Albany’s pro-criminal crowd is at it again. A bill introduced by Democrats in the Assembly and Senate would give inmates in state prisons a healthy pay raise for work they do behind bars. The proposal triples the minimum wage for prisoners, and naturally, New York taxpayers are expected to pay the bill.

A component of the state prison system is an industrial division called “Corcraft,” where inmates produce a wide variety of products, such as office furniture, apparel, and other items. The overarching goal of the program is for inmates to develop skills and reinforce work ethic to prepare them for eventual release.

But the proposed prisoner pay raise is simply the latest in a growing list of misguided priorities coming from Albany. Over the past two years, proposals directed at helping rapists, murderers, and violent abusers have been abundant and out-of-touch. The initiatives and actions from Albany’s pro-criminal crowd have been nothing short of offensive. Consider that recently New York State has: 

• Granted parole to a pair of cop-killers;

• Started a program to give computer tablets to every inmate;

• Launched a program to provide tuition-free college to prisoners; and

• Issued unilateral pardons to parolees, restoring voting privileges prior to the end of their sentencing requirements.

At what point will the needs of over-taxed, law-abiding New Yorkers become the priority?

Putting priorities in their proper place 

The prisoner pay-hike recommendation comes as the governor and state comptroller have issued warnings that the state is facing a dangerous $2.3 billion budget hole. In addition, the governor’s executive budget proposal calls for $4.1 billion in new taxes. Needless to say, there’s a long list of items that require our immediate attention before paying for additional accommodations to incarcerated felons. For example: 

• Direct-care professionals — the men and women who provide life-saving care for those with disabilities, our most vulnerable population — have been denied a wage increase by the governor’s budget;

• Towns and villages across the state face funding cuts to their budgets (which are already in place, threatening the services and programs they can provide to residents); and

• Eligibility for the state’s college tuition assistance program (TAP) hasn’t been expanded in nine years. The minimum grant award given to students receiving TAP hasn’t been increased since 2000.

In policy and principle, this is a poorly-timed insult to law-abiding citizens facing real financial hardships, and to the victims whose lives have been turned upside-down by criminal acts.         

Brian M. Kolb (R,I,C–Canandaigua), a former small-business owner, is the New York Assembly Minority Leader and represents the 131st Assembly District, which encompasses all of Ontario County and parts of Seneca County. Contact him at kolbb@nyassembly.gov

Millions of Americans scratched their heads over the Big Media reactions to the recent State of the Union address. Clearly, a majority of Americans liked the address. Two instant polls by the Big Media (CNN and CBS) each found that 76 percent of viewers approved of President Trump’s address. That is an impressively high rating for this annual address.

Nobody is arguing that maybe 76 percent of viewers have fallen in love with their president. But a few things are abundantly clear. Most viewers approved of what they saw and heard. 

Suppose you missed the State of the Union address. You did not see it or read about it. But you tuned in to the network shows immediately afterward. And you read a few big newspapers next morning. You would probably conclude the speech was a flop.

NBC’s Chuck Todd blasted it as “absurdist theater.” Actually, he declared such before the president spoke. No bias there.

Despite its poll numbers showing 76 percent of viewers approved, CNN’s political director, David Chalian, on screen, pooh-pooed those numbers and that poll — because the viewers included more Republicans than Democrats. But 82 percent of independents approved of the speech. Significant, but let’s not talk about them.

MSNBC featured a lineup of Trump critics. Joy Reid called the speech “grandiose and over the top.” Chris Matthews belittled the president’s criticism of socialism and its failures. 

Then he praised, repeatedly, the Democrat response to the address. The one by Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams, who failed last fall as a candidate for governor. She was heartfelt, inspiring, very impressive, patriotic, happy, basic, and optimistic, says Matthews. Perfect, pass the thesaurus. He ran dry of adjectives with which to praise her.

Also on the panel was Yamiche Alcindor, who gushed about Abrams. She talked about the president not telling the truth.

Former senator Barbara Boxer called Abrams response brilliant. And compared Trump to Jack the Ripper. Literally.

NBC’s disgraced former Nightly News anchor Brian Williams, now relegated to MSNBC, lit into Trump for his “graphic language” on abortion. 

Lester Holt, the current Nightly News anchor, introduced us to the State of the Union address with dreary talk of shutdowns, investigations, and more.

NBC’s website welcomed readers with “On Trump’s big State of the Union applause line, the sound of silence was stunning.” And “This country flipped for Trump. Two years on, the enthusiasm may be waning.”

CNN’s website hosted lengthy comments from 13 prominent social and political observers. There was barely a word of praise among them.

CNN’s Van Jones called the State of the Union address “a psychotically incoherent speech with cookies and dog poop.” 

Meanwhile, the New York Times headline said: “A Message of Unity From an Agent of Discord. Let’s see how long it lasts.” It wrote about “fictitious alter egos” of Trump’s that were exposed in the address. The Washington Post depicted the address in similar bleak and negative terms.

On and on they went — downward. One after another, Big Media folks belittled or criticized the president and his address. One after another sang the praises of his opposition.

This is why the American public thinks so little of Big Media. They expect opinion. They expect lack of enthusiasm from liberals when a political opponent is on stage. But they also expect some attempt at balance. They wish for a few signs of objective coverage. Instead, they get wall–to–wall negative opinion.

Millions of Americans reckon Big Media distorts what they see and hear. They reckon accurately. They remember the televised presidential debates. They recall that when big majorities of viewers called one debater the winner, Big Media declared the other one the victor.

Viewers know that networks pack their panels with bias. The networks give the opposition sweet little air time.

After many instances of this bias, Americans have lost trust in Big Media. Numerous polls confirm the distrust. 

‘Tis a case of who are you gonna believe? What you see and hear? Or what Big Media tell you that you saw and heard?    

Tom Morgan writes about political, financial, and other subjects from his home in upstate New York. He has a new novel out, called “The Last Columnist,” which is available on Amazon. Contact Tom at tomasinmorgan@yahoo.com, read more of his writing at tomasinmorgan.com, or find him on Facebook.