NYS CON CON

Been reading up on it a little and it seems that there are valid cases for both sides whether to open it up or keep it closed.  Would like to hear from smarter people than myself and get others opinions.  My gut says leave it alone for now until we can get special interest groups out of the drafting process.

Yeah, I'm voting No.

I'm not looking to open up "Forever Wild" to a bunch of debate.

Voting yes

State employee benefits are ridiculous  --- they need to be brought back in line with today's reality

Pls consider a yes vote on prop 3

http://voteyesfortheadirondacks.com

Done deal SJ ---- lots of common sense in that prop. I like it.

I am voting for the swippy swappy rule.  That's kind of a no brainer.

ScottyJack wrote

Pls consider a yes vote on prop 3

http://voteyesfortheadirondacks.com

I'm voting for that one too.  The fact that you can propose specific amendments to the constitution proves why a constitutional convention is not necessary.

mm

campgottagopee wrote

Voting yes

State employee benefits are ridiculous  --- they need to be brought back in line with today's reality

What makes you think a new constitution will change that?

mm

If you support a constitutional convention, you need to think about how the delegates will be chose.  

Three would be elected from each state Senate district, and another 16 elected state wide.  The Senate is majority Democratic, and most of them are from NYC.  The 16 "state wide" delegates would most likely be NYC Dems as well.

That's either a bug or a feature, depending on your politics.

If you live in the Catskills, you should expect a new constitution to give the NYC DEP to have even more authority there.  Maybe more authority for the APA as well, or maybe "forever wild" is redefined to allow motorcycle trails on the High Peaks.  

If you are a teacher or a cop, there's the possibility of losing some of the protection of pension benefits. If you think those benefits should be taken away, think about how much influence the teachers unions will have in electing delegates.

If you are a right-to-lifer, you should expect abortion rights to be guaranteed in gold leaf calligraphy in the very first line of a new constitution.

The current constitution guarantees a free public education for everyone, and funding that is a major issue every year  between NYC and suburban legislators.  Maybe that tilts more to the City in a new constitution, or more to the suburbs.  It's not gonna go more in favor of Upstate residents.

No matter which side you are on issues, there's a lot of risk in a wholesale renegotiation of the constitution. There is also an amendment process to correct specific problems with the current constitution, with much less risk of special interest payoffs.

I'm voting no.

mm  

campgottagopee wrote

State employee benefits are ridiculous  --- they need to be brought back in line with today's reality

Not as ridiculous as the benefits at Harvey's business.

MC2 5678F589 wrote

campgottagopee wrote

State employee benefits are ridiculous  --- they need to be brought back in line with today's reality

Not as ridiculous as the benefits at Harvey's business.

LMAO  very good

Milo Maltbie wrote

campgottagopee wrote

Voting yes

State employee benefits are ridiculous  --- they need to be brought back in line with today's reality

What makes you think a new constitution will change that?

mm

I don't --- i was just bustin balls

stick around and you'll catch on

Nothing says it will... but that is why all the Public Employee Unions are telling their members to vote no.  I have mixed feeling about it.  Would I like to see it changed because of jealousy on my part?  I hope that isn't my motive but I always ask myself that question..  I also think that we can't afford it so we need to change the system, make the workers a little more responsible for the retirements.  I mean I see people from the private sector saddled with 1100 dollar monthly health insurance bills making it nearly impossible for them to be able to retire before 65.  Then I see Public employees retiring at 56 with very little out of pocket costs for health insurance.  I know they each chose their career path but something seems wrong with that.  I think the private sector needs to do more for their employees but I also think the State needs to real in those costs as they just seem unsustainable.  

tjf1967 wrote

Nothing says it will... but that is why all the Public Employee Unions are telling their members to vote no.  I have mixed feeling about it.  Would I like to see it changed because of jealousy on my part?  I hope that isn't my motive but I always ask myself that question..  I also think that we can't afford it so we need to change the system, make the workers a little more responsible for the retirements.  I mean I see people from the private sector saddled with 1100 dollar monthly health insurance bills making it nearly impossible for them to be able to retire before 65.  Then I see Public employees retiring at 56 with very little out of pocket costs for health insurance.  I know they each chose their career path but something seems wrong with that.  I think the private sector needs to do more for their employees but I also think the State needs to real in those costs as they just seem unsustainable.

Actually, NY public pensions are mostly fully funded, unlike NJ and other states, so sustainability doesn't seem to be an issue.  I don't know why NY is so much better than other states about that, but maybe the current constitution has something to do with it.  As far as taking health insurance away from young retirees, the right answer is universal health insurance, but that's not consistent with the whole MAGA hidden agenda, which is turning out to be just a scam to impoverish working people so banksters can have bigger yachts.  

mm

I agree with what your saying but were talking about a state constitution formed by the state. they will never take shit away from themselves. I know for me I'm jealous of that. Then again I live in the real working world, so there's that

campgottagopee wrote

I agree with what your saying but were talking about a state constitution formed by the state. they will never take shit away from themselves. I know for me I'm jealous of that. Then again I live in the real working world, so there's that

The GOPs are counting on your jealousy.  That's how they get working people to vote against their own interest.  
As far as state employees making too much, I bailed out of a state job without any idea of where I would land "in the real working world," but I ended up making more than I ever did from the state.  It was the best decision of my professional life.  Actually, it made me rich enough to be a Republican, but I'm not because I worry about my children and grandchildren.

mm

Never meant to imply that state workers make too much. Sorry if you took it that way. However the benefits they get are amazing. That's where my jealousy kicks in. Like TJ mentioned, state employees are able to retire very comfortable early in life due to health care costs and benefits after they stop working. Out in the real working world that's simply not possible unless you cash in bigly.

Milo Maltbie wrote

.  I don't know why NY is so much better than other states about that, but maybe the current constitution has something to do with it.

I know why:

http://njtoday.net/2015/06/09/court-allows-christie-to-rob-retirees-for-now/

Last year, Christie slashed $1.6 billion from the state’s fiscal 2015 public pension contribution. That and other actions have been called severely irresponsible

The NY pension system is well designed and there are a lot of rules (after some corrupt shit) that prohibit any one person or investment bank or company from screwing everyone.

Lots of people on Wall Street want to tear up those rules and get at that pile of money. Voting no helps prevent that.

tjf1967 wrote

I know they each chose their career path but something seems wrong with that.

What is wrong with that? Do you want to change a system in which everyone can make their living as they see fit? What are you proposing?

I think it's strange that people, instead of wanting to make their own situations better, try to make other people's situations worse, as if that will help them be happier in any way.

If you and your neighbor have gardens, but he gets more tomatoes from his, do you go over and stomp on his tomatoes? Or do you try to make your own garden more productive?

And MM is right. The state pays a lot less money that the private sector. That's why people retire from the State, then "cash in" with a consultant job. Nobody that I know of retires from the private sector and then "cashes in" in government. People who work for the state seem to be trading a higher salary for better hours, benefits, & job security. If the benefits went away, a lot of people would probably leave. Just like camp would quit his job if he was forced to take a 20% pay cut.

MC2 5678F589 wrote

  job security.  

There's the other shoe. You can be one of the shittiest workers around but they can't get rid of you. Not sure how that benefits the tax payers at all.