Recent editorials of statewide and national interest from New York’s newspapers:
The President Takes a Campaign Donation From the Pentagon
Wall Street Journal
Feb. 14
That “big, beautiful wall” President Trump never tires of carrying on about is becoming one of the most expensive campaign stunts ever. It is a potentially unconstitutional one as well, as the Defense Department prepares to divert more billions of dollars authorized by Congress from a variety of weapons programs to generate bragging rights for Mr. Trump’s re-election campaign.
On Thursday, the Pentagon formally notified Congress that it would divert $3.8 billion to the Department of Homeland Security to build about 177 miles of fencing along the Mexican border. That will bring to nearly $10 billion what the administration has taken from defense accounts for wall construction, after a skeptical Congress authorized only $1.375 billion.
Lawmakers from both parties have assailed the White House’s raids on military funds as violating Congress’s constitutionally mandated power of the purse.
“This latest effort to steal congressionally appropriated military funding undermines our national security and the separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leaders, said in a joint statement on Thursday.
The Pentagon said the money it was ceding would have gone to fighter jets, combat aircraft, ships and National Guard equipment. Instead, it will be used to put up 30-foot-high barriers along six sections of the border so Mr. Trump can boast that he is fulfilling his campaign promise, despite Congress’s repeated refusal to give him all the money he wants and lower court rulings that barred his use of other funds for the wall. Mr. Trump managed this in part by declaring a state of emergency a year ago to divert military funds, and in part thanks to a Supreme Court ruling that set aside lower court injunctions that prevented Mr. Trump from commandeering Pentagon cash to pay for the wall.
It has become almost tedious to recite the reasons this wall is a waste of money, starting with the fact that it was initially conjured up by Mr. Trump’s campaign advisers, back when he was exploring a run for the White House, not as a solution to illegal border crossing but as a talking point to make sure that their man, famously resistant to reading from a script, would remember to talk about getting tough on immigration.
Once Mr. Trump was elected, the talking point that became his signature campaign promise then became the signature obsession of his presidency. The battle over its funding with a skeptical Congress led at one point to a partial government shutdown and the declaration of a state of emergency. “Build the Wall” became a mantra at Mr. Trump’s rowdy rallies, the motto of meanspirited and often cruel efforts to close America’s doors to immigrants, especially Muslims or immigrants of color, legal or illegal.
The onslaught against America’s openness to immigrants has taken many shapes, from the separation of children from their parents, to the shutting down of various preferential visa programs, to the bans on travelers from some predominantly Muslim countries. The administration has won temporary approval from the Supreme Court to deny green cards to immigrants thought likely to tap public assistance programs, the so-called public charge rule. It has also barred New Yorkers from applying for trusted-traveler programs as punishment for a state law limiting immigration agents’ access to state driver’s license information.
But the expensive and useless wall has remained the centerpiece of Mr. Trump’s spiteful vision. From the outset, the project has been riddled with lies and illusions. Mr. Trump has argued that the wall would block illegal migrants, though as many as half of the undocumented immigrants in the United States entered legally and overstayed their visas. He claims that the southern border is a “pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs,” though according to the Drug Enforcement Administration most trafficking occurs through ports of entry - or, in the case of the powerful opioid fentanyl, through the mail.
It may well be that the $738 billion military budget for 2020 is too big, and that skimming a few billion off the top won’t affect American security. That misses the principle. The power of the purse belongs to Congress, and the lawmakers should decide how America’s wealth is spent. Despite its bitter divisions, Congress has repeatedly concluded that the wall Mr. Trump wants to build is a waste of money.
That does not mean there should be no barriers along the 1,954-mile long border. In fact, there are already 650 miles of fencing of various kinds, and most of what the administration has been doing so far is replacing the older barriers with an elaborate “border wall system.” The cost has been somewhere between $20 million and $30 million per mile in southern Texas (Israel’s wall on the West Bank, by contrast, cost at most $5 million a mile), and the price will only rise as the administration moves to acquire privately owned land through eminent domain, a process that entails lengthy and costly legal action.
That is a ridiculous price to pay so that the president can revel in chants of “Build the Wall” from followers, most of whom would surely vote for him with or without a wall.
Congress, aware that the wall is costly nonsense, ought not allow itself to be sidestepped. It could vote down the state of emergency - and the White House veto that would follow. It could then finally embrace its duty to write a long-overdue comprehensive immigration bill, based on American traditions of tolerance and humanity, that would include a reasonable and functional border barrier.
Online: https://nyti.ms/2P7K3s0
___
Trump pardons, commutations send clear signal
Newsday
Feb. 18
Presidents have the constitutional right to pardon whomever they choose. That power has led to questionable decisions by presidents from both parties over many years. And those chosen for mercy or redemption say something about the presidents who make them.
