State Senate in need of adult supervision

Tom Precious sets the scene in Albany when our so-called leaders attended to the people's business yesterday:

Pandemonium ruled in the State Senate this afternoon, when both Republicans and Democrats claimed ownership of the historic chamber -- shouting over each other as they sought to run separate and simultaneous sessions.

The details would be laughable if they weren't so sad.

"You're out of order. Don't you call me out of order," Sen. Ruth Hassell-Thompson, a Democrat, snapped at Sen. George Winner, who the Republicans tapped to lead the floor fight as presiding officer.

He did so from below the chamber's podium, which the Democrats had seized earlier in the afternoon.

"I don't understand what their point was other than trying to establish that they were in charge," Winner, still clutching his small gavel, said as he worked his way down a packed hallway after the session.

No word on whether the tit-for-tat included discussion of whose mother wears army boots.

You know how bad it is when the Assembly looks like the model of productivity and Speaker Sheldon Silver comes across as a responsible, can-do leader.

How many of you think Tom Golisano and Steve Pigeon look like white knights these days?

Tommy Boy, by the way, is dismissing rumors he is contemplating a run for the U.S. Senate in his adopted state of Florida. The Rochester -- I mean, Naples -- billionaire told News Political Reporter Bob McCarthy that his Responsible New York plans to turn its attention to the State Assembly once things quiet down in Albany.

"Responsible New York, once this thing settles down, will focus on the Assembly," he said.

Is that to say Golisano intends to do for the Assembly what he's done for the Senate?

Comments

[john]

Every single one of them needs to be put over the taxpayers knee and SPANKED, like the spoiled little BRATS that they are!!!!!!!!!! New Yorkers REMEMBER what is going on in Babylon-On-The-Hudson (also known as Albany) and in the next election SPANK every last one of them by FIRING every last one of them in the voting booth!!!!!!!!!!

[Dave]

No way are any of these idiots going to get voted out of office. They set their own boundaries so that it is virtually impossible to get rid of them. And the same idiots that vote them in every year will vote them in again because they will all have the "it's not the guy I voted for...it's the other guy attitude". I for one will not under any circumstances vote for any incumbent that is presently in office. Not a single one of them has shown any leadership ability or has had the kahunas to stand up on their own and make a decision. They only follow what their party wants, period. That is not government. That is what my kindergarten daughter does when the teacher speaks.

[pgr88]

Upstate needs to secede and NY should be broken into 2 states. There is a vast difference between NY City and the rest of the State and it is impossible to bridge that difference - this Senate fiasco is evidence of that.

[TJ]

Golisano's kids need to put Tommy in a home. He is being taken advantage of by Pigeon who is wasting the Paychex fortune, and I am sure making a hefty commission.

Golisano talks big but has yet to offer any solution for fixing NY's problems. Giving the Senate to a Republican party that created the problem over 40 years is madness.

Golisano is clearly not competent to handle his own affairs. He is a billionaire's equivalent to a homeless guy wandering the streets ranting at the passing cars.

[Don]

Let the fools continue acting like a bunch of two year olds. When the government isn't doing anything it is good news for the tax payers. They can't infringe on our rights and spend all of our money if they aren't passing any bills.

[ES]

i agree with pgr88, this state is really needing to break NYC off and we can fund things on our own and so can they. I imagine our taxes would be lower because we would be dropping 8 million people off the population, meaning all services will cost less. Think of the things we would get done. Buffalonians hate being associated with NYC and vice versa. People who have never been to NY think the entire state is one big concrete jungle. Secession would do a lot to change their minds.

[Buffalopundit]

Yes, thank the Lord Baby Jesus that Prince Tom of Golisano and his henchman, the Sheriff of Pigeonham have brought stability, change, and reform to Albany.

Perhaps when they "fix" the Assembly, there will be actual fisticuffs.

[Don H]

A sad commentary on politcs today when party is placed ahead of public interest.

