<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Wonkster &#187; Demographics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/category/demographics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster</link>
	<description>Gotham Gazette&#039;s blog about New York policy and politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 19:38:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Citizens Union Praise Deal, Chide Legislators</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/15/citizens-union-praise-deal-chide-legislators/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/15/citizens-union-praise-deal-chide-legislators/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:50:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dean Skelos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sheldon Silver]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10570</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Citizens Union and The League of Women Voters New York are out with a press release praising the constitutional amendment that would change the redistricting process. Critics say the amendment codifies gerrymandering. Gotham Gazette is published by Citizens Union Foundation the Citizens Union&#8217;s sister organization.
In their joint statement CU and LWV praise the amendment but [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Citizens Union and The League of Women Voters New York are out with a press release praising the constitutional amendment that would change the redistricting process. Critics say the amendment <a href="http://www.capitaltonight.com/2012/03/goo-goos-at-odds-over-constitutional-amendment/">codifies gerrymandering</a>. Gotham Gazette is published by Citizens Union Foundation the Citizens Union&#8217;s sister organization.</p>
<p>In their joint statement CU and LWV praise the amendment but voice their pleasure about how the vote took place. They thank the Governor and legislation leaders, &#8220;for reaching agreement on establishing lasting structural reform to the state’s redistricting process. Given the long standing resistance to enacting redistricting reform and  the high stakes involved, we applaud them in finding common ground on an  issue that is at the core of political power in Albany and results in  the legislature giving up power in the drawing of lines.&#8221;<br />
But note that it came at a price:<br />
&#8220;Though this is a substantive victory for reform, it is tarnished because  the process that produced this welcomed outcome occurred during a night  where in typical Albany fashion nothing was agreed to until everything  was agreed to.  Achieving reform through middle of the night voting and  limited debate on such an important issue is not the way we would have  wanted to see redistricting reform realized.&#8221;</p>
<p>Here is the full release:<span id="more-10570"></span></p>
<p>CITIZENS UNION AND THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS NEW YORK STATE<br />
COMMEND ACHIEVEMENT ON LASTING STRUCTURAL REDISTRICTING REFORM</p>
<p>Good Government Groups Believe LATFOR’s Rigged System<br />
Is Precisely Why Reform Is Needed</p>
<p>With the State Legislature passing a constitutional amendment and accompanying statute, redistricting reform will finally be a reality as opposed to an aspiration.  We commend Governor Andrew Cuomo, Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, their staffs, and members of the State Legislature for reaching agreement on establishing lasting structural reform to the state’s redistricting process.</p>
<p>Given the long standing resistance to enacting redistricting reform and the high stakes involved, we applaud them in finding common ground on an issue that is at the core of political power in Albany and results in the legislature giving up power in the drawing of lines.</p>
<p>Though this is a substantive victory for reform, it is tarnished because the process that produced this welcomed outcome occurred during a night where in typical Albany fashion nothing was agreed to until everything was agreed to.  Achieving reform through middle of the night voting and limited debate on such an important issue is not the way we would have wanted to see redistricting reform realized.</p>
<p>Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters New York State have produced a set of Frequently Asked Questions to educate the public about the proposed constitutional amendment.</p>
<p>The important reform elements include:</p>
<p>The six-member, majority party-controlled LATFOR on which self-interested legislators sit is replaced by a ten-member commission on which no legislators will sit.  The prohibitions on appointment will be similar to the recently formed Joint Commission on Public Ethics.  For the first time, majorities and minorities from each house will be equally represented and there will be two members who belong to neither major party.<br />
New and better criteria that include:<br />
an anti-gerrymandering provision prohibiting the favoring or disfavoring of incumbents, challengers or political parties;<br />
recognizing communities of interest;<br />
requiring that any deviation from the mean population in districts will need to be explained;  and<br />
minority voting rights protections mirroring the current federal law will be enshrined in our constitution, providing needed protection should there be a pullback on the federal level.<br />
Commission approval of the plan will require a super majority vote of seven of the ten members, ensuring minority party  participation in securing the needed votes.<br />
In order to protect against one-party dominance in the drawing of lines, if one party controls both houses of the State Legislature, approval of a plan requires a 2/3 affirmative vote in each house.<br />
Required hearings across the state ensure public input into line-drawing.  It also requires the provision of maps and data to the public in a form that allows for independent analysis and the development of alternate redistricting plans.<br />
The State Legislature must vote twice up or down on the approved commission plan before it can make any amendments.<br />
Amendments made by the State Legislature if it fails twice to pass the commission plan must adhere to the criteria in the constitutional amendment, including the anti-gerrymandering provision, and the statute will further rein in the State Legislature by preventing changes of more than two percent to the population of any district.</p>
<p>We support this reform because we have no confidence that a State Legislature left off the hook this year and angered over a gubernatorial veto would subsequently  find religion and enact reform.  To believe that ignores the reality of New York’s political history for the past forty years on this issue and the broken promises of many of the 184 legislators who pledged to create an independent redistricting commission for 2012.</p>
<p>Ample opportunities have been squandered over the past several years to achieve this reform.  When  the executive branch and both houses of the State Legislature were controlled by one party during the 2009 and 2010 sessions, redistricting reform bills passed committees for the first time, but ultimately were bottled up in each house’s Rules Committees and died. When a new 2011 split-controlled legislature convened  after 184 members pledged to enact reform in time to draw 2012 lines, they did not keep their word.</p>
<p>We must finally break the cycle of inaction.  We must seize this moment when public attention and advocacy have created the opportunity for reform, and secure the change that is achievable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/15/citizens-union-praise-deal-chide-legislators/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Presser For Cuomo?</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/15/no-presser-for-cuomo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/15/no-presser-for-cuomo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:46:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime & Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10568</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After a typical Albany late night/early morning where a number of major pieces of legislation were rushed to the floor for a quick vote with little or no debate Gov. Andrew Cuomo does not seem to be in a rush to get in front of a gaggle of reporters.
Cuomo&#8217;s plan of attack includes two radio [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After a typical Albany late night/early morning where a number of major pieces of legislation were rushed to the floor for a quick vote with <a href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/deals-done-in-the-dark/">little or no debate</a> Gov. Andrew Cuomo does not seem to be in a rush to get in front of a gaggle of reporters.</p>
<p>Cuomo&#8217;s plan of attack includes two radio appearances&#8211;one with his <a href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/albany/20110308/204/3482">favorite messenger</a>&#8211;and a &#8220;video message&#8221; to New Yorker&#8217;s which I assume will be available <a href="http://www.governor.ny.gov/">here</a> later today.</p>
<p>&#8220;Approximately 10:07 AM Governor Cuomo will be a guest on Live from the State Capitol with Fred Dicker. The show can be heard streaming live at www.talk1300.com.</p>
<p>Approximately 11:06 AM Governor Cuomo will be a guest on The Capitol Pressroom with Susan Arbetter. The show can be heard streaming live at http://www.wcny.org/temp-stream.html.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/15/no-presser-for-cuomo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deals Done in the Dark</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/deals-done-in-the-dark/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/deals-done-in-the-dark/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If Albany has changed under Gov. Andrew Cuomo the Senate Democrats haven&#8217;t noticed. Debate on the legislation that determines district lines and is supposed to guarantee voter enfranchisement began around 10 p.m. on Wednesday night. Sen. Michael Gianaris, an outspoken critic of LATFOR&#8217;s lines and the proposed Constitutional Amendment that will change the redistricting process [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Albany has changed under Gov. Andrew Cuomo the Senate Democrats haven&#8217;t noticed. Debate on the legislation that determines district lines and is supposed to guarantee voter enfranchisement began around 10 p.m. on Wednesday night. Sen. Michael Gianaris, an outspoken critic of LATFOR&#8217;s lines and the proposed Constitutional Amendment that will change the redistricting process 10 years from now, pointed out that debate on the important issue began in typical Albany fashion&#8211; late at night and after a rush of last-minute deals.</p>
<p>Even the most  novice Albany observer knows that legislative leaders tend to come to agreements, brief their conferences quickly and then get the legislators into conference to vote on the deals before support erodes or public opinion solidifies against the legislation.</p>
<p>Gianaris also pointed out that this trend has not changed under Cuomo&#8211;the Governor some say has done away with Albany dysfunction. Gianaris further noted that the late-night push on redistricting, legalizing casino gambling, a DNA database, and teacher evaluations came during Sunshine Week&#8211;a week set aside to honor transparency in government.</p>
<p>After debating Sen. Michael Nozzolio about the lines and having a testy exchange where Gianaris asked, &#8220;Have you no shame?&#8221; Nozzolio seemingly joked that Gianaris probably liked the lines that were up for a vote better than LATFOR&#8217;s original lines that combined his district with a fellow Democrat. Finally in exasperation Gianaris told Nozzolio that in his mind the lines were equally bad and told Nozzolio he could take them both and, &#8220;Shove it!&#8221;</p>
