To put it as kindly as I can, at this point it's clear that both former New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer and former New York State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno have more negatives than positives. Each man appears to be corrupt in his own way. Each man appears to suffer from what I've termed "The Entitlement Syndrome."
Measuring the two against each other, though, is less difficult than one might think. I can't quite decide what's sadder, the mere fact that Bruno clearly comes off better, or the fact that of the two Bruno's the only one who's been convicted and sentenced for his illegal conduct.
Eliot Spitzer served as Governor from the beginning of 2007 through March of 2008. His brief reign was marked with acrimony and scandal, and he was finally forced to resign in disgrace. Joe Bruno, by contrast, had a distinguished, long career as a Senator before taking the Majority Leader spot. He took that spot in 1995 and served until he resigned, under a cloud but on his own terms, late in 2008.
After Eliot Spitzer was forced to resign in disgrace, the press repeatedly handed Bruno opportunities to gloat. Wisely, however, Bruno, at least publicly, remained at once gentlemanly and cautious. Bruno expressed concern for the Governor and his family, during this difficult time. Bruno carried on the machinery of government, passing the Senate's draft of the State Budget quickly on the heels of the scandal breaking.
By contrast, Spitzer, already long out of office by the time Joe Bruno was convicted and sentenced, responded to Bruno's troubles with ridiculous gloating. Spitzer, you see, knew Bruno was on the take all along. Spitzer, with his keen investigator's instinct, could tell right away. Not addressed by Spitzer is that he was also engaging in illegal conduct himself at the time, and thus was familiar with some of the warning signs.
Bruno's crimes were the type you had to build not just a factual case for, but a legal case for. Prosecutors had to show that not certain conduct occurred, but that the conduct fit the definition of some crime or other. They did it well enough that I began watching the trial as a Bruno supporter and soured on him day by day. By contrast, however, Spitzer's conduct was clearly illegal. There was no legal argument to be made, one could only dispute the fact pattern. And Spitzer didn't dispute the fact pattern, at least not publicly that I saw. We'll never know the details of why Spitzer was not prosecuted, and it's best that I not voice my strong suspicious, but it should be clear, however, that there was no doubt whatsoever that what Spitzer had done was actually illegal.
Bruno's legislative achievements over many years as Senate Majority Leader were numerous. Spitzer's legislative achievements during his brief, terrifying reign consisted largely of Workers' Compensation reform, ethics reform, and one on-time budget. I'm informed through conversations with knowledgeable folks down at the State Capitol building, and by going over old documents, that Workers' Compensation reform had been in the works for years and years before Spitzer's reign, and that the final bill had considerably more input from the State Legislature than from Spitzer and his people. The Spitzer-era ethics reform has been something of a disaster, with the head of the Public Integrity Commission already having to defend the Commission's existence, and the Commission issuing such bizarre, thoughtless, senseless edicts as what I've termed the “Mocha Protocol.” Spitzer also had a record of quasi-legislative Executive Orders to consider, but these didn't amount to much either.
Bruno was a self-made man, who rose from the streets of Glens Falls to the corridors of power. I have little doubt that Spitzer wouldn't have gotten anyplace without his father. The best evidence of this is the fiscal shenanigans Spitzer and his father used during Spitzer's first run at Attorney General. Regrettably we must go to ever-not-quite-reliable Roger Stone as the primary source of this, as he's been the only one really highlighting it to any degree. And, then of course, there's the fact that after resigning as Governor, Spitzer ran right back to Daddy as his primary source of income.
And we won't even begin to get into Spitzer's role on Wall Street as Attorney General, where his juvenile “sheriff” act, I have argued, forced unethical and perhaps illegal conduct even further underground, where it was harder to ferret out, while simultaneously driving good, needed Wall Street analysis jobs to India.
I come here not to praise Bruno, but to help bury Spitzer, whose bizarre, snide “I knew it all along” act is pathetic and disgraceful.
And, therefore, in its own way, quite fitting.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Saturday, May 15, 2010
The Entitlement Syndrome
• Introduction: The Entitlement Syndrome
There is much in New York State's brutal political scene that I find noble, perhaps mostly the way, as observed by Political Scientist Sarah F. Liebschutz, it's driven by conflict and cooperation between the contrasting forces of competition and compassion.
I have taken note, however, a third force at work in the Empire State's politics. It takes the form of a disease, or contagion. I suspect the disease has been around for awhile, festering in the dark corners of the Capitol Building and causing an occasional outbreak, but these days it appears to be particularly virulent. While I know a fair amount of New York's fascinating political history, I can't reliably tell you if the contagion has ever been as bad as it is now.
