Since Governor Smith and Secretary of State Robert Moses consolidated all of the state's budgetary function primarily under the executive branch it has served the purpose to have only one person with the accountability of budget success and failure.
Prop 1 on all ballots statewide will amend the state's constitution so that legislature will merely needed to drag its feet on state budgets till past the April 1st deadline every year to go over the head of the governor (whom ever is governor) and begin writing its own budget. The diffused accountability amongst the state legislature’s 212 members (Senate & Assembly) will allow legislature to spend wily-nily especially given the fact that by 2010, the turnover of Republican legislators and the growth of the Democratic enrollment and constituency will ensure State Senate to turn to a majority Democratic before the next census & redistricting that will ensure gerrymandering to keep both the Assembly & Senate in Democratic control for at least a generation.
I of course look forward to the state capitol being in solid control of the Dems, what troubles me is if the budget doesn’t have only one head on the chopping block then no one will have to deal with the consequences of the budget. As long as the governor is the one with most skin in the game, the governor will be able to keep petty and impulsive budgetary items from actually getting financed.
Oct 17, 2005
Oct 12, 2005
Letter to the Times Union Editor
Proposition 1 is a losing proposition
First published: Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Proposition 1, on the ballot this November, is a proposal to amend the New York Constitution to change the budget process.
Any change to a broken process may sound like a good idea at first to those of us who watch our state Legislature daily from the up-close environs of the Capital Region, but Proposition 1 would actually make things worse.
It would give the 212 members of the Legislature more authority over the budget when the state fiscal year begins without a new budget in place. In other words, if our senators and Assembly members don't pass the budget on time, we'd reward them with more power to draft the budget than they already have, weakening the role of our governor (whomever it may be at the time). Obviously, the Legislature will delay the budget vote just to increase its bargaining power.
A reform law passed some years ago provided that legislators wouldn't get paid once the fiscal year begins until they get the budget done. That's only fair. The rest of us don't get paid unless we perform our job duties.
But Proposition 1 would insulate politicians from that sort of discipline. It would allow them to be paid regardless of how late the budget is.
Weighing in against Proposition 1 are former Gov. Hugh Carey and Gov. Pataki, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, Citizens' Union, the small-business members of the National Federation of Independent Business, the Business Council of New York State and the Citizens Budget Commission.
All of us are urging New Yorkers to vote no on Proposition 1 on Election Day. We need real reform in Albany. Proposition 1 would only make the state's fiscal problems worse.
ROGER A. HANNAY
President
Hannay Reels Inc.
Westerlo
First published: Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Proposition 1, on the ballot this November, is a proposal to amend the New York Constitution to change the budget process.
Any change to a broken process may sound like a good idea at first to those of us who watch our state Legislature daily from the up-close environs of the Capital Region, but Proposition 1 would actually make things worse.
It would give the 212 members of the Legislature more authority over the budget when the state fiscal year begins without a new budget in place. In other words, if our senators and Assembly members don't pass the budget on time, we'd reward them with more power to draft the budget than they already have, weakening the role of our governor (whomever it may be at the time). Obviously, the Legislature will delay the budget vote just to increase its bargaining power.
A reform law passed some years ago provided that legislators wouldn't get paid once the fiscal year begins until they get the budget done. That's only fair. The rest of us don't get paid unless we perform our job duties.
But Proposition 1 would insulate politicians from that sort of discipline. It would allow them to be paid regardless of how late the budget is.
Weighing in against Proposition 1 are former Gov. Hugh Carey and Gov. Pataki, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, Citizens' Union, the small-business members of the National Federation of Independent Business, the Business Council of New York State and the Citizens Budget Commission.
All of us are urging New Yorkers to vote no on Proposition 1 on Election Day. We need real reform in Albany. Proposition 1 would only make the state's fiscal problems worse.
ROGER A. HANNAY
President
Hannay Reels Inc.
