NY Times Takes Gantt to the Woodshed; Sheds No Tears For Upstate

The New York Times published an editorial yesterday morning sharply critical of Assemblyman David Gantt and his "iron-fisted" control of the Assembly Transportation Committee.

The editorial was complaining about Gantt's blockage of legislation which would allow New York City to install cameras on street poles to catch red light violations. The Times had strong words about Gantt:

"Mr. Gantt is a Democratic assemblyman from Rochester. That’s the Rochester that is 333 miles from Times Square. He has long controlled the State Assembly’s Transportation Committee with an iron fist, micromanaging New York City’s traffic from afar and for bewildering reasons. At one point this year, when journalists asked him why he was blocking a particular city traffic bill, he said: “That’s for me to know and you to find out.” So much for transparency in Albany".

The Times should have called Ralph Esposito and asked him what he thought about Gantt's behavior. Ralph would have told them that sounds like the David Gantt he knows all too well.

There were three things that really struck me about the editorial, though. One is the fact that the Times was so hard on a Democrat. They will probably use this editorial to prove that they are "issue oriented" not "agenda oriented". Yeah, right.

Second, I had to laugh at the suggestion that Sheldon Silver should (or would) do anything about Gantt. The editorial called for Silver to remove Gantt, stating:

"It makes no sense for one upstate legislator to strangle progress — and safety — in New York City. This should be a matter decided by New York’s mayor and City Council. Since it is not, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and his Democratic majority should replace committee chairmen like Mr. Gantt who have clearly been there too long. If he won’t, the voters should".

Sheldon Silver doesn't do anything he doesn't want to do. David Gantt is on Silver's team and that's all that counts. Which, relating to my previous post, questions the sincerity of Richard Dollinger's call for "change" in Albany. Can he get Shelly to sign on?

Finally, I was amazed at the fact that the Times' editorial board so openly displayed their disdain for "Upstate". While I can understand their impatience with Gantt, their umbrage at the fact that a legislator from Rochester (which is, apparently, 333 miles from Times Square) could impact the mighty Gotham, was surprisingly blunt. I don't recall any editorials lamenting the fact that 99% of the time NY City legislators force their will on Upstate residents.

Oh well, at least they didn't leave any doubt about how they feel about us hillbilly's.