Here is a first among any major elected official -- Manhattan BP Scott Stringer has called for the elimination of member items (worth nearly $50 million) in the City Council. While certainly the timing of his proposal is suspect given his intention of running for Mayor, it still makes him the first elected official to go on record in saying that slush funds should be eliminated. The race for 2013 is already getting interesting.
That man has been in city government for years and years, but it's only NOW that he realizes the perverse impact of pork-barrel/"member-item" spending in the City Council?
ReplyDeleteBetter late than never ... But Scott Stringer is only doing this to have a strong platform to attack Council Member Christine C. Quinn (the slush-fund queen who is currently Speaker of the City Council and plans to run for Mayor).
It’s time to change the title of the BOROUGH PRESIDENTS to BOROUGH
ReplyDeleteADVOCATES, since they are symbolic figures who hold not executive power.
Think about it … What are they really “President” of? They are not
Chiefs of State. Not Heads of Government, not Governors, or Mayors or
even legislators.
They’re kind of like smaller versions of the NYC Public Advocate
(Think of each one as one-fifth of the Public Advocate, a position
that’s also pretty insignificant).
It's about time. Although they really make up a small fraction of the City budget, these outlays are just a way for local pols to curry favor with special interests and dish money out to their friends. Will be interesting to see if Stringer makes this a focus of his campaign.
ReplyDeleteStringer needs to manufacture something to run on. It might as well be member items.
ReplyDeleteManhattan Borough President Scott Stringer's call to eliminate legislative earmarks in the City Council is a totally transparent political move to position himself in the mayoral race. As an issue, it low-hanging fruit and no skin off his nose.
ReplyDeleteAnd Tony Cassino, you'll recall that Scott Stringer wasn't sining this anti-member-item tune last year when he testified before you and your fellow members of the NYC Charter Revision Commission.
On December 7, 2010, a New York Times editorial said “the best thing to do about member items is to get rid of member items." I heartily agree!
ReplyDeleteThe member-item system needs to be eliminated because the funds are allocated to favored groups not on the basis of a district's needs but on the basis of pure politics.
ReplyDeleteLegislators in the City Council, State Senate, and State Assembly control these funds like it's their own private stash, but IT'S NOT THEIR MONEY.
Why doesn't Stringer reject the $$$ he receives for pork spending as Manhattan BP????
ReplyDeleteNYC Council Member Peter F. Vallone, Jr. of Queens now has a problem with member items, but his daddy, former Council Speaker and Majority Leader Peter F. Vallone, Sr., absolutely loved member items, loved dispensing them and loved buying political influence with them.
ReplyDeleteBeware of "benevolence"
ReplyDeleteHallelujah
ReplyDeleteOne of the main reasons for member items is so that legislators can steer cash into the pockets of family and friends.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you don't believe me, just ask any of this fine cast of characters:
Former NYC Councilman Miguel Martinez
Former NYS Senator Efrain Gonzalez
NYC Councilman Larry Seabrook
Former NYS Senator Pedro Espada
NYC Councilwoman Maria del Carmen Arroyo
NYS Assemblywoman Carmen Arroyo
Former NYS Senator (and NYC Councilman) Hiram Monserrate
NYS Assemblyman Vito Lopez (the Brooklyn Party Democratic boss)
These old BPs didn't seem to have any qualms about discretionary funds:
ReplyDeleteC. Virginia Fields
Claire Shulman
Howard Golden
Fernando Ferrer
Guy V. Molinari
Obviously this blog does not favor legislative pork.
ReplyDeleteScott Stringer is right, even if his motivations at this point must pure political selfishness.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that Borough President Stringer waited decades before adopting the right position on member items shows how insincere he truly is.
ReplyDelete@Anonymous July 24, 2011 4:15 AM
ReplyDeleteThis blog doesn't favor legislative pork until it does.
Christine Quinn or Bill de Blasio for Mayor!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteIsn't former Queens Boro Prez Claire Shulman sill is holding fundraisers to help her pay off a giant lobbying fine?
ReplyDeleteNYC Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly for Mayor!
ReplyDeleteRaymond Kelly = Michael Bloomberg
ReplyDelete(which ain't so bad, so I'd vote for Kelly over any of those career pols)
If Stringer wants to find real problems, why doesn't he examine the true price of maintaining bloated gold-plated public-sector pensions?
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous July 27, 2011 5:59 PM, here is the answer: The unions need to back serious pension reform and they need to shell out more for health care. That would go a long way to dealing with the situation.
ReplyDeleteThe way that member items are used and misused by lawmakers is part of a psychosis of unconscious arrogance common among politicians.
ReplyDeleteWhat does it matter what Scott Stringer proposes? According to the polls, he's not going to be mayor.
ReplyDelete