Who's to Blame for the MTA Mess? Everyone

While the Doomsday budget was avoided thanks to yet another bailout (this one coming from New York in the form of, among other things, a payroll tax), that doesn't mean that service cuts and fare hikes were not going to happen. Today the single-ride fare for buses and subways went from $2.00 to $2.25 and the monthly went from $81 to $89. It's OK, though, because this is an economic boom time and people have money to burn. Oh, wait...

So who is to blame? Some will blame Albany for not stepping in to completely alleviate the MTA's budgetary issues, others will blame the MTA for allowing things like pensions and other costs get out of control. I, however, will take the middle road and say it is both parties' faults.

First up: Albany. Let's go back to early last year when the buzz phrase was "congestion pricing." Charge a fee to take your car into the most congested areas of Manhattan (below 60th Street) between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. It made sense; if you want the luxury of driving in Manhattan you pay for it. Let's not forget that driving is not a right, it's a privilege. The money generated from said congestion pricing (around $491 million a year) would go to mass transit improvements which are desperately needed, despite it being a great system already). But those in the city and in Albany could not muster the political stones to put it to a vote in the capital, and *POOF* it disappeared like the governor of South Carolina.

Then Albany could not pass a measure as simple and common sense-laden as tolls on East River and Harlem River bridges. Every other bridge and tunnel in the city is tolled, why should these be any different? They could not even pass a measure making it a $2 toll (the same as a MetroCard single ride). Who was one of the "gang of three" (as the Daily News dubbed them)? Pedro freakin' Espada. You can't make this stuff up.

Now onto the MTA. One thing that we hear a lot about now is pensions. Work in a public outfit (police, fire, mass transit) retire in 20 years with a fat pension. The only problem with that is that the contributions workers put into those pension programs do not equal what they receive in the end (with the latter being much more than the former). So who pays for that money? States and municipalities via (you guessed it) your taxes. Pension payments have the ability to bankrupt state and local governments - and that nightmare could become reality if something is not done about it (see California). Massachusetts recognizes the danger that an out-of-control pension system can create and has taken the beginning steps to reign it in.

So what happens when the MTA tries to reel in pension costs by (gasp) asking the future recipients of said pensions to contribute more to their future pensions (akin to a 401k)? The workers strike. Here is the one time that the MTA stood up to the unions, the unions reacted negatively, and the MTA ended up putting its tail between its legs and wetting itself. Then-chairman of the troubled authority, Peter Kalikow, later publicly admitted that it was a mistake to ask workers to put more of their money into a system that gives them money later, saving the general public millions of dollars. Again, you cannot make this up.

So here we are, paying $2.25 a ride while getting service cut during the worst recession in recent memory. We had chances to forestall or maybe even avoid something like this (pension reform, congestion pricing, tolls on untolled bridges), but thanks to a smorgasbord of incompetence from everyone involved, the citizen is left holding the bag (in this case, a bag filled with ineptitude and others' debt). Some people are optimistic, though. Take Debbie Peiser, a hair and makeup artist from the Lower East Side: "It's not like it's an extra dollar each ride. If things are going to improve, then I don't mind it." Her biggest complaint? "I swiped it, and I was expecting a round number." Oh, to be young and naive.

MTA subway (junkyardparadise's flickr), Albany, where seemingly little gets done (Tyler McCall's flickr),

Climate Bill Passes by an All-Too-Thin Margin

The U.S. House of Representatives just passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 by a margin of seven votes, 219 to 212. Kudos to Chairmen Waxman and Markey for taking the lead on the most crucial issue of the next several generations, the threat of global climate change. Many perceive the issue as an environmental one, and one that is only a victory for "environmentalists." But that couldn't be further from the truth.

As I have touched on many times, climate change is an all-encompassing issue that threatens a seemingly endless variety of other issues. You might personally believe that healthcare, civil liberties, war, or any number of other issues is a bigger priority than climate change, a supposedly futuristic notion predicated upon shaky science. But every issue being debated in the United States today can in some way be connected to climate change—or at least related policies.

