Editorial Roundup: New York

Recent editorials of statewide and national interest from New York’s newspapers:

Surprise, Mr. President. John Bolton Has the Goods.

The New York Times

Jan. 27

It’s just possible that common sense and reality have a shot at prying open the doors to the Senate chamber after all. After Republican senators claimed that it was perfectly reasonable to put a United States president on trial without hearing from any witnesses, a few of them are showing signs of recognizing that the truth matters. Or, at least, that the American people believe it does.

What’s changed? Shocking but not surprising revelations from John Bolton’s book manuscript, which The New York Times reported over the weekend, have made impossible to ignore what everyone has known for months: President Trump withheld hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine to benefit himself politically, and against the strenuous objections of his top aides and both parties in Congress.

On Monday morning, Mitt Romney, of Utah, said, “I think it’s increasingly likely that other Republicans will join those of us who think we should hear from John Bolton.”

It’s refreshing to hear those words. And yet the fact that such a statement is noteworthy at all tells you how far from responsible governance Republicans have strayed. They hold 53 seats in the Senate, and yet the nation is waiting on just four - four!- to do the right thing and agree to call Mr. Bolton, the former national security adviser, and other key witnesses to testify in Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial.

A far more representative attitude in the Republican caucus was expressed by Roy Blunt, of Missouri, who said on Monday, “Unless there’s a witness that’s going to change the outcome, I can’t imagine why we’d want to stretch this out for weeks and months.” With this tautology Senator Blunt gives away the game: All witness testimony to date - all presented as part of the House impeachment proceedings - has only strengthened the case against Mr. Trump, but Republicans will not vote to convict him under any circumstances. By definition, then, no witness in the Senate could possibly change the outcome.

The reporting on Mr. Bolton’s manuscript, which is scheduled for publication in March, has scrambled that strategy. Mr. Bolton’s foreign-policy disagreements with Mr. Trump have been public knowledge for months. Last fall, Fiona Hill, a Russia expert and former Bolton aide, testified in the House that Mr. Bolton was alarmed by Mr. Trump’s aid-for-investigations scheme, which Mr. Bolton characterized as a “drug deal.”

In the manuscript, detailed descriptions of which were leaked to The Times, he recounts nearly a dozen instances in which he and other top administration officials pleaded with Mr. Trump to release the aid, to no avail. He describes Mr. Trump’s fixation on conspiracy theories about Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election, and about the supposed corruption of Marie Yovanovitch, the American ambassador to Ukraine. He says that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo admitted privately to him that he knew there was nothing to the theories regarding Ms. Yovanovitch, whom Mr. Trump fired last spring.

Mr. Bolton, a hard-line conservative with decades of service in Republican administrations, is no anti-Trump zealot, which makes his allegations against the president that much more devastating. And his decision to tell these stories publicly nearly certainly waives any claims of executive privilege Mr. Trump might try to assert over their communications.

Let’s not forget the newly revealed evidence that came to light on Saturday, in the form of a tape recording released by the lawyer for Lev Parnas, who had worked for Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, in the Ukraine scheme. Mr. Trump has denied even knowing Mr. Parnas, but on the tape the two men can be heard in conversation at a dinner in April 2018. “Get rid of her,” Mr. Trump said of Ms. Yovanovitch. “Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. O.K.? Do it.”

In a late-night tweet, Mr. Trump angrily denied Mr. Bolton’s allegations. “I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens,” Mr. Trump wrote.

You know what would be a good way to figure out who’s telling the truth? Subpoena Mr. Bolton to testify under oath.

This isn’t a close call. A majority of Americans of all political stripes want to hear from Mr. Bolton, at the least. They believe, as do congressional Democrats, that you can’t vote on whether to remove a president from office without getting the fullest possible account of his alleged offenses.

But Senate Republicans have so far refused to hear from any witnesses or to demand any documents, following the lead of Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, who has never hesitated to undermine the country’s institutions if he thinks doing so will help his party. Mr. McConnell and nearly all in his caucus seem to imagine that if they block their eyes and ears and let their mouths run, the turbulence of impeachment will eventually pass.

