speechifying: analyzing political speech

Prince Harry, third in line for the throne of Windsor, the longest, uninterrupted reign of any royal family in history, was in Washington recently. He accepted an award, presented by General Colin Powell, the former US Secretary of State, from the Atlantic Council for his efforts on behalf of wounded veterans.

HRH Harry Wales is himself a captain in Her Majesty’s Army.  Her Majesty of course is also the prince’s grandmother, Elizabeth II, currently celebrating her jubilee year as monarch.

This speech interested me for several reasons. It is, if not the first, then one of the first truly serious speeches the prince has given. It was in a room full of Washington bigwigs and it was an award for service to a cause that many – rightfully so – hold sacrosanct, the care of servicemen and women injured in the line of duty.  So, given the prince’s caricatured reputation as a hard partying, unserious kind of fellow, this had real potential to go south in a hurry.

As well, I have a bit of a passing fancy with royalty, especially the British version. I once even dreamed I’d speechwrite for the royal family, but alas, I’m likely the wrong nationality, and almost certainly the wrong faith.  But royal family members, especially ones most likely never to be sovereign (in Princess Diana’s somewhat biting phrase, the “heir & the spare”), get most of the access and media oxygen that an important, powerful elected official would, and they get to use that, if they choose, to speak out on issues of import in a way that transcends party politics or the electoral cycles.   In other words, they get to talk to people about important things, say them in a perhaps non-politically correct way and not worry about getting tossed out of office.  It could be fun, and it can be inspiring.

This speech by Prince Harry is actually a good example of it.  So to the speech.

What I liked:

Opening line

“This isn’t daunting at all.”  This wasn’t in the prepared remarks and doesn’t show up in many of the transcripts. But there it is. He says it. And it comes off so real, so human, so humble.

Humility

I’m going to be a bit lengthy on this, but I think it’s got merit.  I think the humility push – and it’s lengthy – three times by my count, not counting that opening ad lib – works because HRH knows his reputation, and his speechwriters know it, and they crafted something here that plays against – and at the same time, towards – that type.  They didn’t run from it; they turned it into a strength – because we can believe he hasn’t done enough (though in reality, he’s done a lot for the cause of wounded vets) and we can believe it might be wrong for a guy “like” Prince Harry to speak for “real” heroes, but it wouldn’t be wrong for “that kind” of guy to speak of them.  So it comes across as honest.

HRH says – this actually was in the prepared text – “For a captain in the British Army to be introduced by such a world-renowned soldier and statesman is truly humbling and a little terrifying.”  He then says he hasn’t done enough to merit the award, and is accepting it on “behalf of my brother, William, our Foundation, all those on both sides of the Atlantic who work so tirelessly to support our wounded veterans.”

Then, the clincher.  He is also, accepting it “particularly for the guys.  This is their award.”  The guys of course are the wounded veterans across the UK and the US.

He continues then “It would be wrong of me to speak for these heroes, but not presumptuous of me to pay tribute to them.”  This could have gone off awfully.  The response could have been, we get it, you’re not worthy.  Now on with it.  But it works here.

Later on, towards the end he reminds everyone that he and Prince William have used their “privileged” position to publicize and relieve the plight of wounded veterans.  Again, everyone knows he’s privileged.  Hiding it doesn’t help.  So out with it and point out what they are doing with the privilege.  It’s not (just) to live a life of luxury and good food, great parties.

One more humble brag, as it were – he remembers to give tribute to a US Marine who is a fellow awardee that night.  Just a nice touch.

The tribute

It’s pretty short and to the point.  A few lines that lead to a strong finish “They have paid a terrible price to keep us safe and free.”

The call to action

He could have ended at the tribute.  But he went on, using his podium and celebrity to remind everyone of the work that still needs to be done, of the lifelong trauma and recovery wounded vets – whether physically scarred or emotionally/psychologically injured – must face, and how they will need continued support.  Beyond that, he mentioned their families and the support they will need too.

Connecting to the US

HRH was here as a celebrity and perhaps too, a celebrity soldier.  Once that was common, as Micky Mantle said, “I’ll play baseball for the Army or fight for it, whatever they want me to do.”  He wasn’t the only athlete or actor to sign up to fight.  And our British cousins certainly know that once upon a time at least, it was common – even expected that princes would ride to battle.  So the prince could really have given his pitch, to continue the Mantle reference, and walked off.

