McNulty's excuse

Listening to McNulty on Alan Chartock's show on WAMC from September at the moment. I've called on him to apologize for voting for the Iraq war. He refuses to apologize, saying that he cast the right vote given the information that was provided by the administration.

This is a dodge. Roughly 73 members of the House voted against the war. McNulty's excuse essentially says that those 73 were wrong, and that they should have voted for the war based on the information they had at the time.

I would have voted against the war with that information. McNulty makes no apology for voting for it, which means he'd do it again in similar circumstances. If you oppose the war in Iraq, and want to make sure we don't get caught up in more foolish wars like this, your choice is clear.

Debate #2

The second debate in our 21st congressional district race is now available. I suggest that you right-click on the following link and "Save Target As ..." so it will download to your computer and viewing will then be smoother:

Redlich - McNulty Debate for League of Women Voters in Schenectady

Listen to McNulty's closing statement at the end. I have referred to his views as socialist at times during the campaign. In his closing he reacts and proudly proclaims his socialist vision for America. As I say in the debate I know that socialism is a loaded word, but think about what he is saying. It is plain socialist thinking.

Thanks again to SACC-TV for taping this and to Todd Wilson of SACC-TV for encoding it digitally.

Times Union endorsement - Not me!!

Here's a shocker. The Times Union endorses McNulty. Of course I disagree with their endorsement, but they did say nice things about me anyway. Read it at: http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=529774&category=OPINION&BCCode=HOME&newsdate=10/29/2006

Debate #1

The first debate between myself and Congressman McNulty is here: Redlich - McNulty Debate Video from SACC-TV. I recommend downloading first (right-click and "save target as") and then double-clicking the file. It will probably take several minutes to download on RoadRunner, and far too long on dialup or other slow connections. Thanks to Todd Wilson from SACC-TV for encoding the video so I could do this.

It will be aired this weekend, both Saturday and Sunday at 9 am, on WNYA-51. For most people that's Channel 4 on cable, but a complete list of channels is below.

Where to Watch
SYSTEM CHANNEL
OVER THE AIR - ALBANY 15
OVER THE AIR - PITTSFIELD 51
ADELPHIA CABLE-BENNINGTON 5
ADELPHIA CABLE-EDINBURG 3
ADELPHIA CABLE-GLENS FALLS 3
ADELPHIA CABLE-LEE 9
ADELPHIA CABLE-NORTH ADAMS 9
ADELPHIA CABLE-NORTHVILLE 3
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS-CHATHAM 3
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS-WEST STOCKBRIDGE 16
MID-HUDSON CABLEVISION INC 9
TIME WARNER CABLE-PITTSFIELD 8
TIME WARNER CABLE-PORT HENRY/TICONDEROGA/CROWN PT 13
TIME WARNER CABLE-SCHROON LAKE 11
TIME WARNER CABLE-ALL OTHER SYSTEMS 4
DIRECT TV 51
DISH NETWORK 7112

Complaint -- PDF format

The Complaint is also available in PDF format.

complaint1a.pdf

Prosecutorial Misconduct -- The Complaint

Below is the text of the Complaint that is being filed today regarding the Rensselaer DA's office. I post this not to focus people on this particular case, but rather to raise awareness of prosecutorial misconduct and the consequences of such conduct in general around the country. As congressman, I will fight for federal legislation to eliminate the absolute immunity prosecutors currently have for much of their misconduct. That immunity does not apply here to extradition, and it does not apply to the failure to train and supervise employees, but in far too many cases it is a shield protecting bad prosecutors.

--------------


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
__________________________________________________
JEREMY PHILLIPS and KELLY CHADWICK, individually
And as parent and natural guardian of COURTNEY PHILLIPS
and SHELBY PHILLIPS,
Plaintiffs,
v. COMPLAINT

PATRICIA DEANGELIS AS DISTRICT ATTORNEY
OF RENSSELAER COUNTY, JOSEPH AHEARN,
WILLIAM ROBERTS, JOHN DOE, an unidentified
employee of the Rensselaer County District Attorney,
and RENSSELAER COUNTY,

Defendants. JURY TRIAL
__________________________________________________ DEMANDED

1. This is a civil action brought to redress the violation of rights secured to the Plaintiffs under federal law and the United States Constitution.

PARTIES
2. Plaintiffs are citizens of the United States and residents of the State of Illinois, County of Cook, Town of Streamwood.
3. Plaintiff Jeremy Phillips was wrongfully accused of Grand Larceny, wrongfully extradited by the Rensselaer County Defendants, and wrongfully detained for a period of 29 days due to the misconduct of the Rensselaer County Defendants.
4. Plaintiff Kelly Chadwick is the wife of Jeremy Phillips.
5. Plaintiffs Courtney and Shelby Phillips are the daughters of Plaintiffs Jeremy Philips and Kelly Chadwick ages 12 and 6, respectively.
6. Defendants Ahearn, Roberts and Doe, residents of the State of New York, are Assistant District Attorneys employed by Defendants Rensselaer County District Attorney and County of Rensselaer.

