More stories

  • in

    Free Buses and Child Care. A Rent Freeze. Can Zohran Mamdani Achieve His Plans?

    The Democratic mayoral hopeful promises free child care, a $30 minimum wage and a massive tax hike on the city’s corporations. But much is not within a mayor’s control.Zohran Mamdani’s rapid rise from upstart mayoral hopeful to likely winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City was propelled by the simple message that the city was too expensive — and that he had plans that would fix it.Mr. Mamdani’s singular focus on the city’s affordability crisis resonated, especially with young voters. They embraced his populist promises to make bus service free, freeze rents on stabilized apartments, build city-owned grocery stores and offer free early child care.But whether his campaign promises can become reality is an open question — and important parts of Mr. Mamdani’s platform are not solely in a mayor’s control.While some of his left-leaning policy ideas are not entirely new — rents have been frozen before, for example — others would represent a dramatic reimagining of city government.And much of Mr. Mamdani’s agenda relies in large measure on increasing revenue through taxes on businesses and the wealthy — part of an overarching vision to rethink how the city funds expanded social programs. Along with raising income taxes, he has pledged to shift the property tax burden “from the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods,” according to his campaign website.Already, Mr. Mamdani’s plans, in line with his democratic socialist political affiliation, have prompted intense backlash from business leaders who say he poses a danger to New York’s economy. In private meetings, power brokers are discussing how to mount a strong challenge to Mr. Mamdani in the November general election.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Andrew Cuomo’s Complicated Legacy in New York City

    Mr. Cuomo, the front-runner in the mayoral race and former governor, has a long — and, his critics say, mixed — record handling important issues in the city.As Andrew M. Cuomo runs for mayor of New York City, his prevailing argument to voters has focused on his experience in government, including his nearly 11 years as governor.Mr. Cuomo has highlighted the infrastructure projects he championed as governor, like LaGuardia Airport and the Second Avenue subway, and his role in raising the minimum wage and approving gay marriage.But his tenure, which ended in 2021 after he resigned following a series of sexual harassment allegations that he denies, also included decisions that critics say hurt the city.They contend that Mr. Cuomo was vindictive toward the city as part of his bitter feud with Mayor Bill de Blasio, and that he should have done more to protect the city, especially its lower-income residents, from budget cuts and the pandemic.Here is how Mr. Cuomo handled five key issues.Many New Yorkers blamed Mr. Cuomo for policies that they believe worsened mass transit, even though he helped usher in the new Second Avenue subway line.Michelle V. Agins/The New York TimesA Beleaguered Transit SystemWhen subway delays began to soar in 2017, Mr. Cuomo remained mostly silent even though he was responsible for the system through his control of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    New York Moves to Allow Terminally Ill People to Die on Their Own Terms

    A bill permitting so-called medical aid in dying passed the State Legislature and will now head to Gov. Kathy Hochul for her signature.The New York State Senate approved a bill on Monday that would allow people facing terminal diagnoses to end their lives on their own terms, which the bill’s proponents say would grant a measure of autonomy to New Yorkers in their final days.The bill, which passed the State Assembly earlier this year, will now head to the desk of Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, for her signature. It is unclear whether she plans to sign it; a spokesman for her office said she would review it.Eleven states and the District of Columbia have passed laws permitting so-called medical aid in dying. The practice is also available in several European countries and in Canada, which recently broadened its criteria to extend the option to people with incurable chronic illnesses and disabilities.The bill in New York is written more narrowly and would apply only to people who have an incurable and irreversible illness, with six months or less to live. Proponents say that distinction is key.“It isn’t about ending a person’s life, but shortening their death,” said State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Manhattan Democrat and one of the sponsors of the bill. It passed on Monday night by a vote of 35 to 27, mostly along partisan lines.He framed the measure as a statement of New York’s values, citing efforts by Republicans to increase governmental control over people’s bodies, including by restricting gender-affirming care and abortion.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Four States Ask F.D.A. to Lift Special Restrictions on Abortion Pill

    The states consider it a move to force the F.D.A. to review and acknowledge extensive research showing the pill’s safety.In a strategy aimed at countering efforts to further restrict the abortion pill mifepristone, attorneys general of four states that support abortion rights on Thursday asked the Food and Drug Administration to do the opposite and lift the most stringent remaining restrictions on the pill.The petition filed by Massachusetts, New York, California and New Jersey might seem surprising given the opposition to abortion expressed by Trump administration officials. But the attorneys general consider it a move that would require the F.D.A. to acknowledge extensive scientific research that has consistently found mifepristone safe and effective, said an official with the Massachusetts attorney general’s office who worked on the filing and asked not to be named in order to share background information. It would also prevent the F.D.A. from changing mifepristone regulations while the petition is pending.The petition notes that at a May senate hearing, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health and human services secretary, responded to questions by Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, who opposes abortion, by saying he had ordered the F.D.A. to do a “complete review” of mifepristone.“We want to make sure that when F.D.A. is making these decisions that they have all the data in front of them, all of the really powerful data that show that mifepristone is safe” the Massachusetts official said.The F.D.A. is required to respond within 180 days by granting or denying the request, or saying it needs more time. In its responses, the agency must document its position, which could be useful in lawsuits, including one that the four states could file if their petition is denied.Mifepristone, which blocks a hormone necessary for pregnancy development, was approved for abortion in America in 2000. The F.D.A. imposed an additional regulatory framework called Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, on mifepristone. That framework has been used for only about 300 drugs, currently covering only about 60 medications.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    In Reversal, Trump Officials Will Allow Huge Offshore N.Y. Wind Farm to Proceed

