Truce?

hm (4.00 / 3)

I'm not sure I'm willing to give this "Paterson is a wuss" meme too much weight.  I'm not sure Albany is either.  I wonder if we may have perhaps a more robust politics going on in Albany now than we might have had.  I see Paterson as weak and compromised because of his sudden elevation and his lost year as Lt Guv (Spitzer's rise neutralized his own operations somewhat)... but I also do not doubt he has firm ideological convictions (of the liberal sort that means he would never have been elected in his own right).  

Nobody really knows what's going on between Paterson and Bruno but them, and I doubt they trust each other all that much.

BUT, what's unsettling is that all three of the Men in the Room are in rather compromised positions- even Silver who is facing a serious primary (and let's not forget Bruno was possibly facing a coup before Spitzer fell).  There is an element of wildness that none of them have had to face before -- the tottering economy, for certain.  And certain precedents and promises that Spitzer made which have complicated matters, which Paterson is scrambling to get under control:  like the ESDC thing with Gundersen which has not faded away yet.  That is in danger of becoming a bona fide political issue which neither Paterson nor Bruno is in a position to profit from.  This is a true rank-and-file issue not only among the NYS GOP, but throughout the region.

This is what happens when you permit your state to have two starkly different economies, one good and one bad, for too long.  Eventually the people in the bad economy grow a brain and in a time when even the economy is going bad for the rich folks - wow, does anyone really think that the natives are not going to get restless?  I really feel for Paterson's "we're all one, I'm the governor, we've got to pull together" message, but you'd have to be -- well, an Eliot Spitzer circa 2005 to make that happen.  Paterson is a mere mortal (a good one, I think, but mortal).

Spitzer may have had feet of clay but what he represented to the people of New York (at least Upstate) was very real, and still is.  The desire for reform is not dead.  And "reform" could yet flare up in a much bigger meaning than just legislative rules reform.

---

by: NYCO @ Mon May 26, 2008 at 13:34:41 PM CDT

Trust (4.00 / 2)

I remember specifically giving Eliot Spitzer some trust after he was inaugurated-- when he seemed to begin governing in a confrontational and bombastic manner (the Hevesi replacement process), I gave him the benefit of the doubt, to see if maybe he did, indeed, have something that worked.  To go ahead and do things his way, in his style.

Personally, I am much more comfortable with David Paterson's style.  But, even if I wasn't, I would make an effort to give him the benefit of the doubt, and see results, then judge.  Result one, to me, was that a budget was passed closer to on-time than most years in NY.  That was a calming and money-saving thing, even if the budget was (is) the typical mish-mash of hasty compromise born of a bad process.  I'll judge Paterson's budget process the by the first one that he proposes and organizes (next year).  For this year, his style seemed to allow for a very serviceable punt.

So, to me, this is something that our leaders need from us, as supporters of a reform administration ticket (Spitzer/Paterson): to give them some trust to lead.

---

by: robinia @ Mon May 26, 2008 at 13:36:33 PM CDT

trust is a good thing (0.00 / 0)

but at the same time, I think there's an immediate question that Democrats need to consider.

Are the interests of Democratic candidates compatible with the interests of the party?

To make that a lot less abstract, are the interests of Paterson looking ahead to 2010 compatible with the interests of our State Senate candidates in 2008?

If Paterson wants to be famous for getting things done, I suspect he'd have a stronger position in 2010 if the Democrats take the Senate in 2008.  However, what's said here - which may not reflect everything he's thinking about - suggests that maybe he's hedging his bets on the Dems taking the Senate.

It's not like he'd be alone on that anyway...

It'll be very interesting to see who lines up to support Democratic State Senate candidates this year.

One last point on trust.  In a well-functioning political system - I know it's crazy but it sometimes happens - politicians recognize the existence of the two-party system and even the need for contested elections.  They can find the level of trust needed to work with each other during sessions while still understanding that elections need to happen.

I know that's been breaking down in the US generally over the past few decades (I'd thank Pat Buchanan, Tom DeLay, and their cohorts.)  Joe Bruno is probably about the worst case of this breakdown in New York, something we'll all have to deal with until he's gone.