It wasn’t Winston Churchill reminding the US Congress his mum was a yank (now that could cause a constitutional crisis in Britain) but he added a few choice words of connection between the US and UK armed forces, and especially his own personal view of the professionalism he witnessed in fighting side by side with US forces.

Inspiration

Prince Harry told two brief snippets of wounded veterans challenging themselves to hike to the North Pole or up Mt. Everest.  He held up wounded veterans broadly as “examples to us all.”

One of the best lines in the entire speech: ”Ladies and gentlemen, these people – ours and yours – are extraordinary.”

Short and short on thank yous

The overall speech was pretty short – this blog post analyzing it may well be longer.  Kudos to the prince and his handlers who didn’t try to push it.

As well, there were appropriate thank yous and acknowledgements (to General Powell and his fellow awardee) and a quick thanks to Chuck Hagel and Fred Kempe, but it was not a laundry list of mind numbing, eye glazing name drops.

Both President Obama & Governor Romney are set to speak at AIPAC’s policy confab this week. Suffice it to say, the President needs to win a good portion of these people back (and/or keep them from deserting) while the former governor needs to peel enough of them away.

Below is what I’d think Mr. Romney ought to say in his speech; another post already has my thoughts for President Obama.

Thank you.  It’s a pleasure to be here with all of you, with so many of the members of Congress, with leaders of so many faiths, with Americans from the shores of the Atlantic to the blue waters of the Pacific, from the plains to the mountains and deserts of our great land. 

It’s no mystery why you’re here.  Israel is, of course, for so many, for the three great monotheistic faiths especially, more than just an inspiring story, or a beacon of liberty.  It is for me – and all Christians – the land Jesus walked.  For Muslims, it holds their third holiest site.  And for Jews, besides being the land promised to Abraham by God, it is the site of the holiest location in the world: the Temple Mount.

But for everyone – of every faith, or no faith, Israel is an inspiring story and Israel is a beacon of liberty.  When the Jewish people returned to the land they had been cruelly driven from two thousand years prior, they were undermanned, untrained and poorly equipped.  A lot like our Continental Army in 1776.  Just like them, Israel’s determined defenders made up in courage and hope what they lacked.  And they were victorious against larger, better trained and better equipped force. 

Like the men of the Continental Army, Israel’s defenders wanted nothing more than to lay down their weapons and return home to livelihoods and families.  But Israel’s enemies never allowed them even a moment’s peace.  Since the day of her founding, brave men and women have been on watch at Israel’s borders, patrolling the seas and the skies to keep Israelis safe.

And like the United States, modern Israel has been, from day one, a haven for the persecuted and the dispossessed.  Some were refugees from war torn Europe, others were expelled from Arab countries and later, some were refuseniks trapped behind the Iron Curtain.  Israel took in these people, just as she took in Jews from Ethiopia, and immigrants from anywhere else, and made them full fledged citizens. 

You may have heard this story before.  But it bears repeating. 

When Israel was still a young nation, David Ben Gurion – by then retired to Sdei Boker – hosted novelist and playwright Herman Wouk.  He told Wouk that he ought to move to Israel, so he could be free.

Wouk pointed out that Israel was ringed by enemies bent on her destruction and inside her own borders, terrorists were ready to attack Israelis each day.  Ben Gurion, without missing a beat, responded “I didn’t say safe.  I said free.”

And as amazing as it is – with so many excuses to become an armed camp, to jettison civil liberties, to deny full equality to some, Israel still has a vibrant free press, a flourishing parliamentary democracy, and an active – some might say hyperactive – supreme court. 

Israel remains today a place – one of the few in the entire Middle East – where anyone and everyone can worship as they wish, where every citizen – no matter their gender, religion or ethnicity – has the vote.

It is a place where the ideals of liberty are put into action each day.

So it is no surprise that Israel has enjoyed the friendship of America dating to the very moment of its founding.  And that friendship, this alliance of two great democracies, has withstood the test of time.  It has grown stronger.  Israel was a key outpost in a critical region during the Cold War.  And Israel remains a key ally in today’s battle for freedom. 