This is a risky strategy. One reason good lawyers insist on deposing witnesses and subpoenaing documentary evidence is to avoid any unwelcome surprises at trial. Mr. Bolton has now provided the latest of those surprises. It is surely not the last.

The most galling part is that Republicans have already admitted how bad the president’s behavior was. Back in September, Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican and one of Mr. Trump’s staunchest defenders, said: “What would’ve been wrong is if the president had suggested to the Ukrainian government that if you don’t do what I want you to do regarding the Bidens, we’re not going to give you the aid. That was the accusation; that did not remotely happen.”

Except that it did, as Mr. Bolton is apparently willing to say under oath. Republicans don’t want him to do that because they don’t want Americans to exercise the simple good judgment that Mr. Graham once did.

Online: https://nyti.ms/312wmiT

___

Yes, NYC’s public schools need a federal racketeering probe

New York Post

Jan. 27

A racketeering investigation of New York City’s public-school system is long overdue.

The US Attorney for the Eastern District apparently is still mulling how far it will probe, but it’s definitely asking questions about some of the most recent grade- and test-fixing scandals.

This outrageous academic fraud - by adults all across the system - keeps recurring, year after year after year, all across the city. Time and again, The Post uncovers a scandal; the Department of Education announces an investigation - and no adult winds up paying any price. Nothing really changes; it’s all rinse-and-repeat.

This month, City Councilman Robert Holden (D-Queens) met with officials in the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District, reports The Post’s Susan Edelman. As Holden wrote the feds earlier, the “apparent pattern of conspiracy to cover up” the cheating and other wrongdoing might warrant an investigation under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

The “no-fail policy” at Maspeth HS is just one small piece of it. Staff with the Special Commissioner of Investigation for city schools claim the SCI has been sitting on cases alleging waste or misconduct by Mayor Bill de Blasio, Chirlane McCray, Chancellor Richard Carranza and other “high-level executives” to protect them, Edelman writes. (The SCI’s office denies it.)

One classic case dates back to 2013: Whistleblowing teachers exposing a massive grade-fixing scheme at Brooklyn’s John Dewey HS - a program students dubbed “Easy Pass.” Eventually, the principal was transferred - but never fired. And an arbitrator eventually threw out the charges against her - because the central DOE refused to cooperate with the investigation.

“School and district officials face essentially no accountability or consequences for fraud,” the Manhattan Institute’s Max Eden notes. Union officials and the State Education Department plainly play along with the endless coverups.

In all, it’s likely worse than the deceptions exposed by the Southern District’s investigation of the New York City Housing Authority - which now have NYCHA answering to a federal monitor.

The city school system probably needs even stronger medicine.

Online: https://bit.ly/2GBkb3a

___

Taxpayers’ Money Should Be Protected By Town Officials

The Post-Journal

Jan. 28

It’s been five years since the state Comptroller’s Office gave town of Carroll officials recommendations to better handle the town’s bookkeeping.

The first order of business for Russ Payne, new town supervisor, and Susan Rowley, new town clerk, should be to ensure the recommendations are fully implemented.

State officials recommend the town supervisor keep accurate supervisor records, that the town supervisor submit annual financial reports in a timely fashion, that the supervisor provide the town board with monthly supervisor reports and that the town board conduct a comprehensive annual audit of the financial records of all officers who receive or spend money within the town. Three of the recommendations have been partially implemented, while the town is roughly four years behind in submitting yearly financial reports to the state.

Concerns over the town’s books have been broached in the past. The state voiced concerns over the town’s bookkeeping practices in its 2014 audit. In November 2017 former Supervisor Jack Jones Jr. requested a state audit of the town’s swim program after it was suspected that not all of the money collected had been deposited in the bank. Last year, Patty Eckstrom, town councilwoman, called for a review of town clerk records.

Enough is enough. If Payne and Rowley accomplish nothing else in their time in town office, they should create a aystem where the proper reports are prepared and reviewed so that taxpayers’ money is properly protected.

Online: https://bit.ly/2u0FAzZ

___

Important for SPCA to heed report findings

Niagara Gazette

Jan. 24

On the plus side, a recent review of operations at the SPCA of Niagara’s Lockport Road animal shelter found no alarming instances where the mistreatment or abuse of animals is concerned.