I call the contagion the Entitlement Syndrome; a distinct and destructive sense of entitlement among many in New York State's political class.
• The Syndrome in Albany
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Democratic Conference Leader John Sampson are both “of counsel” at prominent New York City law firms. As near as I can tell, being “of counsel” at a law firm means they get to do hardly any work for large fees and never ever once have to disclose a client list. That many of those undisclosed clients have business before the State Legislature is pretty much a foregone conclusion. Hey, you need legal representation anyway, right. Assuming you can afford it, why not retain either Silver's firm or Sampson's firm or both? At the very least, it sure can't hurt your chances with the Legislature.
Former Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno was recently sentenced to two years in federal prison for “theft of honest services.” He set up a business consulting firm, but produced little or no written products for his clients, and routinely mixed up his State and private business interests.
I'm sure most readers are familiar with the recent, bizarre incident at a Senate Finance Committee meeting, wherein Senator John DeFrancisco expressed an ignorance of racism in the State contracting process. Senator DeFrancisco's ignorance, however, was quickly eclipsed by a nearly-violent, angry outburst by Senator Kevin Parker.
It should be noted that Senator Parker, in the words of reporter Liz Benjamin, “has a history of anger management issues.” Kenneth Lovett goes over some of these issues here, in a story on a Senator Parker outburst against fellow Democrat Diane Savino. (In that story, please note how Senator Carl Kruger, whom Senator Parker threatened during the Finance Committee incident, was egging on Senator Parker in the Senator Savino incident. No real purpose to pointing this out other than the amusing irony.)
Senator Parker's response to Senator DeFrancisco is all the more fun when one considers that it wasn't just a single outburst. Senator Parker was a seething cauldron of hate for days afterward, accusing Republican State Senators of being “White Supremacists,” before he finally issued a half-assed apology.
Note the following excerpt from a speech Senator Parker made on the Senate floor, as cited by the Times:
That isn't really an apology at all, as far as I can tell.
In other entitlement news, two State Legislators were overheard at the capital whining over their lack of a pay raise. This, in the middle of multiple fiscal and ethical crises and with a State budget well over a month late.
The Entitlement Syndrome is not only limited to individual politicians. It can infect interest groups too, for example the State government worker unions. Anyone who is familiar with my comments, here and elsewhere, knows that I am a big fan of labor unions, but the Entitlement Syndrome has torn through New York State's government employee unions, ravaging their characters, turning them from noble organizations into train wrecks waiting to happen. No union should ever favor layoffs over furloughs, and that's basically what they've been doing.
We could, I suppose, go on and on. We haven't once discussed former Senator Hiram Monserrate, current Senator Pedro Espada, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, or Governor David Paterson.
The common thread here is the Entitlement Syndrome. It causes the victim to feel untouchable, to make him or her feel deserving of public office, of money, of power, of privilege. No one can touch me, the victim thinks, so why should I think about what I'm saying or what I'm doing. It causes victims to draw attention not to their beliefs or causes, but to themselves. It causes loss of the sense that actions have consequences, and a loss of the sense that it's important to get along, at least superficially, with the people you work with every day, even the ones you hate with a passion.
• The Syndrome Outside of Albany
It is frightfully easy to blame the Entitlement Syndrome on Albany, on its culture, on the sense of isolation from reality that, I am informed, can easily set in there. It's thus easy to see ethics reform, campaign finance reform, term limits, and a whole sad litany of standard “reform” ideas as a cure for the Syndrome.
Consider, however, the fact that Carl Paladino is not from Albany. (The link is not to a particular story, but rather to the Carl Paladino “category” on the Daily News's Daily Politics political blog.) Consider the fact that Mr. Paladino appears to consider himself qualified to run for Governor despite his racism, sexism, propensity for forwarding bizarre and offensive E-Mails without a care in the world, and overall lack of any kind of good judgment. Mr. Paladino appears to have one standard response to these stories when they come out, and that is that he's not politically correct and that these matters are all distractions. He is, in brief, attempting to turn behavior that, if any of us were engaging in it, would be considered a sign of a serious mental defect, into a political asset.
Clearly, Mr. Paladino is suffering from the Entitlement Syndrome.
