Home > ADVOCACY > Where We Stand > Stachowski Response

May 12, 2009

Hon. William Stachowski
New York State Senate
2030 Clinton Street
Buffalo, New York 14206

Dear Bill:

I have received notes from many of our members questioning the details contained in your response to their recent advocacy e-mail to you, and wanted to cite some of the items with which we disagree.

We still strongly believe that “no” was the only proper vote on this costly budget. The assertion that the budget had to be passed for the state to continue fundamental programs might have validity had the state not gone two decades without an “on-time” budget. We would have preferred due diligence over keeping to a time clock.

I want to specifically address a number of statements in your response:

“$4 billion will be raised by increasing the personal income taxes (PIT) paid by the wealthiest New Yorkers. 99.6% of the residents of the 58th District will be unaffected by this measure.” While our scope is bigger than the residents of the 58th District, this is not true. Yes, it may not affect their personal incomes, per se, the PIT increase does affect thousands of small businesses statewide (including those in the 58th District), who will be forced to respond with job losses and increased consumer prices. We urge you to support a carve-out for small businesses from this tax.

“The ‘utility tax’ will amount to approximately one dollar by hundred dollars on your utility bill. Your telephone bill will remain unaffected.” Again, the utility tax will raise the bottom line for businesses in New York State already faced with high energy costs, leading to more job losses and higher consumer prices. In a business climate that is already uncompetitive on a national and global scale, these increased costs will only serve to chase more employers from our state. We urge you to support rolling back these taxes.

“By voting in favor of this budget, I voted to remove a majority of the taxes suggested by Governor Paterson, including those on pop, bowling, salon services, digital downloads, and yes, the $10 fee to file a paper tax return.” From our point-of-view, voting against “scare tactic” taxes that were only proposed to make a point is not heroism. Instead, it takes fortitude to vote against a budget that will cost our state jobs. In addition, there are plenty of tax and fee increases still included in the budget to dent business and household budgets – including over $850 million in health insurance taxes. It means little that the $10-a-year tax return didn’t make it into the budget when hosts of New York State residents will no longer be able to afford health insurance.

“My Republican colleagues, the print and electronic media, and others would like you to think that a ‘no’ vote would have led to a budget that had no tax increases, no cuts in services, and no layoffs. This is simply untrue.” The Partnership and Unshackle Upstate can stand tall in saying that we have outlined specific, quantifiable spending reduction opportunities that the state can implement. No one is under the illusion that there would be no “pain” in this budget. But if our proposed reforms to the state’s pension system, Medicaid and Wicks Law had been implemented, we believe they would have mitigated such a painful (and one-sided) budget – and provided a better foundation for the long-term. As it stands, Albany is fiscally ill-prepared for the next state budget, and even more so for post-federal stimulus budgets to come. As a result, we urge you to forward these reforms with Majority Leader Smith during the time that remains in the state legislative session.

The bottom line is that with each company electing to leave New York State, each family that can no longer afford health insurance and each job that is lost – any spin on this budget is unacceptable.

There is one more of your points I’d like to touch on, though:

“In closing, I can say with my head held high and truth in my heart that I voted in favor of a budget that is far from perfect, was done with less openness than I would have liked, and contains more taxes than any New Yorker should be paying.”

This does not strike us as a legacy you really want to leave. On behalf of the Partnership’s 2,500 employer members, I urge you to fix this statement by session’s end.

Sincerely,

Andrew J. Rudnick

P.S. - I want to make note that we believe State Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith did a great disservice to you and your Upstate colleagues in the State Senate – and to Upstate taxpayers in general – by not preparing a budget. As abhorrent as the reality of “three men in a room” is, it is made worse when one of those men – particularly the one we’re counting on to represent Upstate – enters the room without a negotiating stance.