Hawley weighs in on 'the good, the bad and the ugly' aspects of budget extentions

Hawley claims amongst the bad 'raided $80 million from the Environmental Protection Fund.'

Then claims amongst the good 'the reopening of state parks.'

He forgets to mention that the former allowed the latter to happen. Apparently he gets to be on both sides of an issue.

As far as the budget process is concerned, Democrats running for State Senate and Assembly from this region have a plan to restructure New York's budget process and require, by law, an on-time budget. What are Hawley's plans to fix the problems?

Chris,
What took you so long? Hawley has a post and you speak for your candidates. When will CM post here on his own. I'd like him to comment on:

The state proposal on wood boilers
The proposal on re licensing pistol permits every 5 years
What would he do to end the budget embarrassment.

By the way, there is already a law for an on time budget. They just don't obey it. Any idea how your candidates would get it enforced if Mr. Silver does not want it enforced (like this year)?

Constitutional Convention John. See Andrew Cuomo's New NY Agenda.

I've posted Chris's email address here a few times now. You're welcome to ask him those questions personally.

I'll only support a constitutional convention if no elected officials are allowed to attend, nor any government employee.

The idea of the convention was brought up long before you had CN as candidate to run. I thought CM had a new idea.

And,Baron's having an email is not the same as his posting at least a statement on this site.

While your good at speaking for him, he'd probably do better.

John, you have questions and the means to get them answered. Statements will come soon enough, but not in the comment section of this, or any other website.

Chris, You may be doing your candidate as much harm as good here. Mr. Barons is starting to look like a very "handled" candidate.

Just sayin'...

It seems like the very forum that gave C.M. his voice has seen him go completely silent since announcing his desire to run.

I have to say that Mike Weaver makes a very valid point.
I have sent an e-mail and received a response from Mr. Barons, however that does not change the fact that he seems to have come under the control of the Democratic party. And what they say goes. It would be nice to have an un-handled dialogue with all the candidates not just Mr. Barons.

Hey Howard maybe you can do a special online candidates debate. That way it wouldn't be the exclusive attention that Chris is fighting so hard to avoid.

Jeremiah, the politicians that interest me the most are those who recognize the new transparency of the digital era. They just jump into the conversation and don't hide behind handlers. This is an open forum. That's all either candidate needs. If neither want to take advantage of that, then that tells us something about them.

If you're an open and honest candidate, you're not going to hide behind handlers, nor will you fear engaging voters in an honest and free dialogue.

If you're an open and honest candidate, you don't need me to moderate an online discussion.

Jeremiah,

You said you received a response to your email, you're welcome to share that response.

You should all feel free to complain about Chris not posting here, but I would hope you'd extend that same frustration in Mr. Hawley's direction as well.

Chris

I did complain about Hawley not posting here and I believe Howards post was non to subtle about it as well.

I would welcome all the candidates to engage some of their constituents in a dialogue on a medium that has become the equivalent of hanging out in front of the general store.

I'll post the response I received tomorrow. Off to bed for now.

I'm sorry I assumed that when C.M. announced his candidacy, he would utilize this forum. He was always expressing an opinion, and sharing valuable information. It was part of the appeal to find out more about him when he announced he was running.
Chris, your point about Mr. Hawley not posting is a moot point. He never posts here. That is who he is, and that is his loss. Perhaps if he saw the value in open communication with his constituents, he would take advantage of the internet.
November is a long way away. I certainly hope Mr. Barons comes back, and stops heeding the advice of the status quo. One of the major appeals to me about C.M., he is walking the walk. He's done a bunch of talking about "Hypocrite Hawley", now he's attempting to back it up.
If you are reading this C.M., please return to our forum, and share with us. Don't be just another candidate, or a puupet on a string. Do what you do best, BE YOURSELF!
Chris C., you guys haven't won in the past with your current strategy of "handling" the candidates. Why don't you change it up and allow your candidates free reign? The idea of an open, transparent candidate is very appealing.

We offered Howard the opportunity to have running debates between Barons and Hawley right here on The Batavian. The idea was that Howard or the users here would select topics and Mr. Barons and Mr. Hawley could discuss them with limited interruption from other users. The reason for limited interruption was simply that the candidates should be able to engage eachother without being lampooned by people who have no desire other than to see them fail. For example, Mr. Hawley shouldn't have to spend his whole day putting up with me; it would detract from the debate between the people running for office.

Howard has declined this opportunity.

Chris, the offer was that I would start a topic and then ONLY Hawley and Barons could participate in the conversation.

I rejected that because it's not transparent, it's not an open dialogue, it's not a conversation. It also insults readers by assuming that only the elite politicians can be informed and civil and properly address each other.