<p>Republicans attempted to close debate at 11:36 p.m. Sen. Daniel Squadron objected saying that 2 hours had not passed and debate should continue. Republicans ruled his point was out of order. Squadron appealed to the chair. Sen. Sampson rose and talked about respect and decorum. He mentioned that redistricting happens only 10 years and appealed for more time to debate the legislation. &#8220;Where&#8217;s the respect and where&#8217;s the decorum?&#8221; asked Sampson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/deals-done-in-the-dark/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gianaris: &quot;Have You No Shame?&quot;</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/gianaris-have-you-no-shame/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/gianaris-have-you-no-shame/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:37:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Gianaris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Nozzolio]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10556</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sen. Michael Gianaris just asked Sen. Michael Nozzolio &#8220;Have you no shame?&#8221; after being prompted to ask a question while talking about his disdain for LATFOR&#8217;s lines. The presiding member stopped the discourse to remind legislators of &#8220;decorum.&#8221; But Nozzolio said although the question was &#8220;insulting.&#8221; He was &#8220;proud&#8221; of his work on LATFOR. The [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sen. Michael Gianaris just asked Sen. Michael Nozzolio &#8220;Have you no shame?&#8221; after being prompted to ask a question while talking about his disdain for LATFOR&#8217;s lines. The presiding member stopped the discourse to remind legislators of &#8220;decorum.&#8221; But Nozzolio said although the question was &#8220;insulting.&#8221; He was &#8220;proud&#8221; of his work on LATFOR. The debate continues <a href="http://www.nysenate.gov/">here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/gianaris-have-you-no-shame/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Amendment Deal is Official</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/the-amendment-deal-is-official/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/the-amendment-deal-is-official/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:18:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dean Skelos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sheldon Silver]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10553</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Gov. Andrew Cuomo&#8217;s office comes the official news:
GOVERNOR CUOMO, MAJORITY LEADER SKELOS, AND SPEAKER SILVER ANNOUNCE LANDMARK AGREEMENT TO BEGIN PROCESS OF AMENDING STATE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW CASINO GAMING IN NEW YORK
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo, Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver today announced a landmark agreement to begin the process [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From Gov. Andrew Cuomo&#8217;s office comes the official news:</p>
<p>GOVERNOR CUOMO, MAJORITY LEADER SKELOS, AND SPEAKER SILVER ANNOUNCE LANDMARK AGREEMENT TO BEGIN PROCESS OF AMENDING STATE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW CASINO GAMING IN NEW YORK</p>
<p>Governor Andrew M. Cuomo, Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver today announced a landmark agreement to begin the process of amending the state constitution to allow casino gaming in New York. Legalized casinos have the potential to create thousands of good-paying jobs while keeping the tourism and revenue that accompany gaming here in New York State.</p>
<p>&#8220;By taking these important first steps to legalize casinos we are finally confronting the reality that while New York is already in the gaming business, we need a real plan to regulate and capitalize on the industry,&#8221; Governor Cuomo said. &#8220;This is a process that will ultimately put thousands of New Yorkers to work, drive our economy, and help keep billions of dollars spent by New Yorkers on gaming in the state.&#8221;</p>
<p>Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos said, &#8220;I am pleased we have reached an agreement to move forward with a constitutional amendment that will give New Yorkers a say on whether we expand casino gaming in New York State. I thank Senator John Bonacic for his leadership, and look forward to negotiating the details of the implementing legislation prior to putting it out to the voters in 2013.&#8221;<span id="more-10553"></span></p>
<p>Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said, &#8220;Under the current system, gaming revenue is pouring out of the state as New Yorkers spend their entertainment dollars in neighboring states. We need the ability to keep that revenue here in New York. Today&#8217;s vote represents the first passage of this amendment and we will work on accompanying legislation to further define this issue.&#8221;</p>
<p>Senator John Bonacic, Chairman of the Senate Racing, Gaming and Wagering Committee said, &#8220;This is about creating jobs and enhancing tourism. While we have been down this road before, this time we have a much better driver. One thing we have learned is when the Governor says something, he means it. As Chairman of the Senate Racing, Gaming and Wagering Committee, I look forward to working with him to implement legislation necessary to create the thousands of direct and indirect jobs, along with the hundreds of millions of dollars in direct investment, which casino gaming can bring to the Catskills and elsewhere.&#8221;</p>
<p>Today&#8217;s agreement calls for no more than seven privately owned commercial casinos in New York.</p>
<p>Casino gaming already plays a significant role in New York State. Native Americans have five casinos in New York and nine racinos are located at race tracks across the state. New York also has 29,000 electronic gaming machines, more than Atlantic City and more than any state in the Northeast or Midwest. Additionally, New York is surrounded by states and Canadian provinces with legalized casino gaming. However, until now, New York has not taken steps to capitalize on the economic impact of gaming.</p>
<p>The Assembly and Senate must now pass legislation that begins the process of amending the state constitution, which will then be voted on by the next legislature and then ratified by the people. The earliest a public referendum can be held is 2013.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/the-amendment-deal-is-official/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Senate Debating Lines</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/senate-debating-lines/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/senate-debating-lines/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 01:49:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martin Dilan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Nozzolio]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10550</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sen. Martin Dilan is currently grilling Sen. Michael Nozzolio on LATFOR&#8217;s work drawing district lines. Nozzolio is a co-chair of LATFOR and Dilan serves as a member. You can watch the debate here.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sen. Martin Dilan is currently grilling Sen. Michael Nozzolio on LATFOR&#8217;s work drawing district lines. Nozzolio is a co-chair of LATFOR and Dilan serves as a member. You can watch the debate <a href="http://www.nysenate.gov/">here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/senate-debating-lines/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Citizens Union Offers Amendment FAQ</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/citizens-union-offers-amendment-faq/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/citizens-union-offers-amendment-faq/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Citizens Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[League of Women Voters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10548</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Citizens Union and League of Women Voters have offered up a FAQ detailing what the proposed redistricting constitutional amendment would achieve, how the new commission would work, and who would be eligible to serve on it. Both groups are advocating the passage of the amendment but with that caveat it is a helpful read [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Citizens Union and League of Women Voters have offered up a <a href="http://www.citizensunion.org/www/cu/site/hosting/Redistricting/CU_LWVNY_FAQ_RedistrictingConstitutionalAmendment_March2012.pdf">FAQ</a> detailing what the proposed redistricting constitutional amendment would achieve, how the new commission would work, and who would be eligible to serve on it. Both groups are advocating the passage of the amendment but with that caveat it is a helpful read for those looking for a detailed breakdown. Gotham Gazette is published by Citizens Union&#8217;s sister organization Citizens Union Foundation. Here is the FAQ:</p>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">on the Proposed Constitutional Amendment to Reform Redistricting</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">1. What does the proposed constitutional amendment accomplish?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">In summary, it would replace the current Legislative Task Force for Demographic Research and Reapportionment (LATFOR) redistricting process with an independent commission whose appointees are evenly divided between majority and minority parties. For the first time ever, unaffiliated or third party members would be included in the redistricting process. There will be two co&#8208;executive directors selected by a majority vote of the commission with the rest of the staff being hired by the directors, marking the first time the staff is not hired by the majorities.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">The amendment also codifies for the first time in the state constitution additional important criteria for drawing lines. The principles of the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA), which are increasingly facing threat of retrogression in the courts and Congress, are added to the state constitution, preserving the rights of language and racial minorities. Lines would be prohibited from being drawn to favor or disfavor incumbents, political parties or candidates. Communities of interest are recognized for the first time as a criterion for drawing lines.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">The voting procedures and thresholds for passage of a redistricting plan by the independent commission and the legislature varies depending on which parties control each house of the legislature. Supermajority votes are established to prevent dominance by one political party or majority parties in both the commission and the legislature for approval of district lines.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">The proposed amendment breaks new ground in transparency by requiring software, data and maps to be provided to the public, allowing for independent analysis and the creation of maps by the public.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">It also establishes firm deadlines for the different stages of the redistricting process to ensure that lines are established in a timely manner and delays in drawing maps do not disadvantage challengers running against state legislative or congressional incumbents.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">These important changes would be made permanent through the passage of a constitutional amendment. The proposed amendment will be accompanied by a statute which will provide insurance against the amendment not achieving second passage and place an additional constraint on the legislature’s ability to amend the lines proposed by the commission.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">1</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 2 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">1. How is the ten&#8208;member independent commission (“the Commission”) appointed?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Each of the four legislative leaders appoints two members, and two additional members are appointed by a vote of not less than five of the original eight members. These two additional members must not have been enrolled in either of the two major political parties in the preceding five years. For the first time, the redistricting process includes equal representation among the four legislative leaders and appointees not of the Republican and Democratic parties.