Haven't a clue...but what made him do this? ack!!

Cannot wait to hear what he has to say for himself.

But, but, but, I thought only the Republicans were doing the prostitution thing these days... or maybe that's just when it comes to gay sex?

I'm going to assume he admitted it because if he didn't, someone who was busted for running the ring would have said he was involved. A meager attempt to save face.

frooms21--it looks like he may have been named in some court documents, so yeah, that's why he's coming out with it now.

anyway, i'm just going to assume that all elected officials have paid for sex at one time or another until it's proven otherwise.

He's not "admitting" anything--he was caught on a federal wiretap and is about to be exposed, this is just a last-ditch effort to save a shred of dignity.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-spitzer.html?bl&ex=1205294400&en=23ba9f83b5ade3e6&ei=5087%0A

I just heard that he came forward now because he was identified on a wiretap, and it is possible that he's going to be charged with a criminal offense.

According to the NYT, the investigation into the prostitution ring they busted last week was coming up with wiretap evidence of him arranging to hire a prostitute. How stupid is that?!

I am SO disappointed in him. Besides the obviously dickishness required to cheat on your wife with a prostitute, I feel screwed over as a Democrat who campaigned for him. Dems finally get the New York governor's mansion back after what, 12 years, and he goes and ruins it like this? Presuming he resigns (which seems pretty inevitable), I wish soon-to-be-Governor Paterson the best of luck.

Don't you just...I don't know...wonder, sometimes, about the collective intelligence of elected officials? Like, don't they learn anything from watching what happens to each other? Doesn't Spitzer look at all the public figures and politicians over the past few years who have been caught in prostitution scandals, or soliciting anonymous sex in bathrooms, or whatever, and think to himself "Hey, maybe the smart money has non-commercial, non-anonymous sex tonight"?

Apparently not. Idiot.

Charge Spitzer with a Mann Act violation. Women are not property. Paying a woman to have sex is problematic enough, but keeping an account with a pimp to have sex with women? Asshole.

Welcome Governor Paterson! Since Spitzer was a stupid, entitled boy, we're better off as New Yorkers governed by an adult who knows how to get things done.

What an idiot - on so many levels. He betrayed his family, community and the public. ack... there is only one decent thing to do: RESIGN, NOW.

I recognize politically he is finished, but is paying for sex a felony in NY? If it's not a forced prostitution ring it's too bad this ruins his career. The puritan strain is alive and well among the American public.

Like, don't they learn anything from watching what happens to each other? Doesn't Spitzer look at all the public figures and politicians over the past few years who have been caught in prostitution scandals, or soliciting anonymous sex in bathrooms, or whatever, and think to himself "Hey, maybe the smart money has non-commercial, non-anonymous sex tonight"?

It's the same thought process of pedophiles - certainly many are aware of "To Catch a Predator" (not to mention the shame of being on a sex offenders registry), and yet they still walk into Chris Hansen's trap.

Did he just hire prostitutes?

Because "Involved in a prostitution ring" sounds way more sinister than being a john.

I guess being a politician and all, he has the right skill set for prostitution.

Thomas - Where do you see anything indicating he violated the Mann Act?

Re the Mann Act. From the parts of the indictment I read on Smoking Gun, he met a woman in D.C. who took a train from NYC. I read that he was "Customer #9". His fee was $3,000 and he paid $400 up front, probably to cover for the expenses in case he became a no-show. I don't think that amounts to a Mann Act violation, but I'm no expert in the field.

I'm with Mark Temporis. "Involved in a prostitution ring" or "link to prostitution ring" (which is better, but I think still a little misleading) sounds like he is a pimp, or getting kickbacks from pimps, or otherwise somehow profiting from the exploitation of human beings. From what I've read, he was stupid, and exploitative, but he paid to be exploitative rather than profiting from exploitation. Not that there's nothing wrong with that.

The part where he procured and paid for the trafficking across state lines for the purpose of prostitution. I have not looked at the statute in a while, but I do seem to recall that it was about transportation of sex workers across state lines.

The Mann Act, which has a sad and racist history as a club to beat black men for consensual sex (the first Mann Act prosecution was against Jack Johnson), still exists, in amended form, in the US criminal code at 18 USC 2421 et seq. 2423 deal with minors, but the less-used 2422 says in part:

"(a) Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both."

