In Case You Missed it (v119)

Here's your recap of last week's posts, in case you missed anything.  

As usual, we started the week in the Sunday School classrooms, where I focused on immigration. Here's a bit of Margaret Brennan's conversation with Sen. Jim Lankford (R-OK), who helped negotiate the immigration bill we heard so much about last week. 

Lankford said they've been working on the bill for "about four months" and they're trying to get it wrapped up so they can get into people's hands and put false rumors to bed.

So people want to be able to just see it, read it and go through it, and to be able to see the dramatic change that this really makes in how we handle our immigration system and how we work to be able to secure our border completely. That's been the simple request of Americans, whether you're Republican, Democrat, or Independent. People just want a secure border, where we have legal immigration, but we're not promoting illegal immigration. And that's what we've seen in the last three years.

He said some of the language is similar to our pandemic-era Title 42, which allowed the border to be closed when we couldn't process the number of people who were crossing. Right now, he said, when we can't process them, they're just being released into the country.

That's what's driving the mayors in Denver, in Chicago, in New York City, and other places around the country crazy to say, when the border gets crowded, you just release them to our cities, and it causes all the chaos... 

It was interesting that Lankford mentioned some of the country's mayors; so did Bakari Sellers. Here's a highlight in this snip from your Extra Credit.

He chastised the Ds who "have refused to pay attention to immigration and crime in this country, saying it really didn't exist, it wasn't a problem." What's needed now is the folks who have complained,

we need our good mayors, like Frank Scott from Little Rock, like Chokwe from Jackson, Mississippi, we need Randall Woodfin from Birmingham, Alabama, and we even need mayors who don't know what they're doing, like Eric Adams in New York City, to now simply stand up for this piece of legislation and say, 'this is what we need done.'

This has to be the messaging and the messengers who can get this done for the country. This is not a problem that you kick down the road... This is something you fix right now. This is a problem. Fix it.

That sure beats merely complaining about the other side, doesn't it?

Lankford was mentioned again in a Sidebar post, in which we learned that he had been censured by Oklahoma's State Republican Party... at least, that's what it looked like in the beginning. Here's a snip.

According to the censure resolution, 

Senator Lankford playing fast and loose with Democrats on our border policy not only disenfranchises legal immigrants seeking citizenship but it also puts the safety and security of Americans in great danger. 

I'm not sure he's "playing fast and loose" with the Dems; I mean, leading the bipartisan negotiations doesn't sound like he was behaving in a clever and dishonest way with them, does it? 

After news of the censure broke, things started to unravel for what we all thought was the OKGOP.

Interestingly, there are complaints that the Committee's vote to censure Lankford may not have been legitimate, as some members with voting rights weren't invited to the meeting. 

More interestingly, or perhaps comically is the better word, the OKGOP released a new statement today:

The meeting held by certain Republicans on January 27th was an illegitimate meeting. Proper notice was not provided to all members of the State Committee meeting. None of the actions done at the meeting are the official position of the OKGOP and the media is advised to refrain from reporting or suggesting that this was an official action of the 'OKGOP' or 'Oklahoma Republican party' regarding the motions, resolutions, or procedures done at this illegitimate meeting.

Someone's got some 'splaining to do.

Three immigration-related posts in three days - and by then, I was more than ready for some Wondering on Wednesday. I won't lie - the Lankford censure popped up there, too, as did the Florida legislature. That group seems a bit unsettled by what's happening on the book-banning front.

Most of us are aware of the penchant for book banning in Florida. This article by Judd Legum reminds us that the whole mess started when the Rs in FLA attacked alleged "grooming" by school librarians pushing "pornographic" materials in their bookshelves.

Florida's Republican legislature passed — and Ron DeSantis signed — several pieces of legislation that made it easier to take books off the shelves of the state's public schools. This was all seen as smart politics, appealing to parents seeking to protect their children from inappropriate content.

Some of the Rs are getting tired of taking the heat for the ridiculous bans; even noted conservative Bill O'Reilly's books were pulled from the shelves. Legislation is moving along that would "make it more difficult for people to challenge books en masse." That's happened in at least one Florida county, where every book in the library was pulled for review. Legum says the legislation

is an implicit acknowledgment that book banning in Florida schools has gone too far. It also suggests that the enormous number of books being taken off the shelves of Florida schools has become a political problem for Florida Republicans. 

Check the post to see what had me scratching my head on these topics, and a few others.  

I wrapped the week with a Meanwhile, Back in Albany entry on one of my favorite subjects, NY politicians and their gambling revenue addiction. 

And now, it's online casino gaming; here's some info from a Spectrum News report from October 2023.

Lawmakers are working to amend legislation to legalize a new form of online gambling in the state officials say could bring upwards of $1 billion in revenue to New York and help close budget gaps expected over the next few years...

In addition to the revenue, it's flat-out altruistic, too, especially for the New Yorkers who are forced to do their online gambling on apps registered in other states.

We can't help someone with an addiction because we don't know who they are, and once we regulate it in New York, iGaming, we then can help those that might be in need are on their pathway to addiction. We'll put in statutory language in this bill to address that.

Now that the Legislature is back in session, we can see what's up for discussion.

The bill would allow for mobile or online betting on various types of interactive gaming, referred to as iGaming, and iLottery. I'm pretty sure those names are not affiliated with the giant fruit vendor known for selling all the other iThings, or with iCarly, an old Nickelodeon TV show, but there's a chance we could see some kind of copyright lawsuit, right? What are the odds?  

There's a lot in the proposed bill to get riled up about, and I can assure you, riled I was.  

And just like that, you're up to date. Stay tuned for this week's posts - regular features, and more.

Meanwhile, Back in Albany (v47)

Here we go again, New York. 

We're losing gambling money to neighboring states, dammit, and we're not going to take it anymore!

First, there was the casino money we were hemorrhaging to neighboring states.

