Monday, December 20, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Senate Approves Aid Package to States
Thursday, August 5, 2010 -WSJ.com
By COREY BOLES
WASHINGTON—The Senate voted Thursday to approve a package of $26 billion in aid for state and local governments, funded partly by an $11 billion tax increase on U.S. multinational corporations.
In what was one of the final moves by the Senate before lawmakers depart Washington for the summer recess, Democrats were able to score a significant victory for a core constituency of their party: labor unions and public-sector workers.
But at the same time, they handed a hefty tax bill to U.S. companies with units overseas that have been able to pay a lower corporate income tax rate on profits derived from their foreign businesses.
The Senate voted 61-39 to approve the measure, with just two Republicans joining with every single Democrat to vote in favor of the legislation.
House Democratic leadership indicated Wednesday they plan to bring back lawmakers in that chamber to give final approval to the legislation, likely Aug. 10.
The House began its six-week recess at the end of last week. It is rare for lawmakers to return to Washington in the midst of a recess.
For Democrats, whose various efforts to boost job creation have been largely stymied by Republicans in the Senate, the vote will provide ammunition for campaigning during the break.
The legislation would provide $16 billion in aid to help states pay rising Medicaid costs.
Current federal funding for the expansion of the program, which provides health care for the poor, expires at year end. Democrats are seeking to continue the funding through the first six months of 2011.
Hospital stocks have been rising in anticipation of the final vote but were down slightly in recent trading amid a broader market downturn.
Robert W. Baird analyst Whit Mayo said Wednesday that despite the recent rally, he sees more upside, adding the group could rally another 10% or so higher in the next few days.
The bill would steer a further $10 billion to local governments to help them avert layoffs of teachers and other public-sector workers like firemen and police officers.
Democrats said the legislation would enable state and local governments to avert layoffs or create 290,000 public-sector jobs this fall.
The legislation's full $26 billion cost is offset by tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere in the federal budget. This was what allowed Democrats to break the logjam and win enough Republican support to pass the legislation.
The majority of Republicans were critical of the legislation, arguing it was handing U.S. corporations—which they say are proven job creators—another reason to move more of their operations to other countries. At the same time, they said, it was essentially rewarding traditional Democratic supporters at the expense of large firms.
By COREY BOLES
WASHINGTON—The Senate voted Thursday to approve a package of $26 billion in aid for state and local governments, funded partly by an $11 billion tax increase on U.S. multinational corporations.
In what was one of the final moves by the Senate before lawmakers depart Washington for the summer recess, Democrats were able to score a significant victory for a core constituency of their party: labor unions and public-sector workers.
But at the same time, they handed a hefty tax bill to U.S. companies with units overseas that have been able to pay a lower corporate income tax rate on profits derived from their foreign businesses.
The Senate voted 61-39 to approve the measure, with just two Republicans joining with every single Democrat to vote in favor of the legislation.
House Democratic leadership indicated Wednesday they plan to bring back lawmakers in that chamber to give final approval to the legislation, likely Aug. 10.
The House began its six-week recess at the end of last week. It is rare for lawmakers to return to Washington in the midst of a recess.
For Democrats, whose various efforts to boost job creation have been largely stymied by Republicans in the Senate, the vote will provide ammunition for campaigning during the break.
The legislation would provide $16 billion in aid to help states pay rising Medicaid costs.
Current federal funding for the expansion of the program, which provides health care for the poor, expires at year end. Democrats are seeking to continue the funding through the first six months of 2011.
Hospital stocks have been rising in anticipation of the final vote but were down slightly in recent trading amid a broader market downturn.
Robert W. Baird analyst Whit Mayo said Wednesday that despite the recent rally, he sees more upside, adding the group could rally another 10% or so higher in the next few days.
The bill would steer a further $10 billion to local governments to help them avert layoffs of teachers and other public-sector workers like firemen and police officers.
Democrats said the legislation would enable state and local governments to avert layoffs or create 290,000 public-sector jobs this fall.
The legislation's full $26 billion cost is offset by tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere in the federal budget. This was what allowed Democrats to break the logjam and win enough Republican support to pass the legislation.