Westerlo
Oct 10, 2005
NY Daily News Opposes Prop 1
State lawmakers are asking voters to approve a constitutional amendment on Election Day that would give them a stranglehold over New York's budget and push the governor to the sidelines. It's a terrible idea. And making matters worse, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver did a terrible job drafting the gobbledegook you'll find in the voting booth.
There are so many reasons to say no to Proposal 1, we're counting down the top 10. In Reason No. 10, we pointed out that Bruno and Silver have hoarded power while mismanaging the Legislature for years. Today, we have Reason No. 9: Prop 1 is a full-employment act for lawyers, who will use its gaps and inconsistencies to tie state government up in knots of litigation.
For example, the amendment would have a contingency budget kick in when lawmakers miss the annual deadline to approve a spending plan. But who figures out the details of this stopgap budget, and when? Does it need approval from the governor, the Legislature or both? Who implements the across-the-board cuts that are supposed to happen when tax revenues come up short? No one can say for sure.
These are not academic questions. The Assembly and Senate have been late with the budget 20 of the last 21 years. With Bruno and Silver in charge, they're bound to blow it again. Proposal 1 will give them an incentive to stall, since they can throw out the governor's draft and write their own as soon as the deadline passes. And if Bruno and Silver can't agree with Gov. Pataki on a real budget, no way will they be on the same page on a contingency budget full of painful cuts.
So New Yorkers will do what New Yorkers do when they disagree: Sue the pants off each other. The governor will sue the Legislature. The Legislature will sue the governor. Every special interest with gored oxen, and they'll be plentiful, will sue the governor and the Legislature. It will take years, if not generations, for the courts to sort it out. And government will sink to new depths of gridlock.
New York just got through six years of litigation between Pataki and the Legislature over budgetary powers. In December, the Court of Appeals upheld the time-honored principle that the governor should play the dominant role in budgeting. This spring, for the first time since the Reagan administration, the budget arrived more or less on time. And, not coincidentally, Silver, Bruno and their members redoubled their effort to reverse the ruling and weaken Pataki's authority - hoping voters wouldn't notice the gaping holes in their plan.
Don't let this hunk of Swiss cheese see the light of day. Vote no on Prop 1.
There are so many reasons to say no to Proposal 1, we're counting down the top 10. In Reason No. 10, we pointed out that Bruno and Silver have hoarded power while mismanaging the Legislature for years. Today, we have Reason No. 9: Prop 1 is a full-employment act for lawyers, who will use its gaps and inconsistencies to tie state government up in knots of litigation.
For example, the amendment would have a contingency budget kick in when lawmakers miss the annual deadline to approve a spending plan. But who figures out the details of this stopgap budget, and when? Does it need approval from the governor, the Legislature or both? Who implements the across-the-board cuts that are supposed to happen when tax revenues come up short? No one can say for sure.
These are not academic questions. The Assembly and Senate have been late with the budget 20 of the last 21 years. With Bruno and Silver in charge, they're bound to blow it again. Proposal 1 will give them an incentive to stall, since they can throw out the governor's draft and write their own as soon as the deadline passes. And if Bruno and Silver can't agree with Gov. Pataki on a real budget, no way will they be on the same page on a contingency budget full of painful cuts.
So New Yorkers will do what New Yorkers do when they disagree: Sue the pants off each other. The governor will sue the Legislature. The Legislature will sue the governor. Every special interest with gored oxen, and they'll be plentiful, will sue the governor and the Legislature. It will take years, if not generations, for the courts to sort it out. And government will sink to new depths of gridlock.
New York just got through six years of litigation between Pataki and the Legislature over budgetary powers. In December, the Court of Appeals upheld the time-honored principle that the governor should play the dominant role in budgeting. This spring, for the first time since the Reagan administration, the budget arrived more or less on time. And, not coincidentally, Silver, Bruno and their members redoubled their effort to reverse the ruling and weaken Pataki's authority - hoping voters wouldn't notice the gaping holes in their plan.
Don't let this hunk of Swiss cheese see the light of day. Vote no on Prop 1.
