PlanetAlbany

Assembly passing budget bills

Despite the Democrats' 109-41 majority in the chamber, the health and mental hygiene budget just passed by a vote of only 81 to 63. Among the opponents was Democratic Assemblywoman Aileen Gunther, a nurse, who said the health-care cuts were too severe for her to support. An anti-abortion amendment failed by 89 votes to 42.

The New York state budget (updated)

Fred Dicker on his Talk 1300 radio show today was blasting this Daily Gazette editorial for being insufficiently harsh about the state budget, but I rise to the defense of my former colleagues in Schenectady. The editorial's partial defense of the budget does not extend to the ultrasecretive process, and it takes shots at the inclusion of the usual amounts of member items and the failure to reform education spending by reining in construction projects and special ed. It could have mentioned and criticized some counterproductive taxes, such as on health insurance and utilities, that seem likely to make the business climate even worse. It also could have noted a downstate urban tilt, with New York City getting $328 million in aid restored, making out much better than upstate cities like Albany and Schenectady which are losing significant AIM funding. (Saratoga Springs lost VLT aid, but that's a defensible cut from a statewide perspective.) Most Republicans and other harsh critics of the budget's high spending take care to avoid saying exactly where it should be cut.

In its reaction to the budget, the New York State School Boards Association said: "By delaying attempts to allow schools to operate more efficiently — such as a new pension tier, Wicks Law exemption, and procurement reform — the state continues to handcuff local districts." But NYSSBA played along with NYSUT and Assembly Democrats in killing Gov. Paterson's proposed property tax cap, which when combined with the failure to pass structural spending restraint will leave local districts with big and immediate problems.

This all presumes that the budget deal holds together in the Senate. I'll go down to the Capitol this afternoon to see how it's going.

Mr. Process

So, I asked Assembly Majority Leader Ron Canestrari, D-Cohoes, after the end of session today, were you the key player in blocking the governor's proposal to let grocery stores sell wine? No, he said, he was just one of the great majority of Assembly Democrats who didn't want to back the big-business groceries against the smaller liquor stores. The same dynamic was at play in the Assembly rejecting proposals that would have hurt small pharmacies, he said. So what were the key policies he personally advanced or opposed in the budget negotiations? Canestrari replied that he was more concerned with getting it done, with getting the budget passed tomorrow. "I'm a process guy," he said.
A couple of minutes later I ran into him again, as I exited the minority leader's office. The Republicans are in conference, I said, as Canestrari took off with an aide down the Million-Dollar Staircase. "What else do they have to do?" he replied.

Tedisco's missed opportunities

I see Jim Tedisco was in Albany today denouncing the state budget deal, but in his press release there was nothing about the restoration of funds for the Adirondack Amtrak train, which serves the central and northern parts of the 20th Congressional District. Tedisco ignored that issue in the congressional race, and what he did have for a North Country local issue was vowing to bring back the Olympics to Lake Placid, which was feeble stuff. If he'd made the train an issue, he could have taken credit for getting the funds restored. The campaign has totally mishandled local issues and failed to use Tedisco's bully pulpit in Albany. The Saratogian, in its endorsement of Tedisco Sunday, nevertheless complained that he'd been AWOL in the collapse of the Aqueduct VLT deal, which is a local issue for Saratoga County.

On another state issue, the Rockefeller drug law "reform" which Democrats are on the verge of enacting, The Daily News has a tough editorial today making the arguments Republicans should have been making against a bill that is opposed by almost all district attorneys on a bipartisan basis. Instead, the AP the other day had a lame quote from Sen. Marty Golden, R-Brooklyn, about "coddling criminals." Tedisco, too, opposes the measure, but didn't get around to voting against it when it came before the Assembly this month. His campaign has dredged up the death penalty, which is a showboat of an issue as likely to turn away swing voters as win them over. There's a lot more than that to criminal justice policies, which Republicans used to know when they were in the habit of winning elections.

