N.Y. Sues Feds Due to Hydraulic Fracking Concerns

According to reports, the United States government will ask a federal judge to dismiss a New York lawsuit that seeks to force a comprehensive review of how natural gas extraction might affect the 9 million residents of the state. Sources say the U.S. plans to ask for dismissal because the state of New York cannot prove injury and has no right to sue federal agencies. Reportedly, U.S. attorneys are relying on the principle of sovereign immunity, which protects the U.S. from lawsuits unless it waives that right.

According to New York’s lawsuit, the federal commission that oversees the Delaware River Basin has proposed regulations that will allow hydraulic fracking on 15,000 to 18,000 gas wells without a full environmental review. Hydraulic fracking is a process in which water, sand and chemicals are pumped underground to widen the cracks in the earth’s crust and release the natural gas.

Sources say the suit asks the court to halt the regulations until the federal commission complies with the National Environmental Policy Act’s requirements for a full review of all health and safety risks. The Delaware River Basin Commission supervises activities over a large gas deposit known as the Marcellus Shale. Reportedly, companies such as XTO Energy Inc. have pending applications with the commission requesting to explore the area. The lawsuit claims the commission has refused to carry out a full assessment of the effects exploration and hydraulic fracking can have on the environment.

Reportedly, the U.S. attorneys will contend that the harm to New York is “conjectural and hypothetical, and not actual or imminent.” The U.S. will also argue that the case is not yet ripe because the commission has not completed its review. Sources say the Delaware River Basin covers 58 percent of the land area of New York City’s water supply west of the Hudson River. According to the lawsuit, the reason targeted for exploration is protected by a 50 year-old agreement between the U.S. government, New York, New Jersey and Delaware.

According to New York’s lawsuit, the city of New York has spent around $1.5 billion to protect drinking water that flows from the watershed west of the Hudson. The lawsuit claims this money has gone to buying land to serve as a buffer for pollutants, maintaining sewage plants and regulating human activity.

Further, the lawsuit claims that more than 2,000 natural gas wells have been drilled in Pennsylvania which has resulted in the violation of hundreds of water pollutant laws. The above referenced case is New York v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 11- cv-2599, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn).

Radio DJ dedicated to fighting hunger nominated for Lifetime Achievement Liberty Medal

Need to feed

DJ fills empty stomachs

Long Islander Bill Ayres was a rock ‘n’ roll disc jockey in 1973 when folk singer-songwriter Harry Chapin was a guest on his radio show and they found a common interest — each was committed to helping the hungry.

In 1975, they co-founded what is now called WhyHunger, to find “innovative solutions to hunger and poverty,” said Ayres, executive director of the Manhattan-based nonprofit. Chapin died in a 1981 car accident.

The grass-roots support organization works with 8,500 community-based groups in the United States, including more than 200 in the New York City area, Ayres said.

The nonprofit also runs “the only national hunger hot line in America,” said Ayres, who was nominated for a Lifetime Achievement Liberty Medal by colleague David McTiernan.

“You call 1-866-3HUNGRY and we connect you to emergency food in your neighborhood and all the government nutrition programs.”

WhyHunger also works in three areas known as “food deserts” — the Mississippi Delta, southeastern Arizona and a migrant-worker region in California — to help communities grow healthy food, said Ayres, a talk-show host on WPLJ/95.5 FM .

Every fall, the organization holds Hungerthon, a radio fund-raising drive that over the years has raised more than $11 million. This Nov. 19 and 22, Hungerthon will auction a Bruce Springsteen guitar and a portrait of the winning bidder by artist Peter Max.

The group’s Web site is whyhunger.org.

BALCONY Report: Issues & Events, Sept./Fall 2011

As BALCONY continues the fight for fair legislation in the future, this report features two articles analyzing the present impact of the recent debt deal on New York State and the Nation. As the nation’s focus this fall turns to job creation, we offer the BUILD ACT sponsored by a bi-partisan coalition led by Senators John Kerry, Kaye Bailey Hutchinson, and John Warner. The health care battle continues: The Health Exchange Bill is pending, as the US Department of Health and Human Services issues regulations.

