Posted on 06/10/2009 5:01:37 AM PDT by StatenIsland
By the time the dysfunctional body that passes for a Legislature in New York State gets through the 2009 session, calling someone an Albany reformer will be an insult.
In a display of chutzpah that startled even old political hands, the Senate Republicans and two of the least-reputable Democrats in a deeply disreputable place brazenly declared themselves to be a reform coalition and staged a palace coup against the Democratic majority.
We’re still puzzling out how these defections came about and what tawdry promises were made. But make no mistake: Reform and bipartisanship had nothing to do with it. Two weeks until the end of the 2009 session, lawmaking has shuddered to a maddening standstill. The passing of bills, the raising of funds, the discussion of issues have all been put far back on the back burner.
It is worth noting that the befuddled Democratic majority was nothing to wave the flag about. In many ways, it turned out to be almost as bad as the Republicans who ran the Senate for more than 40 years until January.
But some Democrats, like Senator Daniel Squadron of Manhattan, were pushing for real changes that would, for example, have started to clean up the campaign finance system. And Gov. David Paterson was trying to push reform that would include some of the first independent oversight of lawmakers.
Republican leaders have their own package, some of which might improve matters in the Senate. But even the better parts of their reform are eclipsed by one slimy act: appointing State Senator Pedro Espada Jr., a Bronx Democrat, as Senate president. If that appointment stands, Mr. Espada would become governor of New York if Mr. Paterson is out of state or incapacitated. .
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Notice how the Times frames the issue, focusing on "tawdry promises," "least-reputable Democrats," "reform had nothing to do with it," "slimy act," etc.
The other interesting sidebar is the dilemma now faced by Dem Governor Patterson. Many of the reform measures this new "coalition" is discussing were actually proposed by Patterson in an attempt to make him more electable- but only AFTER he knew they would never be passed by a dem-controlled Senate.
Now he's stuck. If the new Senate passes these same resolutions, he either has to keep his word and support them (thereby turning his back on his dem colleagues, with whom he is in hot water already) or turn his back on his own promises.
Lose - lose. But then again, he always was a loser.
Sort of like calling someone in the NYT building a "reporter"
You got to love it-suddenly the NY Times has discovered there are disreputable Democrats in Albany. Enjoy the moment because it’s one of the few times the NYT will ever say a bad word about their fellow Democrats.
Ah, but of course when Jeffords and Sphincter left the Rep Party they were considered to be "enlightened" I wonder if the left wing fools at the NYT actually believe what they write in view of the unalterable fact of it being totally absurd?
The NYT didnt ask about “tawdry promises” when Specter defected.
Oh, they BELIEEEEEEVE.
Funny I don’t recall ther NY Times taking a similar stance with Jeffords or Specter.
Guess only changes in one direction are permitted.
Sort of like calling a “reporter” (ie. communist agent) in the NY Times a loyal American.
NY1 is reporting that more Democrats are likely to join the new coalition today.
Isn't Paterson already incapacitated? He is a blind, sex-addicted cokehead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.