This is turning into a nearly miraculous week in New York politics. Not only did Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver express his “sympathy” for the idea of education tax credits, a proposal that garnered an endorsement from a powerful labor leader and New York’s Democratic attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, but now other Democrats are almost tripping over themselves to call for tax relief. The New York City comptroller, William Thompson, called for an expansion of the current $400 property tax rebate program to $1,000 for low and middle-income elderly homeowners. Meantime in Washington, a possible Democratic gubernatorial candidate and current Nassau County executive, Thomas Suozzi, indicated he would make New York’s highest-in-the-nation tax burden an issue in the election if and when he formally launches a campaign. The question now is, do they mean it?

At a press conference yesterday, Mr. Thompson presented charts showing how elderly New Yorkers are caught between utility bills and property tax levies that are rising dramatically and Social Security payments that are falling behind. As a result, elderly homeowners are increasingly in danger of losing their homes. His solution is to offer an additional $600 rebate a year to about 81,000 seniors who already qualify for the current $400 rebate program.

Mr. Suozzi, in the nation’s capital to participate in a think-tank forum on American suburbs, told reporters after the event that he thinks high local taxes are one of the three major problems facing the state. He lambasted the “special interest politics” in Albany that he said cause the problem, and chided his potential opponent, Mr. Spitzer, among others, for not doing enough to curtail the Medicaid fraud that costs New Yorkers so much each year. He was short on details about what he meant by “special interest politics” or precisely what taxes or regulations he would cut, but long on his conviction that the local tax burden hasn’t been discussed enough in the state.

To those of us who’ve been in the tax fight all these years, these are positive developments – up to a point. It’s certainly true that every little step to ease New Yorkers’ tax bills or even call attention to the issue counts for something. But targeted special interest tax relief is not the approach. Mr. Thompson’s seniors will benefit from their tax relief if it’s approved by the legislature, but what about the rest of New Yorkers? His is only an attempt to pacify especially aggrieved taxpayers. It won’t do anything to control the underlying spending that leads to the high taxes in the first place – or, more importantly still, to increase incentives by lowering taxes on the next dollar earned.

Mr. Suozzi, meantime, will have to do better if he’s going to convince New Yorkers that he’s serious, especially considering the tax cutting war going on in the Republican primary. One Republican candidate, William Weld, has endorsed a “taxpayers’ bill of rights” that would amend the state constitution to restrain spending and mandate tax rebates under some circumstances. Some of Mr. Weld’s primary opponents like Randy Daniels and John Faso, who has been in the tax fight in a principled, strategic way for years, are battling to outdo him.

Mr. Suozzi is on the right track when he points to ills like “special interest politics” and Medicaid fraud that drive up government spending and taxes, but New Yorkers are still waiting for specifics. Mr. Thompson is on the right track when he says that property taxes are too high for New Yorkers. The challenge now will be to avoid the Kerry Mistake. John Kerry tried to convince middle-class Americans that he would cut their taxes, but they didn’t believe him because he spent so much time talking about increasing taxes on “the rich,” who already pay a disproportionate share. New York Democrats have a lot of baggage to lug uphill in the struggle for lower taxes, but it’s good to see them starting to take some initial steps.