April 5, 2007

The State budget was adopted Sunday, a few hours after the Constitutional deadline, but that's "good enough for government work." - Rule 27-G.    A wash of commentaries followed the conclusion of the legislative process.  We are going to link to them and will withhold our own opinion as long as we can.

The Times reported that the budget was literally hot of the presses when the telephone-book size document was placed on the members’ desks.  Obviously, the legislators, and a fortiori, the public, had no chance to read it.  But if they had been able to and did in fact read it, that would probably have made no difference, because there was a consensus to meet the Constitutional requirement (or target) of April 1.  The same thing happened when I was a City Councilmember (1974-83); the leaders decided on the budget, and the members voted to adopt it, whether they had seen it or not..
 
The initial press comments were negative on the role of Governor Spitzer with regard to the budget.  Michael Goodwin of the News, writing on Sunday said: SPITZER NEEDS A DO-OVER; Albany Moves Backward in First 100 Days.  Goodwin's lede:
 
"Given the poor start to Eliot Spitzer's term, there are two possible explanations to what went wrong.  First, his campaign was a fraud, filled with promises he never intended to keep.  Or, second, the Boy Governor is in over his head and is not yet up to the job.
 
"I vote for the second because the first option is too frightening to contemplate.  The second leaves him room for growth and us room for hope.  Either way, however, the question is the same: What do we do now?  In the spirit of spring, I say we extend a golfer's courtesy to the governor: Let's give him a mulligan.  Let's chalk his first 100 days up to inexperience and poor judgment and allow him to begin again. 
 
"Even those on the receiving end of Spitzer's half truths and boorish tantrums should agree to the do-over.  The severe problems we face must be confronted, and it will do no New Yorker any good if the state moves backward for the next four years...

The Post's Fred Dicker slammed the governor Monday with a news analysis on p2 headed: DEAR ELIOT; YOU IGNORED SOUND ADVICE.  In this case, Dicker referred to the advice he had given Spitzer (and his readers) in a November letter. “ Maybe if you had taken some of my suggestions,” Dicker wrote, “you could have avoided the disturbing, business-as-usual mess that engulfed and embarrassed our state during the past week -- as you desperately abandoned y our reform pledges in an unsuccessful attempt to get an on-time a budget.

"Frankly, the price paid for your failure  -- in terms of the public's money and the severe damage to your reputation -- could hardly be higher.  A budget hike three times the rate of inflation that adds an extra $1 billion to next year's projected deficit isn't the fiscally responsible budget I urged -- and you promised.
 
"The Soviet-style secrecy that defined the budget talks -- along with your willingness to use "messages of necessity" to assure that neither individual lawmakers nor the public at large would know what was in the budget -- stole the breath away from your most loyal reform-minded supporters."

Those are three paragraphs out of ten. If you want the rest, link to Dicker.

Monday’s Post carried two other budget articles: Ken Lovett on p2, “POLS SERVE UP PORK; Budget Doles Out $170M in Goodies”.  For the trafe menu, link to Lovett.
 
Also in Monday's Post, E.J. McMahon chipped in with WHAT THE GOV GOT: Less than New York needs.   Some excerpts: "In sheer dollar terms, however, Spitzer made his biggest concessions back on Jan. 31 - in his own proposal for a 7.8 per cent hike in state funded spending.  After pledging in his State of the State address (Jan. 3) to "finally learn to say 'no' to budget requests we simply cannot afford," the new governor unveiled an executive budget that, Medicaid aside, was mainly a big 'yes' to the baseline he inherited from Gov. George Pataki."
 
"After a back-room negotiating process that represented a step backward for budget-making transparency, Spitzer's governance slogan has morphed from an assertive "Day One - Everything Changes" to a plaintive "Rome Wasn't Built in a Day."
 
Responding to these negative views by reporters, someone called out the editorial boards to support the governor, and they hove to:
 
Times, Tuesday 4/3: Editorial, A BETTER NEW YORK BUDGET.
"After Gov. Eliot Spitzer, a self-declared "steamroller," negotiated his first budget last weekend, legislators were gleeful.  A few even boasted publicly that for all of Mr. Spitzer's brash talk, he had been easily flattened by the old hands in Albany.
 
"Such celebrations should be short-lived.  Mr. Spitzer made some compromises, but in exchange he won important and fundamental changes in the way the state operates.  New Yorkers who yearn for a government that works more for its citizens than for the stale, political subculture in Albany should soon be able to recognize that Mr. Spitzer has gotten off to a good start."
 
News, Tuesday 4/3: Editorial, GOV'S RIGHT ON THE MONEY: "...(T)he new state budget must be counted a success for New York City.  Albany is about to start sending record amounts of education aid to the five boroughs, ending too many decades in which the Legislature denied fair funding to the more than 1 million children in the public schools.  Mayor Bloomberg and (Joel) Klein also will be able to open at least 50 more charter schools to offer a chance for superior learning to thousands of youngsters.
 
