The New York County Democratic Committee emailed party members to attend a Community Press Conference in support of Congressman Charles B. Rangel. County Leader Keith L.T. Wright wrote: “We want to let everyone know that we love our Congressman, that we have his back and that we want the Democrats to vote no to censure.”
The County Committee added: "Earlier this week, the House Ethics Committee found Rangel guilty of sloppy and careless mistakes, but not corruption, in the handling of his personal finances and support of a public service program at City College for minority students. The full House is expected to vote after the Thanksgiving break whether he should be censured for his errors."
I applaud Congressman Rangel's service to our country and his progressive leadership in the House of Representatives. But I must distinguish his positive contributions from his recent Ethics Committee conviction. At the very last minute, just as the hearing was to begin, Rangel chose to walk out (effectively waiving a defense), claiming that he couldn't afford legal representation - even though he was advised to set up a legal defense fund way back in 2008.
Charles Rangel's behavior is symbolic of the personal entitlement which typifies too many politicians once they forget that public service is one of the highest callings there is. Failure to pay income taxes on rental income and accepting four rent-stabilized apartments are not mere "sloppy and careless mistakes," as characterized by New York County Democrats. Rangel's conviction is a serious transgression which deserves punishment, regardless of the congressman's record and accomplishments in the House of Representatives.
Attending the "Community Press Conference" would send a message that ethics violations don't matter. I want no part of that message, so I didn't go.
Scott
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
NYC Charter Questions
NYC voters should vote YES on the Charter Revision Commission's two charter questions, even if they are somewhat flawed.
Question 1 undoes the cynical term limits vote of the NYC Council which by legislative fiat wiped away two voter referenda on term limits.
Reasonable arguments can be made that a term limit of three terms is preferable to two; and that legislators should be subjected to longer term limits than executives, in order to strengthen the city council against all-powerful mayors.
Nonetheless, it is a conflict of interest for elected officials to decide the length of their own terms in office. Question 1 would restore the term limits law to what it was before the mayor and city council speaker put self-interest above the fundamental right of voters to decide this issue.
Question 2 is a muddled collection of unrelated items. On balance, though, the proposal is an improvement over the status quo.
Among other things, this proposal would reduce the number of petition signatures required for political candidates to appear on ballots, thereby weakening the Incumbent Protection Plan which is built into all elections.
In addition, Question 2 would amend the Charter to require individuals and entities to disclose expenditures designed to influence elections and referenda. Voters have the right to know about attempts to influence elections -- including secret expenditures aimed at buying party ballot lines.
I urge YES votes on both NYC charter questions.
Scott
Question 1 undoes the cynical term limits vote of the NYC Council which by legislative fiat wiped away two voter referenda on term limits.
Reasonable arguments can be made that a term limit of three terms is preferable to two; and that legislators should be subjected to longer term limits than executives, in order to strengthen the city council against all-powerful mayors.
Nonetheless, it is a conflict of interest for elected officials to decide the length of their own terms in office. Question 1 would restore the term limits law to what it was before the mayor and city council speaker put self-interest above the fundamental right of voters to decide this issue.
Question 2 is a muddled collection of unrelated items. On balance, though, the proposal is an improvement over the status quo.
Among other things, this proposal would reduce the number of petition signatures required for political candidates to appear on ballots, thereby weakening the Incumbent Protection Plan which is built into all elections.
In addition, Question 2 would amend the Charter to require individuals and entities to disclose expenditures designed to influence elections and referenda. Voters have the right to know about attempts to influence elections -- including secret expenditures aimed at buying party ballot lines.
I urge YES votes on both NYC charter questions.
Scott
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Jon Stewart's "Million Moderate March"
Jon Stewart has announced plans to organize a "Rally to Restore Sanity" in Washington, DC on October 30 - a rally which he also has called a "Million Moderate March."
Here is my response to the Daily Show's Facebook's posting:
- Scott
I like the Daily Show, but I must take issue with the whole idea of a Million Moderate March.
President Obama's problems stem from his efforts to be everything to everyone - instead of appealing to the progressives who once were his base.
Jon Stewart is fundamentally wrong when he compares, and equates, attacks from the right with those from the left - and cites as an example of unjustified attacks from the left those who accused President Bush of being a war criminal.