Freelancers will soon be granted the same benefits as traditional workers, and the NYSUT celebrated a small victory in the battle for equitable methods for education reform, as the state announced it will use the NYSUT‘s rubric in their evaluation of teachers.

BALCONY endorses the new Power Bill legislation as a means of bringing more power to New York. Finally, BALCONY hails the passage of the James Zadroga Act on the 10th Anniversary of 911.

Read the details: Report

Education Leaders Spar Over Bloomberg’s Educational Record

By Jon Lentz

Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s leadership of the city’s education system has been flawed in many ways, but mayoral control of the public school system has helped the city overall, a number of education advocates said at a panel discussion yesterday.

The change during Bloomberg’s first term did away with a bureaucratic quagmire and brought more attention and funding to education, said Joseph Viteritti, a public policy professor at Hunter College. But the change has been marred by a lack of a voice for parents, he added.

“There needs to be more input from other people,” Viteritti said. “Part of it is style, not structure. You have to respect the spirit of the law, and that hasn’t been there.”

Viteritti was one of eight panelists at the “On Education” panel sponsored by City Hall, Gotham Schools and Con Edison on the successes and failures of the city’s school system.

For every passionate assertion, there seemed to be an equally passionate counter-assertion.

Shael Polakow-Suransky, the chief academic officer for the city’s Education Department, said mayoral control had met its goal of creating a strong, accountable leadership with groundbreaking results. He touted rising graduation rates and city surveys showing that more than nine in 10 parents are satisfied with the schools.

“We had a graduation rate that hovered for decades right around 50 percent,” Polakow-Suransky said. “It’s now two-thirds of the kids that are now graduating, which is thousands and thousands more kids who are graduating each year.”

Merryl Tisch, the chancellor of the New York State Board of Regents, countered that the state looks at the data differently.

“When you have 75 percent of the youngsters graduating high schools who are going to two-year colleges needing to be remediated … or two years in community college, only 21 percent of them complete, and after six years it’s 24 percent – are you kidding me?” she asked.

The panelists also quarreled over a court decision this week that threw out a state teacher evaluation system.

“With the decision that was rendered yesterday, the judge said that you can be an effective teacher in New York State and get zero points out of a 100-point scale on student performance,” said Tisch, adding that the state plans to appeal. “We believe that that hurts students, that hurts teachers, and that hurts the future of our youngsters.”

But Leo Casey, a vice president with the United Federation of Teachers, said the disagreement was over whether or not state exams are a truly robust and meaningful measure of students’ academic growth, and whether those results should be used to evaluate teachers.

“As a teacher, I know that for my students to be successful in college and beyond, what’s important is not their ability to fill in bubbles on one test, one day a year,” Casey said.

Earlier this summer the teachers union and the city came to an agreement to avert teacher layoffs, but the panelists doubted whether the two parties would sign a new collective bargaining agreement before Bloomberg left office.

“I would certainly hope we could go through a year in which we took up Shael’s call to focus on teacher evaluation, and we didn’t have another year of this contrived political issue of seniority layoffs,” said Casey, referring to Bloomberg’s push to get rid of the state’s “last in, first out” rules. “We’ve lost 8,000 teachers through attrition over the last three years. This system cannot afford to lose more teachers.”

Bill Thompson, the former city comptroller and mayoral candidate, echoed Casey’s concerns.

“It has to be a larger educational vision that’s put forward by a mayor, by a chancellor, working along with the union,” Thompson said. “I think that on both sides there’s an attitude, and I think you’re seeing it with other city and municipal unions also, that we’ll wait for the next person.”

When asked if he thought a new contract could be reached in the next two years, Polakow-Suransky instead asked Thompson, who is again running to succeed Bloomberg, what the next mayor could do differently. Thompson responded that the change would be attitudinal.

