Showing posts with label Electioneering Payments. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Electioneering Payments. Show all posts

Friday, September 5, 2014

Teachout and Wu sue State Democratic Party, Cuomo, and Hochul

The New York State Democratic Party is violating campaign finance laws by funneling money to prop up the Cuomo-Hochul ticket in next week's gubernatorial Democratic Party primary election, alleges a legal petition filed by the Teachout-Wu campaigns. The petition seeks a temporary restraining order against the State Democratic Party from coordinating the spending of party money on behalf of the Cuomo-Hochul campaigns, amongst other legal reliefs.

Teachout v NYSDC Et Al

While the judge refused to grant the temporary restraining order, a hearing was scheduled for Monday to hear arguments in furtherance and in response to the filing of the legal petition.

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Speaker Mark-Viverito's campaign paid a lobbying firm, which also lobbied back at her on behalf of clients

How much corruption has to happen, before progressive activists protest against City Council, demanding reforms to end the corruptive role of money and lobbyists in New York politics ?

How many Mark-Viverito-lobbyist exposés in The New York Daily News will it take before the Mark-Viverito administration and all of her teams of lobbyists come under federal investigation ?

On the heels of yesterday's blog post about campaign finance questions pertaining to New York City Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito's successful Council speakership campaign, an article in today's The New York Daily News revisits on-going questions over the role of lobbyists in the Speaker Mark-Viverito's administration of the City Council.

In the first few months of this year, Speaker Mark-Viverito has been paying approximately $28,000 to the lobbying firm of Pitta Bishop Del Giorno & Giblin -- at the same time when Pitta Bishop was lobbying Speaker Mark-Viverito on behalf of the lobbying firm's clients.

The lobbying firm of Pitta Bishop essentially rescued Councilmember Mark-Viverito's speakership campaign last year when it appeared that Pitta Bishop took control over Councilmember Mark-Viverito's sagging speakership campaign after she became engulfed in a series of mainstream media exposés in connection with the lobbying firm, The Advance Group, which had been managing her lobbying campaign for the Council speakership. Various political campaigns managed by The Advance Group have since become the subject of a series of recent punitive findings and fines assessed by the city's Campaign Finance Board. Nevertheless, The Advance Group remained involved in Councilmember Mark-Viverito's speakership campaign at the time until she won her lobbying campaign. Since Speaker Mark-Viverito became indebted to her lobbyists, government reform activists question how could municipal ethics and campaign finance regulatory authorities condone her close relationship with these lobbyists. Not only can lobbyists close to the new Council speaker leverage her political indebtedness, but some of these same lobbying firms have also played a role in determining secondary and tertiary City Council leadership assignments, extending the control that lobbyists exert over the municipal legislative body. If you look the media, the City Hall press corps keeps looking the other way when it comes to concerns about illegality.

"Simultaneously paying and being lobbied by the same firm is legal, but the practice has been criticized by good-government groups worried that such a cozy relationship can give lobbyists special access to a politician," reported The New York Daily News.

For years, government reform activists have complained that the culture of corruption in government is allowed to get worse under the enabling eyes of do-nothing regulators, do-less good government groups, and non-plussed mainstream media reporters, who claim that some forms of government and campaign corruption are "perfectly legal." The situational ethics of political hacks acting in regulatory capacities is what undermines the public's confidence in government and in elected officials, but yet for every scandalous conflict of interest between elected officials, like Council Speaker Mark-Viverito, and lobbyists, like those at the firm of Pitta Bishop, is that good government groups and government reform activists rarely propose reforms that effectively render illegal the corruptive role of money and lobbyists in government.

In the time leading up to the City Council vote to determine the next Council speaker, some political bloggers suggested a suite of proposed reforms to overhaul the role of lobbyists in determining leadership posts in the City Council. Some of those reforms, first published on November 24, 2013, in a YouTube video, included :

  1. reform the do-nothing Campaign Finance Board ;
  2. pressure progressives to enforce transparency ;
  3. improve Speakership electioneering reporting ;
  4. end subcontractor loopholes ; and
  5. end the provision of free campaign services, including for the Speakership.

These recommendations, in addition to revoking the cloaking rule that allows lobbyists to avoid disclosure when they lobby the City Council for leadership or administrative appointments and banning campaign consultants who receive payments from the Campaign Finance Board's matching dollar program from acting as municipal lobbyists, can strengthen voter confidence in the integrity of government and in elected officials.

Other reforms can be suggested by voters, government reform activists, and by good government groups. But the media neither invites voters to make recommendations for reforms, nor does the media launch government reform campaigns to support the recommendations of government reform activists working to overhaul this broken political system.

RELATED


City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito paid $28G to lobbying firm for consulting, while they lobbied her on behalf of clients (The New York Daily News)

Media reports show that Melissa Mark-Viverito evaded campaign finance caps by opening second account to fund Council speaker race (NYC : News & Analysis)

More questions about Melissa Mark-Viverito's campaign finances and her lobbyists (NYC : News & Analysis)

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

After gaming NYC campaign finance model, mayor and his allies plan to game the NYS model, too

PUBLISHED : SUN, 09 APR 2014, 09:30 AM
UPDATED : SUN, 11 MAY 2014, 10:00 PM

If we have to depend on the Working Families Party for election and campaign finance reform, we are in big trouble

The $200 million cost of spreading the corrupt New York City campaign finance model to the rest of New York state would form an avalanche of money, and all this money would pick up wild speeds as it hurled straight into the pockets of the corrupt campaign consultants and lobbyists that keep the political system broken and owned by big money donors and special interests. This is not what real reform would look like. Real reform would be banning all private donations, ending the appointment of campaign finance regulators by politicians, and instituting newer, tougher regulations of campaign consultants/lobbyists.