Another victim is Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy. Executive Levy isn't from Albany either, though he did a brief stint there as a Member of the Assembly. Yet, he also suffers from the Entitlement Syndrome. In addition to his switch from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party, and his not understanding that his new fellow Republicans might, gasp!, not accept him right away, see this story from Liz Benjamin. Levy says he'll “shake up Albany,” and refers to himself as a “real man.” We've heard similar talk before, from a man named Eliot Spitzer.
Any man who feels the need to refer to himself as a “real man” is, in most instances, not.
Once again, a man who sees himself as entitled, who pounds his fist on the table when he doesn't get what he wants. If that's a “real man,” aren't there enough of that species in Albany already?
• Conclusion
I can only guess how the Entitlement Syndrome developed and how it spreads. It clearly is not limited to Albany. In fact it appears to be spreading rapidly, throughout New York's political class. Almost every prominent New York State politician and interest group appears to have it, to one degree or another. The examples I've cited are far from being the only ones.
I have no idea how to stop it.
There is much in New York State's brutal political scene that I find noble, perhaps mostly the way, as observed by Political Scientist Sarah F. Liebschutz, it's driven by conflict and cooperation between the contrasting forces of competition and compassion.
I have taken note, however, a third force at work in the Empire State's politics. It takes the form of a disease, or contagion. I suspect the disease has been around for awhile, festering in the dark corners of the Capitol Building and causing an occasional outbreak, but these days it appears to be particularly virulent. While I know a fair amount of New York's fascinating political history, I can't reliably tell you if the contagion has ever been as bad as it is now.
I call the contagion the Entitlement Syndrome; a distinct and destructive sense of entitlement among many in New York State's political class.
• The Syndrome in Albany
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Democratic Conference Leader John Sampson are both “of counsel” at prominent New York City law firms. As near as I can tell, being “of counsel” at a law firm means they get to do hardly any work for large fees and never ever once have to disclose a client list. That many of those undisclosed clients have business before the State Legislature is pretty much a foregone conclusion. Hey, you need legal representation anyway, right. Assuming you can afford it, why not retain either Silver's firm or Sampson's firm or both? At the very least, it sure can't hurt your chances with the Legislature.
Former Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno was recently sentenced to two years in federal prison for “theft of honest services.” He set up a business consulting firm, but produced little or no written products for his clients, and routinely mixed up his State and private business interests.
I'm sure most readers are familiar with the recent, bizarre incident at a Senate Finance Committee meeting, wherein Senator John DeFrancisco expressed an ignorance of racism in the State contracting process. Senator DeFrancisco's ignorance, however, was quickly eclipsed by a nearly-violent, angry outburst by Senator Kevin Parker.
It should be noted that Senator Parker, in the words of reporter Liz Benjamin, “has a history of anger management issues.” Kenneth Lovett goes over some of these issues here, in a story on a Senator Parker outburst against fellow Democrat Diane Savino. (In that story, please note how Senator Carl Kruger, whom Senator Parker threatened during the Finance Committee incident, was egging on Senator Parker in the Senator Savino incident. No real purpose to pointing this out other than the amusing irony.)
Senator Parker's response to Senator DeFrancisco is all the more fun when one considers that it wasn't just a single outburst. Senator Parker was a seething cauldron of hate for days afterward, accusing Republican State Senators of being “White Supremacists,” before he finally issued a half-assed apology.
Note the following excerpt from a speech Senator Parker made on the Senate floor, as cited by the Times:
To the extent that my words last week brought commotion and emotion to this house in ways that may distract or divert us from the important work of the people of New York State, work that’s so important for all of us, I offer my sincerest apologies for my zealous advocacy.
That isn't really an apology at all, as far as I can tell.
In other entitlement news, two State Legislators were overheard at the capital whining over their lack of a pay raise. This, in the middle of multiple fiscal and ethical crises and with a State budget well over a month late.
The Entitlement Syndrome is not only limited to individual politicians. It can infect interest groups too, for example the State government worker unions. Anyone who is familiar with my comments, here and elsewhere, knows that I am a big fan of labor unions, but the Entitlement Syndrome has torn through New York State's government employee unions, ravaging their characters, turning them from noble organizations into train wrecks waiting to happen. No union should ever favor layoffs over furloughs, and that's basically what they've been doing.
We could, I suppose, go on and on. We haven't once discussed former Senator Hiram Monserrate, current Senator Pedro Espada, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, or Governor David Paterson.
