Showing posts with label Board of Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Board of Election. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 4, 2014

With Haggerty seeking retrial and Hynes using drug money for campaign consultants, will campaign finance laws ever be reformed ?

State Sen. Malcolm Smith goes to trial for trying to buy the GOP ballot line just days after Gov. Andrew Cuomo "secures" the Working Families ballot line.

A strange convergence of four different election scandals is taking place this week. Former Queens GOP operative John Haggerty, Jr., requested a new trial on technical ground for stealing $750,000 from former Mayor Michael Bloomberg during the 2009 mayoral election as it was revealed that former Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes was using the seized criminal assets in the District Attorney's Office to pay for a campaign consultant.

As if it couldn't get any worse, two politicians are being treated different by prosecutors for essentially having done the same thing.

Why is State Sen. Malcolm Smith facing a corruption and bribery trial for making deals and proposing bribes in order to make a "deal" to get his name on the GOP ballot line in last year's mayoral race, at the same time that newspapers widely reported that Gov. Andrew Cuomo made his own "deal," including offering to contribute to a possible $10 million election fund, to get on the Working Families Party ballot line on this year's gubernatorial race ?

The pattern of corruption in the Haggerty-Hynes cases show how political operatives and elected officials themselves are so starved for corrupt campaign finance money that they will go to great lengths to misuse other people's money. Mr. Haggerty was already convicted in a trial, whereas Mr. Hynes is said to be awaiting possible criminal charges. While State Sen. Smith faces trial over his efforts to buy the GOP line, there's not even a hint that Gov. Cuomo may face criminal charges for trying to possibly buying his way onto the WFP line.

The apparent similarities in these cases, but the unequal application of the law, seem to point to even added corruption in how prosecutors decide which politicos to charge with election and campaign finance crimes.

Saturday, December 8, 2012

Christine Quinn's Watergate ?

Will Quinn's Weaker Campaign Finance Bill Lead To Her Very Own Private Watergate ?

Finding loopholes to funnel unlimited amounts of unregulated campaign cash to influence elections was the scandal, along with the break-in and cover-up, that lead to Watergate and President Richard Nixon's resignation.

When given the chance, why does New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn fight progressive campaign finance reforms ? Why is less campaign finance regulation better ?In the aftermath of the dangerous Citizens United court ruling, which unleashed unlimited corporate spending in political campaigns, why would Speaker Quinn want to go down that route ? What role does campaign money play in her political decisions ?

From The New York Times :

Christine C. Quinn, the City Council speaker and an expected candidate for mayor next year, is supporting a change to New York City’s campaign finance rules that would significantly expand the ability of unions, corporations and advocacy groups to spend money on behalf of local candidates. ...

Critics said the measure, introduced nine months ahead of what is expected to be a closely contested mayoral race, would effectively outsmart the city’s stringent campaign finance system, which tries to rein in spending by interest groups and candidates alike. ...

[C]ritics of the legislation said it would create a new and weaker definition of “coordination,” a change that the Campaign Finance Board says would make it virtually impossible to prove that a mailing was illegally coordinated with a candidate. ... (The New York Times : Quinn Supports Loosening Rules On Campaign Financing By Corporations)

From The Wall Street Journal :

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a likely contender for mayor next year, has riled the agency that administers the city's public campaign-financing system by pushing new legislation that opponents contend would significantly expand the power of unions, corporations and other groups in local elections. (The Wall Street Journal : Quinn Lashed On Campaign Legislation)

Remember, Speaker Quinn is the one, who, in spite of criticism, continues to use slush funds and lulus to thwart the democratic process in City Council.

Are self-serving choices, like supporting weaker campaign finance regulations, one of the reasons why Alec Baldwin said that Speaker Quinn is ''untrustworthy'' ?

Will Christine Quinn's Legislation Create Citizens United in New York City ?

Will Quinn's Weaker Campaign Finance Bill Lead To Her Very Own Private Watergate ?

Finding loopholes to funnel unlimited amounts of unregulated campaign cash to influence elections was the scandal, along with the break-in and cover-up, that lead to Watergate and President Richard Nixon's resignation.