The same terrorists and despots who hate Israel, they hate America.  What they try to do to Israel, they try to do to us. 

That’s why radical Iran must never get a nuclear weapon. 

That’s why Hamas and Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk can never be entrusted with the power or the privileges of statecraft. 

That’s why we must never, ever allow anyone to see daylight between the United States and Israel.

In this, in matters of defense and diplomacy, symbols matter.  The cues a president and his – or her – cabinet give matter. 

So as president, my first foreign trip will be to Israel. 

Because I want everyone – friend and foe alike – to see that our alliance, our support for Israel is rock solid. 

And my cabinet members will know that sometime friends can disagree, but those disagreements aren’t put out for show.  They are handled tactfully and respectfully.  That means privately.

It also means we will treat allies as equals, not as vassals.  We will not decide their future for them.

Israel deserves to meet the future on its own terms, and no one elses.

So we all pray for peace and we hope for it.  Indeed, as we pledge to do whatever is asked of us to help secure it, the ultimate decision on who Israel negotiates with and how is up to just two parties – Israel and her neighbors.  It is not up to the United States.  Not the president.  Not the Congress.  Not the editorial page of the New York Times.

What is up to the United States is to show leadership.  Leadership in stopping Iran from going nuclear.  Leadership in ensuring the Arab Spring doesn’t turn into a dictators’ winter.  Leadership in reminding those who too easily forget – from college campuses to the halls of the United Nations – that Israel is a beacon of liberty. 

And to remind everyone that Israel is so like the United States in one other way.  In her entrepreneurial spirit, her never say die attitude and her tenacious insistence on progress.  It is, like the USA, a shining city on a hill, what the Jewish tradition calls an Ohr La’Goyim, a light unto the nations. 

So rather than turning inward as so many nations might, rather than adopting a besieged mentality, Israel looks ever outward and always forward.  Israel’s start up companies are making the technology that advances our world.  And we all benefit from that. 

Israel once made the desert bloom, and now they share that gift with anyone – helping grow much needed food in deserts the world over.  Israel is a tiny country with a big heart – her humanitarian missions have crisscrossed the globe.

 And Israel remains dedicated to education, art, culture and history.  It is a country of museums and archeological digs, of research centers and scientific inquiry.  It is a country that values life above all else, and has world class hospitals where the sick are treated equally, no matter who they are or where they come from.

It is a country that has relentless optimism in a better tomorrow.

It is, in short, a country very much like our own. 

And America has always stood by nations like ours.  As a great Massachusettsian, John F. Kennedy said in his inaugural address, “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”

We stand here, today, to reiterate that.  Let any foe understand – and may every friend be reassured – we will do whatever it takes, whatever the cost, for freedom.  And that includes standing with Israel.

Today, tomorrow, always.  Thank you.  God bless.

Howie Beigelman, now a corporate communications pro for a Fortune 500 enterprise blogs about political speech in his spare time @speechifying.com. He is an ex-politico and former director of state advocacy for a national nonprofit and also served on the communications staff of a big state governor. He has testified before legislatures and executive branch agencies numerous times and has been published and quoted in newspapers of record across the country.

Both President Obama & Governor Romney are set to speak at AIPAC’s policy confab this week. Suffice it to say, the President needs to win a good portion of these people back (and/or keep them from deserting) while the former governor needs to peel enough of them away.

Below is what I’d think Mr. Obama ought to say in his speech; here’s another post will follow shortly with some ideas for Mr. Romney.

I’m very glad to be here – and thanks for that welcome. I know you have a packed schedule, including a few people who want my job. Governor Romney will be here, as will Speaker Gingrich. I’m not sure if Senator Santorum will make it. We have a lot of things we disagree on, us four, and you’ll have the chance to hear two of us – me and one of them – I just can’t tell you which yet, expand and expound on those differences. We’ve got a mighty different view of what America ought look like, but I’m glad we agree on one thing: America’s commitment to Israel.

