With his ashen-faced wife at his side, the governor apologized and said his behavior “violates my obligation to my family and violates my or any sense of right or wrong.” He was right about his violations, but he was, sadly, wrong when he asserted that politics is only about “big ideas” and not individuals. His short, arrogant statement simply was not enough, not from the Sheriff of Wall Street, not from the self-appointed Mr. Clean who went to Albany promising a new and better day.
It is likely that every aspect of Mr. Spitzer’s other life as Client 9 for the Emperor’s Club V.I.P. — as he has been identified by law enforcement officials — every text message and other secretive communication will be made public. Any politician would have a full-time job just dealing with such revelations. There have been elected officials, over the years, who have survived scandals of this sort. But for Mr. Spitzer, who runs a large and complex state, the burden is especially heavy to show that he has not lost the credibility to push for change, a sound budget and good government, as he promised so confidently a year ago.
While few clients of prostitutes face criminal charges, law-enforcement affidavits raise at least the possibility of criminal charges based on transporting a woman across state lines for prostitution. Mr. Spitzer’s own record of prosecuting such cases gives him scant breathing room. As state attorney general, he prosecuted prostitution rings with enthusiasm — pointing out that they are often involved in human trafficking, drug trafficking and money laundering. In 2004 on Staten Island, Mr. Spitzer was vehement in his outrage over 16 people arrested in a high-end prostitution ring.
A further tragedy here, beyond the personal one of the Spitzer family and the damage he has done to the reform cause, is that Mr. Spitzer’s targets are now relishing their tormentor’s torment. Those on Wall Street who fumed at having to make their world fairer for ordinary shareholders can now chortle with satisfaction in their private enclaves. For New York Republicans, who have blocked some of the most important reforms in Albany, it is hard to imagine the private glee — especially at a moment when they are fighting desperately to hold their majority in the State Senate.
Sadly, this was not the first time that Mr. Spitzer has been caught up in his own arrogance. For all his promise as governor, Mr. Spitzer’s first year was unnecessarily rocky and full of the kinds of mistakes that come as much from hubris as from being new on the job. After succeeding with a few reforms, the governor’s ill-fated attempts to smear his Republican opponent lost him months of progress. Only recently had he seemed to be tempering his abrasive style.
Mr. Spitzer did not seem to understand on Monday what he owed the public — a strong argument for why he should be trusted again. The longer he hesitates, it becomes a harder case to make.
Editorial
Published: March 12, 2008
Gov. Eliot Spitzer has now twice violated his obligations to the people of New York. He violated their trust when, according to law enforcement officials, he patronized a prostitution ring. He compounded that violation Tuesday by hiding in his Fifth Avenue apartment and refusing to explain his actions or his future plans.
To put it bluntly, Mr. Spitzer must either resign immediately or explain why he deserves to continue in office. It is almost impossible for us to imagine how he can survive this scandal and provide the credible leadership that his state needs.
New York’s government cannot afford to be paralyzed while Mr. Spitzer games his political prospects or, as many suspect, tries to work out a better legal deal with federal prosecutors.
Mr. Spitzer didn’t even bother to explain his plans to Lt. Gov. David Paterson, who would step in if Mr. Spitzer does resign. Mr. Paterson told reporters that he had talked briefly with the governor on Monday. But, he said: “No one has talked to me about his resignation, and no one has talked to me about a transition.”
Mr. Paterson should be readying himself to take over this powerful job and keep the state running.
He will have to move quickly to reassure New Yorkers that he is in charge and fully committed to reforming Albany’s broken political system. He could start by getting rid of most of those in Mr. Spitzer’s inner circle and replacing them with the best and most reputable staff he can find.
There will be those who argue — cynically — that Mr. Spitzer’s personal hypocrisy has discredited his calls for good government. They must be resisted. The need for reform now is just as pressing as it was before this sad and sordid spectacle began to unfold.
Mr. Paterson is a virtual unknown to many New Yorkers. He comes from Harlem’s powerful political network and has 20 years of experience in the State Senate. He is legally blind. He also has a sharp sense of the people and politics around him.
Those skills and Mr. Paterson’s easy eloquence should help him with the main and most immediate hurdle: passing next year’s state’s budget agreement that is due on midnight March 31. The budget fight is always fierce in Albany, but the worsening economy will make that even more extreme. What this means is that the affable Mr. Paterson will have to negotiate with — and manage — two of the strongest and wiliest political characters in New York: State Senator Joseph Bruno, the Senate majority leader, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.
That will take not only eloquence and empathy but a steel backbone and strong political advisers.
The Legislature also needs to move quickly on New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s congestion pricing plan. Without Albany’s O.K. by the end of March, the city and state could lose about $350 million in federal aid. Other issues that need to be quickly dealt with are Mr. Silver’s proposal for an increase on taxes for those earning more than $1 million a year and property tax relief that is urgently needed outside New York City.