The majority of Republicans were critical of the legislation, arguing it was handing U.S. corporations—which they say are proven job creators—another reason to move more of their operations to other countries. At the same time, they said, it was essentially rewarding traditional Democratic supporters at the expense of large firms.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Official Ousted From Ag Department Had Taken USDA to Court, Won
Published July 20, 2010
FoxNews.com
The Agriculture Department has a lengthy history with the official forced to resign Monday over a controversial YouTube clip -- it turns out she and a group she helped found with her husband won millions last year in a discrimination suit settlement
with the federal government.
The information about the suit only thickens the plot that has evolved seemingly by the hour since Shirley Sherrod resigned late Monday as the department's Georgia director of rural development.
She claims the video clip, which showed her telling a story about how she withheld her full assistance to a white farmer, omitted key details, and she argues she was pushed out by the Obama administration without getting a chance to tell her side. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack is standing by his decision.
But it's not the first time Sherrod faced off against the federal government. Days before she was appointed to the USDA post last year, her group reportedly won a $13 million settlement in a longstanding discrimination suit against the USDA known commonly as the Pigford case.
The Rural Development Leadership Network announced last summer that New Communities Inc. -- a group Sherrod formed with husband Charles, who is a civil rights activist, and with other black farmers -- had reached the agreement. The RDLN said the USDA had "refused" to offer new loans or restructure old loans to members of New Communities, leading to the discrimination claim.
The announcement said that in addition to the $13 million to New Communities, Shirley and Charles Sherrod would each get $150,000 for "pain and suffering."
A USDA official told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that the settlement had "nothing to do with" Sherrod's hiring last year -- likewise, the official said her resignation was only the result of her comments in the video.
"This is all about her comments," the official said.
Sherrod's settlement was a drop in the bucket in terms of the money the federal government has paid out in Pigford claims to other black farmers over the years. The suit claimed the USDA racially discriminated against black farmers by not giving them fair treatment when they applied for loans or assistance. The case was first settled in 1999, resulting to date in more than $1 billion in compensation payments from the federal government.
In addition, the Obama administration has called for another $1.15 billion to settle claims for other black farmers -- Congress has not yet granted the money.
However, the case has attracted some scrutiny.
Former Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer told Fox News that while those who were discriminated against "should be reimbursed," there are other hangers-on trying to game the system.
"The problem you have with the class-action lawsuits is a lot of people jump in that may be on the fringe, that maybe don't deserve it, that sounded good because their neighbor got a check ... (It) is very expensive, very time consuming," Schafer said. "It probably in the long run is going to be cheaper just to settle the whole thing -- so some people will get paid that probably don't deserve it. And to me, I don't like that kind of thing. I like to settle it on merit."
Vilsack appeared to reference the Pigford case, or the backstory behind it, in his statement Tuesday defending his decision to effectively dismiss Sherrod.
"Yesterday, I asked for and accepted Ms. Sherrod's resignation for two reasons. First, for the past 18 months, we have been working to turn the page on the sordid civil rights record at USDA and this controversy could make it more difficult to move forward on correcting injustices. Second, state rural development directors make many decisions and are often called to use their discretion," he said.
Sherrod claims the administration never bothered to find out "the truth" about the video clip. She says she was telling a story about something that happened more than two decades ago when she was working for a local nonprofit group. She ended up helping that farmer and says she was, in recalling the story, trying to impart a lesson about the importance of looking beyond race.
FoxNews.com
The Agriculture Department has a lengthy history with the official forced to resign Monday over a controversial YouTube clip -- it turns out she and a group she helped found with her husband won millions last year in a discrimination suit settlement
with the federal government.
The information about the suit only thickens the plot that has evolved seemingly by the hour since Shirley Sherrod resigned late Monday as the department's Georgia director of rural development.
She claims the video clip, which showed her telling a story about how she withheld her full assistance to a white farmer, omitted key details, and she argues she was pushed out by the Obama administration without getting a chance to tell her side. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack is standing by his decision.
But it's not the first time Sherrod faced off against the federal government. Days before she was appointed to the USDA post last year, her group reportedly won a $13 million settlement in a longstanding discrimination suit against the USDA known commonly as the Pigford case.
The Rural Development Leadership Network announced last summer that New Communities Inc. -- a group Sherrod formed with husband Charles, who is a civil rights activist, and with other black farmers -- had reached the agreement. The RDLN said the USDA had "refused" to offer new loans or restructure old loans to members of New Communities, leading to the discrimination claim.
The announcement said that in addition to the $13 million to New Communities, Shirley and Charles Sherrod would each get $150,000 for "pain and suffering."