The common thread here is the Entitlement Syndrome. It causes the victim to feel untouchable, to make him or her feel deserving of public office, of money, of power, of privilege. No one can touch me, the victim thinks, so why should I think about what I'm saying or what I'm doing. It causes victims to draw attention not to their beliefs or causes, but to themselves. It causes loss of the sense that actions have consequences, and a loss of the sense that it's important to get along, at least superficially, with the people you work with every day, even the ones you hate with a passion.
• The Syndrome Outside of Albany
It is frightfully easy to blame the Entitlement Syndrome on Albany, on its culture, on the sense of isolation from reality that, I am informed, can easily set in there. It's thus easy to see ethics reform, campaign finance reform, term limits, and a whole sad litany of standard “reform” ideas as a cure for the Syndrome.
Consider, however, the fact that Carl Paladino is not from Albany. (The link is not to a particular story, but rather to the Carl Paladino “category” on the Daily News's Daily Politics political blog.) Consider the fact that Mr. Paladino appears to consider himself qualified to run for Governor despite his racism, sexism, propensity for forwarding bizarre and offensive E-Mails without a care in the world, and overall lack of any kind of good judgment. Mr. Paladino appears to have one standard response to these stories when they come out, and that is that he's not politically correct and that these matters are all distractions. He is, in brief, attempting to turn behavior that, if any of us were engaging in it, would be considered a sign of a serious mental defect, into a political asset.
Clearly, Mr. Paladino is suffering from the Entitlement Syndrome.
Another victim is Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy. Executive Levy isn't from Albany either, though he did a brief stint there as a Member of the Assembly. Yet, he also suffers from the Entitlement Syndrome. In addition to his switch from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party, and his not understanding that his new fellow Republicans might, gasp!, not accept him right away, see this story from Liz Benjamin. Levy says he'll “shake up Albany,” and refers to himself as a “real man.” We've heard similar talk before, from a man named Eliot Spitzer.
Any man who feels the need to refer to himself as a “real man” is, in most instances, not.
Once again, a man who sees himself as entitled, who pounds his fist on the table when he doesn't get what he wants. If that's a “real man,” aren't there enough of that species in Albany already?
• Conclusion
I can only guess how the Entitlement Syndrome developed and how it spreads. It clearly is not limited to Albany. In fact it appears to be spreading rapidly, throughout New York's political class. Almost every prominent New York State politician and interest group appears to have it, to one degree or another. The examples I've cited are far from being the only ones.
I have no idea how to stop it.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Legislative Pay Raises?
A rare display of bipartisanship occurred at the New York State Capitol Building earlier this week: A Republican State Legislator and a Democratic State Legislator commiserated over their lack of a pay raise.
The Republican complained that he ("he" could mean "he or she") “had been promised” a pay raise when he was first elected; from the context it appeared to me that the “promised” pay raise was part of how he was persuaded to run for the Legislature. The Democrat sighed sympathetically, agreeing that the lack of a pay raise was “ridiculous.” The conversation continued along similar lines as the Legislators moved out of my hearing range. I didn't follow them.
This was not some private conversation I spied on. The Legislators were talking openly, and in public. I was right around a corner, I saw them just before I fully rounded the corner, and I could hear them clearly. They couldn't see me, but there were about five people in the immediate vicinity whom these Legislators could clearly see, assuming they were paying any kind of attention to their surroundings.
If I heard it, others had to have heard it, and I'm willing to bet more Legislators than these two have recently engaged in similar conversations, especially as the story about the recent, now-rescinded, gubernatorial staff pay raises broke or was about to break.
What on earth could possess any Legislator to openly discuss a pay raise for themselves in this climate, I can't imagine.
The funny thing is that under normal circumstances I would probably agree with this pair of Legislators. Despite the disparaging portrait of the State Legislature painted by former State Senator Seymour Lachman in his book Three Men in a Room, from talking to people and hanging around at the Capitol it does indeed appear to me that those Legislators who bother to work at all do in fact work hard, and probably deserve more money than they are getting.
And I, personally, would rather not draw elected officials solely from a class of people who can afford to acquire and hold office. I'd rather have a more open field to select from. No one save the corrupt should ever have to look upon public service as their greatest career mistake.
Further, when Legislators are underpaid relative to the demands of the job, they can be tempted by outside income, and sometimes that outside income can taint political outcomes, taint the people's faith in the process, and can lead to criminal activity.
Under normal circumstances, thus, I'd be sympathetic to the idea of a Legislative pay raise.