That’s the lens through which to view the actions extended Tuesday by President Donald Trump to former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, former New York City police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, financier and “junk bond king” Michael Milken, and former San Francisco 49ers owner Eddie DeBartolo Jr. This white-collar rogue’s gallery had in common the element of fraud at the root of their offenses. Trump was explicitly implored by fellow Republicans not to commute the 14-year sentence of Blagojevich, whose crime - essentially attempting to sell the U.S. Senate seat vacated by then-President Barack Obama - exemplified the corruption Trump promised during his campaign to root out.
Apart from the connections each had to Trump or those close to him, it likely is no accident that his actions - seven others were pardoned - came two days before the scheduled sentencing of his longtime confidant, adviser and political dirty-trickster Roger Stone, and the same day Trump criticized the judge in Stone’s case, Amy Berman Jackson, in an apparent attempt to undermine whatever her sentence is for Stone. Whatever you decide to do to Stone, Trump seemed to say, I’m going to undo anyway.
Every presidential pardon is an interference of sorts in the judicial system. Sometimes, because of procedural issues or new information, such acts have merit. But the facts of these cases and Trump’s history of attacks on the judiciary, especially recently, cast this round in a very troubling light.
Online: https://nwsdy.li/2SXemTo
___
We All Should Be Watching These Tax Proposals Carefully
The Post-Journal
Feb. 19
Gov. Andrew Cuomo finds himself in a sticky wicket as state legislators deliberate on the governor’s 2020-21 budget proposal.
There have been several proposals from Democrats in the state Legislature to raise taxes on the wealthy.
A.9650, sponsored by Assemblyman Harvey Epstein, D-New York City, would impose an additional 2% sales tax on retail sales of motor vehicles costing more than $50,000, jewelry costing more than $5,000 and clothing, footwear, handbags, luggage, umbrellas, wallets or watches sold for more than $1,000. Assemblyman Robert Carroll, D-Windsor Terrace, introduced A.9045 to reinstate the sales tax on yachts costing more than $230,000 after an exemption was placed on such vessels in the 2015 state budget while also introducing A.9053 to again collect sales and compensating taxes on some private, non-commercial aircraft. Sen. Jennifer Metzger, D-Middletown, proposed S.7629 to impose a tax on all corporate stock buybacks of issued shares and Sen. James Sanders, D-New York City, has introduced the Millionaire’s Tax and Economic Equity Act of 2020 to extend the top tax state income tax rate to 11.82% for taxpayers who earn more than $100 million.
If Democratic majorities in the state Senate and Assembly pass those bills, it puts Cuomo in a tough spot. Only one year ago, while railing against President Donald Trump’s $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions (SALT) cap, Cuomo railed about the SALT cap’s impact on high-wage earners.
“Our tax base is getting more diversified, however SALT impacts progressive tax policies disproportionately,” Cuomo said to The Hill. “SALT encourages high-income New Yorkers to move to other states and if even a small number of high-income taxpayers leave the state, it would harm state revenues and impact critical funding for education, health care, infrastructure and the middle-class tax cuts.”
The governor was right last year to seek to protect the state’s high-wage earners and his logic should apply now.
State Democrats’ desire to raise taxes on the state’s richest citizens could help close the state’s $6.1 billion budget gap. It could also push even more high-wage earners out of New York state. What the Democrats could well create is a state in which low-wage upstate residents are moving to Pennsylvania, which is the destination for most Chautauqua County residents who leave the county, while high-wage earners downstate move to Florida or other states with more favorable tax climates.
There are a lot of us here in Chautauqua County who will never buy a $230,000 yacht or a personal aircraft. Why should The Post-Journal care about those with such expensive tastes? Chautauqua County should care because the people who typically buy summer homes in our county would be affected. More importantly, if enough high-wage taxpayers leave, that means the rest of us will be paying the taxes they leave behind. Instead of taxing expensive jewelry, yachts and planes, the state will start increasing taxes on gasoline-burning vehicles, sales taxes on anything and everything that can be taxed and, yes, income taxes on the middle class.
Watch these proposals carefully. You might be next.
Online: https://bit.ly/2SYs7Bd
___
New Yorkers get caught in middle of immigration dispute
Post Star
Feb. 16
We wondered if it was possible to take a stand on the state’s “Green Light Law” without getting into a knock-down, drag-out debate about United States immigration policies.
Probably not, but we were game to try.
The “Green Light Law” passed by the New York Legislature last year allows immigrants to obtain a New York state driver’s license before they become citizens while blocking immigration agents from accessing state motor vehicle records.
Many might wonder what the original intent of the law was.
The simple answer, and the least political, is that securing a driver’s license confirms you know how to drive a car. That makes us all safer.
It is the pragmatic point of view that even those in the country illegally are working and driving card, and if they have a driver’s license they can also obtain car insurance in case of an accident.
But of course it is much more complicated than that, with some states enacting immigration policies in direct conflict to the more aggressive policies of the Trump administration.
Those against the law argue that obtaining a New York driver’s license allows unauthorized immigrants a form of legitimacy that makes it easier for them to dodge the authorities.
