Senator Aubertine claims to have passed Power for Jobs legislation:
“With the deadline looming, we needed to come together to protect these jobs and pass a bill as quickly as possible to give businesses in the program the certainty they need to plan,” said State Sen. Darrel J. Aubertine, chair of the Senate’s Energy and Telecommunications Committee. “I’m pleased that we were able to work out a deal with the Assembly and the Governor to ensure that we extended this program.”
Read: here or here
But his colleague Democratic Senator Jeff Klein has a different version of Tuesday's events in the chamber:
Sen. Jeff Klein then stood and read into the record the
Senate Democrats' argument that any measures passed at the single-house
extraordinary sessions called by the governor are basically moot because the
other house isn't also present to pass same-as bills.
And here is Democratic Senator Eric Schneiderman saying they have not passed Power for Jobs. Watch few minutes in the Capital Tonight video.
And here is Democratic Senator Eric Schneiderman saying they have not passed Power for Jobs. Watch few minutes in the Capital Tonight video.
22 comments:
Clearly lots of confusion going on at the Capitol, so no one really knows what's up. All the more reason not to run out the door and make an announcement that people will rely upon to make investments and hiring decision when the truth isn't clear.
Politics -- and taking credit -- before people.
Call me naive or silly or misinformed, or whatever, but doesn't a bill, any bill, need a minimum of 32 votes to be "passed" in order to go to the other chamber, or if the Senate is the last stop, 32 votes before it can go to the Guv for signature as being "passed?"
Or did I sleep in that class?
If so, how can Sen. Darrel claim credit by saying, "we passed it?"
Did it have the necessary 32 votes or not ... the last time I looked a majority DOES not exist, ergo: it can't pass anything with only 31 votes in a 62-member chamber.
Hi, my name is Larry and this is my brother Darrel and that my other brother Darrel - welcome to the Albany cesspool. I don't remember your name, sorry, I must have a communications problem.
~ dmf
Just another misunderstanding to add to the growing list.
The NYS Senate "leaders" (if we can call anyone down there "leader") are the guilty party to this mess ... without question ... and that is why I like Gov. Paterson in this regard:
* In an angry, lectern-pounding appearance outside his office in the Capitol on Wednesday evening, Mr. Paterson also threatened to file a suit to force senators to come back to work, and said he would look into whether he could direct the state treasury to withhold their pay indefinitely.
“You’re not going home. You’re not getting paid. And you’re not going to disrespect the people of New York anymore,” Paterson said.
IMHO, Gov. Paterson is the ONLY one showing any spine or initiative in trying to resolve this mess.
I totally agree: they SHOULD NOT be paid... not one penny.
They damn sure haven't earned it.
But, I guess Sen. Darrel forgot about that little aspect along with his other bragging rights?
~ dmf
One more thing, read this story carefull and highlight the tapdancing and ducking and blaming... that is pathetic.
Those who caused this are looking for scapegoats ... as they try and repaint themselves as just trying to do their jobs.
And, believe me, the Gov. is not the cause.
Defying Paterson, Senators End Session
Interesting article...
~ dmf
From the NYS Constitution - two key provisions:
Two-thirds bills
§20. The assent of two-thirds of the members elected to each branch of the legislature shall be requisite to every bill appropriating the public moneys or property for local or private purposes.
Article IV, Section 3
Powers and duties of governor
§3. The governor shall be commander-in-chief of the military and naval forces of the state. The governor shall have power to convene the legislature, or the senate only, on extraordinary occasions.
At extraordinary sessions convened pursuant to the provisions of this section no subject shall be acted upon, except such as the governor may recommend for consideration. The governor shall communicate by message to the legislature at every session the condition of the state, and recommend such matters to it as he or she shall judge expedient. The governor shall expedite all such measures as may be resolved upon by the legislature, and shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed. The governor shall receive for his or her services an annual salary to be fixed by joint resolution of the senate and assembly, and there shall be provided for his or her use a suitable and furnished executive residence. (Formerly §4. Renumbered and amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938; further amended by vote of the people November 3, 1953; November 5, 1963; November 6, 2001.)
The Guv is on solid ground - the Senate is NOT.
