With Sheldon Silver laying low since Eliot Spitzer become Governor, I’ve spent the last year focused on how bad Joe Bruno and his ilk are for our state. But lately, Silver has set out to even the score, possibly thwarting plans for congestion pricing, certainly to blame for stuffing a well thought out and long-argued New York City garbage plan. With congestion pricing, at least, it could be argued that if Silver allowed a vote the plan would be voted down, that it hasn’t yet been endorsed by the New York City Council, and that other alternatives should be considered before a final decision is made. Silver being Silver I doubt it, but an argument could be made his is being reasonable and we are still moving toward a reasonable outcome. The garbage plan, however, was passed by the New York City Council in a show of considerable political courage, particularly by the Speaker, and is the result of 20 years of arguments, with one interest or another, one concern after another blocking all prior plans. Garbage, like traffic, is one of those things that can never be made perfect, but the city’s plan was certainly vetted. The argument that it would encumber a park is a red herring – the “park” is a similar facility closed not long ago, probably mapped as parkland precisely to avoid its use for anything like a recycling station. And unlike the congestion pricing plan, the city’s garbage plan would certainly have won in a free vote. The question is what to do now.
With regard to the garbage plan, one thing none of the reporting has indicated is whether the City Council legislation made the shift from truck transport to water and rail transport in the other boroughs contingent on transfer stations being build in Manhattan as well. If not, the grown ups down here should bite the bullet and modify it, and proceed with the rest of the plan. By continuing with trucking for the rest of the city, the other boroughs would be cutting off their nose to spite their face, and hurting themselves. The rest of the plan should proceed, however unfair and additionally painful that is, regardless of what happens in Manhattan.
Silver, and the three state legislators from the area where the recycling station would be built, are claiming that it could be built nearby just as easily. This is a typical Silver strategy. He represents undeserving beneficiaries of the status quo, and their resources and focus, combined with a governing structure that makes change almost possible, allows him to maneuver to cheat the rest of us and the future while avoiding blame. There is always a perfect scenario around the corner, always more questions, always more study, and until the perfect solution is found, why not just keep the great deals for some people in place? After all, that way someday everyone will get to take out of our common life more than they put in. Right.
In this case, there is a way to counter that gambit.
The city should put the money it had planned to use to build the Gansevoort recycling station in escrow, and publish a set of criteria that the station would have to meet. And as it builds the other waste transfer facilities, if construction costs rise and more money is required, more money should be set aside for Gansevoort as well. The city should announce that the money is available for the State of New York to create an agency to build a recycling station on the island of Manhattan, and that as soon as one that would not raise operating costs higher than the other stations appears, the city would begin to use it. So the Gansevoort opponents would have the opportunity to come up with their own plan, and implement it, adding non-city money if necessary. The City of New York would then wash its hands of the garbage problem, stating correctly that it had done all it could to address its garbage problem at a reasonable cost, and that it was now the state’s solution.
Once the rest of the waste transfer system was operating, residents of the other parts of the city could be reminded, month after month, year after year, election after election, that their Assemblymember scuttled a fair city plan and made them take trucks with Manhattan’s trash. That’s right, their own Assemblymember, no matter what they say about this particular plan, because they only get one real vote every two years, the vote on who is to be the Speaker. They put Silver in, they are responsible for what he does. Period. Perhaps the trash trucks to Brooklyn could be painted Silver, and called Silvermobiles.
I would ask loyal Democrats to consider what this decision means about the reality of the values of the Democratic party. As I’ve said, 50 years ago the Democrats were the party of bigots, the Republicans the party of snobs. Then it reversed. It’s the cocktail party vs. the frat party today. Most of the rest of use are unrepresented.
As for congestion pricing, it remains to be seen what the upshot will be. Will another more comprehensive solution to congestion, and transportation finance, emerge in the next few months in the middle of possible fiscal crisis, a national election and attempt by the Democrats to take the State Senate? If not, it isn’t just Silver who needs to be held accountable, but lots of other politicians, the contractors who overcharge for infrastructure maintenance, the public employees who wish to retire ever earlier on ever more favorable terms, and the drivers AND transit riders who insist on having their fares, gas taxes and tolls fall relative to the inflation rate year after year, whining about every increase. The transportation debt situation is, in fact, a large part of the generational war, with Silver representing the better-off, older generations who are doing the warring.
If things continue as they are, what can I say? I wish no one ill, but when the breaking point is reached and younger generations treat older generations they way they themselves have been treated, cutting the value of their health coverage and pensions among other things, I may not be willing to object. After all, that debt will need to be paid off, or not, and there will be a limit to the amount of taxes that can be charged future taxpayers with less and less in return, the consequence of the something for nothing and everyone for themselves politics of the past 20 years. If people act greedily toward the community perhaps it is to be expected, given the way good intentions have been exploited by one group of organized and self-interested beneficiaries after another.
Need I repeat my haiku?
In Albany, money flows
To power,
Not to merit or need.
From each according to
Their stupidity.
To each according to
Their greed.
One thing that infuriates me is that Richard Brodsky is blaming the coming MTA fiscal crisis on George Pataki. Why didn’t he do so when Pataki was Governor? I certainly did. Because he and his were in on the “everybody wins” deal, that’s why. That’s why every policy that benefits the insiders today and hurts everyone down the road passes 212 to 0.
The irony is the city- and future-screwer extraordinaire Joe Bruno is on the right side of these issues, from what I read in the newspaper. But who really knows? For all I know, the two arch-enemies Bruno and Silver spent this Thanksgiving toasting the success of their backers at the expense of our future, taking turns being so obviously immoral so that the general public would have neither major party to turn to. All I look to is the overall results coming out of Albany, where garbage pols are in, and garbage policies come out.