|
Journal News, August
7, 2005
Senate GOP Websites
Outshine Democrats'
Amanda Erickson
When voters visit the Web site of Sen. Vincent Leibell,
R-Patterson, they can find out about his role in passing a bill on
all-terrain vehicles, actions he has taken against terrorism and a long
list of legislation he sponsored.
But when they visit the Web site of Sen. Ruth
Hassell-Thompson, D-Mount Vernon, all that's available is her biography and
a list of her committee assignments.
The perks that majority members in the
Republican-controlled Senate have traditionally enjoyed have invaded
cyberspace, critics say, where Republicans get flashier — and potentially
more politically useful — Web sites paid for by taxpayers than minority Democrats
get.
While Republican senators have sites that list press
releases, multiple photos, news coverage and a district map, a survey of
the Democratic Web sites linked to the Senate main page shows that 17 of
the 26 sites feature significantly less information.
Democrats' sites contain only a biography, a white
backdrop, no links, one photo and contact information.
But are enough citizens looking at these sites to make
these differences matter?
No one knows.
While the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that about one in
two New York homes has high-speed Internet access, neither the Senate nor
the Assembly keeps track of how much traffic the sites are getting.
"The system doesn't keep track because we don't see
any reason to do so," said Brian Franke, a spokesman for Assembly
Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan. "Whether a member gets 100 hits
or 12 hits, we still must maintain the site."
Senate Democrats said access to Web resources has been
slow in coming and that Republicans have made it difficult for the
Democrats' Web sites to present important information.
Sen. Liz Krueger, D-Manhattan, said she hasn't created
an updated Web site because the Republicans have censored her documents in
the past. Other minority senators have complained that they were given
access to the Web-site program only last year, four years after their
Republican counterparts had sites put up.
"I don't work for the Senate communications
office," Krueger said. "I was elected by 315,000 constituents, my
position is my own, and I should not be edited or censored by anyone."
But Senate GOP spokesman Mark Hansen said that if some
Democrats have lower-quality Web sites, it is not the fault of the
majority.
"They have the option (of having sites like
Republicans)," he said.
Hansen said the Senate doesn't censor members, but that
the sites were meant to be "informative, not political" and
therefore the Senate will not post campaign or partisan material.
The Assembly also bars partisan or campaign material.
But there is no noticeable difference between the Web sites of Assembly
Republicans and Democrats, a look at their sites shows.
"The Assembly treats all of its Web sites exactly
the same," Assembly Democratic spokesman Bryan Franke said.
Assembly Republicans agreed.
"Our only gripe, and it's a small one, is that
there is sometimes a lag in getting our press releases onto our
sites," said Kelly Cummings, spokeswoman for Assembly Minority Leader
Charles Nesbitt, R-Albion.
Good-government groups said the debate over Web sites is
about par for the course in the land of strictly partisan politics.
"In the Legislature, the majority rules, and they
only give table scraps to political minorities," said Blair Horner,
legislative director of the New York Public Interest Research Group.
The Senate Republican majority is "using every
available political lever as advantage against the growing Senate
minority," Horner said. There are 35 Republicans and 27 Democrats in
the Senate. Democrats gained three seats in last year's elections.
Member Web sites vary widely among states, according to
a spokesman for the National Conference of State Legislatures. While some
legislatures showcase similar Web sites for all members, NCSL spokesman
Gene Rose said, other states' sites reflect more partisan politics.
</tbody>
|
