AMY PAULIN IN THE NEWS
Monday, December 14, 2009
Member item ban in 2010-2011 sees some bipartisan support in Assembly
Legislative Gazette
By Charles Scirbona
Dealing with New York state's fiscal crisis looks to be a major issue when the Legislature reconvenes in January, and lawmakers' discretionary spending appears to be a prime target among some in the Legislature.
Assemblywoman Sandra Galef, a Democrat from Ossining, presented a bold solution when she and Assembly members Amy Paulin, D-Scarsdale, and George Latimer, D-Rye, announced legislation on Dec.3 that would remove member item funds from the 2010-2011 state budget.
The proposed legislation, which has yet to receive a bill number, would save the state between $140 million and $200 million. Galef, who does not participate in receiving and distributing member item funds, said she believes the money that could go toward funding education or health care. "Sacrifice is needed for New York to come out of the recession and sustain a strong foundation for its future," said Galef.
According to Galef, there is no same-as bill ready to be introduced in the Senate, but she mentioned that Sen. José Serrano, D-Bronx, had shown interest in the bill.
When reached for comment, Serrano said he applauded Galef's "courageous position on the issue of member items." Serrano explained his own position, saying, "As a Senate member who ran on the platform of reforming the way we do business in our legislative body, I agree wholeheartedly with her push to rethink the entire member item process."
Member items, which are similar to Congressional earmarks, also known as pork barrel spending, are existing funds in the budget that lawmakers have the discretion to spend on specific projects that are supposed to serve a public purpose. In recent years, member items have been awarded to youth orchestras and football leagues, voluntary fire and ambulance services, municipal celebration committees and libraries, as well as service, charitable and social organizations, ranging from Elk lodges and American Legion posts to Alzheimer's and breast cancer foundations.
Paulin described the state's fiscal crisis as a time when people are struggling to provide basic needs for themselves and their families, saying that when it comes to member items, "we just can't afford them this year." Latimer added "the reality is that we're in difficult times, and we have to ask if discretionary spending is essential. Member items, as valuable as they can be, are discretionary."
Assembly members from both sides of the aisle have joined in supporting the bill since it was announced Nov. 3.
Assemblywoman Teresa Sayward, a Republican from Willsboro, said that since the Legislature left Albany this month without completely closing the budget gap that there will be problems next year when it comes to funding education and health care. "I don't know how we can put [member item] money in the budget and keep a straight face," Sayward said.
Assemblywoman Annie Rabbit, R-Greenwood Lake, also signed on to support the bill during the upcoming regular session. According to Krystal Varrenti, office director for Rabitt, the assemblywoman understands how unfortunate removing member items from the budget will be for nonprofits, but it is something that has to be done.
Josh Fitzpatrick, spokesman for the Assembly's Republican minority conference, said that removing member items from the budget is not a new idea. Fitzpatrick explained that Assembly Minority Leader Brian Kolb, R-Canandaigua, presented this idea to Gov. David A. Paterson on Oct.13 as part of a "series of conversation starters," to give ideas to close the current year budget deficit, which the governor estimated to be $3.2 billion.
All three principle sponsors in the Assembly said that even if the bill did not pass during next year's session they would not accept member item funds from next year's budget. "I recognize the positive aspects of this funding, but we are in the midst of an unprecedented fiscal crisis and can no longer afford business as usual," said Paulin.
Galef said her reasoning came in part from a poll she took of her constituents in a news letter. While she recognizes that it isn't scientific, the majority of respondents said they didn't want member item funds in their district. Latimer called it a matter of principle saying, "If you take a position on something, you must stand by it."
Other legislators, such as Sayward, said that in the past she had refused member items but that she would take the funds this year if the bill failed. "I didn't take member items last year, and the money went back into the member item fund and not the General Fund like I wanted. That's just wrong," said Sayward.
Assemblyman Clifford W. Crouch, R-Guilford, said he also supported the bill but would accept member items should it fail. "We had the offer to reject member items in last year's budget, and I knew that wouldn't save the state one nickel. By not taking the money it would penalize my district, and the funds would just go to someone else's district."
Assemblyman Richard M. Gottfried, a Manhattan Democrat, staunchly opposes the bill. Gottfried explained that it was the proper role for legislators to decide where this money should go and wondered what would become of the people and groups who benefited from member item funds. "Who's going to feed the homeless people in my district? There may be some legislators who don't feel their districts need this money, well bless their hearts. I feel very differently."
Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause New York, agreed that in the current fiscal climate member items were an appropriate place to cut, but said "It's only a temporary solution to a much larger problem."
Lerner also called for a revised system for disbursing member items, saying the current system relies on the good graces of the legislators and is not a reliable source of funds for a nonprofit. "All they need to do is fall out of grace with a particular legislator and they won't receive those funds next year. This is not a good way to mange public funds, period."
However, other good government groups have taken a defensive stance toward the issue of removing member items entirely, even for a single year. "We've never taken a stance that member items should go," said Blair Horner, legislative director for the New York Public Interest Research Group.
Horner said he believes the real problem is not the member items themselves, but how they are distributed. "The core problem is that the system for distributing member items rewards political power." Horner said he hopes that, if anything, the bill would force the Legislature into reworking it's systems to distribute member items fairly and equally to each lawmaker, but says they haven't come that far yet.
Barbara Bartotleti, legislative director of the New York League of Women Voters said her group would not be taking action in support of this bill and that she believes member items to be "not inherently bad." Bartoleti explained that some member item dollars go to fund nonprofits and programs such as Meals on Wheels and said several nonprofits would be hard hit without those funds.
Paulin responded to that concern, saying "member items funds are meant to supplement funding for the groups they are disbursed to, not supplant them." Latimer agreed and said "individuals might see the negative short-term effects, but we have to think of how this will be beneficial in the long term."
###