Tom Friedman wrote in Tuesday's Times that weaning ourselves off of oil could serve to undermine oppressive oil-rich regimes in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. Many countries rich from oil use their profits to invest in nuclear weapons or fund terrorism. Anyone care to do something about nukes and terrorists? Isn't that why we're in Iraq and Afghanistan (or at least Afghanistan)? Isn't that why we're so frightened of Iran?

If we don't address climate change, the healthcare issue will only be exacerbated. Airborne diseases will increase with increased temperatures, including potential epidemics for which we are ill prepared.

If we don't address climate change, refugees of floods, droughts, and desertified lands will try to flee to other countries to rebuild their lives, and as we see all over Africa and Asia, an increase in ethnically diverse populations in economically depressed regions competing for the same jobs and resources tends to lead to intrastate conflict that can easily spread across borders. Want to help prevent war? Help prevent climate change.

Even the agricultural community in the United States, who lobbied hard enough to essentially fend off any potential regulation of greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural sector, would be drastically affected by even a minor change in temperature and climate conditions. But the major problem here is that no one thinks in the long term.

And that is exactly why Republicans, only eight of whom voted for the legislation today, are able to exploit it for political gains. 'It only amounts to a tax,' they say. 'It will only hurt American business and force consumers to pay more for their heat, power, and gasoline.' For them, it's not about preventing disaster across the world. It's about winning back a Republican majority in the United States Congress by exploiting myopic concerns. But climate change is not just an environmental issue, and it's sure not a partisan issue. It has somehow devolved into both over the course of the debate on regulation, and will inevitably cause forward-thinking politicians to lose their seats. This is the unfortunate reality in a democracy like ours of standing up for what is right, even if it may not be exceptionally popular in the short run.

So the Waxman-Markey bill, even though it was watered down excessively to cater to wealthy businesses and utilities and power-wielding lobbyists, has finally passed. No one knows if it will accomplish anything near what scientists say we need to. But at least it's a start. And now the issue will move on to the Senate, where it will be diluted even more, and progress will only be hindered further. In 40 years, we'll all look back at this and wonder how we could have been so ignorant. Those who opposed the bill are on the wrong side of history, just as the anti-civil rights folks were in the '50s and '60s. But in the realm of climate change, by the time that fact is universally accepted, it could very well be too late.

Images: Climate rally outside Capitol (Wall Street Journal), Ahmadinejad in front of oil refinery (New York Times), Republican opponents to ACES (TreeHugger)

Welcome to the Party, South Carolina

Mark Sanford (NYTimes)

At 8:40 pm last night I received an excellent BBM message from a dear friend out on the left coast asking an excellent question: "My state is broke, yours is run by children. What's worse?" I told him that was a tough one, but it's nice to now know that New York and California are joined in embarrassment and shame by South Carolina, whose governor ran off to Argentina without telling anyone so that he could indulge in everything that Buenos Aires has to offer - including his mistress. That's right, Governor Mark Sanford traveled nearly 5,000 miles for a booty call.

Of course, this is not the first time that South Carolina's public officials have made the state proud. When the Sanford news broke and we found out why his wife "wasn't concerned" about him (which makes sense now), there was talk of who would run the state in his absence. Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer seized the opportunity for some exposure and possibly some boost in poll numbers by announcing to South Carolina that the governor's staff did not know where the governor was. Bauer and Sanford are not the best of friends (clearly) and Bauer is actually gunning for the governorship next year when Sanford is forced out due to term limits (though it seems at this point that he will not have the incumbent's support.)

Sanford also happens to be one of those Republicans who opposes gay marriage. Other than being on the wrong side of history, Sanford really lays his cards out on the table here. In a May 7, 2009 CBS column laying out a case as to how the GOP could save itself, Sanford says "First, get back to the principle of saying what you mean and meaning what you say." Sanford says that marriage is between a man and a woman, yet on Father's Day weekend he flies nearly 5,000 miles to have some secret rendezvous with a woman who was not his wife. Say one thing and try to influence legislation that would negatively affect millions of Americans, but don't follow your own words and treat marriage like a joke. Sanford wants to have his cake and eat it, too.

