2012: What does Cuomo’s revolution bring to New York State? Gotham’s Brad Gerstman breaks it down, line by line on Long Island’s News12:

Roslyn, NY May 18, 2011

Brad Gerstman, a lawyer, co-founder of Gotham Government Relations, radio talk show host, potential political candidate and head of Gerstman for the People is sad to announce that the Republicans, who control the House of Representatives, are playing politics with the safety of the citizens of the New York Metropolitan area. The Republicans are seeking cuts to security spending all in an attempt to find additional spending cuts.

“I believe that if the proposed cuts in security funding by the Republican controlled House of Representatives were to be enacted it would cause the New York Metropolitan area to have to cut back on security measures, this would have a negative impact on all New Yorkers because New York is seen as the face of America to the world and candidly because of our large vibrant Jewish population and our many cultural and religious institutions and centers including our synagogues.

Just last week on May 11, 2011, the New York City Police Department stopped an attempted plot to launch terrorist attacks on synagogues throughout New York City. New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly last week while discussing one of the men involved in the terrorist plot said that the man “was motivated to a great extent by a pathological hatred of the Jewish people.”

It is clear to me that since New York City and its suburbs have the greatest density of those practicing the Jewish faith outside of Israel, this area is and will continue to be at high risk of a terrorist attack. Any cuts to security spending will further increase the likelihood of a successful terrorist attack here in New York.

I think it is more than appropriate to remind all the Republicans in the House of Representatives not to play politics with the safety of New Yorkers. I would think that Congressman Eric Cantor, who holds an important leadership position in the Republican controlled House, would fully appreciate that those of Jewish descent are too often the target of terrorist attacks and that as such this is not a subject for bean counting or partisan gamesmanship. Ultimately Republicans must remember that “just because Osama Bin Laden has been killed, it doesn’t mean terrorism will cease to exist.”

Source: Brad Gerstman of Gerstman for the People

How can any sports athlete at Hofstra University feel safe considering the decision by the University to terminate their successful football program in order to provide more educational scholarships? A football program at most universities has its ups and downs, unfortunately losing money at times, and this applies to all athletic programs at a university. However, Hofstra took a drastic approach by terminating its football program where other universities would have found a way to restructure and renew the program, especially a football program where scholarships are involved. If the administration continues with the same logic that the money is better spent for nonathletic scholarships, what Hofstra athlete now or in the future can feel secure in its decision to play for the University?

It is clear that Hofstra president Stuart Rabinowitz doesn’t see the benefits of athletics in terms of its tremendous intrinsic value to a university. All Ivy League Universities and other top schools in the country understand the value of athletic programs to their schools. In fact, from 1937 until recently Hofstra use to understand this value as well. That being the case, how can a wrestling or field hockey recruit from high school roll the dice on Hofstra after it has cut it’s strongest and most highly publicized program without any notice?

A high school recruit need only look at how these football players were treated when the news of the termination was disseminated. The school never even notified the parents of the student athletes. They never provided social guidance or advisory services for the students affected after the news was released. The bad news was provided in a cold statement by the athletic director and then he simply walked out of the room to let the kids fend for themselves.

If I was an 18 year old outstanding baseball player considering coming to Hofstra University to play, I would immediately scratch the school off my list. Why take the risk?

Brad Gerstman is a partner at Gotham Government Relations.

More:

Radio: Brad Talks to WFAN Radio about what Hofstra football means to the school, Long Island and student athletics nationwide.

Video: Hofstra Alumni speak out on the end of football

What do you think? Take our poll…

Our US Attorney General Eric Holder recently announced that terrorist prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, will be tried in the Southern District of New York. The trials will be around the corner from Ground Zero, which is very symbolic in many ways.

That being said, I have two questions to ask. The first is why hold the trial in NYC? My second question, is why are these Guantanamo Bay detainees being tried in Federal District Court instead of Military Tribunals?

Taking a step back for a moment and looking at the general state of New York, one would come to the conclusion that holding these trials in NYC may not be the best idea. We have a floundering economy, New York City and the Federal Government have budget problems and NYC is the biggest American target for future terrorist attacks. Despite these facts, the Obama administration thinks that New York is the best forum for these trials. However, one must wonder whether the Obama administration thought about the cost to New York for the additional security that will be required to have the trials here? Not only will there be security issues but think about the traffic and disruption this will cause in the lives of NYC citizens who are simply trying to live their day to day lives and take care of their families. New Yorkers who live and work near where terrorists will be held and tried face additional risks of an attack. Think about the fear each of us New Yorkers felt going over our bridges, riding our subways and trains after September 11th. Does the Obama administration appreciate the fact that those fears will resurface as a result of holding these trials in New York?

If the abovementioned doesn’t make logical sense as to why we shouldn’t have the trials in New York, let’s look at it from a legal standpoint. These Guantanamo Bay detainees, these terrorist, are true enemy combatants and therefore are subject to military tribunal trials. Those who commit war crimes are arrested in environments that are very different from everyday domestic crimes. Since this is the case, rules of evidence in these military tribunals aren’t the same as in our Federal District Courts. Moreover, the rules of discovery in the Federal Courts will likely cause many dilemmas in terms of military secrets and classified information, which again puts American lives at risk. Which begs the question, why place a square peg in a round hole? This situation doesn’t make sense from a legal standpoint and I don’t understand how it makes sense to the Obama administration from any standpoint.

Those who would argue that holding the trials in New York is appropriate because all Americans are tried in the same manner, with a judge and jury, wouldn’t be completely wrong. However, even though this may appear to be the most honest and fair-minded approach, these are crimes that were committed during war. We are offering far too many protection to terrorists that are trying to kill us and our very way of life that offers such protections. To make matters worse, we are doing it in our backyard. The questions is, why us?

