Cuomo's NY Broadband Pledge Under Audit After Coming Up Short

from the round-and-round-we-go dept

Back in 2015, NY Governor Andrew Cuomo unveiled a Broadband for All pledge the state proclaimed would invest $500 million to ensure statewide broadband access by 2018. The effort was to be funded largely by legal settlements struck with banks after the last recession, with dollar-per-dollar matching pledges by companies promising to deliver speeds of at least 100 Mbps down, 25 Mbps up across the state.

The problem (and tell me if you've heard this one before): ample subsidies and five years later and many New Yorkers say they still can't get even substandard broadband. And according to NY's own data on the project, the "matching funds" promised by industry wound up not materializing the majority of the time:

"Out of 53 broadband projects awarded, only 4 of them matched or exceeded state investment. A further breakdown of the contracts awarded shows that the state focused on addressing a set number of units, or census blocks, to connect. Approximately 256,000 “units” in New York were scheduled to be connected to high-speed broadband."

To pad the stats a bit, NY also deemed that traditional satellite broadband -- rife with slow speeds, high prices, very high latency, and daily usage caps and overage fees -- "broadband." And when local reporters asked the state why they'd given money to satellite providers instead of more reliable fixed fiber providers, the state wouldn't answer:

"A spokesperson from the Broadband Program Office told WGRZ in recent weeks that they ensured these "units" were connected with what they called “enhanced satellite service” with a connection of at least 25Mbps. But the spokesperson wouldn’t comment on why 30% of the units addressed in the program went to a satellite company rather than a provider that offered a fiber-to-the-home solution."

This is, if you're new to U.S. broadband, what the United States does. Politicians get easy brownie points by paying lip service to better, cheaper access. Subsidies fly fast and furiously, then, almost like clockwork, that money doesn't result in the promised outcomes, network improvements routinely wind up half-deployed, and accountability proves hard to come by. Rinse, wash, repeat. It's not hyperbole to suggest that between state and federal subsidies over the last two decades, American taxpayers have probably paid for undelivered fiber to the home service to every home in the country several times over by now.

Yet 42 million Americans remain disconnected during a public health crisis. 83 million live under a broadband monopoly. Tens of millions more live in a duopoly where your only choice is Comcast or a telco DSL line that literally hasn't been upgraded in a decade because doing so wasn't profitable enough, quickly enough, for Wall Street's liking. Regulators and lawmakers inundated with AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon financial affections happily look the other way. Rinse, wash, repeat. Meanwhile, actual people out of reach of service tell the same story, over and over again:

"It’s all a lot of empty promises with no sign of service,” Katy tells Stop the Cap! from her home near Dundee, in the Finger Lakes region of the state. “I’ve lived here since the days when the only phone line you could get was a party line shared with four other homes and I still have my rotary dial phone New York Telephone installed in 1965. These companies don’t want me to forget I am living in the past.”

Katy lives about 500 feet from the nearest address able to subscribe to Charter Spectrum and was quoted $9,000 to extend cable to her home, set far back from the main road. Verizon has never offered DSL in her neighborhood, because she is located too far away from the central office. Her property is set in a small forest, so satellite internet is not a possibility either."

Now, as U.S. kids huddle around Taco Bells just to attend school in a health crisis, the New York State Comptroller’s Office is conducting an audit of the state's Broadband Program to determine, once again, why state, federal, and industry promises mysteriously, routinely, come up short.

Filed Under: andrew cuomo, broadband, broadband for all, digital divide, failed promises, new york

New York's Governor Hands Down A Mask Mandate While The State's Anti-Mask Law Remains On The Books

from the house-divided-against-itself-can-still-disproportionately-arrest-young-black-men dept

The spread of the coronavirus throughout the nation is turning some old laws into new ridiculousness. One of the hardest hit areas in the US is New York, which has nearly 30% of the nation's total cases. This has led to lockdown orders and spread deterrent efforts more severe than seen elsewhere in the country.

One of the new mandates handed down by Governor Andrew Cuomo is a mask requirement when in public. The executive order that went into effect a few days ago says this:

Effective at 8 p.m. on Friday, April 17, 2020 any individual who is over age two and able to medically tolerate a face-covering shall be required to cover their nose and mouth with a mask or cloth face-covering when in a public place and unable to maintain, or when not maintaining, social distance.  