"The WFP, a strong ally of Mayor de Blasio’s and, after a string of victories in last fall’s elections, the most potent player in city politics, believes that winning approval of a public-finance system — which could cost taxpayers $200 million per election cycle — would enhance its quest for higher taxes and more government spending throughout the state."

In it's article, The New York Post lumped the Working Families Party in with "election reformers" and "good government groups." What a joke !

In last year's municipal elections, the most visible Working Families Party political operatives, Scott Levenson and Patrick Gaspard, became the subject of federal complaints over corrupt electioneering activities. These and other corrupt campaign consultants and lobbyists know how to game the system of public matching dollars that once made the New York City model of campaign finance such a darling for government reform activists. However, in the years since its inception, the New York City campaign finance model has shown that it can be exploited by shady lobbyists seeking to make Swiss cheese of city campaign finance regulations. Not only that, but the Working Families Party is said to have many issues with Gov. Andrew Cuomo's neoliberal policies, but the Working Families Party is actually engaging in negotiations to broker a deal to endorse Gov. Cuomo in this year's race reelection race, in spite of Gov. Cuomo's failure to revolutionise campaign finance reform in New York state. It is now possible for candidates to violate caps on political campaign donations by opening several campaign accounts across several jurisdictions and for multiple political campaigns -- all during the same election cycle. Just look at what New York City Councilmeber Melissa Mark-Viverito did in last year's race.

With support from the Working Families Party and operatives loyal to the WFP, Councilmember Mark-Viverito was eligible for four campaign accounts last year: a campaign account, for which there is no transparency, for a Democratic Party District Leader race ; a campaign account for a City Councilmember race that was eligible for public matching dollars in exchange for a spending cap ; a largely unregulated campaign account for a controversial Council speaker race ; and, as icing on the cake, a campaign account for inauguration and transition activities to reward her donors and political operative supporters. Combined, her dependence on a never-ending cycle of corrupt campaign finance spending opens New York City government to the corruptive influence of big money donors, corrupt campaign consultants, and shady special interests and their lobbyists. Add to this the fact that the corrupt political campaign system selects do-nothing officials to nominally oversee campaign finance regulations. In New York City, Rose Gill Hearn oversees the Campaign Finance Board, the city's campaign finance regulatory authority. In her past post as chief of the city's Department of Investigation, Ms. Hearn did nothing in the face of a massive $600 million CityTime fraud by SAIC. If she has no integrity to stop massive corporate fraud, then her corrupt record makes her perfect to keep allowing political operatives and lobbyists to keep gaming the city's campaign finance regulations under the de Blasio administration.

This same model is the vision that the Working Families Party has for the rest of New York state : a campaign finance model that can be gamed and exploited, that leaves elected officials incapable of providing any checks-and-balances on government or corrupt special interests, precisely because all these elected officials are feeding off the nipple of a corrupt campaign finance system that allows big money donors and special interests to set government agenda. It's been reported that the WFP plans to use changes in the state's campaign finance regulations to enact its agenda across the state. But the WFP has shown that what drives its agenda is the source of its campaign donations. In the effort to raise vast amounts of money for state-wide political campaign races, the WFP is going to represent the interests of its donors and the lobbyists, who are paid to conduct these campaign, similar to how the party conducts its business in the city level. How many Bloomberg-era policies have yet to be fully ended or reformed ? If the WFP portrays itself as a reform party, where has it been on the controversial appointment of William Bratton as police commissioner ? What is the WFP going to do to force City Hall to settle the class action lawsuit filed by homeless youths by fully providing the resources to homeless youths so that they can receive shelter, as required by law ? It seems like the WFP isn't interested in reforming some social issues, unless there are big money donors attached to those issues.

In spite of all of his empty rhetoric during last year's campaign season, Mayor Bill de Blasio is still going to allow real estate developers to get their hands of valuable hospital property for zone-busting luxury housing development deals in gentrifying neighborhoods, like what is happening at Long Island College Hospital. Amongst big business special interests, real estate lobbyists and developers have become key mayoral supporters, so it should come as no surprise to see the mayor carry out a city agenda that delivers on the corrupt expectations of real estate developers. On the other end of the political spectrum, you had a Super PAC administrated by Mr. Levenson, the WFP operative and former ACORN spokesman, which spend a million dollars to defeat former Council Speaker Christine Quinn in last year's mayoral race in what some have said was a coordinated act to benefit the mayoral campaign of Bill de Blasio. Further muddling this electioneering controversy is that the NY-CLASS animal rights group and their supporters, trying to enact a noble ban on carriage horses in Central Park, chiefly funded the Super PAC, provided electioneering support to Councilmember Mark-Viverito, and its Super PAC administrator, Mr. Levenson and his lobbying firm, helped to select Councilmember Mark-Viverito as Council speaker, a position from which NY-CLASS would expect Speaker Mark-Viverito to deliver the horse carriage ban.

