zoning variance to exempt the now-constructed store and small parking lot. The town’s zoning board denied the application and found that the use of the cellar unduly burdened neighboring property. The board also cited Caspian’s prior deceitful

statements in its denial.Caspian appealed to the courts,

claiming that “deceit” was not a factor the town could legally consider. The Appellate Division disagreed and found that municipalities may go beyond the enumerated statutory factors when considering variance applications—namely, boards may consider prior deceit. The judges said that deceit alone was insuffi cient to deny an application, but the factor could be part of the framework.

Aiming To Change The Change Requirements On Grand Island BridgeSelevan v. New York Thruway AuthorityDecided by: United States Court of Appeals, Oct. 15

The Grand Island Bridge spans the Niagara River, halfway between Niagara Falls and Buffalo. A toll bridge maintained by the New York Thruway Authority, it costs 75 cents to cross. But for a select

few—residents of Grand Island—the toll can be as low as 9 cents.

Evidently short on quarters, Nassau County resident Robert Selevan and Ontario resident Anne Rubin fi led a class action lawsuit in 2006 challenging the disparate rates. They alleged that the Thruway Authority was violating their constitutional rights and that the fee impeded interstate commerce.

After a district judge in Buffalo held that the lawsuit lacked all merit, the plaintiffs appealed. Reversing the district court, the federal appeals court in Manhattan ruled that the Thruway’s activities, if true, would be illegal.

In ruling that the toll “could” violate the Commerce Clause, the appeals court asked the district judge to consider if this was the type of law “whose object is local economic protectionism” that tends to “excite jealousies” between locals and non-residents. The court instructed the district judge to weigh the toll’s “legitimate local public interest” with the harm experienced by the millions of non-locals who travel the road.

Further, the Court said the differential toll could violate the right to travel protected by the Constitution.

Grand Island motorists can take comfort for the time being—the appeals court merely sent the case back to Buffalo to proceed through the long process of federal litigation. Still, the meddling of the federal court on a wholly intrastate activity should raise some eyebrows for the state’s decision makers.

Major Court DecisionsFor New Yorkers This Month

For advertising information, please contact your account executive at 212-284-9735 or [email protected]

POLITICS • POLICY • PERSONALITIES


The Way to Reach Elected Officials

Look who’s readingThe Capitol...


SC

OTT

WIL

LIA

MS

BY SAL GENTILE

Stuck in a precarious political position, Craig Johnson and Brian Foley have been reluctant

to take a position on the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s proposed fi ve-year capital plan. The two suburban senators are caught between Republicans who are eager to attack, city Democrats who want the plan fully funded and a governor who seems to have lost control over his own agencies.

The politically charged debate over the $28 billion MTA plan, which includes roughly $28 billion for landmark projects such as the Second Avenue Subway, has put two of the State Senate’s most vulnerable members in a bind. And it may end up in a legal quagmire, too.

The proposal has a funding gap of as much as $10 billion, which only the State Legislature could fi ll. Some members, mostly from New York City, want the Senate to fi nd the money.

But others, especially those from Nassau and Suffolk, are reluctant to sign off on a new funding stream for the agency after being barraged with criticism over

the widely unpopular regional payroll tax, which the Legislature approved as part of an MTA bailout earlier this year.

“I am uncomfortable with doing a tax or a fee structure to pay for this thing,” said Sen. Craig Johnson, of Nassau. “We need to think very carefully about whether or not it’s wise to commit to an MTA capital plan without really knowing, or without having any semblance of an idea, of how to fund it.”

Johnson is the Senate’s representative on the four-member Capital Program Review Board, which has the fi nal say on capital funding projects.

The money that does exist for the MTA’s capital plan, roughly $18 billion, runs out after two years. As a short-term compromise, supporters of the capital plan and MTA leaders have suggested that the Board break apart the plan and fund just those two years, and let the Legislature deal later with the last three.

But Johnson, whose vote may well determine the plan’s ultimate fate, said he was hesitant to embrace the two-year solution, adding that he may not have the legal authority to split the fi ve-year

blueprint.“I have no legal opinion on that,”

Johnson said. “My understanding is either I approve it or I don’t approve it.”

Johnson and his suburban compatriot, Suffolk State Sen. Brian Foley, have taken a cautious approach to the plan that may well imperil some of the MTA’s marquee projects. Johnson, for one, has met quietly with leaders of the MTA and Long Island Rail Road to express his concerns that the projects are unaffordable.

Foley, meanwhile, has been hesitant to commit to raising taxes to pay for the plan, and is considering staying out of the fi ght altogether, his aides say. In the Senate, he has pushed to have Suffolk removed from the payroll tax.

Foley declined comment.The MTA plan has also historically

been paired with a Department of Transportation plan to fund infrastructure projects upstate and on Long Island, as a way to spread money broadly across the state and appease lawmakers from outside New York City. But if tradition holds, the DOT plan is unlikely to be approved if the MTA plan also gets shelved. That would put

Johnson, Foley on rails as debate over capital plan looms

Suburban Dems In A Bind Over MTA Funding Deal

Johnson and Foley in a diffi cult spot, given that the MTA plan would require more unpopular taxes while the DOT plan would provide signifi cant funding to their districts.

