|
Editorial
Election taught lessons, but were they learned?
Voters sent a loud and clear message Tuesday that they want change in Washington, D.C., but resisted the urge for major change in Albany. While some of the results are bewildering, there are some lessons upon which both parties- and voters- can build, if they got the message.
Both parties learned that scandal doesn't necessarily equate to a loss for the person associated with that scandal. If that were true, then Republican Tom Reynolds- strongly linked to disgraced former Florida congressman Mark Foley- would not have won his race for Congress and Democrat Alan Hevesi would have been punished for abusing the very trust he held as State Comptroller when he used public money to have a state employee serve as a chauffeur for his wife.
Voters in Reynolds' district have re-elected a very powerful man with both positive and negative political ties. Statewide, residents should be warned that they have returned Hevesi, a man whose duty is to uphold the public's trust and didn't, and who is affiliated with the party now in control of two lawmaking branches.
Locally, many voters feel that they are well represented in the state capitol, despite the contrary, evidenced by the local economy. Still, the actions by voters indicate that things may get better with a Democratic governor and a mostly status-quo local delegation. Many persons familiar with Albany politics say that upstate New York receives the short end of the stick because there is too much influence from downstate representatives. Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer said he will change this, and it will be up to our local representatives to hold him to that. If they don't, then upstate will remain in its economic tailspin.
Area Republicans have their work cut out for them after apparently missing the message sent to them last year. Jeffrey Sell ran a campaign with less than $3,000 after receiving 40 percent of the vote in a county legislator race in 2005. Rather than build on potential momentum, the Republicans chose not to invest in potential stars and ran passive campaigns in many races.
On the national level- and state level- the Republicans got into trouble because many of them strayed from their own policy of cutting taxes and reducing spending. Instead of save and reduce, they cut and spent. Examples of this run the gamut from President Bush to County Executive Giambra. Bush cut taxes, but created more government jobs and spending than FDR. Giambra cut taxes, then spent $200 million from a tobacco settlement like a sailor on shore leave. Throw in an unpopular foreign policy, and the table was set for Democratic victories.
Centrist Democrats saw this, and many of them made longtime GOP ideals part of their own platforms. Now that they have control of the House, the key for them is not to get too greedy from their power as the GOP seems to have done. Critics of the Democratic party call it the tax-and-spend party. Democrats must resist the urge to create more government programs and instead work to cut the deficit rationally. In other words, stick with their cut-andreduce message.
Who paid attention during the election season? We'll have a better idea by next spring, when spending plans are announced.
| 