Once the mayoral race was over, the corruptive role of money in politics cycled out of their Super PAC structures and into 501(c)(4) structures. Witness how the mayor became entangled in a political vendetta against the powerful charter schools executive, Eva Moskowitz. After the mayor took actions to destroy Ms. Moskowitz's charter school corporation, Ms. Moskowitz raised big money donations and launched a powerful multi-million TV attack ad campaign against the mayor. Ms. Moskowitz was so successful that the governor, impressed by her fundraising prowess, came to her rescue ; the mayor, out-raised and out-spent, had to retreat ; and now, the mayor is fighting to resuscitate his damaged popularity poll numbers by mounting his own TV campaign blitz, touting his nominal win in expanding pre-kinder in New York City.

If the mayor needs to keep fluffing his image with political TV commercials, then he's going to have to keep raising more and more special interest money from big money donors. And the Working Families Party, which the mayor co-founded, will undoubtedly keep helping the mayor to keep money in politics, so long as it is to their advantage, meaning that we have very little hope of ending campaign finance corruption in New York. And what can big business interests, like Ms. Moskowitz, learn from these first 100 days of the de Blasio administration ? Keep raising 501(c)(4) political campaign money until it comes time to switch back to Super PAC's, for Ms. Moskowitz has proven herself to be able to challenge Mayor de Blasio in 2017. It's not that her ideology is right, it only comes down to her ability to raise big money donations that can roll over the mayor's political machine in a backdrop of lax campaign regulations and do-nothing regulators. In this vicious cycle, the awareness by the mayor and by his scores of political operatives of Ms. Moskowitz's campaign finance threat frightens the mayor into greater and greater dependence on political campaign donations to fund paid sick day advertising blitz and the pre-kinder commercials. Instead of reforming campaign finance by banning all private donations, along the lines of reforms called for by Green Party gubernatorial candidate Howie Hawkins, the mayor and his team of political operatives are going to double-down on their dependence on big money campaign donors.


QUESTIONING THE NEW YORK CITY CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD

With John Liu's lawsuit against New York City over conflicted city campaign finance regulators, this makes three federal referrals of elections violations, forcing Mayor de Blasio to lawyer-up, recruit special inside election counsel.

After a wave of federal complaints that have been lodged over electioneering violations in last year's municipal elections, Mayor Bill de Blasio has hired a special legal advisor specializing in election law.

Since Mayor de Blasio and City Council Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, and/or their political operatives, are entangled in some of these federal complaints, it should come as no surprise that Mayor de Blasio is now maneuvering to use his public office to defend himself against allegations of wrong-doing that took place during the electioneering of last year's municipal elections.

The three federal complaints lodged following last year's municipal elections :

  1. GOP consultant E. O'Brien Murray argued to the State Department that Patrick Gaspard, a former top White House aide with a deep history in Gotham politics, violated the federal Hatch Act by getting involved in Mayor de Blasio's campaign -- and City Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito's subsequent election as speaker -- while representing the U.S. in South Africa. (GOP Operative Files Hatch Act Complaint Against U.S. Ambassador Patrick Gaspard * The New York Daily News)
  2. Louis Flores, a local political gadfly who ran a blog and wrote a book criticizing Christine Quinn, has filed a complaint with U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara’s criminal division against Scott Levenson and The Advance Group consulting firm, which came under deep scrutiny during the mayoral campaign. (Federal Complaint Filed Against The Advance Group for Election Work * Politicker)
  3. Former New York City Comptroller and failed mayoral candidate John Liu has filed a federal lawsuit against the city and its Campaign Finance Board. He says the board unfairly crippled his campaign by denying him matching funds in last year's race for mayor. (Ex-NYC mayor hopeful sues Campaign Finance Board * AP/The San Francisco Chronicle)


Lax city campaign finance regulators allowed loopholes and exploitation to corrupt the race for the New York City Council Speaker

A series of editorials by the Editorial Board of The New York Daily News slammed City Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito during the Council speaker race, first for circumventing city campaign finance laws, and then for exploiting loopholes in the state's campaign finance laws.

"Mark-Viverito has opened a campaign account under state regulations. She is apparently accepting contributions and apparently paying different consultants to advance her cause. Who’s giving her money and who’s getting her money will not be disclosed until after the speaker’s contest is settled," the Editorial Board wrote in the second editorial, noting, "At the same time, hopefuls Dan Garodnick of Manhattan and Mark Weprin of Queens are dipping into campaign accounts to give tens of thousands of dollars to fellow councilmembers and party organizations," before concluding, "None of this is acceptable."

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Cesspool of Political Corruption Will Only Get Worse Until Sheriff Preet Shuts It Down (Updated)


SPECIAL NEWS UPDATE: FRI, 25 APR 2014, 09:50 AM
Scott Levenson NY-CLASS Christine Quinn Bill de Blasio FBI Investigation into Campaign Corruption photo 2014-04-25TheNewYorkDailyNewsFBIReport_zps189d95ac.png

In the past few weeks, FBI agents have been asking questions about the campaign by the animal rights group NY-CLASS to strong arm former Council Speaker Christine Quinn (center) to support a ban on the iconic horse-drawn carriages, two sources familiar with the matter told The New York Daily News. The horse lobbyists in question include Scott Levenson, and they are linked to Mayor Bill de Blasio (inset). (FBI investigating claim that Christine Quinn was threatened by Scott Levenson for refusing to support carriage horse ban during the mayoral race * The New York Daily News)


PUBLISHED : WED, 19 MAR 2014, 09:07 AM
UPDATED : FRI, 25 APR 2014, 05:40 PM

Super PAC's already lead to corruption, regardless whether annual individual contribution cap is kept at $150,000 or is raised.

