The Deadlocked NY State Senate and The Big Cookie Solution


The New York State Senate is now deadlocked at 31-31, and the lawsuit to impose a judicial solution on a legislative problem was tossed out today. What to do with this mess? The solution is actually quite easy.

First, the idea of one party or the other being in charge because one particular vote was legitimately taken or not is a waste of time. For elevating form over substance is useless when both parties have the power to deadlock Albany. To get anything done, an agreement is necessary.

The solution for the Senate is the same one my father used for dividing The Big Cookie between two sons. One kid cuts it in half and the other kid gets to pick which one he wants. That way the cutter has to be fair. The game of “you cut, I pick” is diabolically simple.

The Senate should do the same. One party divides all the power positions into two separate groups and the other side gets to pick the one they want. Who cuts and who picks? A simple coin toss. There. Was that so hard?

Tomorrow I will attempt to cure the common cold.

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts:

  1. The Deadlocked Jury (Ted Stevens Trial) – Updated
  2. Chief Judge Judith Kaye — For U.S. Senate
  3. Chief Judge Kaye Keeps Door Open On Hillary’s Senate Seat
  4. Chief Judge Judith Kaye, for US Senate, Gets A Bit of Attention
  5. Professionalism (Or Lack Thereof) In The Courthouse. And A Solution

Tags:

June 16, 2009 · 2 Comments ·

2 Responses Leave a comment

  • Comments 2010.6.21 at 00:02 | Quote

    The answer is obvious: they have to let dad decide everything!
    # posted by Blogger Dan Turkewitz : June 17, 2009 11:07 AM

    Reply – Quote
  • Comments 2010.6.21 at 00:03 | Quote

    If they can not decide, the best will be to Toss a coin and see who divides and who chooses…
    # posted by Anonymous New York personal injury lawyers : June 22, 2009 3:00 AM

    Reply – Quote

Leave a Reply

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.