A USDA official told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that the settlement had "nothing to do with" Sherrod's hiring last year -- likewise, the official said her resignation was only the result of her comments in the video.
"This is all about her comments," the official said.
Sherrod's settlement was a drop in the bucket in terms of the money the federal government has paid out in Pigford claims to other black farmers over the years. The suit claimed the USDA racially discriminated against black farmers by not giving them fair treatment when they applied for loans or assistance. The case was first settled in 1999, resulting to date in more than $1 billion in compensation payments from the federal government.
In addition, the Obama administration has called for another $1.15 billion to settle claims for other black farmers -- Congress has not yet granted the money.
However, the case has attracted some scrutiny.
Former Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer told Fox News that while those who were discriminated against "should be reimbursed," there are other hangers-on trying to game the system.
"The problem you have with the class-action lawsuits is a lot of people jump in that may be on the fringe, that maybe don't deserve it, that sounded good because their neighbor got a check ... (It) is very expensive, very time consuming," Schafer said. "It probably in the long run is going to be cheaper just to settle the whole thing -- so some people will get paid that probably don't deserve it. And to me, I don't like that kind of thing. I like to settle it on merit."
Vilsack appeared to reference the Pigford case, or the backstory behind it, in his statement Tuesday defending his decision to effectively dismiss Sherrod.
"Yesterday, I asked for and accepted Ms. Sherrod's resignation for two reasons. First, for the past 18 months, we have been working to turn the page on the sordid civil rights record at USDA and this controversy could make it more difficult to move forward on correcting injustices. Second, state rural development directors make many decisions and are often called to use their discretion," he said.
Sherrod claims the administration never bothered to find out "the truth" about the video clip. She says she was telling a story about something that happened more than two decades ago when she was working for a local nonprofit group. She ended up helping that farmer and says she was, in recalling the story, trying to impart a lesson about the importance of looking beyond race.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Monday, July 12, 2010
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
High Court Ruling Seen as Challenge to N.Y. Gun Permits
Tuesday, June 29,2010
By Sean Gardiner and Michael Howard Saul
A ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court giving federal judges the power to strike down local weapons laws is expected to prompt legal challenges to New York City's gun-permits process.
Tom King, president of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, said the question to be asked after Monday's high court ruling isn't whether there will be lawsuits, but how many will be filed.
"Will there be court cases because of this? Obviously, yes," said Mr. King. "Cases in New York and cases around the nation."
Although he didn't want to speculate, Mr. King said areas in which New York City's gun-permitting process is possibly susceptible to legal challenge include the length it takes to obtain a permit, fees and what Mr. King said was a bias in the city's permitting law that favors "celebrities," the "politically connected" and "wealthy people."
"The way the pistol permit is written in New York City in particular it's really an uninclusive law that makes it much easier for a wealthy diplomat to get a license than it does for the everyday working man," he said.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg leaned on another constitutional amendment, that concerning freedom of speech, to refute Mr. King's assertion.
"That's why you have the First Amendment, so they can say things that just aren't true without going to jail," Mr. Bloomberg said when asked to comment. "But the truth of the matter is we have a bunch of regulations…. They don't say movie stars and rich people get them. They say there's a process. You have to show need."
The Supreme Court's decision Monday reinforced its 2008 ruling that Americans have a constitutional right to own guns no matter where they live, and it put in jeopardy Chicago's longstanding ban on handguns. Mr. Bloomberg said he was sure the decision would spur lawsuits in New York, but added that the Supreme Court's ruling made clear that "reasonable regulations," which he believes are in place in New York City, are acceptable.
John S. Chambers, whose website address is pistolpermitattorneynyc.com, said his law practice revolves primarily around helping people obtain and keep their gun permits. The attorney said there is no official language in the laws favoring the rich and famous. But, he added: "Do I think it's easier when it comes to a 'conceal carry' [permit] for someone like Donald Trump to get it than Mr. Joe Locksmith? Yes."
But he said the problem with the city's system isn't that celebrity power brokers get gun permits more easily, but that non-famous, law-abiding people have to go through such an arduous and expensive procedure to obtain a gun permit.
Mr. Chambers said obtaining a permit to keep a gun at one's residence currently requires at least four trips in person to NYPD headquarters, totals $434.25 in fees and takes three to seven months. "It's got to be a shorter process," he said. "For completely law-abiding citizens who have absolutely no mark on their record, it should be a month."
