With dismal poll numbers and a majority of New Yorkers saying they don’t even want him to run again, Governor David Paterson desperately needs an issue to distract the voters and get them to think about something besides the economy and the budget. 

And it appears that issue is gay marriage.

 Gov. David Paterson said Wednesday he plans to re-introduce legislation to make same-sex marriages legal in New York.

The legislation is expected to mirror a gay-marriage bill introduced in 2007 by former Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who - with Paterson as his running mate - campaigned in 2006 on a platform that included marriage equality.

“We’ll put a bill out and let the people decide one way or the other,” Paterson said Wednesday morning on WHCU-AM (870) in Ithaca.

But even with legislation from Paterson, the state Legislature has not signaled the bill would pass both houses. In 2007, the state Assembly passed Spitzer’s marriage bill, but it stalled in the Republican-controlled Senate and remains that way now under Democratic control.

But, what do the people of New York say about gay marriage? Only 41% of New Yorkers support it.

Quinnipiac University polled 1,528 registered voters this month. Participants were given three choices: gay marriage, civil unions or no legal recognition.

One-third said gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not marry; 19 percent believed there should be no legal recognition.

Democrats, Independents, whites and women were the strongest supporters; opposition was strongest among Republicans, men and blacks.

A June 2007 poll showed 35 percent of voters supported gay marriage; 22 percent were against any legal recognition.

The poll’s margin of error is 2.5 percentage points

With only minority support fromthe electorate, and without enough votes for it to pass in the state senate, Paterson’s reintroducing the gay marriage is only serving one purpose: get the voters to stop talking about the budget, which, as I wrote in an article for the American Issues Project, an overwhelming majority of New Yorkers disapprove of.

Paterson is fighting for political survival. The gay marriage issue is dead-on-arrival and thus a waste of time. If Paterson thinks the voters are going to forget how his budget is screwing them over, he is greatly mistaken.

Read Full Post »

State Senator Bill Stachowski, who was just barely reelected last year, has been having to answer for some questionable actions lately, namely his giving raises to his staffers despite the state budget crisis.

Despite the budget crisis, during which state leaders are angling to pull more money from taxpayers and perhaps lay off thousands of state workers, the Democrats who captured the state Senate have lavished raises on their staffs.

Take Western New York’s two Democratic senators, for example.

Key aides to Sen. William T. Stachowski of Lake View are collecting raises of 40 to 55 percent, while some aides to Sen. Antoine M. Thompson of Buffalo are seeing raises of 20 percent or better. And a couple of Thompson’s aides have doubled their salaries because they reached full-time status.

Senate Democrats argue that they are merely giving staffers “fair” compensation that had previously been denied by the Republican majority, though minority leader Dean Skelos said Democrats are spending more on salaries than Republicans did.

The scandal did force one of Stachowski’s aides to resign.

The pay raises that Democratic senators doled out to their staffs in recent weeks included a bump for Raymond F. Gallagher, who appeared on State Sen. William T. Stachowski’s payroll even though he holds a full-time job elsewhere.

Gallagher, a longtime political hand, also draws a state pension and serves as executive director of a company that, among other things, serves senior citizens through a county government contract.

Gallagher was serving as Stachowski’s part-time “special assistant.”

Until Thursday. That’s when Gallagher resigned from his state job as The Buffalo News inquired about what he does for Stachowski’s office.

Stachowski claimed Gallagher resigned because he couldn’t handle the extra workload, but that seems to contradict the earlier explanation for the raises.

Not only are Democrats like Stachowski giving their staffers questionable raises, they are also still managing to find millions of dollars for pet projects. Donn Esmonde wrote about this last week:

Not only did legislators not cut their own fat, but Stachowski (stachows@senate.state.ny.us) and Thompson (athompso@senate.state.ny.us)—as a perk of Democrats taking over the Senate—siphoned extra money into staff raises. Stachowski defended the upticks as a reward for extra work. Yet even gradeschoolers know that legislators are near-useless appendages, subservient to the “three men in a room”—the governor, Senate leader Smith and Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver—who hold power.

Stachowski reportedly pays $70,000 to a “scheduler” and another $70,000 to a “communications specialist.” Can’t the guy keep his own schedule, or find somebody to write his news releases for less than 70 grand?

Is this the “positive change” Stachowski was supposed to bring for New York and Upstate in particular?