Unfortunately, the audit of the the county’s primary animal shelter released this week suggested one of the bigger problems with the facility involves the level of “dysfunction” exhibited by the humans who have a hand in its day-to-day operation.

In putting together the audit, former Erie County SPCA Executive Director Barbara Carr interviewed dozens of current and former board members, employees, volunteers and even the shelter’s former executive director. She noted in her report that many of those individuals have “long since picked a side and become entrenched” in internal battles that have, in at least some instances, worked against the shelter’s core mission.

While she also found a common theme suggesting a deep compassion for animals and a commitment to their care, in her report Carr also noted that both sides of the shelter’s human divide need to understand that the “interest of the animals” is falling victim to a desire to “win the argument” with their opposition.

“You are all wrong (and you are all right). About something,” she added in her final words to SPCA staff and volunteers. “Now please stop. Your concern for the welfare of animals means you have to learn to work together.”

Why does it so often seem to be such a problem for individuals tied to organizations of public interest in Niagara County to heed such simple directives?

Running an animal shelter is no easy task. A lot of moving parts have to fit together in order for operations to run as smoothly as possible and to meet the ultimate goal of finding as many homes as possible for as many lost or abandoned animals as possible.

In-fighting, finger-pointing and internal disputes do not help improve operations, nor is the negative publicity surrounding such “dysfunction” helpful in fundraising efforts.

Legitimate concerns, especially those involving the mistreatment of animals under the shelter’s care, should be handled professionally and in keeping with acceptable internal operation standards as well as community expectations for quality animal care.

It’s clear, based on Carr’s report, that the SPCA’s leadership - its executive director and the members of its board included - have much work to do to not only help heal existing internal wounds but to also improve record-keeping, communication and establish a higher level of trust among staff and volunteers.

It’s a big job and it requires immediate attention and a willingness, as Carr noted, for all parties involved to work together for the greater good.

In her conclusion, Carr wrote that the core principal in shelter operation is; “Be Kind.” Yet, she said, “One would have to look hard to find an individual in this crisis who has embraced this core belief. In trying to be humane advocates for animals, they have forgotten how to be humane to one another.”

Challenges remain at the SPCA of Niagara, which is not unusual for any service organization, whether it exists to help animals or people.

Addressing those challenges will require an active and engaged board of directors, leadership from the top, continued involvement from the many volunteers who provide care for animals in need each day and ongoing support from the broader community.

While addressing these challenges will no doubt prove difficult, as Carr suggested, fostering an environment where the humans communicate effectively with one another and show each other respect sounds like a good place to start.

Online: https://bit.ly/38QVf3O

___

Take pot legalization out of budget

The Auburn Citizen

Jan. 26

It’s only a matter of time.

All one has to do is look around the country and see the growing number of states to legalize recreational use of marijuana. A day will certainly come when that list includes New York.

As we’ve said in the past, though, New York lawmakers and the governor must make sure they implement legalization in the most responsible manner possible. To that end, we give Gov. Andrew Cuomo credit for including a comprehensive legalization plan in his state budget proposal this year.

But we also have a problem with the governor’s approach: It shouldn’t be lumped in with the massive pile of legislation that becomes the state budget.

Every year there’s a give-and-take between the executive and legislative branches over what measures should be part of the budget and what are taken up separately. There’s technical arguments that both sides can make, and that’s true for recreational marijuana.

For us, the issue comes down to the need for extra public scrutiny. With all of the social and criminal implications that go along with pot use, New York’s legalization bill needs plenty of serious open debate and a straight-forward vote. When measures get buried into the budget, that type of process often never happens. Instead, it becomes a bargaining chip. And it’s often voted on in the middle of the night with little or no discussion.

For an example, look at the mess that has unfolded this year with the criminal justice reforms that were embedded in the budget during the 2019 session. A similar scenario could play out with a poorly written pot bill that’s approved in a nearly $180 billion spending plan.

We don’t expect the governor to remove his proposal from the executive budget. He probably thinks this is the only way to get something done. But lawmakers need to remember their duty to be a check on this governor, and insist that recreational marijuana use in New York state be addressed on its own.

Online: https://bit.ly/38U1Uu1

___