Campaign finance expert and Georgetown University government professor Clyde Wilcox added the authority of his expertise to a filing made by New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman in an effort to block a "Republican-backed political action committee to topple the state’s $150,000 annual contribution limit for individuals," The New York Daily News is reporting.

Professor Wilcox warned that many Super PAC's “would be closely linked to individual candidates or to political parties,” inviting quid-pro-quo corruption, The New York Daily News report added.

NYC Is Not For Sale, "a coalition of left-leaning unions, Democratic donors and animal rights groups," according to a report by The New York Daily News, spent $1.1 million broadcasting several TV commercials that were critical of former Council Speaker Christine Quinn in an effort that ultimately boosted Public Advocate Bill de Blasio's mayoral campaign. As if validating Professor Wilcox's fears, in the days leading up to the general election last November, a Republican political activist filed a complaint with city campaign finance regulators, accusing Mr. de Blasio and key supporters of illegally coordinating the activities of the NYC Is Not For Sale Super PAC that spent more than $1 million attacking former Speaker Quinn in the Democratic primary race for mayor, The New York Post reported.

Preet Bharara - The Only Policeman In New York State photo Preet-Bharara-dbpix-henning-tmagArticle-NYTimes_zpsaf6e1719.jpg

As it stands, city and state campaign finance regulators are being pressed by wealthy campaign contributors, big business interests, and corrupt lobbyists to weaken campaign reform laws under the false guise that caps on contributions "unconstitutionally restricts free speech." The only truly impartial and independent authority to enforce regulations is the U.S. Attorney's Office. Pending before those federal prosecutors is a complaint, asking that the Department of Justice determine whether Super PAC's and their lobbyists broke federal laws pertaining to bribery and the illegal coordinating of Super PAC activities with official campaign activities.

2014-03-12 New York Progress and Protection PAC - Declaration of Clyde Wilcox (57)

2014-03-17 New York Progress and Protection PAC - Defs Memo of Law Opposing MSJ (53)

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Daniel Garodnick concedes ; Melissa Mark-Viverito Expected To Become Council Speaker

Saturday, November 2, 2013

True News Investigates Political Expenditures Dark Pool ; Conflicts of Interest ; Damaging Local Impact of Citizens United ; Near Media Silence

Dark Pool Politics - Lobbyists, Meetings, and Backroom Deals are Hidden - Bill de Blasio photo DarkRoomPoliticsSlideExport_zps8f346168.jpg

Eight campaign consultants all but one are also lobbyists, have monopolized NYC elections system that only the Justice Department using the Sherman Antitrust Act can bust. (Organized Crime Politics * True News From Change)

True News Investigates Political Expenditures Dark Pool ; Conflicts of Interest ; Damaging Local Impact of Citizens United ; Near Media Silence

All the Media Silent On Local Impact on Citizens United. We have just gone though the first local election since the Citizen United ruling where two major IE groups Jobs4NY and NYClass has pumped money into almost every first time winning candidate or attacked their opponent. CrainsNY reporter Chris Bragg has done a good job showing that on of the big PAC groups headed by Advance's Scott Levenson was not following the election law and was in some elections working against the interests of his council clients. Only True News has asked where is the media on Citizens United effect on the city's elections. Mark Levine ran in a minority created district he did not even live in won with the help of Jobs4NY, NYClass and United for the Future.* Politicians for Sale (NYT Editorial) The Supreme Court should follow its own precedent and uphold overall campaign contribution limits.

Cuomo's Public Financing Way Out ? As Goo Goos Stand Up For Moreland Commission Independence. . . Cuomo Looks for Exit

Update : Moreland Commission. Cuomo’s Moreland Act Commission on Public Corruption is discussing the possibility of disbanding after recommending that a constitutional amendment be offered to voters for a public campaign finance system, The Times Union writes.

The state Legislature and the governor’s office have interfered with the Moreland Commission’s efforts to investigate corruption in Albany, and sources say that Gov. Andrew Cuomo is considering an exit strategy from the commission, The New York Times reports * The Times Union writes of the need for strong ethics rules and watchdog bodies, praising state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli and Attorney General Eric Schneiderman for their efforts in bringing integrity to government * The TU praises AG Eric Schneiderman and state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli for joining forces to try to restore some ethics to government.

Media Ignores : Large Ongoing Crimes Being Uncovered That Have Nothing to Do With Public Finance. “(A)ccording to people familiar with the commission’s work, the effort to investigate corruption in Albany is burdened by resistance from the Legislature, which has refused requests for information about lawmakers’ outside income, and by unexpected involvement by the governor’s office, which has leaned on the commission to limit the scope of its investigations.”* A Cuomo spokeswoman insisted the commission is “moving forward aggressively.”* The special Moreland Commission appointed by the governor in July will convene again, privately, today, amid a flurry of stories questioning its independence from the Cuomo administration. Recent reports say the commission held back subpoenas at the administration's request, and Capital reported yesterday that commissioners are in discussions with the administration to propose a public campaign finance system as a constitutional amendment. * It's the first step toward negotiating a truce that leaves the commission irrelevant, or, as Jim Odato suggests this morning, nonexistent.


Is Advance Group Gaming Public Fiance ?