The lose-lose political situation has the GOP salivating.

“I absolutely would not have supported imposing a payroll tax,” said Lee Zeldin, Foley’s Republican opponent. “In Albany, they’re hoping to pass more policies that generate revenue to support their out-of-control spending.”

Gov. David Paterson’s handling of the issue has not helped, Senate Democratic aides and offi cials say. Almost immediately after his own Department of Transportation released its $28 billion proposal for upstate and suburban transportation projects, Paterson rejected the proposal, calling it too costly.

The governor’s aides even called several senators, such as Johnson and Foley, to notify them that the plan would be released, only to call back 10 minutes later to let them know that Paterson would come out against it.

The head-fake has frustrated some Senate Democrats, who say Paterson should have either supported the plan or shelved it. Instead, he has put marginal senators in the diffi cult position of having to oppose a plan that will benefi t their districts because an unpopular governor will not sign it.

“It’s the DOT. It’s his own people,” said one Senate Democratic aide. “It doesn’t make any sense.”

The governor’s position is also at odds even with the more moderate members of the Senate’s city delegation—usually allies of Johnson and Foley—whose districts would be served by some of the MTA’s largest projects. They want the Senate to at least discuss ways to fund the $10 billion gap in the MTA capital plan at the Legislature’s upcoming special session.

As they do, State Sen. Joseph Addabbo said no one should foreclose the possibility of supporting new taxes or revenue streams to fi ll the gap in the plan.

“It’s a choose-your-poison kind of thing,” he said.

Addabbo cautioned, though, that such funding mechanisms should only take effect after the state’s fi nances have recovered from the recession.

Whether that happens will depend largely on how successfully Johnson and his fellow suburban members can negotiate with Senate leadership, who will also be caught between a crusading governor, aggressive Republicans and a dominant city delegation that craves transportation funding.

State Sen. Eric Schneiderman said he understood Johnson and Foley’s concerns, but nonetheless, he insisted, fully funding the MTA was non-negotiable—at least for city senators.

“There are some things you have to have,” he said. “You have to have heat, and you have to have transportation.”

[email protected]


The Capitol: Being the sole Democrat to cosponsor Brian Kolb’s constitutional convention legislation, do you feel like you’re sort of the Olympia Snowe of the Assembly Democrats?Mark Schroeder: [Laughs] Well, fi rst of all, let me answer that question this way. When I fi rst got the phone call from Michael Gormley from the Associated

Press regarding me attaching my name on the Kolb bill, I said that I’m on four bills having to do with the constitutional convention, all authored by Democrats, and the press has never called me on that. He started laughing. You know, my constituents don’t feel that there’s anything wrong with doing things that work and are bipartisan, but apparently, in this business, god forbid if you do something with the other party—and I think that’s fundamentally wrong. The Kolb bill is just another bill that suggests that this state is beyond reform. This state is beyond tinkering at the edges. We need to do things in a very comprehensive way. One way to do it is through a constitutional convention. If you read the Kolb bill, you have “no politicians need apply” in that bill regarding electors. It is exactly how the electorate is feeling right now.

TC: So why are your colleagues so reluctant to get on Kolb’s bill?MS: When I fi rst came to the Assembly fi ve years ago, I was the only Democrat that did not vote for the speaker. When I went to see him the day before, I told him I wasn’t going to vote for him and it’s because I wanted a guarantee. I wanted a guarantee that we were going to have an on-time budget fi ve years ago. … I don’t belong to the club. I don’t take my orders from anybody, and so that is really the area you need to think about in terms of why other Democrats have not done it. Just think that thing through in terms of who belongs to the club and who doesn’t.

TC: You’ve called for the creation of an independent redistricting panel. How do you build support for something like that?MS: You don’t. The only way you do it is by having the constituents and having the media point these things out. That’s why

I’m glad I’m talking to you. It’s worked in Iowa since 1980; it’s an independent group, not politicians. It’s the complete opposite of how it’s done in New York and so, therefore, will it go anywhere in the Assembly? Absolutely not. Will anyone sign on to it? Absolutely not.

TC: You recently called Pedro Espada a “thug” and said that he should step down. What was the impetus behind that? Were you just caught at a moment when your anger got the best of you?MS: Very, very good question and you’re the only one who’s actually asked the question that way—because there was something that caused me to do that, and no one really asked. They’re more interested in the “thug” part. Let me tell you what happened. The New York State Senate has a regional offi ce in Buffalo and one of its staffers went into one of my towns… I thought, geez, it would be nice to know. I’m the only elected Democrat in this town and I’m the only elected state person in this town, so it would have been nice if they gave me a heads-up. So I call the staff person and ask to speak to his boss, and the boss’s name is Mike Darby. We didn’t have a very nice conversation… it wasn’t nice at all. [Espada]’s just going to do what he wants to do and I think he’s using taxpayer money to send people out to campaign, and that’s what they’re doing. I said to him, “Give me a heads-up, I’d like to know what’s happening.” He didn’t think that was good, so that was in the back of my mind. I know that these staff people are taking their orders from Pedro Espada or John Sampson or Malcolm Smith or whoever the leader of the day is. That’s what’s happening, and I took offense to that, and I tried to have a conversation and do something about it but it didn’t go anywhere.

