Opposition from Giuliani, Christie Suggests That Astorino Is a Man of Character

Big-government Republicans like Rudolph Giuliani and corrupt ones like Chris Christie have chosen to either support Andrew Cuomo or avoid supporting the small-government GOP candidate, Rob Astorino.

The New York Daily News reports that on July 24 Christie gave Astorino the brushoff because he doesn't think Astorino can win. Unlike Democrat Andrew Cuomo, who is facing a corruption investigation concerning the Moreland commission,  Astorino probably isn't corrupt enough for Christie.  Like Cuomo, Christie is under a corruption investigation:  Christie's close aides have admitted to closing lanes at the George Washington Bridge because the mayor of Fort Lee, Mark Sokolich, didn't endorse Christie in 2013. Christie has allowed his aides to take the blame, but why on earth would anyone believe that he didn't know?  The Newark Star Ledger adds that Christie's private attorneys have billed New Jersey taxpayers $6.5 million for legal services in his private defense.

At the same time, New York City's Mayor Giuliani, a guy who claimed to be for less government but never cut government, has been quietly supporting Andrew Cuomo.  There are so many things that Giuliani might see in Cuomo: the exodus of 400,000 New Yorkers during Cuomo's three years as governor, his attack on the Second Amendment, his failed Common Core school reform, or his narcissistic plan to rejuvenate New York's economy by appointing eight SUNY campuses to house a few well-connected tech firms, then spending $200 million dollars in TV ads around the country that use the dumb plan as a pretext to promote Cuomo himself.

 I rejoined the GOP out of desperation to get Cuomo out, but the GOP's bankrupt leadership is truly a gang that can't shoot straight. Perhaps Astorino would be best off disowning the GOP and using the GOP ticket to run a Libertarian campaign.

Paper Pushers Dominate Campaign Contributions

OpenSecrets.org lists useful data on campaign contributions for the 2008 campaign. I copied information for Obama, Clinton, Huckabee, Giuliani and Paul into the table below. Lawyers prefer the Democrats. They lead the list of donors for both Obama and Clinton, come in fourth for Romney (not shown), second for Giuliani and eighth for Paul.

Retired people are the chief donors to Huckabee, second largest donors to Obama, third to Clinton, third to Giuliani, first to Romney (not shown) and first to Paul. Securities and investment professionals are third on Obama's list, second on Clinton's list, third on Huckabee's first on Giuliani's, second on Romney's (not shown) and seventh for Paul. Educators prefer the Democrats, and appear in Paul's top ten list but not the leading Republicans'.

Retirees and lawyers seem to lead the list. People who work in manufacturing, technology and retail can expect government to exploit them in the years to come.

Ranks of Donors to Presidential Candidates


Rank / Obama / Clinton / Huckabee / Giuliani / Paul

1 / Lawyers / Lawyers / Retired / Sec. & Inv./ Retired
2 / Retired / Sec. & Inv. / Real Estate / Lawyers / Computers
3 / Sec. & Inv. / Retired / Sec. & Inv. / Retired / Misc. Bus.
4 / Misc. Bus. / Real Estate / Health / Real Estate/ Health
5 / Real Estate / Bus. Services / Lawyers / Misc. Fin. / Real Es.
6 / Entertainment / Misc. Bus. / Misc. Finance / Bus. Serv. / Fin
7 / Education / Entertainment / Misc. Bus. / Misc. Bus. / Sec.
8 / Bus. Services / Health / Business Serv. /Health / Lawyers
9 / Health / Education / Manufacturing / Comm. Banks / Educ.
10 / Fin. / Fin. / Civil Servants / Oil and Gas / Bus.Serv.

Republicans Talk the Talk

I am watching the Republican presidential debate and am favorably impressed. I was especially impressed with Mike Huckabee's thoughts on the Bible and his claim that he favors abolition of the Internal Revenue Service. I continue to be frustrated with Ron Paul's inability to distance himself from the Populist fringe of the Libertarian movement and his views on Iraq. I support him because of his position on the Fed, but he has not introduced the monetary issue into the debate, which is a major loss. Instead, Giuliani mentioned a nonsensical claim that budget cuts would strengthen the dollar. This dumb remark is a mark against him. The dollar is a monetary issue, not a government spending issue. Nevertheless, Giuliani is a convincing candidate as is Mitt Romney. I am also impressed with John McCain's thoughts on waterboarding and on militay strategy. As well, I liked Romney's remarks about "one America" in reference to the American flag.

