Gov. Andrew Cuomo seems to be taking an aggressive stand when it comes to both redistricting and changes in the pension system for public employees, which seems to be leading him more and more onto a collision course with the state Legislature and public unions.
If you accept what some polls are indicating, the governor has public support in pushing for a cheap pension system for public employees, and he has found the means to convince New Yorkers that the current system is just too expensive to maintain. For Cuomo, hoping to cement his growing popularity, the proposed pension changes are a “seminal clash” in the budget and his administration. However, on Monday, the Legislature laid out its 2012-2013 budget without Cuomo’s pension proposal, which means the battle lines are being drawn.
Equally problematic is the redrawing of district lines mandated by the Census. Sunday evening, legislators in the state Senate, with a Republican majority, completed their final proposal, which they were prompted to finish after U.S. magistrate judge Roanne Mann presented her version last week. Their current plan differs very little from the original one, which the governor promised to veto.
“We’ve made dozens of changes to the original maps, virtually all of them based on public input,” Scott Reif, a spokesperson for the Senate majority, told the press. Moreover, he added, they “have advanced a constitutional amendment that would achieve historic reform of the process. As a result, this is an even better reapportionment plan.”
Meanwhile, on Monday, Mann released her final recommendations on the issue. Like the Legislature’s, her recommendation offers few changes and is now slated for a public hearing on Wednesday. By then we should know the impact of a call by community and clergy leaders from the four corners of the state, which demands that the governor veto the maps proposed by the Legislature, which they feel are extremely “gerrymandered.”
There are also disgruntled elected officials in Brooklyn, particularly Hakeem Jeffries, who are very upset with the judge’s rendering. Mann’s congressional lines for Harlem will create a new district for Rep. Charles Rangel, with the majority of its voters being Hispanic.
If the immovable force has met the irresistible force, something has to give because by March 20, the petitioning period for prospective House representatives is slated to begin. In any event, the state will lose two congressional seats, one Republican and one Democrat, in some undisclosed region of the state. Also at stake is the Senate’s intention to expand its numbers from 62 to 63.
Mann and her team had released a proposal last week and the final version is much the same. The proposal will now go up for a public hearing on Wednesday in New York City.
In the new map, Oneida County remains intact, but the district extends south to include Binghamton. It also reaches east into the lower portion of Herkimer County and takes in part of Oswego County to the west. The bulk of Oneida County is in the current 24th Congressional District, represented by U.S. Rep. Richard Hanna, R-Barneveld.
The 24th District extends north to the top of Herkimer County, south through part of Otsego County and west through all or part of Chenango, Cortland, Broome, Cortland, Tioga, Tompkins, Cayuga and Seneca counties.
If Mann’s changes are accepted, northern Herkimer County would be merged into a large district that extends to the Canadian border and east to Vermont. Otsego would go with a district that extends to the state’s southern and eastern borders. The other counties in the 24th District would be put into a district that extends along the Pennsylvania border all the way to the western end of the state.
Both chambers say negotiations continue on the redistricting deal, which is needed by about March 15 to avoid court intervention, with the budget deal due by April 1.
Late Sunday night, the Republican majority released their final proposals for redistricting, with only minor changes to election district lines compared to an initial proposal that Cuomo called wholly unacceptable and promised to veto. Good-government groups say the Republicans want to continue a tradition of distorting lines to protect incumbents and majority power for the coming 10 years. Redistricting is critical for the Senate Republicans, who hold a 32-30 majority going into the fall elections in the blue state.
Legislative leaders and Cuomo say they support a constitutional amendment to require an independent panel, beginning with the 2022 redistricting, but the Legislature’s proposal would still give lawmakers the final say, and Cuomo recently noted redistricting is ultimately a legislative power.
“We’ve made dozens of changes to the original maps, virtually all of them based on public input, and have advanced a constitutional amendment that would achieve historic reform of the process,” Reif said. “As a result, this is an even better reapportionment plan.”
That constitutional amendment, however, would still give legislative majorities the final say over an independent panel. If the constitutional amendment process fails, then a proposed law would kick in that requires independent redistricting, though that could be overturned by a future Legislature.
Cuomo has moderated his hard line after pledging with nearly every legislator during the 2010 elections to make sure redistricting was done by an independent panel. Now Cuomo says he will veto “hyper-political” redistricting plans without saying what that means, other than he’ll know it when he sees it. Cuomo has also said the issue is between the Legislature and the courts, which could ultimately redraw the lines. The issue is dividing good-government groups.
“It’s a question of, do you accept something good and a reform or do you hold out for an ideal occurrence that will never happen?” said Dick Dadey of Citizens Union, offering a position supported by the League of Women Voters. He noted the Legislature never even introduced former Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s redistricting reform, which would have taken the process away from the Legislature.
The Legislature and Cuomo, however, haven’t followed the 2007 budget reform act that was intended to make that process more accountable, public and timely.
“I think we in this state have lost track of the fact that the Legislature is supposed to work for us, that reform is not what the Legislature is willing, grudgingly, to put up with,” said Susan Lerner of Common Cause NY. “If what they are willing to do does not satisfy the requirement of the public, then it is incumbent on us to say, ‘Not good enough, do it again better.’ And that’s what the governor’s veto can do.”
The New York Public Interest Research Group also opposes the measure, saying it doesn’t adequately protect against more partisan redistricting to benefit majorities.
On Monday, Cuomo spokesman Josh Vlasto said the governor requires “better” lines than those proposed a month ago, a constitutional amendment and a law in case the Legislature fails to vote for the amendment.
In terms of pushing his pension changes, Cuomo holds a trump card thanks to a legal provision discovered by his predecessor, Gov. David Paterson, that empowers the governor to enact policy in emergency spending bills if no state budget is adopted by April 1, the start of the fiscal year. On Monday, Cuomo again said he will put his pension proposal in an emergency spending bill, forcing the Legislature either to accept it or shut down state government for a lack of cash.
That, however, could return Albany to the days of dysfunction, a label Cuomo and lawmakers facing re-election this fall want to avoid. It is an endgame lawmakers and Cuomo don’t want because it could wipe out much of the political capital and cooperation they built over Cuomo’s first 14 months in office. Albany had been marked by bitter, partisan gridlock in the Senate and political scandals after Spitzer, a once-powerful reformer, resigned amid a prostitution scandal in March 2008.
For New Yorkers, the issues go beyond political power plays. Cuomo and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, as well as business groups, blame local property taxes, already among the highest in the nation, and the cost of employer contributions to guaranteed public pensions. Cuomo wants benefits reduced. Democratic lawmakers, Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli and union leaders say Cuomo’s proposal is an assault on the middle class, creating a retirement plan inadequate for future blue- and white-collar workers and some police and firefighters who will be the backbone of New York’s future.
As for redistricting, good-government groups warn that New York voters could see less state aid if they live in a district served by a minority party legislator and could also have less of a voice when it comes to legislation.