Richard Aborn, president of the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City and past president of the Brady Campaign, an antigun violence group, said that while he disagrees with the court's ruling, "what is most important to the gun-control movement is the ability to pass reasonable laws designed to break up the illegal gun markets."
He said his group is "undeterred" in continuing to pursue laws aimed at taking illegal guns off the streets.
Write to Sean Gardiner at sean.gardiner@wsj.com
By Sean Gardiner and Michael Howard Saul
A ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court giving federal judges the power to strike down local weapons laws is expected to prompt legal challenges to New York City's gun-permits process.
Tom King, president of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, said the question to be asked after Monday's high court ruling isn't whether there will be lawsuits, but how many will be filed.
"Will there be court cases because of this? Obviously, yes," said Mr. King. "Cases in New York and cases around the nation."
Although he didn't want to speculate, Mr. King said areas in which New York City's gun-permitting process is possibly susceptible to legal challenge include the length it takes to obtain a permit, fees and what Mr. King said was a bias in the city's permitting law that favors "celebrities," the "politically connected" and "wealthy people."
"The way the pistol permit is written in New York City in particular it's really an uninclusive law that makes it much easier for a wealthy diplomat to get a license than it does for the everyday working man," he said.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg leaned on another constitutional amendment, that concerning freedom of speech, to refute Mr. King's assertion.
"That's why you have the First Amendment, so they can say things that just aren't true without going to jail," Mr. Bloomberg said when asked to comment. "But the truth of the matter is we have a bunch of regulations…. They don't say movie stars and rich people get them. They say there's a process. You have to show need."
The Supreme Court's decision Monday reinforced its 2008 ruling that Americans have a constitutional right to own guns no matter where they live, and it put in jeopardy Chicago's longstanding ban on handguns. Mr. Bloomberg said he was sure the decision would spur lawsuits in New York, but added that the Supreme Court's ruling made clear that "reasonable regulations," which he believes are in place in New York City, are acceptable.
John S. Chambers, whose website address is pistolpermitattorneynyc.com, said his law practice revolves primarily around helping people obtain and keep their gun permits. The attorney said there is no official language in the laws favoring the rich and famous. But, he added: "Do I think it's easier when it comes to a 'conceal carry' [permit] for someone like Donald Trump to get it than Mr. Joe Locksmith? Yes."
But he said the problem with the city's system isn't that celebrity power brokers get gun permits more easily, but that non-famous, law-abiding people have to go through such an arduous and expensive procedure to obtain a gun permit.
Mr. Chambers said obtaining a permit to keep a gun at one's residence currently requires at least four trips in person to NYPD headquarters, totals $434.25 in fees and takes three to seven months. "It's got to be a shorter process," he said. "For completely law-abiding citizens who have absolutely no mark on their record, it should be a month."
Richard Aborn, president of the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City and past president of the Brady Campaign, an antigun violence group, said that while he disagrees with the court's ruling, "what is most important to the gun-control movement is the ability to pass reasonable laws designed to break up the illegal gun markets."
He said his group is "undeterred" in continuing to pursue laws aimed at taking illegal guns off the streets.
Write to Sean Gardiner at sean.gardiner@wsj.com
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Monday, June 21, 2010
Cigarette Tax Increased to Keep State Running
Published: June 21, 2010
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE
ALBANY — New Yorkers who like to smoke will have to dig a little deeper to light up next month, after the Legislature passed a bill on Monday that will give the state the highest cigarette taxes in the country.
Related
NYC: Taxes for Your Health. Yeah, Sure. (June 22, 2010)
The new law, part of an emergency budget measure to keep the government running, adds another $1.60 in state taxes to every cigarette pack sold starting on July 1, pushing the average price of a pack to about $9.20.
The average price in New York City, which imposes its own cigarette taxes, will be even higher, nearly $11 a pack.
Those who prefer other tobacco products will also be forced to pay significantly more.
The tax on smokeless tobacco will more than double, to $2 an ounce from 96 cents an ounce, starting on Aug. 1. And the wholesale tax on cigars, dips and other kinds of tobacco will rise to 75 percent from 46 percent .
And in what may be the legislation’s most controversial provisions, starting on Sept. 1, the state will begin collecting — or try to collect — taxes on cigarettes sold on Indian reservations to off-reservation visitors, an issue that led to violent protests during the early 1990s.
One Indian chief has said that trying to collect taxes would be considered an act of war.
