What is it about New York state government when 26 legislators since 1999 have been convicted of corruption, face criminal charges or were forced to resign because of ethical infractions?
Character flaws certainly were a factor but more broadly this reflects a culture by legislators of omnipotence and entitlement. This belief was fostered by budget gimmickry that inflated legislators' control over millions of dollars. It had its origin in a budgetary arrangement by Gov. Nelson Rockefeller.
It was the practice in the early 1970s to pass the budget by the constitutional deadline of April 1. As the session continued and new programs were enacted that needed appropriations, and to make adjustments in the budget based on updated fiscal data, a "supplemental budget" was enacted at the end of the session. Programs to provide college assistance for students from underprivileged backgrounds were of special importance to legislators representing minority communities. As negotiations for these programs stalled, Rockefeller told the concerned legislators he could not provide in the supplemental budget the sums they asked for, but that he would include in the budget some money to sprinkle in their districts as they directed.
As it became known that legislators, of what was then called the Black and Puerto Rican Caucus, were getting money for their districts, others demanded similar authority to direct funding in their districts. I remember one year, when it became known that one of these special programs was to assist Hispanic alcoholics, a Bronx senator in high indignation asked why should there not be a program for Irish, Italian or other alcoholics. Inevitably more and more legislators demanded and received this special funding that before long became institutionalized to include all legislators under what became known as "member items."
The amounts each legislator had available were decided by the leaders of the Assembly and Senate and varied greatly. Some members had $4 million available to do almost as they wished and others barely $100,000. There was hardly any oversight and transparency. Disbursing these funds was a big political plus for the members and gave the leaders even more power over their members.
The control over such sums was too tempting for a number of legislators, who saw how easy it was to misappropriate these funds to enrich themselves. A preferred way was to use their member item to establish "community service corporations," which they then staffed with their relatives and political operatives while draining money for their private use.
It was not just the misuse of public funds that led legislators into criminality. Some used their position to gain illegal favors, receive kickbacks for pushing legislation or were found to have engaged in sexual abuse. Those who engaged in prohibited conduct were misled by their budgetary powers to believe that they were immune from the criminal process and not held to customary ethical standards.
And it was not only the member item program that gave legislators a sense that they were above the law. The opaque budget for the legislature disposes of billions of dollars in lump sum appropriations in disregard of the state constitution's requirement that the legislative budget must be "itemized." It is this lack of budgetary detail that made it possible for Speaker Sheldon Silver to reach into one of the pots of money he controls to settle the sexual harassment claim against former Assemblyman Vito Lopez without it being known at the time.
Member items were discontinued in 2011, but since then a number of legislators still have been indicted or forced to resign. Clearly, more is required to root out the sense of legislative privilege.
Ethical exhortations to legislators to obey the law must be buttressed by a structure that makes it evident to them that they are not above the law.
Franz Leichter is a former Democratic state senator from Manhattan.