New York State Senate Majority Kills 311 Bills in a Single Day

Over 311 legislative proposals were killed in one fell swoop in Albany this week, after the Senate majority adopted a new method to stall legislation: refer all bills where a motion for committee consideration has been filed to the Rules Committee, where they can be ignored.

The new strategy lets them circumvent a senate rule designed to allow rank-and-file senators to force a committee vote on their bills over the objection of leadership.

The rule on motions for committee consideration was first introduced in 2009 by a Democratic majority and passed again by a Republican majority in 2011. The new rule was intended to increase the ability of rank-and-file members to move their bills out of committee by forcing chairs to place the bill on the committee agenda and schedule a vote. This replaced the Senate’s earlier rule on discharge motions which allowed a chair to stall a bill even if the bill had enough support to pass.

According to a three-paragraph letter, sent to committee chairs Tuesday morning, the Temporary President of the Senate “may at any time refer bills to the Rules Committee,” and at the request of the Temporary President, “any pending motions for committee consideration have been discharged from the respective committee and committed to the Rules Committee.”

A search through the legislative research service reveals that an astonishing 311 bills were sent to the rules committee on March 12, 2012.

This action goes against the spirit of greater transparency and accountability that the new rules were meant to accomplish. A 2009 joint statement which included then-Senate President Malcolm A. Smith and Minority Leader Dean Skelos, touted how these rules would increase the power of rank-and-file members. “No longer will the Senate be run by leaders making all the decisions,” the statement said.

Moreover, in summarizing how the new rules-- including the new motion for committee consideration– would strengthen the committee process, the statement added that “these changes will give greater power and authority to individual committee chairs and members so they can consider, judge and act on legislation independent of leadership.”

It’s disheartening to see how the majority has distorted the rules. The ability to kill 311 bills in a single day speaks to how truly “independent of leadership” the Senate has become.

Money and Politics This Week

Every Friday, the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest news concerning the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics—and the ongoing need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll also be linking to dispatches from around the country highlighting the national scope of this crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Matthew Ladd.

For more stories on an ongoing basis, follow the Twitter hashtag #moNeYpolitics and #fairelex.

New York Campaign Finance and Ethics News

1. Former State Congressman Mike Arcuri expressed his strong support this week for a state system of public campaign financing. Arcuri, a member of the NY LEAD coalition, wrote that such a system would put regular voters back “in the driver’s seat.” Arcuri also decried Albany’s “culture of dependence on large campaign contributions,” describing it as a corrosive and expensive practice that reduces public faith in state government.

2. Opening arguments began this week in the federal corruption trial of Pedro Espada, Jr., and his son Pedro Gautier Espada, who are accused of using the Soundview Healthcare Network as “their own taxpayer-funded piggy bank” by funneling more than $500,000 from the organization and spending it on cars, spa treatments, and other personal luxuries. The former state Senate Majority Leader and his son are charged with theft, embezzlement, and misapplication of federal funds, as well as conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

3. Evidence introduced in the ongoing corruption and bribery trial of former Yonkers Councilwoman Sandy Annabi has cast the spotlight on another public official: state Senator Tom Libous, who, according to witness testimony, pushed a law firm to hire his son—and inflate his starting salary—in exchange for steering government business toward the firm’s practice.

National Campaign Finance News

1. An ABC News/Washington Post poll released this week shows that nearly 70% of Americans believe that super PACs should be illegal. The poll also found that broad bipartisan support for banning super PACs: the level of opposition to super PACs by Democrats (70%) and Tea Party supporters (69%) was nearly identical, and well over half of Republicans (55%) favored banning the groups as well. Additionally, of the 69% polled who believed that super PACs should be banned, over half felt “very strongly” about the issue—an indication that Citizens United is squarely at odds with public opinion on corporate campaign spending.

2. A nationwide coalition of campaign finance reform groups called this week for all presidential candidates, including President Obama and the four remaining Republican primary contenders, to reveal the names of their major “bundlers,” the fundraisers who steer millions of dollars to campaign war chests. Although federal law only requires presidential candidates to disclose the names of bundlers who are also registered lobbyists, major candidates in both parties disclosed other bundlers as well during the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections—a practice currently followed only by the President. The coalition letters to individual candidates are available here.

3. The AFL-CIO Executive Council released a statement on Wednesday that roundly condemned the flood of corporate spending unleashed by Citizens United, praised current efforts at campaign finance reform, and threw its support behind public campaign financing as an effective way to “enfranchise voters and ensure that wealth does not yield disproportionate influence.” The AFL-CIO also called for greater disclosure of corporate contributions and campaign expenditures, better contribution limits for wealthy individuals, and other reform efforts “to bring about greater fairness, openness and participation in elections.”

