Contribute the include Adderondack
Brevverges of Scotia, New York,
Makers of an Assortment of Naturally Flavored
Saum Drinks, the State University of New York, and Albany,
and the members and listeners of WAMC.
This program is a production of WAMC News,
and is made possible with funds provided by the state University of New York College at Newport.
From Albany, this is the legislative Gazette,
a weekly news magazine examining the activities of state government.
Your host is political scientist and syndicated colonist,
Dr. Alan Chartock, of the State University.
In this edition, we'll look at two bones of contention between the governor and the legislature,
energy and the equal rights amended.
And we'll talk with Senator Douglas Barclay about his decisions and not to seek another term.
The decision announced earlier this week by Senate Majority Leader Warren Anderson
to keep the Senate in session until next week
has left the door open for possible consideration of the state equal rights amendment.
A measure the Senate originally declined to bring up for a vote.
Ric Lepp-Kausky has the latest on that.
Majority senators have been placed between the proverbial rock and a hard place
over the proposed state ERA.
Governor Cuomo and women's organizations have snatched the amendment from ultimate death
and have given it new life with a last-dig but forceful lobbying effort.
But to combat this, New York's current policy has been a very important step.
The government has been able to make sure that the government has been able to make sure
that the government has been able to make sure that the government has been able to make sure that the government
was able to make sure that the economy has been able to make sure that the economy has been able to make sure
that the economy has been able to make sure that the economy has been able to make sure that the government has been able to make sure that the economy has been the right.
and pass on to Adam Paul Buckner, that this was sort of challenging and controversial.
Although it was governor Cuomo who reintroduced the ERA and his state address in January,
women's organizations accused the governor of not pushing hard enough for the amendment
Like he did for the 21-year-old alcohol purchase age.
The women's groups and Cuomo met, made men's, and together lodged a last-minute push to bring
the legislation to the Senate floor for debate.
The governor then met with Senate Majority Leader Warren Anderson, urging Anderson to
allow debate on the ERA.
Anderson, who says he favors the amendment, told the governor it was not him that was holding
up debate, but other key senators in the Republican conference.
The Senate Majority Leader then gave the governor permission to lobby those senators.
At a press conference following the meeting with Anderson, the governor cited a recent
Marist College poll that showed an overwhelming number of New Yorkers support the ERA.
And he warned the senators that the people of New York are watching.
Now 73 or so percent of the people want the ERA.
I'm sure that's true.
I will tell you myself that is not the ultimate criterion nor should it be.
And I'm sure it's not for any of the people in this group.
You don't do things by polls.
It is interesting to know that so many people, favorite, at least the discussion of this
issue, and I think it's relevant.
I wouldn't want you to get the feeling that I or any of us, I think, if I'm free to speak
for them, are saying every time you get a majority of you in a poll, the NADO or the
law.
I'm not saying that at all.
But it is relevant.
Certainly, if you're going to make this a political argument, certainly if you're a Republican
senator who is thinking about how it's going to cut politically, it's relevant to know
that while I'm conservative, Lita may be telling you your line is in trouble.
You've better remember that there are a whole lot of voters out there saying your life
as a senator may be in trouble.
Women's groups are echoing the governor's sentiments.
They will blame the Senate majority if the ERA dies without debate.
And Noreen Connell of the National Organization for Women says they are targeting opponent senators
and going after them.
I think the Senate leadership is under the delusion that they can run away from issues
of equality for women.
And they can't.
This issue is going to haunt them.
They did not want the issue coming to the floor because they did not want a recorded vote.
And we will hold them accountable for blocking the ERA for holding it hostage.
And I think that will become very clear to them in the next couple of weeks.
Well then women's forces will they try to target some of these senators?
Yes, I can tell you that the National Organization for Women's local chapters have been holding
rallies outside the offices of state senators.
There was a rally in Utica outside of state senator Donovan's office in Pekipsi, a rally
outside of Senator Rouse's office.
On Sunday and Monday in Nassau we had an ERA rally and Monday in New York City we had
a Pekipsi learned outside of Anderson's office.
And then there is going to be Pekipsi outside of the offices of state senators in Rochester,
Buffalo and Syracuse.
And also there has been some activity in Albany itself.