Voting for Tedisco

As my more liberal blogging brethren at The Albany Project and Musings of a (Fairly) Young Contrarian long ago figured out, I will vote for Jim Tedisco for Congress. That's largely because I oppose abortion and killing human embryos for medical research. But I also think Tedisco has a substantive record of achievement that he and the Republican Party have managed to obscure by the terrible campaign they've run. The old-fashioned rules say reporters don't tell you how they vote, although polls and anecdotal evidence show they skew heavily Democratic. I try to report fairly, not being one of those bloggers willing to serve as a conduit for the slander, distortion and vitriol that are the common currency of election campaigns, this one very much included on both sides. But since transparency is a current cliche buzzword, I don't see why I should conceal what I will do on Tuesday.

A negative advertiser's perspective

Since I've been bashing the negative ads of the Jim Tedisco and Scott Murphy campaigns, I post here in full two emails (the second in response to my inquiry about whether the first was on the record) from an ally of Tedisco's. I note that even this guy thinks the campaign has been too negative, and rightly criticizes the counterproductive attacks on Murphy (mainly from the NRCC) for investing in India.

From: Joe Wierzbicki

I’ve  enjoyed your reporting, commentary and observations on the Special Election for Congress in NY-20 at

http://planetalbany.typepad.com/planetalbany/

 

I work for the Our Country Deserves Better Committee (http://www.OurCountryPAC.org) which is a conservative PAC that got involved in this race – with an independent expenditure radio and TV ad campaign.

It’s been a very odd race to watch to say the least, and I wanted to tell you about our own perceptions of things, why we got involved in this race, and why we think Tedisco found himself in a position where he has to turn things around with just 3 days to go until the election. It was our belief that having outside organizations such as ours to tell “the rest of the story” about Democrat Scott Murphy would allow Tedisco to tout a more positive message about his record in fighting government waste and higher taxes.

However, we were a bit dismayed when Tedisco announced that he would not reveal whether he supported or opposed the Obama/Pelosi stimulus package – and continued to evade the issue and his position on it for three weeks.  Every single Republican member of the House of Representatives (conservative, moderate and liberal Republicans all) voted against the bill.  It would hardly be considered radical or extreme for Tedisco to have been opposed to the unprecedented deficit spending by government. To us, this marked a disastrous turn of events.  Not only did it make Tedisco look less-than-straightforward and a little too much like a “typical politician” but it took away, in our opinion, his strongest position in the race.  Obama and the Democrats already control the agenda in Washington and voters know that.  Scott Murphy won’t make one bit of difference to our government’s actions and policies. But Tedisco could have cited all those wasteful pork-barrel spending projects (which he now cites since declaring his recent opposition to the stimulus) and proclaimed himself to be someone who would be the conscience of Congress, acting on behalf of the taxpayers to make sure that the taxpayers’ money only went to worthwhile efforts and programs that would create jobs and put people to work, strengthen infrastructure, etc… Tedisco seems to be more on-message now talking about Scott Murphy being a rubber stamp for what Congress is doing.  We just wish this would have been his take on the issue at the beginning.

In addition, Tedisco stumbled when asked about Rush Limbaugh, and instead of learning the lesson of Michael Steele, and brushing off Democrats’ attempts to inject him into the race (“he has a great show and speaks for a lot of people, but he’s not the candidate in this race, I am, so ask me about what my thoughts are on the issues facing voters”) Tedisco made that unfortunate comment that seemed to be taken as a negative comment towards Rush. Now we’ve had Rush pointing this out on his show the past few days.  We here at the Our Country Deserves Better Committee have been hearing from a lot of our supporters who are very disappointed by this.  It’s served as an unfortunate distraction for Tedisco and causes confusion among conservative voters who are the base of the Republican Party.

I note in the most recent Siena College Poll that Murphy attracts the support of 82% of Democrats but Tedisco is pulling only 65% of Republicans.  Somehow, Tedisco has not managed to positively present his views, and contrast them with Mr. Murphy, in such a way as to energize his base. In a Special Election like this, turnout is so important, and having an energized base is vital. That Tedisco has been off his game in speaking proudly about basic common sense conservative positions and values that are in the mainstream of America (and especially in this district) about standing up for taxpayers, fighting wasteful Washington spending, law-and-order, strong national defense, less government regulation… has really hurt him in our opinion.

