By Bob Confer, www.BobConfer.net

I’ll admit, at times my columns can be a little dry. When it comes to expounding on government it can be difficult to make the subject matter palatable to the average person. Government affects every one of us, but, boy, can it ever be boring. People can only hear so much about how government works, where it is broken, and how it can be fixed.

As dry as it may be, analysis of government has a place in print. Someone can hold that newspaper in hand, read the article in its entirety, skim through it in search of highlights or just plain skip over it if he’s bored (and maybe come back to it at a later time). Most folk look at the newspaper as an educational tool and we know how people approach that…few people have a stomach for education.

But, it seems that everyone has a stomach for television (just look at the couch potato physiques). That’s because TV, unlike newspaper, is as much entertainment as it is education. The stimulation to eyes, ears, and mind drag us into the medium and keeps us there: According to Nielsen Media, the average person watches 4 hours and 35 minutes of TV per day, while only fifty percent of people over 25 read one newspaper in a week’s time.

That being said, television, above all other mediums, can be the perfect place in which to get people involved in civics. The viewers (voters) are there, you just have to bring them in. CNN, unlike watching-the-paint-dry CSPAN, does a fair job of this, bombarding us with multiple hosts, informative snippets, and a variety of styles that makes the layperson find interest in the way our country is run. They can make education entertaining.

And, that’s what Tom Christy did, up until two weeks ago when his popular show “Legislative Journal” was shelved after a decade of good TV. Most of the arguments based on this issue (and there have been many!) have focused on the silencing of the freedom of speech. LCTV says it acted in good judgment, citing censorship laws that it could follow. Those on the other side claim bad judgment, saying the organization had no right to do so and that the censorship was political. I’m not here to address that. Most everyone in the County has. Let’s instead let’s talk about the importance of Tom Christy as an educator.

An educator, you ask? Yes.

Think about some of CNN’s most popular hosts, like Glenn Beck and Lou Dobbs. They’re engaging because the know how to deliver a message and more importantly, they wear their hearts on their sleeves. Better yet, think back to your childhood and your favorite teachers. They succeeded because they filled your mind with life lessons while making a lively classroom experience that had your brain begging for more. Boredom was not an option to them.

Tom is – or should I say, “was?” – like those people. Tom is Tom. He’s unique, maybe a little flamboyant and over the top, and that, along with their sense of civic duty, is what brought the viewers to LCTV to hear about what their legislator is and is not doing for them. Regular Average Joes and Janes, the salts of the earth, tuned in to the show because Tom’s entertaining style made government talk user-friendly. And, in the realm of politics, there is no more important “user” than the common citizen.

These people were anywhere and everywhere. I’ve always been amazed at who tells me they watch Tom’s show, people who otherwise care less about government and normally choose American Idol, sports, and cop shows over news and commentary. They dig what Tom did and, because of that, learned how the world around them works.

The very same sort of people came out of the woodwork every time Tom and I would be out and about. Men and women that he didn’t know would approach him, showering him with hugs, handshakes, and praise. These weren’t people looking to rub elbows with a local celebrity. How do I know? In every one of these encounters the fans would say two important and telling words, “thank you.”

They thanked Tom for giving them three hours of his time every week when he brought THEIR elected officials into THEIR homes and delivered the word of government in a way that THEY could understand.

Because of this educational and civic importance, LCTV should reconsider their stand and bring back WNY’s most popular – and meaningful – talk show host. He is an asset to the community, just like LCTV is, and they, like every one of us, would be better off if both parties got back together again.         

DAVID PATERSON’S BLACK EYE

By Bob Confer, www.BobConfer.net 

When Eliot Spitzer was elected to office in 2006 by a record-setting 69% of the vote, his massive victory was declared a mandate of the people. The voters wanted serious change, someone who would come into Albany and clean-up all the dirt. Here it is, not even a year and a half later, and the man who fed that incredible optimism has proven to be no better than the rest and, actually, dirtier than most. Spitzer has left office with a reign that will be recognized as the greatest political letdown in the history of the State.

The disappointed people of New York are now on the emotional rebound, with folks from Niagara Falls to Long Island focusing a new and unbridled sense of optimism upon the man who now takes the reigns of our state, David Paterson. Elected officials and the press have trumped up his status, appropriately citing his successes against adversity (his blindness) while exaggerating his executive wherewithal.   

It’s unfortunate that we can’t learn from our mistakes. Optimism can be a good thing, but too much of it can blind reality (as was the case with Spitzer). Politicians, especially those with the absolute power of executive branch, need to be looked at with a discerning eye. A lifelong politician like David Paterson has a body of work that can be analyzed to the nth degree. It hasn’t been, probably because all of the media attention has been trained on Spitzer’s adultery and law breaking. So, we are led into this new era believing that Paterson is absolutely wonderful and without flaw.