So when last week it was believed that the state equal rights amendment had been put to
a quiet death, it now has new life.
The question remains however, is there still time?
Governor Cuomo admits he may have been slow in his lobbying push for the ERA, but he
maintains there is still another week for the Senate to debate the issue.
So of course there's a chance, we're here because there's a chance what you need to do.
You need to get the conference or a sufficient number of them and we're not talking about
a lot of people.
To change their minds and go to Warren and say hey maybe we're right, maybe the governor
did fail to make this clear.
You know he was distracted by national ambition, but now that he's come back to earth and explain
to us what the situation is.
Now we understand so blame the governor for the tardiness and let's get it done.
I'll accept that.
Conservatives however disagree with the governor.
Serfen Maltese of the New York State Conservative Party denies his party is putting any pressure
on Republican senators to leave the ERA in limbo and he believes the decision already
made by the Senate's Republican conference is final.
As far as Maltese is concerned, the proposed state equal rights amendment is dead.
A position is that it should not be reinterred.
There was no real call or you in cry for it other than the governor proposing it and
the governor now mischaracterizing this is some sort of a pressure tactic is a lot of
bunk.
So you're denying that the Conservative Party is making any lobbying effort whatsoever.
At this point in time from the state level that's absolutely true.
There is no lobbying effort going on.
If there were it would be coming out of state headquarters and it's simply not.
We regard the Senate conference action as a final action on it and despite what the
governor may now talk about doing and what the pro-ERA forces up in Albany now are talking
about doing we don't see the Republican Senate majority changing their minds.
According to the state constitution, if the ERA is left to die this year, the first
possible chance of it going before New York voters would be 1987.
A proposed constitutional amendment needs approval of both houses of the legislature in two
consecutive years.
Only then would it be put before New York voters.
But if the Senate does take up the measure and passes it, then both houses can debate
the issue next year.
And if it passes next year, a state ERA could go before New York voters in 1985.
The chances of that happening however is very, very slim.
In Albany, I'm Rick Lutkowski.
Energy legislation is another cause of friction between Governor Mario Cuomo and some members
of the legislature.
Bill Graulty prepared this report.
There are a number of major energy issues which have not been resolved and barring a miracle
finish probably won't be until perhaps a special session late this year.
Among the key issues is the Long Island Lighting Company and its unopened Shoreham Nuclear
Power Plant.
Governor Cuomo is standing firm in his opposition to forcing the ratepayers to pick up the tab
or allowing a state bailout of Lil'Cope and he chided Republicans for it not acting.
They have a phasing bill, they have a useful bill, what else do they want?
They haven't thought of anything.
Not a single line.
Now these are people who claim they could make a budget by themselves, right?
Now, for all of a sudden, they have no ideas on energy.
What else do they want us to do?
You know what they want us to do?
They want to dump the hard question.
Well key figures in the Senate didn't think much of Cuomo's proposal to phase in plant
cost over 10 years.
Ray Hull is secretary to the Senate Energy Committee.
The short term rate of a bail is so simplistic that we discarded two years ago when discussing
this issue.
And we have been attempting to work on some of our own but there be far more complex
and probably more doable than one that he suggested.
Another nuclear plant also figures in the dispute.
Nine mile point two.
The plant is plagued with cost overruns and the governor submitted legislation putting
a $5.1 billion cap on costs.
Hull says that cap is needless because the public service commission is about to put its
own cap on and besides he says the legislature ought to stay out of it.
It is a very difficult task at best for the legislature to be setting numbers on a construction
project.
And I think that's what the technical expertise at the PSE is therefore and we think that's
best left to them.
Then there's reallocation of hydroelectric power unless the state devises a way of allocating
the less expensive electricity the courts may step in and it is governor Cuomo's contention
that upstate interest must release some of that power voluntarily or face losing much
of it to downstate customers.
Now that beginning to speak out against my proposal see the upstate is getting calm.
Frankly by a lot of people was saying, you shouldn't give up a vote.
Sixty-seven percent of the rate pay is the downstate.
I say that Warren Anderson is asking them to gamble and I say every day the odds are
getting worse.
Why won't they come forward with an alternative?
They're afraid to tell their people the truth which is that they're in danger of getting
badly hurt and maybe they ought to give up a few votes to protect against that.