We got our friends at the National Tax Limitation Committee to focus on the race, endorse Tedisco and review Murphy’s record and positions – to have another 3^rd party voice validate that Tedisco was better than Murphy on tax and spending issues, and that we at the Our Country PAC would spend the $$$ to get the message out via TV and radio ads because we thought it was important to get this message out, and free Tedisco from having to do the “dirty work” himself and ensue a negative backlash from voters. Let them think negatively of us (we’re not on the ballot) just so long as they also had the doubts raised about whether Murphy can be trusted to be fiscally responsible with their tax dollars.

 Like I said, we entered this race because we were more than willing to be the “bad cop” who said the not-so-nice things about Scott Murphy.  We wanted to motivate the base about some of the liberal positions of Murphy, while Tedisco sold voters on his own attributes, positions and record.  We have a lot of ties to the district and we like Jim Tedisco a lot.  We have been dismayed to see that the initial Tedisco ads, NRCC ads and RNC ads were largely negative, and seemingly focused on irrelevant issues.

Is Scott Murphy’s creation of 1,000 jobs in India really something that voters would be upset by?  We just don’t get it.  If he had laid off thousands while creating jobs in India, perhaps.  But we couldn’t understand the several hundred thousand dollars in NRCC and National Republican Trust PAC ads on something that we didn’t believe would be relevant to voters in NY-20.

The AIG ads have been marginally better, but we would have preferred ads touting Tedisco being a tough bastard who would stop those dirty politicians from taking more and more of our hard earned tax dollars to give to a bunch of special interest groups and lobbyists to use on their pet projects, running up a deficit our children will never be able to pay off, and then wanting to raise taxes to pay for their shameful conduct.   Tedisco could then have chided Murphy for announcing support for a bill he never read or reviewed that wasted hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars – and that when he is in Washington he’ll make sure that the money from NY-20 taxpayers is used to create jobs, provide for important valuable infrastructure projects, etc… etc…

I am very worried to see the continued trend in this district where each poll has Tedisco lower than the previous and Murphy higher.  I hope Jim can pull it out. I’m pasting in the links to the ads we ran below.  Again, for us, our strategy was to highlight Murphy’s bad record on tax/fiscal issues and his liberal national defense/military issues.  It was as much to motivate/educate the base as it was to impact voter perceptions on Murphy and Tedisco.  But I fear that when voters only hear negative-negative-negative from Tedisco and his allies (including us) that it is indeed too much of a turnoff.

We tried to mix in some positive with our negative (as noted in two of the radio ads below) but had we realized that Tedisco/NRCC/RNC would not be touting Tedisco’s image and record and contrasting that with Murphy (we haven’t seen ONE contrast ad in this race… just mudslinging ads) then we would have done our own advertising very different – and told the Tedisco story, highlighted his positions and contrasted those with Murphy’s.  But to be honest, we kind of thought that this should be the job, and primary message, of Jim Tedisco and the RNC/NRCC advertising on his behalf.

Our fingers are crossed for a Tedisco victory on Tuesday.

- Joe

*OUR ADS ON TAX/FISCAL ISSUES

 TV AD: Can’t trust Scott Murphy on Tax Issues:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQPLeooSqS4

 RADIO AD: National Tax Limitation Committee Endorses Tedisco:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGei0SPYwDU

 RADIO AD: Former Albany Radio host Mark Williams on Tedisco and Taxes/Spending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9peWjgq6QHA

 *OUR ADS TO MOTIVATE VETERANS/MILITARY FAMILIES/NATIONAL SECURITY CONSERVATIVES

 RADIO AD: Marine Mom Slams Democrat Scott Murphy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1aE1P_DTRA

TV AD: Can’t Trust Scott Murphy on Military Issues

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYMfGG2YTWg

 

Sure Bob, feel free.