Then, it was sports betting at our casinos, something we needed, you know, to fund things like education and gambling addiction treatment, and to stop bleeding money to neighboring states. And to help our underperforming casinos, which were not generating nearly the revenue we expected. 

Then it was mobile sports betting, because, you know, funding education, even more gambling addiction treatment, and buying tourniquets to stop the blood loss from all that hemorrhaging we've been doing are important governmental functions, as is helping casinos addict more gamblers.

And now, it's online casino gaming; here's some info from a Spectrum News report from October 2023.

Lawmakers are working to amend legislation to legalize a new form of online gambling in the state officials say could bring upwards of $1 billion in revenue to New York and help close budget gaps expected over the next few years.

Why? Well, we're addicted to the money gambling brings in, of course, and the success of mobile sports betting can't be ignored. It's

spurring discussion to permit online casino gaming — also known as iGaming — in the state, allowing games like blackjack, roulette and others to be played from a mobile device.

And, of course, because of those darn neighboring states that already allow it. After all, as Sen. Joseph Addabbo, chair of the Senate's Addiction Funding Committee (sorry - the Racing, Gaming, & Wagering Committee), says

Other states surrounding us are doing it. We can do this. I think it's the conversation we have to have dictated by the poor fiscal situation we're going to be in next year.

In addition to the revenue, it's flat-out altruistic, too, especially for the New Yorkers who are forced to do their online gambling on apps registered in other states.

We can't help someone with an addiction because we don't know who they are, and once we regulate it in New York, iGaming, we then can help those that might be in need are on their pathway to addiction. We'll put in statutory language in this bill to address that.

Fast forward to January 2024, and the legislation is being worked on in earnest. According to Addabbo 

It's a good bill. We got a lot of input from a lot of individuals, but it's a starting point. It's a starting point where I'm hoping that we can have these kinds of discussions during the budget process.

The bill would allow for mobile or online betting on various types of interactive gaming, referred to as iGaming, and iLottery. I'm pretty sure those names are not affiliated with the giant fruit vendor known for selling all the other iThings, or with iCarly, an old Nickelodeon TV show, but there's a chance we could see some kind of copyright lawsuit, right? What are the odds? 

As proposed, the licensing fees for the iStuff would be a cool $2M, and revenues would be taxed at 30.5%, which could generate a billion dollars annually. And, of course, we're hemorrhaging that money to PA and NJ now. Once we get that back, we'll be in good shape, Addabbo thinks.

We need to look at the outyears, 2025, 2026, where according to the state comptroller the fiscal situation only gets worse, then we do need to figure out a sustainable plan both short-term and long-term and that is iGaming and iLottery.

And what about those problem gamblers? There's $11M in annual funding for "addiction services and supports." I'm not sure if that money is dedicated solely to gambling addicts, or if it covers all other causes of addiction as well. But we do need to act with urgency, it seems.

If we're serious about helping people with a gaming problem, knowing that they're doing iGaming anyway in New York, they're just doing it illegally, then you try to do it this year because that will actually help the New Yorker who is already participating in iGaming.

But wait - there's more! Progressive more!

To ensure "existing union casino employees" aren't threatened by the new option, there's a "a fund of at least $25M annually" towards training and supporting employees of private business enterprises - because that's the New York Way. Addabbo also said we may see more union jobs created because people will be able to sit in their jammies and play poker on their phones - with live dealers. I'm sure they'll be even more addicting than CGI dealers.

Anyone who's already allowed to feed our gambling addiction won't be ignored, either. Existing license holders, including "current video lottery terminal licensees, mobile sports betting operators, state-licensed and Native American casinos" can participate in the iJunk if they like.

I'll be following this one as we go through the legislative session.

In Case You Missed It (v113)

Is it really possible that I haven't given a weekly post recap since sometime in October? Ugh. Here's what made it out last week, with snippets and links.

Instead of a Sunday School post, I offered up Happy New Year, Leo McGarry Style. McGarry, many of you'll remember, was the first Chief of Staff to President Jed Bartlet on The West Wing. 

After recovering from a heart attack, he was invited back to the administration in a role that was not at all well-defined. Everyone wanted him, but no one really knew why - and he had to figure it out for himself, and for the rest of them. He did just that, after watching old Bartlet speeches. At a somewhat contentious dinner, he hit Bartlet - on the day after his final State of the Union speech - with a critique not only of the SOTU but of the state of his administration in general. 

The show wrapped up with the senior staff summoned back to work by the President, and led to Leo's office. After a brief explanation from Bartlet on why they were there - to hear from an old friend - Leo updated his whiteboard from 365 days to 364 days left. He pointed out that they had all spent their days reacting to things, not proactively doing things.

He asked what they thought was important, and started listing their ideas: things left out of the SOTU, or that had been dropped over time. Things that motivated, energized, and inspired them. The things that mattered to them. 

I'm hoping to use Leo's message to set the stage for this year.

Next up was a note from the Update Desk on my Meanwhile, Back in Albany (v46) post about the Democratic-controlled New York State legislature and their pay raise.

Many New Yorkers are struggling right now, trying to come up with money to pay their rent, their utilities, to buy groceries, and to scrape together money to put even a fair-to-middling holiday celebration together for their families. 

Rural families, suburban families, urban families - it's not just one subset of New Yorkers; all of us are feeling a pinch in one way or another. Which is why it's so insulting to learn that our legislators just gave themselves a $32,000 raise. 

The reason for the update? I had hoped Hochul would veto the raise; alas, that didn't happen,

even though the raise was more than she had expressed support for, and so was the outside income limit. There have been suggestions that she didn't veto it because she needs the legislature to get things done with the budget and all the legislation they pack into it. There've also been suggestions that she should have gotten a guarantee for having her pick to be the chief judge on the Court of Appeals approved, which may or may not happen.