---

by: simonstl @ Mon May 26, 2008 at 15:18:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

if (4.00 / 1)

To make that a lot less abstract, are the interests of Paterson looking ahead to 2010 compatible with the interests of our State Senate candidates in 2008?

If Paterson wants to advance any liberal agenda at all - and as I said, I think he has true ideological convictions, unlike Spitzer and Pataki and virtually anyone else in a position of power except maybe Silver (can't believe I just said that), then yes, his interests are compatible with a Democratic Senate... and I think he must know it.

I do think there are people who want to paint Paterson as a weak little compromiser (even though his style is to be collegial and congenial)    gee, wonder who.

---

by: NYCO @ Mon May 26, 2008 at 15:28:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A lot of folks would find it convenient (0.00 / 0)

for Paterson to be "a weak little compromiser".

Who exactly did you have in mind?

And some of this comes straight from the Governor, not from Bruno or other folks:

"I'm not going to antagonize the Republican majority by telling them we're working together and then go out in the evenings and become so political that it becomes public and aggravates them," he said. The governor is especially interested in trimming spending.

"If I get the cooperation I'm seeking from Bruno and the Senate majority, and they help me cut into this budget, I will have to honestly state to the public, knowing it will help them politically, that they did what I asked them to do."

Of the Democrats' efforts to gain control of the Senate, Mr. Paterson said: "Obviously, I'm the former leader of the Senate Democrats and wish them well."

He does go on to separate November from the session, I'm happy to see.

---

by: simonstl @ Mon May 26, 2008 at 15:52:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Paterson and Bruno got along (4.00 / 2)

while Paterson took 4 seats from Bruno in the Senate.  Paterson may be just keeping his enemies close.  Then again, he may not be.  When I read that times headline, I felt a little frustrated also.  I think after november we'll have a much better picture as to where Paterson actually stands.  

---

by: Roatti @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 00:22:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

....and we could give him that long a honeymoon (4.00 / 2)

Precisely-- and that is what I mean by supporters extending trust over that period (which is less than a year, really).  It is difficult, because we extended trust to Spitzer and he abused it.  But, very much like in love and friendship, we should avoid letting disappointments with somebody else color our capacity to extend trust to Paterson. The journalists won't-- it is their job not to-- but, as supporters of the Spitzer-Paterson reform ticket, we can and should place some trust in Paterson to get us there his way.

My guess, although it is just a hunch, is that Paterson has assessed the electoral situation re: state Senate, and calculated that his influence is unnecessary to accomplish the desired result.  Rather than sticking that under the nose of the people he has to work with to govern, however, he is simply attending to what does need his attention (of which there is plenty).  That involves not seeing Bruno as an "enemy he keeps close," but, as the representative of the oppositional minority.  That he accords him that much respect is not indicative of Bruno's personally deserving that respect (he doesn't), rather it is indicative of Paterson's ability to be respectful toward the oppositional minority.  That approach could lead to a situation in which the minority party (Republicans) are able to come together to support a more respect-worthy leader without losing face.  If it becomes a mano-a-mano between Paterson and Bruno, the perceived slights and disrespect will strengthen the opposition's tendency to rally tighter around the wronged leader.  That was precisely what happened with Spitzer's approach: he empowered Bruno by attacking him.  Paterson's way, I speculate, could lead to both more and better Democrats and fewer and better Republicans.  I like that idea.

---

by: robinia @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 07:26:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

calendar problem (4.00 / 1)

When governors take office, they normally have two years before there's a state election to deal with.  That makes it pretty easy to have a honeymoon at the start, as the election pressure is off for a little while.

Paterson came in with eight months to November, in a year when his predecessor had raised a lot of hopes about that very November.

I hope Paterson is playing his cards as well as you think he is, and that his strategy will pay off for 2008 - and not just his own election in 2010.

At the same time, though, it's not hard to understand why this looks like a problem for November - and November 2008 is probably our best chance to win the State Senate despite the incredible uphill march it will require.  That's one heck of a fortress, thanks to gerrymandering, member items, and creative distribution of cash.