Gov. David A. Paterson had proposed a smaller increase of $1 a pack in his executive budget proposal, saying it would forestall deeper cuts to state health care spending. But with the state budget now nearly three months overdue, Mr. Paterson and leaders of the Legislature agreed to insert the revised proposal into a pair of emergency bills to finance a week’s worth of government operations, putting pressure on lawmakers to support or risk a government shutdown.
The taxes will provide $440 million in revenue for health care programs, including subsidies for AIDS drugs, money for tobacco cessation programs and $71.6 million for the state cancer research center in Buffalo.
In the Senate, where Republicans and many rank-and-file Democrats had opposed the tax increase, the bill including the higher taxes passed narrowly along party lines, with all 32 Democrats voting yes and all 29 Republicans present voting no.
As for the other emergency bill, which included only appropriations, one Republican, Roy J. McDonald, joined the Democrats in voting yes.
The two bills also passed with only a few votes to spare in the Assembly, where Republicans assailed their Democratic colleagues.
“You’ve never met a tax you didn’t like,” Assemblyman Jim Hayes, a Republican from the Buffalo area, said to Democrats. “The governor proposed a buck. You hiked it to a buck-sixty!”
But Democrats said that the bill would provide needed revenue and begin closing a legal loophole that let New Yorkers buy cigarettes tax-free on reservations, undercutting other retailers.
“Because of the step we took in the Senate today, New York State will now have the added muscle it needs to collect this vital source of tax revenue in full and on time,” said Jeffrey D. Klein, a Democrat from Westchester County and the Bronx who had pushed separate legislation enabling the collection of cigarette taxes from reservations.
Higher cigarette taxes have been hailed by health advocates who say they will persuade many smokers to give up their habit. But critics, including tobacco retailers, said they would drive more customers to the black market.
It was the 12th emergency bill approved since the state’s fiscal year began on April 1. Mr. Paterson has pledged that if the Legislature fails to reach a budget agreement by next Monday, when the next emergency bill is due, he will insert the remainder of his budget proposal into that legislation.
The Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, told reporters that he remained confident that budget negotiations were progressing. “I think they’re going well — maybe a little slower than I anticipated last week, but I think they’re going well,” he said.
Reflecting the secrecy of the negotiations between Mr. Paterson and the Democratic majorities in the Senate and Assembly, Republican senators repeatedly pressed Democrats during a floor debate to explain how they would make up the rest of the gap — roughly $3.65 billion, according to Senate Democrats. They also accused Democrats of negotiating the budget piecemeal to hide the true cost of their budget priorities and lay the groundwork to claim that only new borrowing or higher income taxes could bring the budget into balance.
“I just don’t see how this process is going to result in anything other than taxes and fees and borrowing,” said John A. DeFrancisco, the Senate Finance Committee’s ranking Republican member. “This is not a way to run state government.”
The Senate also appeared poised on Monday night to approve a series of other budget bills introduced by Mr. Paterson last week and approved by the Assembly on Friday. Those bills involve spending for the criminal justice system, general government operations, the Transportation Department and state economic development efforts.
Officials said those bills closed about $1 billion worth of the state’s budget gap of more than $9 billion for this year, achieved through a mix of cuts, new revenue and consolidations.
One of the largest cuts would result in New York City’s losing its entire allotment of direct state aid, about $302 million. The bills would also close two upstate prisons, while the State Police would delay, for the second year in a row, training a new class of recruits.
A version of this article appeared in print on June 22, 2010, on page A20 of the New York edition.
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE
ALBANY — New Yorkers who like to smoke will have to dig a little deeper to light up next month, after the Legislature passed a bill on Monday that will give the state the highest cigarette taxes in the country.
Related
NYC: Taxes for Your Health. Yeah, Sure. (June 22, 2010)
The new law, part of an emergency budget measure to keep the government running, adds another $1.60 in state taxes to every cigarette pack sold starting on July 1, pushing the average price of a pack to about $9.20.
The average price in New York City, which imposes its own cigarette taxes, will be even higher, nearly $11 a pack.
Those who prefer other tobacco products will also be forced to pay significantly more.
The tax on smokeless tobacco will more than double, to $2 an ounce from 96 cents an ounce, starting on Aug. 1. And the wholesale tax on cigars, dips and other kinds of tobacco will rise to 75 percent from 46 percent .