Others, including some county clerks around the state, claim it will make it easier for those who are not citizens to vote in elections.
It all goes to the heart of the immigration debate that we hear so much about.
Are all immigrants criminals?
Should there be a path to citizenship after coming here illegally?
Should all illegal immigrants be deported?
What about the children?
Those are all complicated questions that neither the Trump administration nor Congress has been able to answer.
And that’s not the purpose of this editorial.
What we find particularly disturbing is how the “Green Light Law” has evolved into a war between federal and state governments.
We all should find that unacceptable.
No matter what stand the New York Legislature takes on immigration, the federal government should not be in the business of punishing regular citizens because it disagrees with what laws a state passes.
That is what is happening now.
It was reported last month that the Department of Homeland Security crafted memos calling for ways to retaliate against states that would not share DMV records.
The memo discussed closing down Homeland Security offices in states, refusing to accept state identification, cutting TSA pre-check services at airports and potentially subpoenaing driver’s licenses provided to undocumented workers.
The content of this memo was reported by the online news service Buzzfeed. It is all quite juvenile.
This past week, the federal government blocked New Yorkers from enrolling in Global Entry and other trusted traveler programs that made it easier to cross borders like the one just north of us.
That’s not productive, and just causes problems for anyone trying to do business in Canada.
What is clear is that this issue goes far deeper than just making sure that immigrants have the skill to drive on our roads.
It goes to the heart of the immigration issue, which as we all know, has become an emotional touchstone.
It is obvious that President Trump and Gov. Andrew Cuomo are playing politics on this issue at the expense of New Yorkers.
They met this week in an attempt to resolve the problem – that must have been an interesting meeting – but while it was described as productive, there was no resolution.
Before the meeting, Gov. Cuomo called the Homeland Security actions, “gratuitous and retaliatory.” Afterward, he said it was extortion.
President Trump said national security was more important than politics.
We agree with that 100 percent, but the president also mentioned the many lawsuits New York has filed against his administration need to go away.
That is not appropriate either and does sound like extortion.
This is the world we are living in and we suspect New Yorkers will continue to be caught in the middle.
We wish both of these men would just grow up.
Online: https://bit.ly/38TgVg9
___
After widespread outage, Spectrum must improve communication, redundancy
Syracuse Post-Standard
Feb. 18
New York regulators should hold Spectrum’s feet to the fire over its poor response to a service interruption affecting 2 million customers in the Northeast earlier this month.
Spectrum’s TV, internet and phone services went down Feb. 7 and 8 when snow and ice damaged the company’s fiber-optic lines in several locations. The storm also took out lines that are supposed to provide “critical redundancy.” Clearly, Spectrum needs a better backup. Regulators ought to examine the network’s vulnerabilities and ask whether Spectrum should be doing more to harden it or build in more redundancy.
The cable company also needs to improve the way it communicates with its customers. Spectrum announced its service failure on Twitter. That is not sufficient to reach hundreds of thousands of subscribers. Spectrum’s customer service phone lines were crushed by the call volume. That should trigger a review.
We’re glad to see Spectrum is crediting customers for the time they were without TV, internet and phone service – but only if customers call and ask for it. Surely, Spectrum knows which households were affected. Why not credit everyone, automatically? That would have been a gesture of good corporate citizenship.
At this point, the company could use all the goodwill it can muster. Spectrum is the cable and internet provider its subscribers love to hate. Many have no choice; Spectrum has no competition in many areas of Upstate New York. The company’s monopoly position means consumers have little recourse when it raises rates or offers poor service. For example, former Time Warner customers who wanted to watch Syracuse University sports on the new ACC Network were required to switch to higher-priced plans.
Rep. Anthony Brindisi, D-Utica, has long criticized Spectrum over its pricing, expansion of broadband in rural areas and failure to deliver promised internet speeds. Brindisi also prodded the state Public Service Commission to investigate this most recent outage. “Spectrum needs to be held accountable and look to create redundancies to make sure this type of prolonged outage doesn’t happen again,” he said.
The regulator is following up with a “series of formal interrogatory questions” to Spectrum to establish the timeline and cause of the outage, its impact on customers and the steps taken to restore service. The company’s communication with customers also ought to be part of that investigation.
Spectrum’s spectacular failure merits more than a strongly worded letter as an official response.
Losing internet, TV and phone service is more than an inconvenience for people stuck inside during a snowstorm. It’s a lifeline in an emergency. It’s also a critical tool for businesses taking electronic payments or online orders.
Look, weather happens. Utility lines come down. It takes time to put them back up. Even so, the fact that one snowstorm could cripple an internet/TV/phone provider over two days, and across multiple states, deserves scrutiny from Albany and Washington.
Spectrum’s communication problem has an easy fix: Simply be more transparent and deliver information to the public as broadly and quickly as possible.
Online: https://bit.ly/39Sl5F3
___
Please read our comment policy before commenting.