I like the idea of fewer and especially better Republicans - but I can't really share your hopes, looking over the current Senators and the overall electoral situation.

We'll see...  

---

by: simonstl @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 08:30:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree (4.00 / 1)

I guess only time will prove us right or wrong

---

by: Roatti @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 10:04:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What about... (4.00 / 3)

Those of us Democrats who believe in clean money, rational redistricting, elimination of any off-budget disbursements (i.e., "member items"), and a fresh look, new approach to try and fix the state's problems rather than same-old, same-old?

Where do we belong?

Certainly not in the Republican party. But there are times when the Democratic Party-- at least at the New York State level-- doesn't seem to represent us very well, either.

---

by: davesnyd @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 07:34:21 AM CDT

you're definitely welcome here (4.00 / 1)

I think you'll find a lot of us share similar priorities.  I could use your first paragraph for myself pretty neatly, though who knows if we'd take the same "fresh look".

Encouraging the state party and our legislators to represent them can be frustrating, but knowing that we're not alone eases the pain to some extent...

---

by: simonstl @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 08:17:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

A shift that is turning Albany upside down (0.00 / 0)

to put it mildly. Lets get real, it's a sea change. Why does Paterson feel like he needs Bruno so much so that he's doing everything he can to make it easy on him? Because he's new? He didn't just get on the scene. It's very odd and smacks of more than a truce. Where's the progressive policy, where's the shots over the bow, he's not challenging Joe one bit and Joe's hanging on his last thread. Meanwhile Silver has consistantly challanged Bruno and his conference to get with the program and pass a millionaire tax, a public assistance grant increase, rent regulation reform, marriage equality, you name it. Handing Senate Democrats a club to beat them with this fall.  

---

by: TruBlu @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 08:02:39 AM CDT

just checking (0.00 / 0)

You think Paterson's selling us out?

That's what it sounds like you're saying, but it's worth double-checking.

---

by: simonstl @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 08:18:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes that is what I'm saying (4.00 / 1)

So far the new governor isn't pushing to flip the Senate into Democratic hands. Isn't that what he is there for?

And he's not pushing issues like campaign finance reform and clean elections. Instead he actually broke the pledge he and Spitzer gave not to raise money in the Capital Region while the Legislature was in session. On top of that, it turns out he's been using his campaign funds for personal reasons.

He even walked away from prison closures as the Assembly Democrats were hanging out there trying to shut them. The Assembly put it in their one house budget but Paterson wouldn't have it and basically let the Republican Senators look like hero's back in their own districts.

Perhaps he is being given a pass here because he's new.But the joke is he's neither new to the scene or the reformer I thought he was. But the main thing is he's not Shelly Silver so that's all that matters here right.  

---

by: TruBlu @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 19:09:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You really think Shelly wants to take the Senate? (4.00 / 1)

Go look up how much money he has given to our Senate candidates for their general election campaigns.  

---

by: Roatti @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 19:32:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Probably about as much money (4.00 / 1)

as Andrew Cuomo or Tom DiNapoli or Alan Hevesi. But we don't claim they don't want the Senate to go Dem. And they don't have 108 mouths to feed and probably every one of them thinking he hasn't done enough for them lately. Senators don't elect him, Assemblymembers do. So I just can't criticize the guy for not giving to Senate challengers when you look at his filing and he hasn't even given to most his members. Money's not my measuring stick, although if it was I'd add up the millions put into Assemblymembers who jumped to the Senate, like Assemblyman Aubertine. But my measuring stick is Paterson's abandonment of core progressive issues. Yes, I think Silver is looking forward to the day the Senate goes Dem so many core issues he and his members want done can finally get done. Call me crazy but that's what I think.

---

by: TruBlu @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:19:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

it'll take away his excuses (0.00 / 0)

and he'll have to come up with a whole new game to stay around.

---

by: simonstl @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:29:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Administration? (0.00 / 0)

I do not think the Governor is there to push to have the legislature he wants.  I think the Governor is there to head up the administration of the state under the laws we now happen to have, and sign or veto the new laws coming his way.

