Alessandra Biaggi is a New York State senator who has represented parts of the Bronx and Westchester County since 2019.
This interview with Ms. Biaggi was conducted by the editorial board of The New York Times on July 27.
Read the board’s endorsement for the Democratic congressional primary for New York’s 17th District here.
Kathleen Kingsbury: I understand you have to reject the premise of this question —
Sure.
Kathleen Kingsbury: — to begin with. But I hope you would talk a little bit about what you think you’d be able to accomplish in a Republican-controlled Congress, and be as specific as possible, but also if there’s one big idea that you’d pursue on a bipartisan basis.
Sure. So, OK, I think that — let me answer the question in reverse. I think the idea that I would want to pursue on a bipartisan basis is with regard to ethics reform and accountability. I’m very focused on institutional reform of Congress, of the Supreme Court, of our institutions. We have rules to allow us to change the way that these systems work, and we’ve got to actually use them. So I’m very committed to that.
And specifically, what I think we could accomplish on a bipartisan scale is banning trading stocks among members.
It’s really important to me that we do that for a lot of obvious reasons, but most importantly because we have to rebuild the trust of the people who elect us. And I think that our trust is — it’s a cliché thing to say — but it’s at an all-time low. And I don’t want it to be there, and it can’t be there if we actually are going to be able to build a strong future and pass policies that people believe actually fight for them.
So that’s that on that part of the question. But in the minority, as a minority member, I think that there is a very long and strong history of dissent being powerful in just the way that we shape movements, the way that we shape policy agendas. And so I am — probably everyone knows this — but I’m a very outspoken, bold leader.
And I think it’s important that we have people who have a strategy, who are able to think about the ways in which the Democratic Party can become stronger so that we can ultimately be in the majority. But then, also, there are more specific things. If you’re on a committee, there’s oversight roles. There’s the ability to make amendments. There’s motions to recommit.
There are ways to learn the rules of how Congress works that we can use to be able to exert our power. And most importantly, even if we don’t succeed in the amendment we want or the thing that we want, at least we are showing the people that have elected us that we are fighting for them, and fighting really hard, and using our power. And that is, I think, one of the most important things that we have to do as leaders.
Mara Gay: Senator, inflation is hitting all Americans hard. But in your district in the tristate area, in those northern suburbs, the cost of housing is an increasingly difficult concern, especially at this point in the pandemic. What would you do as a member of Congress to ease that burden?
OK, so there are a few things that I would do with regard to housing. The first one is I would build more of it. It is really important that, when it comes to inflation, that we understand as leaders that the aggregate demand which outstrips the aggregate supply is part of why we have inflation.
And so one of the ways we can get at that is we can allow for affordable housing, transit-oriented housing. And the more housing that we build, even in middle-class and upper-middle-class neighborhoods, the more we will be able to drive down those costs.
But, in addition to that, I think what Congress can do is put funding into the programs that already exist. So, Section 8 housing is one of the areas I’m really focused on. And the reason for that is because, No. 1, it’s an area where we do not fully fund it in this country. And so of all the people who apply, only a fourth of the people are able to get it, No. 1.
And No. 2, it’s not an entitlement. So the fact that there are three-fourths of people who are applying but can’t get access to it is one of the main drivers —
Brent Staples: Who are eligible. Those are eligible people.
They’re eligible, exactly. And they can’t get access to it. And so what happens? They either become unhoused, or they live in their cars, or they try their best to continue to go to work every day and do what they can.
And so housing, to me, is one of the — if I think about what makes a person able to live with dignity, housing, having schools that are excellent, fully funded, being able to have access to health care and also making sure that they have good, well-paying jobs, these are the things that will allow for someone to thrive. And by basically stripping the ability for people to be able to access the programs that exist, it causes harm.
But one other thing in the Section 8 housing that I just want to mention is the ability for individuals to have the opportunity to be placed into middle-income and other areas, because it shows that even if it costs more on the front end to invest from the government side, these are individuals who have opportunities later that are more economically prosperous. And then that means that they will also contribute to society in a way that benefits themselves, and also the entire country.
Kathleen Kingsbury: Thank you. What do you think Democrats should do to secure voting rights and to protect democracy in general?
Everything that they can do. And that includes not just putting their names on bills, which I think is a very bare-minimum use of our power. I think it also means using the courts. I think it means not being afraid of having bills go up and fail or being challenged in the judiciary.
I will say that in 2020, myself and Mondaire Jones were able to sue Donald Trump and the postmaster general because they were, as you probably remember, removing the mailboxes and the sorting machines. And they were telling the [postal] workers that they couldn’t have presumptive overtime.
