Governor-elect  outlined a slew of new ethical reforms he plans to enact once he takes the reigns of the state government in January last week. Marked with both cosmetic and substantial changes, Spitzer’s reform agenda is an interesting mix, and some of it will certainly be easy to move through what has been a slow-as-molasses process of reform in Albany to date.

“If we are to reverse our state’s decline, we must first reform our state government to make it more accountable and effective,” said Spitzer when announcing his ambitious plan. “Reform must begin at the highest levels of government, which is why David and I personally plan to take the following actions on January 1st.  These reforms are the first step in a comprehensive reform agenda that we plan to actively pursue.”

The governor-elect has announced that neither he nor any other elected official should appear in state-funded tourism commercials. He wants to webcast meetings of various state agencies. And he’s planning to bring a new age of nonpartisanship to the dysfunctional halls of Albany government.

But the one reform that has Albany insiders scratching their heads is Spitzer’s insistence on self-imposed campaign finance reform. Specifically, the governor-elect is looking to limit the contributions of LLCs, unions, political action committees and the like to a maximum of $10,000. As it stands today, such entities can contribute up to $50,100 to a candidate for statewide office. Spitzer is well aware of this, since he received numerous contributions in excess of his proposed self-imposed reform.

Spitzer’s biggest non-individual contribution came from the YES Network, a fairly young cable television entity that broadcasts New York Yankees and New Jersey Nets games to homes in the Metropolitan area (Spitzer also received a substantial contribution from the network’s chairman, Leo Hindery). In addition to sharing Spitzer’s zeal for reforming Albany, the YES Network and the governor-elect also share a common consultant. The Mirram Group, founded several years ago by former Bronx Democratic boss Roberto Ramirez and partner Luis Miranda, does work for both the candidate and the network.

The governor-elect also grabbed many over-his-personal-limit contributions from unions across New York state, most of which also backed Spitzer’s ascension to the governorship anyway. Spitzer has a very nice relationship with the state’s union machine, though for the first time ever he will have to really deal with those unions when it comes time to make policy. His predecessor, George Pataki, had a novel way of dealing with unions—selling out to them. This was never more obvious than in 2002 when Pataki, cruising to victory over then-State Comptroller H. Carl McCall, threw huge new entitlement programs at SEIU 1199 and its leader Dennis Rivera, eventually bringing them out of the traditional Democratic fold and into Republican arms.

Spitzer cruised to victory this year as well, and his opponents never had a chance. Spitzer destroyed his opponent in 2002 when he ran for reelection as attorney general, a defeat so enormous that he was almost immediately christened the next governor following Pataki’s exit. Sure, he had to talk Sen. Chuck Schumer out of running against him in a primary, but that was all behind the scenes stuff. Spitzer never faced a real challenge to take the state’s top office.

Which makes it all the more puzzling that he would only now decide to place restrictions on his ability to raise money, especially since he did not really need all the money he raised to begin with. At least that is the sentiment in Albany, according to one Democratic Assemblyman who asked not to be named.

“Eliot’s a nice guy, and I think he’ll be a good governor, but it’s pretty funny that he would try to change the rules now after he raised so much money under the old rules,” the assemblyman said.

State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno has also mocked Spitzer campaign finance plan, deriding it as little more than showboating and openly resenting the implication that campaign support equals influence. “For anyone that thinks that anyone that makes a contribution buys anything other than indicating their positive support ... well then they’re just wrong,” said Bruno.

Spitzer could have enacted these campaign finance reforms prior to his race for governor. He would have won anyway, and he would have looked like a reforming hero in the process. But Spitzer is reportedly a very skittish man when it comes to elections, no matter how assured he is of a victory. The old adage that no election is won until after Election Day stuck with Spitzer, and he probably raised more money than he needed “just in case.” In 2006, reform had to take a backseat to nerves.