Of course, as Esmonde noted in his column, this isn’t just about Stachowski alone. It’s the Albany culture that is the problem, and Stachowski, a career politician (now enjoying the spoils of victory with majority party power) will always be a part of the problem, not the solution. Democrats rushed passage of the state budget without adequate debate, and now, no one really knows exactly what is in it.

The people of New York have to put party loyalty aside and start electing people who will represent the people. We need to bring balance to the state government.

Read Full Post »

That pretty much sums up the results of a recent Mercatus study I heard about on WBEN this morning that ranks New York dead of all 50 states for freedom. The study measures economic and social liberty in all the states, and the Empire state was at the bottom.

We find that the freest states in the country are New Hampshire, Colorado, and South Dakota, which together achieve a virtual tie for first place. All three states feature low taxes and government spending and middling levels of regulation and paternalism. New York is the least free by a considerable margin, followed by New Jersey, Rhode Island, California, and Maryland. On personal freedom alone, Alaska is the clear winner, while Maryland brings up the rear. As for freedom in the different regions of the country, the Mountain and West North Central regions are the freest overall while the Middle Atlantic lags far behind on both economic and personal freedom. Regression analysis demonstrates that states enjoying more economic and personal freedom tend to attract substantially higher rates of internal net migration.

It is actually quite insane that I had more liberty in Massachusetts than I do now living in New York.

Read Full Post »

It is nice to know while those of us in the private sector struggle through this economic slowdown, New York state employees are riding in cars and using gas that we, the taxpayers, are paying for. And we are paying big. Some even get chauffeurs.

While the rest of us tighten our belts, state employees buckle up in free cars provided to them by the state - paid for and gassed up with $86 million in taxpayer money this fiscal year alone, a Post probe has found.

State department heads and commissioners are the most privileged, getting their own drivers and cars from the state’s fleet of nearly 14,000 vehicles. But thousands of other workers also get to use state sedans, SUVs and minivans, instead of their own wheels, to do their jobs - with some even given state gas cards and permission to take the cars home. 

And can you believe that Governor Paterson’s office defended the use of taxpayer-funded drivers?

Gov. Paterson’s office defended the use of the drivers, saying some commissioners were required to travel extensively and “use the car as a private workspace in order to maximize their time.”

Paterson spokeswoman Marissa Shorenstein said all agencies were reviewing spending, including car usage, as a way to cut costs. The state is facing a $14 billion budget gap in the coming fiscal year.

The state’s passenger vehicle inventory stood at 13,680 on Feb. 12, according to the Office of General Services, which keeps the tally but said it could not provide comparison data for last year.

The vehicles in the inventory include the sedans and SUVs used by state officials as well as minivans to drive residents of group homes and vans to transport inmates. State Police cars are not in the count.

All state agency heads are entitled to cars with unrestricted use, including commuting. 

Ain’t it great to be a New Yorker?

Read Full Post »

Today it was reported the Governor David Paterson has the lowest recorded approval rating for a New York governor in Marist Poll history

New Yorkers are sending a strong message to Governor David Paterson, “Shape Up!”  Just 26% of registered voters report the governor is doing either an excellent or good job in office.  That’s a drop of 20 percentage points since the Marist Poll last asked this question at the end of January.  In fact, Governor Paterson’s approval rating is the lowest approval rating a New York State governor has received in the Marist Poll’s nearly thirty year history of statewide surveys. 

Paterson doesn’t get high marks from his own party either.

Among registered Democrats in New York State, 30% think Paterson is doing an above average job while 65% disagree.  Across the aisle, Republicans also overwhelmingly disapprove of Paterson’s performance.  Just 26% of members of New York’s GOP approve of the job Paterson is doing as governor while 72% think he is doing a fair or poor job.  Only 20% of non-enrolled voters agree that Paterson is doing well in the position.

Only 1 in 4 upstate voters approve of Paterson’s job performance.

Paterson has been digging his own grave for sometime… his handling of the budget situation has been laughable. The Hillary Senate Seat situation didn’t help him one bit, and his tax hike proposals are meeting fierce opposition. 

But Paterson’s problems may not just hurt his chances for reelection, it could help propel Republicans back into power in this state.

A prominent Bronx state senator is going public with what many of his fellow Democrats are saying in private - that Gov. Paterson’s bumbling performance may cost Democrats their newly gained control of the Senate next year.