FACTS
7. Plaintiff Jeremy Phillips, then a resident of the State of Massachusetts, was employed as the store manager of Advantage Auto Parts in the State of New York, County of Rensselaer, Town of North Greenbush, from roughly October of 2003 to January of 2004.
8. In January of 2004, Plaintiff’s employment was terminated.
9. On or about July 17, 2005, the New York State Police filed a Felony Complaint against Plaintiff in the North Greenbush Town Court, accusing Plaintiff of Grand Larceny.
10. Plaintiff Phillips was and is innocent.
11. On or about July 25, 2005, the New York State Police obtained a warrant for the arrest of Plaintiff Phillips from the North Greenbush Town Court, Hon. Raymond Elliott.
12. On or about February 21, 2006, the New York State Police requested that Defendant William Roberts, in his role as Assistant District Attorney for the Rensselaer County District Attorney and the County of Rensselaer, issue a warrant for the extradition of Plaintiff Phillips.
13. Defendant William Roberts issued the extradition warrant on or about March 7, 2006.
14. Defendant Roberts’ action was illegal, improper, unconstitutional, and exhibited a depraved indifference to the welfare and constitutional rights of Plaintiff Phillips.
15. Defendant Roberts did not read the file before ordering the extradition.
16. On information and belief, Defendant Roberts consulted with Defendants Ahearn and Doe before ordering the extradition, and obtained their approval.
17. Defendants Ahearn and Doe did not read the file before approving the extradition.
18. The District Attorney Defendants knew or should have known that there was insufficient evidence in the file to sustain a felony complaint.
19. The District Attorney Defendants knew or should have known that there was insufficient evidence in the file to authorize extradition.
20. Plaintiff Jeremy Phillips was arrested on March 8, 2006 in Streamwood, Illinois and held in custody in Chicago by a warrant issued in North Greenbush Town Court.
21. The felony complaint charged Plaintiff with the crime of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, a D Felony, and allegedly arose out of his work for Advantage Auto Parts in North Greenbush around the dates of December 2003 and January of 2004.
22. The Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office ordered, directed, and commanded that plaintiff be extradited from Illinois.
23. Neither Defendant Roberts nor Defendant Ahearn nor anyone else in the Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office reviewed the file before ordering extradition.
24. Pursuant to the order of the Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office, on March 7th 2006, a day before plaintiff was arrested, Defendant William Roberts stated that his office would be willing to extradite Plaintiff back to New York and advised police officers in New York to arrest Plaintiff.
25. The sole basis for the felony complaint was a hearsay statement by an employee of Plaintiff’s former company, Gary Betts.
26. In his statement, taken on January 27, 2004, Betts says “I was told by someone, I don’t recall exactly who told me, that money was missing that should have been deposited.”
27. Betts’ statement consisted entirely of hearsay, and did not identify the Plaintiff as the perpetrator of any crime.
28. There was no other factual basis for the complaint or any warrant to be issued.
29. Defendant Roberts stated that the US Marshalls Office would be used to bring back Plaintiff and that the US Marshalls were in contact with the County District Attorney’s Office.
30. On March 16th, Plaintiff waived his extradition hearing allowing him to immediately return to New York.
31. The US Marshall’s Service refused to provide transportation for plaintiff because they were not involved in the initial case.
32. Defendants knew or should have known that the US Marshall’s Service would not provide transportation.
33. Defendants’ negligence in coordinating with the Marshall’s Service led to a substantial delay in plaintiff’s extradition.
34. Defendant William Roberts, and Defendant Joseph Ahearn, also an employee of the Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office, both refused to consent to bail while the plaintiff was in Chicago.
35. Neither Defendant Roberts nor Defendant Ahearn reviewed the file at the time they refused to consent to bail.
36. Defendant Ahearn stated reason for not getting Plaintiff here in a more timely manner was: “We’re not travel agents.”
37. Plaintiff was finally extradited back to New York on April 5th. Plaintiff spent 29 days in custody.
38. Plaintiff had to pay his own way to get home to Chicago after getting out on bail.
39. The Plaintiff and his family were required to expend $5000 to make bail.
40. The Plaintiff and his family were also required to expend $5000 on attorney fees to represent him in defense of the criminal charge.
41. Plaintiff was employed in Illinois at the time of his arrest with a wife and two children, ages 5 and 11, plaintiffs herein.
42. The delay in bringing Plaintiff to New York was not attributable to Plaintiff, but rather to the District Attorney’s Office for their utter indifference to plaintiff and his family.
43. The Rensselaer County Grand Jury returned a “no bill” for Plaintiff on September 29, 2006.
44. During the course of Plaintiff’s unlawful incarceration for 29 days, Plaintiff was unable to see his young children and his contact with his wife was severely limited.
45. The Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office has been cited for numerous violations involving prosecutorial misconduct in the past.
46. Most recently, the Court of Appeals cited Rensselaer County District Attorney Patricia DeAngelis for “deplorable” conduct in the prosecution of Robert Gorghan.
47. The Appellate Division, Third Department of New York had previously overturned the initial conviction of Gorghan in 2004 and said at the time that DeAngelis “repeatedly strayed beyond the bounds of permissible conduct.”
48. In August of 2006, although not specifically cited as the reason for reversal, in the overturning of a murder conviction of Christine Wilhelm, prosecuted by the Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office, the Third Department, Appellate Division said "prosecutors have wide berth to advocate for their case, there are limitations….and should not seek to lead the jury away from the issues by drawing irrelevant and inflammatory conclusions which have a decided tendency to prejudice the jury against the defendant".
49. In January of 2006, a rape conviction against Burton Hunter was overturned because the Assistant District Attorney handling the original trial failed to disclose a prior accusation of rape by the victim, which the Court considered Brady material.
50. The District Attorney’s Office has also been cited for misconduct in the handling of Jack Carroll’s prosecution for rape and sexual abuse including specifically for allegations of misleading the jury.
51. In a case against Thomas Levandowski, District Attorney DeAngelis was again cited for misconduct. In a decision, the Appellate Decision, Third Department, the Court said, “the prosecutor’s conduct through the course of the trial was so pervasive as to deprive defendant of a fair trial.”
52. On information and belief, Defendant District Attorney was also admonished for prosecutorial misconduct in 1998 for her actions in front of a Grand Jury.
53. Defendant County was aware of these and other instances of misconduct by the District Attorney’s Office, and failed to adequately train and supervise that office.
54. With this as a background, Plaintiff, through counsel, does hereby complain and allege as follows:

JURISDICTION

55. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1341, 1341 & 1343 because it is filed to obtain compensatory and punitive damages for the deprivation, under the color of state law, of the rights of citizens of the United States secured by the Constitution and federal law pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and §1983.
56. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(2) because the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in this judicial district.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of Constitutional Rights Under Color of State Law Malicious Prosecution by Wrongful Extradition
57. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and realleges each and every allegation stated in paragraphs 1 through 56.
58. The United States Constitution protects citizens from malicious prosecution by law enforcement officers, and prohibits officers from prosecuting and extraditing individuals where there is no probable cause to believe that they have engaged in criminal conduct.
59. The actions of Defendants Rensselaer County District Attorney, Joseph Ahearn, William Roberts, John Doe, and the County of Rensselaer above violated Plaintiff’s rights under the United States Constitution. It was not objectively reasonable for these Defendants to extradite Plaintiff for the felony of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree based upon Gary Betts’ statement that “I was told by someone, I don’t recall exactly who told me, that money was missing that should have been deposited.” In short, the allegations created no probable cause whatsoever that plaintiff committed the said crime.
60. Defendants’ actions were motivated by bad faith, malice, and indifference to Plaintiff Jeremy Phillips and his family, including Plaintiffs Kelly Chadwick, Shelby Phillips, and Courtney Phillips.
61. The criminal prosecution of Plaintiff was terminated in his favor after a no bill at Grand Jury.
62. Plaintiff’s prosecution resulted in his loss of liberty, given that he spent 29 days in custody and had to endure costly criminal court proceedings to clear his name.
63. This conduct on the part of defendants also represents a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 given that their actions were undertaken under color of state law.
64. As a direct and proximate result of the unconstitutional acts described above, Plaintiff has been irreparably injured.
65. Defendants District Attorney and County are vicariously liable for the misconduct of Defendants Roberts, Ahearn and Doe.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of Constitutional Rights Under Color of State Law
The Application of Excessive Bail

66. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and realleges each and every allegation stated in paragraphs 1 through 65.

67. The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects citizens from the imposition of excessive or punitive bail by law enforcement officials and mandates that an individual be provided with bail no higher than that necessary to assure his appearance at court.

68. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff was initially denied bail by the East Greenbush Town Court because Defendant Roberts and Defendant Ahearn failed to read Plaintiff’s file and also made false representations that Plaintiff was a fugitive from justice.

69. The actions by Defendant Roberts and Defendant Ahearn violated Plaintiff’s right to be free from the imposition of excessive bail as detailed in the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

70. Defendant’s actions were motivated by bad faith, malice, and an indifference to the rights of Plaintiff.

71. This conduct on the part of Defendant Roberts and Defendant Ahearn also represents a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 given that their actions were undertaken under the color of state law.

72. As a direct and proximate result of the unconstitutional acts described above, Plaintiff has been irreparably injured.

73. Defendants District Attorney and County are vicariously liable for the misconduct of Defendants Roberts and Ahearn.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of Constitutional Rights Under Color of State Law
False Arrest and Imprisonment

74. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and realleges each and every allegation stated in paragraphs 1-74.

75. Based upon the misconduct of the Defendants, Plaintiff was arrested and illegally imprisoned.

76. At no point was Plaintiff free to leave.

77. Defendant’s actions were motivated by bad faith, malice, and an indifference to the rights of Plaintiff.

78. This misconduct on the part of Defendant Roberts and Defendant Ahearn also represents a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 given that their actions were undertaken under the color of state law.

79. As a direct and proximate result of the unconstitutional acts described above, Plaintiff has been irreparably injured.

80. Defendants District Attorney and County are vicariously liable for the misconduct of Defendants Roberts and Ahearn.


FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of Constitutional Rights Under Color of State Law
Derivative Claim

81. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference and reallege each and every allegation stated in paragraphs 1-80.
82. Plaintiffs Chadwick and the infant plaintiffs suffered the loss of companionship and services of their husband and father as a result of the misconduct of the Defendants.



FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Punitive Damages Against Defendant County Of Rensselaer

83. Plaintiff incorporates by reference and realleges each and every allegation stated in paragraphs 1-82.
84. The actions of Defendants Ahearn, Roberts, Doe, and the District Attorney’s office herein described were extreme and outrageous.
85. Based upon the past misconduct of the Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office and failure to remedy past complaints against the office, an award of punitive damages is appropriate to punish Defendant Rensselaer County for its cruel and uncivilized conduct.


DEMAND FOR A TRIAL BY JURY

86. The Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial by jury.


PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs request that this Honorable Court grant them the following relief:

A. Award compensatory damages to Plaintiff Jeremy Phillips against the defendants on the First Cause of Action, jointly and severally in the amount of $3,000,000.00;
B. Award compensatory damages to Plaintiff Jeremy Phillips against the defendants on the Second Cause of Action, jointly and severally in the amount of $3,000,000.00;
C. Award compensatory damages to Plaintiff Jeremy Phillips against the defendants on the Third Cause of Action, jointly and severally in the amount of $3,000,000.00;
D. Award compensatory damages to Plaintiff Chadwick, and the infant plaintiffs Courtney and Shelby Phillips against the defendants on the Fourth Cause of Action, jointly and severally in the amount of $3,000,000.00;
E. Award punitive damages in the Fifth Cause of Action in the amount of $40,000,000.00;
F. A monetary award for attorney’s fees and the costs of this action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988;
G. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.


Respectfully Submitted,

Warren Redlich
Attorney for Plaintiff
255 Washington Avenue Ext.
Suite 108
Albany, NY 12205
888-733-5299

Dated: October 24th, 2006
Albany, New York

Press Conference tomorrow

We're doing a press conference for the campaign tomorrow. This relates to a case I've had for a while. My client was extradited from Chicago on Grand Larceny charges. He spent 29 days in jail, and did not see his kids for that entire time. Problem is that he is innocent. It's not just me saying that. The Grand Jury found there was not enough evidence to go forward. That means there was not enough evidence to extradite him.

So we're suing the Rensselaer County District Attorney's office. At the press conference we'll announce the suit and I will discuss my proposal to eliminate the "absolute immunity" that prosecutors have under federal law. The immunity does not apply in this particular case (extradition is not a "prosecutorial" function), but this case serves to highlight a substantial national problem that gets little attention.

I'm occasionally asked by people how I, a criminal defense attorney can defend someone who I know is guilty. The easy answer is that I do my best to get them the best deal I can, and that in many cases I feel the penalties are too harsh and/or that the criminal law should not apply to their behavior (such as non-violent drug cases).

But I always respond with a question: Have you ever asked a prosecutor how they can prosecute someone they know is innocent?

This is usually met with a blank stare. That's because the question doesn't make sense to people who aren't involved in the system. They don't realize how bad our criminal "justice" system is. They don't understand how often police lie - even when the defendant is guilty and they've got him cold. They don't understand how many judges are biased in favor of the police and prosecutors, and against defendants.

Most of all, they simply have no idea how often prosecutors disregard the rights of criminal defendants. This happens in so many ways. Even the "good" prosecutors do things I think are wrong. This is probably why I'm a defense lawyer.

To the average person on the street it is inconceivable that a prosecutor would prosecute someone they know is innocent. But it happens, and I've been surprised at how often. If you search for cases on this, as I did in preparing for this lawsuit, you find things that shock the conscience. Prosecutors and police lying and hiding evidence that shows a man is completely innocent. In Walker v. NYC a man spent 19 years in prison for murder. The police relied on an informant. That informant was unable to pick Walker out of a lineup, and told police that another man was at the scene of the murder - that man happened to be in jail at the time and couldn't have been there. Police and prosecutors covered up those details and put the informant on the stand at trial even though they knew he was lying. One of the prosecutors even stated in open court that there had been no lineup even though he knew there had been one.

Some cases are even worse. One Supreme Court case I read had the prosecutor, like Walker, putting a witness on the stand he knew was lying. Even worse, that prosecutor fabricated evidence to get the conviction. It later came out and the Supreme Court ruled that the defendant could not sue the prosecutor because he had absolute immunity.

There are many cases in the casebooks like this. And there are many more that never make it into the casebooks because lawyers know not to bother suing prosecutors because of this immunity.

That is why I'm calling for federal legislation to eliminate the absolute immunity that prosecutors have. That immunity eliminates any incentive for prosecutors to treat defendants like human beings, as my client found out in our case.

Many prosecutors do not fall prey to this. The Saratoga DA's office is known for being excellent. They get paid reasonably well and do not have the same crushing caseload one sees in Albany and Schenectady. As a result they are able to keep their ADAs. They get quality, experienced prosecutors. They also have good leadership and common sense throughout the office. The quality of prosecutors varies depending on where you are, and most of them are pretty good. Albany and Schenectady suffer from higher turnover, but most of the ADAs there are still reasonable. In smaller counties like Schoharie, Fulton and Montgomery, you have much smaller offices. The head DA usually does a lot of the real prosecution - something you don't see much of in the bigger counties. Having the DA on the front lines means they stay in touch. They're not perfect, but they often have a strong feel for juries and good relationships with the judges and defense lawyers.

