November 21, 2010
CUOMO OFFERS A HISTORY LESSON
By BOB McCARTHY
If there is a time when Andrew M. Cuomo morphed from campaigner to governor, it may have been following his Tuesday visit to City Hall.
That’s when the governor-elect summoned a sense of history to compare the grim fiscal realities of 2010 to the crisis confronted by former Gov. Hugh L. Carey upon taking office in 1975. That emergency, spawned by overspending and a plethora of borrowing, almost bankrupted New York City and possibly the state as well.
“Use the crisis to deal with a lot of issues we needed to deal with anyway,” Cuomo said of the reforms he will seek. “There’s a silver lining to it. The state can now galvanize, focus and change.”
Cuomo naturally inherits an appreciation for history. His father — former Gov. Mario Cuomo — reveled in it. And the governor-elect has been around long enough to understand that history — especially what happened in 1975 — offers lessons for those confronting a $10 billion deficit in 2011.
That’s why Cuomo’s recognition of the events of almost 36 years ago looms as a major focal point as he prepares to take office on Jan. 1. If he is to follow in Carey’s footsteps, it means the entire spectrum of New York—labor, business, government—must change its ways. They must recognize—as Carey did — that “the days of wine and roses are over.”
Carey, now 92, must be watching all this with interest from his New York City home. Also watching is former State Sen. Seymour Lachman, co-author with former Newsday reporter Robert Polner of the new book: “The Man Who Saved New York: Hugh Carey and the Great Fiscal Crisis of 1975.”
Lachman’s book details how Carey confronted and solved a situation with potentially disastrous consequences, even at the expense of the liberal constituency that had just elected him. Lachman said last week that Cuomo’s comparison to 1975 is valid.
It’s that serious. The former senator believes that Cuomo enters office knowing that “sweeping things under the carpet or using gimmicks” won’t smooth the situation, as in the past.
Lachman believes Cuomo will learn from the lessons of the past; that if everyone works together — as the new governor frequently implores — the crisis can produce not only a balanced budget but major systemic changes.
“Just as Gov. Carey did, he has a major job to bring these people together to resolve this problem before it gets worse,” he said.
But Carey operated in a different time. Brooklyn District Attorney Joe Hynes, running for governor himself in 1998, often said he would emulate Carey by solving problems with legislative leaders “over at the Mansion with a steak and a martini.” Such camaraderie is now rare.
Lachman points out that the Legislature to which he once belonged is now more “dysfunctional” than ever. In addition, Cuomo and Carey are “very different personalities.” And there’s that question of public sector unions.
But Lachman believes the new governor is up to the task. His experience at HUD may have prepared him as a negotiator in the same way that Congress prepared Carey. And while his resolve sounds very much like Eliot Spitzer four years ago, Lachman thinks Cuomo will avoid the “bull in a china shop” approach that failed Spitzer.
He points out that President Gerald Ford finally acquiesced to state aid when Carey and New York City leaders showed they had tightened their belts and made new accommodations with labor.
“It was a very, very heavy lift for Gov. Carey,” Lachman said. “And it will be a very heavy lift for Governorelect Cuomo to do it. But he has to do it.”
Op-ed follow-up, with Lachman interview
December 16, 2010
Text Size