And in what may be the legislation’s most controversial provisions, starting on Sept. 1, the state will begin collecting — or try to collect — taxes on cigarettes sold on Indian reservations to off-reservation visitors, an issue that led to violent protests during the early 1990s.
One Indian chief has said that trying to collect taxes would be considered an act of war.
Gov. David A. Paterson had proposed a smaller increase of $1 a pack in his executive budget proposal, saying it would forestall deeper cuts to state health care spending. But with the state budget now nearly three months overdue, Mr. Paterson and leaders of the Legislature agreed to insert the revised proposal into a pair of emergency bills to finance a week’s worth of government operations, putting pressure on lawmakers to support or risk a government shutdown.
The taxes will provide $440 million in revenue for health care programs, including subsidies for AIDS drugs, money for tobacco cessation programs and $71.6 million for the state cancer research center in Buffalo.
In the Senate, where Republicans and many rank-and-file Democrats had opposed the tax increase, the bill including the higher taxes passed narrowly along party lines, with all 32 Democrats voting yes and all 29 Republicans present voting no.
As for the other emergency bill, which included only appropriations, one Republican, Roy J. McDonald, joined the Democrats in voting yes.
The two bills also passed with only a few votes to spare in the Assembly, where Republicans assailed their Democratic colleagues.
“You’ve never met a tax you didn’t like,” Assemblyman Jim Hayes, a Republican from the Buffalo area, said to Democrats. “The governor proposed a buck. You hiked it to a buck-sixty!”
But Democrats said that the bill would provide needed revenue and begin closing a legal loophole that let New Yorkers buy cigarettes tax-free on reservations, undercutting other retailers.
“Because of the step we took in the Senate today, New York State will now have the added muscle it needs to collect this vital source of tax revenue in full and on time,” said Jeffrey D. Klein, a Democrat from Westchester County and the Bronx who had pushed separate legislation enabling the collection of cigarette taxes from reservations.
Higher cigarette taxes have been hailed by health advocates who say they will persuade many smokers to give up their habit. But critics, including tobacco retailers, said they would drive more customers to the black market.
It was the 12th emergency bill approved since the state’s fiscal year began on April 1. Mr. Paterson has pledged that if the Legislature fails to reach a budget agreement by next Monday, when the next emergency bill is due, he will insert the remainder of his budget proposal into that legislation.
The Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, told reporters that he remained confident that budget negotiations were progressing. “I think they’re going well — maybe a little slower than I anticipated last week, but I think they’re going well,” he said.
Reflecting the secrecy of the negotiations between Mr. Paterson and the Democratic majorities in the Senate and Assembly, Republican senators repeatedly pressed Democrats during a floor debate to explain how they would make up the rest of the gap — roughly $3.65 billion, according to Senate Democrats. They also accused Democrats of negotiating the budget piecemeal to hide the true cost of their budget priorities and lay the groundwork to claim that only new borrowing or higher income taxes could bring the budget into balance.
“I just don’t see how this process is going to result in anything other than taxes and fees and borrowing,” said John A. DeFrancisco, the Senate Finance Committee’s ranking Republican member. “This is not a way to run state government.”
The Senate also appeared poised on Monday night to approve a series of other budget bills introduced by Mr. Paterson last week and approved by the Assembly on Friday. Those bills involve spending for the criminal justice system, general government operations, the Transportation Department and state economic development efforts.
Officials said those bills closed about $1 billion worth of the state’s budget gap of more than $9 billion for this year, achieved through a mix of cuts, new revenue and consolidations.
One of the largest cuts would result in New York City’s losing its entire allotment of direct state aid, about $302 million. The bills would also close two upstate prisons, while the State Police would delay, for the second year in a row, training a new class of recruits.
A version of this article appeared in print on June 22, 2010, on page A20 of the New York edition.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Sunday, June 13, 2010
World Cup 2010: Radomir Ancic seeks positive response
Sunday, 13 June 2010
BBC---SPORT
Serbia coach Radomir Ancic is seeking a positive response from his players following their 1-0 loss to Ghana in their opening game of the World Cup.
Asamoah Gyan's late penalty won Sunday's Group D game in Pretoria for the African side after Serbia's Aleksandar Lukovic was sent off.
"For sure, this is a big blow for us. To start a World Cup with a defeat is a bad thing," said Ancic.
"We will use all our energy to be positive preparing for the next game."
Serbia's next match is against Germany on 18 June, and they know that a victory is vital if they are to stand any realistic chance of qualifying for the last 16.
