Niou, Yuh-Line

Subterms

    Latest story

    113 Shares149 Views

    Niou vs. Goldman, Round 2? Won’t Happen, After All.

    by

    For weeks, left-leaning New York City Democrats have publicly debated whether to launch a third-party bid in a race for a rare open House seat in the heart of New York City.But on Tuesday, they decided to take a pass, as Yuh-Line Niou, a state assemblywoman who finished second to Daniel S. Goldman in August’s Democratic primary, declared that she would not seek a rematch using the Working Families Party ballot line in November after all.“We are conceding the primary and I will not be on the WFP line for the general,” Ms. Niou, 39, said, referring to the Working Families Party, during a seven-minute video she posted to Twitter around 9 p.m.“We simply do not have the resources to fight all fights at the same time, and we must protect our democracy now,” Ms. Niou added.The decision provided a reprieve not just to Mr. Goldman, a former assistant U.S. attorney who made his name prosecuting the first impeachment case against President Donald J. Trump, but also to some Democratic Party leaders, who feared a fight between the party’s left and more centrist wings would divert resources from races more pivotal to retaining control of Congress.Mr. Goldman, 46, is now all but assured of a victory in November; the Republican candidate, Benine Hamdan, is thought to have little chance in the heavily Democratic district.Progressive activists, who had eagerly stoked a fight to block that path, were certain to be disappointed in the outcome. They believe that Mr. Goldman was too moderate and accused him of buying one of the city’s most liberal districts, which connects Lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn, by pouring nearly $5 million of his own fortune into the race. With a 13-person primary field narrowed to just two, they argued Ms. Niou stood a better chance.But other allies bluntly advised Ms. Niou that she could not win a rematch given Mr. Goldman’s personal fortune, the compressed timeline and the institutional support rallying around him in New York and Washington. Ms. Niou and the Working Families Party, which was prepared to share its ballot line with her in November, grudgingly came to agree.Daniel Goldman won last month’s Democratic primary on the strength of his record as a Trump prosecutor and the $5 million he gave to his campaign.Gabriela Bhaskar for The New York TimesThough it is its own fully fledged political party, the W.F.P. is more typically a force in Democratic primaries, acting to push candidates to the left. Only rarely does it back a challenger to a Democrat in a general election. It has never done so in a congressional race.“We have always been sober about the structural barriers we face when running grass-roots candidates against the power of immense wealth,” Sochie Nnaemeka, the party’s director in New York, said in a statement.Ms. Nnaemeka added that the party would be focused on defeating Republicans, and urged Mr. Goldman to “take note of the progressive positions shared by candidates who cumulatively received a majority of the vote.”Prominent New York City Democratic officials had worked to head off Ms. Niou in recent days by uniting around Mr. Goldman, making a possible electoral path even more tenuous. More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      What Two Primaries Reveal About the Decline of Working-Class Democrats