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">LATFOR is comprised of six members, with two each from the majority parties in each house with only one each from the minority party, effectively giving the majority parties full control of the process, ignoring the views of the minority parties.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">2. Who can serve?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Rules prohibit those with conflicts of interest from serving on the Commission including no person who has served in the last three years as a New York legislator, statewide elected official, member of congress, and spouses of the preceding groups, legislators’ staff, lobbyists, state officers, state employees, or party chairs. To the extent practicable, the appointments should reflect the diversity of the state and result from consultation with outside groups.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Four of the six members of LATFOR are legislators.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">3. How does the Commission approve a redistricting plan? Will an even&#8208;numbered Commission create gridlock?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">A supermajority vote – seven out of ten votes – by the Commission is required to send a redistricting plan to the legislature, which can be passed by majority vote of the legislature, encouraging collaboration and cooperation. If control of the legislature is split between the two major parties, the plan must have at least one vote from each of the two major party appointees. If the legislature is controlled by one party, those seven votes must include at least one vote from the appointments of each of the four legislative leaders to ensure that there is no major party dominance. If no plan gets seven votes, the plan with the highest number of votes goes to the legislature, but approval of such a plan requires at least 60 percent approval in the legislature.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">The members of LATFOR appointed by the majority – four of the six – control the process and draw the lines with little to no input from the appointees representing the minority parties. Those lines are then provided to the legislature and passed by the majority party controlling each house.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 3 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">4. What additional voting procedures ensure inclusion of the party out of power in case one party controls both chambers?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">In order to protect against one&#8208;party dominance in the drawing of lines, if one party controls both houses of the legislature, approval of a plan requires a 2/3 affirmative vote in each house.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">A simple majority is required for any district plan provided by LATFOR. Consequently the majority parties in each house completely control redistricting from drawing the lines to passing them.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">5. What criteria must be considered by the Commission?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">In addition to requiring contiguous and compact districts, and nearly as maybe equal in size districts to the extent practicable, for the first time the state constitution will include criteria that require:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">• that districts shall not be drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents, particular candidates or political parties;</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">• consideration of communities of interest in drawing district lines;</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">• protections for racial and language minority groups in the drawing of district lines consistent with the Voting Rights Act, ensuring those protections remain regardless of what happens at the federal level; and</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">• an explanation by the Commission if the legislative districts are not equal in population.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">LATFOR must first follow federal law which requires adherence to the Voting Rights Act and the creation of state legislative districts whose populations are within 5 percent of the average size district. The constitution also requires that districts be contiguous and, as is practicable, compact, and provides that counties and towns cannot be divided under certain circumstances.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">There are currently no prohibitions in the state constitution that prevent lines from being drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents, particular candidates or political parties. Nor are there provisions that require communities of interest to be considered as a criterion for drawing lines.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 4 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">6. Does the legislature get to draw the lines if it votes down the Commission’s plan?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">The legislature can only amend the lines if the Commission’s plan(s) fail to achieve legislative approval after two “up or down” votes without amendments, but the legislature is restricted to changes that adhere to the criteria in the constitutional amendment. An accompanying statute will further restrict the legislature to making changes that affect not more than two percent of the population of any district.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">There are no restrictions on their ability of the legislature to amend the plan, which is essentially guaranteed passage, as the majorities of the legislature control LATFOR.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">7. What process is there for public input?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">The amendment requires 12 hearings across the state ensuring public input in line&#8208;drawing. It also requires the provision of maps and data to the public in a form that allows for independent analysis and the development of alternate redistricting plans.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">There are no requirements for hearings, although LATFOR has held them voluntarily. There are no requirements for maps and data to be provided to the public, although LATFOR has provided maps and some data but not done so in a form that is easily accessible by the public or facilitates development of alternate plans. LATFOR has not made software for drawing maps available to the public.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">8. Why has there not more been public input on the constitutional amendment?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Various proposals have been introduced in the legislature through the years and have been the subject of input by the public, including good government groups and civil rights groups. Redistricting has been the subject of hearings in both the Assembly and Senate for the past several years, and the issue has been covered extensively in the media. Constitutional amendments must be voted on twice by two successively elected legislatures, and then passed at the ballot box, providing for more review and giving the public an opportunity for participation in this reform.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">The degree to which hearings are held on bills varies. The constitutional amendment, because it requires a vote by a second legislature in 2013, will have much more time for review than a typical bill.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 5 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">9. What assurance is there that the amendment will be passed again in the next legislative session?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Citizens Union and the League, as well as the Governor, have conditioned support of the constitutional amendment on passage of an accompanying statute that will put in place a statutory version of the amendment if it does not achieve second passage. This statute would also contain a restriction on legislative amendments to the lines on third passage, allowing no more than two percent of the population of districts proposed by the Commission to be changed, which will go into effect regardless of whether the legislature passes the amendment twice.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Not applicable.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">10. If this constitutional amendment is passed, how would New York rank among the 50 states in how it conducts redistricting?</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">We believe that this will put New York in the forefront of redistricting reform, particularly among states that cannot achieve reform through publicly initiated referenda. Most states leave redistricting completely in the hands of the legislature. Even in Iowa, which has been a model for independent redistricting, the legislature has final approval of the lines.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Current Process:</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">In the majority of states, the legislators directly draw the lines. New York has an advisory body, LATFOR, an entity that exists in law to advise the legislature on line&#8208;drawing. Because four of six of its members are legislators it is essentially legislators drawing their own lines. Consequently, New York is not even close to being a leader in independent redistricting.</div>
<p>Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State</p>
<p>Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)</p>
<p>on the Proposed Constitutional Amendment to Reform Redistricting</p>
<p>1. What does the proposed constitutional amendment accomplish?</p>
<p>In summary, it would replace the current Legislative Task Force for Demographic Research and Reapportionment (LATFOR) redistricting process with an independent commission whose appointees are evenly divided between majority and minority parties. For the first time ever, unaffiliated or third party members would be included in the redistricting process. There will be two co&#8208;executive directors selected by a majority vote of the commission with the rest of the staff being hired by the directors, marking the first time the staff is not hired by the majorities.</p>
<p>The amendment also codifies for the first time in the state constitution additional important criteria for drawing lines. The principles of the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA), which are increasingly facing threat of retrogression in the courts and Congress, are added to the state constitution, preserving the rights of language and racial minorities. Lines would be prohibited from being drawn to favor or disfavor incumbents, political parties or candidates. Communities of interest are recognized for the first time as a criterion for drawing lines.</p>
<p>The voting procedures and thresholds for passage of a redistricting plan by the independent commission and the legislature varies depending on which parties control each house of the legislature. Supermajority votes are established to prevent dominance by one political party or majority parties in both the commission and the legislature for approval of district lines.</p>
<p>The proposed amendment breaks new ground in transparency by requiring software, data and maps to be provided to the public, allowing for independent analysis and the creation of maps by the public.</p>
<p>It also establishes firm deadlines for the different stages of the redistricting process to ensure that lines are established in a timely manner and delays in drawing maps do not disadvantage challengers running against state legislative or congressional incumbents.</p>
<p>These important changes would be made permanent through the passage of a constitutional amendment. The proposed amendment will be accompanied by a statute which will provide insurance against the amendment not achieving second passage and place an additional constraint on the legislature’s ability to amend the lines proposed by the commission.</p>