The Center for Constitutional Rights outlined a strong legal case for impeachment:
http://ccrjustice.org/files/impeach_06.03.06_AlterNet.pdf
The Bush administration was not held accountable for its assault on civil liberties through its use of extraordinary rendition, torture and the establishment of secret prisons beyond the reach of American law or international treaties.
Congress and the Obama administration made calculated political decisions not to investigate transgressions by President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
Conservative Republicans do not have a monopoly on anger.
Progressives have a legitimate right to be angry with Presidents Bush and Obama - and with Democrats who refuse to pursue a real progressive agenda in the interest of achieving a futile bipartisan coalition.
A "moderate" vision is not the answer to our nation's ills. Progressives should not concede the fight to change this country - even if too many Democrats join Republicans in deciding that a progressive agenda is off the table.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Thank You, Governor Paterson
The Stop and Frisk Bill, which Governor David Paterson signed into law on July 16, 2010, does not curb the abusive practice in which more than half a million innocent New Yorkers, predominantly African Americans and Latinos, are stopped, questioned and frisked each year -- but not charged with a crime or even a violation.
But the bill is an important first step. This bill, which significantly applies only to stops in New York City, prohibits the NYPD from retaining personal information on people who are stopped-and-frisked but not criminally charged. This is a victory for the privacy rights of innocent people.
The symbolism of the bill signing ceremony cannot go unmentioned: Thanks to the hard work of the bill's sponsors, State Sen. Eric Adams and Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, elected officials from New York City stood with the governor to champion a bill which was bitterly opposed by both the mayor and police commissioner. In so doing, the state legislature performed an important check on Mayor Bloomberg's administration -- something which the New York City Council, under the leadership of Speaker Christine Quinn, has largely refused to do.
In exercising this limited control over the NYPD, the legislature's New York City delegation sends a subtle message to those police officers who live outside NYC but sometimes act as if they own our streets and neighborhoods, reminiscent of Rudy Giuliani's infamous Street Crimes Unit: This is our city. You work for us.
Maybe it is time for the NYPD to revisit the concept of community policing, in which police officers work with community leaders and residents -- a policing technique which Raymond Kelly favored until Rudy Giuliani declined to reappoint him to be his police commissioner after David Dinkins stepped down.
It is ironic indeed that Raymond Kelly has chose to embrace the police practices -- "broken windows" and "quality of life" -- of the very mayor who declined to retain him.
Scott
But the bill is an important first step. This bill, which significantly applies only to stops in New York City, prohibits the NYPD from retaining personal information on people who are stopped-and-frisked but not criminally charged. This is a victory for the privacy rights of innocent people.
The symbolism of the bill signing ceremony cannot go unmentioned: Thanks to the hard work of the bill's sponsors, State Sen. Eric Adams and Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, elected officials from New York City stood with the governor to champion a bill which was bitterly opposed by both the mayor and police commissioner. In so doing, the state legislature performed an important check on Mayor Bloomberg's administration -- something which the New York City Council, under the leadership of Speaker Christine Quinn, has largely refused to do.
In exercising this limited control over the NYPD, the legislature's New York City delegation sends a subtle message to those police officers who live outside NYC but sometimes act as if they own our streets and neighborhoods, reminiscent of Rudy Giuliani's infamous Street Crimes Unit: This is our city. You work for us.
Maybe it is time for the NYPD to revisit the concept of community policing, in which police officers work with community leaders and residents -- a policing technique which Raymond Kelly favored until Rudy Giuliani declined to reappoint him to be his police commissioner after David Dinkins stepped down.
It is ironic indeed that Raymond Kelly has chose to embrace the police practices -- "broken windows" and "quality of life" -- of the very mayor who declined to retain him.
Scott
Saturday, July 17, 2010
40 Years Later
Leonard Levitt's take on the ongoing corruption scandal at the NYPD, involving a deliberate downgrading of felonies to misdemeanors, clearing of streets through false arrests and preventative detention, intimidation of crime victims, and the forced hospitalization in a psych ward of police whistle-blower Adrian Schoolcraft, is, in a word, stunning.
The famed police reporter compares the latest scandal to one of forty years ago, when no one initially believed Frank Serpico but eventually a full-blown corruption scandal emerged.