Advance Group's Logo on Phony Group Makes Millions in Matching Funds, Main Stream Media Ignores. Several payments that a UUFT super PAC sent to a fictitious political consulting firm “Strategic Consultants” have the Advance Group logo on their invoices.

10.09.13 FOIL Docs-3 by Chris Bragg

Advance Group puts logo on phony firm's invoice( CrainsNY) Last week, The Insider broke the news that the United Federation of Teachers' super PAC had paid more than $370,000 to a fictitious political consulting firm "Strategic Consultants Inc.," which was actually the well-known Manhattan consulting firm the Advance Group. An open records request that came back on Tuesday from the City Campaign Finance Board (and is embedded below) offers fresh and somewhat amusing evidence of the connection between the two: Many of the invoices the agency received from Strategic Consultants have the Advance Group logo on them.* Supreme Court Again Weighs Spending Limits In Campaigns. This decision could = the death of democracy.

It is very clear that Wall Street has Dark Pools where traders operate beyond the regulators. What is not clear is that their are also Dark Pool where lobbyists, campaign consultants and elected officials make deals with each other undermining democracy hidden from public view.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

The Parkside Group's Citizen's United Invisible Campaign Consultant/Lobbyist Operates in Dark Pools

Dark Pool Politics - Lobbyists, Meetings, and Backroom Deals are Hidden - Bill de Blasio photo DarkRoomPoliticsSlideExport_zps8f346168.jpg

NY's Corrupt Campaign Culture Enablers

The Parkside Group's Evan Stavisky is using the Supreme Court's Citizen United ruling to completely hide from the city and state campaign disclosure reporting reporting system. Despite being involved in over 50 campaigns this year, the Parkside name is not in the Campaign Finance Board or NYS Board of Elections campaign disclosure reporting files. How about that Moreland Commission ? Stavisky ran the so-called independent expenditure PSC Jobs4NY, which spent $10 million to elect council members and is now working with the Queens' Democratic organization and other PAC's to elect the next speaker. Last year, Parkside made $1.8 million in lobbying fees. Parkside also took in $2.77 million from Albany legislators' campaigns.

New York's Culture of Corruption is Caused By The Consultants Who Elect Politicians. Campaign Consultants/Lobbyists are often "connected at the hip,” said NYPIRG’s Bill Mahoney. What the NYPIRG worker was saying their is a secret bond between elected officials and those that run their campaigns. What NYPIRG has not looked at is the secret bonds between campaign consultants many of whom are also lobbyist. These secret bonds were not caused by the courts but by the state's weak campaign reporting requirements. Parkside which was paid over $2 million by the Democrat Senate Campaign Committee hires other consultants to do some of the work, but does not have to disclose who they are paying. The big money and lack of rules have developed a secret world of Dark Pool where campaign consultants make deals giving each other work and trade support for their lobbyists clients.

Campign Consultants Working On More Than One Side in the Same Time. This secret horse trading world has not only created a monopoly on who becomes a campaign consultant the money and power the chosen consultants are making and amassing has caused them to become sloppy arrogant as they go for the big money. Incredibly with the help of Citizens United they have found a way to work on more than one side in the same race. The advance group got paid $28,000 by gay city council candidate Yetta Kurland at the same time the firm worked secretly to promote her opponent Cory Johnson’s candidacy through an IE paid for by the UFT via a company called Strategic Consultants—apparently a dummy shell corporation set up to obscure the Advance Group’s double-dealing.True New is working on more examples of campaign consultants working together to game New York's election system and why the DAs, Moreland and AG is silent on the Advance Groups Corruption

Jobs4NY Parkside Helped Elected to the New Council : Margaret S Chin (1), ), Inez E Dickens (9), Andrew Cohen (11), Andrew King (12), Fernando Cabrera (14), Vanessa L Gibson (16), Paul A Vallone (19), Costa G Constantinides (22), Costa G Constantinides (22), Rory Lancman (24), Laurie Cumbo (35), Ritchie Torres (36), Rafael L Espinal, Jr. (37), Alan Maisel (46), Mark Treyger (47), John Mancuso (50)

How Come the Millions Spent By PACS are Not Included in the Lobbyists Tally. About $105 million was spent on lobbying in the first six months of the year, the lowest in five years, according to a JCOPE report.

Another Secret Attack Between Two Elected Officials Through A PAC. Independent Expenditure Effort Raises Eyebrows in the Bronx(NYO) Ms. Mark-Viverito and Assemblyman Luis Sepulveda were two of mayoral front-runner Bill de Blasio’s earliest backers. But behind the scenes–as the two appeared together at press conferences–Mr. Sepulveda’s chief of staff, Kenneth Thomas, was serving as a board member on a political action committee that had set its sights against her.

Sunday, September 8, 2013

George Arzt : The $90,500 Campaign Finance Board Political Donations Man

Updated ! SUN 2013-09-08 06:00:00 EDT

All summer, the lobbyist, campaign consultant, and political insider George Arzt was quoted by the mainstream media as an impartial observer on this year's mayoral race. However, come to find out that he has been part of a group of politicos having weekly meetings strategizing how to install New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn as Michael Bloomberg's successor. Not only that, but according to the information on the Campaign Finance Board's Web site, employees that disclosed their relationship with one of Mr. Arzt's lobbying clients, Extell, funneled $11,675 in political donations to Christine Quinn's campaign accounts. What gives reporters the basis to trust Mr. Arzt, when he said he had no horse in this race ? (Politicker : Christine Quinn Takes a Seat at Ed Koch’s Table with George Arzt Holding Court, too)

George Arzt is a political adviser, lobbyist, spokesman, public relations consultant, and a very generous campaign contributor.