[liferocks]

Tom is a fool for letting Steve Pigeon use him. Also, why hasn’t the Casey/Brown administration distanced themselves from these jokers? I have heard that Casey is going to farm out some of his political dirty tricks to Pigeon and Responsible NY. How does Tom G feel about that? Also, I wish more would be discussed on the money laundering going on in LA that involves Pigeon.

[frquarter]

ALL you whiners about tom golisano..well ok smart alexs what have the democRATS do for the last 50 years here in western ny,,,HIGH TAXES HIGH FEES closing of plants closing of stores population has dropped...you whiners need to look into your pown faults,,,,,you fear democRATS of NYC,,,,THEY ARE THE THORN IN YOUR SIDE..of course you are either gullible or so darn stupid...that you live in denial.....nystate must have NYC REMOVED FROM THE STATE...and all career politicians democRATS or pubs must be removed ,,,,a new government and term limits...no more volkers stachowskis ,,,,they are the problem,,,,2 wimps....but they know how to spend your money for their staff and patronage jobs,,,,yes i mean....all the other caREER POLITICIANS ALSO,,,,but these are the examples how these dysfunctional B.S. YOU GULLIBLE FOR YEARS....WISE UP AND WAKE UP.....2010 GOING TO BE A VERY INTERESTING YEAR......

[Dave]

You have GOT to be kidding me. If you are sitting in the chair first you are in charge so the Dem's showed up at 6:00am so they could sit down first???? Is this for real??? Why don't you just take your ball and go home.
And we voted these people in charge???

[Buffalo Libertarian]

Don wrote: "Let the fools continue acting like a bunch of two year olds. When the government isn't doing anything it is good news for the tax payers. They can't infringe on our rights and spend all of our money if they aren't passing any bills."

Agreed, except that the American Constitution guarantees each state a republican (small "r" not big "R") form of government.

[CMS]

As pathetic as this entire display has been (including Stachowski's and especially Thompson's mindless logic), I have to admit that I think I'm enjoying it. Good. I hope the whole system collapses. Shelly Silver, I hope they get you next. I will relish that day.

[TJ]

It is obvious that those of you who call for an split from NYC have no clue that upstate is heavily subsidized by the taxes generated from NYC.

We cannot afford to lose the NYC cash cow. Upstate taxes would go up around 200%.

Get a grip on reality folks. What New York really needs is to cut the many layers of local gov't, reform NYS labor laws so that gov't no longer operates for the benefit of the employees, cut the public payroll by 30% and learn that we cannot afford all the gov't that we have or want.

If you want lower taxes then Amherst can no longer have three school districts and the villages of Sloan, Depew, Williamsville, Hamburg etc can no longer exist only to spend tax dollars that provide services that are a duplication of those provided by the towns.

We a the problem.

[John D. Craik]

You're all crazy if you thinking breaking off from NYC will help us. NYC is a huge WEALTHY city, Buffalo is a small poor one. Don't buy what the local politicians tell you, it's their fault, not NYC's that our taxes are high -- the funding actually tends to flow up to us, not the other way around! ANY objective study finds that.

[Buffalo Libertarian]

Now do you people see at least one reason why you need to stop voting for Democrats and Republicans and why you need to stop listening to the media lies about there being only two political parties to choose from?

[Dave]

Buffalo Libertarian - Why would anyone stop voting for only democrats and republicans? People in this state need to come up with a way to ensure that there is ALWAYS a 32-32 tie. This is funnier than anything EVER put on the comedy channel or run on Saturday Night Live. Take some time and stop and listen to these so called "educated" people that were voted into office. Then go to any grade school in the country and listen. You will hear the same arguments. "I was here first so it is mine." "Get off of my yard" I am going to lock you out". "I will let you in but I am going to lock the desk" "We don't think this is right so we want a do over"... etc, etc, etc... This stuff, coming out of the mouths of adults, is hilarious...