<p>1</p>
<p>Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 2 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</p>
<p>1. How is the ten&#8208;member independent commission (“the Commission”) appointed?</p>
<p>Each of the four legislative leaders appoints two members, and two additional members are appointed by a vote of not less than five of the original eight members. These two additional members must not have been enrolled in either of the two major political parties in the preceding five years. For the first time, the redistricting process includes equal representation among the four legislative leaders and appointees not of the Republican and Democratic parties.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>LATFOR is comprised of six members, with two each from the majority parties in each house with only one each from the minority party, effectively giving the majority parties full control of the process, ignoring the views of the minority parties.</p>
<p>2. Who can serve?</p>
<p>Rules prohibit those with conflicts of interest from serving on the Commission including no person who has served in the last three years as a New York legislator, statewide elected official, member of congress, and spouses of the preceding groups, legislators’ staff, lobbyists, state officers, state employees, or party chairs. To the extent practicable, the appointments should reflect the diversity of the state and result from consultation with outside groups.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>Four of the six members of LATFOR are legislators.</p>
<p><span id="more-10548"></span></p>
<p>3. How does the Commission approve a redistricting plan? Will an even&#8208;numbered Commission create gridlock?</p>
<p>A supermajority vote – seven out of ten votes – by the Commission is required to send a redistricting plan to the legislature, which can be passed by majority vote of the legislature, encouraging collaboration and cooperation. If control of the legislature is split between the two major parties, the plan must have at least one vote from each of the two major party appointees. If the legislature is controlled by one party, those seven votes must include at least one vote from the appointments of each of the four legislative leaders to ensure that there is no major party dominance. If no plan gets seven votes, the plan with the highest number of votes goes to the legislature, but approval of such a plan requires at least 60 percent approval in the legislature.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>The members of LATFOR appointed by the majority – four of the six – control the process and draw the lines with little to no input from the appointees representing the minority parties. Those lines are then provided to the legislature and passed by the majority party controlling each house.</p>
<p>Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 3 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</p>
<p>4. What additional voting procedures ensure inclusion of the party out of power in case one party controls both chambers?</p>
<p>In order to protect against one&#8208;party dominance in the drawing of lines, if one party controls both houses of the legislature, approval of a plan requires a 2/3 affirmative vote in each house.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>A simple majority is required for any district plan provided by LATFOR. Consequently the majority parties in each house completely control redistricting from drawing the lines to passing them.</p>
<p>5. What criteria must be considered by the Commission?</p>
<p>In addition to requiring contiguous and compact districts, and nearly as maybe equal in size districts to the extent practicable, for the first time the state constitution will include criteria that require:</p>
<p>• that districts shall not be drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents, particular candidates or political parties;</p>
<p>• consideration of communities of interest in drawing district lines;</p>
<p>• protections for racial and language minority groups in the drawing of district lines consistent with the Voting Rights Act, ensuring those protections remain regardless of what happens at the federal level; and</p>
<p>• an explanation by the Commission if the legislative districts are not equal in population.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>LATFOR must first follow federal law which requires adherence to the Voting Rights Act and the creation of state legislative districts whose populations are within 5 percent of the average size district. The constitution also requires that districts be contiguous and, as is practicable, compact, and provides that counties and towns cannot be divided under certain circumstances.</p>
<p>There are currently no prohibitions in the state constitution that prevent lines from being drawn to discourage competition or for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents, particular candidates or political parties. Nor are there provisions that require communities of interest to be considered as a criterion for drawing lines.</p>
<p>Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 4 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</p>
<p>6. Does the legislature get to draw the lines if it votes down the Commission’s plan?</p>
<p>The legislature can only amend the lines if the Commission’s plan(s) fail to achieve legislative approval after two “up or down” votes without amendments, but the legislature is restricted to changes that adhere to the criteria in the constitutional amendment. An accompanying statute will further restrict the legislature to making changes that affect not more than two percent of the population of any district.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>There are no restrictions on their ability of the legislature to amend the plan, which is essentially guaranteed passage, as the majorities of the legislature control LATFOR.</p>
<p>7. What process is there for public input?</p>
<p>The amendment requires 12 hearings across the state ensuring public input in line&#8208;drawing. It also requires the provision of maps and data to the public in a form that allows for independent analysis and the development of alternate redistricting plans.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>There are no requirements for hearings, although LATFOR has held them voluntarily. There are no requirements for maps and data to be provided to the public, although LATFOR has provided maps and some data but not done so in a form that is easily accessible by the public or facilitates development of alternate plans. LATFOR has not made software for drawing maps available to the public.</p>
<p>8. Why has there not more been public input on the constitutional amendment?</p>
<p>Various proposals have been introduced in the legislature through the years and have been the subject of input by the public, including good government groups and civil rights groups. Redistricting has been the subject of hearings in both the Assembly and Senate for the past several years, and the issue has been covered extensively in the media. Constitutional amendments must be voted on twice by two successively elected legislatures, and then passed at the ballot box, providing for more review and giving the public an opportunity for participation in this reform.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>The degree to which hearings are held on bills varies. The constitutional amendment, because it requires a vote by a second legislature in 2013, will have much more time for review than a typical bill.</p>
<p>Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters of New York State Page 5 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Redistricting Constitutional Amendment</p>
<p>9. What assurance is there that the amendment will be passed again in the next legislative session?</p>
<p>Citizens Union and the League, as well as the Governor, have conditioned support of the constitutional amendment on passage of an accompanying statute that will put in place a statutory version of the amendment if it does not achieve second passage. This statute would also contain a restriction on legislative amendments to the lines on third passage, allowing no more than two percent of the population of districts proposed by the Commission to be changed, which will go into effect regardless of whether the legislature passes the amendment twice.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>Not applicable.</p>
<p>10. If this constitutional amendment is passed, how would New York rank among the 50 states in how it conducts redistricting?</p>
<p>We believe that this will put New York in the forefront of redistricting reform, particularly among states that cannot achieve reform through publicly initiated referenda. Most states leave redistricting completely in the hands of the legislature. Even in Iowa, which has been a model for independent redistricting, the legislature has final approval of the lines.</p>
<p>Current Process:</p>
<p>In the majority of states, the legislators directly draw the lines. New York has an advisory body, LATFOR, an entity that exists in law to advise the legislature on line&#8208;drawing. Because four of six of its members are legislators it is essentially legislators drawing their own lines. Consequently, New York is not even close to being a leader in independent redistricting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/citizens-union-offers-amendment-faq/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting For a Deal</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/waiting-for-a-deal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/waiting-for-a-deal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 21:15:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime & Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Sampson]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10545</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Albany is in a holding pattern as legislators seem to be hammering out a deal with Gov. Andrew Cuomo that could wrap up redistricting, Tier 6, the DNA database and perhaps the budget. Senate Minority Leader John Sampson issued this statement decrying linking redistricting to other issues:
“Rumors are swirling that, in true Albany fashion, the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Albany is in a holding pattern as legislators seem to be hammering out a deal with Gov. Andrew Cuomo that could wrap up redistricting, Tier 6, the DNA database and perhaps the budget. Senate Minority Leader John Sampson issued this statement decrying linking redistricting to other issues:</p>
<p>“Rumors are swirling that, in true Albany fashion, the awful redistricting provisions have been tied to the creation of Tier VI. If this is true and both are allowed to move forward, we will be disenfranchising minorities while simultaneously eliminating retirement security for working families in a classic Albany backroom deal. Senate Democrats will not be party to these cynical maneuvers.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/14/waiting-for-a-deal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Against the Amendment</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/07/against-the-amendment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/07/against-the-amendment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 19:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Citizens Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Common Cause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Kellner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Susan Lerner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10541</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Democratic legislators continue to hammer away at  possible compromise deal on redistricting that would include a constitutional amendment. A constitutional amendment wouldn&#8217;t permanently change the redistricting process until the next process 10 years from now and would require passage by two successive legislatures.