Then there's Rensselaer. For reasons I can't explain, it seems to have become prosecutors gone wild - like Lord of the Flies. The press likes to pin this on the current DA, Patricia DeAngelis, but the problems go back before she was in charge. Time after time they have been tagged by the courts for prosecutorial misconduct, and they just don't stop. And that's because of the perceived immunity. I know of one case that was brought and then quickly dropped because of it. This emboldens them. And it does the same for prosecutors in various places across our state and the whole nation. The only way to bring this under control is to eliminate the immunity so that those who are wronged can hold the malicious prosecutors accountable.

Segments from WTEN

WTEN (Channel 10, the ABC affiliate here) had candidates in for 50-second bits on two issues, Iraq and the federal response to local flooding.

You can see my answers, and the answers of Sweeney and Gillibrand, here: http://wten.com/Global/story.asp?S=5545644&nav=menu30_1

McNulty did not appear, probably because of his knee injury.

Better press -- Debates coming up

The Times Union had a very nice article today about the recent debate. We debated on the 17th in Schenectady for public access cable. The debate will air on the 28th and 29th at 9 am on cable channel 4 for most of the area cable companies. If I can, I'll get the debate video and post it here or on YouTube.

The Times Union article is at:
http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=527865&category=REGION&newsdate=10/22/2006

We will also debate on the 25th in Schenectady for the League of Women Voters, at the 1st Unitarian, 1211 Wendell.

More media coverage - Capital News 9 interview

I was interviewed this morning on Capital News 9. The interview is now available on their website. I thought it went pretty well, though it's still hard to watch myself on TV - I talk too fast, have bags under my eyes, twitch too much, etc.

Click the following link to see the interview: Warren Redlich on Albany's Capital News 9.

Why politicians waste money - the voters

This blog and my campaign are about how government needs to stop wasting money. After a substantial amount of campaigning I can tell you one reason why politicians keep wasting our money. Because voters constantly ask them for money.

This morning was a great example. I took my daughter to religious school and attended a breakfast meeting there. There was a speaker who talked about the upcoming elections. As a brief aside, this expert lives in this congressional district but did not know who I was and could not name the candidate (Tom Raleigh) who ran against McNulty in the primary this year -- and Raleigh lives in the same town as this gentleman. I don't say this to come down on the expert, but rather to emphasize how dramatic the underreporting of challengers is.

Anyway, during the course of the breakfast, my presence was announced. Please keep in mind that I was not there to campaign. I was there because I took my daughter for school and I was interested in hearing the speaker. I did not ask that my presence be announced, but the guy running the meeting is a friend and I didn't ask him not to announce me either.

After the breakfast a gentleman confronted me to express concern about how the Pataki and the New York Republicans had shifted funding for some food safety lab from Albany to Geneva (New York). He was polite, but did not seem to fully understand that I am running (okay, blogging) for Congress, and that Congress does not control New York State spending. He was very passionate about this issue. I think that's because he works at the lab in question. He thought I would be able to raise this issue with Pataki and the other Republican leaders at one of our meetings.

If you're not laughing at this point, please read that last sentence again. I have never met George Pataki. I have met Lt. Gov. Mary Donohue a few times, but have never had the time to discuss any policy issues with her. I have met Jim Tedisco and Hugh Farley more often, and they actually know me by name and face, but still have never had the opportunity to have substantive policy discussions with them. If there are such meetings, I have not been invited. I doubt Donohue, Tedisco or Farley are in these meetings much either.

At some point the voter's wife approached, and she was even more passionate about this issue. I'm guessing they don't want to move to Geneva and feel quite strongly about it.

Somewhere in there I explained (when I could get a word in) that while Congress wouldn't have much say about this, that if there were federal funding involved, I would oppose such funding in the first place, as this is not a role I see for the federal government. Apparently this was somewhat offensive - or maybe I had lapsed into speaking Japanese.

I tried to explain that Price Chopper probably would find a way to make sure that the food it sells is safe because they want to keep having customers come in. This idea was flatly rejected. Price Chopper wouldn't do it, I was instructed. Keep in mind here that Price Chopper's owners are heavy contributors to the religious facility where we were having the conversation. I also mentioned my opinion that the States are perfectly capable of taking care of such matters if government involvement is needed, but again I was told that I'm wrong. This couple was really quite unpleasant. They would not stop talking, had no interest whatsoever in my opinion on this issue (or any other) and the wife in particular took a great deal of offense when I told her that if she was not going to listen to what I had to say, then I wasn't interested in listening to her. I had not come to this event to campaign and was due to pick up my daughter. One of the frustrating things about being a candidate is that other people assume that you are at their disposal whenever they want to talk to you. And in cases like this, if you don't agree with them they will keep telling you the same annoying nonsense until you bow down, apologize for your ignorance, beg forgiveness, and agree to support whatever ridiculous position they have. Or in my case, until I tell them to vote for the other guy.

You see, on any issue, there are some very passionate people who believe that the private sector will fall apart and kill people unless the nanny state comes in and saves us all. Often, but not always, these people happen to earn their living saving us all from our inability to avoid killing ourselves.