I think it’s fair to say that friends of Israel, and avid supporters of her, can disagree on not just domestic policy but also on our foreign policy. The Good Lord knows in Israel itself, there’s plenty of healthy debate and disagreement about how Israel should face the future.

But certain things are not up for debate.

First, Israel’s existence. In case anyone, somewhere in the world hasn’t yet gotten this message: Israel is here to stay. And the commitment of the United States to Israel is, in a word, unshakeable.

It is bipartisan. It extends to both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue and to both chambers of Congress. It runs from the blue states to the red, and from one coast to the other. It has lasted longer than most of us in this room have lived, and it will outlast ALL OF US here.

And when I say Israel, I mean – and Americans all mean – the democratic, Jewish state of Israel.

Words are easy to mouth, but since Harry Truman uttered a few simple words to indicate the United States would recognize Israel’s declaration of independence, America has backed up those words with deeds.

We have defended Israel with our votes and our vetoes in the halls of the United Nations.

We have refused to be a part of international conferences supposedly about fighting racism, but really about destroying and delegitimizing Israel.

You know, it’s pretty obscene when people try to cast Israel as illegitimate, as a pariah state, as unequal and unfair. We know America itself wasn’t always perfect, and Israel, like our other democratic allies across the world, isn’t perfect.

But it is free, it is fair and it has a god given right to exist. We will tell anyone so. And we will help make it so.

That’s why we have sold Israel weapons and partnered with them to develop new systems to help defend their people. In fact, no administration in history has done more peer to peer and partner to partner work between our two militaries than mine and Mr. Netanyahu’s.

And we haven’t done any of this because it’s politically correct – and I certainly haven’t gotten much credit for it here at home. But we’ve done it because it’s morally right. Israel has been a haven to thousands and a beacon for millions.

Israeli advancements in science, technology, agriculture and medicine help save lives and improve lives across the world. Ask those devastated by earthquake in Haiti, or threatened with famine in Africa, or denied religious liberty in still too many countries. Ask our own troops who utilize Israeli advances to help protect themselves in combat.

Now, none of this means that America and Israel, or my administration and that of Prime Minister Netanyahu will always agree. Friends can disagree. Friends can argue.

But friends will never desert friends in need.

So let’s be clear. Attempts by Iran to build a nuclear weapon will not be tolerated.

I’ll say it again, in case people didn’t catch it. Iran must not be allowed a nuclear weapon.

People of good will can disagree on the approach. But we are united in the goal.

And in that goal, I have repeatedly said, no option – including military action – is off the table. No option is off the table.

Some people claim the Iranians think I’m bluffing. Well, ask Osama Bin Laden if I bluff.

I’m also not bluffing when I tell you I think the best way to keep Iran at bay is to make peace between Israel and her Palestinian neighbors.

I know Israel has made tough choices for peace in the past, giving up land to Egypt and forging a tough but fair peace with Jordan. And Israel has taken real risks with the Palestinians, having disengaged from Gaza and pulled back from Lebanon.

There have been steps forward – the Palestinian Authority is at its most transparent. They have trained security forces to keep the peace and stop terror. And they are allowing – encouraging – and working on new investment and infrastructure.

Gilad Shalit is home. Finally.

Yet we know there will be setbacks – there have been. Terror attacks. There is still too much incitement. There is still corruption. And patronage.

But it is progress. Progress takes time. Dr. King knew that.

He dreamed of a day someone like him – someone like me – could be president. He just never saw it happen.

We all – American, Israelis, Arabs, dream of a day there is a peaceful Middle East. We still have work to do to make it so.

And in that work, America will always be standing beside Israel, as a friend, and ally.

Thank you all.

Howie Beigelman, now a corporate communications pro for a Fortune 500 enterprise blogs about political speech in his spare time @speechifying.com. He is an ex-politico and former director of state advocacy for a national nonprofit and also served on the communications staff of a big state governor. He has testified before legislatures and executive branch agencies numerous times and has been published and quoted in newspapers of record across the country.

This will begin an occasional series here of reviewing fictional political speeches. I’m going to start with Theoden’s speech to The Riders of Rohan in the third book of JRR Tolkien’s epic Lord of the Rings.  Many people hold up Aragorn’s speech at the Black Gate but I think Theoden’s is better.  Happy to take suggestions on future  speeches in this category.