Assemblyman Micha Kellner slammed the deal in a statement. “The proposed redistricting deal is [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Democratic legislators continue to hammer away at  possible compromise deal on redistricting that would include a constitutional amendment. A constitutional amendment wouldn&#8217;t permanently change the redistricting process until the next process 10 years from now and would require passage by two successive legislatures.</p>
<p>Assemblyman Micha Kellner slammed the deal in a statement. “The proposed redistricting deal is unfortunately more politics as usual. This partisan pact, which would amend the state constitution to create a lawmaker-appointed 10-person panel to draw district lines, keeps in place the hyper-political process of allowing politicians to draw their own districts, choose their own voters and serve their own self-interests,&#8221; read Kellner&#8217;s statement.</p>
<p>Meanwhile , Common Cause/ NY is also out with a statement pushing for Gov. Andrew Cuomo to veto district lines rather than to come to a deal.</p>
<p>&#8220;As Common Cause/NY has repeatedly stated, reform in this redistricting cycle now lies with the Governor&#8217;s veto pen. It&#8217;s very simple: the Special Master has provided a legal and fair alternative to the Legislature&#8217;s political maneuvering, which would give New Yorkers the democracy they deserve now. A constitutional amendment is not interchangeable with reform in this cycle, and must meet certain standards in order to constitute real reform. Common Cause/NY won&#8217;t speculate on press reports about the proposed amendment. However, if and when a bill is introduced we will evaluate it against strict criteria to determine whether it is worthy of support.,&#8221; said Susan Lerner.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Citizens Union <a href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/06/groups-react-to-masters-congressional-maps/">continues to push for an agreement</a> that would avoid a veto and &#8220;create permanent change&#8221;. Gotham Gazette is published by Citizens Union&#8217;s sister organization the Citizens Union Foundation. Kellner&#8217;s full statement is after the jump. <span id="more-10541"></span></p>
<p>“The proposed redistricting deal is unfortunately more politics as usual. This partisan pact, which would amend the state constitution to create a lawmaker-appointed 10-person panel to draw district lines, keeps in place the hyper-political process of allowing politicians to draw their own districts, choose their own voters and serve their own self-interests,&#8221; read Kellner&#8217;s statement.</p>
<p>New Yorkers don’t want backroom political deals. New Yorkers want honest and fair government, which can only start with honest and fair legislative districts. And any system that allows politicians to pick their voters fundamentally undermines our democracy.</p>
<p>Moreover, change for appearance sake is not real change. It’s bad enough that this proposal expressly allows the Legislature to outright reject new district lines. But to add insult to injury, this amendment would enshrine partisan politics into the constitution by requiring a supermajority of only one political party to approve the lines. This proposal clearly represents a step backwards. The whole purpose of a constitutional amendment should be to remove the Legislature completely from the redistricting process.</p>
<p>New Yorkers deserve better, and I urge Governor Cuomo to follow through with his pledge to veto any redistricting deal that allows legislators to continue choosing their own voters.”</p>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">“The proposed redistricting deal is unfortunately more politics as usual. This partisan pact, which would amend the state constitution to create a lawmaker-appointed 10-person panel to draw district lines, keeps in place the hyper-political process of allowing politicians to draw their own districts, choose their own voters and serve their own self-interests.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">New Yorkers don’t want backroom political deals. New Yorkers want honest and fair government, which can only start with honest and fair legislative districts. And any system that allows politicians to pick their voters fundamentally undermines our democracy.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Moreover, change for appearance sake is not real change. It’s bad enough that this proposal expressly allows the Legislature to outright reject new district lines. But to add insult to injury, this amendment would enshrine partisan politics into the constitution by requiring a supermajority of only one political party to approve the lines. This proposal clearly represents a step backwards. The whole purpose of a constitutional amendment should be to remove the Legislature completely from the redistricting process.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">New Yorkers deserve better, and I urge Governor Cuomo to follow through with his pledge to veto any redistricting deal that allows legislators to continue choosing their own voters.”“The proposed redistricting deal is unfortunately more politics as usual. This partisan pact, which would amend the state constitution to create a lawmaker-appointed 10-person panel to draw district lines, keeps in place the hyper-political process of allowing politicians to draw their own districts, choose their own voters and serve their own self-interests.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">New Yorkers don’t want backroom political deals. New Yorkers want honest and fair government, which can only start with honest and fair legislative districts. And any system that allows politicians to pick their voters fundamentally undermines our democracy.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Moreover, change for appearance sake is not real change. It’s bad enough that this proposal expressly allows the Legislature to outright reject new district lines. But to add insult to injury, this amendment would enshrine partisan politics into the constitution by requiring a supermajority of only one political party to approve the lines. This proposal clearly represents a step backwards. The whole purpose of a constitutional amendment should be to remove the Legislature completely from the redistricting process.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">New Yorkers deserve better, and I urge Governor Cuomo to follow through with his pledge to veto any redistricting deal that allows legislators to continue choosing their own voters.”</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/07/against-the-amendment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Groups React to Master&#039;s Congressional Maps</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/06/groups-react-to-masters-congressional-maps/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/06/groups-react-to-masters-congressional-maps/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 23:18:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[City Hall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Citizens Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Common Cause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Roanne Mann]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Roanne Mann, the special master assigned to create the state&#8217;s congressional lines should the Assembly and Senate fail to come to a compromise, released her maps today. Reaction has flooded in from interested parties across the state. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver told reporters the lines could be a foundation for compromise. Common Cause hailed the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Roanne Mann, the special master assigned to create the state&#8217;s congressional lines should the Assembly and Senate fail to come to a compromise, released her maps today. Reaction has flooded in from interested parties across the state. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver told reporters the lines could be a <a href="http://www.capitaltonight.com/2012/03/silver-calls-maps-are-a-template-for-a-deal/">foundation for compromise</a>. Common Cause <a href="http://www.capitaltonight.com/2012/03/common-cause-gives-thumbs-up-to-maps/">hailed the maps</a> as &#8220;fair. &#8221; Citizens Union used the opportunity to <a href="http://http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/119363/citizens-union-see-you-can-draw-fair-maps/">push for a legislative deal</a> that would change the redistricting process permanently through a constitutional amendment.</p>
<p>The Times Union <a href="http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/119363/citizens-union-see-you-can-draw-fair-maps/">notes</a> that CU&#8217;s release goes into an astonishing amount of detail about a possible deal. &#8220;Intriguingly, the statement goes into great depth discussing the under-construction constitutional amendment detailed in Friday’s TU — so much depth that one would think it had already been rolled out with a Red Room presser featuring Gov. Andrew Cuomo, legislative leaders and representatives from Citizens Union, whose members have been most vocal in pressing for the constitutional change as thus far described,&#8221; reads the Times Union post.</p>
<p>Meanwhile Gov. Andrew Cuomo <a href="http://www.capitaltonight.com/2012/03/cuomo-says-he-hasnt-seen-house-lines-yet/">told reporters</a> that he has yet to see the maps.</p>
<p>Perhaps most interestingly is the analysis of the city&#8217;s lines by the American Community Coalition on Redistricting and Democracy. Take a look at their breakdown after the jump. <span id="more-10539"></span>QUEENS:</p>
<p>·         The proposed Congressional District (CD) 6, if adopted, would be a Congressional district with the highest concentration of Asian Americans ever created.  At nearly 40% of the district (37.9%), the Asian American community of Northeast Queens would have major influence in a Congressional seat.</p>
<p>·         This district is nearly identical to District 5 recommended in the Unity Map, drafted by AALDEF and endorsed by ACCORD (see http://aaldef.org/unity-map.html)</p>
<p>·         The significant voter dilution of Asian American voters in Northeast Queens between the current CD 5 and CD 9 (Flushing, Bayside, Auburndale, Queensboro Hills, Fresh Meadows and Oakland Gardens) is corrected by this proposal.</p>
<p>·         This proposed district also keeps together the neighborhoods of Woodside and Jackson Heights in CD 14.</p>
<p>·         This proposal could be improved if Bellerose could be connected with Queens.</p>
<p>MANHATTAN AND BROOKLYN (including Manhattan’s Chinatown and Sunset Park):</p>
<p>·         ACCORD is pleased that CD 7 recognizes (as does the current CD 12) there is a community of common interest between Sunset Park and Manhattan’s Chinatown, and keeps these together in one district.</p>
<p>·         This district is very similar to the proposed District 12 in the Unity Map.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/03/06/groups-react-to-masters-congressional-maps/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Judge Sets June 26 Primary</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/27/judge-sets-june-26-primary/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/27/judge-sets-june-26-primary/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:53:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10501</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If there wasn&#8217;t enough going on regarding redistricting this week the whole sordid affair got a kick in the pants thanks to U.S. District Court Judge Gary Sharpe who has ruled that unless that state takes legislative action all of New York&#8217;s future federal non-presidential primaries will be held on the fourth Tuesday of June. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If there wasn&#8217;t enough going on regarding redistricting this week the whole sordid affair got a kick in the pants thanks to U.S. District Court Judge Gary Sharpe who has ruled that unless that state takes legislative action all of New York&#8217;s future federal non-presidential primaries will be held on the fourth Tuesday of June. Groups in favor of independent redistricting have been concerned for months that Gov. Andrew Cuomo might not want to veto LATFOR&#8217;s district lines because it could send things into chaos right before a possible Spring primary. That Spring primary is now a reality barring any action from the legislature. If the legislature does not act New York will have three primary dates: the June primary for House and Senate races, the April Republican Presidential Primary and the September Senate and Assembly Primary.</p>
<p>Sharpe wrote:</p>
<p>&#8220;Notwithstanding any current state law or administrative procedure to the contrary, New York shall conduct its 2012 non-presidential federal primary election on a date no later than 35 days prior to the 45-day advance deadline set by the MOVE Act for transmitting ballots to the State’s military and overseas voters, i.e., at least 80 days before the November 6, 2012 federal general election. In 2012, that date shall be June 26, 2012.</p>
<p>In subsequent even-numbered years, New York’s non-presidential federal primary date shall be the fourth Tuesday of June, unless and until New York enacts legislation resetting the non-presidential federal primary election for a date that complies fully with all UOCAVA requirements, and is approved by this court.&#8221;</p>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">Notwithstanding any current state law or administrative procedure to the contrary, New York shall conduct its 2012 non-presidential federal primary election on a date no later than 35 days prior to the 45-day advance deadline set by the MOVE Act for transmitting ballots to the State’s military and overseas voters, i.e., at least 80 days before the November 6, 2012 federal general election. In 2012, that date shall be June 26, 2012.</div>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 0px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden;">In subsequent even-numbered years, New York’s non-presidential federal primary date shall be the fourth Tuesday of June, unless and until New York enacts legislation resetting the non-presidential federal primary election for a date that complies fully with all UOCAVA requirements, and is approved by this court.</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/27/judge-sets-june-26-primary/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>McEneny:Cuomo Was the Hold up</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/27/mcenenycuomo-was-the-hold-up/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/27/mcenenycuomo-was-the-hold-up/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jack McEneny]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LATFOR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10496</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[LATFOR co chair Assemblyman Jack McEneny told Liz Benjamin of State of Politics last night that LATFOR delayed releasing its lines yesterday by the request of Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
You can get the full interview and event timeline over at State of Politics.