I'm not sure about either of those, but I wish if she was going to approve it anyway, she had made them wait and stew in it for as long as possible. 

Mid-week, I was Wondering on Wednesday about the drama surrounding the Congressional Republicans and their attempts at electing a Speaker of the House. 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

When Sally Field won her second Academy Award, she said, "Right now, you really like me!" I wonder what Rep. Kevin McCarthy would say, after losing six votes for House Speaker?  Perhaps it's, "Right now, I wished you really liked me?"  Or, maybe "Right now, I wonder if you ever liked me?" 

I also can't help wondering how many votes McCarthy will allow before he decides it's time to step aside for someone 16 0r 17 votes more palatable?  He's said he's in it to win it, and that he's "earned" the Speakership, but there may never be enough votes for him. 

Of course, there was encouragement (pressure?) from Mar-a-Lago as McCarthy floundered.

Former president Donald Trump tried to exert whatever power and control he has over the party, urging the Rs to get behind McCarthy who, Trump said, "will do a good job, and maybe even a GREAT JOB - JUST WATCH!" That didn't work - Lauren Boebert even suggested that Trump should have told McCarthy to step aside - and now I'm wondering what other Rs might have the power to convince the GOP caucus to align. 

There was wondering, too, about who could help break through the squabbles, and about Rep. George Santos, the lying Congressman-elect from Long Island who wouldn't know the truth if it bit him. 

And finally, in the wee hours of Saturday morning, the debacle came to an end, as I noted in Mr. Speaker.

Finally, the long first week of the new year is over, and we have a Speaker of the House. He may be missing some pieces of soul, or body parts, but he got the votes, and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Trump) is the guy who'll be wielding the gavel. 

I went to bed after he lost the 14th vote, the one about which McCarthy was sure he'd win, because he had counted the votes. 

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Blecch) had a different idea, and prevented the victory. It was at that point that the majority of the Republican caucus wanted to punch Gaetz in his smirking fact, and one of them - Alabama's Rep. Mike Rogers - almost did. That would have been a horribly popcorn-worthy moment, for sure. 

McCarthy offered a taste of what's to come (more on that later today); sadly,

We also heard McCarthy and his allies talk about the importance of Donald Trump in securing the win, so it seems pretty clear that any hope of Trump not being a factor can be tossed out the window, at least at this juncture.

One thing's for sure: McCarthy will be

hammering away with the smaller-than-usual gavel. 

I've got a Sidebar on the GOP's agenda ready for you, and I'll have highlights of Gov. Hochul's inaugural, our standard weekly posts, and more for you this week.

I hope you stick around.

The Update Desk: MBIA (v46)

And... it's a done deal. 

I'm not really surprised that our legislators are going to be the highest-paid in the country, making $142,000 per year, for a 60-day session plus whatever other time they put into their jobs that we don't know about, until we get their newsletters. 

You'll recall I told you about this a little over a week ago in Meanwhile, Back in Albany (v46)

Many New Yorkers are struggling right now, trying to come up with money to pay their rent, their utilities, to buy groceries, and to scrape together money to put even a fair-to-middling holiday celebration together for their families. 

Rural families, suburban families, urban families - it's not just one subset of New Yorkers; all of us are feeling a pinch in one way or another. Which is why it's so insulting to learn that our legislators just gave themselves a $32,000 raise. 

I think this was the fastest I've ever reached out to my elected representatives.

I've emailed Sen. Rachel May and Assemblymember Pamela Hunter, my representatives, for their thoughts and comments on their votes. It's clear from my comments that I don't support this move, so I'll be interested if I get a "thanks, Constituent" letter or if they'll try and convince me this is a good idea.

At the time, I didn't know how they voted, but I had a suspicion. I since confirmed that the count was mostly along party lines, which is no shock. In the Senate, it was 33 - 23, with 7 Dems voting no; in the Assembly, it was 81-52, with 8 Dems joining their Republican colleagues in voting no.

My two? They were both 'yes' votes. And I have yet to get a response from either of them.

I've also reached out to Gov. Kathy Hochul, urging her to veto the legislation and force the two chambers to override her veto, which they can do if they want, and I encourage you to do the same if you don't like being taken advantage of by our legislators. 

I got what appears like a canned response to anyone who writes to her; "thanks, and we've got a lot of work to do together" kind of thing, with no mention of my issue. 

And then we heard, late on New Year's Eve, that she had signed the bill, even though the raise was more than she had expressed support for, and so was the outside income limit. There have been suggestions that she didn't veto it because she needs the legislature to get things done with the budget and all the legislation they pack into it. There've also been suggestions that she should have gotten a guarantee for having her pick to be the chief judge on the Court of Appeals approved, which may or may not happen.

I'm not sure about either of those, but I wish if she was going to approve it anyway, she had made them wait and stew in it for as long as possible. 

Meanwhile, Back in Albany (v46)

Many New Yorkers are struggling right now, trying to come up with money to pay their rent, their utilities, to buy groceries, and to scrape together money to put even a fair-to-middling holiday celebration together for their families. 

Rural families, suburban families, urban families - it's not just one subset of New Yorkers; all of us are feeling a pinch in one way or another. Which is why it's so insulting to learn that our legislators just gave themselves a $32,000 raise. 

Let me say that again: 

Rural families, suburban families, urban families - it's not just one subset of New Yorkers; all of us are feeling a pinch in one way or another. Which is why it's so insulting to learn that our legislators just gave themselves a $32,000 raise. 

I can assure you, if I could get to my rooftop, I'd be shouting about this from up there, even in this weather. Fortunately for me, my neighbors, and for you, I'm not able to get up there now, so you're safe.

Why did they decide to give themselves a $32,000, 29% pay raise, after getting a 38% pay raise in 2019, you ask?  I'll let them explain it to you.