      by

      The results of the Democratic congressional primaries in New York City on Tuesday give us a hint of just how far the working-class liberalism once associated with city politics has declined. The winners of two races in particular, Jerrold Nadler and Daniel Goldman, who will almost surely represent much of Manhattan (and a bit of Brooklyn) in the House, emerged as the victors of complicated congressional primaries in districts that were redrawn to reflect national shifts in population.They represent different kinds of New York City Democrats — Mr. Nadler, a longtime congressman, has deep roots in the old grass-roots liberalism of the Upper West Side, while Mr. Goldman is a political newcomer whose star has risen through his association with opposition to Donald Trump — but their shared success nonetheless highlights socioeconomic divisions in Manhattan that have a long history.The primaries reflected the tensions and divisions within contemporary liberalism itself and raise the question of how (or whether) Democrats can effectively represent such radically different constituencies.The changes in the city districts were a result of math — subtraction, to be specific. New York State lost a seat in the House because its population came up short by 89 people in a census conducted in 2020, at the height of Covid in New York. Indeed, if so many New Yorkers had not died in the early months of the pandemic, these contests — particularly the one that pitted Mr. Nadler against his House colleague Carolyn Maloney — would almost certainly not have taken place.Beyond the numbers, though, the primaries were part of a continuing story of class divisions in New York City. In the mid-1930s, the Columbia University sociologist Caroline Ware wrote a study of Greenwich Village that focused on the Irish and Italian immigrants who moved there in the late 19th century and whose Catholic churches still dot the neighborhood.Some at the time saw the Village as a success story of immigrant assimilation. But Professor Ware had a different interpretation. The people of the Village, she suggested, lived side by side but had little contact with one another. They were left to navigate a complicated city as “isolated individuals rather than as part of coherent social wholes.”The national Democratic Party faces a similar class divide between highly educated urbanites and the working-class voters for whom it often claims to speak. It’s no secret that the party has moved away from the fiercely pro-union New Deal politics of the mid-20th century. For much of the 20th century, New York State’s congressional delegation included more than 40 representatives (compared with 27 today), a voting bloc that generally collaborated in support of an expansive social welfare state and working-class interests. New York representatives included many of the country’s most left-leaning politicians (like the Upper West Side’s Bella Abzug).Mr. Nadler and Mr. Goldman come from different backgrounds, politically and economically. Mr. Nadler grew up in the city and got active in politics opposing the Vietnam War. Mr. Goldman is a Washington native who attended Sidwell Friends, Yale, Stanford; he served as assistant U.S. attorney with Preet Bharara in the Southern District of New York.For Mr. Nadler, despite his victory on Tuesday night, the political world he emerged from no longer exists as a vital force. This is in part because of transformations within Democratic politics.Mr. Nadler’s political career was forged at a pivotal moment in the aftermath of New York’s fiscal crisis of the 1970s. He was first elected to the State Assembly in 1976. In the following years, Democratic city officials were forced to increase subway fares, close public hospitals, charge tuition at CUNY and cease to embrace a politically ambitious role for local government. Mr. Nadler was elected to Congress in the early 1990s, when Democratic leaders like Bill Clinton proclaimed the end of the era of big government and were most optimistic about free trade and deregulation despite its impact on cities like New York.He has supported many measures over his long career that would aid working-class people, but at the same time the Democrats have generally backed away from politics that would more forcefully address inequality and the economic divide.Meanwhile, the economic fortunes of Manhattan were also changing — as part of an effort to secure a steadier tax base in the aftermath of the collapse of manufacturing, the city under Ed Koch began to reorient its economy toward Wall Street and real estate development.As Wall Street became an engine of the city’s economy in the administration of Michael Bloomberg, Manhattan’s demographics began moving in largely the opposite direction from the city as a whole. From 2010 to 2020, the white and Asian share of the borough’s population grew, while the Black and Latino share fell.Today, the institutions that had once helped to stitch together constituencies from different ethnic and racial backgrounds, like unions, are far weaker in the city and nationally than they once were. People confront the problems of living in New York through the lens of personal ambition — as “isolated individuals,” as Professor Ware put it — rather than through collective efforts to improve the city’s life.The narrow victory of Mr. Goldman illustrates even more sharply the political crisis of working-class New York. In addition to being an heir to the Levi-Strauss fortune, Mr. Goldman is a type well known to denizens of Lower Manhattan, a successful lawyer who was able to self-fund his campaign. He is clearly a candidate whose political appeal was strongest for the new leaders of the Village and Lower Manhattan, the professional upper classes who work in law firms and investment banks, who fund their children’s schools’ parent-teacher associations and the park conservancies.This is a social world that has little meaningful overlap with the working-class population, often Asian and Latino, that still dwells here but lacks the confident political organization and alliances with the middle class that it once possessed.Mr. Goldman’s political fortunes rose with his role as lead counsel in the first impeachment suit against Mr. Trump; his path to the House was largely paved by this rather than any deep engagement with the kinds of material issues that affect the lives of working- or even middle-class New Yorkers.Mr. Goldman’s race was very close — he won by roughly 1,300 votes. The runner-up, Yuh-Line Niou, a state assemblywoman, ran a campaign whose rhetoric focused on class appeals, but unions and progressive groups proved unable to act in a coordinated way to support any single candidate in a crowded field.Despite their different backgrounds, both Mr. Goldman and Mr. Nadler embody a Manhattan that has shifted in ways that affect not only its own politics but those of the country at large. Their careers point to the divides that Professor Ware pointed out decades ago.In her account, the Village — and New York, and America as a whole — faced the problem of how to respond to the collective problems of a modern industrial society through the lens of a political culture that had been shaped by ruthless individual acquisition. The particular problems have changed, and yet Lower Manhattan remains home to a population that, as dense as it is, is intensely divided by class and ethnicity, that is characterized (as Professor Ware put it) by “an almost complete lack of community integration.”The bitter politics of the August primaries, which reveal yet again the declining power of New York’s liberalism, are the result.Kim Phillips-Fein, a historian at Columbia University, is the author, most recently, of “Fear City: New York’s Fiscal Crisis and the Rise of Austerity Politics” and “Invisible Hands: The Businessmen’s Crusade Against the New Deal.”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. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      In N.Y. Primaries, a Fight for the Democratic Party’s Future

