Will Dirty Politics Kill the Internet?

By Tim Karr, May 26, 2010

This article was recommended to me and can be located on the Free Press website.  I believe that it is important for everyone to pay attention to what is happening with this important issue.  Visit the Free Press website for more information.  Pat

Congress just sold you out to Comcast, Verizon and AT&T.

Big phone and cable companies are so determined to dismantle consumer protections on the open Internet that they’ve spent millions to flip Congress against you. Earlier this week, many in Congress delivered.

On Monday, 74 House Democrats joined 37 Senate Republicans to sign an industry-written letter that tells the Federal Communications Commission to halt all efforts to protect Internet users and stop big companies from blocking Internet traffic.

Net Neutrality – the principle that would keep users in control of the Internet – was the top communications policy of President Obama when he came into office last year. Obama has repeated his support for an open Internet on several occasions since, and last summer appointed Julius Genachowski to lead the FCC and fulfill this presidential promise.

That promise has now been cast into doubt by dozens of Democrats willing to sell out their president, their constituents, and millions of Net Neutrality supporters to do the bidding of special interests.

Big Money vs. Common Sense

It gets even worse. The Democrats’ “do nothing” appeal would drastically undercut the FCC’s ability to carry out the National Broadband Plan and connect more people to the Internet. These Democrats are actually taking a position against bringing life-improving broadband services to rural and low-income communities.

Their letter warns Chairman Genachowski against pursuing a plan that would enable the FCC to act as a watchdog and serve the public interest over the Internet, preventing phone and cable companies from blocking access to websites and services, while promoting policies that ensure universal and affordable access.

“The uncertainty this proposal creates will jeopardize jobs and deter needed investment for years to come,” the letter says. “We urge you not to move forward with a proposal that undermines critically important investment in broadband and the jobs that come with it.”

Say what? Even the top executives at Verizon and Comcast say that the FCC’s proposal will have no impact on their investment in broadband networks. And experts overwhelmingly agree that extending broadband services to those stuck on the wrong side of the digital divide would create more jobs.

A study by the Brookings Institution and MIT estimated that a one-digit increase in U.S. per capita broadband penetration equates to an additional 300,000 jobs. If our broadband penetration were as high as a country like Denmark’s, we could provide approximately three million additional U.S. jobs.

The Dirty Little Secret

The letter is so full of misleading information that it’s hard to know where to begin.

But behind it all is one dirty little secret: Nearly every one of these representatives has accepted massive contributions from the phone and cable lobby.

Such behavior by elected officials is outrageous and unethical. Perhaps some of these representatives just didn’t know what they were signing. Or perhaps this is just business as usual — members willing to sell out the public in exchange for campaign cash. (Is it any wonder the latest Gallup public opinion poll counts a congressional disapproval rating of 73 percent?)

But in putting their names to this letter, these members are telling us to have blind faith that phone and cable companies have the best interests of Americans in mind – and will deliver fast, open and affordable Internet services without government oversight.

That’s a huge mistake. Comcast and AT&T can no better police themselves to protect the Internet than BP can police itself to protect the oceans. We already know how that ends. The phone and cable companies must play by the rules.

In response, Free Press (my day job) is urging hundreds of thousands of people to sign our own letter telling the FCC that Congress doesn’t speak for you, President Obama or the millions of other Americans who support a fast, open and affordable Internet.

Congress can’t hand these companies control over the future of communications. The results would be disastrous.

If only more members of Congress knew that their bad deeds couldn’t be swept beneath the carpet – unnoted and unpunished. It’s time they heard from us.

Marion Carll Farm

The Marion Carll Farm, a 9 acre oasis in the middle of Commack, was visited recently by the people who are working on bringing it back to being an educational and heritage center to further the understanding of the history of Long Island. The farm, which is located in Commack, has a history which dates from the pre-Colonial Native  American period to the 19th century agrarian era of our island. Visitors have included Suffolk County Legislator John Kennedy, Commack School Superintendent Dr. Donald James, Commack Community Association President Bruce Ettenberg, Shinnecock Nation representative Quantah’ Rose, Huntington Historian Robert Hughes, Huntington Historical Society President Toby Kissam, Suffolk County Commissioner of Public Works Gil Anderson, Suffolk County Director of Historic Services Richard Martin and members of the Commack Community Association.

