At 11:30 a.m. the Senate Consumer Protection Committee is set to consider a bill (SB 4074) from Republican Senator Lee Zeldin that would attempt to curtail the fake electrical products market.
His bill would ensure that merchants selling defective electrical products sold with fraudulent labeling will receive training to help them distinguish labeling, with the the treat of "stiff" fines if the mistake is repeated.
The new bill comes in the wake of fires have been attributed to extension cords that with fraudulent labels. This law would not only increase the penalties for selling those cords, and other fraudulent electronics, but it would also provide training to prevent further incidents.
This proposal has previously maneuvered through the Senate, but it has not been very popular in the Assembly, where it again exists (AB 672) and has sat for two months.
Showing posts with label Lee Zeldin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lee Zeldin. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Chance of Marriage? Zeldin Edition
On Wednesday, Gov. Andrew Cuomo met with same-sex marriage proponents to lay out a strategy going forward to make their shared goal a reality. In the aftermath of the meeting, the governor said it was one of many meetings that will be held and argued that the current limit on same-sex marriage isn't fair.
"To me this is more than just a piece of legislation. This is about the lives of people who I have known for many years, who currently are without the rights to which they are entitled. I look forward to working with lawmakers and stakeholders to make sure that New York joins the growing number of states that allow the freedom to marry for all couples," said Cuomo.
His biggest obstacle, though, is a Senate that has continuously failed to pass this measure. Most recently it failed by a vote of 24-38, with Democrats squandering their slim majority.
Now, with Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, R-Rockville Centre, promising that the measure could come up for a vote, its time to re-examine the bill's chances. We'll start by examining the views of a freshman Sen. Lee Zeldin, R-Long Island, who succeeded Democrat Brian Foley, who voted for the measure.
When Foley did vote for the measure, Zeldin announced that he would have opposed the measure. "Personally, I happen to believe that marriage should be defined as between a man and woman… And I know many people who are gay and that is their business and I respect that," wrote Zeldin when the measure failed.
This means that Zeldin is a no. Stay tuned for additional installments of "Chance of Marriage?" as we wait for a same-sex marriage bill to be introduced.
"To me this is more than just a piece of legislation. This is about the lives of people who I have known for many years, who currently are without the rights to which they are entitled. I look forward to working with lawmakers and stakeholders to make sure that New York joins the growing number of states that allow the freedom to marry for all couples," said Cuomo.
His biggest obstacle, though, is a Senate that has continuously failed to pass this measure. Most recently it failed by a vote of 24-38, with Democrats squandering their slim majority.
Now, with Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, R-Rockville Centre, promising that the measure could come up for a vote, its time to re-examine the bill's chances. We'll start by examining the views of a freshman Sen. Lee Zeldin, R-Long Island, who succeeded Democrat Brian Foley, who voted for the measure.
When Foley did vote for the measure, Zeldin announced that he would have opposed the measure. "Personally, I happen to believe that marriage should be defined as between a man and woman… And I know many people who are gay and that is their business and I respect that," wrote Zeldin when the measure failed.
This means that Zeldin is a no. Stay tuned for additional installments of "Chance of Marriage?" as we wait for a same-sex marriage bill to be introduced.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Got Your # On My Wall
The Republican controlled Senate appears determined to pass legislation that would make it illegal for a person to alter their caller identification with the intent to defraud or harass the recipient of a call.
Republican Sen. Lee Zeldin introduced the bill (SB 2909) on Thursday, and unlike thousands of other bills in the chamber, it has already been scheduled for a committee meeting. On Tuesday the Senate Consumer Protection Committee will address the bill, which was introduced in the senate last year and never was put on a committee agenda.
An Assembly version (AB 52) from Amy Paulin, D-Scarsdale, has already moved through the Assembly Consumer Affairs and Protection committee and is likely to cruise through the chamber, where it has previously been passed.
The bill seems like an intrusion that Republicans would never want to get involved in, as it limits personal freedom, but apparently they're opposed to "spoofing."
What's "spoofing" you ask? Well in the bill's justification, it is described this way:
The bill alleges that telemarketers use this technique to encourage people to pick up the phone, as they're more likely to pick up when a call is identified as a local number.
But it's not only the recipients of calls who are harmed as people whose numbers are misrepresented could become the recipient of angry phone calls at any hour of the day from people who have received calls that seemingly were placed by the person being spoofed, but were actually placed by someone else.
Kind of hard to imagine who opposed this bill in the past. Big Stalker?
Republican Sen. Lee Zeldin introduced the bill (SB 2909) on Thursday, and unlike thousands of other bills in the chamber, it has already been scheduled for a committee meeting. On Tuesday the Senate Consumer Protection Committee will address the bill, which was introduced in the senate last year and never was put on a committee agenda.
An Assembly version (AB 52) from Amy Paulin, D-Scarsdale, has already moved through the Assembly Consumer Affairs and Protection committee and is likely to cruise through the chamber, where it has previously been passed.
The bill seems like an intrusion that Republicans would never want to get involved in, as it limits personal freedom, but apparently they're opposed to "spoofing."
What's "spoofing" you ask? Well in the bill's justification, it is described this way:
Spoofing occurs when a person intentionally alters caller identification information to mask the true identity of the caller. The minimum effect is that the end user is deceived - the person making the call is not the person identified on the screen -and the person identified on the screen is "spoofed." This means that the person being spoofed has had caller identification information - his identity, in essence - intentionally misappropriated by the caller to achieve an end.
The bill alleges that telemarketers use this technique to encourage people to pick up the phone, as they're more likely to pick up when a call is identified as a local number.
But it's not only the recipients of calls who are harmed as people whose numbers are misrepresented could become the recipient of angry phone calls at any hour of the day from people who have received calls that seemingly were placed by the person being spoofed, but were actually placed by someone else.
Kind of hard to imagine who opposed this bill in the past. Big Stalker?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)