      by

      The party’s more moderate establishment declared victory, but a closer look reveals the battle for the soul of the party will grind on.Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, a moderate Democrat from New York City’s northern suburbs, saw a clear-cut lesson in his lopsided primary victory Tuesday night over one of his home state’s brightest left-wing stars.“Tonight, mainstream won,” Mr. Maloney, who also leads House Democrat campaign committee, declared afterward. “Common sense won.”The 30-point margin appeared to be a sharp rebuke to the party’s left flank, which had tried to make the race a referendum on Mr. Maloney’s brand of leadership in Washington. A second, narrower win by another moderate Democrat, Daniel Goldman, in one of the city’s most liberal House districts prompted more hand-wringing among some progressives.But as New York’s tumultuous primary season came to a close on Tuesday, a survey of contests across the state shows a more nuanced picture. Four summers after Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s surprise victory ignited Democrats’ left flank and positioned New York at the center of a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party, the battle has entered a new phase. But it is far from abating.Mostly gone this year were shocking upsets by little-known left-leaning insurgents like Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and a gaggle of challengers in Albany. They dislodged an entrenched block of conservative Democrats controlling the State Senate in 2018. Representative Jamaal Bowman defeated a powerful committee chairman in 2020. Those contests made the political left appear ascendant.Kristen Gonzalez, a State Senate candidate supported by the Democratic Socialists of America, won her primary race in a district in Brooklyn and Queens.Janice Chung for The New York TimesTwo years later, though, the tension within the party appears likely to grind on, as progressives struggle to marshal voters into movements as they did during the Trump presidency. At the same time, the party’s establishment wing has regained its footing after President Biden and Mayor Eric Adams, avowed moderates, won the White House and City Hall.“We are past that political and electoral moment,” said Sochie Nnaemeka, the director of New York’s liberal Working Families Party, said of the rapid gains of past election cycles. “The headwinds are a real amount of voter fatigue, economic malaise and just the pressures of everyday life.”Ms. Nnaemeka and her allies still found reason to celebrate on Tuesday though, particularly over state-level contests. Kristen Gonzalez, a tech worker supported by the Democratic Socialists of America, won a marquee Brooklyn-Queens State Senate race over Elizabeth Crowley, despite Mayor Adams and outside special interests openly campaigning against her.“Today, we really proved that socialism wins,” Ms. Gonzalez told jubilant supporters after her win.As moderates backed by well-financed outside groups and well-known leaders like Mr. Adams sought to oust them, progressives also successfully defended key seats won in recent election cycles.Among them were Jabari Brisport, a member of the Democratic Socialists, and Gustavo Rivera, another progressive state senator targeted by Mr. Adams. Mr. Bowman, whose district had been substantially redrawn in this year’s redistricting process, also survived.“We had some really good wins,” Ms. Nnaemeka added. “Despite the headwinds, despite the dark money, despite the redistricting chaos, we sent some of the hardest working champions of the left back to the State Senate to complete the work the federal government isn’t doing right now.”But in many of the most recognizable races, there were clear signs that those wins had limits.Mr. Maloney provided moderates with their most resonant victory, defeating Alessandra Biaggi, a progressive state senator who was part of the 2018 insurgency, by a two-to-one margin. This time, she had the vocal backing of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. She fiercely critiqued Mr. Maloney as “a selfish corporate Democrat with no integrity.”Alessandra Biaggi mounted an aggressive challenge to Mr. Maloney from the left.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesBut she was drowned out by a flood of outside spending that came to Mr. Maloney’s aid, with attacks centered on her harsh past criticisms of the police. She struggled to quickly introduce herself to voters in a district she had never run in before. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former President Bill Clinton also openly lent their support to the congressman.In the race for an open Democratic seat in New York City, Mr. Goldman, a former federal prosecutor, beat out three progressive stars in some of the city’s most liberal enclaves. All had once enjoyed the backing of the Working Families Party. And former Representative Max Rose, an avowed centrist attempting to make a comeback on Staten Island, handily turned back a primary challenger championed by activists.The outcomes — along with Gov. Kathy Hochul’s yawning primary victory in June over a left-aligned challenger, Jumaane Williams — left leaders of the party’s more moderate wing crowing over what they see as a more pragmatic mood among the electorate in the aftermath of the Trump presidency. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Daniel Goldman, Ex-Trump Prosecutor, Tops Crowded Field in N.Y. Primary