So Cuomo asked the legislature to approve an electrical allocation of authority or
watered down version of a previous proposal but the bill did not specify allocation targets
again Ray Hull.
That is an irony yet enough itself.
I received that bill late what was it Tuesday afternoon, reddit with absolute horror in
the sense that it's a pure power authority piece in the sense that it establishes only
the bare bones of an allocation authority and then does nothing else.
It essentially hands a blank check to the power authority.
It was in all senses almost laughable kind of thing in the way it was handled.
Then I go home and I'm sitting there watching the governor on the Togall end show on Channel
17 Tuesday evening and I hear him say for all everyone in the listening to hear that he
opposed from the very beginning the RREA proposal by John Dyson and that it was just
one of something he could go along with yet that very afternoon he had handed up a bill
which was well, he can't even quantify how much worse than the original RREA.
If the original RREA had some exact and specific allocation direction to it this thing was
a wide open blank check.
We have to really wonder if the man is reading this stuff that obviously the power authority
must be submitting to him because we can't imagine who else would be writing this stuff
giving the power authorities that's brought direct powers.
So there are many areas of disagreement and both sides are saying the other is guilty
of docking the issue and failing to take the lead.
I guess the irony of the whole thing is that yes, they're sending them down so late when
they're things that we've all talked about and thought about literally months if not
years ago.
There's an irony to that that we see and certainly appreciate but as far as the urgency of
the problem of course there's an urgency to it.
We are grinding towards the end of the session here but on the other hand the leadership
we've all been waiting for just hasn't materialized in any way on paper anyway.
Do you think anything substantive is going to happen before adjourned?
Probably not although anything possible.
I would say that there are some of the infallary issues might be considered but that the major
pieces the hydro and so on would probably remain for a later special session.
Ray Hall, Secretary to the Senate Energy Committee.
In Albany I'm Bill Graulty and now a man for whom it is never water over the dam, that
dynamo himself, Fred Dicker of the New York Post.
The wonders of state government.
In the past few weeks we've seen lawmakers reject a safety proposal which enjoyed the
widespread support of the public and then turn around and endorse another plan which
appears to have hardly any support at all.
It's a strange process that goes on in Albany and it's often the perception of action rather
than the substance of the action itself which is of greatest importance to lawmakers.
Two weeks ago the state legislatures turned some down on a proposal raising to 21 the
age requirement to purchase alcohol and effort to cut down the inordinately high rate
of drunk driving fatalities among young men and women.
So what many lawmakers said is public opinion polls repeatedly show New Yorkers favor the
higher drinking age.
We know what's best they argued after all if a 20-year-old can join the army and fight
for his or her country let him drink.
And of course if the legislators protect the liquor industry, local taverns and mom and
pop liquor stores in the process so much the better.
But then this week we saw the double take.
The legislature made national headlines as it moved ahead with the plan to impose the
nation's first mandatory seat belt law on all New York drivers no matter what their age.
The arguments for the buckle up legislation were much the same as those for the 21-year-old
drinking age.
The common good will be served through the saving of lives and a reduction in action in
related medical costs.
However, in spite of the logic it took assembly speaker Stanley Sink a good bit of arm twisting
to line up the votes needed to get the measure approved in the assembly.
I got a hundred phone calls on this issue, Troy Assemblyman Neil Calleher said shortly
before the vote and 99 of them were against this measure.
Thus Calleher a Republican voted against the seat belt bill.
But this coming week the bill is expected to clear the Senate and then it's on to Governor
Cuomo for almost certain approval.
What happened?
Well it appears lawmakers now in their final days of one of the least productive legislative
sessions in memory started getting nervous after their vote in the 21-year-old drinking
age.
They didn't want to leave Albany with the image of having failed to act on the problem
of carnage on the highways.
That's why they came up with the bill the public appears not to like.
After all it was the best substitute they could find to the higher drinking age.
But all this begs the following question is the mandatory seat belt measure a good piece
of legislation.
Ironically it appears to be a whole lot better than the higher drinking age not with standing
public sentiment.
Convincing statistics presented by the sponsors of the legislation suggest the lives of several
hundred New Yorkers will be saved each year by requiring the use of seat belts.
The best figure the proponents of the higher drinking age should come up with was about
70 lives a year saved.
