The New York Times - EDITORIAL - May 28, 2011
The first item on Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s post-inauguration to-do list was ethics reform. He’s been in office five months, and we’re still waiting for the bill. While the governor has been negotiating behind closed doors with legislative leaders (shouldn’t transparency top the list of reforms?), others are acting.
Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli have announced plans to use their offices’ resources to investigate anything suspicious that involves the use of state funds. That includes no-show jobs, illegal expense reports, pension padding and bid rigging for government contracts. The Schneiderman-DiNapoli idea is a good one, but not enough. Here’s what is needed, as Mr. Cuomo laid out in his campaign “Plan for Action”:
- An independent ethics commission with powers to investigate and punish legal violations by lawmakers and members of the executive branch. No more self-policing.
- End “pay to play,” with stiff contribution limits for contractors and lobbyists, immediate disclosure of contributions and real punishments for breaking the rules.
- Full disclosure by lawmakers of outside earnings and clients — with no exceptions. Lawyers whose clients have business before the state must come clean. As Mr. Cuomo wrote, “Voters cannot have complete faith in their elected representatives if they cannot assess where else those representatives are earning money.”
- A complete overhaul of campaign finance laws, including a move to public financing of elections, limiting contributions to party “housekeeping” accounts, closing other loopholes and giving the attorney general jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute violations.
Now's your time, Andrew!
ReplyDeleteWe need REAL ethics reform NOW.
Do something before the chew you up and spit you out like the rest....
the Time is Already Passed and Andrew failed.
ReplyDeletethe only thing there is time for now are the feds to finally "rock" new york like we were promised at this blog almost 3 years ago.
and time for Federal Monitor over ALL of OCA and ALL Oversight bodies and commissions until system cleaned up.
nothing short will suffice.
part of that cleanup also requires cleaning up the federal judges and courts who have systematically turned a blind eye to rampant constitutional problems and corruption within the state system.
ReplyDeleteperhaps those are the ones inter-bred or born out of or too connected to current system?
enough federal cases have been filed in federal civil court where the "authorities" have failed to act and yet large part of the federal judiciary becomes part of the problem
To 2;44 PM...Experiencing both courts NOW in over extended stalled litigation..you are on the money...BOTH courts are involved, as my extreme investigation has indicated...in some very Un-American...UnDemocratic..... major Illegal Judical activity of corruption, cover-ups and coercive perjurous testimony and documents.
ReplyDeleteI am stunned that these men are men I grew up around, age -wise, at least in my area and I never saw them display the need or desire to gravitate towards dealings within corruption.....so I can only feel that it IS the title of "JUDGE" and that black robe of their royality..that makes the MAN embrace immorality, with unleashed unethical and greedy defects.
Remove the robe and let several people that are revolved often, determine justice.
One man called JUDGE in America will always destroy our legal system of Democratic justice..it cannot ever be any other way.
Sndy Cuomo talking about ethics is a bad joke, ha, ha!
ReplyDeleteSndy Cuomo talking about ethics is a bad joke, ha, ha!
ReplyDeleteYou want Ethics Reform? Fire Andrew Cuomo and his crew!
ReplyDeleteWHAT IS “INSTITUTIONAL RACISM?”
ReplyDeleteIt’s when a Licensing Board or any Review Board picks on someone egregiously, or on the other hand, lightly slaps on the wrist another, based purely on race, religion, skin color, creed, political persuasion, or sexual orientation. For example, the Departmental Disciplinary Committee First Department of Manhattan which regulates lawyer ethical conduct, and the NYCLA Fee Dispute Committee of Manhattan which determines if lawyers can keep their charged legal fees if disputed, are predominantly, and totally, made up of Jewish people. There are hardly any Chinese, Japanese, Muslims, Indians, Blacks, or Hispanics (well, NOW there are a few Hispanics) on the Board of Directors of those agencies. So here is the million dollar question - if a Jewish Attorney is facing either of these 2 agencies, or if a Black or Muslim Attorney is facing either of these 2 agencies, which one of these 2 individuals is most likely to get fucked over unfairly, and why? And after years and years (if not decades) of this kind of shoddy ill-treatment, which of the 2 Attorneys is most likely to be richer with fewer blemishes on his career, and which one is more likely to be poorer and blotched with marks all over his record as a Lawyer? And people wonder why there are more minorities in prison that white or Jewish people - racists say “minorities have more of a propensity for crime and violence” than Jews or Whites, when in reality, their system gives them a free pass in the seemingly most sinister and horrendous of cases (see the Allen Isaacs case), while nailing to the wall those hapless and unlucky minorities who have the misfortune of falling into their spiderweb, sometimes through sheer jealousy and competitor sabotage. What is the solution to this travesty and miscarriage of justice? Well, there must first be AWARENESS that there is a problem, followed by ACCEPTANCE that there is in fact a problem. Only then can we achieve a system of governance over Attorneys, Judges, and others that is fair, neutral, and impartial.