From The National Herald:

Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, a Democrat, said legislators work hard, year-round, and deserved a raise to cover the increased cost of living.  "It’s a full-time job,” she said. “Sooner or later in order to be able to afford to do the job, we have to raise pay.”  

What she means is, she wanted a raise. In the same article, 

Assemblywoman Patricia Fahy, a Democrat, said the raise would help the Legislature retain quality members who could make more in the private sector. “We have had an unhealthy churning and turnover particularly from downstate members,” she said. 

What she means is, she wanted a raise. And, she doesn't want anyone other than an incumbent Democrat to win election, particularly downstate where the Ds have all the power.

From Politico:

Democrats defended the 29 percent pay increase that will serve as a nice holiday present, saying their salaries were stuck at $79,500 for 20 years before jumping to $110,000 in 2019 after a recommendation from a special compensation committee. The deal also includes limiting lawmakers’ outside income to no more than $35,000 a year. 

“It’s a full-time job. People are working throughout the year, and to wait until 20 or 30 years (for a raise) isn’t reasonable either for lawmakers,” Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins told reporters. 

What she means is, she wanted a raise. And her argument of having to wait 20 0r 30 years is ridiculous, since we all know they just got that raise back in 2019. The article graciously reminds us, or informs us, of the challenging legislative calendar our legislators set for themselves.

The Legislature has a roughly 60-day session in Albany that runs three to four days a week from January through June, and then occasionally reconvenes if a pressing issue arises — like in July when lawmakers came back for a day to vote to toughen gun laws after the Supreme Court tossed the state’s century-old concealed carry law. 

The rest of the year is spent dealing with constituent work in their districts, lawmakers said. 

Would it surprise you to learn that Ms. Stewart-Cousins hasn't recorded any items in her website's newsroom since August 26th? No communications to her district, or to the rest of us New Yorkers? No press releases? No nothing, since celebrating Women of Distinction? (By comparison, I've done over 40 posts since then, and I'm kicking myself that it's only that many...)

Would it surprise you that her website calendar shows only eight events in all of 2022? Or that it shows zero events since May?  I don't know about you, but that doesn't sound very much like a full-time anything to me...

From the same article, 

“This is the right thing to do,” said Senate Finance Chair Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan). She said people shouldn’t be discouraged from running for office “because I won’t be able to meet my bills.” 

What she means is, she wanted a raise. I'd suggest, though, that "people shouldn't be discouraged from living in New York because they won't be able to meet their bills" is perhaps a better description of what life is like for many. And that's one contributor to why more people have left NY than any other state, according to this report; I don't know if "legislators aren't paid enough here" is on the list of reasons people leave, but I highly doubt it.

And, this, too, from the same article. 

“Legislators work hard, and we’re about to come into session in January to continue trying to do the best we can for families in the state of New York,” Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie (D-Bronx) told reporters. “This is more of a timing issue.” 

What he means is, he wanted a raise. Honestly, you've gotta love a guy who stands in front of a microphone and suggests that, now that they've given themselves a raise, they're going to try and do their best for the rest of us. I swear, you can't make this stuff up. 

And from Spectrum News:

Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins to reporters on Thursday morning acknowledged the public perception of the pay raise increases, noting lawmakers will address "affordability" issues facing New Yorkers next year when the new legislative session begins.   

"This is a full-time job, I think people understand," she said. "We work hard and it was finally time to resolve the issue of pay." 

What she means is, she wanted a raise. It wasn't "finally time to resolve the issue of pay" - for her and the rest of them, it was finally time to create the issue of pay.

From the same article,

Pay raises have long been a thorny issue in the state Legislature. And if the pay bill is approved, state lawmakers will still be paid less than what New York City Council members earn at $148,000.  

"Legislators work very hard -- even some of the Republicans," Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie said. "There's no compensation you can give to be away from your families." 

What he means is, he wanted a raise. Cracking a joke on an issue of this magnitude? Yeah, that's leadership, Carl. And one more thing: if there is no amount of compensation that makes up for you being away from your family, why the hell did you run for office to begin with, and for re-election so many times?  

I'll close with this piece from mychamplainvalley.com, quoting Stewart-Cousins on the issue of outside income:

There is currently no cap on outside income for lawmakers, but this bill would cap it at $35,000. Could we see some turnover with lawmakers who do have outside jobs?

“Well possibly, and that’s why we made that part of it effective two years from now, because people could have run with the old understanding that they would be able to make unlimited outside income and now with this legislation you will not be able to do it,” said the Leader.

What she means is, she wanted a raise. And she didn't want to wait two years to get it, even though "people could have run with the old understanding that they would" make a mere $110,000 annually for serving in the Legislature. 

I've emailed Sen. Rachel May and Assemblymember Pamela Hunter, my representatives, for their thoughts and comments on their votes. It's clear from my comments that I don't support this move, so I'll be interested if I get a "thanks, Constituent" letter or if they'll try and convince me this is a good idea.

I've also reached out to Gov. Kathy Hochul, urging her to veto the legislation and force the two chambers to override her veto, which they can do if they want, and I encourage you to do the same if you don't like being taken advantage of by our legislators. 

More to come on this issue, I promise.

Meanwhile Back in Albany (v45): A New Day

In a private ceremony just before midnight, and a public one 11 hours later, Kathy Hochul took the oath of office and became the first woman governor in the state's history, and the first person from Upstate NY to hold the position since Nathan Miller, a Cortland County native, was elected in 1920.

She spoke to New Yorkers this afternoon; here's what she wanted us to know.  And, I'll say that I edited her speech into paragraphs, rather than publishing it as a teleprompter feed. Sorry about that - or, you're welcome, as the case may be. I've added some emphasis where I thought it helpful.

Good afternoon.

On a cold January day nearly seven years ago, I took the oath of office to become your Lieutenant Governor.