      by

      Daniel Goldman, the former assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted the first impeachment case against Donald J. Trump, captured the Democratic nomination for an open House seat covering parts of Brooklyn and Manhattan, according to The Associated Press.The victory on Tuesday in the heavily Democratic district all but assures Mr. Goldman a seat in Congress come 2023; he will face Benine Hamdan, a little-known Republican candidate, in November. Mr. Goldman, an heir to the Levi Strauss fortune, has a net worth of up to $253 million and pumped nearly $5 million of his own money into the race.As of early Wednesday morning, Mr. Goldman had won 16,686 votes, or 25.72 percent of the total, according to unofficial results from the city Board of Elections. Yuh-Line Niou, the runner-up, a state assemblywoman from Manhattan, won 15,380 votes, or 23.71 percent of the total. Some absentee ballots have yet to be counted, and on Tuesday night, Ms. Niou declined to concede.During his victory speech Tuesday night, which he delivered before the race was formally called, Mr. Goldman singled out the Jewish and Chinese-American communities in the district for backing his campaign.“Tonight though is not a victory for myself, or any one person,” he said. “It is a victory for all of us, all of us who will not let authoritarian forces undermine the foundation of our democracy and the rule of law.”He vanquished several candidates who had stronger political ties to the area and who were drawn into the 10th Congressional District after an unusually messy redistricting process earlier this year.The district’s contours changed to include the northwest precincts of Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan — prompting Representative Jerrold Nadler, who now represents the 10th District, to run in the 12th District against another incumbent, Carolyn Maloney, after that district was redrawn to include his Upper West Side base.The result was a rare open seat in the heart of New York City, and a political gold rush. Thirteen Democratic candidates were on the ballot Tuesday, including a former congresswoman, a current congressman from the northern New York City suburbs, two local state assemblywomen and a local city councilwoman.Carlina Rivera speaks to supporters and volunteers on the Lower East Side.Sarah Blesener for The New York TimesMondaire Jones conceded to Daniel Goldman at his Park Slope election party.Dave Sanders for The New York TimesMr. Goldman lacked the political connections of many of his opponents. He had never held elective office before, nor had he been particularly involved with local Democratic political clubs or neighborhood community boards. But his wealth enabled him to carpet bomb the district with television ads. And Mr. Goldman was able to successfully advance his case for election: that only a lawyer with his background prosecuting crime was equipped to protect American democracy in the age of Mr. Trump.In the waning days of the race, several of Mr. Goldman’s opponents sought to turn his financial stature and investment portfolio against him. According to financial disclosures with the House, which cover an 18-month period ending June 30, Mr. Goldman has a line of credit from Goldman Sachs worth up to $50 million, and has held investments in the weapons manufacturer Sturm, Ruger & Company; in oil companies including Chevron and Exxon Mobil; and the parent company of Fox News.Yuh-Line Niou did not concede on Tuesday night.Stephanie Keith for The New York TimesMr. Goldman promised to put his assets into a blind trust upon taking office and argued his holdings were so politically diverse because his portfolio was structured to mirror the S&P 500.Last Monday, two of his competitors — Ms. Niou and Representative Mondaire Jones, the congressman who currently represents Rockland County and parts of Westchester — held a joint news conference accusing Mr. Goldman of trying to buy the election. Mr. Jones called Mr. Goldman a “conservative Democrat.”“He is using his inherited wealth to distort the Democratic process, to the point where he may well win this race if this grass-roots coalition does not stop him from doing so,” Mr. Jones said. Reporting was contributed by Téa Kvetenadze, Jasmine Sheena, Sadef Kully and Samira Sadeque. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Nadler Routs Maloney in Marquee Showdown of Bruising New York Primaries