For those of you living under a rock who never saw Return of the King, watch this speech now.

To set the stage here, this is not the final battle but rather the penultimate one. Though if things had gone the other way, it would have been, to borrow words from Lord Vader, the end of the rebellion.

The Dark Lord (not him, the other Dark Lord) Sauron has laid siege to the last great holdout defending the world of men (and hobbits, dwarves and elves). Scarcely garrisoned, the defenders of Minas Tirith, an ancient, massive, seven leveled fortress – numbering about 10,000 – have no hope of withstanding 100,000 Orcs and others.*

Pressing on to relieve the besieged city are the men of Rohan, led by their king, Theoden, aging and just recently recovered from years under the spell of an evil wizard and still grieving over the recent death of his only son.  Arriving at the battlefield, his 6,000 men – and their horses – are tired.

More than that, they are cowed by the sight and size of the enemy.

Theoden seizes the moment.  He rallies them. He inspires them. And they feed off his courage. And then they charge, smashing the enemy and together with the beleaguered Gondorians, some fresh reinforcements from the south and Aragorn’s men coming from the sea, smash the much larger enemy between them, winning the day.

What I liked

The speaker’s prescence

Bernard Hill doesn’t need my approval but the way he licks his lips while speaking is a fantastic visual cue.  In the book, at first Theoden himself is shrunken, “cowed by age.”  Merry Brandybuck through whose eyes Tolkien has us seeing this scene thinks “Perhaps Theoden would quail, bow his old head, turn away to hide in the hills.”

But something changes.  Theoden finds his courage.  He rises to the occasion.  He even seizes a war horn from his bannerman and blows it until the horn shatters, causing every horn in their host to take up the call (and in the movie clip above you see – and hear – what the war horns from 6,000 mounted spearmen can do to an overwhelming defending force facing their charge).  In his charge, he outpaces – Tolkien’s word – his banner, his household knights, and all his men.  He is, as we would say today, on his game.

The venue

The hills overlooking the plains of Pelennor and the burning hulk of Minas Tirith is a splendid sight for this talk.  There is no better place to give courage to his men.  There is no time more ripe or right.

The message

His men are petrified. They believe there is no hope.

Theoden believes this too. And he does not lie to them. They are all going to die. But they will go down gloriously.

And he does all of this in six lines.

Theoden calls them to their duty – their sworn duty to him as their liege lord.  “Arise, Riders of Theoden.”  He makes this personal for them.  And he gives direct orders “fire and slaughter.”

But he never hides from them the truth of this day – it is a day of shaken spears and splintered swords.

And while he never lies, he never despairs either.  And he gives them hope: “the sun rises!”

Then called to honor, ordered to kill, and hoping (against hope) for victory, Theoden doesn’t keep talking.  He shouts that they must “Ride for Gondor” and then the charge is sounded.

What I didn’t like

Nothing.  This was awesome.

* For research quality facts about the numerical strength of both sides, I am relying on The lord of the Rings Wiki

Give the President some credit. SOTU speeches are notoriously boring unless a random Congressman yells out “you lie!” or it comes during a war or other cataclysmic event. And while this one definitely had its tedious moments, it was a relatively crisp speech. And while still cloaking himself in the nonpartisan shield of his office, President Obama also let fly the first counterattack of the 2012 campaign.

What I liked:

He had a narrative structure.

Most SOTU’s are just laundry lists of legislative or regulatory programs or foreign policy priorities. The President began with reminding everyone he was the one who finally got Bin Laden. And he did it understatedly with an appropriate tribute to the military.

I’m not sure how the Joint Chiefs felt about their use as political pawns but we all remember that the last time this president called out leaders sitting in the front row at the SOTU it was – in an astonishing breach of protocol, all the more so from a former constitutional law professor – to dress down the Supreme Court justices for the Citizens United decision. So we’re all agreed this was better.

And then he got personal, speaking of his grandparents and their service during World War II, another nice touch.

He then segued in with a lesson from the military and their values of teamwork, country before self and cause before personal success and used it to prod Congress to work with him. I don’t doubt – based on the Speaker and Leader Cantor’s facials throughout the speech that they didn’t enjoy it – but rhetorically speaking it was well played.