And that was the first time for me, as a legislator, that I realized my job is not just to pass legislation. It’s also to use the power of the courts and to think about how we can actually use that power. And we won.
And so that, to me, is one of the other things that we can do. It also, I think, requires us to organize. I think that in this party, one of the things that we lack is a long-term strategy that the other side has.
And it’s very simple. It doesn’t have to be complicated. It’s literally going state to state — in a state like New York, just to be very specific — having a strong state party chair that meets with the county chairs once a month, but then those county chairs meet with the local chairs once a month.
And at the beginning of every year, you have a goal of: We can flip one county “leg” seat. We can flip one congressional seat. We can — all in the effort to actually be able to secure voting rights and voting initiatives that are on the constitutional ballot. Yes?
Patrick Healy: Senator, do you think Democratic elected officials are out of step with Democratic voters on immigration, on L.G.B.T.Q. rights, on any issue in particular now, just in terms of —
Can I ask a clarifying question on that?
Patrick Healy: Sure.
So do you mean specifically on how they fight or in the bills that they put up?
Patrick Healy: I think it can be more messaging, in terms of language, sometimes priority setting. But really, it’s your call, anything you see as just not syncing.
OK. Well, I think that we definitely, we have a come-to-Jesus moment in our party here to choose a different playbook of how we lead. And that is not just for L.G.B.T.Q. issues. And what was the other issue that you said?
Patrick Healy: Immigration.
Immigration issues. It really is for all issues. But specifically on those two issues, I think that part of why we might not have support even from people in our own party is because we don’t always go into the rooms with people who might not either understand the policies that we’re trying to pass or [might] be angry about the policies that we’re trying to pass.
And as a result of avoiding those kinds of conversations and organizing, which is a key role of building power, I think we leave people behind. And then they feel like, well, I don’t understand the changes that are happening in the world. And my leaders didn’t come to speak to me about it. So I’m now going to have resentment toward them. And I feel like you do that so often, and it’s an unforced error, that we can be so much better at.
Eleanor Randolph: So, Senator, we have a few yes-or-no questions.
Sure.
Eleanor Randolph: And we’d appreciate just yes or no as answers.
OK.
Eleanor Randolph: The first one is, would you support expanding the Supreme Court?
Yes.
Eleanor Randolph: Would you support ending the filibuster?
Yes.
Eleanor Randolph: What about term limits for members of Congress?
That one I am — I tilt yes. And the reason is —
Eleanor Randolph: Tilt.
Tilt yes because I don’t know the magic number.
Eleanor Randolph: All right. So —
Yes. I would say yes. Yes, yes.
Eleanor Randolph: OK. What about an age limit for members of Congress?
Well, we have mandatory retirements on the judiciary, so I can’t imagine why we wouldn’t apply that standard to all of the other parts of our government. So yes.
Eleanor Randolph: Yes. And should President Biden run again?
Maybe. I’m sorry.
[The room laughs.]
Kathleen Kingsbury: It’s a one-word answer.
I think it’s too early to determine. Maybe.
Eleanor Randolph: OK, thank you, Senator.
You’re welcome.
Alex Kingsbury: I’d like to ask about Ukraine. And I wonder if you think there should be an upper limit for the amount of taxpayer dollars we spend on the war there, and if we should attach any sort of conditions to the continued spending that we’re sending overseas.
OK, so I will start by saying that I think the — so I respect President Biden’s efforts to, first and foremost, exercise all diplomatic measures right before having sanctions put into place. I also think that democratic countries across the world that are invaded and that are our allies, absolutely, with our allies, deserve to have the aid and support that they need to minimize loss of life and casualties. So I support that.
I am cautious of any kind of action that will bring our military into an additional conflict. And so, just to fully answer your question, I think the answer is that — the answer is yes. We cannot fund in perpetuity, but I don’t think that we have to because we have other countries that are allied with us that are also contributing to the aid to Ukraine.
Now, I say this, obviously, not having the privilege of being there, but also, looking at all of the images and watching and listening to what’s going on, it’s an atrocity. It’s outrageous. And it’s also dangerous, because it’s not just about loss of life, which is the most important casualty of this war. But it’s also because Ukraine is one of the largest distributors — exporters of grain. And so this is absolutely on the verge of risking famine across the globe.
So we’ve got to stop that. And I’m not sure that I have all the answers for that. But I hope that satisfies, at least, your question.
Nick Fox: Could you say what you think Democrats can do about climate change in the face of Republican opposition and opposition from the Supreme Court?
[The Senate passed the climate, health and tax bill on Aug. 7 and the House on Aug. 12, both after this interview took place.]