      by

      Representative Jerrold Nadler, the influential chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, handily defeated his longtime congressional neighbor, Carolyn B. Maloney, in a bruising three-way primary battle on Tuesday that was preordained to end one of the powerful Democrats’ political careers.The star-crossed skirmish in the heart of Manhattan was unlike any New York City — or the Democratic Party writ large — had seen in recent memory. Though few ideological differences were at stake, it pitted two committee chairs who have served side by side in Washington since the 1990s against each other, and cleaved party faithful into rival factions.Allies had tried to pull Mr. Nadler off the collision course into a neighboring race after the state’s calamitous redistricting process unexpectedly combined their West and East Side districts this spring. But he pushed forward, relying in a lightning-fast campaign on his reputation as an old-school progressive and leading foil to Donald J. Trump to win over voters in one of the nation’s most liberal districts.“Here’s the thing: I’m a New Yorker, just like Bella Abzug, Ted Weiss and Bill Fitts Ryan,” Mr. Nadler, 75, told supporters after his victory, referencing liberal lions who represented New York in Congress. “We New Yorkers just don’t know how to surrender.”Mr. Nadler, in thanking Ms. Maloney, said that the two had “spent much of our adult life working together to better New York and our nation.”He won the contest for New York’s redrawn 12th District with 56 percent of the vote, compared with Ms. Maloney’s 24 percent, with 93 percent of votes counted. A third candidate, Suraj Patel, earned 19 percent, siphoning crucial votes away from Ms. Maloney, whom he nearly beat two years ago.It all but assures Mr. Nadler a 16th full term in Congress and Ms. Maloney’s political retirement.The race — which ended in underhanded jabs about Mr. Nadler’s mental and physical fitness — was the highlight of a string of ugly primary contests that played out across the state on Tuesday, from Long Island to Buffalo, as Democrats and Republicans each fought over rival personalities and the ideological direction of their parties.In another of the most closely watched contests, Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, the moderate lawmaker tasked with protecting Democrats’ narrow House majority, easily fended off a challenge from Alessandra Biaggi, a state senator and a rising star of New York’s left wing.The race in the lower Hudson Valley had become an ideological proxy fight, and Ms. Biaggi’s defeat was the latest high-profile setback for leftists in New York. The former President Bill Clinton and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi endorsed Mr. Maloney, while Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez publicly backed Ms. Biaggi.“Tonight, mainstream won,” Mr. Maloney said in his victory speech. He will face Mike Lawler, a Republican assemblyman, in what may be a competitive general election.Outside Buffalo, Carl Paladino, a businessman known for his explosive, sometimes racist remarks, was leading a Republican primary against Nick Langworthy, the state Republican chairman who entered the race because he feared that Mr. Paladino could harm the party’s statewide ticket in November.A 13-candidate Democratic primary in the new 10th District connecting Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan remained too close to call, as Daniel S. Goldman held a narrow lead. The results were similarly close in a special election for a Hudson Valley swing seat, vacated by Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado, that could offer a preview of the general election.The primary contests were particularly painful for Democrats, who entered the election cycle optimistic that the decennial redistricting process in blue New York would yield crucial pickup opportunities to protect their loose grip on the House of Representatives this fall.Instead, the state’s highest court ruled this spring that the Democrats’ congressional map was unconstitutional and put in place a neutral alternative. It set off anguishing intraparty brawls that have drained millions of dollars that party leaders had hoped would go toward defeating Republicans and will now cost the state Ms. Maloney’s important House Oversight and Reform Committee chairmanship in Washington. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      The New York Times’s Interview With Yuh-Line Niou