Truthfully, he is just as his predecessor was and like many of his Albany peers, a man with flaws and a symbol of what’s wrong in the State Capital. Paterson comes into office with some very timely and damning baggage: In an order issued one month ago by US District Court Judge Norman Mordue, a lawsuit against New York State is allowed to progress to trial because substantial material fact was provided by the plaintiff, Joseph Maioriello, who believes that he was fired by the Senate (specifically Patterson’s office) based solely on race.

For 26 years Maioriello – who is white - was an at-will employee of the Assembly and Senate, serving as a photographer and cable television coordinator. Reporting to specific elected officials as part of their support staff, he had to re-submit his application following the completion of every two-year election cycle. A good employee, he was rewarded with constant contract renewals. 

In March of 2003, three months into a post-election legislative cycle, Maioriello was unceremoniously terminated. This coincided with Paterson’s rise to prominence as the Senate Minority leader. Once he took control of the Democratic caucus Paterson decided to make some changes to the support staff, which included the dismissal of Maioriello and replacing him with a black photographer.

Stunned, Maioriello inquired about his job loss and was told by one of his supervisors that it was due to poor job performance. Considering that his quality of work was never called into question and there was no evidence of any negative reports such as unsatisfactory performance appraisals or write-ups, he pressed the issue even further, going to Paterson’s chief deputy, John McPadden. According to court records, Maioriello said the conversation progressed as follows:

McPadden: “Senator Paterson is relieving you of your duties. There are certain minority senators…people of color…who want to replace you…by another photographer.”

Maioriello: “Why?”

McPadden: “You know who it is. They want to replace you with a minority photographer. A black photographer”

Maioriello: “Why?”

McPadden: “You got to remember who Senator Paterson is. Senator Paterson is black.”

Highlighting the plaintiff’s claim is evidence that the black photographer received preferential treatment under Paterson’s watch. In his 26th year of service, Maioriello was paid $34,206. Upon taking that same role, his replacement, El-Wise Noisette, was paid $48,000. 

McPadden denies any wrongdoing. So, does our new Governor. As a matter of fact, Paterson said that given his visual impairment he would not know if a photographer was black or white. Half in jest, half in truth, his comment did not carry weight with the judge.

So, now this goes on to trial, one the jury of which will probably decide in Maioriello’s favor based upon this and other significant amounts of evidence. The outcome will not be a pittance, either: Maioriello is seeking $1.5 million in damages.

Temper your enthusiasm for Paterson - a self-proclaimed “bomb thrower” – with this bombshell. It is one of many stories bound to come out in the coming months. He’s not the choir boy that we are supposed to believe he is….just like the guy before him.

DEREGULATING ABORTIONS IN NYS
By Bob Confer, www.BobConfer.net

 New York State is overregulated. That, we know far too well. The economy and living conditions across the state would be markedly improved were many burdensome regulations to be dropped off the books. Sometimes, though, you have to be careful what you wish for. Deregulation of certain activities can have serious consequences on living conditions, even for those yet to come into this world. Abortion, something that many of us believe is wrong to begin with, is one of those things that require extensive regulations. Unfortunately, the current administration in Albany disagrees.

In his State of the State address this past January Governor Eliot Spitzer pushed his Reproductive Health and Privacy Protection Act. Since then, he’s been in constant communication with the pro-abortion sects of the legislature, prepping them to pass this bill which he forced through the Senate rules committee. The Act would essentially deregulate abortions in New York. It even prohibits the state legislature (the supposed voice of the people) from ever enacting any abortion regulations in the future. By doing so, Spitzer offers an all-out assault on the rights of the unborn.

With its open-ended language, it’s not a stretch to say that the Act would promote abuses of the system it creates. The new law would state that a woman has the “…right to determine the course of her pregnancy, which includes the right to bear a child or terminate.” Combine that with nebulous language allowing late-term abortions (those into the period of fetal viability) based upon the (Physical? Mental? Emotional?) health of the woman, and the doors are open to abortions occurring throughout the entire nine-month period of pregnancy. As someone whose healthy and whimsical three-year-old niece was born at 26 weeks and weighing only 18 ounces - the very borderline of viability - I can’t help but look at these questionable late-term abortions as more than the killing of a fetus; they’re outright infanticide.

Much to the detriment of the “women’s’ rights” tag that gets applied to legislation such as this, physical abuse of women by their partner is actually encouraged. This law comes complete with a redefinition of the criminal liability associated with causing an abortion through force. Basically, under the new parameters, if a man sickeningly beats his girlfriend or wife with the desire of causing an abortion of the child he doesn’t want, he is protected from the laws that exist today and gets off relatively Scott-free. Domestic abuse is more common than our society wants to believe (nearly one in three women is abused in her lifetime by a “lover”) and the Governor’s act will only invite the very, very worst of it.