Sounds good and necessary, but as appellate public defender Sam Feldman points out on Twitter, this executive order conflicts with a law that's been around since the middle of the 19th century. That's going to be a problem.

If you can't read/see the tweets, Feldman says the new order does not suspend Penal Law § 240.35(4), which has been in existence since 1845. People trying to follow the executive order may find themselves engaging in criminal behavior. Here's Feldman:

As of 8pm tonight, wearing a mask in public places around other people who are also wearing masks is both forbidden and required by New York law. I'm sure the police will enforce these contradictory mandates in a completely rational & nondiscriminatory fashion.

Here's the law that's still on the books while the governor is mandating mask-wearing:

Being masked or in any manner disguised by unusual or unnatural attire or facial alteration, loiters, remains or congregates in a public place with other persons so masked or disguised, or knowingly permits or aids persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place;  except that such conduct is not unlawful when it occurs in connection with a masquerade party or like entertainment if, when such entertainment is held in a city which has promulgated regulations in connection with such affairs, permission is first obtained from the police or other appropriate authorities…

Perhaps the swiftest (or at least most entertaining) resolution would be for Governor Cuomo to issue an executive order declaring the entire state a "masquerade party" until the COVID-19 threats subsides. It might be the best thing for Cuomo himself, who appears to have run afoul of the law by "knowingly permitting or aiding persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place."

Given the law's origins, maybe it's time to take it off the books. Unlike others in the nation targeting KKK members, this one was a response to the "Anti-Rent War" in which protests by tenants culminated in a battle between anti-renters and local law enforcement. Some protesters disguised themselves as Indians, leading to the anti-mask ordinance. Rent is a pretty hot topic at the moment, what with 22 million Americans now unemployed. With planned rent strikes on the way in New York City, the new mask mandate is likely to run head on into the state's anti-mask law once law enforcement arrives on the scene.

A mask-wearing mandate coupled with an anti-mask law is selective enforcement just waiting to happen. And if it's anything like the last few hundred years of selective law enforcement, it will be minorities who pay the price for conflicting messages. We've already seen this happening elsewhere in the nation, where social distancing mandates are being enforced against minorities who throw parties but ignored when a bunch of white people decide stay-at-home orders violate their god-given right to act as attack vectors during a pandemic. Leaving it up to police officers to decide whether a person wearing a mask is a compliant citizen or a lawbreaker is going to result in a lot of blown judgment calls.

Filed Under: andrew cuomo, anti-mask law, covid-19, executive order, mask mandate, masks, new york

NY Governor Offers Journalists A Gift No Journalist Would Be Interested In Receiving

from the stop-trying-to-help dept

File under: Things No One Asked For

In case you can't read/see the tweet, it's New York governor Andrew Cuomo threatening to enact a #JournalistsLivesMatter law -- something no journalist has ever suggested they might want.

Let’s make assaulting the press a felony in New York State. Last year saw heinous and deadly attacks against members of the press, journalists must be protected from the threat of physical harm for just for doing their jobs.

While it's refreshing to see a political figure think someone other than law enforcement might need a little extra protection, sentencing enhancements that only apply when certain people are assaulted or killed is never the answer. The state already has a law against assaulting journalists. It's called assault. And in certain cases, it can be felony. (Which, ironically enough, happens anytime anyone assaults a cop in New York.)

There's no reason for journalists to be afforded extra protections just because of their job. If it doesn't make sense for cops, it doesn't make sense for journalists. A profession is not a race, gender, or religious persuasion. Hate crime laws make very little sense themselves, but at least they address the fact people may be targeted for aspects about themselves they have no control over. Journalists and cops don't need to be journalists and cops. A person's race is not a choice and they can be targeted for abuse and physical attacks simply for being the wrong color.

But there's a disturbing aspect to this proposal you won't find in Blue Lives Matter laws: the government gets to pick and choose who's a journalist. That's something we really don't want the government to be doing because it invites direct intervention in First Amendment protected activities.