Well the lesson to be learned here is this.
Many good things get done at the Capitol that often for the worst of reasons.
Going to keep my eye on the ball at the Capitol this is Fred Dicker of the New York Post.
There was an announcement this week which surprised some people.
Republican Senator Douglas Barclay of Polaski announced he would not run for another term.
Not only is Senator Barclay well respected but he was considered by many to be the likely
successor to Republican leader Warren Anderson when Anderson retires.
But last week Anderson said he would run again and this week Senator Barclay said you would
not.
Senator why are you deciding now to leave the Senate?
Well I've been in the Senate for 20 years and I think I've had some accomplishments, had
some disappointments.
But at 51 years of age I decided that I have to look at where I'm going and what I'm
going to be doing in the future.
And hence since I think I've done a credible job I decided that it was time for me to
practice more law and for to get into other interests which I've been interested in for
a number of years.
And hence I made the decision to step down.
Senator what are some of those interests?
Well I'm involved in the private sector substantially.
I have a number of clients that I can represent in the future.
Involved with a number of board of directors of corporations and there's a lot of opportunity
and to a degree I'm a venture capitalist and I would like to pursue some of those interests.
You're the conference chairman here in the Senate and a lot of people saw you as the
absolute heir apparent to Warren Anderson at the point at which he would step down.
Don't you think you're foregoing the chance to be majority leader of the state Senate?
Well firstly it's an academic and moot question because Senator Anderson has been and will
continue to be a great majority leader.
And so really you're sort of whistling in a wind and a sense of saying that perhaps you
could be.
And what is your proudest achievement in the state Senate?
Well that's a difficult question because there have been a number of things.
I think that I'm very pleased I got elected the first time and thereafter which makes you
feel good in the sense that people have confidence in you.
Carried a lot of different kinds of legislation from housing legislation.
I sponsored and created with Governor Rockefeller the Urban Development Corporation which has
had its ups and downs but it also has built a lot of housing.
It's done a lot of other interesting situations from Roosevelt Island to a shopping mall
in Oginsburg to new cities at Amherst and outside of Syracuse or Radisson.
That was a very interesting situation.
I did the decriminalization of the marijuana laws but I also did the Rockefeller drug laws.
So I've had a number of different interesting statewide statutes passed.
And now of course I'm working on court reorganization which may or may not go.
But I have not counted it up but I would dare say that we have had sign-in-the-law between
600 and 700 bills which cover the spectrum of local situations to statewide implications.
Senator who would be the next logical person who would chair the Republican Party conference
here after you're at departure?
I really have no idea.
Is that an important task sitting in there and making and chairing those meetings?
Yes and no.
It's important in the sense that you get into heated types of situations and I think you
have to know those senators well enough so that you can move the conference in a direction
and have it come up with a decision when necessary and you also have to know when the
conference ought not to come up with a decision.
I speak to you as the chairman of the Republican conference but I think a lot of us want to
know whether there's democracy within side these conferences whether the leader sort of
lets out the line or whether people really can disagree and come up with an independent
thinking aside from leadership.
I'm going to assure you that can come up with independent thinking and independent thinking
is expressed on every issue.
Is there a specific bill you'd point to recently that would show that the ERA for example?
What you have to understand in this situation is that you've got to have a majority and
that majority has to lead and that you have to come to decisions and make decisions.
Okay so the issue like whether or not the equal rights amendment which you guys are under
some heat now comes up for a vote.
Assuming that the conference takes a vote then that's the line.
But just trying to tell me is that there is some discipline within a conference.
Oh there's got to be discipline and if you don't have discipline you're going to have
anarchy and you couldn't get anything done.
Now in regard to ERA if anyone listened to me carefully as chairman of the conference
what we did with ERA is have a long interesting discussion on the issue and never put it to
a vote nor did we decide not to take it up again.
We decided to do nothing at this particular moment.
You're an immensely popular person in this legislature.
You've had since you've announced this you've had calls from the vice president all kinds
of people.
Why?
I mean I know the state senators are important but why is the vice president in the United
States calling you up?
Well obviously that's a very happy occasion for me and certainly I'm very grateful that
he did call.
You have a lot of friends in this business and when you're in it for 20 years or so you
develop those friends.