“I don’t know if it changes dramatically on finances and the economics,” Thompson said. “I think attitude is a huge difference. I think the ability to sit down and work with the union would change, because I don’t think that’s the prevailing attitude out there right now. I think that teachers, in a number of ways, feel as if they’re being scapegoated.”

Polakow-Suransky also dismissed recent press reports about cheating scandals, saying the number of allegations actually proven had not gone up. He said the city’s schools had a number of protections in place, from conducting citywide standardized tests only on a single day to stronger legal protections for whistleblowers to a system-wide audit.

“I can’t say that in a system of 75,000 teachers, that there aren’t a couple cases where people make mistakes or behave inappropriately, but I also don’t think we’ve seen any evidence that there’s a system-wide problem,” he said.

Still, Tisch said it was critically important for the city to prove that its results were rock solid.

“I believe that so much of what the mayor has done in this city is really carved out around educational reform,” said Tisch, who noted that the state is going to come out with specific proposals on testing for cheating in coming weeks. “Therefore, the numbers we post of what’s transpired in the city need to in essence be shown to be bulletproof.”

Tisch added that Bloomberg’s hard work and prioritization of public education had led to a “revolution” in New York City.

“He took it on,” Tisch said. “He took it on in forceful ways. He committed resources to it as never before. But it’s not perfect, and why do we have to go from failure to perfect? Is that the only barometer by which we judge ourselves?”

The Legacy Letters:

an inspirational collection of letters from
Family Members to Loved Ones WHO PERISHED on 9/11 IS RELEASED

All proceeds support Tuesday’s Children’s programs and services for 9/11 Families

New York, August 15, 2011 – With the 10th anniversary of September 11th approaching, Tuesday’s Children, a non-profit organization dedicated to serving 9/11 families, has compiled a deeply compelling collection of letters by 9/11 relatives written to their lost loved ones.

For details, click here: Letters

Warren Buffett’s Tax Dodge

OPINION

Barney Kilgore, the man who made the Wall Street Journal into a national publication, was once asked why so many rich people favored higher taxes. That’s easy, he replied. They already have their money.

That insight is worth recalling amid the latest political duet from President Obama and Warren Buffett demanding higher taxes on “millionaires and billionaires.” Mr. Buffett is repeating his now familiar argument this week, coinciding with Mr. Obama’s Midwestern road trip on the economy. Since the media are treating Mr. Buffett as a tax oracle, let’s take a closer look at some of the billionaire’s intellectual tax dodges.

• The double tax oversight. The Berkshire Hathaway magnate makes much of the fact that he paid only 17.4% of his income in taxes, which he considers unfair when salaried workers often pay more. But Mr. Buffett makes most of his income from his investments, in particular from dividends and capital gains that are taxed at a rate of 15%.

What he doesn’t say is that much of his income was already taxed once as corporate income, which is assessed at a 35% rate (less deductions). The 15% levy on capital gains and dividends to individuals is thus a double tax that takes the overall tax rate on that corporate income closer to 45%.

This onerous tax on capital is a U.S. competitive disadvantage in the global economy, which is why Congress agreed in 2003 to cut the rates on dividends and capital gains. Even as the rest of the world is cutting tax rates on corporate income, Mr. Buffett wants to raise U.S. rates in a way that would make America less attractive for investment. Under a sensible tax reform, the feds would impose either a corporate tax or a dividend and capital gains tax, but not both.

• The middle-class bait-and-switch. Like Mr. Obama, Mr. Buffett speaks about raising taxes only on the rich. But somehow he ignores that the President’s tax increase starts at $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. Mr. Obama ought to call them “thousandaires,” but that probably doesn’t poll as well.

The President needs to levy his tax increase at such a lower income level because that’s where the money is. In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers reported income above $1 million and they paid $178 billion in taxes. A mere 8,274 filers reported income above $10 million, and they paid only $54 billion in taxes.

But 3.92 million reported income above $200,000 in 2009, and they paid $434 billion in taxes. To put it another way, roughly 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama’s plan aren’t millionaires, and 99.99% aren’t billionaires.

