Comments on: The Hatch Hitch

By: lanres

lanres — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:17:40 +0000

One needs only to go to City Hall - Law Department - look through the bullet proof glass at the reception window - look straight a head to see a “Vote Democrat” sticker facing you. There is no other party signs visible and speaks volumes as to why City workers feel pressured.

By: Agent in Charge

Agent in Charge — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 01:30:48 +0000

REWARD $750,000.00 CASH
Most recently, A State Supreme Court Justice in New York State has been under investigation for wrong doings in Custody Matters. A Reward of $750,000.00 Cash is offered for information leading to the Arrest, Conviction & De-Benching of Justice John F. O’Donnell of 312 Rivermist Drive or 25 Delaware Ave, Buffalo, NY 14202. Please send your information along with your contact information to the following. All information will be kept confidential to Federal Law Enforcement Agencies.
Agent in Charge
PO Box 2191
Buffalo,NY 14240-2191
September 26th.2008

By: WNYMind

WNYMind — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:12:03 +0000

The hatch act for city workers would be great, but getting rid of the redundant patronage workers and letting the civil servants actually do their work would be better. END PATRONAGE JOBS!!!!!

By: Sean Cooney

Sean Cooney — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:47:48 +0000

There most certainly is some undue pressure on public employees to support the candidates that their bosses do and this law would put a clear end to the pressure. However, the most important reason for this law is not captured it its title or in any of the commentary so far.

The most compelling reason is to ensure that public confidence in government is not undermined by the notion of the “poltical hack.” The truth is when hundreds of City employees are knocking on our doors, asking for our signatures, standing at our polling places , running as committee members, and managaing campaigns our city suffers. The appearance, whether true or not, is that our City government is putting politics before policy, signatures before service, and their committee races before their community. More than anything else, this appearance is the cause of Buffalonians lack of confidence in our government and in our City.

This law is a bold and deliberate attempt to finally fundamentally and structurally alter the overly rabid poltical culuture within our City. We will all be better off when it is passed. This law will be a test of who talks reform and who truly will put reform before re-election.

By: John Rieley

John Rieley — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:17:26 +0000

I have been following this story with some amusement. The Hatch Act critics are acting like seeking to reform the corrupt system of pressing governmental employees into political work is somehow novel. Beginning in the 1880 the Federal Government sought to limit political activity by governmental employees. The Hatch Act in its current form was pushed in 1939 by a Democratic Senator after strong allegations that the Democratic President, FDR, was using WPA employees to work on Democratic campaigns. The Democratic Senator Hatch ended the practice of leaning on employees to do political work. The Hatch Act has virtually eliminated the practice of using Federal rank and file employees to do political work. Have you ever heard a IRS or Social Security worker say “I have to work for Clinton or I will get fired.” Nope, because it has been eliminated by the Hatch Act. It is a good law that brought about a huge sea change in the lives of government employees.
We all know that this type of pressure is alive and well in City and County Governments and should be ended. Wouldn’t it be nice if the guy who was hired to clean City Hall actually cleaned City Hall. Wouldn’t it be nice if any of our post WWII Mayors had to run for re-election based on their records and not have re-election virtually guaranteed by a coerced army of City Hall workers. Reform is good. Do not be afraid.

By: Jeremy Toth

Jeremy Toth — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:25:20 +0000

I am happy that this proposal has generated this much heat. It draws much needed attention to a long time problem - political activity as a prerequisite to employment and promotion. And let’s be clear, everyone knows this is not just simple threats like “donate or lose your job.” People put in for promotion and know they have to support the “right” candidates to be considered. Seasonal workers desperately trying to become permanent have to carry petitions and donate or they remain seasonal. The threats also extend to relatives. If your nephew is trying to become permanent then you better get involved in the “right” campaign too. Finally, even if your actual job is not threatened the working environment can become so toxic that the individual employee can’t do their job. This is why morale in City Hall is abysmal. Anyone saying this is not city hall reality just isn’t telling the truth. Everyone, everyone, everyone knows this is how it works. And everyone knows under Steve Casey the abuses have become egregious. The real question, and its legitimate, is how to balance the rights of people to be politically involved with the legitimate city interests of ensuring employees first and foremost do the jobs they are paid to do without political threats. Unfortunately, the rhetoric from the Mayor’s mouthpieces is so disingenuous that we can’t even get to the real debate that should be had.

By: jean

jean — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 16:24:26 +0000

It’s a working document. Maybe if some of the Councilmembers stopped spinning on behalf of the Mayor they could actually DISCUSS what’s before them and come to a compromise. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ban City employees from donating to City campaigns.

By: Joe Golombek

Joe Golombek — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:21:03 +0000

I believe I would have been disingenuous had I not offered an alternative to the current plan being submitted by several of my colleagues. In order to get further away from this type of alleged behavior I believe we need a city manager form of government. That is why I have resubmitted a resolution that I originally sponsored four or so years ago calling for a committee to explore the option.

By: Peter A Reese

Peter A Reese — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:31:27 +0000

While I sympathize with government employees who feel pressured to participate in political support of a particular regime, I am reminded of the words of John Curr of the NYCLU,”You cannot legislate courage.” While resisting political pressure may have unpleasant consequences, many individuals have given their lives for the rights abd privileges we enjoy. With this in mind, how much sympathy can I have for someone who is willing to forfeit such rights because his supervisor might become angry? I have been a union activist and whistleblower. I know what it is like to be abused for standing up to “The Man”. But I’m still here and breathing. The sun still rises and sets for me.

Is it the job of the Common Council to insert backbones in timid city workers? No law can do that. Government workers already enjoy job protections which private sector employees would literally die for. If people choose to live on their knees it is a choice they will have to live with. Protecting people by stripping them of their constitutional rights in return for a paycheck is not something I want to see in Buffalo.