I am humbled that the people of New York twice put their faith in me to fill this role, which required me to be prepared, if necessary, to serve as your Governor. And now, that day has come. 

At the stroke of midnight, I once again took the oath of office, creating a sacred bond of trust between me and every New Yorker. And thus, I stand here as the 57th Governor of New York. But I did not get here without the courage and sacrifice of others. 

The courage of early suffragettes who began the long march for equality, and the elected women who came before me, paving the way for this day—they taught me resistance. The courage of my grandparents, as teenagers, fleeing great poverty in Ireland in search of a better life—they taught me perseverance. The courage of my mother who - despite growing up in an abusive home and losing her own mother at a young age—raised 6 children in Buffalo, all the while engaging in social and racial justice movements. Together, we founded a home for survivors of domestic violence when she was 70 years old—she taught me empathy. 

The courage of my Dad to dream big for his family, making steel by day, getting an education at night, and leaving it all to join a tech start up in the early days of computers—he taught me to be a risk-taker. The courage of my own family, husband Bill, and children Will and Katie—to encourage me to pursue my passion for public service, despite countless hours of my absence—they taught me unconditional love.

I share those influences so you can understand the depth of my commitment to you. And to those New Yorkers who have yet to meet me. I say this: you may not know me. But I know you. 

In my travels to all 62 counties every year, I've walked your streets, met you at diners, supported your small businesses, listened to farmers, engaged local officials, and worked to revitalize long neglected downtowns.

I've listened with a broken heart to your stories of loss from opioid abuse, sadly similar to what happened to my nephew. I've rallied with advocates to pass paid family leave, raise the minimum wage, enact GENDA, protect our strong gun laws, and so much more. And I've been in the trenches with local health leaders and officials battling the pandemic day after day after day. 

As a result of all this, I've embraced and internalized the hopes and dreams of 20 million people who share the name New Yorkers. I want you to know you are heard, and I'm ready to get to work as your Governor to solve the big problems this state faces.  Your priorities are my priorities—and right now that means fighting the Delta variant.

None of us want to see a rerun of last year's horrors with COVID-19. Therefore we will take proactive steps to prevent that from happening.

Priority Number 1: We get children back to school and protect the environment so they can learn, and everyone is safe. For months, I've been consulting with parents, elected officials, teachers, school boards, and superintendents. As a result, we need to require vaccinations for all school personnel with an option to test out weekly—at least for now. To accomplish this in New York, we need partnerships with all levels of government, and I am working now on getting this done. 

New York is launching a Back to School COVID-19 testing program to make testing for students and staff widely available and convenient. I am also immediately directing the Department of Health to institute universal masking for anyone entering our schools. Later this week I will announce a series of school-related policies that will be concise and consistent, giving the school districts what they have been asking for. 

Which leads me to Priority Number 2. Increase vaccination rates for New Yorkers. Much progress has been made, but too many are not yet vaccinated putting themselves and their communities at risk. With the FDA's full approval of the Pfizer vaccine yesterday, New Yorkers can expect new vaccine requirements. More on that soon. 

Priority Number 3. Prepare for Booster shots and make sure they are available and are distributed quickly and reliably. When I consulted with Dr. Fauci last week, we discussed the urgent need to ensure vaccinated individuals receive a booster dose at 8 months.  I am prepared to do whatever is necessary, including reopening mass vax sites so that a booster is available to all New Yorkers who meet that timetable.

These are my Day 1 initiatives on COVID. There will be more regular updates and announcements in the near future. Now let's talk about the COVID assistance for New Yorkers that is long overdue. 

President Biden and our federal delegation—led by Senators Schumer and Gillibrand—worked hard to secure funds for renters, landlords, workers and more. But, I am not at all satisfied with the pace that this COVID relief is getting out the door. I want the money out—and I want it out now. No more excuses and delays.

I met with Assembly Speaker Heastie and Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins earlier today, and we are unified in our sense of urgency that this money get it out to people in need. 

We are launching a new targeted campaign to reach more New Yorkers on rent relief. We are forming a real partnership with legislators, the City of New York, other cities and counties to get the job done. I am hiring more staff to process applications immediately. I am also assigning a top team to identify and remove any barriers that remain.

New Yorkers should know, if you apply and qualify for this money, you will be protected from eviction for a solid year. Let me repeat. If you apply and qualify, you will not be evicted for a year.

We will take the same focused approach to our Excluded Workers Fund. The money is there, and these people were just as impacted by COVID and need help now. 

The final priorities I will outline today are simple—get this state working again—focused and without distractions.  That begins with a dramatic change in culture—with accountability and no tolerance for individuals who cross the line.

Today, I am directing an overhaul of State government's policies on sexual harassment and ethics, starting with requiring all training be done live, instead of allowing people to click their way through a class.

A new era of transparency will be one of the hallmarks of my Administration. To me, it's very simple.  We will focus on open, ethical governing that New Yorkers will trust.

I will direct State entities to review their compliance with state transparency laws, and provide a public report on their findings. I have instructed my counsel to come up with an expedited process to fulfill all FOIL requests as fast as possible—and post completed requests publicly online. I will sign an Executive Order requiring ethics training for every employee of the New York State government—which, shockingly, is not required across the board.

To recap, these are the highest priorities of my Administration in its first days: combatting Delta, getting direct aid to New Yorkers more quickly, and beginning to change the culture in Albany. 

To achieve all of this, and so much more, we must and will work together. Across every corner of this state, we will have a fresh and collaborative approach. I've already reached out my hand in friendship to many elected officials who too, are eager for a new relationship with the State. 

The Bible tells us there is a time for every purpose under heaven. I believe that. I believe with every fiber in my body, that this is our time. 