One of George Arzt's clients is Extell, and Extell is the sponsor of the exclusive, luxury condo called One57 that is the target of an investigation by the Moreland Commission for possible corruption. Extell has funneled approximately $75,000 in campaign contributions.

According to this report, generated moments ago from the New York City Campaign Finance Board Web site, Mr. Arzt has contributed $90,500 in political donations to municipal candidates since 1993.

2013-08-23 George Arzt Campaign Donations - Master List - Quick Search - New York City Campaign Finance Boa...

According to the information on the Campaign Finance Board Web site, employees that disclosed their relationship with Extell funneled $11,675 in political donations to Christine Quinn's campaign accounts.

2013-08-23 Extell - Christine Quinn Advanced Search - New York City Campaign Finance Board

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Quinn Flip Flops On Outside Campaign Finance Corruption

With State Senator Brad Hoylman at her side, New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said that she was changing her mind about accepting the corruptive influence of outside campaign money to help boost her sagging bid in this year's mayoral race.

In April, Speaker Quinn denounced the use of outside campaign money, sometimes called "independent expenditures" to soften the sound of corruption. That was back when Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign was ahead in the polls. But then in late June, once Speaker Quinn's campaign began a sharp nose-dive, she welcomed the assistance of outside campaign money.

Meanwhile, it was Speaker Quinn who supported loosening restrictions on the role of corporations in being able to spend money to influence municipal elections when she watered down the city's campaign finance laws.

Six More Years Of Christine Quinn's Slush Fund Scandal

Christine Quinn and Her On-Going Slush Fund Scandal ... Six Years Later

New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s opponents in the mayoral race are trying to resurrect the “slush fund scandal”, when the Council allegedly assigned millions of dollars to fictitious organizations, The Wall Street Journal writes (via City & State) : Campaigns Hit Quinn on 'Slush Fund'

Monday, January 28, 2013

@ChrisCQuinn and #CocaCola #PaytoPlay #SugaryDrinksBan Corruption (White Lines Remix)

Coke Executives Make Drop Into Christine Quinn's Mayoral Campaign

From The New York Times : Quinn, Cool to Soda Ban, Gets Donations From Coke
By MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM
Published: January 25, 2013

The American soft-drink industry, fighting Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's restrictions on sugary drink sizes, is courting a lawmaker who could eventually have the influence to overturn the rules: Christine C. Quinn, the City Council speaker and a leading mayoral candidate.

Executives from the Coca-Cola Company donated nearly $10,000 this month to Ms. Quinn's campaign, public records show, days before industry lawyers argued against the mayor's plan in State Supreme Court.

The industry, fearful that New York City's first-in-the-nation limits will erode profits and spawn copycat policies around the country, is hopeful that Mr. Bloomberg's plan can be undone by legislative or executive action once City Hall changes hands at the end of this year.

No other mayoral candidate appeared to benefit from the beverage industry's largess, although several of Ms. Quinn's rivals, including Comptroller John C. Liu and one of his predecessors, William C. Thompson Jr., have been outspoken in their criticism of the drink restrictions.

The Coke executives' campaign contributions represented a noticeable sum for Ms. Quinn, who has expressed unease with the soda limits, which would restrict sales of sugary drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces.

She has suggested that the measure is punitive and will not necessarily be effective at limiting calorie intake, as Mr. Bloomberg has argued. Still, Ms. Quinn, an ally of his, declined to take up legislation to overturn the restrictions, which were approved by the Board of Health last fall and are set to take effect in March.

A spokesman for Ms. Quinn's campaign declined to comment on Friday on the contribution.

The soft-drink industry, which has given millions of dollars to politicians as it fights taxes and restrictions on its products, has aggressively courted New York lawmakers since Mr. Bloomberg unveiled his proposal last spring.

This month, the political arm of Coca-Cola contributed $1,000 to the campaign of Councilwoman Letitia James, a candidate for city public advocate who emerged as a leading opponent of the mayor's plan, records show. In November, Melissa Mark-Viverito, another councilwoman who criticized the mayor's plan, received $75 from a marketing official at PepsiCo.

The contributions to Ms. Quinn, which totaled $9,750 and ranged from $500 to $1,500 apiece, came from 16 high-ranking Coca-Cola employees, some based at the company's Atlanta headquarters, including Clyde C. Tuggle, the senior chief public affairs and communications officer, and Sonya Soutus, a senior vice president for public affairs.

"We support candidates that promote fair policies that enrich the communities and marketplaces where Coca-Cola employees live and work," Gary McElyea, a spokesman for Coca-Cola, said by e-mail.

Officials at Pepsi also contributed $175 each to the campaigns of Daniel R. Garodnick, a councilman, and Reshma Saujani, who is running for public advocate, in the last four months. A manager for Coca-Cola in the Bronx gave $175 to the Council campaign of Robert H. Waterman, a Brooklyn pastor.

A version of this article appeared in print on January 26, 2013, on page A17 of the New York edition with the headline: Quinn, Cool to Soda Ban, Gets Donations From Coke.

This is a political parody slideshow that was composed with editorial criticism and satire.