We've already seen some legislators attempt to do this while pushing for shield laws. While it's a good idea to leave journalists unmolested by government agencies -- especially in light of Attorney General nominee William Barr's remarks during his confirmation hearing -- the laws allow the government to decide who's a journalist and who can be forced to turn over sources without repercussion.

Journalism is an action as much as it is a profession. WikiLeaks personnel should be eligible for shield law protections as should a local blogger who covers small town political issues. Anyone continuously pestering the government with FOIA requests is engaged in journalism, even if all they do is dump the documents in the public domain with a minimum of commentary. Shield laws -- and Cuomo's severe misreading of the room -- make journalism just a bit riskier by giving the government the power to decide who's qualified to bring you the news.

Filed Under: andrew cuomo, journalism, journalists, journalists lives matter, new york

ICE Performs Warrantless Raid Of Private Farm; Draws Heat From State And Federal Officials

from the 'rule-of-law,'-my-ass dept

A recent ICE raid of a New York farm made national headlines thanks to the agency's apparent disregard for the Fourth Amendment, among other things. The show of force, coupled with the lack of Constitutional compliance, presented ICE as ruthless enforcers of the law. But there's not much respect for the "rule of law" contained in these actions, no matter how the current administration -- with its emphasis on expelling foreigners from the US -- presents itself.

John Collins was standing outside the milk house at his dairy farm this morning when he heard yelling coming from inside. He ran in, he says, and saw his worker, Marcial de Leon Aguilar, pinned up against the window by armed men.

The men did not identify themselves and were screaming at Aguilar, Collins said.

"I run and say, 'What the hell is going on in here?'" Collins said.

Then the men told Collins they were officers with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He asked them for a warrant or some paperwork to explain what they were doing. They had none, he said, so he ordered them to get off his property and leave Aguilar alone.

As this happened, Collins said, Aguilar's children watched. They were waiting nearby for the school bus to come. Collins said the officers put Aguilar in handcuffs and took him across the rural road to their vehicles. At least seven officers had come onto the small farm, Collins said.

This resulted in immediate backlash from prominent New York government officials. Governor Andrew Cuomo sent an angry letter [PDF] to the agency chastising it for its apparent refusal to respect Constitutional protections.

Your agency's aggressive claims of upholding the rule of law belie the fact that the pattern of conduct and blatant constitutional violations committed by both agents in the field and regional leadership actually reflect a readiness to sink to lawlessness.

[...]

The persistent failure of your agents to properly identify themselves or produce required documentation to conduct lawful searches and arrests is illegal and creates significant risk of harm to all New Yorkers, including law enforcement who have also been left unaware of your activities within the communities they are entrusted to protect.

NY Senator Kirsten Gillibrand followed the governor's letter with a demand for a federal investigation.

Unbelievably, ICE thinks its actions -- a warrantless raid conducted on private property -- are Constitutional.

Agents were within their rights to be on the farm and did not need a warrant, ICE spokesperson Khaalid Walls told [Vice Media's Eoin Higgins] in an email. The agency said that its actions were justified because de Leon-Aguilar's wife Virginia, who is enrolled in the Alternatives to Detention program, which allows her to stay out of immigration detention while she goes through immigration court proceedings, had missed a number of appointments.

"After having missed several scheduled reporting dates," said Walls, "the resident was deemed to be out of compliance with the terms of the program, necessitating a home visit, which does not require a judicial warrant."

This is wrong. First of all, the raided farm was private property. Even if a home visit was in order, the home resided on property owned by someone else. This wasn't a rental property with only a door separating residents from the outside world. And this was no "home visit." The plainclothes ICE officers showed up, trespassed on private property, and effected an arrest. No permission to enter was sought and no warrant was presented.

ICE can't honestly say it doesn't need warrants to perform these actions. Its own training manual (published by Unicorn Riot) stresses the need for warrants. Searches still require warrants, even if they're looking for illegal activity. ICE can search businesses for illegal workers, but it still needs "Blackie's" warrants (named after a 1981 case brought against the INS), which allow the government to search for people, rather than property. There is no known warrant exception to intrude on private land to search for illegal workers. ICE may feel the Alternatives to Detention program gives it the right to search homes occupied by members of the program (and it does), but when the home resides on property owned by a US citizen, the barrier to entry remains a search warrant. The immigrant arrested in this case had proper documentation to work and resided in a house owned by John Collins on the Collins' property. To reach the house, ICE had to enter private property owned by someone ICE had zero interest in: a legal resident and American citizen.