As Liz points out&#8211;Cuomo spoke to the press earlier in the day and insisted [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LATFOR co chair Assemblyman Jack McEneny told Liz Benjamin of State of Politics last night that LATFOR delayed releasing its lines yesterday by the request of Gov. Andrew Cuomo.</p>
<p>You can get the full interview and event timeline over at <a href="http://http://www.capitaltonight.com/2012/01/mceneny-latfor-lines-delayed-at-cuomos-request/">State of Politics</a>.</p>
<p>As Liz points out&#8211;Cuomo spoke to the press earlier in the day and insisted he hand&#8217;t seen the lines and was not ready to comment. After the lines were released Cuomo&#8217;s spokesperson issued a <a href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/cuomo-would-veto-lines/">statement saying</a> that &#8220;At first glance,&#8221; the Governor would likely veto the lines.</p>
<p>Cuomo has seemingly done his best to avoid actually saying he will veto the lines this year.</p>
<p>Cuomo, when pressed, did state numerous times last year that he would veto unfair lines but he has yet to make a firm public statement this year&#8211;redistricting was absolutely absent from his delivered State of the State remarks. It looks like the back-room wrangling for more significant redistricting reform and a constitutional amendment will continue. Meanwhile the public will get a chance to weigh in on LATFOR&#8217;s lines at a series of public hearings. The first hearing will take place in Albany on Monday at 10:30 a.m., on Tuesday LATFOR will be in the Bronx and Wednesday in Brooklyn. Check out the <a href="http://www.latfor.state.ny.us/hearings/docs/20120125hrg_schedule.pdf">full schedule here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/27/mcenenycuomo-was-the-hold-up/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>McEneny Defends LATFOR</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/mceneny-defends-latfor/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/mceneny-defends-latfor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gov. andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jack McEneny]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Albany Assemblyman Jack McEneny, who also happens to co-chair LATFOR, issued a statement defending the maps issued today. Maps that the New York Public Interest Research Group called the most gerrymandered in recent history. Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said he would veto these lines if they stay as they are.
Here is McEneny&#8217;s statement:
&#8220;The Assembly plan [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Albany Assemblyman Jack McEneny, who also happens to co-chair LATFOR, issued a statement defending the maps issued today. Maps that the New York Public Interest Research Group called the most gerrymandered in recent history. Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said he <a href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/cuomo-would-veto-lines/">would veto these lines</a> if they stay as they are.</p>
<p>Here is McEneny&#8217;s statement:</p>
<p>&#8220;The Assembly plan released today by the Legislative Task Force on Demographic Research and Reapportionment (LATFOR) is the culmination of a months-long process to reshape New York’s electoral map based on shifts in population that have occurred over the last decade. Our proposal is responsive to the many individuals across the state who offered oral or written testimony to the Task Force.<br />
<span id="more-10491"></span><br />
In particular, good government groups have asked that we make districts as nearly equal in population as practicable.  Toward that end we have drawn districts that have less disparity than is required by law and closer to equality than the current lines.  The proposed Assembly districts – with one exception, which was drawn to avoid crossing a county line – have a population deviation of less than four percent.   This is a plan which moves us more toward a key reform.</p>
<p>As part of the process, we took into consideration and incorporated many elements of proposals submitted in map form by numerous voting rights and good government groups, private citizens and public officials.  We are grateful to them all for helping us with this constitutionally mandated task and look forward to further interaction and suggestions as we make our way across the state a second time to receive more input.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/mceneny-defends-latfor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cuomo Would Veto Lines</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/cuomo-would-veto-lines/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/cuomo-would-veto-lines/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:45:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Josh Vlasto]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10489</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gov. Andrew Cuomo&#8217;s spokesperson Josh Vlasto says that lines released by LATFOR today are unacceptable.
“At first glance, these lines are simply unacceptable and would be vetoed by the Governor. We need a better process and product.”
Earlier today Cuomo said he would let the process &#8220;play out&#8221; but apparently the Governor did not like something he [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gov. Andrew Cuomo&#8217;s spokesperson Josh Vlasto says that lines released by LATFOR today are unacceptable.</p>
<p>“At first glance, these lines are simply unacceptable and would be vetoed by the Governor. We need a better process and product.”</p>
<p>Earlier today Cuomo said he would let the process &#8220;play out&#8221; but apparently the Governor did not like something he saw in these lines.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/cuomo-would-veto-lines/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dadey Responds to LATFOR&#039;s Maps</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/dadey-responds-to-latfors-maps/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/dadey-responds-to-latfors-maps/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:30:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Citizens Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dick dadey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LATFOR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10487</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dick Dadey, executive director of Citizens Union, says he still wants Gov. Andrew Cuomo to veto LATFOR&#8217;s district lines, &#8220;If fairer lines are not created for 2012  and there is no structural reform.&#8221; Gotham Gazette is published by Citizens Union Foundation the sister organization to Citizens Union. Senate Democrats were taken aback by Dadey&#8217;s recent [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dick Dadey, executive director of Citizens Union, says he still wants Gov. Andrew Cuomo to veto LATFOR&#8217;s district lines, &#8220;If fairer lines are not created for 2012  and there is no structural reform.&#8221; Gotham Gazette is published by Citizens Union Foundation the sister organization to Citizens Union. Senate Democrats were taken aback by Dadey&#8217;s recent <a href="http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/109785/cus-dadey-a-veto-doesnt-get-us-reform/">interview with Jimmy Vielkind of the Times Union</a> where it seemed Dadey was giving Cuomo room not to veto the lines. Dadey told Vielkind: &#8220;“A veto is no guarantee that there will be fairer lines for 2012, and we wouldn’t get any structural reform,” he said. “We’ve always wanted the governor to use his veto threat to achieve reform, not to have these lines go into court. What does that get us at the end of the day? It doesn’t get us what we want — structural reform.”</p>
<p>Dadey told me: &#8220;I stand by what I said to Jimmy, but we expect if fairer lines are not created for 2012 and there is no structural reform the Governor should keep his veto promise. Citizens Union has always been about structural reform.&#8221;</p>
<p>The structural reform would likely be a constitutional amendment for the 2022 redistricting process. I asked Dadey if he would settle for one over the other&#8211;just improved 2012 lines or just structural reform and he had this to say:</p>
<p>&#8220;I cant imagine a scenario where we don’t get changes in 2012 and structural changes. They go hand in hand.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dadey made it clear that he is not happy with LATFOR&#8217;s proposed lines.</p>
<p>&#8220;What is clear is these maps are gerrymandered. That is what we get  when legislators are left to draw their own districts. It  makes the case of why we need permanent change and why the Governor should use his veto promise to get fair lines.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dadey said the Senate&#8217;s lines were particularly offensive.</p>
<p>&#8220;It is just abhorrent that somehow four Democratic incumbents are being forced into districts in interest of creating opportunity minority districts when nothing has changed on Long Island to create a minority opportunity district.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/dadey-responds-to-latfors-maps/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>UFO or 63rd Senate Seat?</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/ufo-or-63rd-senate-seat/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/ufo-or-63rd-senate-seat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:09:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Mahoney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LATFOR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10483</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 63rd Senate seat created by Senate Republicans looks uncannily to me like the evil Reaper spaceship from the popular Mass Effect video game series. It sweeps down from Montgomery County slices away half of Sen. Neil Breslin&#8217;s Albany County district, swallows Green County and its tentacles stab into the top of Ulster.
