I care what Jonathan Lippman thinks. Cuomo's opinion has no weight in the matter.  

You frame the question "Just because the Constitution doesn't say you can't do something, does that automatically mean you can?"

But, is the question really "Just because the Constitution doesn't say you can do something, does that automatically mean you can't?"

  Isn't Paterson using powers not explicitly prohbited to him?

I looked at the New York State Constitution, and coupled with what everyone agrees the Public Officers Law says, Paterson (and Sheldon Silver who apparently agrees and maybe even came up with the idea or someone on the Assembly staff  - somebody did) is probably right with this proviso: He has to reappoint Ravitch again on January 1, 2010.  Unless the ;egislature changes the law, but it can't until the Senate meets.

Article V Section I of the State Constitution says that the legislature may provide for how a vacancy in the offices of Attorney general and Comptroller (elected statewide) shall be filled. And they did. Both houses meet togetehr and legislators vote individually - 210 votes. It says no election shall be held for those 2 offices except at the same time as when electing a Governor.

 Article XIII apparently deals with all other offices. Section 3 says that the legislature may provide for the filling of any vacancy - but in the case of elected officials, it can't last beyond the start of the next political year.

 The legislature apparently did pass a law and one of the provisions of the law is, that for any elected official that they did not say how it is to be filled, the Governor can make the appointment alone. 

Putting 2+2 together it looks like the Governor can appoint a Lt. Governor through the next December 31!

This is completely unintended but may be correct.

Attorney genertal Cuomo seems ot be basing his objection on the idea that the Lt Gov's office is already filled - by the Senate President. But his office is NOT filled  it is just that his functions are caried out. But does the senate President collect a salary? Does he have a Lt Gov staff if one is provided by law? No. So the office is NOT filled and it IS vacant.

 The only thing is, this will not settle the deadlock. The Lt Governor can vote in the case of a tie, but he doesn't count as a member of the quorum, and the State Senate has been unable to do any business because a quorum of 32 members has not been formed. 

If the apppiontment is accepted though, at least it gets rid of the issue of Pedro Espada being next in line to the Governor and also acting as Governor any time David paterson ges out of the state even to a wedding in Connecticut. Even for a few hours Es[ppada cod do something.

Biut probably that isn't why the democarts are so intent on not making any concessions.

Because the republicans were not able to do anything, everybody that was on the payroll on June 8 is still on the payroll. Any compromise and 50-100 possibly incompetent patronage hires lose heir jobs 

I looked at the New York State Constitution, and coupled with what everyone agrees the Public Officers Law says, Paterson (and Sheldon Silver who apparently agrees and maybe even came up with the idea or someone on the Assembly staff  - somebody did) is probably right with this proviso: He has to reappoint Ravitch again on January 1, 2010.  Unless the ;egislature changes the law, but it can't until the Senate meets.

Article V Section I of the State Constitution says that the legislature may provide for how a vacancy in the offices of Attorney general and Comptroller (elected statewide) shall be filled. And they did. Both houses meet togetehr and legislators vote individually - 210 votes. It says no election shall be held for those 2 offices except at the same time as when electing a Governor.

 Article XIII apparently deals with all other offices. Section 3 says that the legislature may provide for the filling of any vacancy - but in the case of elected officials, it can't last beyond the start of the next political year.

 The legislature apparently did pass a law and one of the provisions of the law is, that for any elected official that they did not say how it is to be filled, the Governor can make the appointment alone. 

Putting 2+2 together it looks like the Governor can appoint a Lt. Governor through the next December 31!

This is completely unintended but may be correct.

Attorney genertal Cuomo seems ot be basing his objection on the idea that the Lt Gov's office is already filled - by the Senate President. But his office is NOT filled  it is just that his functions are caried out. But does the senate President collect a salary? Does he have a Lt Gov staff if one is provided by law? No. So the office is NOT filled and it IS vacant.

 The only thing is, this will not settle the deadlock. The Lt Governor can vote in the case of a tie, but he doesn't count as a member of the quorum, and the State Senate has been unable to do any business because a quorum of 32 members has not been formed. 

If the apppiontment is accepted though, at least it gets rid of the issue of Pedro Espada being next in line to the Governor and also acting as Governor any time David paterson ges out of the state even to a wedding in Connecticut. Even for a few hours Es[ppada cod do something.

Biut probably that isn't why the democarts are so intent on not making any concessions.

Because the republicans were not able to do anything, everybody that was on the payroll on June 8 is still on the payroll. Any compromise and 50-100 possibly incompetent patronage hires lose heir jobs 

I looked at the New York State Constitution, and coupled with what everyone agrees the Public Officers Law says, Paterson (and Sheldon Silver who apparently agrees and maybe even came up with the idea or someone on the Assembly staff  - somebody did) is probably right with this proviso: He has to reappoint Ravitch again on January 1, 2010.  Unless the ;egislature changes the law, but it can't until the Senate meets.