You know, four weeks ago or so, Gormley [from the Associated Press] asked me about the constitutional convention and, you know, I said that Pedro Espada is a “thug” and I believe that he should step down. Let me be clear on what I mean by that. I am requesting and I am asking still that Pedro Espada step down from the leadership position of majority leader. I am not asking him to step down from a state senator. I have no standing in that.

The RenegadeMark Schroeder has only been in the Assembly for fi ve years, but it was

this fall when he started to really cause a stir. First, he made news by calling Senate Majority Leader Pedro Espada “a thug” and demanded

that he step down. Later, he became the sole Democrat to sign on to Minority Leader Brian Kolb’s bill calling for a constitutional convention. Then he came out publicly in support of Andrew Cuomo running as the Democrat for governor instead of David Paterson.

Between soundbites, Schroeder took some time to explain the origins of his independent streak, why he made his decision on the governor’s race, and tea parties.

What follows is an edited transcript.

The people of the East Bronx duly elected him, and if he wants to be their senator for the next 20 years, that’s their business and not mine, but I do not want him running the Buffalo regional offi ce and going into Orchard Park with his operatives. I think that’s disrespectful and I wish that he would just get out of the way.

TC: Considering Espada’s associations with Tom Golisano, Responsible New York and Steve Pigeon, do you feel like he’s gaining too much infl uence in Western New York?MS: I’ve been a New York State Assemblyman for fi ve years and an Erie County legislator for three years. I was in the private sector for 20 years, so I have a respect and admiration for Tom Golisano. Two years ago, I also belonged to what is called the Italian-American Legislators in Albany. I nominated Tom Golisano to be the “Citizen of the Year” from the Italian-Americans, and I’m the one who initiated it. I’ve only had two Democratic primaries in the past two years and both were induced by Steve Pigeon. The reason why I know I’m right for this business is that I do not take things personally.

TC: Do you support Gov. Paterson running for re-election or do you think he should step aside in favor of Andrew Cuomo, like President Obama has requested?MS: I thought the president’s behavior was inexcusable. It was misguided. It was wrong. I hope he has learned lessons from it. You do not come into the governor’s state and embarrass the governor in his own state. That was misguided and it was disrespectful and he should not have done that. When you’re president of the United States, you can get a message in many different ways to the governor, and you don’t do it that way. That was inappropriate. Having said all that, the governor, in my view, aside from the Gillibrand appointment… I’ve been disappointed. … At some point in time you have to lead and take charge of the government, and in June, I was still disappointed. I hoped that over the summer he would have internalized and got his staff right. There were lots of different people and all that, but at some point in time you have to be comfortable with who you have around you and have a public relations campaign to let people

know you’re in charge and say what you’re doing. He never did it. It hasn’t happened and, therefore, I will not be supporting Gov. Paterson. I like him… I like him very much. He’s a tremendous leader and he’s done great work and has been a good public servant for the last 30 years, but we need leadership. Enter Andrew Cuomo. ... Why Cuomo? Andrew Cuomo identifi es a problem, he articulates it better than most, and then he can close the door on it better than anybody, and most of that has to do with legislation. He understands how to work. Go back to the sexual predator legislation, the student loan scandal, and the dissolution and consolidation. He is able to get it done and he can get legislation done nationally with Congress. He is and will be a very effective leader if he has an opportunity to be our next governor.

TC: Is all your stirring of the pot an effort to raise your profi le in the state, to get your name out there?MS: This sounds trite, but my concern really is only to the people that I serve in the seminal neighborhoods in the city of Buffalo, Lackawanna, Orchard Park and Seneca. Those people are fed up. I know because I’m out there every single day. They understand what I’m doing and they agree with me, and that’s my only motivation and that’s that.

TC: In July, you spoke before a Tea Party in Buffalo. How was the reception there?MS: Well, fi rst of all, I don’t go anywhere I’m not invited. I was invited. There were about 400 people there and I was a little nervous because I know and understand that they really despise politicians. I felt comfortable, though, because of the message that I gave. I felt comfortable and did my thing. … I know I feel similar to many of them. Also, I understand who the Tea Party people are… Some are very much involved in the issues and some just go. I walked in with a couple of senior citizens from my district and just wanted to be somewhere where they could listen to the issues. At the end, I had my brother-in-law go with me, and I thought in the back of my mind that it probably wasn’t bad to have a bodyguard with me on this particular day.

—Andrew J. Hawkins

[email protected]

Date post:	22-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	the-capitol
View:	212 times
Download:	0 times

The October 26,2009 Issue of The Capitol

Documents