    The Trump administration had issued a highly unusual stop-work order on the Empire Wind project last month, leading to intense pushback from officials in New York.The Trump administration on Monday allowed construction to restart on a huge wind farm off the coast of Long Island, a month after federal officials had issued a highly unusual stop-work order that had pushed the $5 billion project to the brink of collapse.In a statement, Gov. Kathy Hochul, Democrat of New York, said she had spent weeks pressing President Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to lift the government’s hold on the wind farm.The project, known as Empire Wind, is being built by the Norwegian energy giant Equinor and when finished is expected to deliver enough electricity to power 500,000 New York homes.“After countless conversations with Equinor and White House officials, bringing labor and business to the table to emphasize the importance of this project, I’m pleased that President Trump and Secretary Burgum have agreed to lift the stop work order and allow this project to move forward,” Ms. Hochul said on Monday evening.When the Trump administration halted work on Empire Wind last month, it stunned observers and sent shock waves through the wind industry.Equinor had obtained all necessary permits for the project after a four-year federal environmental review, and the company had already begun laying foundations for the project’s turbines on the ocean floor. Another 1,500 workers had begun constructing a marine terminal in Brooklyn.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ‘Fraught With Abuse’: Lawmakers Denounce Brutality in N.Y. Prisons

    During a daylong hearing in Albany, state lawmakers heard from family members of men who died in New York State prisons in recent years.Family members and friends of men who died in New York State prisons in recent years denounced a system in turmoil and longstanding tolerance of brutality by guards on Wednesday at a joint legislative committee hearing.One who testified was a mentor of a 22-year-old man who the authorities said was beaten to death by corrections officers at the Mid-State Correctional Facility in Central New York in March.Another was the father of a man who officials said was fatally beaten by guards at the prison across the street, Marcy Correctional Facility. He demanded to know why officers who had repeatedly been accused of abuse were allowed to remain on the job.A third was the daughter of man who died in late 2023 after he was beaten by corrections officers at Green Haven Correctional Facility and then denied medical care, she said.Their stories were aired during the public hearing held by State Senator Julia Salazar and Assemblyman Erik M. Dilan, both Brooklyn Democrats, during a period of particular strife across New York’s 42 prisons.Earlier this year, thousands of prison guards walked off their assigned posts in a series of unsanctioned strikes that they said were in protest of hazardous working conditions. The wildcat strikes prompted deployment of 7,000 National Guard members and, eventually, mass firings of guards.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    When Taxpayers Fund Shows Like ‘Blue Bloods’ and ‘S.N.L.,’ Does It Pay Off?

    Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York has proposed an increase in the film tax credit to stay competitive with New Jersey and other states.New Yorkers — and residents of many other states — have paid more for entertainment in recent years than just their Netflix or Hulu subscriptions.Each New York household has also contributed about $16 in taxes, on average, toward producing the drama series “Billions” since 2017. Over that period, each household has also paid roughly $14.50 in production incentives for “Saturday Night Live” and $4.60 for “The Irishman,” among many other shows and movies.Add it all up, and New York has spent more than $5.5 billion in incentives since 2017, the earliest year for which data is readily available. Now, as a new state budget agreement nears, Gov. Kathy Hochul has said she wants to add $100 million in credits for independent productions that would bring total film subsidies to $800 million a year, almost double the amount from 2022.Other states also pay out tens or hundreds of millions each year in a bidding war for Hollywood productions, under the theory that these tax credits spur the economy. One question for voters and lawmakers is whether a state recoups more than its investment in these movies and shows — or gets back only pennies on the dollar.New York has one of the largest tax credit programs and makes most of its data public, so we totaled its spending to see which productions benefited the most. More

  • in

    Elise Stefanik, Cabinet Hopes Dashed, Considers Her Next Move

    Styrofoam packing peanuts littered an empty office in the Rayburn House Office Building across from the Capitol on Monday morning as two moving men unpacked a plush couch, an upholstered armchair, lamps and a lucite side table.Representative Elise Stefanik of New York was back.This had not been the plan.Ms. Stefanik, the self-proclaimed “ultra MAGA” warrior whom President Trump nominated to serve as ambassador to the United Nations, had expected to sail through her Senate confirmation vote, which was to be scheduled in early April.So she boxed up her office. She sent off her longtime chief of staff, Patrick Hester, to start a new job at the State Department, where he ended up working for seven days. She completed a “farewell tour” of her district, checked out schools for her son in New York City and was looking forward to moving into the $15 million Manhattan penthouse that comes with what is considered a fairly cushy job.Instead, Ms. Stefanik was back here on Capitol Hill amid the peanuts, contemplating her next steps and pinning most of the blame for what happened on Speaker Mike Johnson.To detractors, the president’s decision to pull Ms. Stefanik’s nomination was something akin to karmic comeuppance for a Republican lawmaker who was elected as a moderate but tacked unapologetically to the MAGA right, coming to personify the opportunistic shape-shifting that has gripped her party in the age of Mr. Trump.Ms. Stefanik’s plight seemed to crystallize in one succinct cautionary tale the limits of loyalty in the MAGA universe. Even one of the president’s most stalwart defenders, an effective ally since his first impeachment trial, ultimately did not get what she had long been promised.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More