| || |
Thanks for nuthin'!
April 1, 2009 - John Stack
I keep talking to people, and often they ask me about my feelings on Gov Paterson. I knew his popularity numbers were approaching Bushian levels. But to me, it seemed like a lot of the flak was undeserved. A big deal was made out of him choosing Kirsten Gillibrand to succeed Hillary Clinton. I think it was a great pick. I think he should be applauded for it. In the same story he was chastised for not being more open on the process. I defended him then as it being his prerogative to select a replacement any way he saw fit.
I also applauded his stance of not kowtowing to any of the special interests and such. He was a democrat, but owed no democrats favors, such as school unions or town and city and county organizations. He seemed to be governing for the good of the State, rather for just his own party. This, for probably the only time it has happened in my lifetime. He came up with radical new ideas to help close the monstrous budget gap caused by a recession not caused by him, but felt by New Yorkers probably more than anywhere else. Not all of his ideas were great, but at least he opened his mouth and offered an idea or solution.
Recently, supposed advocates of open government have railed against the secrecy of the budget process. Blair Horner and others seem to look at idealistically, as if it was more transparent to the public, a better budget would have been crafted. They even went as far as to say the budget would have been out earlier! I don’t understand this at all. The legislature refuses to change the way they do business. If the public was actually let in ( the dog and pony show of Silver, Bruno and Pataki ‘negotiating’ in public was a ridiculous farce and affront to New Yorkers), how would it get any better? How would it have helped to have the minority ‘leaders’ in the room?
I had hoped the ‘secrecy’ would afford
No comments posted for this article.
Post a Comment
News, Blogs & Events Web