So I guess Sanford can join John Ensign down at the end of the bar reserved for Republican 2012 hypocrites boosting Romney's and Gingrich's chances for the Republican primary. I bet Sanford is wishing he did take that hike in Appalachia rather than see his other woman in Argentina. But, in his own words, he wanted "to do something more exotic."

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Monserrate and Espada: Out of Control

Hiram Monserrate and Pedro Espada, Jr. have taken their egomaniacal actions to astronomical new heights today, with Monserrate comparing himself to Jesus Christ and Espada saying that he is a victim of a "jihad." Monserrate's words came while he was speaking on Al Sharpton's radio show over the weekend at Sharpton's National Action Network. Espada's came while speaking to a Latino advocacy group in the state capital.

Monserrate started his Jesus comparison by saying that he would never compare himself to anyone in the Bible: "You know, I'm never gonna compare myself to anyone in the biblical context." Monserrate went on to say that he remembers Jesus turning over tables in the temple (as if he were there) to get people to do their business correctly. Monserrate compared what he is doing in the state senate to Jesus causing a ruckus in the temples. The irony of Monserrate turning his back on his party to get back at one guy he had a personal beef with being more in line with Judas' actions than Jesus' is apparently lost on him.

Monserrate acknowledges, however, that his actions could cost him politically. He stated, "If it costs my election one day because I decided to turn over a table or two and say business gotta be done different, then so be it." I cannot ignore the horrific grammar offered up by Monserrate. I like my representatives to be smarter than I am (not a very difficult thing to do), and even I know that the phrase "and say business gotta be done different" is cringe-inducing to anyone with more than 5 years of formal schooling - and I don't even need Strunk's Elements of Style to tell me that. If, in fact, Monserrate is elected to another term (that is, assuming he is not a felon at that point and is kicked out the state senate) is elected again, I will do anything I can to avoid Jackson Heights, Corona, East Elmhurst, Elmhurst, and Woodside, as well as lose all hope in humanity.

On to moron number 2: Pedro Espada, Jr. He feels that any animosity hurled his way is simply a "jihad" against him, not due to the fact that he is an hubristic, egocentric puppet controlled by a grumpy billionaire who has brought the state's political process to its knees while he deals with some personal problems with Malcolm Smith. Let's again look at the word jihad. Because of a distortion from a radical group of Muslim extremists, many people mistake the whole theory of jihad to be death to any non-believer of Islam. In reality, jihad is an inner struggle to live one's life in the way that Allah would like. So to be clear, Espada might benefit from a jihad, in so much that it requires personal reflection and a correction of one's errors in judgment and actions.

These two state senators are out of control in terms of their egocentrism. You cannot make it up: Monserrate is comparing himself to Jesus Christ and Espada claims that there is a jihad against him. The saddest thing about all of this is that Monserrate and Espada actually believe what they are saying, and that's where things get dangerous. Almost everyone sees through these two clowns; the Daily News excoriated Espada over his living quarters after a staged tour of his "residence" in the Bronx. And no one's forgotten about Monserrate slashing his girlfriend's face open with broken glass. Jesus certainly never did that to anyone. Peace.

Photos - Monserrate at the National Action Network on Saturday (NY Daily News), Espada pulling a Vanna White in his Bronx "home" (NY Daily News)

Ag Committee/Lobby Stymies Climate Regulations

H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, finally passed through the Energy and Commerce Committee of the House a few weeks ago, after weeks and weeks of tough negotiations, and lots of unfortunate compromises that will only serve to further slow the process of cutting carbon emissions in the United States. Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, the crafters of the original bill, have since been meeting with lawmakers in the House, explaining to them the functions of various components of the bill, as well as the "safety valves" encouraged by more conservative Democrats like Rick Boucher, who have also recently been promoting the merits of the bill to Congress.

Now, with Speaker Pelosi interested in calling the bill to a floor vote possibly within a week, one great obstacle has stood in the way of passage: the House Agriculture Committee. The chair of the committee, Collin Peterson, a Democrat who represents all of western Minnesota, has remained stubbornly opposed to the bill's passage, not because it directly impacts farmers, but because it doesn't benefit them enough. Peterson wants to be able to enhance the ability for farmers and agrobusinesses to reap the benefits of biofuels such as corn ethanol, as well as give them more opportunities to sell carbon offsets to other polluters.