Spitzer saw his role as steamrolling across all branches of government, and that worked poorly.  I have no problem whatever w/Paterson focusing on the Executive Branch and letting the rest of us do the pushing to take over the Senate.  We can do it!  A real reformer has no trouble trusting the people to make this happen-- he does not have to be in charge of everything.

---

by: robinia @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:27:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not just administration (0.00 / 0)

It's not like the Governor is a non-partisan city manager type.

I think it's at least fair to suggest that the highest elected official in the state is also expected to be a party leader, working with the people who elected him to elect others.

That is, at least, my understanding of politics.  

It doesn't have to mean hyper-partisanship or personalizing everything.  However, it certainly means recognizing the importance of elections, staying in touch with voters, and building coalitions that create change through elections - not just talking amongst the usual leaders in a room.

Trusting the people is a key part of it - but it's awfully hard for the people's voice to be heard in the currently severely broken system.  Trusting the people in this instance has to mean working to amplify their voice, to give them a chance to participate.

That requires change - change that really needs the Governor's help.

Yes, Spitzer was a trainwreck - but that doesn't mean we should lurch from hoping for aggressive governors to hoping for passive governors.

---

by: simonstl @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:37:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

A management style not for the macho? (0.00 / 0)

I'd characterize Paterson's management style as collaborative, not passive.  And, my experience has been so far that he is responsive to voters.  When I went with a reform crew to deliver to him an angry and demanding letter about why he was not pushing campaign finance reform this year, he responded, not passively, but collaboratively. In person, although we did not have an appointment. He explained that his views of what is needed have in no way changed (he still believes, as he said, that reform is what is badly needed and that it is essential that reformers and legislators keep pushing it hard). BUT, his new responsibilities put him in the position of looking hypocritical if he asked for anything that needed funding while requiring others to reduce spending from even the approved budget levels.  

He did not stop there. We offered, and he masterfully accepted, the opportunity to find as much common ground as we could, and work together from there: we agreed that he would talk to Silver to have Clean Money Clean Elections pass the Assembly this year, in prep to pass the Senate once it was a Dem majority there.  That is a plan based on both the reformers and the Governor believing that we will win.  

Now, we can be pessimists (see Noel below) and not even try, we can be paranoid and worry that our fellow party members and even party leaders are playing us, or we can pull together, share leadership, each do what we can do from where we stand, trust our partners, and whip the crap right out of the corrupt GOP in NYS (which will, BTW, also result in the NYS GOP being reformed after the Capos go down).  I know what I'm after, and if Paterson wants to share a little leadership w/Malcolm Smith or TAP, heck, you won't catch me calling him a wuss (that means a female, right?  Maybe one could even be governor in NY some day.)  A secure gentleman can be polite and kind to his opponents without compromising any principles whatever.

---

by: robinia @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 09:14:52 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

oops. (0.00 / 0)

Noel's pessimistic assessment of our chance to win the Senate is in a different thread, not below.  Sorry.

---

by: robinia @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 09:18:37 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wow. (0.00 / 0)

I've been "giving Paterson a pass" because he's not even three months into a governorship he didn't expect to hold, and scrambling to get things done.  His past experience helps, but  hardly means that he can get off to an instant leap from the starting blocks.

A lot of what he's done has actually impressed me.  He has Democrats here both happy and concerned about the likelihood of a genuinely shrinking state budget.  For Upstate specifically, he deftly executed a turnaround on garbage truck routing - with the help of Sen. Schumer - that left some Assembly Democrats looking pretty foolish.

Yes, I'd like to see him push harder on the Senate.  I'm less concerned with what he did during budget season off the starting blocks, though, and more concerned with what he'll do in November.

So I'll keep an eye out, but I don't think I'm nearly as doubtful as you are.  But thanks for the clarification.

(And after the initial objections this story drew for criticizing Paterson, it's especially good to see that I'm hardly the furthest Democrat out there.)

---

by: simonstl @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 07:28:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]