Anything less than a full, open dialogue/conversation subverts what The Batavian is about.

Bottom line, Barons is now being "handled". And, like it or not, Chris has become his spokesman

It's an open dialogue between the two people running for office, it's a comparison of ideas between two people, one of whom will be sitting in Albany making decisions about those issues next year, and it would have been driven by the questions and concerns of the people here.

I'm his campaign manager John, and I like it very much. If you miss Chris' posts, tell Howard to set up the debates. If you want to know how Chris feels about the issues, just ask him; he'll tell you.

We'll be setting up better ways for everyone in the 139th to have access to Chris just as soon as we get finished making an official campaign announcement.

BaronsNYAssembly@aol.com

I understand where you're coming from Howard, but if a closed forum is a way to get the candidates to discourse, that wouldn't be all bad. The candidates can debate a topic, we can comment and ask questions after they are done and if the candidates choose to engage or not, like you said that will tell us a lot about them.

Two people talking with everybody else excluded is not an open dialogue. It's closed and elitist. That's how old media does things, not new media.

Dave, I hear what you're saying, but it just runs counter to my principles.

My dream is that some day it won't even be a second thought that candidates engage in the conversation on The Batavian. If I compromise my principles just to appease C.M. Barons, then I kill that dream. This is about more than just this election or these two candidates.

There is just simply no reason either candidate can't jump into the conversation any time they want and I'm not going to give them a crutch for avoiding what I consider their responsibility to participate.

And, of course, we'll continue to publish their press releases, etc., as appropriate to the news and timing considerations. So it's not like you won't be hearing from them. If they don't do the right thing and participate, then you just miss out on the chance to have an open conversation with them about the issues.

I looked back at previous posts to see how CM felt on some issues and was dismayed to find that he edited his posts after he announced his decision to run. What's up with that? His idea or yours Chris?

Chris has always edited his posts on The Batavian for the sake of clarity but the content is never changed. He has done this since he began posting here, it's one of the pitfalls of being a self-editing author, nothing is ever good enough or safe from a grammatical tweak or two.

He would tell you that his book took a few months to write and three years to edit.

Again, I understand Howard, not trying to criticize just throwing in my 2 cents. Also as I have said many times: "be true to yourself", stay with your standards. And, you're right anybody can jump in here whenever they want. As long as they use their real name, of course.

I suppose something should be clarified here as well. Chris hasn't ruled out doing blog posts, much in the style of a letter to the editor.

It's the constant and never ending engagement in the comment section that ends up looking like media favoritism.

Chris said "It's the constant and never ending engagement in the comment section that ends up looking like media favoritism. "

That might be a valid point if this was a restricted site with an invitation necessary to contribute. However, Mr. Hawley would have every right to post here as well, and I believe if he viewed his opponent engaging in open, real time conversation, he might feel compelled to do the same.

JoAnne,
Did he just tweak prior posts, or did he change his positions?

Bud, sorry I don't think I was clear enough there. I didn't mean that this site would be favoring a candidate, I meant that the candidate would6 be perceived to be favoring one media outlet over another.

He tweaked John, not content, but clarity. He's been doing that for the two years he's been posting on The Batavian.

Chris,
While I appreciate that you are CM's spokesman, I didn't know you were JoAnne's also. I would like her opinion.

"I meant that the candidate would6 be perceived to be favoring one media outlet over another."
So, what? I'm sure CM wants to be fair, but other types of media have different formats. Just because this particular media drills down further than other styles isn't a reason to shun it. Just my humble, pedestrian opinion, but if CM runs his campaign in the newspapers in Genesee and Orleans counties, he won't stand a chance. You need an edge, to put it bluntly, here it is and noone can accuse CM of being a Johnny-come-lately Batavian contributor.

Dave,

Chris intends to continue doing blog posts here. It's just the comment section that won't be utilized. Not really that big a deal.

Isn't it the "comments" feature and the interaction it promotes that makes this site what it is?

Chris, you are backing a man who gained interest because of his openness in a public forum. Instead of letting him be the man he is, you are making him appear to be handled. I realize CM has no attachment to downstate establishment Democrats but, that is exactly what people will believe.

There is very little chance of CM being elected as a Democrat in this area, that should be news to no one. CM should embrace who he is and grab every bit of free press he can before it is too late. He has no choice. He should be commenting on every public forum that will allow it.

Dave,
Yes it is the comment section that makes this site so popular.

Yup, and Chris is gonna blog so you folks have something to comment about.

The standard practice of bloggers is to make a blog post and then defend, expand, respond, clarify in a multi-way dialogue with readers in the comments.