Leavitt notes that police union presidents publicly complained about the practice of downgrading crimes in 2005. But when the chairman of the mayor's corruption commission sought records to investigate the allegations, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly refused to provide them, Mayor Michael Bloomberg remained silent... and the commission chairman resigned.
End of story?
Please read Leonard Levitt's column: http://nypdconfidential.com/columns/2010/100712.html
And please urge our public officials to demand the appointment of an independent commission, with subpoena power and public hearings, to investigate the latest corruption allegations against the NYPD.
The NYPD couldn't be trusted to investigate itself 40 years ago. And it can't be trusted with this responsibility now.
Scott
The famed police reporter compares the latest scandal to one of forty years ago, when no one initially believed Frank Serpico but eventually a full-blown corruption scandal emerged.
Leavitt notes that police union presidents publicly complained about the practice of downgrading crimes in 2005. But when the chairman of the mayor's corruption commission sought records to investigate the allegations, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly refused to provide them, Mayor Michael Bloomberg remained silent... and the commission chairman resigned.
End of story?
Please read Leonard Levitt's column: http://nypdconfidential.com/columns/2010/100712.html
And please urge our public officials to demand the appointment of an independent commission, with subpoena power and public hearings, to investigate the latest corruption allegations against the NYPD.
The NYPD couldn't be trusted to investigate itself 40 years ago. And it can't be trusted with this responsibility now.
Scott
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Now, It's Up to the Governor
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly refuse to relinquish "broken windows"/"quality of life" police enforcement, a legacy of Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the Manhattan Institute (the conservative think tank whose ideas he promoted)
Thanks in large part to the leadership of State Sen. Eric Adams of Brooklyn, the State Legislature has passed a bill to curb one abusive component of broken windows policing -- permanent data retention on people who are stopped and frisked, but not arrested or fined.
In a free society, surely innocent people have the right to keep personal information out of a permanent police data base.
Now, it's up to Gov. David Paterson (who in the past has been sensitive to civil liberties issues), to do the right thing and sign this bill into law, notwithstanding the complaints of Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly.
As columnist Bob Herbert argues in Monday's New York Times, signing this bill "should be an easy call for the governor."http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/opinion/06herbert.html
Civil liberties must matter in the world's greatest city.
Thanks in large part to the leadership of State Sen. Eric Adams of Brooklyn, the State Legislature has passed a bill to curb one abusive component of broken windows policing -- permanent data retention on people who are stopped and frisked, but not arrested or fined.
In a free society, surely innocent people have the right to keep personal information out of a permanent police data base.
Now, it's up to Gov. David Paterson (who in the past has been sensitive to civil liberties issues), to do the right thing and sign this bill into law, notwithstanding the complaints of Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly.
As columnist Bob Herbert argues in Monday's New York Times, signing this bill "should be an easy call for the governor."http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/opinion/06herbert.html
Civil liberties must matter in the world's greatest city.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
The NYPD Tapes
Is there no protection for whistle blowers in the NYPD?
In The Village Voice's "NYPD Tapes" series, secret audio recordings by a police officer in Brooklyn's 81st precinct in Bedford-Stuyvesant reveal a disturbing pattern of illegal police conduct:
* Manipulation of crime statistics to artificially lower numbers and categories of crimes;
* Threats against police officers if they don't meet their stop-and-frisk and arrest quotas;
* Intimidation of crime victims through "callbacks" to pressure them to downgrade or drop their complaints;
* Instructions to police officers to clear streets by arresting and detaining people for doing nothing more than standing around on streets in their own neighborhoods;
* Arrests of people for not showing identification outside of their own homes (this sounds like the NYPD version of arrests under Arizona's new immigration law, which even Mayor Bloomberg has denounced);
* Arrests by officers who didn't personally witness criminal activity (notwithstanding their own sworn complaints).
In the fourth installment of "The NYPD Tapes," the whistle blowing cop claims that a deputy chief stepped on his face with a boot, and subsequently dragged him to a psychiatric ward of a Queens hospital, where he was hospitalized and medicated against his will for six days.
The NYPD has had little to say about the accusations by the whistle blowing cop beyond stating that no one at the 81st precinct has been disciplined and claiming that there is an internal inquiry. Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly has declined to address a letter of complaint from City Council member Albert Vann and other elected officials, community leaders and clergy.