Speaking of domestic situations, the Act also allows for the continued decay of the family unit by limiting parental responsibility and their understanding of their child’s well-being. The law would grant supreme privacy to all minors, making it so that a young girl’s parents cannot find out that she had an abortion(parental consent for an abortion is not required under current law). Amazingly, this very same girl cannot receive painkillers or piercings without parental consent, things so very minor in comparison. An abortion and its aftermath can be traumatic to a young girl. The act of sexuality that brought the “need” for it could have been, too. All of this can set a teen onto a path that ruins her entire life. The young teen, despite her worried or rebellious thoughts to the contrary, needs her parents at that moment in time, more so than ever. She needs their support during and after the abortion. But, how can parents do their jobs to the best of their abilities when they are hog-tied by State law, left completely oblivious to this life-altering event?      

Fundamentally, in more ways than one, this is an insidious law. The language of Spitzer’s bill identifies abortion as a fundamental right, an appropriate designation in the eyes of its delighted supporters. If that’s so, it’s really unbelievable how much our society has eroded over the life of our nation. These United States of America were founded over 230 years ago with the intent of creating a Heaven on Earth. Those who founded this nation truly understood the fabric of fundamental rights. Those rights, in their most basic essence, were – and are to this day – Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Take away one of them (Life) and the whole concept of fundamental rights is completely meaningless.   

NO NEW TAXES. JUST BIGGER ONES.
By Bob Confer, www.BobConfer.net

Last week in the state capital the legislature and Governor Spitzer were arguing over what the budget deficit would be for fiscal year 2008-2009. This wasn’t quibbling over pennies; their differences were in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Spitzer believes the deficit will be $4.8 billion. The state assembly pegs the losses even greater at $5.1 billion. Although they couldn’t agree on the exact amount they made it known that they agreed on at least one thing: we’re in the red. Big time.

What would you do if you were in their shoes? Looking at how you manage your personal finances or those of your employer, you’d probably cut expenses. It’s illogical to live beyond your means. Sadly, that line of thought just doesn’t exist in Albany. Decreasing the size of government never really crossed their minds. Instead, their preferred means of beating the deficit is to find new revenues by taxing us even more.

But, didn’t Eliot Spitzer promise last November and again in January that he’d deliver no new taxes? He did, but, being a lawyer by trade he understands how to misuse language to suit his needs. He may have said no new taxes, but that doesn’t prevent him from making the current ones bigger, adding some new fees (which are really taxes anyways) or closing some “loopholes” which end up making the untaxable taxable.

Over the past four months the Spitzer administration, even to the chagrin of the tax-happy legislature, has devised numerous ploys to increase revenues through bigger taxes. Here are some of the things he wants to do:

Increase the Auto Insurance Surcharge: New York residents currently see a $5 surcharge (tax) on their auto insurance policy. The Governor wants to increase that beyond reason, up to $20 per year. Considering there are just under 12 million registered vehicles in the state, the new revenues would be $178.5 million. Playing the safety card, Spitzer says the funds will be used to further the development of NY Alert and to repair many of our 17,000 bridges. Those same news releases fail to tell us that $100 million of the insurance surcharges will be deposited into his Upstate Revitalization Fund, his $1 billion gimmick that starts from Square One – and Dollar Zero - this year.

Tax Internet Sales: Every day more and more people take up online shopping. For the smart shopper great deals can be had. In many cases the savings are magnified by the lack of sales taxes. If a business entity does not have a physical operation in NY, state sales taxes cannot be collected. At the end of the year NY residents, on an honor system, are supposed to record such purchases on their tax forms so the state can collect the tax from the consumer. Of course, many New Yorkers don’t record this, accounting for “only” $45 million in 2006. Spitzer wants to collect what’s been missing and would like to tax all online stores regardless of their location. His people believe they can rake in at least $100 million every year. If this passes other states will follow suit and the uniqueness that the Internet possesses as a tax-free haven will be gone.

Tax The Rich: “….the rich have more money than they need. A just tax structure would ensure that all taxpayers end up with equal spending after taxes.” Eliot Spitzer said those disgusting words last fall. Regardless of one being rich or poor, who is the government to determine the amount of money people should need or have? To fulfill this fascist dream of his, Spitzer wants to adjust the income tax structure. Currently it is a graduated scale that goes from 4% to 6.85%. He wants to move the top end to around 8%.

Tax Subsidiaries: As it stands a company can do business with its out-of-state subsidiary and not be taxed on it because, after all, it’s just an intercompany transaction, a business doing business with itself. Spitzer wants to change this. Charging taxes on such transactions will allow Albany to rake in at least $215 million a year. That is, until some companies decide to leave because of it.

These four changes to the NYS tax structure are just a few of the many that Spitzer has proposed. He’s right…he’s not making any new taxes. But, he sure is trying to squeeze every last penny out of our residents and businesses with the taxes he does have. It’s unbelievable how much he’s let us down. He was elected on a mandate by the people to bring about change in New York. If anything, he’s only been changing it for the worse.