Only In New York?

Only In New York?

[This letter was published in The New York Post on Tuesday July 10, 2007]

Are the abuses of police powers by Governor Spitzer unique to New York?
("Abuse of Power?" Editorial, New York Post, July 5, 2007, page 26) At least in
Albany there are some powerful Republicans like Joe Bruno to fight back. In some
places e.g., Massachusetts there is one-party rule. Similar police abuses
are customary with no Republican Party to oppose them.
As in Albany, the new Massachusetts Governor promised change and he is
doing business as usual. Is this something that is common to all politicians? Or
is it something in the New York water?
--
Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

AN ABUSE OF POWER?

New York Post
Editorial

July 5, 2007 -- So now comes word that the New York State Police, at the direction of Gov. Spitzer's office, undertook a detailed surveillance of Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno.
The surveillance appears to have culminated in a selectively leaked story published in an upstate newspaper meant clearly to undermine Bruno in his on-going battles with Spitzer.

Which it clearly has done.

Post State Editor Fredric U. Dicker reports this morning that detailed State Police records have been kept of Bruno's travels around the city. It was those records that apparently served as the basis for the newspaper story - which appeared last Sunday in the Albany Times-Union.

No such records have been kept on the travels of Spitzer and Lt. Gov. David Paterson.

It hardly needs to be said that the application of police powers to serve political ends is antithetical to American traditions, values and law.

If, in fact, Spitzer sicced troopers on Bruno, the governor's effectiveness will be significantly constrained. As it is, the boorishness that has characterized his administration almost from the beginning has all but hamstrung state government, rendering the governor's ambitious reform agenda moot.

In May, at the height of the governor's battles with Bruno, troopers began keeping records of the majority leader's use of a state helicopter and ground transportation for a number of trips he made - but not that of any other state officials. The cops say they have no separate documentation of any trips by Paterson or Spitzer himself - although Spitzer acknowledges having used state aircraft and vehicles.

Yesterday, gubernatorial spokesman Darren Dopp said Bruno got special attention after Conservative Party Chairman Michael Long - often at ideological loggerheads with Bruno - said that the lawmaker was bringing armed troopers to fund-raising events.

Long flatly denied that.

Obviously, somebody is not telling the truth.

Where the story goes from here is anybody's guess. To term the entire matter bizarre would be to understate the case.

What seems clear, however, is that Spitzer & Co. ordered the police to track Bruno's travel methods and compile records - and then suggested that the Times-Union request those records, which it did under the Freedom of Information Law - resulting in the paper's story Sunday.

If Bruno did nothing wrong - and from what's on the record now, it appears that he did not - then the dust-up over the trips pales before the larger question:

Did Eliot Spitzer, or someone acting at his direction, in fact order state troopers to undertake a surveillance of Joe Bruno in an effort to gain political advantage?

Parallels with other abuses of police power by politicians spring to mind. If Spitzer wants to avoid spending the coming months - if not years - attempting to govern under such a cloud, he would do well to commission an independent investigation of the facts already on the record, and of those which might come later.

This is an extraordinarily serious matter. It must be attended to forthwith.