The lawsuit that's certain to follow this intrusion will sort out the Constitutionality of ICE's actions. At this point, they appear completely unconstitutional, but qualified immunity and the good faith exception may allow the agency to escape liability for the actions of its officers.

Filed Under: 4th amendment, andrew cuomo, ice, immigration, john collins, kirsten gillibrand, marcial de leon aguilar, new york, private property, warrants

New York Makes Playing Pokemon Go, Other Online Games A Sex Offender Parole Violation

from the grandstanding-is-an-art-form dept

While I don't play Pokemon Go, I've still found the public hysteria surrounding the game to be endlessly entertaining. I've laughed as "get off my lawn" types bitch and moan simply because people are having harmless fun in ways they don't understand. I've chuckled as Pokemon Go players forget that the rules of reality still apply while in augmented reality. And I've laughed at the absurd new lawsuits popping up to try and cash in on the phenomenon.

Continuing the trend of hysterical reactions to a relatively simple game, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo this week took the step of making online games a violation of parole for sex offenders. Not just Pokemon Go....all "similar games," whatever that winds up meaning. In a prepared statement by the Governor, Cuomo insisted that Pokemon Go was a dangerous new avenue allowing sexual predators to prey on helpless tots:

"Protecting New York’s children is priority number one and, as technology evolves, we must ensure these advances don't become new avenues for dangerous predators to prey on new victims," Governor Cuomo said. "These actions will provide safeguards for the players of these augmented reality games and help take one more tool away from those seeking to do harm to our children."

Cuomo also sent a letter to Pokemon Go creator Niantic (pdf) urging the company to help keep Pokemon Go out of the hands of sexual predators:

"The State has taken action to prohibit sex offenders from using this game, but we need your assistance to make certain that sex offenders will not continue to use Pokémon GO by technologically barring their use. Working together, we can ensure that this danger today does not escalate into a tragedy tomorrow."

So yeah, there's obviously a number of huge problems with this. Sex offender registries are already seen as highly controversial and potentially ineffective. The majority of people on them aren't the kind of scary "sexual predators" out to grab kids that the media and politicians like to suggest. In some cases they include people who were caught urinating in public or having consensual sex in semi-public areas. In other words, the vast majority of people on the list have zero interest or likelihood of using the game to go hunting for victims.

On top of that, banning the playing of all online games is a pretty major step in potentially ruining the lives of people trying to get back on track. Banning a specific subset of people from playing Pokemon Go alone would be incredibly difficult, but banning the playing of all online games in an age when even single player games often have an online component? It's quite frankly impossible.

Meanwhile, such a ban would do nothing to stop a child molester from simply hanging out near obvious "pokestops" without ever having to fire up the game.

Cuomo's reaction appears driven by a new report by New York State Senators Jeffrey D. Klein and Diane J. Savino. The report took a list of 100 registered sex offenders across New York City, and compared it to locations where Pokemon Go players gather to fight monsters or collect in-game items. They found 59 instances where a pokéstop or "gym" was within half a block of a sex offenders' home. Granted this being the dense grid that is Manhattan, your chance of being near a sex offender's residence at any given moment is already arguably very high.

In short we're talking about potentially demolishing a life for playing games, using new rules that won't be enforceable anyway. That's before you even get to the potential constitutional questions about the freedom of assembly and due process. All so, let's be honest, Cuomo and other politicians can piggyback on the Pokemon Go phenomenon in order to promote themselves as selfless defenders of tots and toddlers.

Filed Under: andrew cuomo, grandstanding, new york, pokemon go, sex offenders
Companies: niantic

NY Governor Announces App Version Of State's 'See Something, Say Something' Program

from the swipe-left-to-report-as-potential-terrorist dept

Seizing on a terrorist attack halfway around the world, the governor of New York has vowed to make his state safer by adding more bodies to the NYPD's overstuffed counterterrorism units and, as is the style of the time, introduced an app that will allow any New York resident to report anyone with a camera near a public building, bridge, tunnel, parked car, or power line.

