It is a well-established fact that the planet is heating up.  2014 was the hottest year on record and last week, the first prediction of 2015 came out –it wasn’t good news.

According to the scientists at the federal government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the summer months of June, July and August in the Northern Hemisphere saw its highest globally averaged temperature since records began in 1880.  Some have said that it may have been the hottest summer on the planet in over 4,000 years.

NOAA also said record heat was reported across northeastern Africa stretching into the Middle East, part of southeastern Asia, most of the northern half of South America, and parts of central and eastern North America.

That extended heat wave has heated the oceans and has contributed to the large El Niño that powered the hurricane that ravaged the Mexican coast over the weekend and is drenching the south.

The heating up of the planet is turbocharged by the dramatic increases in carbon dioxide generated by human activity.  According to scientists at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Earth is experiencing carbon dioxide levels not seen since prehistoric times and has never seen carbon dioxide levels increase at such a rapid rate.

The NASA scientists predicted that these increases in carbon dioxide will cause “real, significant changes in the Earth system now, not in some distant future climate, and will continue to be felt for centuries to come. We can study these impacts to better understand the way the Earth will respond to future changes, but unless serious actions are taken immediately, we risk the next threshold being a point of no return in mankind’s unintended global-scale geoengineering experiment.”

NASA found that the “global concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere – the primary driver of recent climate change – has reached 400 parts per million for the first time in recorded history.”

What is a critical driver in these increases in carbon dioxide?  The burning of fossil fuels.  And the reason that so little is happening to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is that the fossil fuel industry, (made up of oil, gas and coal companies) has done all it can to undermine the science documenting global warming.

In a recent series of articles in the Los Angeles Times, internal documents show that oil company giant Exxon – which once was considered a pioneer in climate change research – began in the 1990s to fund a campaign that questioned climate change.

The reason, according to the reporting of the LA Times, was that Exxon feared that there might emerge a growing public consensus that would lead to governmental policies that would hurt the company’s finances.  Essentially, Exxon decided to put its corporate profits ahead of scientific research that showed that global warming would hurt the public’s health.

And the oil giant decided to start funding groups that would combat proposals to reduce greenhouse gases.  According to the LA Times, Exxon joined an association of companies from industries linked to fossil fuels, to aggressively fight potential climate change regulations.  The plan was to spend millions of dollars on a disinformation campaign emphasizing scientific uncertainty and underscoring the negative economic impact of such laws on consumers.

Their effort was so successful that in 1997, the U.S. Senate refused to ratify a U.N. treaty committing states to reduce greenhouse gases because restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions “could result in serious harm to the United States economy” — an argument Exxon used repeatedly in its public-relations campaign.

For years, the efforts by the oil, gas and coal companies were successful: significant percentages of Americans did not believe that global warming was real or that human activity was the driving force behind it.  As a result, policies to reduce greenhouse gases were stymied – and the planet heated up.  As the planet has heated up, weather patterns have begun to change and so has public opinion. Those changes have affected voters in each party.

A recent poll of voters found that a “majority of Republicans (56 percent) now believe that there is solid evidence of global warming, up from 47 percent a year ago, joining solid majorities of Democrats (79 percent) and Independents (69 percent).”“Americans who believe there is evidence of global warming are also increasingly confident in their belief, with a record 65 percent saying they are ‘very confident’ in their appraisal.”

Those beliefs have not, as yet, shown up in the public policies of the Congress.  The political strategies of the oil, gas and coal companies are still paying off.  The big question facing the nation is whether public policies will catch up to public opinion – and will they do so before it is too late.

Is it possible that there might be a “perfect storm” which will break Albany’s ethics reform logjam?  New Yorkers should hope so.

Here is some evidence of the growing pressure:

In November, in separate trials, both the former Assembly Speaker and the former Senate Majority Leader face court dates for alleged corruption.  The ongoing legal proceedings should continue to keep Albany’s ethics under the spotlight and may well build up even more pressure for Governor Cuomo to convene a special session devoted to ethics.

