Long Train (Not) Runnin'

Steve Zorn posted about the MTA's proposed "elimination of non-Stakes Belmont service" (and they're presumably not talking about the New York Stallion Stakes) via the Long Island Railroad over on his Business of Racing blog. He and NYRA's John Lee led the game opposition at a public hearing in Garden City.

"The LIRR would eliminate train service in a manner that impacts the least number of riders," according to the MTA's proposal. I don't know what the figures are for Belmont ridership, but it certainly can't be much, and I'm afraid that bottom line will ultimately trump the worthy arguments against the service elimination, should the Ravitch plan to bail out the MTA with payroll taxes and tolls on the East River bridges not be adopted (and the latter component of that plan has no shot). The proposed fare hikes, cutbacks, and job cuts are extensive, and they more prominently involve the city subway system. Their effects would be far more profound to far more people than those involving service cuts to Belmont.

So I'd say that the outlook is grim, at least in the short-term. But don't despair. Ultimately, the LIRR connection from Manhattan to Belmont will prove to be a powerful argument to bring slots to the track and additional redevelopment to the facility. Not only will the rail link survive, but the Belmont station will be renovated and cleaned and the tracks maintained so that the trains don't have to go like .2 MPH around that final turn for home over the Cross Island Parkway. In a more perfect world of course, NYRA would shake this off and instead lure stranded railbirds to one of their lavish OTB facilities in various parts of Manhattan. But that not being the case, attendance at the track will no doubt take a slight hit for the time being.

- Governor Paterson is getting absolutely reamed by the press over the manner in which he conducted his Senate selection process, and some seem to be writing his political obituary. NY Times' columnist Maureen Dowd called him a "goof-ball," the Daily News' Mike Lupica, who doesn't seem to know much more about politics than he did about sports, labeled him as "phony," and says he'll be "one term and out." And the NY Post, who attacked Spitzer with a kind of venom that was extraordinary even for them, claims that: we miss Client 9 in one of the most hilarious editorials I've seen in a while,. Gimme a break.

One can certainly criticize the governor for taking too long, and for thinking out loud too much and too often. But c'mon, it was the press itself who turned this thing into a circus, with its obsession with Caroline Kennedy's bid, its focus on meaningless polls, and its unrelenting questioning and probing of the governor's intentions. I think we were just seeing Paterson's folksy and irreverent style in response, and I don't believe it will ultimately have any effect whatsoever on his reelection prospects. His electoral fate will ultimately be determined by his handling of the budget negotiations over the next few months, and this messy affair will become a distant memory.

Where Paterson really did go wrong was the critical remarks about Ms. Kennedy that "leaked" from his office after she withdrew. Although he's now attempting to deny his involvement, Elizabeth Benjamin had reported in the News that one of his paid consultants was behind it all; Fred Dicker calls him a liar. I think that this criticism is all completely valid, and that Paterson screwed up here. But, while not defending his actions, who can blame the governor for being pissed off? And for trying to make it clear that he wasn't going to pick her anyway? He would have been a goof-ball in my eyes if he had. Far too many people had far too many things to say about Ms. Kennedy, and statements by people like Bloomberg's aide Kevin Sheekey that he was nearly obligated to pick her if the state wanted a piece of the bailout pie, were way beyond the pale.....as were implications to that effect like her endorsement by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. So I find his desire to push back to be completely understandable, if totally misguided. Paterson didn't at all need to condone leaks from his office to the effect that she wasn't qualified for the job - she clearly demonstrated that herself.

And by the way, Josh Isay, the consultant who did such a masterful job running Ms. Kennedy's "campaign" into the ground, was rewarded with a new gig. I'm telling you man, I'm in the wrong business...