Mr. Buffett says it’s only “fair” to raise his taxes, but he’s lending his credibility to raising taxes on millions of middle-class earners for whom a few extra thousand dollars in after-tax income is a big deal. Unlike Mr. Buffett, those middle-class earners aren’t rich and may earn $250,000 for only a few years of their working lives. How is that fair?

• The charity loophole. For billionaires like Mr. Buffett, the single most important deduction in the tax code is for charitable giving. Middle-class earners can’t give nearly as much money away to reduce their overall tax burden. Yet we don’t hear Mr. Buffett calling for the elimination of that deduction in the name of fairness.

Mr. Buffett has also already sheltered the bulk of his fortune from federal taxes by putting them into a foundation that will give the money away. That’s an act of generosity, but if the government’s purposes are so vital, why doesn’t he simply give the money to the IRS?

Rebecca Quick of CNBC put that question to Mr. Buffett in 2007. His answer: “Well, that’s a choice and it’s an option . . . If I had to give it to a single individual, or make some young Buffett a multibillionaire, or give it to the government, I’d absolutely give it to the government. I think that on balance the Gates Foundation, my daughter’s foundation, my two sons’ foundations will do a better job with lower administrative costs and better selection of beneficiaries than the government.”

Mr. Buffett is no doubt right about the relative efficiency of private donors, but should billionaire philanthropists get such a large tax preference? Another case of fairness?

Mr. Buffett is one of the great stock-pickers of his time, and we don’t begrudge him a single dollar of his wealth. We only wish that, having already made himself rich, he weren’t so intent on making it harder for others to become rich too. If he’s worried about being undertaxed, we’d suggest he simply write a big check to Uncle Sam and go back to his day job of picking investments.

James Zadroga Act Protects 9/11 First Responders

By Nicholas Kapustinsky

It took nearly ten years and the sustained effort, spirit, and sacrifice of one of the broadest coalitions in New York’s history and on December 22, 2010 the hard work paid off as the U.S. Congress finally passed the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. The bill provides desperately needed medical monitoring, treatment, and compensation to 9/11 first responders, lower Manhattan area residents, workers, volunteers, and students who were exposed to the toxins at Ground Zero on 9/11 and in the aftermath. The bill provides $4.3 billion funding for health and compensation over five years.

James Zadroga was a New York Police officer whose participation in rescue and recovery operations in the rubble of the World Trade Center and consequent exposure to toxic chemicals resulted in a respiratory disease that eventually led to his untimely death in 2006. The passage of the bill into law in 2010 represented a culmination of years of hard work and sustained partnership.

BALCONY, the Business and Labor Coalition of New York, was a staunch supporter of the Zadroga Bill and compensation and treatment programs. In 2006, partnering with NYCOSH, the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health, whose work in championing this cause was invaluable, BALCONY released a series of TV and radio PSAs featuring the Actress Sigourney Weaver, Director Jim Simpson, and the late Boxing Champ José Torres. The PSAs urged the residents of lower Manhattan and 9/11 first responders to register for possible workers compensation benefits.

L – R: Lou Gordon, Jim Simpson, Bruce Ventimiglia, José Torres, Sigourney Weaver

The 9/11 coalition was led by President Denis Hughes and Suzy Ballantyne of the New York State AFL-CIO, Dr. James Melius of LECET, NYC Firefighters Union President Steve Cassidy, and Mt. Sinai Medical Center. Following the passage of the law, Denis Hughes expressed his relief, “With today’s vote, Congress has made the initial down payment on our debt to this nation’s heroes.” As America approaches the 10th anniversary of the attacks, Mr. Cassidy emphasized the critical importance of the law saying, “we still have sick firemen, firemen who are dying…we needed this.”

Zadroga Law sponsors: Rep. Jerry Nadler, Senator Charles Schumer,
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, and Rep. Carolyn Maloney

Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), prime sponsor of the House Bill (HR 847) said of its passage, “Congress kept its promise to “never forget” by overwhelmingly passing [this bill] into law.” Representative Jerry Nadler (D-NY) echoed that sentiment, “Members of the House put aside politics and made history by voting in favor of justice and care for the first responders and survivors of 9/11.”

