Posted on 02/28/2007 12:54:11 PM PST by pissant
NEW YORK -- Mayor Rudolph Giuliani says he will go back to Albany next week to push to keep rent controls on more than 1 million apartments, and to urge Republican leaders to come around to his position.
``I believe that we should continue rent stabilization and rent control,'' the mayor said. ``I will continue to oppose'' their elimination.
The mayor is scheduled to spend much of Thursday at the Capitol, meeting with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat, and other leaders.
Giuliani is at odds over rent control with fellow Republican Gov. George Pataki and state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, a Rensselaer County Republican, who have proposed revamping rent laws.
State laws regulating the rents of more than 1 million apartments, mostly in New York City, are set to expire June 15.
Bruno has sought the virtual abolition of rent controls, which date to the end of World War II. Silver, like Giuliani, wants the regulations extended.
Pataki's plan would decontrol households with incomes above $175,000 a year, except for people over 62 or the disabled. Rent controls for other tenants would continue until they and their families vacate or die.
In recent private talks among legislative leaders, Silver has revealed he may willing to permit the rent-regulated apartments of some high-income tenants to be decontrolled, according to news reports.
Under current law, renters with household incomes of $250,000 or more who live in apartments renting for at least $2,000 a month do not qualify for rent control, which stabilizes rent prices.
Silver ``would like to take it down from $250,000 to maybe $225,000, something like that,'' Bruno told the New York Post and the Daily News.
Giuliani told reporters Pataki is making a mistake by trying to lower the threshold.
``If the governor wants to protect 99 percent of New Yorkers, he's going to have to move that level all the way up, closer to the $250,000 where it's presently at,'' the mayor said.
On Friday, Bruno said a compromise on the rent issue, which has stalled the state budget and other issues such as welfare reform, was up to Silver.
``The message (from Giuliani) ought to be that unless they get to the table and do something before (June) 15th, they are going to see every tenant deregulated,'' Bruno said.
Silver spokeswoman Patricia Lynch did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment but told the Post, ``We've always been willing to discuss tinkering around the edges, including with luxury decontrol.''
A major stumbling block to an agreement on rent protections is vacancy decontrol.
************
Sure. Everyone should be able to live wherever they want. If they can't afford it, the government should pay. That's why I have this 5,000. square foot townhouse on Beacon hill in Boston. I deserve it. It's as simple as that.
Solly cholly, DH is not a protectionist. He's for 2 things in that regard. Busting China's balls for cheating on trade (they tariff us unfairly), and not joining organizations that have sovereignty over US trade agreements. Pretty wise. Htis is no Pat Buchanan.
HE IS A REAGAN FREE TRADER WHO DOES NOT WANT TO GIVE THE COMMIES IN CHINA AN UPPER HAND.
Just a cold hearted snake--
Paula Abdul
"doesn't quite meet their purity standards"?
that's like saying Helen Thomas doesn't quite meet our beauty standards.
Duncan WHO?!?!??!!
LOL
me too (he was great as "America's Mayor"..give him major props), but he has never been any stripe of 'Conservative'!
Well he give out free donuts? Then he's got my vote. LOL!
I pointed out Nixon as a form of parody.
Rudyfiles love to point out "well Reagan did this or that" so I didn't want to miss a chance to equate Rudedog with his fellow statist Richard Milhous Nixon.
So a "ten year old article" is extremely relevant to anyone who is interested in his political ambitions.
But which doesn't address the fact you've attached your boat to a very large rock, and you'll let it sink before allowing anyone to save it who isn't "pure" enough, ideologically speaking. If you had an accident, would you quiz the EMTs about their ideological purity before allowing them to save you, only to allow yourself to die if they weren't pure neough for you? Self-defeatism isn't anything to beam with pride about.
You're for Hunter? Great! Get his name out there. Make certain people know who he is. But this obsessive Anti-Rudy stuff is not winning anyone over to the Hunter ranks. It would help to get him up to double digit support before figuring it's time to go negative on the rest of the field -- 18 months prior to the general election, and nearly a year in advance of the first primaries. And goo luck with that, since he's currently polling about six -- as in six people, not percentage points.
. . . and the rent-controlled apartment in which they live . . .
. . . and the government-regulated taxi fares . . .
. . . and those 40,000 police officers that make everyone "safe" . . .
. . . and all the laws that keep those nasty guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens . . . etc., etc.
I'm cementing Rudy's defeat. That's what my intention is. If there are those who can look at his long history of liberalism and forgive it, more power to them. Though the Hunter ping list contiues to grow.....
Those already choosing Rudy come hell or high water are not my targets. It's those who are looking at facts and history to make up their minds.
ROFL!
I really wish I could make a wager with the Duncan folks on how long he lasts in the primaries.
I'm not a Rudy supporter at this point, but these histrionics are becoming annoying.
Fair enough. I'm simply saying your approach here, especially based on the candidate you're supporting, smacks of "I'm not going to win, so I have to take everyone else down with me". Rather akin to a guy on a basketball team saying "if I can't lead the team in scoring, then no one is going to get any points". Doesn't really help the team that much, and certainly doesn't make that player look good in the eyes of the fans, you know?
It's a long, long way to the primaries.
When a politician says he is for "fair trade," obtains financial support from Buchanan and Nader supporting protectionist Roger Milliken , but claims not to be "protectionst," it has all the credibility of a politician who wants to provide a "path to citizenship", gets donations from Tyson Chicken, but claims to be against "amnesty".
Do you believe that Rudy now OPPOSES rent control?
No one has posted more articles on Duncan Hunter than I have. His bio, his votes, his interviews, his platform. Unlike Rudy, there is not 500 articles in the MSM each day extolling his virtues (or lack therof, for that matter) to choose from.
There is however, a gaggle of Rudy supporters here that think posting the daily Rasmussen poll or some such means alot. They post them to gin up support for their guy. I have not once complained, even though this is a CONSERVATIVE website, not a liberal GOP site. The fewer folks here that buy his snake oil, the better. Hence my posts.
Rudy is for economic freedom, how exactly?
No, that was exactly my point. Why can't we look at what he's saying now instead of dredging up ten-year-old articles?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.