And they work in peculiar ways and they know an awful lot of people and in turn your
name comes up in certain areas and certain things happen.
So the good part about it is that when people ask me why I'm getting out, making a decision
why are you getting out instead of asking why don't you get out.
So in a sense that makes me feel good because I could foresee a time where everybody says
well it's about time that he moves along and fortunately I'm doing it at the point where
they're saying that why are you doing it and I'm giving my reasons which I think are valid
ones.
It's a good feeling instead of having to say well they're going to have to take them out
in a box.
Senator Douglas Barclay how do his colleagues feel about his decision?
We spoke with Senator Charles Cook.
Well the first thing I make for it is that it's a tragedy for the state of New York because
Doug has been as chairman of Judiciary and as a senator at large a very valuable part
of New York state government and I think that all of us who are closer friends feel
very badly that he's leading the significance in terms of the future.
The Senate of course means that there will be a number of changes in the leadership structure
because there will now be two major committees open next year and probably a good bit of
reshuffling of the leadership.
Who will exceed to the conference chairmanship in the Republican conference?
I don't have the slightest idea who would take that over.
That would be a matter that would be decided when all the committee chairmanship are in
place and there's some matter of constructing a leadership team.
I think we're probably looking for a day not too far distant when Senator Anderson will
no longer be running for reelection to the Senate and I think that we're probably going
into a transition phase where many of the people, newer members are going to be starting
to move into the inner circle including chairman of the conference.
Senator Charles Cook you have to be of the legislature to understand what the announcement
by Senator Douglas Barkley that he would not stand for reelection meant in a generally
boring slow capital this week.
We're talking major bombshell.
The 51 year old Barkley, a widely respected Republican leader and a very wealthy man is
moving on to other things, reportedly a major investment opportunity.
Barkley is a real loss for the Senate since Barkley is bright, temperate and short of
himself.
In short, he has always been one of the class acts of the party and of the legislature
itself.
But when a cataclysmic event of this type occurs either in the Kremlin or in the legislature
or the professional gossip and watchers begin to examine the implications.
Here then are some of the possible reasons Barkley has decided not to stick around.
The first of these is that Warren Anderson, the present majority leader, did not retire
this year.
The second is that it is unclear who will exceed to the top leadership post when Anderson
does retire.
Speculators are now giving the nod to the Pekipsi Republican Senator Jay Rawlson who
like Barkley as bright an articulate but who has a few other advantages.
Barkley is from the North country but Rawlson is from the Midhuts in Valley which is far
more central to the rest of the state and is fellow Republicans than Barkley's district.
Barkley is not only chairman of the Judiciary Committee but is also chairman of the Republican
Conference or in layman's terms the Caucus.
This gives him a key voice in decision making on the major issues.
Rawlson, while Rawlson had something else going, he is the chairman of the Republican
Campaign Committee.
He is the guy who channels the money to support senatorial races.
Now you all remember, rule number one in politics is to get elected and then reelected.
The man who gives out the money is in a position to influence all that.
One has to look no further than to Warren Anderson to understand the principle.
The majority leader was the head of the Campaign Committee before he became the leader.
And so the wins of change are blowing in the legislature.
Many of the Republican majority like Anderson, W.T. Smith, John Markey, Martin Nor, are
known to be getting on.
So the Republicans will have to prepare a transition, which will allow them to retain control
of their house and to elect substitutes for the retiring senators if and when they do retire.
That planning has to be done now.
Now is the time the Republicans have to plan so that when change does occur, they'll
be ready.
Their choice of a leadership team is as important as anything they will do this year.
And if it's Jay Rollison that's to be the leader, now that Doug Barkley has taken himself
out, the Republicans will be in good hands.
But this legislature and the Republican Party are going to be a lot poorer with a disappearance
of senator Doug Barkley.
That's our show for this week.
Join us again next week for another look at state government.
Doof-Grawl, the edits and produces this program, Rick Leopcowski is the associate editor.
We had helped this week from Jean Powell.
Please address comments and questions to us at WAMC Box 13,000, Albany, New York,
1-2-1-2.
I'm Alan Chartock.
The legislative gazette is produced by WAMC News.
Alan Chartock is executive producer.
This program is made possible with funds from the State University of New York College
at New Pulse.