The first thing that we can do is, as a party, put a line in the sand about taking money from the fossil fuel industry. I think it’s one of the most important signals that we can send to people that, whether we’re in the majority or in the minority, that we are serious about climate change.
I also think that having investments in things like electrifying the grid, hydro, solar, geothermal, wind, making sure that we are also not leaving people behind who work in other industries that might get — not priced out, but eliminated, because their industry has become moot — is an important part of allowing us to bring people along for the ride, so work force development.
But we can also do something that I have done in New York, which I’m really proud of, which is to think about other industries that have not been regulated. The fashion industry is one of those industries. I introduced a bill called the Fashion Act. The main goal of the bill is to drive down the global greenhouse gas emissions that the fashion industry contributes to worldwide every year, which is about 8 percent.
And so we can look at other industries in addition to energy, and think about how we can basically have an all-hands-on-deck approach and get at this from creative ways as well.
Mara Gay: Thanks. Is there any further action that Congress can take on gun violence?
There is so many things that Congress can do on gun violence. They can ban ghost guns. They can have an assault weapons ban, which is not a crazy thing to say, because we had one until we didn’t.
We can also fully fund our anti-violence programs because when it comes to gun violence, one of the things that I think all members of Congress need to do, collectively, is to talk about gun violence and public safety, not just from the perspective of after the gun goes off or after something happens, but also what can we do to prevent it.
And so being able to understand that communities are safe when people are fully — when people are housed, when schools are fully funded, when we have after-school programs — when we actually do fund those anti-violence programs that are interrupters for violence is important. But both parts of the puzzle have to exist for us to actually have a comprehensive plan to be able to solve for this.
Mara Gay: Thank you. And you’ve been quite active on protecting abortion rights in the State Senate. What would you do in Congress —
Everything.
Mara Gay: That you think can get done?
Anything and everything. So, first and foremost, I think that we have to codify Roe. And I wish that we did it 50 years ago, but we didn’t. And so we’ve got to do that.
The second thing I think we can do is we can think about making sure that we are using federal dollars for states that still have abortion legal to be able to provide additional funding — that states are already — providing for different clinics and services, and also from people who are traveling to states like New York, like we’ve done here, who are going to — who want those services, so putting those funds into abortion access funds, for lack of a better word.
We can also do things like look at … what is the role of the F.D.A.? Currently, abortion pills are on something called the REMS list, which is a list that basically makes it harder for the pills to be accessed by people. It’s the same list that opioids are on. And it is outrageous we don’t just remove it.
And so I wrote a letter with my colleagues in the Senate, in the State Senate, to send to the F.D.A. to request that this happens. We haven’t heard back yet. But the point is that we have to think about it not just from the codification or from the organizing perspective but also from the agency perspective, and to push on our leaders to not be afraid to, No. 1, fail — because we might — but also to be able to show urgency around the things that matter and not respond to things like this, or rights being taken away, with fund-raising emails.
[Brent Staples laughs.]
Kathleen Kingsbury: What should Congress do to address the increasing threat —
Brent Staples: Excuse me. I’m sorry. I take that back. [Laughs harder.]
It’s OK.
Kathleen Kingsbury: What should Congress do to address the increasing threat of domestic terrorism?
Well, not what we have done in the N.Y.P.D., which is oversurveillance and targeting of certain groups simply because they fit a certain profile. I think that we have to — let me think about this. I want to be really thoughtful about this.
OK, I think that the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. and all of our intelligence agencies working together is a key part of this. I think that making sure that these agencies are strong enough to intercept any kind of potential threats or current threats is a key piece of this.
And part of what frustrates me the most — and we see this more with domestic terrorists — is that there are so many signs on the internet of someone making threats, whether it’s in certain chat rooms or using certain social media platforms. And yet they’re not interrupted as often as they should be. And so I think that’s a key role.
I also want to just say that I care very much about all of our privacy. And the oversurveillance is something we always have to balance when it comes to the surveillance of reducing threat. But I do think that’s a key role.
Mara Gay: Senator, we ask a lightning round question —
OK, let’s do it.
Mara Gay: For a little quiz. First question is, how does Plan B work?
Plan B — OK, right. So that is the morning-after pill. So Plan B is a pill that stops ovulation from happening.
Mara Gay: Yes, that’s correct.
Yes.
Mara Gay: Do you own a gun?
I do not.
Mara Gay: Have you ever shot a gun?
I have.
Mara Gay: In what context?
It was in a shooting range, and it was the only time. And I did not enjoy the way that it felt.
Mara Gay: How long ago was that?