“I’m worried about what’s going on with the governor,” said Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr., one of the “gang of three” that flirted with the GOP before voting to give their own party a 32-30 Senate lead.

“I’m very concerned that if things continue the way they’ve been going with the governor, after next year’s election we’re going to be in the minority again,” said Assemblyman Ruben Diaz Jr.’s father.

“We won in the fall because of the Obama tsunami, but we’ll no longer have that next year, and things will be different.

“Gov. Paterson has been unlucky with the national economy,” he added, “but even though he’s a nice human being, there are things he’s done that have created problems - the Caroline Kennedy stuff, the salary increases for his staff and his wife’s chief of staff. This isn’t the time to be doing that, when you’re asking state employees to get 3 percent pay cuts.” 

Paterson’s bungling may even help a Republican win the governor’s race in 2010,  A Siena College survey has Rudy Giuliani beating Paterson. 

Paterson’s inability to lead may provide Republicans with the opportunity to take this state back from the party that has run it into the ground… at all levels of government. Even in the 20th district Republican Jim Tedisco is leading in the polls and is expected to win the congressional seat vacated by Kirsten Gillibrand. 

Read Full Post »

This week, following an earlier report about his expensive taxpayer-funded trip to the the Inauguration, Governor Paterson decided to save a tiny bit of face by paying back state taxpayers for the cost of the trip, which is now said to be over $23,000.

Errol Cockfield, the governor’s spokesman, said the governor had revisited his earlier decision to charge the state and will dip into his campaign account to pay all costs for the trip. He was unsure if the governor still considers the event state business.

The reversal came after the Times Union inquired about Paterson’s return trip to Washington, D.C., the weekend of Feb. 21 when the governor, three aides, Michelle Paige Paterson and her top aide attended the National Governors Association conference. In January, Paterson and his wife and five aides traveled to the same city for the presidential inauguration. For the NGA trip, Paterson’s campaign picked up the more modest tab immediately; commercial flights were used and hotel rooms cost $279. Rooms used for the earlier trip had cost upwards of $1,200. Paterson has used the state plane and charged taxpayers for similar conferences before. 

While it is good that he will pay us back, this seems to me to be too little too late. Given other Instances of Paterson being reckless with taxpayer dollars despite the fiscal situation,  we can be safe in guessing that Paterson is probably taking advantage of us in ways we don’t even know yet.

Read Full Post »

Isn’t that nice? The New Post has learned that, despite the state fiscal crisis, and the fact he asked thousands of state workers to give up their own pay increases, Governor Paterson secretly gave raises to more than a dozen of his staffers, some as much a 46%.

The startling pay hikes, costing about $250,000 annually, were granted after the governor’s “emergency” declaration in August of a looming fiscal crisis that required the state to cut spending and impose a “hard” hiring freeze.

One raise was approved as recently as last month - when Paterson claimed the budget deficit had reached an unprecedented $15.5 billion.

The raises, which have stunned the few state workers who know about them, are outlined in data obtained from the office of state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli, prepared at The Post’s request.

Two of the raises were tied to publicly proclaimed promotions - granted despite the supposed hiring freeze - of some of Paterson’s most important appointees, although the announcements didn’t include disclosure of the pay hikes.

The remaining 14 raises appear to have gone to individuals who remained in their same positions, despite claims by a spokesman for Paterson that they had been promoted. 

I guess he can’t see the hypocrisy of it all.

Read Full Post »

Even as Governor Paterson was warning New Yorkers about the bleak fiscal situation the state is in, that didn’t stop him from going ultra extravagent when he went to Washington D.C. for the Inauguration…

…at our expense:

Gov. David Paterson and three aides billed New York taxpayers $19,350 for their four-night stay at an upscale Washington D.C. hotel for the presidential inauguration, despite the governor’s repeated warnings about the state’s fiscal troubles.

Paterson and three top aides stayed at the luxury AKA White House hotel two blocks from the White House during the inauguration, with the governor billing taxpayers an average of $1,280 a night, according to records of state-issued credit-card expenses.

In total, taxpayers were charged about $4,800 a night for the hotel stays of Paterson, chief of staff Charlotte Hitchcock, special assistant David Johnson and secretary William Cunningham, records obtained from the state Comptroller’s Office show. Paterson’s bill was $5,123 for the four nights.