NY League of Conservation Voters & Conservation Voters Action Fund Endorse Tim Bishop

FARMINGVILLE, NY – Congressman Tim Bishop is proud to receive the endorsements of the New York League of Conservation Voters (NYLCV) and the national League of Conservation Voters Action Fund, two non-partisan organizations that support elected officials with proven records of protecting our country’s environmental resources.

NYLCV held a news conference today at Ammann Riverfront Park in Riverhead to officially announce their endorsement of Congressman Bishop.

This endorsement recognizes Congressman Bishop’s ongoing fight to win federal support for projects that help preserve and renew Long Island’s diverse ecosystem. NYLCV President Marcia Bystryn praised Congressman Bishop for his record of reaching across the aisle to rally bipartisan support for environmental legislation that benefits all Long Islanders, regardless of their politics.

“Through his four terms in Congress, Tim Bishop has proven himself as a strong and steady advocate for the environment in Long Island and New York as a whole,” Bystryn said. “The League is proud to endorse him for re-election in 2010.”

This year, Congressman Bishop has helped draw federal attention and funding to environmental issues that New York’s state and local governments cannot handle on their own, like footing the costs of dredging river transportation routes or maintaining the infrastructure that keeps the Long Island Sound healthy and clean.

“Congressman Bishop has been a champion of clean energy legislation that will create jobs, curb pollution and reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” said LCV Action Fund President Gene Karpinski. “We are proud to endorse Congressman Bishop for re-election because he stands with the people of New York who need clean energy jobs now, and not with the Big Oil companies and special interests who are blocking progress in Washington.”

When environmental disasters struck Suffolk County during the past year—for example, when severe thunderstorms destroyed homes in Riverhead in March—Congressman Bishop fought tenaciously to bring home relief from FEMA. Bishop also spent months negotiating with state and local government to win permission and funding for an emergency dredging of Wading River Creek, which was made impassable by the March storms.

In July, Congressman Bishop joined forces with Congressman Peter King (R-Seaford) to bring home millions in federal funding for projects that will restore and protect the Long Island Sound next year. On the national level, Congressman Bishop sponsored the Clean Estuaries Act, which will improve the water quality of estuaries nationwide and help protect our country’s economy.

“In Long Island, the health of our environment is very much tied to the health of our people and the health of our economy,” Congressman Bishop said. “I look forward to continuing my work with the New York League of Conservation Voters and the National LCV Action Fund to ensure that New York remains a safe, clean and beautiful place to live.”

MTA Audit - NOW WHAT?

 NYS Comptroller Tom Di Napoli’s office released the long awaited audit of the MTA. Below is the summary included in the audit and a link to the report.

The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has effectively managed and controlled its employee overtime costs.

(Click full report http://www.osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093010/09s88.pdf)

Audit Results–Summary
We found that the MTA has not eff ectively managed and controlled its overtime costs. Rather,there has been a culture of acceptance among MTA managers regarding overtime, and no real efforts were made to make significant changes in longstanding practices that resulted in routine, and often unnecessary, overtime. As a result, overtime has become the rule rather than the exception for many of the MTA’s employees, and the MTA’s already high overtime costs have continued to escalate.

