Governor Paterson was in Queens on Wednesday, and when asked about the Aqueduct racino, he said:
“I am willing to take what ever choice that the other two can arrive at because we need the money and we need to start generating work and opportunity right here in southeast Queens." [Queens Chronicle]Now, c'mon governor. As you no doubt know, I'm one of your biggest fans. I've praised you for consistently and loudly sounding the alarm on the deficit from the moment you took office, for showing leadership in your dealing with the Senate, and for properly taking matters into your own hands when appropriate. And, on top of all that, you're a fucking pisser too.
But what really is the story here? You've shown no hesitation in acting unilaterally when it was called for. You moved to withhold Senators' pay during the coup stalemate, and appointed a lieutenant governor even though everyone, including the state Attorney General (in extremely adamant terms), said that you didn't have the constitutional power to do so. You told the legislature that if they couldn't agree to the measures necessary to close the deficit, you would do it yourself. And now that they indeed fell short of your goal, you've declared that you're indeed going to withhold payments from localities, including schools.
"I will probably be sued for this, but I will not let New York state run out of money on my watch...." Paterson reiterated that he would unilaterally hold back the funds because the state is about to run out of cash and shouldn't borrow money from other accounts to make payments to counties, municipalities and school districts. [Times Union]So I don't understand what exactly is going on here. Is there something we don't know? The state is so desperate you say, literally on the verge of issuing IOU's and having its credit rating destroyed, that you are resorting to measures you know may be unconstitutional. But when it comes to Aqueduct, you'll "take what ever choice that the other two can arrive at?" What the fuck is that? I know of at least one bidder that is willing to write the state a check for $300 million tomorrow. So why is it, in this case, that you haven't taken charge? Why don't you tell Shelly Silver and John Sampson who you want!? And then, tell the public too, explain your reasoning behind the choice, articulate once again the dire importance of the up front cash and continuing cash flow. Then (assuming, of course, that you pick the bidder who you honestly and objectively, free from politics and influence, feel will be of most benefit to the taxpayers), should they not go along (and why, really, if they truly have the state's best interests at heart, would they not?), let those bozos be the ones to tell the voters why they are costing the state a million dollars a day!