A Senate version of the bill (S1334) passed shortly thereafter. “This victory lap saves lives,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). “This was the American people…demanding a response and demanding we stand by our heroes and their families,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).

BALCONY Director, Lou Gordon stated “The shared struggle and sacrifice of those who fought so hard to see the Zadroga bill passed symbolized the sacrifice of what first responders did at Ground Zero. They found common ground and did what’s right.

President Barack Obama signed the Zadroga Bill into law on January 2, 2011.

The Zadroga Law went into effect on July 1, 2011 “It delivers on the promise we made to the heroes of Ground Zero. These designated Centers of Excellence will ensure a seamless transition and the continuity of care critical to our responders and survivors,” stated Rep. Peter King (R-NY), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and a prime sponsor of the Zadroga Law.

Stop Coddling the Super-Rich

By WARREN E. BUFFETT

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.

The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)

I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.

Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.

Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.

But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.

Warren E. Buffett is the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.

Ex-Gov. Hugh Carey: A ‘great New Yorker’

Two-term governor acted to rescue state during 1970s economic crisis

By Frank Eltman, Associated Press

From left, former NY Gov. Mario Cuomo, George Petaki, Gov. Andrew Cuomo, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Sen. Chuck Schumer.

NEW YORK — He knew the words to many an Irish ballad, raised 14 children in his Brooklyn home and considered Frank Sinatra a friend.

Former Gov. Hugh Carey’s “larger than life” personality was celebrated by friends, family and political acquaintances — both friends and foes — at a funeral Mass on Thursday at St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

Although he is credited with leading New York out of an economic crisis as governor in the 1970s, Carey also was remembered as a World War II Army colonel who liberated concentration camps; a savvy lawmaker whose tenure on the House Ways and Means Committee prepared him for the economic challenges he would later face in Albany; and a compassionate chief executive who never turned his back on the underprivileged.

The seven-term Democratic congressman, who was governor from 1975 to 1982, died Sunday at the age of 92.

Democrats, including U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, former Gov. Mario Cuomo and his son Andrew — the current governor — U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel and former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, were joined by Republicans, including former Gov. George Pataki, former U.S. Sen. Alfonse D’Amato, former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and U.S. Rep. Peter King of Long Island.

“We’ve all been to too many tragic funerals,” Pataki said after the service, which was attended by about 1,500 people. “This is one where we could momentarily set aside the sadness of the loss and appreciate and enjoy the wonderful life and the wonderful service of a great New Yorker.’

Despite being a well-known public figure, it was Carey’s large family who took center stage at the service, and in his life.

One of Carey’s grandchildren performed an original song, “The Ballad of the Great Hugh Carey,” on a guitar, five of his children spoke of their father’s lifetime of service, and 31 of his grandchildren and great-grandchildren carried communion and wine to the altar during the service.

“Hugh Carey was a political leader par excellence,” Cardinal Edward Egan said. “Never in my lifetime has this beloved nation of ours so urgently needed to learn the lessons of faithful and loving married life that Helen and Hugh quietly and powerfully taught us all.”

Former Gov. Cuomo called Carey “the most effective governor in our modern history.”

“He, in fact, saved New York City in the ’70s,” Mario Cuomo said. “When he saved New York City, he saved New York state. He protected the honor of the whole country. Imagine what Moscow would have said if New York City went bankrupt.”

Koch said he always enjoyed working with Carey. “He had a terrific sense of humor,” Koch said. “And he had a marvelous Irish tenor.”

Schumer said of Carey: “His family, his faith and his community were what gave him the strength to do what he did.”

Carey took office on Jan. 1, 1975, amid the worst economic climate since the Great Depression. New York City was nearing bankruptcy, threatening to bring the Empire State down with it.

