I would argue that its legal because the passage of either bill doesn’t represent a “benefit” to the Legislator himself - as opposed to the current situation where a new position was offered directly to that Legislator (Estrada). Does the office of President Pro Tem come with a raise?
The two Democratic turncoats, Espada and Monserrate, are indeed slimier than most.
Espada lives in a posh suburb of Westchester and not even in his home district of the Bronx. He is currently under investigation for using a health clinic for personal and political reasons. He has years of back fines payable to the Campaign Finance Board related to races as early as 2001. The state has stopped funding some of his non-profits due to “administrative deficiencies” and “misuse of funds”.
Monserrate is even more colorful. He comes to this controversy fresh from slashing his girlfriend with a shiv made out of broken glass. He was indicted in March and if convicted, he will be bounced out of the Senate thanks to to our state constitution. Of course he claims it was an accident.
These two are first class.
Well, there’s certainly a benefit to him in the sense of, “Look, voters, at the pork I bring home!”
But we don’t look at it that way – we assume that, as you hint, the benefit is to the voters. And he might argue that his assumption of the office of President-Pro-Tem is to provide benefit to the voters as well.
Consider a case where two Reps are contending for the office of Speaker. One says, “Vote for me for Speaker, and I’ll support your public works project and make sure it comes to a floor vote.” Legal? Of course it is.
More to the point, it’s non-justiciable.
But that’s not the situation here. The situation here is “Vote for me for Speaker and I’ll make sure you get a bigger office, larger staff, more power, and more access to the press to help with your reelection.” Legal?*
*I’m not arguing that it doesn’t happen exactly that way all the time, just that based on the above-quoted New York law, it starts to shade over to a darker-than-normal gray area.
Oh, you are saying they are perfect choices for the Republican Party! 
I’ve been trying to understand this too. I mean, I’m a New Yorker (and an Albanyite - not a scumbag though, I hope) - and I swear, I understand other politics better than our own. What a joke, and other states are sniggering up their sleeves at us. Le sigh.
Okay, why do you think that’s the point?
Or that the competent court here is not the one of Public Opinion?
I cannot imagine a court ever wading into that area and seeking to make those distinctions. I There’s no problem with traditional bribery, but when it comes to more shades-of-gray conduct like this, it’s simply non-justiciable. So pointing to the law here as proof that it’s bribery is simply useless.
Cite? Link?
What, you don’t believe it happened, BG?
Very funny. 
In a way, I prefer the simple honesty of slashing your SO in the face than, say, the antics of Joe Bruno.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/21/AR2009062101029.html
Keys may be hidden, but Paterson’s going to call 'em back into session. With the judge of the Court of Appeals as a possible President.
Of course I believe it happened; they’re New Yorkers. Still, we have standards here.
And I see that the Democrats have welcomed back with open arms the “more colorful” Monserrate. The GOP has apparently kept the (less colorful?) Espada.
Yup. This whole thing is a real local embarassment presided over by a chump of a governor. The only one who seems to be able to call any shots at all is Golisano.
So, what exactly do you want a cite on, BG? I’ll get it for you.