Are you saying that C.M. Barons is going to take the more constrained, from-on-high, old-media approach of "here's my post, don't care what you say about it, I'm above too above it to respond?"

He's just going to post and then expect others to talk among themselves without responding?

Chris Barons isn't a blogger Howard, he's a candidate for the New York State Assembly.

If he's making a blog post, he's a blogger. The whole idea of the blog format is to be conversational.

Chris, isn't it his goal to win the seat?

You have to understand that without a game changer, CM will lose.

What has CM done to have earned a seat in Albany? Has he held a lower public office? What were his accomplishments in that term? Has he built a company from the ground up? How many jobs did he create? What did he do for the stock price of that company?

What sets CM apart besides blogging on this site?

To answer your question John...I don't know if the posts were edited for content or clarity. They were originally written over a year ago and I was not on the Batavian then. One issue was about farm subsidies as I recall.

Chris...if CM blogs...he's a blogger.

So basically CM is going to publish his own press releases..aka..blog.. on the Batavian so he can reserve the right to edit them at a later date.

Chris,
Why edit blog posts that are a year old? I can see tweaking something written even a month ago, but a year. This just doesn't sound right.

Mr. Barons' ideas will speak for themselves. You are welcome to judge them on their own merits.

Please feel free to contact Chris personally if you have questions.

BaronsNYAssembly@aol.com

Deleted by poster.

Jeremiah,
Thanks for posting his comments. I am waiting for him to answer my email, and I'll post it also.

I see a flaw in his answer to #2 . We already have a legal mandate to have an on time budget, so how will his making another one make a difference?

As for #3, if Mr. Silver says no, its no. How will he get the Speaker to allow non-partisan alliances

Here are two questions emailed to CM Barons yesterday, and his answers:

1) Do you support the Assembly bill to re license pistol permits every 5 years?

"I'm not aware of any current effort to enact 5-year renewals of pistol permits. Assembly Bill 801A, sponsored by State Assemblywoman Amy Paulin (D-8), requiring five-year renewals on pistol licenses; its companion bill Senate Bill 1598, sponsored by State Senator Eric Schneiderman (D-31). The bill was introduced in 2009- passed Assembly and died in the Senate. I know Pataki tried to institute such legislation in 2004. My position on pistol permit renewals: money-grab, I oppose it; to keep handgun ownership info up-to-date, I might support it. If my gun is stolen, I have a way to identify it as belonging to me, including keeping the owner's address up to date. I do not agree with some new avenue for parting citizens from their hard-earned dollars".

2)Do you support the proposed wood boiler bill?

"This is not a bill; this will be a regulatory statute under the DEC. As I have not seen the statute in its entirety, I can only comment in general terms. New York is not the only state to react to SOME wood burning boilers. Some New England states have outright banned them. The problem with SOME of these stoves- they are poorly designed and function as smudge pots blanketing whole neighborhoods in a sooty, low-lying cloud. The negative health impact of faulty designed boilers derives from the large-particle smoke produced by incomplete combustion. Before making a decision on this regulation (I believe there will be hearings and input sought prior to enactment) it would be helpful to know how many units are actually out of compliance, what models require modification and how costly the modifications are. As I understand it- there are multiple issues: flue pipe height, combustion chamber design and damper design. All stoves may not have the same or all of the issues. Possibilities to mitigate financial impact on those who have invested in such heating systems: 1) grandfather those units already in operation, 2) require manufacturers of non-conforming units to modify those units at their cost, 3) allow owners of non-conforming units a grace period to make the modifications and spread costs over time, 4) have different levels of compliance depending on population densities in affected area, 5) offer a tax credit for modifying non-conforming stoves".

Here is what I wrote back.
#1) There are already provisions under the law to keep handgun ownership up to date, so there is no valid reason to support it. This law has been brought back and I am sure you saw Halley's comments on it.

#2) To me, the only acceptable resolution would by your #1. The others either make the owner who bought a unit in good faith and within the law to pay (your #3) or pass the cost to others (#2 & 5)
Your #4, for new units makes no sense. For new units, one standard is all that is needed.

John and Jeremiah, you've played right into Chris(the candidate) and Chris(the campaign manager) hand. By posting e-mail responses as Chris C. challenged, you've given C.M. TheBatavian forum but on his terms. If people keep posting his e-mail responses, we won't get the open dialogue, conversational format that TheBatavian is known for. What we will get is carefully crafted campaign mailings.

I was thinking the same thing Jeff.

Me, too.

You're probably right, but then again, he is not going to come on anyway the way he used to. In fact, he has a post saying that.