The MTA provides public transportation in and around the New York City metropolitan area. It employs about 71,000 workers at an annual cost of about $4.6 billion. In accordance with its enabling legislation, the MTA is expected to be financially self-sustaining, and generate enough fare and other revenues to cover its expenses. However, in recent years, the MTA has consistently operated at a financial deficccit.
Between 2005 and 2009, the MTA’s annual overtime costs increased from $468 million to $590 million, an increase of 26 percent. We examined records showing the amount of overtime pay received by the MTA’s employees. We found that many of the employees are being paid significant amounts of overtime, as their annual overtime pay is approaching, and in some cases exceeding, their annual salaries. For example, in 2009, there were 3,274 employees whose total overtime pay for the year equaled at least 50 percent of their annual salaries, including 147 whose total overtime pay exceeded their annual salaries. There were 10,909 employees (more than 15 percent of the workforce) whose total overtime pay for the year equaled at least 30 percent of their annual salaries. When we examined why the employees at four of the MTA’s seven constituent agencies were working such significant amounts of overtime, and whether the overtime was, in fact, necessary,we found indications that the overtime often was not necessary. For example, routine track maintenance work is often performed by workers on overtime, because the workers’ regular work shifts coincide with peak service periods when the tracks are not available for routine maintenance.

In addition, many of the employees who work overtime are replacing absent workers, especially workers who have called in sick. Much of this overtime could be eliminated if absenteeism were reduced and absent workers were only replaced when necessary. We also found that many of the employees working overtime have no valid justification for doing so, and some may not actually work all the overtime hours claimed. If corrective actions were taken to eliminate the unnecessary overtime identifi ed by our audit, we estimate the MTA could save more than $56 million a year in overtime costs.

The MTA Central Office, together with the management of the seven constituent agencies, is responsible for overseeing the agencies’ operations. However, we found that these officials have not eff ectively managed and controlled the agencies’ overtime costs. For example, the agencies’ overtime budgets are seriously flawed, because past overtime inefficiencies are routinely incorporated into the current year’s budgets, and the Central Office routinely accepts the budgets, without question. Also, the Central Office has not worked actively with agency management to reduce overtime costs, even though the MTA has consistently faced serious budget shortfalls. Prior to our audit, neither the Central Office nor agency management had proposed reduction goals for overtime costs, such as a 10 percent reduction. Such a reduction would result in savings of nearly $60 million annually for the MTA, which could help off set
planned fare increases, cuts in service, and/or cuts in capital improvements.

When we discussed our observations with Central Office officials, we were told that, prior to the current administration, the management of the constituent agencies was left to agency officials. Officials in the current administration state that they plan to take a much more active role in managing and controlling employee overtime, and further indicate that some actions have already been taken to reduce overtime costs. According to officials in the four constituent agencies we examined, employee absenteeism and union work rules are the primary drivers of overtime. However, we note that only limited eff orts have been made by management to reduce absenteeism and address unproductive work rules,and management needs to be more proactive in these areas. We recommend MTA offi cials consider adopting some of the best practices of other public transportation authorities that have been able to control their
overtime costs.

Our report contains a total of six recommendations for improving the MTA’s management
and control of employee overtime. MTA offi cials are in general agreement with our fi ndings
and recommendations and intend to pursue them as part of their internal eff orts to reduce
overtime.
This report, dated August 5, 2010,

Demos - "I once again call on Randy Altschuler to come clean"

George Demos said:

“Instead of admitting that he was plagiarizing releases from another candidate, Randy Altschuler is compounding his plagiarizing scandal by lying to Long Island’s families.  Altschuler cynically instructed his consultant to assure us that plagiarism is standard practice because “when you’re in politics there’s only so many ways you can word stuff.”  Contrary to these bogus assertions, the press releases unambiguously state “Randy Altschuler said.” 

In the span of a few years Randy Altschuler switched from bragging about his outsourcing of our American jobs to India to now being ashamed of it.  He switched from the Green party to the Republican Party.  He switched from trying to run for Congress in New Jersey to now trying to run on Long Island.  Altschuler switched from being fervently pro-choice to now claiming to be pro-life.  

Randy Altschuler doesn’t know who he is or what he believes, and apparently he doesn’t know what to say about the issues either.  All he knows is that he has millions of dollars made from outsourcing our American jobs to India and that he wants to be a Congressman. 

I once again call on Randy Altschuler to come clean and release the press releases he scrubbed from his website.”