Read Full Post »

A reader informs The Bean of new report from Capital Hill Research Center Report that says “24 New York counties near a state border or Native American reservation will be hardest hit by job losses associated with the proposed 18 percent tax on soft drinks,” as is being proposed by Governor David Paterson.

The report says a major price differential resulting from the new tax will encourage consumers to travel across state lines or onto Native American reservations to purchase tax-free soft drinks.

“If the soda tax is implemented, it will produce a massive shift of business and wealth to neighboring states and Indian reservations,” said James H. Watson, director of the Capital Hill Research Center based in Albany.

The effect will be especially pronounced along the borders with Massachusetts and Vermont, which exempt soft drinks from taxation, and in the communities adjacent to the state’s three main Native American reservations, which do not charge state or local taxes.

The report notes that the price advantage of Native American retailers would increase from the current 29 percent to 47 percent if the new soda tax is implemented. (This is due to the combined effect of local and state taxes, plus bottle deposits, plus the new soda tax, none of which would be administered by reservation retailers.) 

The report also says that in the Southern Tier of the state retailers stand lose even more sales to retailers in northern Pennsylvania. The estimated jobs that could be lost by Paterson’s soda tax is 6,100.

So, Governor Paterson, is it worth it?

Read Full Post »

A new poll from Rasmussen says that most Americans ”think it’s all right for Big Brother to crack down on smokers, but he better keep his hands off their cell phones and their sodas.” According to the poll 70% oppose tax increases on soda… like the tax proposed by Governor Patterson.

Seventy percent (70%) of Americans also oppose a national tax on all non-diet soft drinks. Eighteen percent (18%) like the idea of a so-called “obesity tax” like the one proposed by New York Governor David Paterson. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.

Opposition to Paterson’s so-called obesity taxes has generated some interesting backlash… Earlier this week ”protesters dumped sugary soda into the Susquehanna River” in Binghamton in protest of Paterson’s proposal.

“We’re past our line-in-the-sand. We cannot handle any more taxes,” said Judy Monroe, of Windsor, as she toted an “anti-obesity tax” sign along the sidewalk at the Washington Street pedestrian bridge. “It’s to give people an awareness of additional taxes.”

After making their point for no new taxes, 18 protesters leaned over the cold metal railing at the bridge to dump non-diet soda and water from plastic soda bottles into the icy river.

The self-described “Binghamton Tea Party” was aimed at the additional 18 percent tax on non-diet soda, sweetened iced teas and other beverages proposed in Paterson’s fiscal year 2009-10 budget.

The governor said the tax is aimed at fighting obesity; others call it a money grab from middle-class families.

“New York has been a tax-and-spend state for 40 years,” said Trevor Leach, an organizer from the Binghamton Campaign for Liberty. “This got us into trouble. We must return to the principles of our founding fathers.”

Here is some video of the “Binghamton Tea Party.”

Governor Paterson, are you listening?

Read Full Post »

Ouch. This has to hurt.

 Gov. Paterson’s lead over Attorney General Andrew Cuomo in a potential 2010 Democratic gubernatorial primary has dwindled from a whopping 23 points last month to just two, according to a poll released today.

For the first time since May, Cuomo has a better favorable rating among voters - 64 percent - than Paterson, who is at 60 percent, according to a new Siena College Research Institute poll of registered voters.

A little over year ago, Paterson was thrust into the governorship, and seemed to win the praise of members of both parties… now he’s damaged by the ongoing budget debate, and this Caroline Kennedy debacle. I don’t think Cuomo would be any better, but Paterson lost my respect several months back, so it is nice to see (no pun intended) he isn’t is gonna waltz his way to reelection.

Read Full Post »

I am not going to play the partisan game where when an official in your party is indicted you ramble on and on about how an indictment is not a conviction, but when someone not in your party is indicted you treat it like a the accused has already been found guilty. When any elected official is accused of violating the public’s trust it doesn’t matter if it is a Democrat or a Republican, it is a bad thing for everyone.

There has been a lot of stories recently about public officials who have violated the public’s trust, some of the more well known stories include the mayor of Detroit, the governor of Illinois, the mayor of Baltimore, and now, Joe Bruno, the former majority leader of the state senate. 

In an eight-count indictment, federal prosecutors accused Mr. Bruno of collecting more than $3 million over a 13-year period, beginning in 1993, from a handful of companies seeking contracts and grants with the state, as well as contracts to manage pension fund investments for at least 16 labor unions. In addition to receiving cash payments disguised as consulting fees, he also had undisclosed interests in a race horse partnership and in a computer software firm that had contracts with state agencies, according to the indictment.

