Archive for January 19th, 2007
Eliot Spitzer was lauded by many for instituting new ethics rules that apply to him, the Lieutenant Governor and their staff.
Neither the Governor nor the Lieutenant Governor will hold or participate in any fundraisers within the Capitol Region during the legislative session.
That sounds like a very good rule EXCEPT for the nefarious meaning of the term Capitol Region. We are currently in the midst of a legislative session, yet that did not stop Eliot Spitzer from being the main draw at a $25,000 per head democratic party fundraiser in New York City yesterday.
The club (New York Young Republican Club) noted in its press release Spitzer’s reform pledge that neither he nor LG David Paterson would attend fund-raisers in the Capital Region during the legislative session, adding:
“Apparently, (Spitzer) feels that it is alright to host fundraisers during the legislative session as long as it is outside Albany.”
I guess Eliot forgot the one important question - Is it right, or is it Wrong?
Is the Sheriff of Wallstreet already becoming the Master of the Loophole?
[tags]Eliot Spitzer, ethics, fundraiser, loopholes, democrats, New York, governor[/tags]
Bill Online Easily, Fast & Free with PayPal. No Software Needed. Sign Up Now!
Supreme Court Declines To Hear Eminent Domain Case
The Day
January 19, 2007
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Tuesday to hear the eminent domain case of two Port Chester, N.Y., businessmen who planned to build a CVS pharmacy on their property until it was seized by the village so that another developer could build a Walgreens pharmacy there.
The plaintiffs asked the court to hear the case and clarify its 2005 ruling in Kelo v. City of New London, which upheld New London’s use of eminent domain on the Fort Trumbull peninsula for economic development. Instead, the Supreme Court’s decision not to consider the case lets stand a finding by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit that the Kelo ruling prevents challenges to the taking of a specific property within a redevelopment district.
Netflix Delivers DVDs to your home. NO LATE FEES. Try for FREE!
Democrats tried to ram lobbyist reform quickly through the Senate. The reform would have imposed terrible financial reporting requirements even on legitimate groups. The requirements were a direct assault on the first amendment rights of people to make their views known.
One of the Democratic priorities for the new Congress was passage of a lobbyist reform bill, but the introduction of S.1 into the Senate has caused a veritable firestorm of controversy. That’s because section 220 of the bill introduces disclosure requirements for “paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.” The Traditional Values Coalition calls this section the “most expansive intrusion on First Amendment rights ever proposed in the United States Senate,” while GrassrootsFreedom.com chairman Richard Viguerie says that if it passes, “We’d be living under totalitarianism, not democracy.” -Ars Tecnica
The Senate bowed to the deluge of calls and letters received. One of the groups leading the fight for freedom of speech was DownsizeDC.org, Inc. S.1 passed the Senate by a vote of 96 -2. However, the Bennett Amendment, that stripped section 220 from the bill, passed by a 55 - 43 margin. The House has not acted yet on lobbyist reform.
[tags]freedom of speech, free speech, first amendment, DownsizeDC, Senate, Congress, S.1[/tags]
[tags]fur elise, kid, child, piano, virtuoso, amazing, awesome, music[/tags]
I received this letter in my email today in response to this blog post. Below is the original letter and my response.
Dear Mike,
I recently found your blog in reference to Excalibur. We are a small, non-profit agency that has provided cost-free services, for those who are either disadvantaged and /or physically challenged. We have provided these services for 20 plus years, and have programmed over 50,000 individuals. Perhaps, these people and our services only equate to you as “pork”, but for us, they are individuals who deserve,even the most basic freedoms, which often is overlooked by most,or completely taken for granted. Dignity and respect are the other two attributes. Perhaps our services, seem trite to you, but to the individuals and Human Service Agencies who have used our program, I can assure you, it isn’t.
Catherine Catalano
Excalibur Leisure Skills Center, Inc.
Dear Catherine,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my blog post. My intention was not to malign your agency, or any other that I mentioned. My criticism falls with our current system of government financed charity. There are many instances of wasteful spending and many agencies that don’t deserve the funding. There are also many good agencies. We have developed a society that looks to the government to solve all problems. Consequently we are taxed to death and have no real say about how our money is spent.
I would much prefer a significantly smaller government that stays out of social services, health care and many other areas. The result would be a great increase in the amount of discretionary money in the private sector. Many, if not most, people would willingly support the charitable organizations that they deem worthy. I believe individuals would make better informed decisions leading to charitable care going where it is needed most. I believe most organizations would function much better under that scenario and the duplication of services would be eliminated. Politicians suffer no financial harm if they spend our money foolishly; in fact, the temptation to do so is very great. Pork is doled out in order to secure votes. When people are spending their own money they wisely scrutinize the worthiness of the recipient.
In summary, I think the needs of individuals are best addressed voluntarily by individuals. I do not wish to see anyone truly needing help not having resources to turn to, but I am fed up with government waste and high taxation.
Michael Rebmann
North Buffalo Journal and Review
[tags]New York, pork, government waste, Excalibur, taxes, charity, legislature[/tags]