Article V Section I of the State Constitution says that the legislature may provide for how a vacancy in the offices of Attorney general and Comptroller (elected statewide) shall be filled. And they did. Both houses meet togetehr and legislators vote individually - 210 votes. It says no election shall be held for those 2 offices except at the same time as when electing a Governor.

 Article XIII apparently deals with all other offices. Section 3 says that the legislature may provide for the filling of any vacancy - but in the case of elected officials, it can't last beyond the start of the next political year.

 The legislature apparently did pass a law and one of the provisions of the law is, that for any elected official that they did not say how it is to be filled, the Governor can make the appointment alone. 

Putting 2+2 together it looks like the Governor can appoint a Lt. Governor through the next December 31!

This is completely unintended but may be correct.

Attorney genertal Cuomo seems ot be basing his objection on the idea that the Lt Gov's office is already filled - by the Senate President. But his office is NOT filled  it is just that his functions are caried out. But does the senate President collect a salary? Does he have a Lt Gov staff if one is provided by law? No. So the office is NOT filled and it IS vacant.

 The only thing is, this will not settle the deadlock. The Lt Governor can vote in the case of a tie, but he doesn't count as a member of the quorum, and the State Senate has been unable to do any business because a quorum of 32 members has not been formed. 

If the apppiontment is accepted though, at least it gets rid of the issue of Pedro Espada being next in line to the Governor and also acting as Governor any time David paterson ges out of the state even to a wedding in Connecticut. Even for a few hours Es[ppada cod do something.

Biut probably that isn't why the democarts are so intent on not making any concessions.

Because the republicans were not able to do anything, everybody that was on the payroll on June 8 is still on the payroll. Any compromise and 50-100 possibly incompetent patronage hires lose heir jobs 

There needs to be a Constitutional Convention or a series of voter referendums to fix the mess in Albany.  The first thing they need to do is eliminate the position of Lt. Governor.  As far as I can tell, the Lt. Governor doesn't do anything non-ceremonial except cast tie breaking votes in the Senate and take the governor's phone calls when he is out of state.  It is a waste of taxpayer money to pay for this office.

Simply do three things:

1. Mandate via referendum or constitutional amendment that the Senate must always have an odd number of seats.  Not even.  Odd.  So that there can't ever be a tie if every member votes and nobody abstains.  And mandate that if one member doesn't vote or somebody abstains and there is in fact a tie, a new vote must be taken. 

2. Empower the governor to name any of his top officials (AG, Comptroller .etc) to act as his surrogate if he is out of state or expects to be medically incapacitated.

3. Change the Constitution so that a special election is called within 90 days of the governor dying, resigning or being removed from office, and state that in such an event the President of the Senate will become acting governor only until the election is held. 

Do these things and you can both eliminate the useless Lt. Governor's position and salary, and prevent partisan deadlocks in the Senate. 

I don't quite understand why the absence of a provision in the Constitution undermines the atatute which permits a gubenatorial appointment to fill a vacancy when here is “no provision of law for filling the same."  The Governor regularly, for instance, appoints District Attorneys and sherrifs when the occupant resigns.  The Constitutional amendment in the 1940s dealt only with when an election for LG could be held, and the other constitutional provisions to which the AG makes reference apply, it seems to me, to the period before a new LG can be appointed.  That nobody thought of this until Mike Giannaris, or whoever did before him, is interesting but hardly dispositive because we have never actually needed an LG and the last mid term resignation ocurred because the LG had nothing to do.

 But what interested me the  most is that the Cuomo family apparently disagrees within their own ranks as to what the AG's duty is with regard to something the Governor wants to do on beahlf of the state.  

From the New York Times, 1/28/84:  http://www.nytimes.com/1984/01/28/nyregion/cuomo-and-abrams-in-battle-over-attorney-general-s-role.html?scp=9&sq=Abrams%20&%20cuomo%20&st=cse

[Attorney General Robert] Abrams said he thought the betting plan, which would be run by the State Lottery Division, was unconstitutional. He added that no lawsuits had been brought, so the request to begin preparing a defense was premature.

The dispute over the sports-betting plan, which faces serious opposition in the State Senate, has brought into the open what both Mr. Abrams's aides and Mr. Cuomo's aides say is a debate that has been going on privately between the two elected officials for months.

Mr. Cuomo has insisted that Mr. Abrams is ''the executive's lawyer'' and should do what his client, the Governor, requests.

Mr. Abrams has replied that he is an independently elected official who represents not just the Governor but the entire state government and has a right and a responsibility to speak his mind.