Governor Hochul, even as she savors her hard-fought victory, must also know that she survived a political near-death experience — and respond accordingly.

Not only is a five-point win modest for an Empire State Democrat but her losing Republican opponent, Congressman Lee  Zeldin, had longer coattails than she.

His strong showing outside New York City helped elect four new Republican members of Congress, a group that will be key to turning the House red.

In that light, it’s a good time for Ms. Hochul to consider which policy compromises she can make, as she sets out to govern a New York electorate that has shown itself to be more sharply-divided than was appreciated.

The policy ideas that follow are by no means an exhaustive group — but would send the right signal.

Energy: 

It’s not politically practical for the Governor to roll back the state’s ban on natural gas drilling in its rich Upstate shale formations.  But the Governor could announce a study commission—to report in no more than a year—to determine where fracking could safely take place.

 Such a face-saving turnaround would allow New York to share in the employment bonanza which the Marcellus Shale has brought to bordering Pennsylvania, such that even Senator-elect Fetterman had to pledge his support for fracking.

Energy jobs are a far better means to revive her own Western New York region than marijuana pipe dreams and casinos. 

It’s become clear that the free world is in desperate need of cleaner-than-coal gas, as it struggles with Vladimir Putin’s supply strangle. New York has a part to play.

Housing:

Ms. Hochul has said she’ll push for still more “affordable” (subsidized) housing  But with five percent of the nation’s population, New York already has 10 percent of such housing (490,000 units). Yet its housing crisis is perennial.

It’s time to take steps to boost production instead—to enable lower-income residents to buy starter homes rather than be trapped in public housing. State funds should help localities that relax draconian zoning cover increased costs for services, such as schools.

The 2019 expanded rent regulation law cries out for amendment, at least to make it clear that price controls on nearly a million apartments depend on economic conditions and are not permanent.

Mental Health:

It is one thing to pledge to get dangerous persons off New York City’s streets.  It’s another for the many mentally ill among them to have somewhere to go for treatment.

In 1965, New York state psychiatric hospitals housed 93,000 patients; today there are just some 5,000 such beds. Ms. Hochul has set her sights on federal Medicaid funds to increase that number.  But the state already spends more for Medicaid than any other state.  It will need to be prepared to spend its own funds on this pressing public need, whether for expanded hospitals or smaller “supportive” housing apartments.

Bail: 

In the aftermath of its 2019 bail reform law, New York is the only state that limits the discretion of judges to consider the dangerousness of the accused in deciding whether to hold them.

Ms. Hochul need not reject  the entire premise of reform — that cash bail can consign the poor to jail when better-off defendants would await trial at home.

 But those who are accused of pushing subway riders onto the tracks, raping women out jogging, or shooting up housing projects have to be held before trial. New Yorkers would be deeply relieved by a return to a dangerousness standard.

New York City’s Charter School Cap:

As the New York City public school system loses students (some 100,000 since the start of the pandemic), long waiting lists persist for successful charter schools.    

Ms. Hochul has already said, in her debate with Mr. Zeldin, that she supports lifting the current cap on charters in the city.  No new school charters in the city can currently be had, under state law.

Lifting the cap would signal that Ms. Hochul is not a slave of teacher unions and recognizes the need of low-income urban parents desperate for better schools.

Beyond the constructive effects of policy changes such as the above, they would send a message of reasonableness and practicality to voters. In a state that has lost more population, per the most recent Census, than any other, both have been in short supply.