"See Something, Send Something" allows anyone to capture suspicious activity as a photo or written note and send the information to the New York State Intelligence Center. From there, the tip will be reviewed and if relevant, sent to the appropriate law enforcement agency. Public service announcements promoting the campaign will be played at DMV offices and service areas along state highways.

By using the app, which can be downloaded for free for iPhone and Android phone users, there is no worry about who to send the tip to or what phone number to call—users can simply send a photo of the suspicious activity using their device’s camera, by choosing a photo from its library, or sending a written note. It also includes information on what to look for and when to report suspicious activity. The service is already available in Colorado, Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia.

The governor's press release reminds New Yorkers that the app is for reporting of suspicious people/objects/actions only and very definitely not for criticizing the government's terrorist hysteria or regaling local DHS Fusion Centers with an assortment of dick pics.

In order to keep the app focused on safety, users should report only suspicious behavior and situations (e.g., an unattended backpack or briefcase in a public place) rather than beliefs, thoughts, ideas, expressions, associations, or speech unrelated to terrorism or other criminal activity.

Well, good luck with that.

The office also reminds users that no matter how often they send messages about the suspicious Muslim listening to ISIS instructions on his headphones with ever-increasing amounts of exclamation points/capital letters, it will never result in local law enforcement instantly arriving to "control the scene."

The app does not replace 911 and should not to be used for someone needing immediate police action or to report an emergency.

Not included in the press release is any disclaimer or warning that "immediate police action" may result in serious injury or death, even (or especially) if impending injury/death is what's hoping to be prevented by the summoning of law enforcement.

The governor's office also links to recommended reading material to better inform would-be See-Senders about the warning signs of potential terrorist activity.

Terrorist cells have been known to record and monitor activities, taking pictures and making drawings.

ALSO: new parents, artists, people with excessive amounts of time on their hands, public sector employees, everyone who possesses a smartphone, etc.

A clarifying note inside the app that will probably be read by no one adds some cautionary wording not found on the NY DHS website.

Taking pictures or video of facilities, buildings, or infrastructure in a manner that would arouse suspicion in a reasonable person…All reporting on photography should be done within the totality of the circumstances.

But acting as an extra set of eyes for a city that has millions of them -- some even located in human skulls -- doesn't just help fight the War on Terror. It also helps fight the War on… Fire.

Being observant supports homeland security and fire prevention efforts.

If nothing else, the app comes highly recommended by someone who watches a lot of cable news programming.

This App was on Cnn, Cnbc, Msnbc.. Due to IsIs we have to do all we can to protect ourselves

The app itself has been around since January 2013. Despite that, it's apparently still only usable in six states. And there seems to be no information available on how many suspicious activity reports the app has generated, much less if it's actually resulted in any attacks prevented.

What it is, though, is "something," the favorite activity of politicians looking to capitalize on tragic events. My Mobile Witness is nothing more than "Do Something: the App." It gives those who feel they need a direct line to local DHS offices something to do with their idle fingers/paranoia and gives the state's top legislator something to say in the wake of the Paris attacks. Everybody wins… except maybe those who are accosted/arrested for whipping out their sketch pad within eyeshot of a public structure.

Filed Under: andrew cuomo, neighbors, new york, overreaction, say something, see something, send something, spying, surveillance, terrorism, trust

The Out And Out Corruption Of Hollywood's State Subsidies

from the needs-an-investigation dept

For many years, we've written about what an incredible scam state tax subsidies to filmmakers are. Various states shove each other aside trying to throw more money at Hollywood, if they just agree to make their films locally. Hollywood insists that these subsidies are good for the states, because they "create jobs." But the details almost always show otherwise. They are almost always a massive loss to the taxpayers. What jobs are created are temporary -- and often filled by people who fly in from out of town. What "downstream" economic benefits are created are marginal at best. Almost every study of these subsidies has found that they lose money overall. And yet, the states keep expanding these programs, sometimes betting pension funds on them.

So the big question has to be: why do states keep throwing money at Hollywood this way?

The answer, it appears, may have an awful lot to do with out and out corruption.