~ dmf
The NYS Constutition is here
Dan -- The Senate has different rules than the Assembly. As long as the initial role call was valid, you can pass consent bills without 32 members in the chamber. Essentially, as long as a member is considered "present" for he role call they are automatically voting "yes" on all bills on consent even if they are not in the chamber. Although this is just a technicality, I would think somone who would like to represent us in Congress would know this.
Also, for your last post Dan. The Senate technically does not have to "vote" on the bills, they are only required by the constitution ajourn session. They are allowed by law to gavel in and gavel out, or just lay the bills aside.
Also, the Gov has no power what so ever to withhold pay.
He does have the power to call a constitutional convention, but what is the point. The same people who are involved in this whole mess will make a mockery of the constiutional convention as well unless this battle is settled before then.
The constitution is written extremely vague for a reason. Both sides arguments are constitutionally sound for this simple fact. With the courts refusing to rule, it is left up to interpretation.
You need to do some homework Dan.
I would like to thank Darrel's staff for responding to Danny's posts
I would like to thank Darrel's staff for responding to Danny's posts
If you like it or no a resolution was put on the floor on June 8th and a roll call vote started. There was no way the dems could have walked out. I don't care for the guy but I see no way that it was not an official vote to make him president of the senate. Just wonder why no one has went to court to get a ruling on the legal issue of the vote from that day. It would answer a lot of questions.
Who says Senators and their staffs aren't working? You can see Drew's fingerprints all over this blob... and that one ... and that one...
I am not from Darrels staff by the way, just someone who reads the news closely. If you did the same you would get the same information. And Anon 8:54, they did go to court, the court is refusing to rule on matters of politics, probably the right move for them.
They did not go to court to get a ruling on the vote. They went to stop him from taking over if something happens to Patterson. You must not read to much.
They went to court 3 separate times now....the court will not rule on anything...genius...
I don't know who that certain Anonymous thinks he/she is by lecturing me on rules of government in the senate or congress or anywhere else... whoever they are they are dead f**king wrong and I wish they would put their name with their bullshit posts and I hope IV holds their feet to the fire.
Perhaps it is they, not me, who needs to read one more time this document...
The NYS Constitution
I stand by my posts... sadly, you can't, Anonymous Ä$$hølë ...
~ dmf
oooooooo-ooo: King Danny, ruling the world from his little keyboard.
"I don't know who that certain Anonymous thinks he/she is by lecturing me on rules of government in the senate or congress or anywhere else... "
These are the words from a man who thinks he is of a temperament to LEAD others.
He has had a running monologue with HIMSELF on this blog for the past several weeks. THEN he challenges ALL comers to a debate. You have already scared off all the other blog followers.
I don't think most people will take you at your word to be the final reference on matters of NYS Constitution or Public Law.
Anon. 3:50: your post in part directed at me >>>>
"I don't think most people will take you at your word to be the final reference on matters of NYS Constitution or Public Law."
Actually, nitwit, the courts would be the final say-so on constitutional matters were there a dispute amongst the three branches re: law and/or anything being constitutional/unconstitutional - not and certainly not you.
Scurry on.
FYI: I do have the temperment [manner of thinking, behaving, and reacting] to lead and/or to follow, too, for that matter. But, while I'm in either of those modes, I will continue to speak out and not tuck tail and blindly follow... that's not my nature.
More important, I have a public record of leadership across many avenues; just not in elected office (yet).
~ dmf
Sounds like the NY State Senate.
Clarification on the "Power for Jobs" passing, being introduced, sidetracked, stuffed back in Sen. Darrel's tunic, or whatever is here:
Aubertine offers a compromise (but doesn't show to support it?)
My comment is stated clearer above.
~ dmf
FLASH from the "Jefferson Democrat"
Senator Aubertine: A True North Country Leader
Sub Heading: Senator Aubertine describes in plain language how to move the NY State Senate forward.
Radio link there about "Aubertine's Plan"
~ dmf
Anon. 3:50 - my pussy reference meant someone like a soft-fuzzy
little kitty cat (pussy)... did you read something else in there? If so, you missed that boat on that one.
Hiding behind an Anonymous moniker is soft and fuzzy... for whatever reason, IMHO...
Attack me and let me defend myself, but show your face - stand by your convictions like I do, publicly.
That remains my basic point with Anonymous posters no matter where they pop up. To me, it's like facting your accused in court, right?
~ dmf
Post a Comment