In addition, for almost three months the state’s ethics watchdog, the Joint Commission on Public Ethics, has been without an executive director.  Having a rudderless ethics watchdog while two of the state’s leading political figures are on trial for corruption will be, at best, lousy optics. And to make it worse, until recently the agency hadn’t posted a job opening announcement for the position.  But last week, they did.  Now the search is on.

A formidable candidate has thrown his hat into the ring:  the former head of the state’s now-defunct lobbying regulator, David Grandeau.  Grandeau was a feared and respected head of the lobbying commission and was dumped as part of the ethics reform package approved in 2007.  Apparently, Grandeau had accumulated far too many enemies, including then-Governor Eliot Spitzer.

But Grandeau has said he will apply for the job,and that should set the standard by which any candidate is judged.  Unless the JCOPE commissioners choose him as the new replacement, they will have a hard time justifying any other choice.  But having Grandeau in the pool should hold JCOPE’s feet to the fire in hiring a new executive director, with the easiest option of just choosing him.

Related to that development, last week a panel reviewing the state’s ethics enforcement held its first, and probably only, public hearing.  The governor and the legislature were supposed to have chosen this commission in 2014 and the group should have reported on their findings by the end of last year.

Despite this legal requirement, in 2014 the governor and the legislative leaders blew off their responsibility, but were forced to act when that glaring failure came to light right after the arrests of the then-Assembly Speaker and Senate Majority Leader.

The members of the commission were chosen last Spring and are supposed to wrap up their work this November.  As part of the law that set up the state’s current ethics regime, a review panel was required to “review and evaluate the activities and performance” of the state’s ethics watchdogs and make “any administrative and legislative recommendations on strengthening the administration and enforcement of the ethics law.”

Reviewing the state’s ethics law changes is important, and that importance is not an academic one.  Over the past years, New York has been plagued by an unending series of investigation, controversies, and scandals concerning state public officials.  Yet, the state’s leading ethics watchdogs have been largely on the sidelines.  And while there may be explanations for this apparent inactivity, the public deserves to know why.  And if the ethics watchdogs have been paralyzed by weaknesses in state law, or lack of resources, or political paralysis, the public deserves to know that too.

The public’s deepening cynicism and growing anger has been well-documented.  In a recent poll, 90 percent of New Yorkers think corruption is a serious problem in state government and that it has gotten worse over the past few years.

It also appears that New York’s ethics laws are weak when compared to the nation.  While it is always difficult to compare states, New York performs badly in such comparisons.  In a recent comparison of state ethics laws, New York’s ethics enforcement received a grade of “F.”

When reformers first called on Governor Cuomo to call a special session devoted to ethics, he said no.  Now, however, there have been media reports that the governor and legislative leaders are considering a special session devoted to phasing-in $15 minimum wage in exchange for a possible tax cut aimed at businesses.

If that special session happens, New Yorkers should demand action on ethics.  If that happens, Albany’s logjam could be broken.

Recently, a National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine report identified a huge problem in health care:  the failures of health care providers to quickly and accurately identify a patient’s diagnosis.  The report estimated that most patients will experience at least one wrong or delayed diagnosis over their lifetime.

In many cases that delay can have no serious consequence, in others the consequence can be deadly.  For example, a delay in identifying a cancer can tip the scales from being easily treatable to catastrophic.

Diagnostic errors make up the leading type of malpractice lawsuits and are almost twice as likely as other claims to have resulted in a patient’s death.

The report, “Improving Diagnosis in Health Care,” is the latest in a series issued by the Institute of Medicine that has examined medicine’s failures in protecting patients.  A report done fifteen years ago, “To Err is Human,” found that tens of thousands of patients are killed each year due to negligent health care.

Sadly, too little has been done to respond to these reports.  The most recent report argues that in the case of improving diagnoses, improvements are difficult to make.  The report stated that there is no good way to monitor diagnostic errors, or of how often they lead to serious consequences.

The report does make recommendations – urging better teamwork and communication between health providers.  The report also urges that patients look out for themselves.  The lead author writes, “patients are central to the solution.”

Yet, most patients do little to look out for their own interests.  They rely on the judgment of their providers – the doctors, nurses and other health care professionals – to treat them.  Patients, and the general public, are at best dimly aware of the dangers of inadequate or negligent care.  A few of those harmed seek compensation in court, but the vast majority of those who suffer from poor quality care assume it is the result of bad luck, not bad care.

