December 13, 2006

The New York State Legislature meets today in special session, with the intention of voting itself a substantial pay raise.  Since the legislature cannot increase their own salaries during their two year terms, this will be their last chance to get a raise until January 2009.
 
As you can imagine, their energies are at fever pitch.  The issue is how much legislation they will have to pass to get Governor Pataki to sign the increase.  If he does not, they could pass over his veto by two-thirds votes if Silver and Bruno concur.  But that is somewhat more embarrassing to them than having the governor sign off on it.
 
The bills most important to the governor are for civil confinement of sexual predators, and increasing the cap on the number of charter schools in New York State, which is now one hundred.
 
If these bills are passed, it is supposed that the governor will appear to be tough on crime, particularly sexual offenses, and innovative on education.   These issues are supposed to resonate with the people of Iowa, where Governor Pataki is considering entering the Republican presidential primary.   He says he will decide next month, not wishing to allow presidential ambitions to interfere with his work as governor.
 
The "most dysfunctional state legislature in the country", as the Brennan Center has tagged the New York Senate and Assembly, is trading legislation on public issues in return for money for themselves. This does not inspire public outrage as it is taken for granted.
 
If the governor wanted to build a new Executive Mansion for himself, or increase the number of assistants he has, or raise their salaries, the prospect of a trade-off with the legislature, although seedy, would not be as offensive.  It would be more of an "If I scratch your back, you'll scratch mine" transaction.
 
But to take legislation unrelated to the issue of salary increases, and to hold it hostage, is, in our judgment, a much worse scenario. Sexual predators who have not been cured should not be released at the end of their prison terms, because the likelihood is that they will commit similar offenses, and innocent people will be raped and killed.  This is not a matter of vengeance, but of protection of future victims.  What standards should be used to determine the mental health of the predator is a matter for debate, but the principle is important.
 
The idea that protecting New Yorkers from rape and murder should be tied to legislators going from $79,500 to $100,000 or more a year is shocking, even in these days of cynicism.  What does one issue have to do with another?   This appears to us to be a misuse of power.  We believe the three men in a room should work out a civil confinement bill, without two of them and their legions having to receive additional financially rewards for doing their jobs..

Someone may say: "what's new about this, don't they do it all the time."   Our response would be: "That  may be true, but  people still have a right to complain every time their pockets are picked."   If there were any link between compensation and productivity, the proposed 25% increase would not be taken seriously.  The kidnapping of  the civil confinement bill, with the pay increase as the ransom, indicates a certain lack of moral sensibility?  Does it not?
 
Anyone who disagrees is invited to respond, and we will publish what you say, so our readers will hear both sides of the issue. You can sign your name, or use initials or a screen name, if you want to protect your identity.  We want your views; please, respond to starquest@nycivic.org.  P.S.: If you agree, you can say so, too.


#337 12.13.06  623wds