[Buffalo Libertarian]

Well, Dave, it is certainly entertaining but it will prove to be entertaining for only so long before it devolves into annoying.

[wil]

First of all, we can't secede because the Constitution forbids it...It was put in after the Civil War.. Whoever brought that up needs to read that document pronto... Secondly, let's stick to the facts... The Senate has been controlled by the Republicans for the last forty of more years. They must be held accountable for their actions and record for this time frame. Pataki was there for 8 years.. he is part to blame...Giambra shares some blame...The Dems as well.... This Espada guy will lose his reelection bid i guarantee it...The other guy is going to jail for assault, (if Justice prevails)
What can you say about Golisano..If you need any more proof that some of our politicians can be/ are bought.... there you go.... Quite Sad really,,,, We need another Andrew Jackson....

[CMS]

"because the Constitution forbids it...Whoever brought that up needs to read that document pronto..."
If only it were that simple, we would have far fewer problems than we currently do, particularly at the Federal level. Sadly, the US Constitution has become but a relic in today's US political system, in which all 3 branches abuse it with regularity.

[Buffalo Libertarian]

Wil, below are the amendments in question: show us where they specifically say that states cannot leave the union.

"Amendment XIII
(Ratified December 6, 1865)

1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Amendment XIV
(Ratified July 9, 1868)

Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave. But all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Amendment XV
(Ratified February 3, 1870)

Section 1
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

I think what you meant was Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution itself: "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress."

Besides, since when does the government of New York State give a rat's behind about the federal Constitution, particularly since it's clear that Congress and the President of the United States haven't given a rat's behind about it since at least Teddy Roosevelt?

[OPMike]

Buffalo Libertarian,

The key phrase in Section 2 of the Constitution is "without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress."

So if we can get that consent (a huge if) technically it is possible to form the new state of Upper York.

[wil]

I saw it in there somewhere...
Could very well be the one you posted... anyway Texas vs White affirmed it in 1869...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

[Buffalo Libertarian]

Wil, it isn't there.

Texas v. White is a not an amendment to the Constitution and the Constitution itself says nothing about whether states can leave the union. One can argue whether James Madison intended (in writing the Constitution) to continue the idea of perpetual union that existed under the Articles of Confederation (as the majority opinion in Texas v. White assumes) but the fact of the matter is that if the Constitution doesn't specifically prohibit states from leaving the union then such prohibition does not exist.

[Barton Keyes]

This blog contains an interesting debate as to "session". We, however, need to clarify a few points.
First we need to distinguish at least two separates types of session: a) the separation of part of a state, i.e. up-state New York separating from down- state New York, and b) any state separating from the US itslelf (as allegedly done by the Confedrate States).
As to (a)the US Constitution does say in Article 3, Section 3 that "...no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State formed by the Jurisdiction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."
Thus, for up-state to seceede from down-state both the legislature in Albany and the US Congress must approve.
B) Neither the US Constiution nor any amendment explicitly says that session from the US by any state is forbidden. However, President Lincoln argued in his First Innaugural Address that "in contemplation of universal law, and of the Constitution, the Union of these states is perpetual. Perpetutity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all natural giovernments. It is safe to assert that no government proper, ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination." The South argued otherwise. But for all practical purposes the South lost that argument when it lost the Civil War.
The US Supreme Court in 1868 affirmed Lincoln's interpetation of the power of sesssion in the case of White v Texas. The Court found that the Articles of Confederation had created a perpetual union. It also found that the US Constitution by its own words had created a "more perfect union", and hence, could be nothing less than the perpetual union created by the original Articles of Copnfederation to which the Constitution was the successor. And we need also to remember that the Supreme Court has and is generally accepted as havinhg the power to interpret what that US Constitution does and does not mean. And as to the right of session by a state it has found that the states doie not have such a power.
Thus, absent a new ruling by the Supreme Court or an amendment to the Constitution, the states will remain pertpetually part of the US.