Lots of people are mad at Governor Paterson these days. Some of this anger is justifiable, given the long string of scandals that have emanated from his office. But recent criticism of the governor over the fact that the state has been engaging in "creative" accounting techniques seems to be somewhat misplaced.

Most of us are currently feeling the economic pinch. Some of us have lost well-paying jobs; others have had hours trimmed, or seen reductions to our salaries. There can be no doubt that things are tough all over.

So, what do you do when the first of the month rolls around and you find yourself unable to pay the monthly bills? Do you live without electricity? How about food? Maybe you decide you can't afford to live in that house you bought and simply mail the keys back to the bank? Most would agree that such drastic decisions should be put off until they are absolutely necessary.

And, what if you had a reserve that you were saving for a rainy day? Would a potential foreclosure by the bank be enough for you to tap into this fund, thereby keeping your head above water for another month? Most people would say "yes": putting food on the table, or having lights, or a roof over one's head would be more than enough justification to raid whatever kitty we might have stashed away. Some folks, in fact, would even go so far as to live off credit cards, at least for a little while.

Now, we have NY State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli's report criticizing the governor's accounting practices. DiNapoli's report says that the state "dips into funds here, and shifts money over there, all to cover cash shortfalls and avoid making the difficult decisions needed to align spending with revenues." DiNapoli goes on to say that, "If the state's true structural deficit is hidden, hard decisions can be avoided and everyone can pretend things are fine."

But what decisions is DiNapoli talking about? Exactly where should we be cutting spending? Recently, the governor proposed closing a number of state parks, including our own Minnewaska State Park Preserve, in order to close next year's budget gap. Of course, the outcry against this proposed move was swift and significant. In just a few weeks, for example, more than 20,000 people joined a Facebook group protesting the proposal. Now, it appears that the governor has rethought this idea, and rightly so — closing Minnewaska would have a huge impact on our local economy, as tourists would likely decide to take their money elsewhere in the northeast.

We could, perhaps, get rid of some state troopers, but most people would agree that this is a bad idea. We could, like California, eliminate social safety-net programs or release non-violent prisoners. Maybe we could kick out into the street those seniors citizens who live in state-subsidized housing?

Yes, these are hard decisions.

But the governor took a different route. He understands that it took a long time for the state to get into this deep a mess, that he has an emergency situation with which to deal, and that real solutions to the systemic problems in Albany will take years, and far more political courage than is currently available, to correct.

So, he has decided that keeping a certain level of government services is non-negotiable. He took a look around at the various authorities and agencies that make up our state government, found that a number were running surpluses, and decided that leveraging this money to close the budget hole made a lot more sense than imposing even more draconian austerity.

This is not to say that Albany isn't broken, that our government hasn't become utterly dysfunctional, and that corruption on both sides of the aisle isn't wide and deep. But, if making "tough decisions" means destroying public safety, or the modest quality of life the least among us enjoy, then the governor's accounting decisions are to be commended not criticized, at least until someone — Mr. DiNapoli himself, perhaps — can propose a workable alternative.