Edition: U.S. / Global

Metro Matters; On the Holding Of Coats, And Tongues

Published: April 29, 2002

CANDIDATE Cuomo's camp, in a defensive mode since Andrew M. Cuomo described Gov. George E. Pataki as a valet, has come up with a creative notion for why the remark drew near-universal ire -- not because it was off the mark, as detractors contended, but because Sept. 11 has put even constructive criticism of the incumbent governor off limits.

The very concept of a New York campaign turning into an exercise in eggshell-treading sounds a little like predicting that the Atlantic will be as calm as a lake all summer. Could Mr. Cuomo and his opponent in the Democratic primary for governor, H. Carl McCall, really be forced to practice rhetorical restraint? The larger question is whether the catastrophe of last September has changed the public dialogue altogether, whether certain people are considered unassailable and certain subjects unapproachable.

Short answer: no. The long answer: oh come on.

Just a cursory look at New Yorkers over the last several months suggests some course corrections, but no inclination to rewrite the rules of political engagement.

Some things really have changed, especially the tendency to denigrate police officers after the torture of Abner Louima in a Brooklyn station house and the shooting death of the unarmed Amadou Diallo in the Bronx. Police officers won new respect; they, along with the always popular firefighters and other emergency workers, became national heroes.

But even newfound respect for the police probably does not mean that if an allegation of police misconduct emerged tomorrow, the public would ignore it because of a groundswell of good will in the aftermath of Sept. 11.

Same with politicians, if not more so. Mr. Pataki's popularity rose significantly after the attack, polls show. But so did President George H. W. Bush's standing during the gulf war. Then he lost to Bill Clinton.

The public's memory is notoriously short, and its sophistication can be notably nuanced. It is worth recalling that most New Yorkers opposed former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani's pursuit of an extended term last year, despite their regard for his masterly leadership during the city's crisis.

Given that precedent, there seems little chance New Yorkers would object if either Mr. Cuomo or Mr. McCall questioned Governor Pataki's record on health care, the budget, education, contributions to improving the flagging upstate economy or role in rebuilding Lower Manhattan.

SO why the outcry when the eager Mr. Cuomo said that Mr. Pataki stood in Mr. Giuliani's shadow and ''held the leader's coat'' after Sept. 11? Objections centered as much on substance as on tone; what Mr. Cuomo said was at odds with the prevailing assessment of the governor.

Mr. Pataki did not show the commanding leadership that Mr. Giuliani did, but though he and the mayor had not had a good relationship, the governor seemed to deliberately and generously defer to the mayor. And though he made that embarrassing request for $54 billion from Washington for pork-filled aid, he also gave the city what it needed, like the authorization to break borrowing limits and quick public access to Medicaid.

With his insult, Mr. Cuomo sounded as though he was trying to take political advantage of the city's suffering. It was a bit like the campaign incident last year when a mayoral contender, Mark Green, was widely ridiculed for boasting that he would have done ''as well or better'' than Mr. Giuliani did guiding the city in the aftermath of the terrorist attack. He sounded brash, as Mr. Cuomo did this year.

The public does not like candidates to be brash about sensitive subjects, but that does not mean, as the Cuomo defense would have it, that Sept. 11 is above politics. It's just that, like race and religion, it is one of those sensitive subjects that force politicians to be on firm ground before they speak out.

''With respect, Andrew picked the wrong topic,'' said Maureen Connelly, a consultant who advised Michael R. Bloomberg during his campaign last year. ''9/11 does not exempt any elected or appointed official from criticism. We still have a democracy; elected and appointed officials are still accountable for their actions. You can criticize anybody. It's up to the press and the public to determine if it's appropriate.''

Which is what happened with the one-liner about the coat, and why Mr. Cuomo quickly shifted his language to focus on Mr. Pataki's leadership of the rebuilding effort. Could be that the campaign will be a tribute to substance, for once. Then again, the Atlantic is not and never has been calm.