The ag business community is most fervently opposed to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) having any role in compelling them to monitor their greenhouse gas emissions, and Peterson actually sponsored an amendment to cut off funding for the EPA's analysis into whether corn ethanol actually has such a great deal of indirect carbon emissions associated with its life cycle that it is in some ways more harmful than gasoline. Cutting of funds for a scientific analysis—now there's a useful way to get your agenda across.

And Peterson's committee is certainly not the only one that's helping to squander our best chance to address climate change. The House Appropriations Committeee just approved an interior appropriations bill establishing the EPA's budget for fiscal year 2010, but incorporated two amendments wherein 1) the agency is not allowed to tell farmers to even report their emissions, and 2) all livestock operations are exempt from possible future climate regulations. The ag lobby seems to have Congress right where they want them.

The worst part is this quote by Rep. Peterson:

My problem this year is it's been so cold that the crops aren't coming up. And they're saying to us, 'Oh, it's such a big problem because it's going to be warmer than it usually is.' My farmers are going to say that's a good thing—we're going to be able to grow more corn.

Well, while south Asian countries are being flooded, Pacific islands are submerging, desertification is rendering African farmland unusable, ice caps are melting, weather conditions are becoming more erratic, and millennia-old ecosystems are being quickly destroyed, at least Minnesota farmers might have a few good harvests.

Images: Collin Peterson (umn.edu), ag lobby cartoon (greenscissors.com), corn field (Climate Chnage Connection)

Dumb and Dumber: Hiram Monserrate and Pedro Espada

Anyone in the tri-state area knows that the embarrassment that is Albany has reached new heights the past week, with two state senators defecting from the Democratic side of the aisle to caucus with the Republicans. The two flip-floppers, Hiram Monserrate of Queens and Pedro Espada of the Bronx (or Mamaroneck, but more on that later), claimed that they pulled their childish antics - which held the legislative process hostage during a crucial time for lawmakers - for their constituents, for the people of New York, to change how things in Albany are done. When you peel back the thin veneer of false justification, however, it's clear what really motivated the coup: a grumpy billionaire upset about his taxes, personal beef with fellow senators, and straight-up narcissism.

Let's start with the grumpy billionaire. His name is Tom Golisano. In a nutshell, he helped Malcolm A. Smith (the politician formerly known as state senate president) and fellow Democrats take control of the political body by throwing money into their campaign coffers. For this, he felt that Smith should not tax him and his fellow noblemen. Smith went ahead and did anyway, and that did not leave big man Golisano happy. When Smith did not pay the requisite attention Golisano thought his presence deserved, he devised a plan to oust Smith from his seat as president and majority leader.

If Golisano wanted Smith out as majority leader, he would need a new majority. That's where Golisano's top political adviser, Steve Pigeon, comes in. Pigeon is a good friend of Pedro Espada, who also had beef with Malcolm A. Smith. See, Espada had backed Malcolm Smith in his bid for the state senate presidency and when Smith gained that position, Espada wanted some perks, including an extra capital office, $100 Gs for office rent back in his Bronx district and a bunch more staff members. Smith said no.

But getting only one Democrat to switch sides would leave the state senate in a 31-31 tie. To fully ensure that Smith was dethroned, one more state senator was needed. Enter Hiram Monserrate, who is most known for slashing his girlfriend in the face with broken glass. Monserrate has made no bones about his motives for switching; he's already moved back to the Democrats' side, saying he's happy that Smith is no longer the leader.

So it's an hierarchy of puppetry going on here, with billionaire Tom Golisano holding the strings that control Pedro Espada, who, in turn, holds the strings to Hiram Monserrate. It seems that Monserrate's strings have broken a bit as he returned to caucus with the Democrats. In the end, though, Golisano could not have picked more ethical, law-abiding politicians.