4. The Washington Post finds that candidate and campaign spending during the GOP primary has been cut in half since the last presidential primary, and that the influence of super PAC spending has been amplified by weak fundraising. According to David Donnelly of the Public Campaign Action Fund, traditional fundraising has been supplanted by “this new phenomenon of people writing huge checks in support of the candidates. You’re replacing excitement with those who have a huge amount of money.”

5. The downturn in GOP primary fundraising from small individual donors can also be attributed to sky-high contributions by corporations and wealthy backers, argues Nick Nyhart of Public Campaign, who finds that Republican super PACs, and billionaire backers such as Sheldon Adelson and Foster Friess, may reduce contributions from ordinary citizens. “It sends a bad message to ordinary voters,” Nyhart said. “You begin to feel like politics is a playing field that only millionaires and billionaires are allowed on.”

Money and Politics This Week

Every Friday, the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest news concerning the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics—and the ongoing need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll also be linking to dispatches from around the country highlighting the national scope of this crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Matthew Ladd.

For more stories on an ongoing basis, follow the Twitter hashtag #moNeYpolitics and #fairelex.

New York Campaign Finance and Ethics News

1. Amidst the media’s recent focus on independent redistricting, New York City Council member Dan Garodnick encourages New Yorkers not to lose sight of the importance of campaign finance reform, highlighting the many benefits that the New York City public matching funds system has created for small donors, candidates for public office, and the voting public. Last week, Garodnick and 26 other City Council members sent a letter to Gov. Cuomo in support of his renewed pledge to support a statewide bill for public campaign financing.

2. Former US Representative Anthony Weiner claimed in an interview late last week that in the fall of 2010, he was privy to allegations that current Representative Michael Grimm (R—NY)—who has lately come under scrutiny for accepting questionable campaign donations—was himself attempting to extort political contributions from a well-known rabbi. Grimm’s attorney promptly released a statement denying the allegations, calling Weiner’s remarks part of a “Democratic smear campaign.”

3. The Republican candidate for the vacant seat of the New York State Assembly’s 145^th District, Mickey Kearns, is facing a formal complaint that he violated state campaign laws by accepting individual and corporate contributions for the upcoming special election over the legal limit. How the complaint will be handled by the state Board of Elections, whose enforcement power is widely seen as ineffectual, remains to be seen.

National Campaign Finance News

1. “Even in an age of super PACs . . . small-dollar fund-raising matters: It provides not only cash, but a way to engage volunteers, measure enthusiasm and organize get-out-the-vote efforts.” According to the New York Times, this explains a critical vulnerability of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, which has “relied overwhelmingly on his network of high-dollar donors.” By contrast, both Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich enjoyed bursts of small-donor enthusiasm following their primary victories. Unlike his competitors, Romney has failed to connect with grassroots donors, in large part due to widespread perception that Romney’s wealth obviates the need for contributions from small donors.

2. The Washington Post, however, notes that far from relying on small donors, the Santorum and Gingrich campaigns have been “kept on life support by billionaire supporters,” namely Foster Friess and Sheldon Adelson, “who have taken advantage of changes in campaign law to pour millions into independent super PACs.”

3. The Times also opined on Sunday that the upcoming presidential election will be heavily influenced not only by the economy, but also by “the huge sums of money sloshing around” in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United, and that this flood of contributions has led to the most negative Republican primary since the Watergate scandal broke.

4. John Boehner’s decision on Saturday to share the fundraising stage in Florida with Representative Vern Buchanan, who is currently under federal investigation by the FBI and IRS for failure to disclose business holdings and raising campaign money through straw donations, did not escape the Times editorial board, which noted that Boehner’s appearance simply proved that “once again the mighty campaign dollar trumps all.”

New Efforts to Improve Ballot Design

We’re always interested in learning about new projects to improve elections, so we thought we would share an exciting new proposal to make it easier for election administrators to improve ballot design. By applying the basic design principles to ballots, Field Guidelines to Ensure Voter Intent proposes to publish a series of books with guidelines and examples of common ballot design problems to help election officials employ ballot design techniques that help ensure that every vote is cast as voters intend.