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Quinn Weakens Campaign Finance Laws For Corporations

New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn thinks that corporations are people, too, and that they deserve to be counted as member organizations in order to allow corporations to use corporate money to influence the outcome of elections.

New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn achieved a life-long dream to weaken campaign finance laws yesterday. A new bill, which was passed with almost unanimous support through the New York City Council, was nominally promised to help unions, but the dark side of the bill is a backdoor loophole that exempts corporations from disclosing election-related communications with their employees, stockholders, directors, and other stakeholders about activities that corporations undertake to endorse and support corrupt candidates.

Read also :

"City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, facing accusations that legislation she championed opened a 'gaping loophole' in New York City's campaign-finance system, backed off her proposal and oversaw the passage of a watered-down bill Wednesday that reduced the reporting requirements for unions, corporations and advocacy groups." (Council Eases Finance Rules * The Wall Street Journal)

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Susman and Quinn Violate Campaign Finance Disclosure (No Surprise)

Is Pfizer executive Sally Susman, who has reached her cap of in-kind campaign contributions to Christine Quinn's undeclared mayoral campaign, deliberately trying to exceed campaign finance restrictions ? What kind of shady campaign finance chair is running Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign ?

Speaker Quinn has had a history of campaign finance ethics. Remember how Maura Keaney has had several questions raise about her campaign work on behalf of Speaker Quinn, including getting busted one time, which resulted in fines imposed on Ms. Keaney ?

Saturday, September 15, 2012

The Committee To Frack New York ?

Update #2 : My blog post below was written independently last night, but I just found a more detailed investigation posted on the Internet with the same title : Shift by Cuomo on Gas Drilling Prompts Both Anger and Praise (Revised : Monday 1 Oct 2012 6:20 a.m.)

Update #1 : My blog post below was written independently last night, but I just found a more detailed investigation posted on the Internet with the same title : The Committee to Frack New York ? (Revised : Sunday 16 Sept 2012 8:20 a.m.)

Shady Pro-Cuomo Lobby Group Allowed to Hide Donor Names

Are there any "straw donors," who gave money to the Committee To Save New York ? Are there any donors, who are fracking lobbyists or shale oil companies ? We'll never know, because Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is on the cusp of either approving or rejecting fracking near the precious and irreplaceable Hudson River, exerts undue influence over the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE).

Giving JCOPE and voters full transparency and disclosure about the Committee to Save New York would be one way for voters to have faith in the integrity of the fracking review process.

It's been revealed that environmental groups, government accountability activists, and advocates of greater government transparency are worried that the Cuomo administration has been going out of its way to cuddle with special interests linked to the oil and gas industry.

"New York regulators gave natural gas drilling industry representatives exclusive access to draft regulations for shale gas drilling as early as six weeks before they were made public, according to records obtained by the Environmental Working Group through New York's Freedom of Information Law," reported the Environmental Working Group.

Gov. Cuomo is setting off all kinds of alarm bells, because it appears that the Cuomo administration isn't even going to order a healthcare study about the impacts of allowing fracking to pollute New York state.

To make matters worse, nobody knows what influence campaign contributions will have on the Cuomo administration's fracking decision. And to murky up the waters, the state ethics panel, JCOPE, recently ruled that the Committee to Save New York, a lobbying group that promotes Gov. Cuomo's political activities, can "keep secret the identities of a vast majority of millionaire donors" who have been financing the lobbying group, according to The New York Times.

Read the investigative report : The Committee to Save 1% New York.

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Occupy Victory Over Obama Evolution On Citizens United

Earlier today, U.S. President Barack Obama announced during a Reddit chat that he was now open to a legislative remedy to put an end to a controversial 2010 Supreme Court decision that allows corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. That case came to be known by the name of its appellant, Citizens United.

“Over the longer term, I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United (assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t revisit it),” he wrote. “Even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight of the super-PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change.”

President Obama's sudden change of heart over the unlimited influence of corporate money in campaigns comes as his re-election campaign comes to a close, and after his own campaign has benefitted from tens of millions of dollars raised through Super-PAC's, such as "Priorities USA Action, the super PAC that is supporting his candidacy and run by a former White House communications aide," reported The Huffington Post.

Groups that have been fighting the undemocratic influence that the Citizens United decision is having on elections in the United State see President Obama's newly expressed rhetoric as a starting place, but until his administration takes action, there is no telling how committed President Obama really is to election reform.

One of the winners of President Obama's "evolution" on Citizens United is the Occupy Wall Street movement. On January, 3, 2012, the New York City General Assembly of the Occupy Wall Street movement officially called for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United decision (See NYCGA Notes).

Saturday, February 19, 2011

2009 Campaign Payments Fraud - Update

The New York Times reported :
''Suit Suggests Political Party Knew of Fraud''

UPDATED !
In contradictory new developments in the trial against GOP operative John Haggerty, prosecutors from the Manhattan District Attorney's office allege that ''Mr. Haggerty lied to the Bloomberg campaign to get it to pay $1.2 million to the Independence Party,'' according to court documents released on February 17 and reported about by The Times.

How did Mr. Haggerty lie to the Bloomberg campaign to get it to pay $1.2 million to the Independence Party, if the campaign to reëlect the mayor (CREEM) knowingly used Mayor Bloomberg's private banking accounts to ''wash in'' money in order to deliberately funnel the Independence Party donations to Mr. Haggerty ?

