What did David Patterson do to New York?
February 26, 2010 What is going on? Over the past few years I have not given much attention to state politics (my own negligence), but somewhere in the background, just around the corner, anti-Paterson drums have beat incessantly. His approval rating remain impressively low while a demeaning tone generally infuse commentary and headlines. Without giving much thought I quietly assumed he was as the public perceived – the bane of the state.
The clamoring really kicked up another notch in early February when the Post and several other papers and blogs began bubbling about a big story the Times was working on – a bombshell that would finally bury the Paterson administration. Finally, I had to see for myself why the governor was being condemned. Looking through New York papers, journals, blogs, etc., it is practically impossible to not come away with the impression that Governor Paterson is incompetent, out of his league, and objectively incapable of running a government.
The tabloids take it to another level. Those who read the Post and Daily News must think Paterson is a village idiot who stumbled through life by virtue (welfare) of his blindness. Their attacks on the governorship have been pitiless and downright nasty. Yet, underneath all the exasperation I found very little that indicates scandal or egregious mismanagement. When he took office he admitted to having an affair while he and his wife were separated – hardly scandalous.
The Post was at the root of perpetuating the rumor that Governor Paterson had a drug-induced sexual encounter with another woman in the Executive Mansion. When he insisted on his innocence and demanded media accountability for what he called “a spate of outrageous rumors”, he was criticized even more. In the Daily News, columnist Joanna Molloy disparaged him for defending himself “when he should have just kept his mouth shut.” (Interesting to note: A sidebar link in Molloy’s piece navigates to a nice picture of Andrew Cuomo smiling with his two daughters and is accompanied by a brief history of his benevolent political rise.) This is indicative of his treatment. Newspapers, blogs, and journals seem sharply tilted against Paterson, if not bluntly, then by juxtaposition and tone.
Even the involvement of the Times has been somewhat dubious. Their silence and refusal to smother the fire of an apparently fallacious story, the one that was supposed to drive him out of office, created the expected bombshell out of the eventual February 17th cover story that was barely worthy of front page status. Then they kept Paterson in their sites and on the front page. February 19: As Campaign Nears, Paterson Is Seen as Increasingly Remote; February 21: Defying Critics, Paterson Opens His Campaign; February 25: Question of Influence in Abuse Case of Paterson Aide; February 26: Paterson Weighs Race as Top Aide Quits in Protest; February 27: Under Fire, Paterson Ends His Campaign for Governor; February 28: Paterson Faces a Big Question: Can He Govern?
Of course the tabloids jumped all over the Paterson aide story in a feeding frenzy to make sure Paterson was properly executed in the media sphere as they had foretold. Back at the Daily News, Molloy bellowed that “Paterson's silence on David Johnson's alleged act of domestic violence is deafening.” Taking her most superior tone yet, she berates the governor for his atrocious hypocrisy (because he called for Hiram Monserrate’s dismissal from the Senate after he was convicted of domestic assault), turns every accusation in the Times article into a grandiose charge (e.g. police called the confrontation between Paterson’s aide and his girlfriend second degree harassment, but Molloy declares it could be felony assault), and in denouncing possible state police meddling, asks, “where are we - Iran?”
With the deepest respect for free speech and expression, how does hyperbole of this strain benefit public discourse? Admittedly, my own perspective on this brouhaha is gradually shifting to Paterson’s defense, because I search for what he has actually done to deserve this supremely low reputation only to discover an echo chamber of hypercriticism and cynicism without substance. The New York Times continues to run stories on the efficacy of Paterson’s governorship while the tabloids and critics scream for his resignation. Even Democrats in Albany are demanding he step down, but this is coming from an assembly considered to be one of the most dysfunctional governing bodies in the country (according to a report by New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice).
In the 450 reader comments on the February 27th Times article covering Paterson’s withdrawal from the governor’s race, criticism and theories are far-reaching. Lack of hard evidence justifying his perceived persecution has led many to see racist motives. A large group of readers see the entire fiasco as behind-the-scenes power politics. The Post, Daily News, and Times are all implicated, but the power behind the repudiation is left to speculation – big money, old politics, blue blood (Cuomo for governor and Paterson’s perceived mishandling of the Clinton Senate seat vacancy in which he passed over Caroline Kennedy). Ethical corruption and general incompetence again runs consistently with very little to back up the rhetoric.
Tucked into the general cantankerous criticism (as opposed to informed and constructive criticism which tends to take more governance-specific lines rather than simple blanket condemnation) is disapproval of his handling of the budget, but this was something he merely inherited and has not shied away from. In fact, he has been very vocal in bringing more focused attention to what he sees as the critical issue at hand. There is also sufficient disappointment with how he has handled the state assembly. This may be true. Some say it requires craftiness or a strong arm, but, he did introduce the Albany Reform Act. This seems to be a substantial piece of legislation, one that may be critical to restoring government integrity. On a state and national level it has been discussed for years, but the those who it would impose upon cannot pass anything worthwhile. The New York reform seeks transparency and accountability in campaign financing, legislation, and ethics. So why cut off the limb that is trying to save the body?
It seems par for course for politicians to be dogged constantly for one thing or another, attacked for character, and disparaged because of their past, associations, or words misspoken. This could simply be his inability to fight through the typical flack. This could be a symptom of our problematic political system, or a symptom of our human reality. Maybe in the end I will discover my naiveté and shortsightedness, but for now Governor Paterson’s downfall is eerie to watch and hacks away at my dwindling hope for a political system spoken of with winged-words on the campaign platform and mutilated on the playing field.