As candidates, we meet these people when we're campaigning. All the time. They all want us to spend your money on something. By contrast, we very rarely encounter people who tell us to spend less money. It becomes very easy as a politician to promise these wingnuts -- oop, I mean these thoughtful and passionate people -- that we'll spend money to address these problems. Then when you get elected you've made all these promises and it's human nature to try to deliver. And this is how we end up with governments at all levels that are bloated beyond all recognition (a close relative of FUBAR).

We do not need a Commerce Department. American businesses do quite well in commerce and do not need government help. Same with the Agriculture Department, Education Department, Housing Department, etc. To the extent that government does intervene in such areas, the money tends to go not where it is most needed. Instead it tends to go to whatever groups have the most influence and who have given money to the right politicians, etc.

Agriculture subsidies are one of the worst examples of this. Something like 90% of the subsidies go to millionaire corn farmers in the midwest who've got huge tracts of land (anyone get the Monty Python reference?). Meanwhile, farmers in upstate New York get diddly squat. I remember someone telling me about Chuck Schumer's visit to Montgomery County, where he was surprised at how few farmers there are left. That's probably because he's making sure all the subsidies in New York go to all the farms run by his friends in Brooklyn.

We have to stop using the federal government as a redistribution machine. That is not what the founders of this nation intended. Whatever good intentions may have started this have not been achieved.

McNulty - a class act

I know I'm supposed to attack my opponent at every opportunity (see the Sweeney - Gillibrand race), but I can't do it. I'm running for the seat currently held by Mike McNulty. I disagree strongly with his voting record and his statements on some issues, but I can't attack him on a personal level.

When I say I'm running for Congress, people often ask me who I'm running against. I don't really like that question. I'm not running against him. I'm running to get people to know about me and my positions on the issues. I'm running for positive change in Congress and America. The notion that a challenger is running against the incumbent puts a negative cast on the challenger's campaign from the beginning. This relates to one of the best criticisms of today's Democratic Party. They're not really running for positive change. They're running against the Republicans, and that's all they've got.

Anyway, the thing about McNulty is that he's just a really nice guy. I'm not saying he's perfect. His voting history and rhetoric are hard-core socialist and he did funnel campaign money to his brother in the last election cycle. But socialists are everywhere in Washington and Albany and the campaign funds incident was minor compared to what we see from other politicians. One often sees elected officials accused of voting based on who gave them money. I've never seen a single incident where I thought McNulty's vote was influenced by anything other than his beliefs. He doesn't raise money like the other politicians either. McNulty typically raises $300K in a 2-year cycle, which is much less than one sees from so many others.

I've met him and spoken with him on a few occasions, and this is the situation where he really shines. He's just pleasant, a decent fellow. We debated twice in 2004, and chatted before and after each debate. He could have been rude and unpleasant, perhaps to intimidate me or because he might be offended at my campaign. Nope. He was just plain friendly. His staff, including Charlie Diamond, are the same way. I called Charlie about something a few weeks ago. He called me back and we spoke for a few minutes. They return phone calls and respond to e-mails, and are always polite. His family is also like this, as I've seen with his dad and his sister.

It all really stood out to me this past week. McNulty didn't show up for an event. I was told he had been injured and was going in for surgery. Since he's been such a nice guy in the past, and maybe because I have some decency in me, I sent an e-mail to his office wishing him and his family well. His office replied to the e-mail indicating that he was getting arthroscopic surgery for his knee, and thanking me for the message. But that's not all. McNulty himself actually called me to thank me for the message - as he was waiting for surgery.

So let me get this straight. You're a congressman. You're busy with so many things - in case people don't know, it's not that easy of a job. You've got the responsibilities of being in office, the campaign, helping other candidates, your family, etc. to deal with, plus you're about to have surgery, and you actually take time to call your opponent to thank him for an e-mail.

Mike McNulty - a class act.

So much easier to run "against" someone when you hate him. Yet another reason why I'm running "for" something (to stop wasting money).

Actual press coverage

I was quite pleased to see that a local newspaper printed a substantive discussion of the campaign in the 21st congressional district. The Record (sometimes called the Troy Record since it's office is in Troy) ran an article by Robert Cristo on Thursday, October 12th. It appeared on page 10 in the Local News section, though I could not find it on their website. It is a big article, covering more than half the page.

The article really gets my message out better than any other media story so far. First it prints my attack on McNulty for voting for the Iraq war, and his more recent waffling (he now says the war was a mistake, says we should get out, but just voted to continue funding it). Meanwhile the McNulty quotes do not deliver any kind of clear message (because he doesn't have one).

The article then moves on to my "stop wasting money" theme, detailing my criticism of the Republican leadership and Bush. It even hits my key point about not wasting billions defending rich countries. It again quotes McNulty, but again his position is lost in unclear Democratic Party rhetoric.

Thank you to The Record for giving substantive coverage to this campaign.

I should also give kudos to the Times Union for calling me to get my opinion on the North Korean nuclear test, and reporting what I said. Their article is on the web (for now at least) at: http://www.timesunion.com/ASPStories/Story.asp?storyID=524211&newsdate=10/12/2006&BCCode=MBTA

Thanks to Cathy Woodruff for calling and to Liz Benjamin and the TU for printing what I had to say about this issue. They had spoken with Sweeney and McNulty, and decided they should hear what the challengers had to say. This was a particularly good article because it showed a strong contrast between myself and the other three. All of them spoke about sanctions and diplomacy, in typically vague politician terms. I said we didn't need to take a lead role, that the four countries surrounding N. Korea (Russia, China, Japan and S. Korea) are quite powerful and don't need our help. It also hit on my key position - that we've been defending Japan and South Korea for 60 and 50 years, and it's time they took care of themselves.

