The 200,000 problems
Hillary Clinton is getting a bunch of flak this week for not delivering on the pledge she made in her 2000 U.S. Senate campaign to bring 200,000 jobs to upstate New York – set off by a great piece in the Washington Post.
And rightfully so.
Not because she didn’t deliver a robust package that revitalized the upstate economy, but because she had the gall to propose such a plan. This is not just a knock against Clinton. She simply did what most politicians do: sell voters the idea that they have some kind of outsized impact over the United States’ $18 trillion economy.
Politicians who seek to control the economy may as well try to fly a kite in 50 mph winds. If they are skilled, they may be able to move the kite slightly in one direction. If they aren’t, the kite can fly off in the wrong direction or crash into the ground.
This leads me to yesterday, when Gov. Andrew Cuomo defended Clinton to the press at a stop in Western New York. He said “the Legislature did not understand that they had to compete for other states for jobs.” What’s laughable about that statement is that he gives the Legislature too much credit. Even if they had recognized the problem and taken sweeping action, they still would just be one hand on the string of a kite, helping to guide it in a strong gale. If they are pulling in a different direction than the other hands, they aren’t going to do much.
I covered Clinton’s 2000 U.S. Senate campaign briefly, when I was working at the Ithaca College TV news station. She made occasional visits to the liberal haven in upstate New York, where the call for 200,000 upstate jobs resonated with twentysomethings who were clearly stressed out about finding employment. I mention this because I can’t tell you anything else about Clinton’s 2000 campaign agenda. The only memorable thing was that she put forth a very specific goal, and presented it as a promise to voters.
In doing so, she gave voters an easy concept to connect with. It helped her stay roughly even with Rick Lazio upstate, only losing outside of New York City and Long Island by roughly 85,000 votes. She also gave journalists a very specific number to question her about for the rest of her political career. This is a layup for a journalist. All we have to say is, “You promised this. It didn’t happen. Why?”
Clinton has many reasonable explanations for why she didn’t deliver. George Bush was elected president. The 9/11 attacks happened. Democrats lost control of the U.S. Senate in 2002. Her ability to implement the proposals she felt would lead to job creation in upstate New York diminished.
Basically, she took a risk, she reaped a short-term reward, and now she’s dealing with the consequences – which she is probably OK with, because those consequences don’t seem to be too harmful to her campaign.
But there is clearly a lesson to be learned here. You would think that anyone who happened to be involved in the campaign – like, oh, I don’t know, her campaign manager Bill de Blasio – would have realized that setting such a specific goal would invite criticism. You’d think that such a person would avoid using the same 200,000 number, so people like me don’t jump at the chance to make the connection.
But then de Blasio, now mayor of New York City, set a goal of building or preserving 200,000 units of affordable housing. What an interesting coincidence. I wonder if journalists are going to be asking him about how that’s going when he runs for re-election next year?
At least the mayor has set up a website with frequent updates to help us out. But that won’t stop the New York press corps from combing through, and questioning, the numbers. And if he fails to reach that goal, we’ll demand an answer to the same question we asked his former boss: Why?
NEXT STORY: De Blasio should pay attention to charter winds