Laws more important than cases

Brendan Lyons reports in the TU (full story only in print today) that the feds have tried without success to interest the state attorney general's office and the Albany county district attorney in prosecuting Joe Bruno, the former Senate majority leader. Apparently the U.S. attorney's office is still holding a grudge that Bruno was acquitted of most charges earlier this year -- and the two counts he was convicted on may have to be dismissed as the result of a (no longer very recent) U.S. Supreme Court decision.

But even if Bruno walks, his federal trial served a useful purpose in displaying Albany's routine corruption, which is protected by state legislation still in effect. Hence the current leaders of the Senate and Assembly, just like Bruno in his day, decline to reveal how much and by whom they are paid in the private sector. The governor-elect has pledged to change this, but pledges to reform Albany are a dime a dozen. The governor-elect, Andrew Cuomo, is also the current attorney general. I don't care if he doesn't prosecute Bruno, but it would be nice if he induces legislators to permanently expose the actual and potential conflicts of interest of themselves and their leaders.

Comments

[Matthew]

I really don't see anything happening.

The very people Cuomo would have to rail against to get things changed are the very people he needs to advance his legislative agenda. That is unless he uses his "political capital" to oust Silver, alla Pataki installing Bruno, who has total control over his fiefdom.

[Bob Conner]

Good points, Matt, and the conventional wisdom is that you can never be too cynical about Albany politics. But surely even these guys won't be able to get away with another phony ethics "reform" like the last one (in 2007), will they? And they've gotta do something, don't they?

[Matthew]

I agree, Bob, but your premise assumes people outside of the press actually cares about ethics reform when we the public view "every politician as being corrupt".