I should also mention that the Daily Gazette also mentioned me in an article, apparently about Eric Sundwall's effort in federal court to get back on the ballot - I was there supporting Eric. Unfortunately I haven't seen the article. I think it was written by Bob Conner. This one has me confused though. I got a call and an e-mail from some Republican leaders saying that I shouldn't say bad things about Sweeney. This was in reference to that article in the Gazette. I saw some friends in Scotia that evening and asked them about it. They told me the article just mentioned me briefly, and that I hadn't said anything bad about Sweeney. If anyone has that article and can scan it and e-mail it to me, I'd appreciate it.

3 1/2 weeks to the election. Hopefully the voters will get to read a bit more about the differences before they vote.

The First Debate - Kirsten Gillibrand

This morning I went to a candidate event put on by NY seniors. The only other candidate to show up was Kirsten Gillibrand. Sweeney refused to come. McNulty was expected but they said he had been injured.
I spoke first as Gillibrand was late. I said some of the ideas on this blog, focusing of course on 'stop wasting money.'
I fielded several questions, mostly related to Social Security.
Gillibrand spoke next. She speaks well, though we disagree on many issues. Mostly her positions are cookie-cutter lines from the Dems in DC. She didn't handle some questions well in my opinion, either not answering or going way off the topic.
The biggest gaffe was in her response to immigration, where she talked about terrorism and said the big problem is the southern border. I responded by noting that the 9/11 terrorists came across the northern border. This was also our biggest policy disagreement. She called for closing the borders while I favored open immigration.
Overall she was quite pleasant. We chatted briefly after and she remained a good person.

Socialism in its many disguises: ARISE

I went to a meeting of a group called ARISE the other day. The name stands for A Regional Initiative Supporting Empowerment. It's a very pleasant group of people, made up of member organizations that are mostly churches in the Albany area.

Underlying ARISE is a philosophy that is so well hidden I suspect most of its members, and even some leaders, don't even realize it's there. It is plainly a socialist organization. I do not mean this in the sense some have of socialism as a consciously evil intent to take over the government for the purpose of controlling the economy. It is rather the consciously do-gooding but inherently misguided and dangerous intent to influence the government for the purpose of controlling the economy. Most of their current issue positions are not socialist in nature, but when you hear their leaders talk, you can hear the socialism.

One of the symptoms of socialism is when you see statements that demonstrate a complete lack of sanity. I heard one of these at the ARISE meeting. The President (and again, I'm sure he's really a nice fellow despite this) said that "we" don't want the Albany area to become like Austin (Texas) or Silicon Valley (the corridor between San Jose and San Francisco in California). I haven't been to Austin in about 20 years, but I got a Master's degree at Stanford in 1991, and have been back a couple of times since. Silicon Valley is one of the most wonderful places on Earth. I was reading the Wall Street Journal just now. They have an article (10/5/2006) about how high-tech companies continue to move to Silicon Valley. In the article they mention that 28% of San Jose is high-tech workers and the average high-tech worker in San Jose makes over $120K/year where the average high-tech worker in the US makes "only" $75K. Maybe it's just me, but I think that would be good for the Capital Region.

Many of today's quasi-socialists express concern about the dangers of growth, especially when that growth is unrestrained by their do-gooding wishes for society. Sprawl is an example of this concern, as is "inequity" - when some people gain more from growth than others.

When it comes to dealing with sprawl, Silicon Valley is doing quite well in my opinion. For one, there is a fairly good mass transit system in the Bay Area, including a train from San Jose to San Francisco, a bus system, and the BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) system which mainly serves San Francisco but reaches the northern end of Silicon Valley. But there's another key detail about Silicon Valley. It is true that some workers who can't afford housing there have to live in fairly distant suburbs. But that is a consequence of geography. There isn't that much usable land. It happens to be on a peninsula, squeezed in between the San Mateo mountains and the San Francisco Bay. San Francisco is less than 50 miles from San Jose, and most of the valley is only about 5 miles wide, for a total of maybe 250 square miles, though there's quite a bit more if you include all of Santa Clara County. In our area, by contrast, there is essentially unlimited space. It's 90 miles from Queensbury to Catskill, and another 90 from Canajoharie to the Massachusetts border. That's roughly 8100 square miles, well over 8 times the area of Silicon Valley, and we have a lot less people here.

By the way, I also remember Austin to be a nice, fun place, and Wikipedia puts the household income in Travis County to be nearly $60K, or about $15K higher than the national average. Texas is also known for relatively low cost of living (a trait Silicon Valley does not share). Austin is also known as the "Live Music Capital of the World".

So whenever you hear someone tell you that they don't want Albany's Tech Valley initiative to turn this area into another Austin or Silicon Valley, please realize that you're staring socialism in the face.

