ONE OF THREE TO LEAVE THE ROOM:
PATAKI SINGS ALBANY SWAN SONG
WITH 17 MONTHS LEFT IN HIS TERM,
HE'LL CHASE BRASS RING IN IOWA.

By Henry J. Stern
July 28, 2005


Governor Pataki's announcement yesterday that he will not seek re-election has a number of desirable aspects.  For one thing, it spares him a laborious, uphill race, presumably against State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer.  He will also distinguish himself from three major New York political figures who unsuccessfully sought a fourth term: Mayor Ed Koch (1989), Governor Mario Cuomo (1994), and Senator Al D'Amato (1998).
 
His entrance into the Presidential race can help him even if he is not nominated, which appears almost certain to be the case.  First, the Presidency is the highest office in the country, and it is no disgrace not to be elected.  That is, unless you are nominated, run in the John Kerry mode and get blamed for your party's defeat.  It is unlikely that Mr. Pataki will receive the nomination, so whatever attention he gets and the longer he lasts in the race, the better-known he will become.  We will see how far a relatively liberal Republican can get?
 
We listened to the governor's announcement Wednesday. It sounded as if his first-term speechwriters had been called back for this special occasion.  He spoke well, showing the gift that made him an effective vote getter.  As they so often do, the Democrats co-operated by running progressively weaker candidates against him, ending up with Carl McCall, who began his campaign of inclusion by declining Liberal Party support, even though the Liberals had supported him in his races for State Senator and State Comptroller.
 
McCall's last public role was as chair of the Compensation Committee of the New York Stock Exchange, which gave Richard Grasso a $180 million package on his departure, most of which was previously authorized and contracted for.  When the payments became a public issue, Grasso and Kenneth Langone of Home Depot were severely criticized, but McCall somehow escaped official mention despite his role in the alleged giveaway.
 
Governor Pataki was good on parks and conservation issues, possibly the result of his admiration for Theodore Roosevelt.  On fiscal responsibility, he seesawed, soft in election years, tough in odd numbered years.  His supervision of state agencies was intermittent at best, reflecting the ebb and flow of his labile interest in public matters.

Perhaps his biggest flaw was the prevalence of 'pay to play' in his administration.  Lobbying, favoritism, and campaign contributions informed many state decisions, including questions of procurement when vendors sought state contracts.  Some agencies, particularly the State Department of Labor, were infested with political appointees who were not effective in performing whatever modest duties they may have had.
 
When he relied on able staff, like Brad Race, Mike Finnegan, and John Cahill, the governor did better.  When they left and government devolved to people of lesser ability, the state suffered.  He is wise to leave on his own, as Mayors LaGuardia and Wagner did after their three terms in office.  The four-termers in New York State politics were iconic figures: Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller and Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Jacob K. Javits.  We do not believe that Pataki is perceived by anyone as being at that level.
 
There are other advantages in announcing one's impending departure a year and a half in advance.  First, it clears the field fso others can compete for the Republican nomination in 2006.  Since the Attorney General is giving up his office to run for Governor, that position will also be an open seat.  Comptroller Hevesi will be a heavy favorite for re-election.
 
Second, it gives the Governor an opportunity to govern for the next year and a half free of political considerations.  Except as it may impact his Presidential race, he is free to do whatever he believes to be the right thing.  It would be superb if the Governor would use his remaining time in office in the public interest. 

That is not overly likely for four reasons: 1)To serve the public interest, you must have a fairly clear idea of what it is.  2)You must then want to serve it, even at the expense of private interests which may have been good to you.  3)You must detect and frustrate the temptation that some of your supporters will salivate over, taking every economic advantage of their positions before leaving office.  4)You must be willing to spend political capital to pursue honorable goals.  That phrase was used by Bush 43.  It still has meaning.
 
The Governor ought to draw up a list of problems to solve in the remaining 17 months.  The first item should be the mess in Medicaid.  It makes one wonder what the Health Commissioner has done about Medicaid fraud and waste in the six years she has served.  Was she looking?  Another item should be transportation, and how to fund it.  Unfortunately, the MTA overbuilds, wasting billions of dollars on boondoggles of limited transportation value, because the agency relies on people whose judgment is worse than theirs.  The real parties in interest in many of these projects are the construction unions and contractors.
 
Historically, the Pataki years will be compared with the twelve Cuomo years that preceded them.  Nelson Rockefeller built the State University, the Albany Mall and many other projects.  Hugh Carey saved the City of New York from bankruptcy and replaced its hapless mayor.  The legacy of Governors Cuomo and Pataki, who between them served for an entire generation, is more difficult to discern.  Pataki, however, still has the chance to burnish his record.  We hope he takes advantage of the historic opportunity he fleetingly enjoys.