As everyone is aware, the people of New York are facing a year end deficit of over 3 billion and a double digit BILLION dollar structural deficit in the next budget year.

Of course our economy is the major source of pain. Tax revenues have been thin and nobody expects a significant turnaround for quite a while.

There is no question that State spending has to be curtailed extensively. Our government spending cannot be sustained which is why the Legislature and Governor have proposed a number of ideas, good and not so good, of areas to make cuts. A number of these areas include very emotional and lightning rod issues, such as education, health care, police, individuals with disabilities and the like.

The people of New York State must brace themselves to face such drastic measures. However, there is a way to avoid the drastic cuts that the Governor and Legislature are discussing. There is a way to increase New York State’s revenue substantially which will reduce the needed cuts that will impact us all.

The State is losing nearly 2 billion dollars a year in tax revenue due to ILLEGAL sales of untaxed cigarettes from the Native American reservations to the general public. These ILLEGAL sales have been putting stores that sell legally and fully taxed cigarettes out of business. These ILLEGAL sales occur via the internet and bootleggers in the black market.

Why are we not pulling together to compel our Governor to enforce the law? It is well settled law that these sales from the Reservations are in fact ILLEGAL. Why do we permit ILLEGAL activities by one group and enforce laws against everyone else? I will tell you the reason is because the Native Americans have openly declared war on NY State if we enforce the law against their ILLEGAL activity. Do we back off drug dealers because they are dangerous? Why would we back off Native Americans that threaten us and force our elected officials to make cuts to many necessary services in our State, some of which the Native Americans benefit from as well.

Let’s collect the nearly 2 billion dollars in tax revenue that we desperately need to avoid the draconian cuts that will be coming down the pike.

By Brad Gerstman

Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago? We all the know the answer and the people spoke with their votes Nov 3rd. Job losses, government cutbacks, government borrowing, no real changes, same partisan fighting…..and the the voters are fed up.

If you look at elections in VA, NJ, Westchester, Upstate NY, NYC, and Nassau County, you will see that people wanted a change. This time change means they want a different party and different person than the one that is currently in the position.

Having had the opportunity to work as an election commentator on RNN, I heard callers explaining the reasons why they voted for the opponent. None could say why they liked the opponent but all were clear in their distaste for the incumbent.

This was a tough election to be an incumbent. Instead of the high re-election rate most enjoy in local elections, the incumbency meant living with a target on their backs. Incumbents were blamed for the horrific economic conditions that exist today.

We can’t look back now but we can look forward to the election in 2010 where so many NYS elected officials and other federal officials will face these angry voters. The question will be whether the anger will continue to will it subside?

By Brad Gerstman

The focus of many Americans is on whether President Obama will add the 40,000 additional American troops requested by the U.S. Military Commanders on the ground or will he resist the pressure to extend the war.

Some argue that “the surge” in Iraq is positive proof that a dramatic increase in troops can turn this war quickly. However, the American people need more information about the current status of the war before we can formulate an educated opinion as to what the right direction will be for our troops and our Country.

In Iraq, the strategy went beyond adding troops. It included forging various alliances with different warring factions, joining forces with Iraqi security troops and spending money to create more alliances on the ground. It was because of this strategy and the increasing of our troop commitment that led to the turnaround in the war.

Something to note is that Afghanistan, unlike Iraq, is roughly the size of Texas and has such unforgivable terrain that many divisions of Soviet forces have been devoured by it. The American public should be educated on the strategy and ultimate goal for Afghanistan in order to better understand a decision by President Obama to send or not to send more troops. It is my opinion, that this critical information should be shared with us, the American people, before we should jump to any conclusions on how many troops to commit, if any at all. Let us remember that 40,000 troops is a drop in the bucket considering the size of Afghanistan.

Brad Gerstman is a partner at Gotham Government Relations

BRADLEY L. GERSTMAN | Friday, June 20, 2008 | Uniondale, NY

Elections at every level of government have a big influence on the business climate.

The ability of businesses to innovate, expand, operate in a reasonable regulatory environment and keep more profits are all impacted at the ballot box.

But how do small businesses ensure that candidates for public office support their needs? Many people mistakenly think all businesses use campaign contributions, PACS, lobbying and even the “old boy” network to achieve their agendas. While this may be more true among larger businesses, small- and medium-size businesses have surprisingly little influence.

A Harris poll taken last February found that a large majority of Americans think big companies have too much influence in Washington. But the same poll also revealed that most people also think small businesses, which represent the bulk of employers in the United States and Long Island, have too little influence.

Remember, the majority of jobs, especially here on Long Island, are generated by medium and small businesses. For the past 15 years, more than nine in 10 U.S. jobs were created by small businesses. Yet, many people take for granted that you can maintain a high rate of employment with quality jobs while at the same time place or permit burdens that inhibit job creation on businesses.

The vast majority of tax revenues, whether they are for payroll, sales, business or real estate, originate from a paycheck. High employment with quality jobs improves overall quality of life, and provides government with the resources to spend on much-needed programs for the general welfare.

Business must be treated less as a special interest group and more as a vital component in maintaining the quality of life in our communities. Too many elected officials are quick to side with voters against the interests of business, even if their actions actually hurt their constituents. Their political instincts tell them to side with “the voters,” rather than businesses, which they view as less influential come election day.

However, the facts are that one-third of the voting population works at, or owns, a small business. Imagine what might happen if small businesses truly spoke with a unified voice, and with their numbers, influenced candidates to adopt a more pro-business agenda?

I guarantee that the debate on issues such as health care, taxes, labor, energy and regulations would look a lot different.