When given the chance, why does New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn fight progressive campaign finance reforms ? Why is less campaign finance regulation better ?In the aftermath of the dangerous Citizens United court ruling, which unleashed unlimited corporate spending in political campaigns, why would Speaker Quinn want to go down that route ? What role does campaign money play in her political decisions ?

From The New York Times :

Christine C. Quinn, the City Council speaker and an expected candidate for mayor next year, is supporting a change to New York City’s campaign finance rules that would significantly expand the ability of unions, corporations and advocacy groups to spend money on behalf of local candidates. ...

Critics said the measure, introduced nine months ahead of what is expected to be a closely contested mayoral race, would effectively outsmart the city’s stringent campaign finance system, which tries to rein in spending by interest groups and candidates alike. ...

[C]ritics of the legislation said it would create a new and weaker definition of “coordination,” a change that the Campaign Finance Board says would make it virtually impossible to prove that a mailing was illegally coordinated with a candidate. ... (The New York Times : Quinn Supports Loosening Rules On Campaign Financing By Corporations)

From The Wall Street Journal :

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a likely contender for mayor next year, has riled the agency that administers the city's public campaign-financing system by pushing new legislation that opponents contend would significantly expand the power of unions, corporations and other groups in local elections. (The Wall Street Journal : Quinn Lashed On Campaign Legislation)

Remember, Speaker Quinn is the one, who despite criticism, continues to use slush funds and lulus to thwart the democratic process in City Council.

Are self-serving choices, like supporting weaker campaign finance regulations, one of the reasons why Alec Baldwin said that Speaker Quinn is ''untrustworthy'' ?

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Coney Island Election Problems

2013 New York City Mayoral Candidate Bill Thompson posted this photograph on Facebook with this caption :

"I just witnessed chaos at 2950 West 33rd Street poll site in Coney Island. The site didn't open until after 9 a.m., and then the machines were not ready. This is the line to vote."

I posted a comment on the photograph, thanking Mr. Thompson for sharing this information. I also asked Mr. Thompson if he would help bring reforms to the Board of Elections. Later in the day, when I went to blog this photo, I noticed that I had been unfriended by Mr. Thompson. So, I guess he won't agree to help bring reforms to the Board of Elections ?

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

BOE Scandal in Charles Rangel and Adriano Espaillat Congressional Race

Board Of Elections Defends Its Work In Disputed Congressional Primary

From NY1 :

As State Senator Adriano Espaillat continues his legal challenge of his primary loss last week to incumbent Congressman Charles Rangel, the city Board Of Elections says it is not to blame for the disputed results.

Rangel reportedly had a 2,300-vote margin of victory on primary night, but that lead has since dwindled to just 802 votes. The Espaillat campaign says roughly 2,100 absentee and affidavit ballots still need to be counted.

Initially, 79 election districts reported a complete lack of votes in the Democratic primary.

Elections officials say the zero-vote tally was entered when police officers could not read the handwritten totals or election inspectors failed to add up the votes. The incomplete count was then shared with the media.

"There's a process that we have to follow in order to do the re-canvas and make sure that every vote is counted and that's what we are charged with," said Pamela Perkins of the Board of Elections. "We are not charged with explaining election night results, because they are not our results."

Espaillat also claims valid ballots are not being counted and some voting machines were broken.

These errors have made the BOE subject to criticism from Mayor Michael Bloomberg, good government groups and newspaper editorial boards, but the board's commissioner said the agency did its best.

"It's unfortunate, but I think that the campaigns are launching incredibly vicious attacks of the hardworking men and women of the Board Of Elections. They're based on absolutely nothing but a conspiracy theory," said BOE Commissioner J.C. Polanco. "The reality is that we have hardworking men and women at the Board Of Elections who work tirelessly to make sure that each one of these ballots gets counted."

Good government groups also question why the initial election results were so erroneous.

"Other states have managed to give unofficial results on election night that are darn close if not completely accurate to the end official tally because they use modern technology in a modern way. It's embarrassing that New York refuses to do that," said Susan Lerner of Common Cause New York.

The BOE is beginning its count of the remaining votes on Thursday.