"Gov. Spitzer was the driving force behind this education bonanza, and he deserves thanks for delivering in the face of entrenched interests that have had their own way for far too many a year.  To knock the rookie governor for not achieving 100% of his goals while failing to transform lawmakers into Boy and Girl Scouts is to engage in otherworldly quibbling."

The Post was not on the reservation.  In their Tuesday editorial, ELIOT’S EDUCATION, began: “A giddy Joe Bruno yesterday delivered judgment on New York’s spanking new, $122-billion state budget – and his own role in shaping it.
“Whatever happened?” crowed the state Senate majority leader.  “Two months ago my days were numbered?” …My members were all going to desert and leave?”
“Whatever happened?
“It’s a fair question, even coming from someone under the continuing scrutiny of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
“What did happen?
“Gov. Spitzer got taken to school last week, that’s what happened, and New Yorkers will be paying for his crash course in Albany realpolitik for years to come.
“Everything Changes on Day One?”
“Hardly…
We have given you eight of the 29 paragraphs in the editorial.  In the Post, however, the paragraphs are very short; some consists of only one or two words, which makes for easy reading.

How do the people of the State of New York feel about this controversy?  The first take on public sentiment came with the release of the Quinnipiac poll Wednesday, April 4..  Rather than link to newspaper accounts, we go directly to the release by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.  BTW, Quinnipiac is also the name of a small river which flows into Long Island Sound near New Haven, Connecticut.  The university, originally Connecticut College of Commerce, was renamed in 1951 to commemorate the Indian tribe which inhabited the greater New Haven area from the 17th to the 19th centuries.

The director of the Institute is Maurice Carroll, a distinguished former reporter for the New York Times, who aptly described the poll’s findings:

“There’s nothing like a knock-down, drag-out New York State budget battle to take the steam out of even the most vigorous steamroller.  Budget stories dominated the media and Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s job approval sagged.  On the budget, did Gov. Spitzer or win a ‘fair compromise?’  Slightly more voters say he gave away too much.”

The good news for the governor is that on the most vital statistic, the approval rating, Gov. Spitzer won a 48-27 vote of confidence.  His self-described ‘steamroller’ style was approved by a 47-36 vote.  The bad news is that these numbers are down from a 61-11 approval rating in Quinnipiac’s February 13 poll, when the steamroller won by 61-24.

In today’s survey, 47 per cent of voters say the steamroller tactic contributes to legislative gridlock, while 23 per cent say the tactic is working.  That is inconsistent with the steamroller style being approved by 47-36 in the same poll, but poll results often vary, depending on how the question is worded.

The fact is, the people still like the governor, but public taste is fickle.  Working in his favor is the fact that his colleagues, Bruno and Silver, get far lower ratings.  Silver had 30 approving and 30 disapproving, while Bruno had 27 positive and 34 negative, perhaps as a result of his purported pending indictment.  The legislature as a whole received an unfavorable rating, 34 positive and 43 negative.
 
Wednesday brought us results from the Quinnipiac poll, which showed a sharp decline in the governor's approval rating. from 61` to 48 per cent.  This could have been from the television campaign waged against his budget cuts by the hospitals and unions.  The governor responded with a $3.5 million campaign of his own, with $3 million coming from campaign funds and $500,000 said to be from his own pocket.  It seems unjust for a public official to have to spend his own money to compete with special interests waging expensive advertising campaigns against his policies.  Well, he doesn't have to, but shouldn't a man have the right to fight back.
 
Whenever a compromise is reached, both sides can proclaim that they have one.  That is the case with regard to the budget.  We don't think it's worthwhile to declare a winner, but reformers are usually disappointed at the outcome of negotiations because they do not get all they want.
 
In almost all cases where there is conflict, we, and the newspaper editorial boards, seem to find ourselves in agreement with Governor Spitzer and not with the odd couple of Silver and Bruno.   Each legislative leader has his own sacred cows: In Bruno's case, hospitals and their unions (who supported the Republican for that state senate vacancy in Nassau), armed hunters, and Long Island school districts (whose state subsidy was increased by double digits) Silver, has a different set of favorites: public employee unions, plaintiff's lawyers and the criminal defense bar, among others.
 
It is hard for us to tell which side got the better of the negotiations.  If they are all boasting about the result, that is probably being done for show purposes.  Notice that in public Speaker Silver is the least loquacious of the triumvirs.  He   saves his voice for the bargaining table.  In a tripartite negotiation, there is usually an odd man out.  In the last couple of years, Bruno and Silver combined against Pataki.  In 2007 it was the two Democrats, Spitzer and Silver, negotiating with Bruno.  Notice which of the three leaders is always part of the majority coalition.
 
There are many things to say about the governor's rocky start, but today is not the day for specific judgments.
The problem is complicated by the fact that we all, at least all of us, want him to succeed.  But there is no question that hopes for significant change have diminished in the first hundred days, along with the governor's popularity.  Why that is so, and what can be done about it, are questions which we will discuss shortly.


 
#363  4.5.07   1953wds