While I'm on this topic, I do have to mention one other nonsense notion from the left. I often hear people characterize Bill Gates as being somehow evil. I'm not particularly fond of Microsoft myself (I prefer Apple), but Bill Gates has to be the single greatest employer in history. Anyone who worked at the company early on who stayed for any length of time became a millionaire. Many employees went on to net worths exceeding $10 million and I'd guess roughly 50 of them, perhaps more, went into the $100 million club. At least three are billionaires (Gates, Allen and Ballmer), and I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few others.

Capitalism has led to a vast improvement in the human condition. The history of the 20th century has demonstrated how the greater economic freedom inherent in capitalism in countries like the US allowed economic growth that has made all of our lives dramatically better. Today's poorest Americans live better than 90% of the rest of the world. By contrast, countries like Russia and China suffered very badly from socialist policies. Now that they are embracing capitalism and free markets, their economies are growing dramatically, lifting hundreds of millions of their citizens out of poverty. Try telling someone from China that their country should go back to socialism and see the look on their face.

Socialists see a static world. There's a pie out there and everyone should get an equal piece of the pie. Supporters of capitalism see a dynamic world, where the opportunity to get more pie leads people to work harder, innovate, and take risks. The result is not that the successful get more of the pie. It is rather that they make the pie larger and while the successful do get a larger percentage, the average person ends up getting more pie as well.

Recently I've been seeing articles that the average American is not sharing in the current growth because wages are not rising much. This ignores at least two things: 1 - many employees own stock and they benefit when the stock market does better; and 2 - everyone benefits from falling effective prices. Today's cars are safer, more powerful and even more fuel-efficient than cars from 20 years ago. Computers continue to become better, faster and cheaper. You can buy a TV today for $1000 that Bill Gates could not have bought 10 years ago. Yesterday's $500 televisions are so cheap people throw them away after a few years.

And that reminds me of another icon the left hates - Walmart. Again, I personally do not shop at Walmart much. I find the shopping experience unpleasant. I'm doing fairly well and so the low prices are not a big deal to me. But for the "average Joe", Walmart is great. Walmart generally pays higher wages than competing local businesses, and has lower prices too. People who work at Walmart can afford to shop there.

Top 10 Reasons the Media Won't Cover My Campaign

After seeing what does get press (i.e. Mark Foley), I've decided to do a Top 10 List of reasons why the media isn't covering my campaign:

10. I haven't been caught sending racy e-mails to 16-year-old boys.

9. My wife hasn't gotten any speeding tickets.

8. The FBI is not investigating me for wiretapping my wife's phone.

7. I have never had a government employee chauffeur my wife around.

6. I haven't received hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from special interests.

5. I have never funneled campaign contributions to family members.

4. I did not dodge the draft.

3. I've never been caught at a frat party.

2. I've never described my opponent, Mike McNulty, as a pair of legs or a pretty face.

and

#1: I did not have sex with that woman, Miss [Monica] Lewinsky.


I was thinking of having a campaign event at my house - a keg party for college students (including those under 21), with strippers. But I don't think my wife would let me do that. :-)

For those who are not paying attention (or reading this at a much later date), here's a key to the list above:
#10: Congressman Mark Foley recently left Congress after being exposed for sending inappropriate e-mails and text messages to 16-year-old congressional pages.
9: Senate candidate Jeanine Pirro's husband has gotten a few tickets.
8: Pirro again.
7. NY Comptroller Alan Hevesi
6. Various politicians, but I was thinking of John Sweeney, Kirsten Gillibrand in the 20th district, and my opponent, Mike McNulty in the 21st district.
5. McNulty and Sweeney have both funneled campaign money to family (McNulty's brother and Sweeney's wife).
4. I had to get a George W. Bush jab in there, though it applies to Dick Cheney and Bill Clinton too.
3. Sweeney again.
2. And Sweeney yet again - he's such an easy target.
1. C'mon, that one's timeless.

Throw the bums out ...

I met an interesting guy this weekend at a conference in Owego. Russ Diamond spoke about an effort he was involved in this year in Pennsylvania. Apparently the PA legislature did some things that offended a lot of people (even the press). Diamond and his group picked up on this and got a substantial number of people to run against incumbents in what he described as "Operation Clean Sweep". This effort led to a far greater than usual turnover in the PA legislature this year, with as many as 50 incumbents leaving - either by being beaten or by retiring in greater numbers than in typical years. Diamond estimated the turnover as 5 times the typical number (10).

His group's website is: http://www.pacleansweep.com/

I'd love to try to do something like this on the federal level, and hope to discuss such an effort with Diamond once this election is over.

McNulty Brags About Wasting Money

First McNulty votes for the war in Iraq. Then he stands by the war for a long time. A few months ago (at most) he decides we should never have gone to war, calling it the biggest blunder in military history. And just this past week, he not only voted to approve more spending for the Iraq war, he's actually bragging about voting for it in a press release: http://www.house.gov/mcnulty/pr060927.htm

His press release is spin on how much money of this $448 billion waste of money comes into our district: $16 million. Let's see. $448 billion, divided by 435 congressional districts, equals a bit over $1 Billion. And he's bragging about bringing home $16 Million - 1.6% of what would be average.

Someday I'll figure out why he gets a free pass on all this from the media.