We started with a defeat so now we must prepare in a different way when it comes to play Germany," added Ancic.
If they are to achieve the win they need, they will have to improve on Sunday's display, which saw them often over-run in midfield by a dominant Ghana.
The Africans produced enough chances to win by an even greater margin than that provided by Gyan's 85th-minute spot-kick, but they spurned them.
Zdravko Kuzmanovic's handball gave Gyan the opportunity from the spot, which he dispatched high into net, sparking wild celebrations amongst the Ghana team and supporters in Loftus Versfeld Stadium.
Serbia's Nemanja Vidic, who plays club football for Manchester United, believes the wayward flight of the new World Cup ball may have been to blame for fellow defender Kuzmanovic's handball.
"I think that many players say this ball is not so easy to control," Vidic said. "I think more in the air than the feet.
"I think all teams have problems with the long balls and crosses. The ball moves a little bit different.
"But it was the same for them and for us."
606: DEBATE
As a Serb I don't think my optimism is totally unfounded, we have loads of talent but we just seem to freeze on the world stage
galapagos2008
Ten minutes prior to the goal, Serbia had been reduced to 10 men when defender Lukovic was shown his second yellow card of the match for tugging Gyan's arm.
"The fact that Lukovic got removed from the game was a tough measure, as well as the yellow card to [Nikola] Zigic. This of course had an influence on the final result," said Ancic.
"There was a lot of respect between the teams and one mistake [the penalty] made the difference, but before that we had several opportunities to score a goal and I think there was a lot of tension throughout the game.
"I think what made the difference was that our opponents were more lucky than us."
Serbia were not without their chances during the game, but their best opportunities were either wasted or, as with a stinging 12-yard strike from Milos Krasic just prior to Ghana's goal, repelled by keeper Richard Kingson.
Serbia now switch their focus to the Germany match, before a final group game with Australia on 23 June.
Australia face Germany in Group D's second match on Sunday.
BBC---SPORT
Serbia coach Radomir Ancic is seeking a positive response from his players following their 1-0 loss to Ghana in their opening game of the World Cup.
Asamoah Gyan's late penalty won Sunday's Group D game in Pretoria for the African side after Serbia's Aleksandar Lukovic was sent off.
"For sure, this is a big blow for us. To start a World Cup with a defeat is a bad thing," said Ancic.
"We will use all our energy to be positive preparing for the next game."
Serbia's next match is against Germany on 18 June, and they know that a victory is vital if they are to stand any realistic chance of qualifying for the last 16.
We started with a defeat so now we must prepare in a different way when it comes to play Germany," added Ancic.
If they are to achieve the win they need, they will have to improve on Sunday's display, which saw them often over-run in midfield by a dominant Ghana.
The Africans produced enough chances to win by an even greater margin than that provided by Gyan's 85th-minute spot-kick, but they spurned them.
Zdravko Kuzmanovic's handball gave Gyan the opportunity from the spot, which he dispatched high into net, sparking wild celebrations amongst the Ghana team and supporters in Loftus Versfeld Stadium.
Serbia's Nemanja Vidic, who plays club football for Manchester United, believes the wayward flight of the new World Cup ball may have been to blame for fellow defender Kuzmanovic's handball.
"I think that many players say this ball is not so easy to control," Vidic said. "I think more in the air than the feet.
"I think all teams have problems with the long balls and crosses. The ball moves a little bit different.
"But it was the same for them and for us."
606: DEBATE
As a Serb I don't think my optimism is totally unfounded, we have loads of talent but we just seem to freeze on the world stage
galapagos2008
Ten minutes prior to the goal, Serbia had been reduced to 10 men when defender Lukovic was shown his second yellow card of the match for tugging Gyan's arm.
"The fact that Lukovic got removed from the game was a tough measure, as well as the yellow card to [Nikola] Zigic. This of course had an influence on the final result," said Ancic.
"There was a lot of respect between the teams and one mistake [the penalty] made the difference, but before that we had several opportunities to score a goal and I think there was a lot of tension throughout the game.
"I think what made the difference was that our opponents were more lucky than us."
Serbia were not without their chances during the game, but their best opportunities were either wasted or, as with a stinging 12-yard strike from Milos Krasic just prior to Ghana's goal, repelled by keeper Richard Kingson.
Serbia now switch their focus to the Germany match, before a final group game with Australia on 23 June.
Australia face Germany in Group D's second match on Sunday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)