Our time to escape the oppression of a deadly virus and make our schools and workplaces safe for return. Our time to build trust between communities and law enforcement, invest in mental health resources, and address the root problems of crime and keep our residents and children safe. Our time to make greater progress in ending the ugly specter of systemic racism. Our time to help small businesses and create new jobs for New Yorkers hit hard by the pandemic. Our time to unleash the power of New York's women, and to make sure that any barriers to success and opportunity are eradicated once and for all. And our time to show the world that "ever upward" is more than just our State's motto. It's who we are. And where we are going. 

This is our time to look forward with a powerful sense of optimism and determination. It will not be easy. And we have a lot of work to do. 

One of my favorite inspirations is from a speech by Teddy Roosevelt—it speaks of the man in the arena who is marred by dust, sweat and blood, stark contrast with the timid souls on the sidelines. 

Today, for the first time in New York history, a woman will enter that arena as Governor. As I undertake the weighty responsibilities before me, know that I have the confidence, courage and the ability to lead New Yorkers forward. And to make New York's women proud.

You will find me to be direct, straight-talking and decisive. I will not be deterred, and I'm willing to be bloodied and marred in the pursuit of doing what's right for the people of this great State. 

My friends, I invite you to join me in this fight for our future. I only ask for your faith in me and for your prayers. God Bless New York. And God Bless America.

It was short and to the point. It struck a balance between "this is who I am" and "this is what we need to do."  And it expressed a reasonable, first-day amount of dissatisfaction with what happened before, and reasonable expectations for what's to come.

I say, what have we got to lose?

Meanwhile, Back in Albany (v44): Cuomo's Goodbye

Today my Sonofa Gov, Andrew Cuomo, leaves office. He'll be replaced by Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul, the first woman to ever hold New York's highest office. 

Cuomo spoke today, via a videotaped message. You can watch and read his parting thoughts on the state's website. Some highlights are below.

Hello. As you probably know I'm stepping aside as your governor. I wanted to share some thoughts with you that I've been thinking about over the past few days. 

What's been on his mind over the past few days? It hasn't really been introspection, at least not as far as his admitted behavior is concerned.

I now understand that I acted in a way that made people feel uncomfortable. It was unintentional and I truly and deeply apologize for it. I feel awful about it and, frankly, I am embarrassed. And that's not easy to say.

In fact, it was impossible to say, today. Instead, we got this.

There will be another time to talk about the truth and ethics of the recent situation involving me, but let me say now that, when government politicizes allegations and the headlines condemn without facts, you undermine the justice system - and that doesn't serve women and it doesn't serve men or society.

Of course, everyone has a right to come forward and we applaud their bravery and courage in doing so, but allegations must still be scrutinized and verified whether made by a woman or a man. That is our basic justice system.

See, it wasn't about his behavior, it was about politics, and people who want what he has, or so he thinks. 

I understand that there are moments of intense political pressure and media frenzy that cause a rush to judgment. But that is not right. It's not fair or sustainable. Facts still matter.

A fire cracker can start a stampede but at one point everyone looks around and says, why are we running? The truth is ultimately always revealed. 

The Attorney General's report was designed to be a political firecracker on an explosive topic. And it worked. There was a political and media stampede. But the truth will out in time - of that I am confident. 

To his credit, he understood that trying to stay in office and fight, which is and always has been his first reaction to any criticism or accusation, no matter how big or small. 

Now there are moments in life that test our character, that ask us, are we the person we believe we are? Or are we the person we try to be at our best? You know me. I am a fighter and my instinct is to fight this because it is unfair and unjust in my mind. But you also know that I love New York and I serve you. That is the oath that I took, and in this moment I believe the right thing is that my service come first. 

After telling us what must be done to ensure the Empire State's future (police reform, and giving us back our SALT tax deduction, for example), he spoke of "what made New York State the Empire State in the first place."

New York's historic success was not a process of evolution. It didn't just happen. We weren't born this way. We were born of vision and daring and competence. We built the canals, the roads, the bridges, and education system and the economy that made us the greatest state in the nation.

Our future is ahead of us, though. 

But today is a different day. We have reason to believe in New York's future based on what we have accomplished together. We've shown potential. We've shown that the New York spirit that reached for the skies, that refused to accept defeat, that challenged possibility, that said no to the status quo, that took on the bureaucracy that still exists. And we must demand that government continue to perform and achieve and accomplish. 

Cuomo spoke about lessons he's learned during his time in office, "and the one that gives me the most hope is my belief in the essential intelligence and goodness of the people of this state." 

I said, when I started, I work for the people. I work for you. And to me, that is everything. My faith has been in the people, not the politicians and not even the political system. I know too well the flaws of the political system. I believed and still believe that New Yorkers informed with the facts when they believe the facts, when they believe they're told the truth, they will do the right thing. Even when it's hard. 

It's not easy, but it's possible. And I know it's true because you proved it. You are the u in unity and New York chooses unity over division every time. I believe that for New York, the best is yet to be, because I believe you will make it so.

In sum, we didn't get everything done that we wanted to, or even everything we should have done. And we didn't always get it quite right. But I want you to know from the bottom of my heart, that every day I worked my hardest. I gave it my all and I tried my best to deliver for you. And that is the God's honest truth.

And then he thanked us, "for the honor of serving as governor of New York," for making NY "the progressive Capitol of the nation," and then he mentioned his dad.

Thank you for vindicating E.B. White's words, often quoted by my father, God, rest his soul. When he said, "New York is to the nation what the white church spire is to the village, the visible symbol of aspiration and faith, the white plume saying the way is up." 

Thank you for the honor of serving you and never forget, always stay New York tough, smart, united, disciplined and loving. It's the essence of what makes New Yorkers so special. God bless you.

And at 11:59PM, it will be over. 

Meanwhile, Back in Albany (v43): It's Politics, Not Me, Too

The Sonofa Gov announced his resignation today, effective in 14 days. You should read his full remarks; selected excerpts (and commentary) are below.

I’d like to address several issues today. First, I’ve always started by telling New Yorkers the facts before my opinion. So, let’s start New York tough with the truth.