But I suppose [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.capitaltonight.com/2012/01/meet-the-new-senate-district/">63rd Senate seat</a> created by Senate Republicans looks uncannily to me like the <a href="http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://images.wikia.com/masseffect/images/8/84/Sovereign_Codex_Image.jpg&amp;imgrefurl=http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Reaper&amp;h=343&amp;w=338&amp;sz=106&amp;tbnid=QZO9KyRQ_Akl4M:&amp;tbnh=96&amp;tbnw=95&amp;zoom=1&amp;docid=-mgmOyGTJ9LbEM&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=48AhT_GfM6ry0gG5uPjmCA&amp;ved=0CE0Q9QEwBA&amp;dur=357">evil Reaper spaceship</a> from the popular Mass Effect video game series. It sweeps down from Montgomery County slices away half of Sen. Neil Breslin&#8217;s Albany County district, swallows Green County and its tentacles stab into the top of Ulster.</p>
<p>But I suppose that is a rather insignificant observation when you look at what New York Public Interest Group&#8217;s Bill Mahoney has to say about the proposed maps as a whole.He says, the Senate&#8217;s maps are, &#8220;clearly the most gerrymandered lines in recent New York History.&#8221; He provided this statement and statistical breakdown to back up his claim. Check it out. <span id="more-10483"></span></p>
<p>Mahoney had this to say:</p>
<p>&#8220;There are several methods of measuring how representative of voters districts are.  The typical deviation from the ideal population is one of the few completely objective criteria that can be used.  While judging this set of proposed maps by this yardstick, the Senate’s maps are clearly the most gerrymandered lines in recent New York history.  The Assembly’s are slightly better than 2002’s final maps, but fall far short of providing mathematically equal representation.&#8221;</p>
<p>Senate: Districts 3% or further from ideal population:</p>
<p>1984: 0</p>
<p>1992: 0</p>
<p>2002: 19</p>
<p>2012: 50</p>
<p>Senate: Districts within 1% of ideal population (as proposed in Gov. Cuomo’s bill)</p>
<p>1984: 44 out of 61</p>
<p>1992: 47 out of 61</p>
<p>2002: 11 out of 62</p>
<p>2012: 3 out of 63</p>
<p>Assembly: Districts 3% or further from ideal population:</p>
<p>1984: 15</p>
<p>1992: 49</p>
<p>2002: 70</p>
<p>2012: 67</p>
<p>Assembly: Districts within 1% of ideal population:</p>
<p>1984: 92</p>
<p>1992: 46</p>
<p>2002: 18</p>
<p>2012: 26</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/ufo-or-63rd-senate-seat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LATFOR&#039;s Maps Are Out</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/latfors-maps-are-out/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/latfors-maps-are-out/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:18:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Amedore]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10481</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[LATFOR has posted their proposed district lines for 2012. Both the Assembly and Senate maps are available here.
Senate Republicans have issued a statement defending their lines and the 63rd Senate District their maps create. Of the 63rd seat the statement says:
&#8221; The plan adds a 63rd Senate seat, as required by the formulas under  [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LATFOR has posted their proposed district lines for 2012. Both the Assembly and Senate maps are available <a href="http://www.latfor.state.ny.us/maps/">here</a>.</p>
<p>Senate Republicans have issued a statement defending their lines and the 63rd Senate District their maps create. Of the 63rd seat the statement says:</p>
<p>&#8221; The plan adds a 63rd Senate seat, as required by the formulas under  Article III of the State Constitution.  That seat is located in the  Capital Region and Upper Hudson Valley, which experienced the largest  percentage increase of population growth in the state since the 2000  U.S. census.&#8221; This seat is the one that Assemblyman George Amedore is <a href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/waiting-on-the-lines/">expected to run for</a>.</p>
<p>The statement calls the process by which the lines were created, &#8221; open and transparent.&#8221;</p>
<p>Here is the full statement from Senate Republicans: <span id="more-10481"></span></p>
<p>The bipartisan Legislative Task Force on Demographic Research and Reapportionment &#8211;co-chaired by Senator Michael F. Nozzolio and Assemblyman John J. McEneny  &#8211;  today released new Senate district lines, based on population shifts which occurred over the last ten years.</p>
<p>The Senate plan is fair, legal and protects minority voting interests.  It complies with the State Constitution, the U.S. Constitution, state and federal laws, and the Federal Voting Rights Act.</p>
<p>The new draft district lines are the result of an open and transparent process.  The boundaries were drafted after the Task Force coordinated 14 public hearings in every corner of the state, taking 55 hours of testimony from more than 375 witnesses.</p>
<p>The population of each Senate district fully complies with the requirements of the state constitution, including “town on border,” “block on border” and is well within the standard required by the U.S. Supreme Court.</p>
<p>The plan provides continuity by largely preserving the cores of existing districts.  In fact, the vast majority of new districts contain three-fourths or more of their old districts.</p>
<p>Consistent with the Voting Rights Act, the Senate plan protects minority representation by maintaining or strengthening every African American district in New York City &#8211; - despite the loss of nearly 100,000 African Americans since the last census.</p>
<p>The plan maintains Hispanic populations in currently represented Hispanic districts, and even increases the Hispanic population in a number of districts.</p>
<p>The Task Force maintains “communities of interest” together whenever possible, including consolidation of the Orthodox Jewish community into one Brooklyn Senate district rather than five Senate districts.  The Senate plan also includes a first-ever majority Asian-American Senate district anchored in Flushing, Queens.  The Task Force will also seek additional public input on uniting “communities of interest” in the coming weeks.</p>
<p>The plan adds a 63rd Senate seat, as required by the formulas under Article III of the State Constitution.  That seat is located in the Capital Region and Upper Hudson Valley, which experienced the largest percentage increase of population growth in the state since the 2000 U.S. census.</p>
<p>Nine additional public hearings will also take place, beginning on Monday, January 30 at 10:30 a.m. in Albany, in Hearing Room A on the second floor of the Legislative Office Building.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/latfors-maps-are-out/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting on The Lines</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/waiting-on-the-lines/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/waiting-on-the-lines/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:22:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David King</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eye on Albany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[andrew cuomo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Reilly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George Amedore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jim Tedisco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liz Krueger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neil Breslin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10479</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[All week LATFOR members have told the press that they should expect the new district lines any day now. In fact Assemblyman Jack McEneny has given a time and date a few times only to have the lines not be made public. The most recent expectation is that the lines will be revealed at 2 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All week LATFOR members have told the press that they should expect the new district lines any day now. In fact Assemblyman Jack McEneny has given a time and date a few times only to have the lines not be made public. The most recent expectation is that the lines will be revealed at 2 p.m..</p>
<p>Assembly members reportedly were emailed their lines late last night. It is unclear when Senate Republicans will reveal their maps. Some details have leaked out and it looks like the maps could be majorly disruptive to a number of upstate incumbents including Sen. Neil Breslin,  Assemblymen Bob Reilly and Jim Tedisco. The Times Union <a href="http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/GOP-plans-63rd-district-2681707.php">reported</a> that Breslin&#8217;s district could be cut in half to create the 63rd Senate seat in an effort to allow Republican Assemblyman (and reality TV star) George Amedore to run for the Senate. Breslin <a href="http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/albany/20111226/204/3662">predicted to the Gazette</a> late last year that the lines would be decided in a court battle and that the Giants would win the Super Bowl.</p>
<p>The Republican announcement could be tied to negotiations with Gov. Andrew Cuomo about a constitutional amendment to institute non partisan redistricting for the next go around&#8211;in ten years.  One has to wonder if they have waited til Thursday to release the lines, why they wouldn&#8217;t just wait until Friday. Friday is always the preferred day to bury unpleasant news.</p>
<p>Sen. Liz Krueger is getting tired of waiting and wants to know what all the secrecy is about. She released this statement: &#8220;All this week we&#8217;ve seen leaks, rumors, and a tiny trickle of information, some good, some bad, and some very, very ugly. What the public hasn&#8217;t seen is the map, even though we all know it exists. Why the holdup? It&#8217;s deliberate. The Republicans have been keeping the public in the dark, trying to manage expectations instead of letting New Yorkers see what they&#8217;ve cooked up and judge it for what it is.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2012/01/26/waiting-on-the-lines/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bloomberg&#039;s Record on Poverty</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2011/09/22/bloombergs-record-on-poverty/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2011/09/22/bloombergs-record-on-poverty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 21:05:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gail Robinson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gotham City]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bloomberg administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fernando ferrer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frances fox piven]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homeless]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[joel berg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mayor Bloomberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[michael bloomberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York city poverty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poverty initiative]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For many months, the Bloomberg administration has boasted that as poverty rose elsewhere in the country, it remained constant here, thanks in part to his policies.
