Big Giuliani problem: Who cares about NY City?

Rudi Giuliani’s campaign depends to a great extent on his clean-up of crime in NY City in the 1990s. It allows him to cover up a multitude of his non-conservative policies. Consider this exchange from yesterday’s GOP debate:

Fred Thompson: Mayor Giuliani believes in federal funding for abortion. He believes in sanctuary cities. He’s for gun control. He supported Mario Cuomo, a liberal Democrat, against a Republican who was running for governor; then opposed the governor’s tax cuts when he was there.

Rudi: I had the most legal city in the country. And I took the crime capital of America and I turned it into the safest large city in the country. The senator has never had executive responsibility. He’s never had the weight of people’s safety and security on his shoulders.

Well, whatever Rudi did in NY City, across the country crime also fell sharply in the 1990s:

According to new research by a University of California, Berkeley, law professor, the crime rate dropped dramatically during the 1990s, falling 40 percent in cities and states across the country and in all major crime categories from homicides to auto thefts, producing the longest and deepest crime decline in the United States since World War II.

And besides, since when is local crime a federal responsibility? We need to get rid of all federal involvement in local police matters, including cutting off all funding using U.S. taxpayers’ money.

Finally, most Americans just don’t like NY City. They hate the Yankees baseball team. They don’t like the pushy attitude of New Yorkers. And they don’t like paying for the vast federal subsidies that go to the city.

if it comes down to Rudy or Mrs. Clinton, you’ll hold your nose like me and pull the lever for Rudy.
Horse pooh of a choice.

Um... how does that old saying go?
"He may be an S.O.B., but at least he's OUR S.O.B."

Works for me.

- John (who will support the Republican nominee in '08)

And, what did Rudy ever do to clean up crime, other than assault Second Amendment rights?

Well, for one thing, Giuliani turned to professor James Q. Wilson's "broken window theory": that one broken window in a building only invites more windows to be broken.

Taking a cue from that, Giuliani got the police department to go after low-level "street nuisance" crimes and misdemeanors that were destroying life in the city. The prime example is the "squeegee men" who would descend upon drivers at intersections, try to wash your car windows, demand payment for doing so, and get belligerent if you refused. Also panhandlers, etc.

By taking steps to restore civil order at the lowest levels, the public perception began to change, to turn to almost being optimistic about the city's future.

He was also able to initiate police procedures that improved the cops' ability to put a dent in serious crimes, as well.

I've never been a lover of the big cities, New York City in particular. I have worked there regularly since 1979, in and out of Manhattan and also for a number of years in the Oak Point/Hunts Point area of the South Bronx. So I'm not a New Yorker per se. But I have seen the changes that the Giuliani administration wrought there, and they were amazing.

Who could ever have thought that the city of the Dinkins era - a crumbling, hopeless, "ungovernable" place - could enjoy a new Rennaissance?

- John

By the way, did you know that Thompson backed the the Trail Lawyers/Tort lobby right down the line to defeat Tort Reform on every effort during his time in the Senate.

By the way, did you know those bills were to address STATE tort laws and Fred doesn't think the FEDERAL government has any business involving themselves in STATE matters?

We all know you don't like Fred, but your continued BS is tiresome.

> By the way, did you know those bills were to address STATE tort laws and Fred doesn’t think the FEDERAL government has any business involving themselves in STATE matters?

I don’t think it is possible for individual states to address this issue. You will always be able to sue a company in a state that did not pass torte reform. In fact, the states without torte reforms will be able to generate extra income from these lawsuits making it beneficial for them not to pass torte reform and undermining reforms in the states that did pass them.

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.