The attorney general did a report on complaints made against me by certain women for my conduct. The report said I sexually harassed 11 women. That was the headline people heard and saw and reacted to. The reaction was outrage. It should have been. However, it was also false...

The most serious allegations made against me had no credible factual basis in the report. And there is a difference between alleged improper conduct and concluding sexual harassment. Now, don’t get me wrong, this is not to say that there are not 11 women who I truly offended. There are. And for that I deeply, deeply apologize...

He gave a list of things that he did that were misunderstood. He was only being nice, being friendly, using endearing terms, he thought, or joking. He said "I take full responsibility for my actions."

I have been too familiar with people. My sense of humor can be insensitive and off-putting. I do hug and kiss people casually, women and men. I have done it all my life. It’s who I’ve been since I can remember. In my mind, I’ve never crossed the line with anyone, but I didn’t realize the extent to which the line has been redrawn. There are generational and cultural shifts that I just didn’t fully appreciate, and I should have. No excuses.

He spoke about Trooper #1, but first, he patted himself on the back for bringing diversity to his State Police detail. 

Please let me provide some context. The governor’s trooper detail had about 65 troopers on it, but of the 65 only six women and nine Black troopers. I’m very proud of the diversity of my administration. It’s more diverse than any administration in history. And I’m very proud of the fact that I have more women in senior positions than any governor before me.

The lack of diversity on the state police detail was an ongoing disappointment for me. In many ways, the governor’s detail is the face of state government that people see. When I attend an event, people see the detail that’s with me. I was continuously trying to recruit more to diversify... 

And he addressed her allegations: 

This female trooper was getting married, and I made some jokes about the negative consequences of married life. I meant it to be humorous. She was offended, and she was right.

The trooper also said that in an elevator I touched her back and when I was walking past her in a doorway, I touched her stomach. Now I don’t recall doing it, but if she said I did it, I believe her... It was totally thoughtless in the literal sense of the word, but it was also insensitive. It was embarrassing to her, and it was disrespectful.

There was finger-pointing: 

Now, obviously, in a highly political matter like this, there are many agendas and there are many motivations at play. If anyone thought otherwise, they would be naïve, and New Yorkers are not naïve... 

Part of being New York tough is being New York smart. New York smart tells us that this situation and moment are not about the facts...  This is about politics... There is an intelligent discussion to be had on gender-based actions on generational and cultural behavioral differences on setting higher standards and finding reasonable resolutions. But the political environment is too hot and it is too reactionary for that now, and it is unfortunate.

And the 'this is bigger than me' part: 

... when I took my oath as governor... I became a fighter, but I became a fighter for you, and it is your best interests that I must serve. This situation by its current trajectory will generate months of political and legal controversy. That is what is going to happen. That is how the political wind is blowing. It will consume government. It will cost taxpayers millions of dollars. It will brutalize people... This is one of the most challenging times for government in a generation. Government really needs to function today. Government needs to perform. It is a matter of life and death — government operations, and wasting energy on distractions is the last thing that state government should be doing. And I cannot be the cause of that.

 And there was New York Tough:

New York Tough means New York loving, and I love New York, and I love you. And everything I have ever done has been motivated by that love. And I would never want to be unhelpful in any way. And I think that given the circumstances, the best way I can help now is if I step aside and let government get back to governing. And, therefore, that’s what I’ll do because I work for you, and doing the right thing is doing the right thing for you. Because as we say, “It’s not about me. It’s about we.”

 And compliments to his staff:

To my team... I want to say this: Thank you. Thank you. And be proud. We made New York state the progressive capital of the nation. No other state government accomplished more to help people. And that is what it’s all about...

Today so much of the politics is just noise, just static, and that’s why people tune it out. What matters is actually improving people’s lives, and that’s what you did. You made this state a better state for the generations that follow, and that is undeniable, inarguable, and true, even in these ugly, crazy times.

He mentioned his daughters: 

I want them to know from the bottom of my heart that I never did and I never would intentionally disrespect a woman or treat any woman differently than I would want them treated. And that is the God’s honest truth. Your dad made mistakes, and he apologized, and he learned from it. And that’s what life is all about.

And finally, there was the "honor of my lifetime" part to wrap things up. 

... Out of many one. Unity, community, love. That is our founding premise, and our enduring promise. And that is the salvation of this nation that it so desperately needs to hear. Thank you for the honor of serving you. It has been the honor of my lifetime. God bless you.

Apologetic? Nope - not really. More defiant than anything, blaming everyone else for what's happening to him. He's done that throughout his career, on ethics, campaign finance reform, and more. My Moreland Commission and Meanwhile Back in Albany posts are enlightening in that regard. 

Satisfactory? Nope. He's still in denial about his actions, suggesting that the goalposts had moved. But they haven't. His understanding of where those goalposts were was - and is - sorely lacking, but that's on him, not on his accusers. He was the boss, he was the one in power, and he knows it. The goalposts are exactly where they always were - and he knows it. 

Sincere? As much as he can be, I guess. But I found his comments about how much money would be spent during an impeachment to be disingenuous. "The Executive Chamber" has a $2.5M contract with a law firm, after all - and that's coming from our pockets, not his. And, of course, there's the countless hours of hand-wringing, testifying, strategizing, retaliating and who knows what else that he and his staff have been doing, instead of doing the people's work. 

And he touches only on the sexual harassment allegations - never mentions the book deal, and having his staff, ahem, "volunteer' to help on that - that's illegal, and it's impossible, since he has said his office - The Executive Chamber - is a high-pressure, long hours, late into the night shop, dealing with life-and-death stuff. Who has time to work on their boss's book under those circumstances?  

He never mentioned the nursing home stuff - that's where the $2.5M noted above is going. He's apparently using campaign funds for the sexual harassment legal team - that's legal here, sadly - even though he said he wasn't.