What is more, the reporter Aram Roston from PolitickerNY has raised questions about Mayor Bloomberg's pattern in using private donations for campaign-related activities. Indeed, in court filings made on December 15, 2010, in the criminal trial against Mr. Haggerty, defense attorneys made assertions that CREEM "intentionally chose the least transparent way possible to conduct ballot security....It was Mr. Bloomberg who chose to hide payments, not Mr. Haggerty," reported The Wall Street Journal. The Journal's article added :

Mr. Haggerty's attorneys suggested the district attorney's office should "commence an investigation immediately" into the possibility that the mayor violated laws by transferring personal funds to the Independence Party for the direct purpose of helping his campaign with a ballot-security operation. If Mr. Bloomberg "made the contribution directing how it should be spent, he would be in violation of both the New York State Election Law and the New York City Campaign finance Law," Mr. Haggerty's attorneys allege.

According to New York State law, contributions in excess of $94,200 to a state political party are prohibited from being used to promote a candidate, The Journal reported. Furthermore, New York City law requires politicians' electoral campaigns to report and disclose campaign-related expenditures, and The Journal added that Mayor Bloomberg's ballot-security operations expenditures were not reported or disclosed by CREEM.

Adding to the lack of transparency about Mayor Bloomberg's intent in structuring the expeditures by transferring personal funds to the Independence Party is the fact that the Mayor's Office refuses to release all related e-mails about campaign-related activities. After The New York Post filed a Freedom of Information request, demanding more information about Mr. Haggerty's involvement with the Mayor's Office, the Mayor's Office release only "nine e-mail exchanges" between Mr. Haggerty and "mayoral aides" during 2008 and 2009. "There were other e-mails that the mayor's refuses to release on the grounds of 'personal privacy,' " The Post reported.

Meanwhile, back to The Times's own report about the February 17 court documents : this is the first time that prosecutors have said the Independence Party may have known about the alleged fraud. But The Times seems to be continuing with the storyline that the ''fraud'' committed was that the act that Mr. Haggerty used the CREEM payments for personal use, not that CREEM failed to disclose Mr. Haggerty's work as campaign-related activities.

''An extensive review of records and campaign documents by The Observer, as well as interviews with witnesses, indicate that Mr. Bloomberg funneled money to Mr. Haggerty, who claimed to be a 'volunteer,' sidestepping the political committee the mayor had promised to use to finance his election campaign. By deploying Mr. Haggerty and an unrelated political party, the mayor's team avoided drawing attention to a controversial election day tactic. But even more serious, experts say Bloomberg may have broken campaign finance laws,'' reported Mr. Roston.

The way that CREEM structured the payments to Mr. Haggerty allowed CREEM to avoid having to legally disclose the payments (and controversial activities), and the structure troubles some legal experts. "This is clearly an attempt to evade the purpose of the law," John Moscow, a former white-collar prosecutor in Manhattan, told Mr. Roston.

Meanwhile, the artist and blogger Suzannah B. Troy offers a slightly different political analysis. Mr. Haggerty is a "fall guy," she wrote. ''I have been saying all along Haggerty is innocent ! John Haggerty is as innocent as Mike Bloomberg,'' wrote Ms. Troy. ''Technically there is no doubt Haggerty broke the law but so did Mike Bloomberg by wiring money from his personal account, 1.1 million dollars the day before the election !''

The controversial campaign reëlection-related services that Mr. Haggerty was hired to provide have been described as a ''ballot security operation.'' In Mr. Roston's article, the impression of the ballot security operation was to presumably discourage or fend off the voters of Mr. Bloomberg's opponent, Controller Bill Thompson (D), an African-American. Although alluded to, left unsaid was whether the ballot security operation was intended to deliberately turn away Mr. Thompson's African-American voters from the polls.

Thursday, February 3, 2011

At Quinn Protest, A Use of City Resources for Campaign Activities ?

Is Speaker Quinn using city resources, and police,
for campaign activities ?

At a political fundraiser on the evening of Feb. 2, 2011, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn deployed a large team of police officers. Three peaceful protesters, myself included, gathered to hold up a banner, asking for a new hospital for the Lower West Side of Manhattan, to replace St. Vincent's. Police told us to move, and one officer pushed me to get me to move, even though we were on a public sidewalk and not blocking traffic. Plus, there were no barricades, to indicate that there was a restricted zone. Is Speaker Quinn using city resources, and police, for campaign activities ? Who is instructing NYPD to intimidate protesters ?

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Haggerty, Sheekey planned to hide campaign payments

''Indicted campaign aide John Haggerty points finger at Mayor Bloomberg's former deputy mayor,'' reports The New York Daily News.

In motion papers filed yesterday, lawyers for indicted campaign worker John F. Haggerty, Jr., asserted that Mayor Michael Bloomberg's 2009 reëlection campaign had structured ''donation'' payments from the mayor's private bank accounts to the Independence Party, with the participation of Deputy Mayor Kevin Sheekey.

"Bloomberg's money went into the party's 'housekeeping account,' which is supposed to support only general party activities," reported Adam Lisberg from The Daily News.

Besides the millions that Mayor Bloomberg spent from his campaign committee account, he also has spent unknown millions from his personal (private) bank accounts, as well as having made millions of dollars in ''donations'' to charitable organisations in exchange for their political support in overturning the term limits law.

Here we begin to see clear evidence of a three-tiered campaign funding operation, where only one tier was ever meant to be disclosed or reported.