Good research

One can quibble – even outright argue – with some of his proposals but he did bring the facts to support his side. The piece about GM being number one in the world was good. I’d have thought he’d play more on the Ford investments in the US especially given the rest of his speech decrying companies with factories overseas but that may have been something edited down in interests of time, or more likely, something they lacked enough specific facts on.

The Master Lock piece was equally well done. As was his factoid about how many trade cases he’s brought against China.

I think community colleges get plugged as job training wizards in nearly every SOTU and state of the states galore but again, the facts paid out on how some have been successful in retooling workers in need of new skills was well done.

He never mentions the Keystone pipeline but he took on critics with his announcement that he’s opening up 75% of offshore energy. Again, good stats to back his policy.

It’s not research but almost as good – likely better in some quarters – is his trumpeting the Buffet rule. One can argue the policy (indeed nothing is stopping anyone from paying more than their legally required share of taxes) but there’s no defense against charges you are unfairly targeting the rich than to have a rich man say you’re in the right.

Smart Politics

As I said, the SOTU isn’t a political speech and the floor of Congress isn’t the place to play politics. But no mistake, this was a political road map to how to get enough votes to win.

His reference to the million autoworker jobs at stake and reminding us that some said to let the industry die. That’s coming to a SuperPAC ad near you soon enough contrasted with a grainy image of Mitt Romney.

And somehow he managed to hit on the following cities, each of which, you’ll be shocked to hear is in an important state for President Obama come November. Toledo, Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Raleigh.

Smooth rhetoric

It’s always hard in a speech like this to actually get any soaring rhetoric. But he did it. A few times. You can argue the policy but he definitely pushed it as best he could.

His “deficit of trust” remark on banks hit home with his base. And his remark that he “bet on American workers” was a shot at independents.

And he continued to reach towards the nation’s political center (at least in his words; the deeds of the policy remain yet to be seen): trying to thread the needle on education and immigration reform as he did. I’m not sure how independents will feel about an even more increased federal role in education or what they really think of immigration issues in those states the president does need to win, but give the speechwriters credit for wordsmithing it to sound like he was in a cooperative and compromising mood.

What I didn’t like

No Giffords shoutout

This was an opportunity to talk about courage, perseverance and self before country. It was an opportunity to talk about family and to give props to NASA astronauts too. I could see it having been: Commander Kelly was willing to risk his life to explore – and before that to serve – but found sometimes courage and service begin and end at home.

Foreign policy section

It came off as a defense of his administration but that was it. There were no new plans, new ideas or even old ideals to be cherished. The Israel reference came off as a blatant political pander.

The conclusion

As much as I liked his opener and his use of the military as a model, I disliked his ending and his attempt to use the military as a model.

It came off as tin eared. We get it. You killed Bin Laden. But really, you know America works because you sat with Secretary Gates and Secretary Clinton? There is only so much you should be using the military on. And this descended into political overkill.

Howie Beigelman, now a corporate communications pro for a Fortune 500 enterprise blogs about political speech in his spare time @speechifying.com. He is an ex-politico and former director of state advocacy for a national nonprofit and also served on the communications staff of a big state governor. He has testified before legislatures and executive branch agencies numerous times and has been published and quoted in newspapers of record across the country.

In Tuesday’s post I previewed what I thought we’d see in the State of the State.  I got some of it right.  More of it wrong I think.  Here’s a link to the speech itself (as prepared; the Governor deviated somewhat, but I’m going to focus on this text).

What I liked:

Good introduction

I liked, overall, the Governor’s introductory.  While a bit long on words it did a rather good job of summarizing his first year’s accomplishments against the bar that had been set.  And he did a rather good job of spreading the accomplishments around – over different policy areas, even different geographic regions (no one north of Westchester will care about the MTA payroll tax; but it’s a solid win downstate and with the anti-tax/pro-business crowds).

Also, he didn’t do any shoutouts or mark any special occasions.  No thank you’s.  Nothing that could distract or bore people before he got to the meat.  He dove straight in.