There are many other problems that will require a strong and credible governor’s attention and backing, including rules on ethics and fair election redistricting and campaign finance reform.
All of this is on hold while Mr. Spitzer focuses on his personal plight. New York cannot wait any longer.
HW#23
Explain what point of view each editor expressed in the
editorial "
03/13
Aim: How does Herbert use details to support his argument in his editorial "Sharing the Pain"?
Do Now:
- Copy WOD
- Do Test-Prep Question
- Read on this day of history. Pick one event that intrigued you and copy down in your notebook.
- Read and copy one of the most interesting news summaries including the headline in your notebook. Take the Daily News Quiz.
- Go to the cartoon page and interpret the cartoon
1. Interpret the quotation of the day on your own words:
Journal #9 Theodore Roosevelt: “Do what you can with what you have.”
2.Read the editorial and identify three details that the author used to support his argument.
Sharing the Pain
Now that the economic crunch is reaching those near the top of the pyramid, there is finally a sense that the U.S. is facing a real crisis.
Forget about a soft landing. The stock markets continue to tumble. The dollar has weakened. The subprime mortgage debacle has morphed into a full-fledged panic. And Joe Stiglitz is telling us the war in Iraq will cost $3 trillion.
Maybe now we can stop listening to the geniuses who insisted that the way to nirvana was to ignore the broad national interest while catering to the desires of those who were already the wealthiest among us.
We have always gotten a distorted picture of how well Americans were doing from politicians and the media. The U.S. has a population of 300 million. Thirty-seven million, many of them children, live in poverty. Close to 60 million are just one notch above the official poverty line. These near-poor Americans live in households with annual incomes that range from $20,000 to $40,000 for a family of four.
It is disgraceful that in a nation as wealthy as the United States, nearly a third of the people are poor or near-poor.
Former Senator John Edwards touched on the quality of the lives of those perched precariously above the abyss of poverty in his foreword to the book, “The Missing Class: Portraits of the Near-Poor in America,” by Katherine S. Newman and Victor Tan Chen. Mr. Edwards wrote:
“When we set about fixing welfare in the 1990s, we said we were going to encourage work. Near-poor Americans do work, usually in jobs that the rest of us do not want — jobs with stagnant wages, no retirement funds, and inadequate health insurance, if they have it at all. While their wages stay the same, the cost of everything else — energy, housing, transportation, tuition — goes up.”
The economic pain and anxiety felt for so long by the poor and the near-poor has been spreading like a stain in the middle class as well. It’s hardly been a secret. But neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have stepped up to this fundamental long-term challenge, and that includes the three remaining candidates for president.
No one will tackle the crucial issue of employment in a serious way. The cornerstone of a middle-class life in America (and that means the cornerstone of the American dream) is a good job. The American dream is on life support because men and women by the millions who want very much to work — who still have in their heads the ideal of a thriving family in a nice home with maybe a picket fence — are unable to find a decent job.
For years, families have been fighting weakness on the employment front with every other option imaginable. Wives and mothers have gone to work. People have been putting in more hours and working additional jobs.
And Americans have plunged like Olympic diving champions into every form of debt they could find.
As Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, told me some months ago: “Workers are incredibly, legitimately scared that the American dream, particularly the belief that their kids will do better, is ending.”
It is. The dream is in grave danger because the ruling elite stopped looking out for the collective interests of the society and all but stopped investing in the future. We are swimming in a vast sea of indebtedness, most of it bringing no worthwhile return.
Former Senator Bill Bradley, in a conversation the other day, described the amount of public and private indebtedness in the U.S. as “ominous.” In his book, “The New American Story,” Mr. Bradley said:
“For almost a generation, America has cheated our future and lived only in the here and now. Economic growth depends on the level of investment in both physical capital — machines, infrastructure, technology — and human capital, which consists of the combined skills and health of our work force.”
Instead of making those investments, we’ve neglected our physical and human infrastructure, squeezed the daylights out of the work force (now a fearful and demoralized lot) and tried to hide the resulting debacle behind the fool’s gold of debt and denial.
Americans save virtually nothing. They have looted the equity in their homes and driven their credit card balances to staggering heights. Meanwhile, the Bush administration has claimed colossal new standards of fiscal irresponsibility. At some point, to take just one example, someone will have to pay the $3 trillion for the war.
This craziness is not sustainable.
Without an educated and
empowered work force,
without sustained investment
in the infrastructure and
technologies that foster
long-term employment, and
without a system of taxation
that can actually pay for
the services provided by
government, the American
dream as we know it will
expire.
HW#24 Read the editorial and
identify three details that
the author used to support
his argument.
03/14/08