Prosecutors said Mr. Bruno used his position in the Senate to take “official action on legislative, funding, contract and regulatory issues” benefiting those who were paying him, although the prosecutors did not cite any specific examples.

Mr. Bruno, 79, was charged under an anti-corruption law making it a crime to deprive citizens of honest services from their elected officials. He faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison if convicted.

Read Full Post »

…according to her rivals:

DESPITE claims that he’s still undecided, Gov. Paterson is “certain” to pick Caroline Kennedy to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton in the US Senate, several unhappy contenders for the job have told friends and associates in recent days.

The contenders based their conclusion on the view that Paterson, after nearly two months of indecision, would “greatly embarrass” and “entirely humiliate” Kennedy, anger her prominent political family and even offend President-elect Barack Obama by picking someone other than President John F. Kennedy’s daughter.

As for the governor’s claim to be weighing a last-minute finalist, the contenders agree with a close Paterson friend who said, “It’s clear David is just trying to play mind games with the press.” 

So, if all this is true, how is this any different than selling tho seat the highest bidder?

It is clear that if Paterson picks Caroline, he expects to have a primary challenger in 2010, if not a formidable Republican rival, and thus wants the Kennedy muscle behind him. But I think if he makes this pick, it weakens him in the short term enough that he is only inviting other Democrats to step up and oppose him. And Caroline herself may welcome a challenger who seeks to capitalize on discontent with the circumstances of her selection for the Senate.

Read Full Post »

In what could be described as a bipartisan vote of no confidence in Governor Paterson, Republicans and Democrats are pushing for a special election to fill the Senate seat that will be vacated by Hillary Clinton when she leaves to serve as Barack Hussein Obama’s secretary of state.

Such a move is hardly unprecedented. Is 2004, the Democrat-controlled legislature voted to do the same thing, to give the blue state’s voters the power to choose to choose a replacement for John Kerry, had he won the presidential election, thus preventing the Republican governor at the time, Mitt Romney, from appointing a replacement of his choice.

The circumstances in this situation make a bill changing the procedure less likely, but perhaps not impossible. There are a variety of factors that could make this bill passing a reality.

• Governor Paterson appears to be completely uninterested in the preference of the voters, and is reportedly favoring Caroline Kennedy.
• Paterson is also pushing a very unpopular budget, giving Democrats political cover for stripping him of the power to fill the seat.
• Paterson is an unelected governor about to make someone an unelected U.S. Senator. That doesn’t sit well with a lot of people.
• Given the recent Senate-Seat-For-Sale scandal in Illinois, a special election removes the chances of impropriety by putting the choices it the hands of the voters, not one single person.

Let’s face it, the seat has been vacant for 2+ years anyway, so the anticipated three months it would take to hold the special election would have virtually no influence in any votes in the Senate, since Democrats already have a comfortable majority. So, there really is no reason to oppose this bill. Even Paterson should support the idea, since he is up for reelection in 2010, and may not want to alienate voters, and/or inspire a primary challenger.

Read Full Post »

Could be, according to Robert Freeman, the executive director of the state Committee on Open Government.

Gov. David Paterson’s secretive process to select Hillary Rodham Clinton’s successor in the U.S. Senate conflicts with his campaign promises to open up government, and New York’s top regulator of open government laws says it appears to violate state law.

Just days from announcing his choice, Paterson won’t identify “about 10″ people who he said are in the running to follow Clinton, President-elect Barack Obama’s designated secretary of state. The governor won’t release the blank questionnaire he sent to each candidate looking for background information. He won’t turn over their completed forms.

“The process is confidential,” is the stock answer from his office.

Keeping the questions posed to Senate hopefuls secret appears to violate the state’s post-Watergate freedom of information laws, according to Robert Freeman, executive director of the state Committee on Open Government, the state agency that regulates enforcement of the good-government laws.

“How could it not be public? It’s a blank form,” said Freeman, a lawyer who since 1976 has been the top state employee advising government and the public on interpretation of the public officers’ law.

The names of those under consideration also should be disclosed, Freeman said.

Read Full Post »

NY Daily Balance posts an interesting graphic that “illustrates the areas represented by Senate Democrats who have taken control of the State Senate.”

Interesting indeed.

Read Full Post »