Present circumstances, however, are far from normal. New York State is in the middle of severe, system-threatening fiscal and ethical crises. I could easily go on and on for pages about all the troubles New York State faces, but instead I'll focus on the most obvious: The State Budget is over a month late and the budget extenders haven't exactly been peaches and cream. These two Legislators were, literally, whining about not having pay raises while simultaneously failing on what is arguably their primary responsibility.
Under normal circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to a pay raise for State Legislators. Under current circumstances, however, so much as thinking about it, let alone talking about it publicly, is disgraceful.
I recommend that the leaders of the four legislative conferences advise their members to not discuss this issue publicly for the next couple of years. Save the money to avoid bankrupting the State. If you discover you have the money to spend that you didn't realize you had, I'm sure your constituents can think of things to spend it on that'll do the State, and yourselves, a lot more good than raising your own pay will. If you must spend it on yourselves, invest in competent staff, something which it appears all four conferences are severely lacking in. There's also bridges that need fixing; a lot of them. And I'm sure a lot of people would like to avoid Thruway tolls or mass transit fares going up.
Basically, anything would do more good right now than raising your own pay. Raising your own pay right now, or even talking about it, doesn't even help yourselves. Don't let the thought enter your minds, let alone openly discuss it in public areas, until maybe the State is no longer on the brink of fiscal, ethical, and political oblivion.
The Republican complained that he ("he" could mean "he or she") “had been promised” a pay raise when he was first elected; from the context it appeared to me that the “promised” pay raise was part of how he was persuaded to run for the Legislature. The Democrat sighed sympathetically, agreeing that the lack of a pay raise was “ridiculous.” The conversation continued along similar lines as the Legislators moved out of my hearing range. I didn't follow them.
This was not some private conversation I spied on. The Legislators were talking openly, and in public. I was right around a corner, I saw them just before I fully rounded the corner, and I could hear them clearly. They couldn't see me, but there were about five people in the immediate vicinity whom these Legislators could clearly see, assuming they were paying any kind of attention to their surroundings.
If I heard it, others had to have heard it, and I'm willing to bet more Legislators than these two have recently engaged in similar conversations, especially as the story about the recent, now-rescinded, gubernatorial staff pay raises broke or was about to break.
What on earth could possess any Legislator to openly discuss a pay raise for themselves in this climate, I can't imagine.
The funny thing is that under normal circumstances I would probably agree with this pair of Legislators. Despite the disparaging portrait of the State Legislature painted by former State Senator Seymour Lachman in his book Three Men in a Room, from talking to people and hanging around at the Capitol it does indeed appear to me that those Legislators who bother to work at all do in fact work hard, and probably deserve more money than they are getting.
And I, personally, would rather not draw elected officials solely from a class of people who can afford to acquire and hold office. I'd rather have a more open field to select from. No one save the corrupt should ever have to look upon public service as their greatest career mistake.
Further, when Legislators are underpaid relative to the demands of the job, they can be tempted by outside income, and sometimes that outside income can taint political outcomes, taint the people's faith in the process, and can lead to criminal activity.
Under normal circumstances, thus, I'd be sympathetic to the idea of a Legislative pay raise.
Present circumstances, however, are far from normal. New York State is in the middle of severe, system-threatening fiscal and ethical crises. I could easily go on and on for pages about all the troubles New York State faces, but instead I'll focus on the most obvious: The State Budget is over a month late and the budget extenders haven't exactly been peaches and cream. These two Legislators were, literally, whining about not having pay raises while simultaneously failing on what is arguably their primary responsibility.
Under normal circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to a pay raise for State Legislators. Under current circumstances, however, so much as thinking about it, let alone talking about it publicly, is disgraceful.
I recommend that the leaders of the four legislative conferences advise their members to not discuss this issue publicly for the next couple of years. Save the money to avoid bankrupting the State. If you discover you have the money to spend that you didn't realize you had, I'm sure your constituents can think of things to spend it on that'll do the State, and yourselves, a lot more good than raising your own pay will. If you must spend it on yourselves, invest in competent staff, something which it appears all four conferences are severely lacking in. There's also bridges that need fixing; a lot of them. And I'm sure a lot of people would like to avoid Thruway tolls or mass transit fares going up.
Basically, anything would do more good right now than raising your own pay. Raising your own pay right now, or even talking about it, doesn't even help yourselves. Don't let the thought enter your minds, let alone openly discuss it in public areas, until maybe the State is no longer on the brink of fiscal, ethical, and political oblivion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)