      by

      Yuh-Line Niou is a state assemblywoman in New York’s 65th District, representing parts of Lower Manhattan since 2017.This interview with Ms. Niou was conducted by the editorial board of The New York Times on July 28.Read the board’s endorsement for the Democratic congressional primary for New York’s 10th District here.Kathleen Kingsbury: OK. Well, it’s very nice to meet you. I’m Katie Kingsbury. I’m the Opinion editor. Obviously, you have a range of our colleagues. We don’t have much time together, and we have a lot of questions. So we ask you to keep your answers relatively brief, if possible. And we’re going to dive in.I understand the premise of this question you may reject out of hand. But I hope we could start by talking a little bit about what you think you would be able to accomplish in a Republican-controlled Congress, if you could be as specific as possible. But also, is there one big idea that you would want to pursue on a bipartisan basis?I do reject that premise [laughs]. I don’t want us to lose, obviously. And I think that it’s really important for us to always come with preparation that there is going to be some kind of difficulty in negotiating things. As you know, I have represented part of this district for six years now. And when I first came in, I actually was elected the day that Trump got elected. I was also elected into a seat where it was Sheldon Silver’s seat.And then on top of that, we were still in a I.D.C.-controlled Senate situation where, obviously, there were Democrats who were elected as Democrats but voted with the Republicans, gave the power to the Republicans. And we were still able to get things moving. And I think that the reasons why we were still able to get certain things moving was because we had folks who were going to be moving on the ground, and we had outside influences, and we also had inside forces, like me, pushing for certain things.[The Independent Democratic Conference, or I.D.C., was a group of Democratic state senators who in 2011 broke with their caucus to work with the Senate’s Republican majority. It has been defunct since 2018.]I think that in the six years that I’ve been an elected official, I’ve definitely changed a number of ways that Albany moves and works. And I think that I would do the same here as well. And I think that it’s really about political courage. It’s about making sure that you’re standing up, giving transparency to how things are working, making sure that you have a communication with your constituents, fighting for the things that we care about.And obviously, I believe representation matters. And I believe that we have better government when more voices are involved. I think that — I represented a voice that I think was definitely not seen very often in Albany, if never. And I think that there were a lot of times when we needed to be the first and only, even though it was a difficult first and only.And I am not here to be an agent of the broken status quo. And I want to make government work. And I think that instead of being the status quo and just accepting that the I.D.C. was going to be the I.D.C., and that was going to be the Senate, I went out there. I supported candidates who were running against the I.D.C. I went out there myself to make sure that we were changing the Senate. And then I think that we’ve changed the way that Albany has worked forever.I will, I think, from my end, continue to fight for the things that I’ve always fought for. I’ve always been an anti-poverty advocate. I’ve always tried to make sure that we had a more fair and equitable government in all those things. I think that the way that I look at things is unique in the sense that I think I have lenses that I look through. I look at everything through an economic-justice lens, a racial and social justice lens, an environmental-justice lens and, of course, through a disability lens.[Ms. Niou has talked openly about being autistic.]And I think that it’s really important for us to make sure that every single bill that we do, every single policy that we enact, is seen through those lenses. And I think that’s where we have that change. And that makes that huge difference. So every single thing is interconnected in that way.And so when we’re talking about big legislation, one of the pieces that I’m really, really proud of that I think that I would continue to fight for on the federal level is to make sure that we have a prohibiting of unfair, deceptive, abusive and predatory practices.This was a state bill that I was working on because of the Dodd-Frank decision that people probably are very familiar with — the overturning of Dodd-Frank on the federal level that made it so that certain unfair practices and consumer protections were obviously lifted. So I think that it’s really important for us to continue to fight to make sure that we have an ability to be able to help those who need the most help.Mara Gay: Thank you. What would you do, as a member of Congress, to