Overall the quality of the Republicans is above the quality of the Democratic candidates (whom I insist are space aliens).

One of my favorite moments of the debate was when McCain mentioned that Hillary wants to spend $1 million on a Woodstock Concert museum. I live about 15 miles from where the concert was (down Ulster County 42/Peekamoose, turn left on NY 42 toward Monticello).

The most telling moment was when the young man in California asked whether the candidates would oppose farm subsidies. While they all said that they favored lower taxes and Huckabee said that he wanted to abolish the IRS, none of the candidates seemed enthusiastic about eliminating farm subsidies.

Republicans talk the talk, but I'm not exactly convinced that, besides Ron Paul, they walk the walk.

Would a President Giuliani Cut Taxes?

Norma Segal and I have been debating the merits of Rudy Giuliani. I have some concerns about Rudy. Specifically, he tended to obsess on minor conflicts. For instance, there was a battle with the taxi drivers that I recall caused him to redirect all of the police one day to a taxi demonstration. This was a conflict that Giuliani precipitated, similar to his threatened law suit over a New York Magazine ad. Giuliani's anti-crime initiative of ticketing minor offenses was intrusive. I recall getting parking tickets for parking five feet instead of six feet from a hydrant on 87th Street, or something like that.

Steve Malanga of City Journal argues that:

"Giuliani changed the primary mission of the police department to preventing crime from happening rather than merely responding to it...William Bratton, reorganized the NYPD, emphasizing a street-crimes unit that moved around the city..."

But I have had a long conversation with several NYPD officers and executives who said that Giuliani did not support the police in substance and left the police department with low morale and in weak organizational shape.

I am skeptical that reductions in crime rates during the 1990s were due to anything other than demographic shifts. In particular, the aging of the baby boomers reduced the percentage of the population most likely to engage in violent crimes. Also, Mario Cuomo had invested in expensive prisons during the 1980s, and these likely kept felons off the streets. I think it is a stretch to attribute reduced crime rates in New York City to Mayor Giuliani.

Malanga agrees with Norma about Giuliani's tax policies. He argues that Giuliani is a "conservative" because he cut city spending by 1.6 percent his first year in office. He also contends that Giuliani:

"reduced or eliminated 23 taxes, including the sales tax on some clothing purchases, the tax on commercial rents everywhere outside of Manhattan’s major business districts, and various taxes on small businesses and self-employed New Yorkers."

In a city that suffers from taxphilia to the degree that New York does a 1.6 percent cut in spending is a major improvement. In the scheme of things it is small change given that New York's spending is out of line and that much of it goes into wasteful government operations and mismanagement.

On August 4, 2001 Marcia van Wagner of the Citizen's Budget Commission wrote the following letter to the New York Times.

"...The common perception that Mr. Giuliani has reined in spending results from misleading city budget reporting practices that omit increased spending on debt service and do not adjust for the transfer of one year's surplus to the next.

"Accurately reported, New York City spending grew 6 percent a year from fiscal year 1997 to 2001, while inflation averaged 2.3 percent. In a comparable period (1985 to 1989) under Mr. Koch, spending grew 6.7 percent a year while inflation averaged 4.5 percent.

"New Yorkers should not believe that the recent growth in the number of police officers and teachers was accomplished with budget restraint."

According to the New York City Independent Budget Office , the city's spending increased from $32.1 billion to $36.0 billion, or 12 percent from June 1996 to June 2000. During the same period the Consumer Price Index increased by nine percent, from 157.8 to 173.7. Thus, Mayor Giuliani did not cut spending during his last four years in office, although he did not increase it very much. There may be budget shenanagans that cause these numbers to be understated, as Ms. van Wagner argues. In any case, these numbers do not qualify Mayor Giuliani as a tax cutter or as a supporter of limited government. It is true that holding the line in tax-and-spend New York is an achievement.

Can a small government Republican emerge from tax-and-spend New York?

Regarding spending, Mayor Giuliani probably is better than President Bush. But he is not a standard bearer for reductions in the scope of government or free markets. If he aims to be, he needs to make a stronger case that he is.