It was — let’s see, maybe it was 2018.
Mara Gay: OK. What is the average age of a member of Congress?
Let me think about this for one second — certainly older than 36. [Laughs.] I would say probably like 56 or 57.
Mara Gay: Fifty-eight. Close. Senator?
Average age of senators? Well, we have Grassley, who’s almost 90. [Laughs.] And that drives up the median. Sixty-two?
Mara Gay: Sixty-four. Close. Please name a member of Congress, dead or living, whom you most admire and would potentially emulate yourself after if elected.
Katie Porter.
Mara Gay: All right. And what is your favorite restaurant in your district?
The Outpost.
Mara Gay: OK. Thank you.
Kathleen Kingsbury: You don’t actually currently live in the 17th District, correct?
I’m about to, as soon as I leave here. We’re actually signing the paperwork at 3:30 today.
Kathleen Kingsbury: OK.
Yeah, so I live in Westchester County. I’m a Westchester native. We’re moving a little bit north, to North Castle. So —
Kathleen Kingsbury: Do you think you’ll be able to properly represent the district despite only having moved there?
I do, I do. As a member of the State Senate, I am part of the Westchester County delegation. I also am — thankfully, because I’m part of a Democratic conference that has people from across the state — I also have colleagues from Rockland County and Putnam who overlap with Westchester, and Dutchess as well, that I have been able to learn a lot from, especially in Rockland County and Putnam County. Whether it’s issues around, like, the well water or issues around transportation as it relates to Rockland County, these are things that I have been working on with my colleagues but also have been exposed to and fighting with them in the delegation for.
Patrick Healy: What do you consider your greatest accomplishment in your time in the State Legislature?
Reviving the Senate Ethics Committee, absolutely. It was a committee that — can I answer —
Patrick Healy: Please.
So it was a committee that had only met two times in 10 years before I was elected. And when I was elected, I expressed to the leadership that I wanted to take on this committee. There was almost an immediate response of: Why in the world would you want this committee? This committee does nothing. And I said, “That’s exactly why I want this committee.”
And so on the first day that we were sworn in, I changed the rules of the committee that we could be able to have bills come through it and also hold hearings. That led us to be able to have the first hearing on sexual harassment in Albany in 27 years, which led to the passage, of course, of some of the strongest anti-sexual-harassment, anti-discrimination laws in the country. And then we did other hearings on ethics and also violence in — excuse me, sexual violence in correctional facilities.
Now the committee meets every month, excuse me, sorry.
Kathleen Kingsbury: One more question.
Jyoti Thottam: Yeah. So in the past, you said you supported the defund the police movement. Do you still support that? And what would you say to voters in your district who are concerned about crime or just feel unsafe?
So I want you all to know that I care a lot about public safety. And a huge part of my leadership has been around making our criminal justice system fairer as well as balancing the rights of the victims of crimes. Specifically, my work has been around sexual violence.
When I tweeted that, it was absolutely — it was an act of solidarity. But it also felt like a response to the moment that was occurring in this country, which is, in my opinion, one of the most outrageous things I’ve ever seen as an adult, which was a Black man literally being murdered on video.
And I think the reason why I don’t use [that term] anymore and only used it in that period of time is because what I have learned is that the language is unworkable. It scrambles people’s brains in a way that does not allow them to hear what else I have to say. I am committed to what is behind it, which is police reform, police accountability, making sure that we are really thoughtful about how we can address police brutality in this country, because it’s not a new problem. And yet we haven’t really made a significant amount of progress.
There are police departments across the country — very seldom, very few ones, Camden, New Jersey, being one of them, where they actually have reformed the police. And —
Brent Staples: Look what it took down there, though.
What’s that?
Brent Staples: Look what it took.
A tremendous effort. They overcame tremendous amounts of pushback. And New York is no different from that. Our police unions are very strong and very vocal and, any time we’ve done anything, have had so much pushback.
But there’s not a system on Earth, including the Legislature, but especially policing, that can’t be made better. Policing is absolutely one of them. And I’m committed to that. And I’m committed to it not just because I care about the systems being better, but also because I grew up in a law enforcement family. I understand the risks that they take every day. But I also understand that they are public servants too, and that we have a role in making them better.
Jyoti Thottam: So has your position actually changed over time?
Well, I don’t use the language anymore, if that’s the question that you’re asking. But I think it’s important that every single agency or quasi-agency of the government that is funded by taxpayer dollars absolutely deserves to be looked at. And that includes — again, I put myself in this category every time, because I don’t want it to seem like I’m exempting those of us who are in the Legislature.