That may answer people's questions about the Mann Act.

"I recognize politically he is finished, but is paying for sex a felony in NY? If it's not a forced prostitution ring it's too bad this ruins his career..."

That reminds me of a recent case in Sydney:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7282711.stm

"...Five people have been arrested and charged with offences including people trafficking and debt bondage.

"Police said the women were lured to Australia and forced to work up to 20 hours a day in legal Sydney brothels.

"They had agreed to work in the sex industry, but were deceived about conditions, police said.

"'My understanding is that they came to Australia to work in the sex industry, but under more reasonable conditions,' Australian Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Tim Morris said..."

What a moron.

And of course he'll resign. Republicans and their friends in the press will make sure of it. Hell, I wouldn't be suprised to see David Vitter issue a statement calling for Spitzer to step down.

So, Spitzer's all set to strengthen NY's abortion laws in favor of women, & then this hits the fan? Great timing!

Thomas - You are absolutely correct. I did not see that he had her come to Washington from NY. Thanks.

I don't actually have a problem with prostitution in and of itself. If it were legal it could be regulated and made sure that the women were kept healthy and in good conditions.

Anyhoo, what a stupid move. This is going to destroy any credibility he has. Which sucks, especially in regard to the RHPPA.

But if he does resign, at least Lt Gov David Patterson is a good successor.

what an a-hole. I can't believe I believed this guy was good for NY. How do you build your reputation as attorney general, prosecute prostitutes, then get implicated for the same offence? He should resign.

I don't think NJ's McGovern should have resigned for admitting a gay affair... actually, he admitted an affair w/ a lobbyist.

I guess they all get drunk with power and think they can do whatever they want. It's just so sick.

@ SixtiesLiberal: It's not about puritanism, it's about hypocracy.

The fact that Spitzer thought he was above the very laws he has enforced in the oh-so-recent past appears completely antithetical, but is not shocking for arrogant men of power. They often seem to see their personal issues as irrelevant to their greater public works.

But I think the most important question that does come out of this for the feministing community, is what happens to the Reproductives Rights and Privacy Protection Act that he was spearheading to revamp NY's abortion laws? I was inspired when he headlined this act in immediate response to the Supreme Court's patronizing decision of Spring 2007, and I wonder whether Patterson will push it with the same energy? If Spitzer's actions put this act in peril, he will not just owe apologies to his family (given), nor to the public (hardly given), nor the individual women he exploited (fat chance), but to all his female constituents (and I'm not holding my breath for that one either.)

The fact that Spitzer thought he was above the very laws he has enforced in the oh-so-recent past appears completely antithetical, but is not shocking for arrogant men of power. They often seem to see their personal issues as irrelevant to their greater public works.

But I think the most important question that does come out of this for the feministing community, is what happens to the Reproductives Rights and Privacy Protection Act that he was spearheading to revamp NY's abortion laws? I was inspired when he headlined this act in immediate response to the Supreme Court's patronizing decision of Spring 2007, and I wonder whether Patterson will push it with the same energy? If Spitzer's actions put this act in peril, he will not just owe apologies to his family (given), nor to the public (hardly given), nor the individual women he exploited (fat chance), but to all his female constituents (and I'm not holding my breath for that one either.)

SixtiesLiberal- Puritans don't approve of prostitution. Also, non-puritan sex-positives often don't approve of prostitution. But it's awesome to see you posting about how feminism should be all sexyfun again. Remind me how we should chill out about this rape crisis sometime. :-)

Either way, even people who approve wholeheartedly of prostitution have problems with politicians who have been recently prosecuting prostitutes using them, and most prostitutes in every level of the industry do not enjoy working for men.

The only men "involved in prostitution rings" I have ever come into contact with were pimps or pimps disguised as "agency owners" who would beat, rape, and abuse their workers.

Odds are high that this man was involved in the business end of something far more brutal than what most of this country pictures when they think of expensive callgirls.

Hmm, now that I've found the actual article, I take back most of what I just wrote. It appears his only offense was seeing the prostitute in the first place and that this was relatively high end stuff.

Which means that the man is a douchebag, but not as much of a douchebag as I thought.

However, it would be nice if the police tried to focus on the unglamorous plight of women dying in the streets rather than going to dramatic busts of women who travel to see senators. :-(