deBlasio Over Delivers To NYPD, Undercuts His Promise To Voters

http://gothamist.com/2015/06/23/de_blasio_cops_budget.php

In deBlasio's 2013 campaign there were implicit promises made regarding police reform and an implicit promise with Dante deBlasio being the face of the most effective campaign ad, that Bill deBlasio would be a mayor that understands and empathize with people of color. His recent turn around on policing and a double down on Commissioner Bratton's and PBA President Pat Lynch's desire to turn the city's open society (nearly anarchistic culture) into a police state with unchallengeable and criticism-free police officers.

In a democratic and free society, the individuals not only has a right to challenge authorities but an obligation to constructively criticize authority and those that implement the policies that were supposed to the will of the people in the first place. If the people demand that the local constables harrass and bully their youth, then constables should follow that course. On the other hand if the only the privileged want the unprivileged to be harassed indiscriminately the unprivileged have the right to redressed their concerns to their government through their elected representatives, which is the intrinsic campaign promise deBlasio ran and won with in 2013.

deBlasio may be campaigning nationally on a income inequality message, but this most recent reversal is undercutting whatever progressive cred he may have had as a candidate. I would also want to remind everyone that it was deBlasio and his campaign manager Emma Wolfe that strong armed robbed the WFP nomination on behest of Cuomo despite never intending to hold Cuomo to his promise to deliver the State Senate back into Democratic control; as Cuomo had already promised Senate Majority leader that he would retain the Senate chamber.

DeBlasio: Kathy Hochul Is Progressive, Just Ignore Her Donations To Pro-Life Preacher And Her Bragging About How Conservative She Is

Kathy Hochul, former Congresswoman from the Buffalo area and first time candidate for public office without the endorsement of the New York State Conservative Party, is running for Lieutenant Governor with incumbent governor Andrew Cuomo. In the Democratic primary liberal lions (Rep. Jerry Nadler, Mayor DeBlasio, etc) circled the wagons around Hochul to protect her from the accurate claim that she is a conservative Democrat. The New York Observer yesterday reported that from her release of tax information she has made donations to a Texas evangelical preacher whom has had a long career of unambiguous hatred of abortions and has never been welcoming to birth control of any sort. As the highest female running on the Women's Equality Party ticket (the party name which is misnomer since 7 men are running on the ticket and only 3 women) this is embarrassing to say the least since raison d'etre of the party is to pass the tenth point of the 10 point Women Equality Agenda of unrestricted access to abortion as a legal right in New York State. Andrew Cuomo has been airing ads to encourage people to vote for him and Hochul on the WEP ballot line assuming that vast majority of the electorate will vote for him on the Democratic party line without prompting. Which begs the question, if Andrew Cuomo doesn't intend to vote for himself on the Working Families Party, nor respect the Deblasio negotiated deal that landed him the endorsement of the WFP why should anyone else? Why should a deal that was dismissed by the governor even before newspapers had a chance to put the story to print be honored by the activists and high info voters that typically vote WFP? Should the 142,000 voters that voted for Cuomo on the WFP line in 2010 return the favor in 2014 when there was not even lip service paid to keeping the commitments of the deal that delivered WFP line, and a clear path to an unobstructed general election, just to say "at least progressives have a seat at the table"?

To think that WFP has any influence, when the governor whose social policy has been adequately to the left but whose economic policy has been pure voodoo supply side and tax cuts for the wealthy and public service cuts for the rest, currently is being snookered by the top of the ticket actively working against the WFP with his own alternative faux reform third party is delusional. Though it is unlikely to be anything but a coronation of King Cuomo to another term in office, thoughtful progressives or anyone that is concerned with integrity of our elected officials should withhold their vote from either of the major candidates and vote for a 3rd party this November. For those New York State voters that are left of the aisle Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins; for those on the right Libertarian Party candidate Michael McDermott.

If you get caught with small amounts of marijuana better be in Brooklyn

Newly elected Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson has stated going forward prosecutions of low-level marijuana possession will cease due to giving more resources and higher priority of prosecuting other crimes. NYPD police commissioner Bill Bradley has stated that would not affect NYPD policy of arresting individuals with less than an ounce of marijuana in Brooklyn; basically the NYPD is fully aware that they will be wasting beat cops time and therefore tax-payer money to harass Brooklynites all for the cause of keeping up the appearances in the futile "War on Drugs."

For those that think this policy change is going to turn Brooklyn into The Wire's Hampsterdam, fret not, since leniency will only be granted to those without a criminal record and no violent charges that coincided with the arrest. What was the impetus for this policy change? Last year over two thirds of the marijuana possession arrests were dismissed by the judge (at least those that met the criteria DA Thompson has set as policy going forward). If a vast majority of those arrests weren't ever going to get convictions, why put forward the limited resources of the DA office to prosecute victim-less crimes? I believe we are going to be on the verge for some prosecutor seeking out jury nullification for low level marijuana possession charges akin to what actually occurred during the Prohibition Era. What will the ever increasing militarized police do when fewer and fewer of their arrests get prosecuted or when the prosecutor seeks out jury nullifications?

The question you may have is that if carrying 1-2 ounces of marijuana is the law, then why does the local prosecutor get the ability to not enforce the law? It is because since the late 1970's it is legal in New York State to carry up to 2 ounces of marijuana as long as it not openly carried. So the police seeking to meet their quotas or arrest goals (stop & frisk is intrinsically tied to these bunk arrests) beat cops routinely demand their suspicionless stop & frisk victims to turn out their pockets which if they are in possession of a joint to comply with the cop's demand they have to break the law, which is the reason that it is NYPD policy not to reach into the pockets since that would not incriminate the targeted individuals.