Showing posts with label Michael Grimm. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Grimm. Show all posts

Monday, February 3, 2014

Watching the Political Chess Pieces Move on the $10 billion New York State Medicaid Waiver

The political machinations at play over Cuomo's reëlection pork slush fund

Last month, New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo insulted Republicans by saying that "extreme conservatives" of the GOP had no place in New York state. How can Gov. Cuomo insult the political party that controls the House, which controls federal funding ? Ideological differences aside, the political reality is that Gov. Cuomo should keep the state on good terms with Republicans in order to "work the system," seeing as he is such a political insider, especially given how Gov. Cuomo is waiting on $10 billion in federal Medicaid funds to divert into pork projects in this year's budget to fluff his reëlection campaign. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is absolutely correct is not wanting to cross the GOP on this Medicaid waiver, because setting the frank realities aside (Like, who exacerbated the hospital closing crisis but Cuomo himself !!), why would the GOP want to see the Obama administration give a $10 billion re-electioneering slush fund to Gov. Cuomo after Gov. Cuomo just trashed the GOP ? If Obama/Sebelius have total discretion over approving this waiver, then President Obama may pay the price with amped-up vitriol from the GOP. It seems like Gov. Cuomo was flat out stupid to insult the GOP. Unless he was trying to score cheap political points by just using extremist talk, like one of my friends told me the other day . Even then, it was stupid.

There could be more than just normal beastly Washington politics causing the delay in the Medicaid waiver. If you want to really look behind the curtain, you might find former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's people causing the delay, too. President Obama supports Mrs. Clinton in her presumed campaign for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, so the last thing President Obama would want to do is to help prop up Gov. Cuomo's reëlectioneering pork plans with the $10 billion Medicaid waiver that Gov. Cuomo plans to turn into a slush fund. These monies are purported to be "savings," but they are in fact money that was gutted from Medicaid from the poorest people, preventing them from being able to access full-service hospital, comprehensive medical, or Level 1 Trauma care in times of emergency. Cuomo's plans for these monies have nothing to do with helping to fund Obamacare expansion plans, but, instead, to dole out for his reëlection campaign purposes. He is sleazy like that, and there's no way to expect that Gov. Cuomo will do the right and honorable thing with this kind of windfall. And Mrs. Clinton's people know that, too, and if you were Mrs. Clinton, why would you want to see your primary challenger make use of a $10 billion slush fund like that ? Mrs. Clinton's machine is slowly taking back control of the DNC, so there's that added motivation to block/cut the waiver, too.

Added to the political pressures on the $10 billion waiver is New York City mayor Bill de Blasio's tax hike for the rich. If the $10 billion is delayed or cut, then Gov. Cuomo will not have the money to fund the mayor's expansion of pre-kinder classes as he had promised, making it easier for Mayor de Blasio to argue that he needs his tax increase. Mayor de Blasio is also doing his best to see to it that Mrs. Clinton comes out on top of Gov. Cuomo, so the mayor has a partial motivation to see to it that the Medicaid waiver is delayed or cut, even to the detriment of NYC hospitals.

At the joint appearance by the mayor and governor, the governor and the mayor only committed to preserving emergency care in Brooklyn -- (the same bait-and-switch talk that former Council Speaker Christine Quinn shifted to regarding St. Vincent's) -- and the governor and mayor specifically refused to say that they'd save "full-service" hospital care. So, that $10 billion isn't going to be used to save Interfaith Medical Center or Long Island College Hospital as we would all like to see. The only way that Mayor de Blasio would go along with pressuring Secretary Sebelius to make good on the whole $10 billion waiver is if Gov. Cuomo promised to share some of that slush fund with NYC -- which we already know will not be used to save Brooklyn hospitals. The mayor is under tremendous budgetary pressure to deliver on approximately $7 billion in union contracts, and he needs all the money he can get.

The dark side question is : are "Leftists" really trusting the governor and the mayor to let some of that $10 billion trickle down to voters ? It's been my argument that, since I saw James Capalino campaign for BDB, the de Blasio administration would be controlled by lobbyists. Lobbyists are going to instruct the governor and the mayor on how to spend that money. My darkest fear is the people will not benefit from the money at all. Maybe the unions will get better contracts, but people who don't have lobbyists working for them will get nothing. As it is, the karma of this money is already questionable, since it represents Medicaid healthcare cuts to the poorest New Yorkers.