Unfortunately, he can no longer say that. 
New census figures, as reported in the Times this morning, show that poverty rose more rapidly in New York City – by 1.4 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For many months, the Bloomberg administration has boasted that as poverty rose elsewhere in the country, it remained constant here, thanks in part to his policies.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, he can no longer say that. </p>
<p>New census figures, as <a href=" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/nyregion/one-in-five-new-york-city-residents-living-in-poverty.html">reported in the Times</a> this morning, show that poverty rose more rapidly in New York City – by 1.4 percentage points &#8212; than in the nation as a whole from 2009 to 2010. This brought the number of people living in poverty in the city to 20.1 percent, the highest level since 2000. Child poverty <a href=" http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903791504576585191483768526.html">rose even more</a> – by 3 percentage points – leaving three out of every 10 city children in homes below the poverty level.</p>
<p>A <a href=" http://www.alignny.org/?p=3008">report by Alliance for a Greater New York</a> said the situation may be even worse than those numbers would indicate because of the high cost of living in New York – a luxury brand, as the mayor has called it. </p>
<p>Incomes across the city fell by 5 percent. But some people continue to do very well. In Manhattan – the county in the country with the biggest income gap – the average earning of the top fifth of the population came to $371,754,</p>
<p>While deploring this high level of poverty, advocates quickly responded that the figures only confirm what they see every day – an increasing level of need in the city. More homeless. Longer lines at soup kitchens and food pantries. People desperate for work.</p>
<p>More reaction and a review of Bloomberg administration poverty policies after the jump.<br />
<span id="more-10145"></span></p>
<p>So far there has been no official response top this from the Bloomberg administration, as far as we know.  (The mayor today though has celebrated the friendship between the city and the French with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and <a href=" http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2011/09/questions-about-deputy-irk-mayor-bloomberg">responded testily</a> to questions about where Deputy Mayor Robert Steel lives.)</p>
<p>Advocates have not been so reticent. Joel Berg of the <a href=" http://www.nyccah.org/">New York City Coalition Against Hunger</a> said the numbers offer the &#8220;latest proof our city and state policies are failing in fundamental ways.”</p>
<p>While saying the figures in and of themselves are not surprising, the <a href=" http://www.coalitionforthehomeless.org/">Coalition for the Homeless</a>&#8216; statement said they paint &#8220;a shocking picture of reality.&#8221; </p>
<p>Renewing its call for a so-called <a href=" http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/work/20100115/22/3147">Living Wage</a> – a move the Bloomberg administration has <a href=" http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2011/05/12/living-wage-gets-its-hearing/">rejected</a> – the <a href=" http://www.livingwagenyc.org/">Living Wage NYC</a> coalition blamed the mayor for the rising level of need in the city. </p>
<p>&#8220;The Bloomberg administration&#8217;s economic policy has prioritized the interests of corporations and developers, and neglected the needs of most New Yorkers,&#8221; its statement said in part. &#8220;It has given corporations and developers billions of taxpayer dollars and allowed them to create poverty-wage jobs with impunity. &#8230; This aristocratic agenda of protecting the rich and ignoring the most vulnerable has clearly failed countless New Yorkers across the city.&#8221;</p>
<p>Despite occasional forays into poverty policy the administration has had a spotty record on the issue. The Bloomberg rarely mentioned poverty – political opponent Fernando Ferrer said he never did –during his first term. During his second term he did <a href=" http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/iotw/20060619/200/1887">launch a poverty initiative</a>, but it never gained the kind of traction and mayoral enthusiasm that has marked his public health campaigns, for example.</p>
<p>In 2009, Bill de Blasio, then running (successfully) for public advocate, <a href=" http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/socialservices/20091023/15/3063">told Gotham Gazette</a> he &#8220;never felt social services was one of the chief concerns&#8221; of the mayor. While the motivation for the policy initiative, was good, de Blasio said, it &#8220;did not create meaningful&#8221; change.</p>
<p>At that time Frances Fox Piven, an expert on poverty programs who teaches at CUNY, gave Bloomberg credit for not following his predecessor, Rudolph Giuliani, in punishing the poor. But she added, the Bloomberg administration failed to revamp &#8220;the policies that keep the poor poor. Moreover, it has presided over a real estate boom that has steadily encroached on the neighborhoods of poor and working class people, replacing affordable housing with glass towers of multi million-dollar condos.&#8221;</p>
<p>Earlier this year, Gotham Gazette public finance columnist Glenn Pasanen <a href=http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/finance/20110518/8/3529>looked back</a> on the five years since the initiative and concluded,&#8221; it is hard to find any changes in city policy, practice or theory to ameliorate city poverty.&#8221; While pilot program to fight poverty have served only a few thousand of New Yorkers, Pasanen wrote, the mayor&#8217;s budget cuts have affected programs that hundreds of thousands, if not millions of low-income New Yorkers rely on.</p>
<p>Ironically, despite their failure to do much here, Bloomberg has spearheaded an effort to replicate his anti-poverty programs in other cities – and gotten funding to do so. One popular idea involved giving cash to poor people in return for certain behavior – making sure their children go to school, say, or taking them to a doctor. Although these programs show some sign of success in developing countries, Pasanen <a href=" http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/finance/20110719/8/3568">found little evidence</a> they do any good in the United States as a hole, let alone in New York City.</p>
<p>&#8220;The weak premise that cash-incentive, self-help pilot programs will alleviate poverty in New York City has effectively obscured the real conditions of poverty in the city: unemployment, limited childcare, poor schools and job training, etc.&#8221; Pasanen wrote.</p>
<p>(This summer Gotham Gazette looked at program and policies in a number of areas affecting low income New Yorkers. To see our series – The Tattered Safety Net – go <a href=" http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/socialservices/20110831/15/3593">here</a>.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2011/09/22/bloombergs-record-on-poverty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Poorer State</title>
		<link>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2011/09/13/a-poorer-state/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2011/09/13/a-poorer-state/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gail Robinson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Demographics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gotham City]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fiscal policy institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income gap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new york city coalition against hunger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poverty level]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/?p=10078</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One in six New York state residents &#8212; more than 3 million people &#8212; live in poverty, according to statement by theNew York City Coalition Against Hunger on census figures released this morning. 
The figure 2009-10 represents an 11 percent increase from 2007-2008, the coalition said. The numbers become particularly striking when one considers just [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One in six New York state residents &#8212; more than 3 million people &#8212; live in poverty, according to statement by the<a href=" http://nyccah.org/ ">New York City Coalition Against Hunger</a> on census figures released this morning. </p>
<p>The figure 2009-10 represents an 11 percent increase from 2007-2008, the coalition said. The numbers become particularly striking when one considers just how low an income a family must have to be seen as living in poverty –- less than $18,310 for a family of three.</p>
<p>In its statement, the coalition anticipated a rise in poverty for New York City alone, although it noted those numbers are not yet available. In 2009, more than one in five New York City residents lived in poverty, with experts <a href=http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/economy/20100927/21/3372> saying</a> the level would have been higher without the federal economic stimulus program.</p>
<p>While critics have warned of increased need in the city – longer lines at food pantries and the like &#8212; the Bloomberg administration has <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/nyregion/21poverty.html>  maintained</a> that poverty remained relatively constant during the recession and the weak &#8212; if that &#8212; recovery. </p>
<p>&#8220;To a large degree, economic stimulus programs and policy initiatives aimed at bolstering family income succeeded in preventing a rise in poverty in New York City,&#8221; concluded a <a href=" http://nyccah.org/ ">report</a> issued in March by the mayor’s <a href=" http://www.nyc.gov/html/ceo/html/home/home.shtml ">Center for Economic Opportunity</a>.</p>
<p>What no one can deny, though, is that the disparity in wealth in the city has increased. The wealthiest 1 percent of city residents has 44 percent of all income in New York, nearly four times as much as they did just 30 years ago, <a href=http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/FPI_GrowTogetherOrPullFurtherApart_20101213.pdf>according to the Fiscal Policy Institute</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/2011/09/13/a-poorer-state/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