Christopher Koopman recently wrote a post, digging through some of the Sony hack emails, highlighting how this isn't just about states wanting some "Hollywood glamour." There's often some other stuff going on:

In the past few years, film programs across the country have been wracked with criminal charges and convictions. Louisiana is in the midst of a criminal trial against individuals charged with fraudulently collecting more than $1 million in state film tax credits for the creation of a film studio in New Orleans. Massachusetts has faced its own criminal trials over tax credit fraud. And in Iowa, a state audit found $26 million in improperly issued tax credits, and a subsequent investigation resulted in 10 criminal cases and 7 convictions. The state ultimately suspended its program in 2009. Nearly six years later, the state is still in the midst of sorting out the criminal trials surrounding its program.

This corruption has also extended to those in positions of determining how these programs work and who receives the available funds. California is currently in the midst of its own film-subsidy scandal involving a state senator, Ron Calderon, who headed the select committee on film and television and was a member of the California Film Commission. Indicted on 24 felony charges, and facing a maximum sentence of 396 years in federal prison, Calderon is accused of accepted cash bribes from an undercover FBI agent who he thought was associated with an independent film studio. In exchange, he agreed to advocate for an extension of the film tax credits.

And then, of course, there's the fund-raising hook. Hollywood scratches a politician's back? The politician scratches Hollywood's back:

Politicians also use their support for incentives, or the threat of removing them, to induce political contributions for Hollywood beneficiaries. For example, in another Sony an email dated January 6, 2014, NY Governor Andrew Cuomo’s “people” request Sony commit to raising $50k by July of 2014. The email continues, “$50k is a heavy lift since most of it needs to come from individual contributions (only $5k can come from corp.)” There are then several other emails from Sony’s head of government affairs soliciting contributions. In one of them he notes “Thanks to Governor Cuomo, we have a great production incentive environment in NY…Because of all of this, I think it’s important to significantly support his reelection efforts…”

So, notice that there are three parties at work here -- but only two of whom are actually represented. Cuomo gets campaign funds he wants. Hollywood gets tax breaks they want. It's just the taxpayers who aren't represented and get shafted.

And, as Koopman notes, each year the MPAA sends out a celebratory email highlighting just how much the studios have been able to fleece from taxpayers:

As you have requested annually, attached is the State Government Affairs Department Annual Report for 2013. As you will read, this year MPAA saved the member companies collectively an estimated $110.08 million in corporate tax liability on an annual basis and approximately $86 million in potential regulatory, administrative, compliance and legal fees, also annualized, as a result of accomplishing legislative objectives in the states.

Since 2007, the aggregate annual savings secured by MPAA for the member companies in connection with key corporate state tax legislation is approximately $439.08 million. This is a result of the enactment of single sales factor apportionment in California, and New York City as well as favorable advertising and licensing corporate tax sourcing formulas adopted in North Carolina, Michigan, Illinois and Louisiana.

In addition, states awarded an estimated $1.5 billion in production tax credits in 2013, according to the Los Angeles Times, which MPAA either was engaged in enacting or keeping in place. The majority of those credits went to MPAA member companies as a result of motion picture and television location production in various states, with per project savings ranging from 10 to 30 per cent.

We had another successful year thanks to the hard work of Melissa Patack, Angela Miele, Sarah Walsh, Brian Cohen and Carlin Scrudato, as well as all of your tremendous support, engagement, and encouragement. Also, special thanks to the executives on the state tax, legal and IP working groups, whose expertise and involvement is invaluable. As you know, our contract advocates in the 50 states, who are critical to our success, work tirelessly for MPAA and the member companies. Our coalition partners also played major contributing roles, in particular NATO, DGA, SAG, IATSE and Teamsters.

I don't begrudge the MPAA/studios doing this. Of course, they're going to scrounge for free money from the states who are willing to give it. But it seems problematic given how these programs time after time after time have been shown to be massive failures, often leaving states in serious trouble. At the very least, it seems to deserve deeper scrutiny by the public and government officials as to exactly why states are so ready to hand out this kind of money.

Filed Under: andrew cuomo, corruption, hollywood, movie subsidies, subsidies, tax breaks
Companies: mpaa