The Institute of Medicine has done tremendous work in highlighted the silent dangers resulting from poor quality health care.  It is the government’s responsibility to respond.  After all, it is the government which licenses health care professionals and which pays for most of the bills through public programs such as Medicare.  Unfortunately, too little has been done.

In fact, in last year’s budget the governor proposed to eliminate one of the state’s programs to make it easier for the public to review the backgrounds of their doctors.  That website, nydoctorprofile.com, was spared as a result of support in the legislature.

But instead of merely maintaining an inadequate status quo, state government should be aggressively boosting its efforts to protect patients.  Here are four steps that the governor should include in his upcoming budget plan:

1. Improve the doctorprofile website. The state’s website (nydoctorprofile.com) allows the public to easily examine a doctor’s background.  The website has not been improved since it first went online 15 years ago.  The state should modernize the website and require that a notice be posted in all health facilities to notify patients of its existence.
2. Overhaul the state’s program for tracking medical mistakes. The state requires that hospitals report medical mistakes to the Health Department.  But the program is viewed as a failure and does little to strengthen the state’s oversight of the quality of care delivered in hospitals.  The state should beef up its mandatory reporting system and sanction those hospitals which fail to do so.
3. Strengthen the state’s program for sanctioning poor quality providers. Health care providers are licensed to practice by the state, but the state has been criticized as doing too little to actively monitor those working in New York.
4. Require periodic recertification of doctors to ensure that they are maintaining their medical skills.

Those steps would begin to move New York in the right direction – toward protecting patients.

Last week, advocates across the nation celebrated “National Voter Registration Day.”  In New York, there was little to celebrate.

According to the U.S. Elections Project, in the 2014 election only the state of Indiana had a lower voter turnout than New York.  That’s right; New York was 49^th in the nation in voter participation.  Unfortunately, New York’s miserable performance is not an aberration; New York has consistently ranked as one of the nation’s worst states for voter participation.

There a many reasons for this sad ranking:  More competitive races tend to lead to higher voter turnout.  The gubernatorial election wasn’t ever tight, and even with the Republican challenger winning most of the counties in the state, Governor Cuomo beat him handily in the overall vote total.  According to the New York State Board of Elections, about 3.8 million people voted in that election. The Board considers nearly 11 million people eligible to vote.  Thus, only about 30 percent of registered voters cast their ballots for the race to determine the most powerful elected official in the state.

Non-competitive elections can smother voter turnout, but there are also barriers to getting registered to vote.

New York State had a “voting eligible population” of about 13.5 million in 2014.  The state Board of Elections reports that nearly 11 million New Yorkers are considered registered to vote.  That means that roughly 2.5 million eligible citizens were not registered to vote.

What are the barriers to voting in New York?

One big obstacle is the registration process itself.  Like much of the rest of the country, New York requires voters to register to vote.  In most of the rest of the democratic world, there’s no separate step called registration. It happens automatically. Thus, registering citizens to vote is the responsibility of the government.  The voter just has to show up.

In the United States, the responsibility is on the citizen to get registered.

New York has taken some steps to make it easier to register.  For example, an eligible voter can go the Board of Elections website (elections.ny.gov) and download a PDF version of the registration form, fill it out and send it in.  While a step forward, in the modern age an online system – in which a voter can register electronically – makes more sense.

New York has moved toward a full online voter registration system.  It began allowing people with driver’s licenses to register to vote online through the Department of Motor Vehicles in 2012.  The governor’s office said last week that more than 195,000 people had registered to vote that way — 53,000 of them for the first time.

While that’s good, it doesn’t make a big dent in the effort to register the millions of New Yorkers not yet registered who wish to do so.  And for those who are not drivers, the DMV program is of little help.

An obvious next step would be to expand that program found in the DMV to all other state agencies.  Those other agencies have databases of people they serve and collect a wealth of information – information that’s relevant to register to vote.  Yet when it’s time to register, it’s back with paper and pen to fill out a hard copy form or a PDF version found online.  The governor can expand the DMV program to all agencies through his budget plan.