Pedro Espada is under two investigations as we speak. He's already been fined over $60,000 the past few years for failing to properly document campaign contributions. On top of that, his first investigation involves a non-profit that he is in charge of. Back in 2005, three employees of Espada's Soundview Health Center pleaded guilty to diverting $30,000 in money meant for family programs and AIDS programs at the clinic to Espada's fruitless campaign for Bronx borough president in 2001. Some of the other actions the clinic had been accused of was taking food meant for AIDS patients and giving it to Espada campaign workers.

The second Espada investigation involves his legal residency. A state senator must live in his district, and while Espada has a condo in the Bronx, his neighbors say they never see him and it's reported that his district offices are not even set up yet. New York AG Cuomo is looking into whether Espada instead resides in Mamaroneck rather than the Bronx.

Now onto Monserrate. He is currently under indictment for slashing his girlfriend's face, which required 20 stitches to close (and now has him facing felony assault charges). While he says it was an accident and that he tripped and fell while getting her a glass of water, there is supposedly videotape evidence that will convict him (according to law enforcement sources) that also caused a judge's "blood to boil." His girlfriend originally said that Monserrate beat her, but then did a 180 and now will not cooperate with police. As if beating a woman is not enough, Monserrate is also under investigation on whether a nonprofit group financed by Monserrate used city money to help campaign for him (which cannot be determined because, as the Times says, its books "disappeared.")

So don't get confused; Monserrate and Espada aren't doing any of this for you, the taxpaying resident of New York. They're doing it to get back at Smith, they're doing it to get their names in the paper and feed their hubristic self-images, they're doing it because they're some billionaire's puppets. As if we did not get this message clearly enough, they decided to take in a Mets-Yankees game in the city while Albany lay in chaos because of their actions. I mean, these are two people, one of which whose workers took food from AIDS patients for his campaign workers and the other who beat up his girlfriend, pretending to act on behalf of New York residents. John Liu, a Queens councilman, sums it up nicely while referring to Monserrate's antics: "I personally think he's having the time of his life." Yeah, but at our expense.

Photos - Monserrate and Espada taking in a Mets-Yankees game (NY Daily News), Grumpy billionaire Tom Golisano (NY Times), Monserrate and Espada debating whose hubris is more out of control (NY Daily News)

RIght-Wingers vs. Right-Wingers

Frank Rich had a very insightful op-ed in the Times yesterday on the hatred that percolates from the right wing in the United States. Indeed, while conservative policies are often deleterious to average Americans, we find huge swaths of support for such policies in public polls, thanks largely to the masterful messaging of political conservatives, messages often predicated upon fear and hatred.

Recently, conservatives have evoked the notion of progressive policies being similar to the policies of Hitler, in an ironic twist of logic. And lo and behold, we find the same sort of demagoguery coming from Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is attributing "Hitler-style techniques" to his political rivals. It is no coincidence that conservatives in the United States and conservatives in Iran are using similar tactics to manipulate their electorates. They are both understandably successful at garnering support after using such fear-inducing language (I still find it painfully hypocritical, though, that Ahmadinejad evokes Hitler as an epitomization of evil while continuing to deny the Holocaust).

One glaring consequence of this extremist conservatism is that as it intensifies and gains influence, in whatever country, it makes the world a more hate-filled and consequently dangerous place. Since his groundbreaking speech in Cairo, Obama has been barraged by conservatives as being too "apologetic" to the Muslim world. In his speech, however, he not only made no semblance of an apology, but addressed the need for Middle Eastern nations to reject authoritanism and establish true democracies, governmental shifts that would serve to weaken the hate-mongering right wing extremists in those countries. Yet the analogous extremists in the United States, who purport to cherish freedom and democracy, decry the President for his less-than-hawkish tone, calling him weak and ultimately harmful for America.

As these extremists convince their fellow citizens to elect politicians who espouse their views—as they have in the cases of George W. Bush, Vladimir Putin, Ahmadinejad, and recently Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman in Israel—the inflammatory tone in each of these countries is increasingly amplified, until a tipping point is reached. In the case of Israel and Iran, frighteningly enough, that tipping point could come in the form of war, and even nuclear war.