Oct 5, 2005
Cheney's staffer caught for espionage
Espionage Case Breaches the White House
ABC News
By BRIAN ROSS and RICHARD ESPOSITO
Oct. 5, 2005 — Both the FBI and CIA are calling it the first case of espionage in the White House in modern history.
Officials tell ABC News the alleged spy worked undetected at the White House for almost three years. Leandro Aragoncillo, 46, was a U.S. Marine most recently assigned to the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney.
"I don't know of a case where the vetting broke down before and resulted in a spy being in the White House," said Richard Clarke, a former White House advisor who is now an ABC News consultant.
Federal investigators say Aragoncillo, a naturalized citizen from the Philippines, used his top secret clearance to steal classified intelligence documents from White House computers.
In 2000, Aragoncillo worked on the staff of then-Vice President Al Gore. When interviewed by Philippine television, he remarked how valued Philippine employees were at the White House.
"I think what they like most is our integrity and loyalty," Aragoncillo said.
Classified Material Transferred by E-Mail
Officials say the classified material, which Aragoncillo stole from the vice president's office, included damaging dossiers on the president of the Philippines. He then passed those on to opposition politicians planning a coup in the Pacific nation.
"Even though it's not for the Russians or some other government, the fact that it occurred at the White House is a matter of great concern," said John Martin, who was the government's lead espionage prosecutor for 26 years.
Last year, after leaving the Marines, Aragoncillo was caught by the FBI while he worked for the Bureau at an intelligence center at Fort Monmouth, N.J.
According to a criminal complaint, Aragoncillo was arrested last month and accused of downloading more than 100 classified documents from FBI computers.
"The information was transferred mostly by e-mails," said U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie at the time of Aragoncillo's arrest.
Since that arrest, officials say Aragoncillo has started to cooperate. He has admitted to spying while working on the staff of Vice President Cheney's office.
Aragoncillo began working at the White House in 1999. Officials are now trying to learn how he landed the job, when he started spying, and how he escaped detection for so long.
"Of course, it is a source of embarrassment when you find out that this kind of activity has been carried out literally right under your nose," said Martin, the former espionage prosecut
ABC News
By BRIAN ROSS and RICHARD ESPOSITO
Oct. 5, 2005 — Both the FBI and CIA are calling it the first case of espionage in the White House in modern history.
Officials tell ABC News the alleged spy worked undetected at the White House for almost three years. Leandro Aragoncillo, 46, was a U.S. Marine most recently assigned to the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney.
"I don't know of a case where the vetting broke down before and resulted in a spy being in the White House," said Richard Clarke, a former White House advisor who is now an ABC News consultant.
Federal investigators say Aragoncillo, a naturalized citizen from the Philippines, used his top secret clearance to steal classified intelligence documents from White House computers.
In 2000, Aragoncillo worked on the staff of then-Vice President Al Gore. When interviewed by Philippine television, he remarked how valued Philippine employees were at the White House.
"I think what they like most is our integrity and loyalty," Aragoncillo said.
Classified Material Transferred by E-Mail
Officials say the classified material, which Aragoncillo stole from the vice president's office, included damaging dossiers on the president of the Philippines. He then passed those on to opposition politicians planning a coup in the Pacific nation.
"Even though it's not for the Russians or some other government, the fact that it occurred at the White House is a matter of great concern," said John Martin, who was the government's lead espionage prosecutor for 26 years.
Last year, after leaving the Marines, Aragoncillo was caught by the FBI while he worked for the Bureau at an intelligence center at Fort Monmouth, N.J.
According to a criminal complaint, Aragoncillo was arrested last month and accused of downloading more than 100 classified documents from FBI computers.
"The information was transferred mostly by e-mails," said U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie at the time of Aragoncillo's arrest.
Since that arrest, officials say Aragoncillo has started to cooperate. He has admitted to spying while working on the staff of Vice President Cheney's office.
Aragoncillo began working at the White House in 1999. Officials are now trying to learn how he landed the job, when he started spying, and how he escaped detection for so long.
"Of course, it is a source of embarrassment when you find out that this kind of activity has been carried out literally right under your nose," said Martin, the former espionage prosecut
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)