In addition, in New York State, voters are typically required to register 25 days before an election – well before most voters tune into the election debates.  The state should allow New Yorkers to register and vote on Election Day.  Each year, just as interest in elections and candidates begins to peak, potential voters find that the deadline for registering to vote has already passed.  Such a system would dramatically increase voting rates.  Voter participation rates in “same-day” states are traditionally among the highest in the country.

New York should allow for full online voter registration, automatic registration of eligible citizens, pre-registration of 16- and 17-year-olds, party changes later in the election cycle, “same-day” registration, and automatic transfers of registrations for New Yorkers who move within the state.

In taking those steps, New York can start to move from national laggard in voter participation, to national leader.

After a brief hiatus, Albany’s ethics areonce again in the media.  Last week, two Assemblymembers were sentenced to prison for their ethics crimes and Governor Cuomo’s “Buffalo Billion” economic development program was reported to be under scrutiny by federal prosecutors.

First, the convictions.  Former Assemblyman Boyland was sentenced last week to 14 years in federal prison.  The Boyland case was incredible.  The former Assemblyman had earlier been prosecuted for accepting bribes, but was found not guilty.  Within two weeks of his exoneration, undercover federal agents recorded how Boyland accepted $7,000 while he gave them a tour of his district. “Everything we’ve seen here I’m in control of,” Mr. Boyland said in the tapes.

According to prosecutors, the relationship with the agents continued.  Later, Boyland suggested that the agents buy a derelict hospital in New Jersey for $8 million. He then told them that they should apply for grants to use public money for its renovation and resell it for $15 million to a nonprofit he said he controlled. He said he would arrange the deal in exchange for a bribe of $250,000.

Boyland was also convicted of lying about tens of thousands of dollars in expenses to the government, including travel payments, claiming falsely he was at work in Albany. While collecting those reimbursements for being in Albany, he was in fact enjoying personal trips in locations like North Carolina, Virginia and Istanbul. He even filed expenses for the meetings with the undercover agents.

The case of former Assemblyman Scarborough followed that pattern.  Last week, Scarborough was sentenced to 13 months in prison after he admitted submitting at least $40,000 in false expense vouchers for days he did not actually travel to Albany.  Prosecutors found that  of Scarborough’s 198 expense vouchers they reviewed, 174 were found to contain false information. The vouchers included claims for some overnight stays in Albany when the lawmaker was actually in Georgia and at home in Queens.

While those sentences closed the books on those two cases, the most intriguing ethics story resulted from media reports that the “Buffalo Billion” program – an economic development effort advanced by Governor Cuomo – was under scrutiny by federal prosecutors.  Reportedly, the investigation is focused on the multimillion-dollar contracts awarded to build facilities for high-tech businesses.

The “Buffalo Billion” program has been criticized for the secrecy in which it operates, and recent media reports have disclosed that a large campaign contributor to the governor was awarded a lucrative contract under circumstances that have raised concerns.

Of course, there is no way to know what the U.S. Attorney is doing, or whether he will identify any suspicious behavior.  But it was reported that the U.S. Attorney was conducting “a comprehensive look at the bidding process,” and that his office is “looking at communications between contractors and state officials.”

If those media reports are true, it means a significant change in the activities of the U.S. Attorney’s office and its examination of the governor.  It would be the first evidence that the U.S. Attorney has broadened his investigation beyond his current review of the actions of the Administration in shutting down the Moreland Commission to Investigate Public Corruption.  Reportedly, the U.S. Attorney is looking into whether laws were broken when the governor pulled the plug on the Moreland Commission as part of a deal to close down the budget negotiations in 2014.

While we can’t be sure what will happen next, Albany seems to be plagued with unrelenting controversies and scandals.  Inexplicably, so far the governor and the state’s political leadership seem to have decided to ignore the scandals.  90 percent of New Yorkers think Albany’s ethics are a problem.  Federal prosecutors seem to be continuing the hunt.  All incumbent state legislators face the voters in one year.

Ignoring the mounting political threat seems like a huge political mistake.  New Yorkers should demand action, not a head-in-the-sand approach.  And if they don’t get it, lawmakers will face an angry electorate.