Declaring the “days of wine and roses are over,” Carey took drastic action, seizing control of the city’s finances, engineering more than $1 billion in state loans and mustering the backing needed to reorganize its shaky finances and restore confidence.

He then won federal loan guarantees from the reluctant Republican administration of President Gerald Ford that secured the plan. Ford’s hesitancy made front-page news, immortalized in the paraphrased New York Daily News headline: “Ford To City: Drop Dead.”

His daughter, Marianne Carey Hayes, said her father was willing to share credit for his accomplishments during the financial crisis. “He was always quick to point out it was due to an incredible team he put together,” she said.

Carey also campaigned successfully for the appointment, rather than election, of judges to the state’s highest court, a move that was seen as insulating the Court of Appeals from politics.

Before he became governor, Carey spent 14 years in Congress representing his Brooklyn district.

Hugh Leo Carey was born in Brooklyn in 1919. He left St. John’s College in 1939 and fought in the infantry in World War II with the 104th Division in France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany.

Carey and his first wife, Helen, had 14 children. Two sons died in a car accident in 1969, and Helen, who had cancer, died in 1974.

His accomplishments were sometimes overshadowed by gaffes, however, such as an offer to drink a glass of toxic PCBs to downplay contamination of a state office building.

His 1981 marriage to millionaire Evangeline Gouletas was troubled from the start. Carey’s new bride had said she was twice married and her first husband had died; the truth was she had been married three times and all her exes were still alive. Carey and Gouletas divorced in 1989.

Living Longer But Paying More

State wants to use actuarial tables that would cost retirees
By Rick Karlin

ALBANY — State employees on the cusp of retiring have some good news and some bad news. In the first category: They will live longer.

That’s according to the actuarial tables that offer statistical predictions of life span. According to the latest tables the state wants to use, a public employee who retires at age 55 will likely live to be 83. Earlier estimates had those retirees living only until age 78.

The bad news is that longer life span will likely translate into higher health insurance costs for those workers who “banked” a lot of unused sick time with the aim of using it to offset their retiree health insurance costs.

To understand the nexus between life expectancy and sick leave credits, one has to be familiar with the intricacies of state employee insurance plans. Currently, those who retire from state service can continue to keep their health insurance at the same rates paid by the currently employed.

For instance, a person covered under the popular Empire Plan would be charged $59.23 per month for individual coverage or $250.12 for a family, according to a recent bulletin from a major union, the Public Employees Federation.

That’s based on the employee paying 10 percent or 25 percent of the premium, respectively.

But many retirees actually pay less because they can bank unused sick days. Upon retirement they can apply the value of these sick days toward the cost of their premiums.

But starting with those who retire on or after Oct. 1, the state wants to update the actuarial tables to reflect the longer life spans. That means those sick day credits would have to be stretched over a longer period of time, thus raising the net price that retirees pay after their sick time credits are used.

A 55-year-old with 100 days of unused banked sick time, for example, would see their credit change from $92.16 to $74.11 per month. While that person would have to pay another $18.05 on a $250.12 family premium under the popular Empire Plan, others can conceivably continue to get fee coverage if they had enough sick days credits to offset the insurance cost. Employees can use up to 200 unused sick day credits.

The new tables were outlined in a PEF memo sent last month.

While there’s little disagreement that people are living longer, there is some confusion over whether the new tables would be automatically triggered by approval of the new five-year contract that PEF and another major union, the Civil Service Employees Association, have tentatively accepted pending ratification votes.

The PEF memo said that the new tables would go into effect if the contract is approved.

“Our position is it couldn’t be imposed (by the state),” PEF spokeswoman Darcy Wells said of the new higher-cost tables. “It’s a negotiated benefit.”

CSEA officials agree that it’s a contractual matter, but they say the new tables — which are addressed in the tentative contract — provide protections against an even costlier deal the governor’s office might impose.

“Civil Service has the ability to update that table and they haven’t done it for a number of years,” said CSEA spokesman Stephen Madarasz. He said the Cuomo administration earlier in the year planned to update the tables, which led to them becoming a bargaining point in contract negotiations.