 I’ve followed your writings for the past several weeks, and wanted to provide you with the perceptions of a group that got involved in this race – why we did and what were the thoughts and motivations behind our actions.

 NY-20 is indeed a special election for us.  You see our e-Campaign Coordinator lives in Washington County.  Our Vice Chairman was a radio host for years on WROW and WGY.  So when Gillibrand was appointed to the Senate the resulting Special Election was one we were very motivated to participate in.

People are free to disagree with our views on issues or our perceptions on the race, but I thought given what I’ve read at Planet Albany that you might be interested in how we viewed the race and what our thinking was as the race unfolded.

-Joe

 

Weekly makes case that Tedisco hasn't

The weekly Ballston Journal endorsed Jim Tedisco this week, because it is fearful that the various bailouts, stimulus and budget plans, along with the commitment by the Democratic administration and Congress to spend much more on health care, education and new energy sources, threaten to pile up deficits and debt that will ruin the currency and bankrupt the country. It's an old-fashioned argument from the day when fiscal conservatism meant more than just cutting taxes. It might appeal to the large number of Republicans in the district who, according to the latest Siena poll, are not yet sold on Tedisco. (The Journal is also old-fashioned in that it only appears in print. The Tedisco people ought to put up a PDF link to the editorial on their Web site.)

Grim day for Tedisco campaign

The Jim Tedisco campaign scored a little coup yesterday when it won the endorsement of The Chronicle, a high-quality weekly newspaper in Glens Falls, where Democratic candidate Scott Murphy lives. But there's a sentence in that endorsement which nails what has gone so badly wrong with the Tedisco campaign. Chronicle Editor Mark Frost wrote: "When I sat down to interview Mr. Tedisco last Friday, frankly I expected him to be stupid, like many of the TV commercials that have run on his behalf." Frost discovered his error, and wound up writing a persuasive endorsement. But Tedisco and the Republican Party, from the NRCC on down, have only themselves to blame for Frost's initial perception, because they have run a stupid campaign seemingly based on the premise that voters are stupid.

The first Siena Research Institute poll of this race showed Tedisco up by 12 points. Then, on March 12, a Siena poll showed him up by four. Today, for the first time, Siena shows Murphy in the lead, by four points. Today's poll, like the March 12 one, proves in its crosstabs that Tedisco's commercials have been driving voters away, causing them to vote for Murphy. It has been clear to me since March 4  that the attack on Murphy for investing in India was a losing strategy, and it should have been clear to everyone by March 12. That day, Tedisco was quoted as criticizing the NRCC's negative ads and vowing to take control of his campaign. But the next day, when I pressed him on it, he declined to say explicitly that the NRCC should pull the negative ads, and even tried to defend the jobs-in-India line of attack. Tedisco isn't stupid but he is stubborn, and in this case it's hard to tell the difference. While most of the emphasis has gone elsewhere, the India theme has continued to resurface in the campaign. And unbelievably, the NRCC has continued to use the lame line at the end of its India ad, about how Murphy "just doesn't get it," as the tag line on its more recent attack ads (which are the only kind it's run). Do they really think the rubes of upstate New York do not groan like anyone else when a grating cliche like that is exhumed? Today, the NRCC released a video attacking Murphy on the death penalty. Have these guys had an idea about anything since 1932?

The Tedisco camp denies complicity in the successful legal effort to knock Libertarian Eric Sundwall off the ballot, but the objectors to the Sundwall petitions appeared to be ideological allies of Tedisco, prompting Sundwall today to endorse Murphy.

So after this string of disasters, is there any hope left for Tedisco? It wouldn't hurt if he stopped issuing statements that seem to be exercises in denial, and admitted where the campaign has gone wrong. The Siena poll does show areas where he should have a good chance to do better, i.e. among Republicans and in the northern part of the district (where Murphy is way ahead). Anti-abortion radio ads being run by the Right-to-Life Committee will likely help shore up the base, and it's not too late for Tedisco to stress some local issues that could be of particular benefit up north. Then, if he can keep it close, it will come down to turnout and each side's get-out-the vote operation. 