Lastly, I want to point out that President Obama himself may want to delay or cut the $10 billion. The president's administation has been a complete disaster. His last saving grace is to try to take credit for the rise of the (fake (read : no-reform)) progressivism that's emerging out of the new crop of (poser) politicians in New York City. President Obama himself may want to delay or cut the Medicaid waiver so that he can take credit for an income tax hike on the 1% for which the mayor is lobbying. The tax hike is a good thing, but all these backroom machinations and other mixed-motivations are what are at play. There's no way to predict what will happen, because these pieces keep moving....

SIDEBAR : If Staten Island Congressman Michael Grimm leaves office, the GOP will have less reason to care about New York. I hate myself for thinking like this, but we actually need a powerplayer GOP politician in New York to help focus the GOP on the dire economics of New York state. If we go completely blue, why would the GOP-controlled House care about us anymore ? President Obama's too weak to lead the Democrats to take back control of the House this November, so we are stuck with the GOP for the next few years. Insulting them doesn't work, not when Gov. Cuomo has his hands out, begging for a slush fund.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

What Rep. Grimm's Threats of Violence Against NY1 Reporter Teaches Us About Media Intimidation

If Reporters or Bloggers Dare To Report Truth About Political Corruption, Politicians and Lobbyists Become Enraged

Rep. Michael Grimm's violent outburst and threats of bodily harm to NY1 Capital Hill reporter Michael Scotto revealed how elected officials keep political reporters and bloggers on a tight leash. “I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last,” Rep. Grimm said, in part, in a statement published by Politicker.

What is more, a former staffer for Rep. Grimm told The New York Post that, “This is not the first time he’s tried to intimidate a reporter.”

In other words, elected officials have a sense of entitlement when it comes to giving reporters access to interviews. Elected officials do not believe that political reporters have a duty to fully inform voters about the government's work. Rather, politicians have come to believe that they can trade "favors" with representatives of the media. But when reporters or bloggers do not subjugate themselves to politicians, violence or rage can ensue, as was captured by NY1's camera.

After a series of blog postings published last year about allegations of campaign finance irregularities involving the political lobbying firm The Advance Group, the firm's head lobbyist Scott Levenson called me in a fit of rage. His tone was confrontational, similar to the anger Rep. Grimm expressed to Mr. Scotto. I believed that Mr. Levenson was trying to intimidate me into silence, the way that Rep. Grimm had tried to intimidate Mr. Scotto.

Many bloggers believe that one of the main reasons that political reporters do not fully report the truth about political corruption is that politicians and their army of lobbyists trade "favors," provide insider "tips," set up "interviews," or act as "sounding boards" for reporters. According to this cozy relationship, politicians and their lobbyists expect that reporters will never ask tough questions that are "off-script." You especially see the kind of soft-balling on local TV news programs, where hosts never fully confront powerholders for the truth the way Mr. Scotto and I had, recently.

The instance of Mr. Scotto actually confronting Rep. Grimm on camera about allegations of corruption is rare for TV news. Very few reporters dare to actually embrace the discomfort of approaching politicians or lobbyists on camera with questions about political corruption. Because of this rarity, it's all the more evident that the media's two most recent "shake downs" have been of Republican politicians : New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Rep. Grimm. No TV news program dares to go after the Democrats, who now oversee the corrupt city Board of Elections, for example. Are behind-the-scenes expressions of anger and rage, like this but never caught on tape, the reason why Democrats have been able to slay the news media from investigating political corruption ?

Rep. Michael Grimm Assaults Michael Scotto, Threatens NY1 Reporter With Battery

PUBLISHED : WED, 29 JAN 2014, 03:46 AM
UPDATED : FRI, 25 APR 2014, 05:40 PM


Rep. Grimm Threatened Bodily Harm to Mr. Scotto by Breaking Him in Half and Throwing Him Off a Balcony.

NY1 Capitol Hill reporter Michael Scotto interviewed Staten Island Republican Rep. Michael Grimm following President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, and Rep. Grimm became enraged after Mr. Scotto pressed the Congressman on camera about the Congressman's growing campaign finance scandal.

