Paterson Too Good to be True? (Probably)

I know he hasn’t even officially assumed the governorship yet, so it’s way premature to judge him. Still, I just assumed I’d easily find a lot not to like about David Paterson, but honestly I’m having a very hard time of it. Turns out he supports reforming the Rockefeller drug laws, reining in trigger-happy cops, and even voting for non-citizens. Now it turns out he is (or at least was very recently) a big opponent of eminent domain:

If David Paterson as governor displays the opposition to eminent domain that he showed as a state senator, several high-profile development projects in New York City could be derailed or delayed, including a Columbia University expansion, the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, and the transformation of Willets Point in Queens.As a state Senate leader, Mr. Paterson in 2005 held a rally with Council Member Letitia James and state Senator William Perkins on the steps of City Hall during which he called for a statewide moratorium on the use of eminent domain.

Mr. Paterson said a decision handed down by the Supreme Court in the Kelo v. City of New London case could lead to a “gold rush” of eminent domain use across the state, The New York Sun reported at the time. He said he would gather legislators and introduce legislation to impose a moratorium on its use.

I’m sure he’ll go along with whatever tax hikes Sheldon Silver proposes (but then again he might surprise us), and all his talk at his press conference yesterday about campaign finance reform made me nervous, but so far we could do a lot worse. Heck, we have done a lot worse — in each of the last three gubernatorial administrations.

Do any of our readers have any dirt on Paterson? Leave a note in the comments.

5 comments for “Paterson Too Good to be True? (Probably)

  1. Pingback: 2 pac ringtones
  2. March 19, 2008 at 4:07 pm

    Why exactly should non-citizens be allowed to vote? I’m for open and legal immigration, but I don’t think that, for instance, people over here on vacation should be allowed to vote in our elections. By the same token, I don’t expect myself to be able to vote in Italy’s or Germany’s elections. Do you mean local elections or all elections?

    “I don’t approve of how Patterson, while Deputy Govoner, who presumably should have known Spitzer was up to something… simply turned a blind eye to all of it.”

    You may want to watch using this terminology in the future, because Paterson actually is legally blind. Some people might think you’re phrasing it that way on purpose.

  3. Ken Mitchell
    March 15, 2008 at 11:21 am

    Probably, however most politicians are. Will he be better than Spitzer? Probably.

  4. E5
    March 14, 2008 at 1:41 pm

    I don’t approve of how Patterson, while Deputy Govoner, who presumably should have known Spitzer was up to something… simply turned a blind eye to all of it.

  5. Moishe J Pipott
    March 14, 2008 at 10:57 am

    Patterson will give his long time homonym, Frank Padavan, a chance for redemption, after Padavan was repeatedly jitled for a commissionership under Pataki and Giuliani. Padavan prides himself as a party-less independent, and has been under increasing threat from his traditional constituents because of his opposition to their dormitory and their feudal zoning casuistry. Given how he was ostensibly denied commissionerships in order to preserve the majority, he relishes this unique opportuntiy at payback.

Comments are closed.