Last Tedisco-Murphy debate is a draw

Democratic candidate Scott Murphy delivered his opening statement tonight in a dumbed-down, condescending singsong, the same kind of Mr. Rogers delivery that Bobby Jindal used in his notoriously ineffective rebuttal to President Obama's address to Congress. It made me think of Murphy's latest positive TV ad, set in Glens Falls, which is less successful than the brilliant ad which opened his campaign, and how come this political novice seems to have gotten less comfortable as the campaign has gone on. But he got better tonight after that opening, and repeatedly tied Republican candidate Jim Tedisco in knots over Tedisco's unsupported position that the stimulus bill contained $300 billion in pork. Tedisco, the experienced professional politician, had a disastrous start to his campaign, including a terrible performance in the first debate. He has gotten better since, but is still making too many mistakes (like still not having figured out how to talk about the stimulus bill). Tedisco did raise one new problem with the bill, citing what he said was IBM's announcement today that it will move 4,000 jobs to India. IBM, he said, is expected to get stimulus money, and the bill should have included anti-outsourcing provisions. He also raised a couple of other objections to current Democratic policies I hadn't heard him make before, including the piling on of debt and and interest payments, the reduction in tax exemptions for charitable giving, and the lack of stimulus support for farms. He said voters shouldn't send "a rubber-stamp" to Washington, and cited issues in Albany such as workers compensation reform that he said he worked on to help the economy.

Murphy did better on a health-care question, giving a wonkish, thorough and reasonable-sounding answer about what reform measures would work.

The two candidates gave similar answers regarding foreign and defense policy, education, small business tax credits, energy and immigration. Murphy again made his wacky claim to be the more pro-gun ownership candidate. Tedisco closed with what seems to me a lame line (maybe because I used to hear him in 2006-07 say it about Gov. Spitzer) that he wants to work to make Obama the greatest president in history, and Congress likewise.

Tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. the last Siena poll comes out, but I'm tied up in the morning so will not be one of the first to comment on that. It's been a short campaign, but long enough to put people on edge. Yesterday at the Capitol, a top Tedisco aide complained about what he termed the "nasty" things I've been writing, and didn't want to hear me telling him it's been good free advice. On the other hand, Mary Tedisco told me the other day she likes the blog. If you want to win, Jim, better listen to your wife.

Back to the future at Aqueduct?

As the state tries to figure out what to do following the collapse of the Delaware North plan to build VLTs at Aqueduct Race Track in Queens, which left a big hole in the state budget, Assemblyman Gary Pretlow, D-Mount Vernon, chairman of the Assembly Racing Committee, said they should reconsider the MGM plan -- although not necessarily with MGM. MGM made a deal with the Pataki administration in 2005 to put in VLTs at Aqueduct, but pulled out in 2007. Delaware North won a later bidding process, but Pretlow said that was only because it promised $370 million to the state upfront, money which it said this month it could not pay. The other bidders, Pretlow said, SL Green and Mohegan Sun/Capital Play, had better proposals than Delaware North. Pretlow said the prospects for Aqueduct would be improved by ruling out VLT development at the nearby Belmont Park track. That is also the position of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, and Pretlow said he fully agrees with the speaker. Pretlow denied that the Paterson administration is disorganized, and said he has confidence in its handling of the matter. Sylvia Hamer, deputy secretary for technology operations and gaming, is point person on this for the governor. Pretlow and another knowledgeable source said the MGM plan went through the SEQR process and is likely the best starting point to resurrect the prospect of VLTs at Aqueduct. Pretlow said the state does not need to go through the full RFP process again. Installing several thousand VLTs at Aqueduct and redeveloping the facility is supposed to give New York racing long-term fiscal stability, as well as providing substantial additional revenue for the state. The Aqueduct VLTs were approved as a revenue-raiser following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack. VLTs have been proposed but not yet approved at Belmont, too, including by Long Island senators and the Spitzer-Paterson administrations.