In the end, he's just a man, like many before him and like many - hopefully fewer, as time progresses - who will come after him. Political men, compelling when in power, much less so as their power slips away. Sitting alone, trying to pin the tail of blame on unnamed political enemies, elephants and donkeys alike, not caring who they bring down with them. 

That's really who he is, today. 

In Case You Missed it (v78)

Time for a cuppa and a recap of the week that was March 14th - 20th. 

It's rare that we start with something other than Sunday School, but that's what happened on Sunday, the first two-fer of the week. 

I offered up a Noodling Around post on how the people we elect seem to be working their agenda, not our agenda, and how that messes up opportunities for bipartisanship. Here's part of the post that sets the stage for what's coming this week in Part Two.

The folks at Pew Research did a poll last summer, the results of which are shown here, to see what issues registered voters thought were "very important to their vote" in the 2020 election. 

Looking at the chart, I can't help thinking how most of the issues could have been identified by people from both parties, and from the officially unaffiliated middle, which is where you'll find me. And while we don't know why these issues are very important, we know that they are, and that there's a lot of common ground here; nine of the twelve garnered at least 50% mention.

More to come on this one. 

For your Sunday School, I focused on the classroom discussions about my Sonofa Gov, Andrew Cuomo. Jake Tapper, host of 'State of the Union' on CNN, offered some commentary at the end of the show; here's an excerpt.

Tapper had a lot to say, including that Cuomo is entitled to due process. Still, he said,

By now he has to know there is a chasm between how he perceives how he talks to women on his staff and how some of those women perceive it, as in some of them perceive it not only as inappropriate but as pressure to sleep with him...Only he knows what other names and incidents might come forward as he digs in. One wonders if that is even a remote consideration.

The last two sentences are even more important now, given the news we got at the end of the week.

Staying on the Sonofa Gov, Monday was another two-fer. First, I had a Sidebar countering one of the key classroom proclamations: that Cuomo should resign, because that New Yorkers want him to. A Siena College Research Institute poll suggests that the people of NY aren't as keen on him resign as the politicians of NY are.

In a survey of 805 registered New York State voters, 57 percent said they were satisfied with how Mr. Cuomo had addressed the allegations, while 32 percent said they were not. Fifty percent said he should not resign, while 35 percent said he should. Nearly half said they believed he could continue to do his job effectively as governor, with 34 percent saying he could not.

The Sunday School Extra Credit post, on the non-Cuomo stuff, included excerpts from Stacey Abrams and Chuck Todd's conversation about the boatload of anti-voting legislation around the country, including in her home state of Georgia. They also talked about HR 1, the House's 'For the People Act,' that the Senate will take up soon.

She said "the whole of our democracy" needs to be defended and protected, and that 

the Senate has to believe it has the responsibility and the ability to act. And that is why my focus is on making certain that the exemption to the filibuster be the necessary front and center conversation, so we can get something done to protect our democracy.

She doesn't think much of the bills in Georgia, as you'll see in the post. 

Next up? A Poll Watch on that SRCI survey; again, I focused on the non-Cuomo stuff (although I did recap those highlights at well.) Among the findings? 

• Upstaters show higher favorability ratings for both the Assembly (42%) and Senate (44%) than I expected; Independents (35% and 36%, respectively) are less happy with both chambers. 
• Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie and State Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins have extraordinarily high Don't Know/No Opinion ratings (71% and 68% respectively), given they're not new in their roles. That may have to do with them being in Cuomo's shadow, until recently.

Five posts before we hit mid-week? Maybe that's why your Wondering on Wednesday took a different turn - because it surely did. Here's how the post started.

Today, we're playing a fill-in-the-blank version of our wondering game. You're free to complete the answers any way you want. 

1. Someone suggested Meghan Markle might run for president in 2024. I wonder, will this really make Former Guy more likely to _______?
2. I wonder how many people have learned a new skill, such as _________, since the pandemic was declared a year ago this week?

I'll publish my answers to the questions this week. And I'm still open to yours, if you want to share.

Thursday's Meanwhile Back in Albany addressed the struggles and missteps the NYS Assembly's having trying to get an investigation of Cuomo off the ground, and whether it was an impeachment investigation or just an investigation. It's the latter, I guess.

The Assembly Judiciary Committee's investigation "will focus on three different things: the seven women who have accused the governor of assault, the nursing home deaths and the mounting questions about" the Mario Cuomo Bridge project. As one Assembly member said, “He’s got three major buckets of shit going on here,” referring to Cuomo. 

An apt description, I'd say. 

Friday was the third two-fer of the week. First, I dropped Democratic Overreach: HR 1 Edition. As Stacey Abrams pointed out, the voting rights stuff is a big darn deal - but that's not all the House put in HR 1. There's SO MUCH STUFF in the bill, which is at least partly why it passed without a single Republican's support. Here's my take on that.

Are the ethics, oversight, and transparency provisions important? Of course they are, from an overarching, lofty goal perspective. Should we be concerned about political appointees, lobbyists, and foreign influence? Of course we should be. 

But do those have the same immediate impact as do admittedly partisan restrictions and limitations on voting? 

My answer's in the post. 

We closed the week with a TGIF  that meandered around some fun subjects, including this one, about a house fire in Wisconsin.

An investigation determined the fire started on a couch in the living room and the cause of the fire was determined to be from a glass "crystal ball" ornament. The crystal ball had been located on a table near the couch and in direct sunlight. When sunshine came through a large set of windows and through the glass ball, it ignited the couch.

It seems some things should be kept under wraps and out of direct sunlight, including "crystals, mirrors, glass ornaments, and even bottles."

There's at least one other thing mentioned in the post that should be kept under wraps. You'll know it when you see it, I'm sure. 

That's a wrap on your week in review - I'll see you later for Sunday School.