Spitzer, MadmanThere's a fair amount of concern in Democratic circles that Eliot Spitzer has simply set expectations too high. He'll be vulnerable, in four years, to critics who point to the things that haven't changed, and note that "everything" was supposed to change. And on Day One! (Dan Janison was first out of the gate on this one.) He'll compromise with the legislature on this or that, and be hit for compromising. In GOP attack-ad fantasy land, the economy will turn down and he'll have to break his No New Taxes pledge (which really didn't make much sense, unless he knows more about the future of the stock market than anyone else). Basically, Spitzer seems to have broken the rule about not overpromising. And in a blowout year, he had no political reason to do so. But there was a non-electoral reason to overpromise. It made a lot of legislators think that he was, basically, insane. He's publicly committed him to things that legislators might otherwise have tried, and succeeded, to talk him out of. With Joe Bruno weaker than ever and Shelly Silver playing nice, Spitzer's hand was already strong. The fact that he heads into negotiations with the legislators -- both rank and file and leadership -- convinced that he's a little nuts, a little irrational, and committed to more than he can possibly do strengthens his hand further. The risk, in a way, was that in a good budget year, negotiations would be too easy. Spitzer has found a way to keep them hard. Spitzer learned from his Wall Street cases that his willingness to cross the line -- as with his tacit threat to indict, and probably ruin, a major insurer -- was a wonderful negotiating tactic. In fact, the kind of politics he's most experienced at isn't electoral politics, it's negotiations over the boardroom table. So his early promises may be bad electoral politics, but smart Albany hardball. And if he gets what he wants, that'll be good politics.
Rudy didn't reform anything and he's running for president on a pretty shabby record. Bloomberg promised to reform the Bd. of Ed. and the place is in worse shape than it's ever been in and he won re-election against non candidate Ferrer and is now spending money so people will refer to him as a presidential candidate. Meanwhile there are more homeless on the street than ever before and he's paid for polls to say that people like him. Not sure how the public thinks based on the records of the above, so let's give the Gov. a chance to screw up before we call an end to a governorship that has barely started. I will admit if Bruno isn't run out of the senate, it isn't a good sign of things to come.
He should Suozzi the legislature in 2008. Simply put. Everyone will be turning out that year. And probably in a bad year.
Did he want the office for his own personal ambition, or to make a difference? If the latter, he did right by pulling a pin on a grenade and threatening to let go. I'm not sure it will work. But I am sure nothing else will.
Spitzer was voted in to change things, not to promise to change things, which many felt meant more than just one of the three men in the room. Bruno is already on his way out, which leaves the Assembly Speaker. The cynic in me says it a game: say really tough stuff, but call everyone who may be insulted beforehand and tell em it's the other guy your talking about. Spitzer never looked at Albany corruption before as AG, which is why I would have preferred to see Suozzi. He knew the way to get through these people was with a bulldozer, not a peace pipe.
You hope Spitzer will change the fiscal priorities, and lose on procedural issues.
You fear that Spitzer will be given some symbolic procedural victories, the fiscal priorities will remain unchanged, and the winners will keep grabbing more and more and deferring the cost to a diminished future.
Good thing the budget comes first.
fiscal issues cannot be changed without procedural progress. three men in a room is no way to run a state and certainly no way to put together an appropriate budget.
Spitzer should still have a fair amount of political capital (and fundraisers) to be able to, as Larry puts it, "Suozzi the Legislature." But if Spitzer does falter, he might not be able to do it if he's looking ahead to a steeper hill to climb in 2010.
Keep the hat. It works.
As for the new gov, his tactics may not be all that exotic after all. The wind is at Spitzer's back. He bares his teeth first and compromises later when he has to.
Prosecutors and cops do this. They hype the top count figuring they can fall back on the lesser counts when the deal is cut or the case goes to a jury. Ask for the moon, get what you can. He'll never have this kind of capital again.
Post new comment |
along with over-promising, his overall tone misses the point of his electoral victory.
NYer's didn't vote for him to create bi-partisanship or an atmosphere in albany where everyone is working together to "fix" NY. they voted for HIM to fix NY single-handedly. He is the reformer, supposedly, with a vision to make NY a better place to live and work.
Voters have no faith in thier leaders in Albany and with good reason.
He is in a position of strength and needs to exercise that strength by dictating to them reforms and policies to make NY better.