Politicians like Obama, who are wise to strike a more tempered tone, help to ease some of the tensions, anger, and hatred that can so easily be tapped for political gain. While Obama may receive criticism for his words, he is ultimately making the world a more peaceful place. He is helping to avoid the unnecessary violence brought about by right-wingers who, in their hatred for right-wingers in other nations, engage in an arms race, both figuratively and literally, sending the level of discourse spiralling downward and increasing the propensity for confrontation and war. Too often, people believe that the only way to deal with incendiary leaders like Ahmadinejad is to elevate incendiary leaders of our own. But maybe the path to world peace is by backing away from the "tough guy" persona and actually engaging our supposed enemies.

Images: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (truthdig.com), nuclear warhead (howstuffworks.com), Obama in Egypt (publicradio.org)

Murderers Deny Mass Murder

Yesterday, a white supremacist murdered a security guard at the Holocaust museum here in DC. A notebook found in his car read "The Holocaust is a lie. Obama was created by Jews. Obama does what Jew owners tell him to do. Jews captured America's money. Jews control the mass media. The 1st Amendment is abrogated --henceforth."

Free speech is a tenet of our democracy, and shouldn't be compromised. But too often speech is used to distort and manipulate until the truth is all but lost. James von Brunn had no doubt been lied to himself, until he believed all the hateful, dishonest things he had been told. Adolf Hitler once said,

The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies.

And he was right. That is partly how he was able to convince an entire nation of relatively intelligent people that they must follow him in his path of intolerance, hatred, and mass murder.

To me, the most frightening thing is that there are so many people who genuinely believe that the Holocaust did not occur. If enough people repeat a lie over and over again, others will start to assume that there are simply two sides to the story, and it becomes a debate rather than a truth. White supremacists and world leaders alike have been denying the Holocaust for years, and many even denied it while it was taking place.

Now, as the decade comes to a close, the last of the world's Holocaust survivors are slowly passing away. What happens a generation from now when they are all gone and can no longer tell their stories? Two generations from now when their children are gone and cannot relay their stories to others? Will the "truth debate" become more inflamed until history itself is entirely compromised? Will 1984 manifest itself, not because of an authoritarian regime, but because of an exceptionally vocal group of psychopaths?

There is so much about psychology and morality and humanity that the horrors that took place in the Holocaust can teach us. But when people undermine the very existence of some of the most atrocious actions mankind has ever undertaken, it effectively serves to devolve us as a species.

Free speech is important to preserve, but we have to remain vigilant of its abuses, and continue to proliferate the lessons that must be learned from the tragic realities of history.

Welcome Back Kane

Given that the LSAT was on Monday and I now have a little more free time on my hands than I used to, I am (as promised) back to the blog - and yes I recognize the irony of welcoming myself back. While the three people who may or may not have regularly followed this bad boy have probably moved onto greener (and more entertaining) pastures, I do look forward to the occasional wayward internet surfer who stumbles upon this site.

In all seriousness, there are some new blog-related things. Well, only one now that I think about it. I'm sure you've all heard of this crazy thing the kids today are doing called Twitter. Well, I decided to set one up for this blog. I come across many stories on a daily basis that I would like to talk about, but do not have the time/energy to. With Twitter I can write a snarky 140 character summary of the story with a link. You can check it out here and click "Follow" to keep track of my tweets.

And while I haven't been writing in the blog recently, I still had some writing-related things going on. My neighbor and friend Charles P. Pierce recently wrote a book called Idiot America about the stupidity of some people in this country. If you're not familiar with Pierce's writing, he's funny and entertaining to read and you can read this piece, which was the front page article of the Boston Globe magazine this past weekend, as a warm up. Anyway, pick up a copy of the book and read the acknowledgments, because you may see a familiar name.

So expect a post or two in the coming days. A lot of important things have happened that I would have liked to write about, not the least of which is the unbelievably juvenile behavior of the New York State Senate. I'm anything but a fan of possible felon Hiram Monserrate, so to hear that he and fellow sleaze Pedro Espada, Jr. were behind this middle school girl behavior was not surprising. Infuriating, but not surprising. Peace.