As the Brennan Center found in Better Ballots, common problems due to poor ballot design and instructions have led to the disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of voters. As recently as last week, we were reminded of the importance ballot design can play in a close election. The results of a hotly contested City Council race in upstate New York were overturned after a hand recount found that a voting machine had not properly counted two ballots. One of the two ballots in question was improperly marked; a voter had circled an oval instead of filling it in. Although the machine was unable to detect the vote,the voter’s intent was clear to election officials as they reviewed the ballot. The margin of victory in that election was a single vote. Mistakes like these can often be prevented through clearer instructions on how to properly mark a ballot.

In this upcoming election season, we hope to see more important tools like these that will help election officials prepare for elections.

Money and Politics This Week

Every Friday, the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest news concerning the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics—and the ongoing need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll also be linking to dispatches from around the country highlighting the national scope of this crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Matthew Ladd and Dan Rockoff.

For more stories on an ongoing basis, follow the Twitter hashtag #moNeYpolitics and #fairelex.

New York Campaign Finance and Ethics News

1. Former Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey has joined the push for comprehensive campaign finance reform—including the creation of a statewide public financing program—by joining the NY LEAD coalition, a group of prominent civic and business leaders committed to public campaign financing in Albany. Kerrey explained in a statement, “At the moment there is little hope that Congress will enact a Federal law that provides a voluntary system of public financing. In New York – thanks to the leadership of Governor Cuomo – it could happen. By doing so New York would give power back to small donors in State campaigns and set an example to the U.S. Congress.”

2. John Liu’s campaign treasurer, Jia Hou, has been arrested on charges of fraud and obstruction of justice. Coming a mere two weeks after one of Liu’s most prominent Democratic fundraisers was indicted on similar charges, the arrest casts further doubt on the credibility of Liu’s fundraising practices. It also highlights the crucial role that robust disclosure and enforcement provisions play in New York City’s public campaign finance program, given Hou’s failure to adequately identify donors in her filings to the Campaign Finance Board.

3. The New York Times observes that Gov. Cuomo’s proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year will make it more difficult for the state Comptroller to audit state contracts before they are signed, arguing that in Albany, “where waste and corruption are too often the default mode,” the value of meaningful pre-audits by the Comptroller’s office should not be taken lightly, regardless of the efficiency gains that the new audit process would achieve.

4. New York will lose two congressional seats as a result of the 2010 census, and Congressional legislators appear to have noticed: those in the greatest danger of losing their seats in the redistricting process have given a combined $169,527 to lobbyists working on the process in the New York state legislature. Representative Nita Lowey, a Democrat, gave $10,000 to the Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee’s housekeeping account in November 2011, and Representative Richard Hanna, a Republican, has given $10,000 to the Senate Republican Campaign Committee since last year as well.

National Campaign Finance News

1. The New York Times finds a significant amount of overlap between presidential candidates and their super PACs, suggesting that the theoretical independence of super PACs does not work in practice. The article singles out the relationship between Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and the “Restore our Future” super PAC that supports him, finding, for instance, that both the campaign and the super PAC have both paid a single consulting firm, TargetPoint, for assistance with direct mail. TargetPoint’s founder, Alexander Gage, admitted that the situation looked “ridiculous.”

2. A Democratic state legislator in Kentucky is advocating for a public financing system for judicial candidates running for the state supreme court. State Representative Jim Wayne (D-Louisville) said: “It’s conceivable that special interests could buy Supreme Court justices and put them on the bench. We think that our system is vulnerable to this type of purchase of Supreme Court justices.” The proposal would let judicial candidates obtain voluntary public financing after raising $10,000, including $5,000 in small contributions from at least 200 donors.

3. Former US Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) suggested this week that Supreme Court justices are becoming “squeamish” at the results of their controversial Citizens United ruling, that the ruling has damaged the Court’s credibility, and that he was optimistic the Court might consider reversing itself. Feingold remarked that, given the unprecedented amount of corporate money the decision has unleashed, the Justices “know they’ve done something even worse than Bush v. Gore in terms of the credibility of the court.” In February, Feingold had also attacked President Obama for deciding that his re-election campaign would back a super PAC, arguing that the President was “dancing with the devil.”

4. The billionaire Koch brothers announced this week that they would donate a combined $60 million to super PACs to defeat President Obama’s re-election campaign, in what US Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) calls a “gross perversion of the political process.” Blumenauer notes that in the final three months of 2011, Obama’s re-election campaign and the DNC raised a similar amount from 583,000 separate contributors giving an average of $55 apiece, and that the Koch brothers’ multimillion-dollar threat would “cancel out the efforts of half a million American citizens.”