After Mr. Scotto had asked the Congressman questions about allegations of campaign finance crimes, Mr. Grimm told Mr. Scotto, "I’ll break you in half," according to a report of the attack published in The New York Times. Rep. Grimm also threatened to throw Mr. Scotto off a balcony, according to a transcript of Rep. Grimm's threats reviewed by The New York Times. "The confrontation occurred in the rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building, part of the Capitol complex," The New York Daily News noted.

Rep. Grimm is a solidly-built, 43-year-old former U.S. Marine and ex-undercover FBI agent. According to The New York Post, Rep. Grimm's threats to Mr. Scotto suggested that Rep. Grimm was physically intimidating Mr. Scotto as a way to control Mr. Scotto with fear. “Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again, I’ll throw you off this f–--king balcony,” Rep. Grimm said, adding, “You’re not man enough. I’ll break you in half. Like a boy.”

"A two-year federal investigation of fundraising for Grimm’s 2010 campaign led to the arrest this month of a former girlfriend, Diana Durand. She was accused of using so-called straw donors so she could exceed the $4,800 maximum allowable contribution to his campaign," reported The New York Daily News, adding that, "According to the criminal complaint, once she reached the donation limit, she gave money to at least two other people so they could contribute to Grimm. Durand was the second person arrested in connection with the case. Ofer Biton, an Israeli citizen who helped Grimm raise campaign money four years ago, pleaded guilty on Aug. 18 to visa fraud as a result of the investigation."

Rep. Grimm has reportedly denied any wrongdoing in the crimes involving the campaign finance scandal, and he himself has not been charged with any crimes, yet.

"It is extremely disturbing when anyone threatens one of our reporters – let alone a U.S. Congressman," NY1’s political director, Bob Hardt, said in a series of messages on Twitter, adding, "The NY1 family is certainly alarmed and disappointed by the behavior of Representative Grimm and demands a full apology from him. This behavior is unacceptable."

If Reporters or Bloggers Dare To Report Truth About Political Corruption, Politicians and Lobbyists Become Enraged

Rep. Michael Grimm's violent outburst and threats of bodily harm to NY1 Capital Hill reporter Michael Scotto revealed how elected officials keep political reporters and bloggers on a tight leash. “I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last,” Rep. Grimm said, in part, in a statement published by Politicker.

What is more, a former staffer for Rep. Grimm told The New York Post that, “This is not the first time he’s tried to intimidate a reporter.”

In other words, elected officials have a sense of entitlement when it comes to giving reporters access to interviews. Elected officials do not believe that political reporters have a duty to fully inform voters about the government's work. Rather, politicians have come to believe that they can trade "favors" with representatives of the media. But when reporters or bloggers do not subjugate themselves to politicians, violence or rage can ensue, as was captured by NY1's camera.

After a series of blog postings published last year about allegations of campaign finance irregularities involving the political lobbying firm The Advance Group, the firm's head lobbyist Scott Levenson called me in a fit of rage. His tone was confrontational, similar to the anger Rep. Grimm expressed to Mr. Scotto. I believed that Mr. Levenson was trying to intimidate me into silence, the way that Rep. Grimm had tried to intimidate Mr. Scotto.

Many bloggers believe that one of the main reasons that political reporters do not fully report the truth about political corruption is that politicians and their army of lobbyists trade "favors," provide insider "tips," set up "interviews," or act as "sounding boards" for reporters. According to this cozy relationship, politicians and their lobbyists expect that reporters will never ask tough questions that are "off-script." You especially see the kind of soft-balling on local TV news programs, where hosts never fully confront powerholders for the truth the way Mr. Scotto and I had, recently.

The instance of Mr. Scotto actually confronting Rep. Grimm on camera about allegations of corruption is rare for TV news. Very few reporters dare to actually embrace the discomfort of approaching politicians or lobbyists on camera with questions about political corruption. Because of this rarity, it's all the more evident that the media's two most recent "shake downs" have been of Republican politicians : New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Rep. Grimm. No TV news program dares to go after the Democrats, who now oversee the corrupt city Board of Elections, for example. Are behind-the-scenes expressions of anger and rage, like this but never caught on tape, the reason why Democrats have been able to slay the news media from investigating political corruption ?