Unfortunately, there is no indication that investigations are underway by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, the U.S. Attorneys of the Eastern or
Southern District of New York, or the Brooklyn District Attorney.
The police misconduct in Bed-Stuy is part of a broader pattern of police misconduct in New York City under Commissioner Kelly, which includes illegal arrests during the Republican National Convention in 2004; investigations and political arrests in Staten Island of individuals who did little more than "annoy" local politicians; bogus prostitution arrests of gay men; and hundreds of thousands of marijuana possession arrests each year, predominantly of African Americans and Latinos.
Civil liberties must matter in NYC. There must be accountability for systemic violations of our rights. We should never accept the attitude reflected by the police commissioner's recent statement that million dollar settlements of police misconduct lawsuits are simply the "cost of doing business" (New York Magazine, "Boss Kelly," May 24, 2010).
Surely we can fight crime without making criminals of NYPD officers. And surely things have changed in NYC, and the NYPD, since the days of famed whistle blower Frank Serpico, who coincidentally also worked for several years in the 81st precinct.
Scott
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-06-15/news/adrian-school-craft-nypd-tapes-whistleblower/
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-06-08/news/nypd-tapes-3-detective-comes-forward-downgrading-rape/
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-05-11/news/nypd-tapes-part-2-bed-stuy
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-05-04/news/the-nypd-tapes-inside-bed-stuy-s-81st-precinct/
In The Village Voice's "NYPD Tapes" series, secret audio recordings by a police officer in Brooklyn's 81st precinct in Bedford-Stuyvesant reveal a disturbing pattern of illegal police conduct:
* Manipulation of crime statistics to artificially lower numbers and categories of crimes;
* Threats against police officers if they don't meet their stop-and-frisk and arrest quotas;
* Intimidation of crime victims through "callbacks" to pressure them to downgrade or drop their complaints;
* Instructions to police officers to clear streets by arresting and detaining people for doing nothing more than standing around on streets in their own neighborhoods;
* Arrests of people for not showing identification outside of their own homes (this sounds like the NYPD version of arrests under Arizona's new immigration law, which even Mayor Bloomberg has denounced);
* Arrests by officers who didn't personally witness criminal activity (notwithstanding their own sworn complaints).
In the fourth installment of "The NYPD Tapes," the whistle blowing cop claims that a deputy chief stepped on his face with a boot, and subsequently dragged him to a psychiatric ward of a Queens hospital, where he was hospitalized and medicated against his will for six days.
The NYPD has had little to say about the accusations by the whistle blowing cop beyond stating that no one at the 81st precinct has been disciplined and claiming that there is an internal inquiry. Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly has declined to address a letter of complaint from City Council member Albert Vann and other elected officials, community leaders and clergy.
Unfortunately, there is no indication that investigations are underway by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, the U.S. Attorneys of the Eastern or
Southern District of New York, or the Brooklyn District Attorney.
The police misconduct in Bed-Stuy is part of a broader pattern of police misconduct in New York City under Commissioner Kelly, which includes illegal arrests during the Republican National Convention in 2004; investigations and political arrests in Staten Island of individuals who did little more than "annoy" local politicians; bogus prostitution arrests of gay men; and hundreds of thousands of marijuana possession arrests each year, predominantly of African Americans and Latinos.
Civil liberties must matter in NYC. There must be accountability for systemic violations of our rights. We should never accept the attitude reflected by the police commissioner's recent statement that million dollar settlements of police misconduct lawsuits are simply the "cost of doing business" (New York Magazine, "Boss Kelly," May 24, 2010).
Surely we can fight crime without making criminals of NYPD officers. And surely things have changed in NYC, and the NYPD, since the days of famed whistle blower Frank Serpico, who coincidentally also worked for several years in the 81st precinct.
Scott
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-06-15/news/adrian-school-craft-nypd-tapes-whistleblower/
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-06-08/news/nypd-tapes-3-detective-comes-forward-downgrading-rape/
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-05-11/news/nypd-tapes-part-2-bed-stuy
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-05-04/news/the-nypd-tapes-inside-bed-stuy-s-81st-precinct/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)