If we fail to do our job or don’t do our job to 100 percent of what we’re called to do, then we should have our budget taken a look at as well. And so in the N.Y.P.D. — I believe it was in 2021 — the statistics showed that 30 percent — and I might invert them just because my brain might do that. But 30 percent of shootings, violent shootings, were solved, and 40 percent of rapes were solved.
But I want those numbers to be 100 percent. Those are things that are important to me. And if it means taking police out of responding to mental health crises or to the homelessness crisis, then we have to re-scope them and make it so that they are actually responding to the things that do make our communities safer, and also reducing police brutality.
Patrick Healy: Many of the communities that you now run in represent the new district and are considered politically moderate. You have a strong record as a progressive.
Yes.
Patrick Healy: Why are you the right person to represent those voters in those kinds of northern New York suburbs?
So I want to just also start by saying that a lot — so about 37 percent or so of the district identifies as progressive, and a little bit more identifies as moderately progressive. And so why I know I can represent this district and why I can appeal to them is because I have a record of delivering. And it’s not just on things that I think people would consider to be progressive.
It’s for all people, for middle-class families, for working families. I also am a reformer. And one of the things that I think is really important for you all to know is that when I’m knocking on doors, which I do every weekend, or making phone calls to people in the district, the thing that I hear the most is that people are truly sick and tired of self-serving elected officials across the entire spectrum.
And I can say across the entire political spectrum with confidence, because when I knock on the door, I don’t always get the Democrat on the other side of the door. The dad might be a Republican, and he might be very happy to share that opinion with me. And the one thing that’s common amongst people is that feeling. And that’s something that I think I embody the opposite of.
I think that I have proven through my record, but also, really, through my ability to tell people the truth about what’s going on inside of their institutions, which has given people the desire to trust that I’m somebody who has their backs.
I will just have one anecdote, if I can, about … in 2020, when I was running for re-election in the State Senate, I, after the election was over, had several phone calls from Republicans in my district who called the office to say, “We don’t agree with her on basically anything, but we voted for her because she was outspoken about what was going on in our nursing homes. And that proved to me that she cared about my loved ones and the people in nursing homes that might not have been taken care of or kept safe.”
And so that just signaled to me that, again, people, I think, are willing to look past some of the differences that we have if they feel like the person that’s representing them is a fighter, is someone that represents a different kind of leadership and is loyal first and foremost to them.
Mara Gay: I just wanted to ask you, how are you going to overcome your opponent’s advantage, his name recognition in this district, his fund-raising? How many doors have you knocked on? What is your pathway to victory?
OK. So the best way that I can overcome being an underdog — which I am very used to doing, I was an underdog in 2018, I’ve been an underdog every time I’ve taken on a really powerful interest or even our former governor — when I spoke out against him. I don’t think there’s anybody who has more — who had more power or money than him.
And the best way that I can just describe the pathway to victory is by fighting for every single inch. So I have personally knocked on several hundred doors. We have knocked on over 3,000 doors. We’ve made over 45,000 phone calls into the district. We have sent thousands of postcards.
And so what we have in people — through grassroots organizing, through people who don’t even identify as grassroots organizers but are new in the political process — what we have in people — excuse me, what he has in dollars, we make up in people. We are not going to raise the same amount of money as him. But we don’t need to. We just need enough money to be able to communicate.
And so we have had a mail program that has already started. In fact, we started our mail program before he did. And we did that specifically because we thought that there would be people who did not know me, and I wouldn’t have name recognition in certain areas. So we did an introductory letter.
We’ve done five pieces of mail since then. But then I just want you all also to know that a lot of the organizers in this district are part of the race that I ran in 2018, the No I.D.C. race. And so they’re common to a lot of the causes not just in the electoral politics but also then when we got to Albany.
So it’s organizing. It’s continuing to raise. It’s continuing for me to be present in the district, to have meet-and-greets. We’ve had people literally go on our website that have never met me before to request to host a meet-and-greet. And every time we do that, we have that multiply into two or three other meet-and-greets. Those are the inches that add up to the wins.
And I will just tell you that I am not — I shouldn’t say it this way. Let me say it to the positive. I love to organize. I love to knock on doors because it means something to people. It makes them feel like you actually care about representing them. And that is, to me, the best way that you build trust. But also, that interaction will multiply into that person’s immediate network.
And that also has come back for us to have more volunteers. So we also have over 140 volunteers. We have a fellowship program. I believe there are 25 or 30 individuals who are our fellows who have been with us since the beginning of the race.
And I’m sure I’m forgetting something. But those are the components that will be part of the pathway to victory.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
Source: Elections - nytimes.com