Good wording

He used the word progressive several times.  Perhaps he or his staff read this Pew poll on how Americans react to ideological code words (liberal, conservative, socialist, libertarian) and saw progressive ranks better than liberal.  If so, it was a decently smart political move.  And if it was meant to harken back to New York’s past (the more likely scenario) it also isn’t a bad move.

He thunk unconventionally big

The Aqueduct Racetrack redevelopment idea is a swing for the fences.  For years, any discussion of a bigger convention center always started and ended with Javits.  Now from a policy (and local NIMBY political) standpoint, I’m not sure this idea flies.  Will folks visiting for a convention really want to be based in Queens (my hometown so I’m definitely a fan, but Manhattan it’s not)?  Yes they are closer to the airports but farther from all the fun stuff.  Be that as it may, this was out of the box thinking.  And the idea to take Javits and its environs to a new mixed use neighborhood was also unconventional.

Similarly, his push for casino gambling could have been another of those been there, done that moments.  But his call for a constitutional amendment was different.

The Energy Highway bit really could have used a few more specifics but again, somewhat out of the box.  The master plan for state facilities energy usage was a nice, easy add on that could end up showing real taxpayer savings if done right.

Education reform, something I touched on yesterday was something the Governor also only touched on.  But if he means it, it was a shot across the bow of the education establishment.  The riff about how everybody in Albany has a lobbyist but the kids was well wordsmithed and reminds us of the words of former union prexy Al Shanker: “When schoolchildren start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of schoolchildren.”  (As an aside, as an education reform advocate in a past job, the Governor’s riff is besides true, the best answer to parents and others who wonder why the state isn’t helping their kids more.  No one gets any free money from the government.  Somewhere along the line someone forced an elected official or a policymaker to do it; either by their sheer numbers, by their influence or endorsement or with a donation.  People who want anything from government need to put up or shut up.)

While I’m personally no fan of campaign finance reform (I think especially in the internet age, when the press, public and political opponents can learn instantly if someone’s been paying to play then transparency has a better shot of policing politicians than another rule on dollar amounts which they’ll figure a way around) but that aside, it’s probably a win for the Governor to talk about this with his base.

What I didn’t like

No shoutouts & not personal

While it was a good rhetorical move to jump right into the speech, there was a place somewhere to, as I put it in my previous post, say something incredibly touching about Hugh Carey.  But beyond that, the Governor delivered a personally cold speech.  He’s no philosopher king like his father and he isn’t a slick speaker like President Clinton, but there is a way, even within his own personal style to well, get personal.  By the Aqueduct bit he could have spoken of his childhood in Queens or by his piece on restoring the Capitol, he could have referenced his own early memories.  But if that’s not his style, that’s ok.  There was still plenty of opportunity, to personalize the speech.  Other than the Genting reference by Aqueduct there’s no hook of a company or an individual who would be helped or can capitalize – or who already has been – by a policy change.  Are there no solar companies in New York State ready to jump in on the energy highway?  Is there not one victim or relative of a victim to showcase the importance of expanding the DNA database?

Not enough facts & stats

I know this is a hard line to draw but – as an example – the speechwriters and researchers did an excellent job with the Aqueduct piece.  Who knew our convention space was 12th in the nation, behind Anaheim?  Similarly his poignant stat on New York spending more than any other state on education but ranking 38th in graduation hit home his point like nothing else.  But couldn’t that kind of detail helped press his case elsewhere?  Don’t we have stats on the energy business – where New York ranks in this?  How many New York companies are there in this business and how many people they employ?  What would expansion mean for them?

The kitchen sink syndrome

I remarked in the prior post that State of the States are Frankenstein-like creations.  This did not begin that way at all, but by the end had degenerated into a throw in everything we’ve got so everyone can find something they like.  I’d rather have seen less ideas and more thought out proposals in each (and yes, I’m aware that for many of them it will be the Budget Address and Executive Budget where it gets fleshed out).

Venue

This is nitpicky, but I think there’s a real grandeur to the Assembly Chamber and it’s a cool place to give the speech, even (or especially) when it gets so overcrowded they are packing folding chairs in and it becomes SRO, leaning towards fire hazard.

Overall score: the Governor gets a lot of points for swinging hard for the fences with some creative policy proposals.