QB VII (EPISODE II OF THE JOE BRUNO DEMOCRATS)

[Ed. note MB: Edited for clarity, politeness (Ed. note GM: this means he took out any comment about his friends he didn't like)  and basic HTML standards compliance (Ed. note GM: this means he interjected nasty remarks about anything he didn't agree with)]

[2nd Ed. note: Good grief, enough of the drama already. Post has been removed by the author, and replaced with a link to the unedited piece on Room Eight, which you can access by clicking here.]

I prefer not to repeat myself, but with so much disinformation being put out with regards to the proposed MTA fare increase, I feel compelled to respond. But before responding to the nonsense, let’s talk about what is real, and what no one is saying. For the past 15 years, advocates of lower taxes, lower fares, and richer pensions, and other spending priorities have had a deal – satisfy all of them by de-funding the transportation system, both road and transit. Why haven’t we noticed? Because billions of dollars were borrowed so the consequences of this would not become apparent until those who mattered have cashed in and moved out. The sums of money are so large that they make the whole fare increase discussion trivial. The MTA has a surplus? The agency’s buses, subway cars, tracks, structures and other equipment wear out at a steady rate, and if they aren’t replaced at that rate the transportation system falls apart. In order to pay for a barely break-even amount of normal replacement in the 2005 to 2009 period, the MTA is borrowing $12.5 billion or $2.5 billion a year. So how can an agency borrowing $2.5 billion per year to meet expenses that will continue indefinitely have a surplus? It’s like all those households borrowing against their home equity at low teaser rates to live large for a few years, but now facing foreclosure and bankruptcy. Massive borrowing by the MTA has going on since the early 1990s, because like sub-prime mortgage borrowers, many of us didn’t want to read all the boring budget documents. Our so-called leaders, like predatory lenders, didn’t mention the eventual bill, only the short-term monthly payment, which they were considered heroes for keeping as low as possible.

Tonight the democrats are at it again; another debate amongst their presidential hopefuls takes place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In my estimation this is at least the tenth debate amongst them so far; or maybe it just seems that way. Damn, it is already a long presidential campaign folks. Remember this: frontrunners hate long campaign seasons. Just like frontrunners in horseracing that often fade into the homestretch, often times the late running closers get up in time to win at the wire. Remember John Kerrey; he was in mid-pack when Howard Dean was leading in all the pre-Iowa caucus polls. I think the same can be said about Mike Dukakis, no?

In the grapevines, rumors are circulating that State Senator Eric Adams is considering whether or not to enter the race for the Brooklyn Borough presidency in 2009. If this is true then that brings the number to five, of blacks considering the same race. This list includes Assemblyman Nick Perry, Councilmember Charles Barron, Deputy Boro Prez Yvonne Graham and Chris Owens (son of former congressman Major Owens). Still no direct words yet, as to what are the intentions of State Senator Velmanette Montgomery relative to this race; indications are however that she will pass on this one (again). There are (hopefully) no other blacks looking at this race, at this point in time. It seems that Al Vann is finally going to retire when his term is limited (thank God), and his sidekick Annette Robinson has shown no indication that she is interested in this race (thank God again).

[I know I promised that my next piece in this series would be about erstwhile Congressional candidate and unlikely left-hero, Steve Harrison, but my “The Daily Gotham” (TDG) posting of Part One (wherein I excoriate Joe Bruno, and outline his modis operandi in unsparing detail, like practically no one has ever done before), was answered almost solely with accusations that the entire series was a contract on behalf of Harrison’s likely primary opponent, Dominick Recchia.

There are reports that Merrill Lynch & Company will move its headquarters out of Lower Manhattan to a new skyscraper adjacent to Penn Station. This is described as a “blow” to city and state efforts to revitalize Lower Manhattan in the wake of 9/11. Efforts to revitalize Lower Manhattan, however, pre-date 9/11, and the World Trade Center itself was part of one such effort. All of these efforts, which have been led by real estate interests seeking higher office rents and sales prices, have assumed that Lower Manhattan needs to be a competitive location for the central offices of large U.S. corporations with employees located throughout the New York Metropolitan region. Downtown is at a disadvantage competing with Midtown for such facilities, because Midtown is directly accessible not only by subway from the city but also commuter rail from the suburbs. Suburban commuters must transfer to a subway or the PATH to get to Downtown. For fifty years the state and city have sought to offset this disadvantage by offering bribe to corporations such as Goldman Sachs to locate Downtown, and considering proposals to extend the commuter rail lines to Lower Manhattan at an unimaginable and unaffordable cost. But whether Merrill Lynch locates in Midtown or Downtown, its jobs will be accessible to New York City and State residents, and it will pay New York City and State taxes to support public services. And even if all large corporations were to exit Lower Manhattan, the area could still be as vibrant as it was before 9/11. More vibrant, in fact.

With apologies to the “Naked City”, let me start this article by saying that there are over nine million political stories in New York City; this is just another one. It’s a story about a podiatrist named Kendall Stewart-who is also a member of the Brooklyn delegation to the New York City Council; it is also about a Brooklyn Senator named Kevin Parker. You can figure out who the hot-head is; this isn’t calculus. Come September next year the two will square off in a primary election for the Democrat’s nod. It is always strange when two incumbents throw-down; given its rarity. This race promises to be a political crack head’s wet dream.

Frequent readers of my posts may recall this http://www.r8ny.com/blog/larry_littlefield/taxes_generational_equity_state_and_local_taxes.html portion of this http://www.r8ny.com/blog/larry_littlefield/taxes_generational_equity_part_one.html analysis last February. By preparing a tax return for a hypothetical Brooklyn retired couple with an income of $75,000, and a hypothetical working couple with a child who also had the exact same income of $75,000, I found that the older couple would have paid just $2,570 in state and local income and property taxes, or 3.4% of their income, in 2006. The young couple, despite having the cost of caring for a child, despite working rather than relaxing at home, despite having the same income, despite not having health insurance while paying Medicaid taxes so the older couple could have health insurance, despite having little wealth rather than a paid up home, would have paid $7,857 in state and local taxes, or 10.5% of their income, in 2006. The state legislature is now prepared to act to correct this obvious unfairness. By providing an additional $200 million in property tax breaks to – senior citizens.

I received a few calls on Monday in response to my 2 posts debunking the New York Post on the issue of drivers’ licenses and voting.

I pointed out to the callers something that the Post reporter apparently does not understand.

A New York State drivers’ license is not now and has never been proof that you are eligible to register to vote!

Like a rabid dog in the last throes of delirium, Senate Republican Leader Joe Bruno is flailing about, wrecking as much havoc as possible before the inevitable. Unfortunately, as always, a Democrat has once again come to his rescue, helping him to live on to face another inglorious day of singing about the virtues of self-reliance while he and his allies rob every last dollar from the public till, because they can. At the end of the film, the cop looks at Jack Nicholson and says “It’s Albany, Jake”.

The only difference between this year and all the others is that this time the Democrat providing Bruno with his life raft has not done it intentionally. Mario Cuomo used to throw Warren Anderson and Ralph Marino bouquets. Eliot thought he was throwing Joe Bruno a rock, but it turned out to be a rope, and now Joe’s hanging him with it. Only in Albany could a Governor catch a legislative leader of the opposite party using state helicopters for political purposes and end up turning it to the leader’s advantage. Now, to top it off, the Governor’s found a way for a man who should be making license plates to be making hay from them instead. It is to weep.