ease the burden on renters in New York City, in your district, and even on those who would like to own?So one of the biggest things, obviously, that people probably know me for is the fight that I’ve done for affordable housing and also for NYCHA. So folks probably also realize that one third of my assembly district is public housing. And public housing is the only true and deeply affordable housing that we have here in New York. And from my end, in Albany, I have been the leading voice fighting for the state government to actually put funding directly into our public housing’s capital budget.Folks probably know this, but time after time after time, every single year that I was telling them we need to make sure that we are funding our public housing, I was told, it’s a federal issue. It’s HUD. We can’t do this. And I was able to move our speaker, my very first term, to be able to get $250 million directly into public housing for capital dollars. Of course, Cuomo didn’t release it all. But we were able to get it.And in my sixth year now, we finally, in total, have now put over a billion dollars of state dollars into capital fixes for public housing. And obviously, for the federal level, I definitely want to continue to make sure that we are actually fully funding public housing.There are several bills right now that I obviously would support greatly. But Nydia Velázquez has her Public Housing Emergency Response Act, which would allocate $70 billion, I believe, to public-housing capital repairs, which would fully fund public housing, and a large portion would come to New York. A.O.C obviously has her Green New Deal package, which looks at public housing, making sure that there’s climate-change use savings from energy efficiency that would also fund more public-housing construction.And then also, one of the biggest things is — obviously the big piece is — we have to repeal the Faircloth Amendment, which makes it so that we cannot have more public housing. I think that we need more public housing and not less. And it’s really important to make sure to alleviate some of that housing burden. I believe that the Faircloth Amendment makes it so that the amount of public housing that we have to 1991 levels was the highest that we could ever have.Right now, there has been obviously a push on the Assembly side and the Senate side of the state government to make it so that there is a push towards privatization. And I’m very concerned about it. I think that the privatization of public housing is dangerous. But we have to make sure that we’re protecting Section 9.I will say that the plan that we ended up with was a lot better than the plan that I saw six years ago. And I think that our pushback was what made it so much better. I will say that I’m still concerned about some of the obvious election things that they have in there. They did not firm that up. But anyway, sorry. I get really wonky about these policy things.But I will say that if I had been in Congress this session, I would have been a vocal champion for the $350 billion in housing investments that Chairwoman Maxine Waters actually put together into the Build Back Better plan. I was really disappointed to see, of course, that those housing ideas actually seemed to vanish almost without anybody really fighting for it. But I will say that those housing ideas should probably be a stand-alone thing. It would be a really, really excellent thing to see.[The House version of Build Back Better passed last year includes a $166 billion investment in affordable housing.]We saw, yesterday, really exciting — well, I guess it’s still happening right now — but really excitingly, some of the climate stuff happening. So we’re in the midst of it. They’re doing these negotiations. I really hope that they also have a housing package that they can do like that.Mara Gay: Thank you.Jyoti Thottam: OK, great. Just going back for a bit, what do you think, in Congress, the Democrats can do to protect democracy and, particularly, secure voting rights?We’ve been going through it. And I think that one of the biggest things that I would say is really important is, obviously, the politicization of our courts has been really awful to see. It’s been really difficult for me to even stomach or swallow some of the things that are coming down the pike. I can only think of horrible things.But the politicization of our courts is a real issue. And I think that there are bills that will expand the [Supreme Court] or put in term limits for the court. I think that we have to really look at them and examine that. I think that right now, we have a couple of bills that are really great. One of them obviously is the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. And I think that we have to make that good trouble and protect our voters and protect our voting rights.And I will say that my mom, when she first came to campaign with me for the very first time — she told me something that remains in my heart every single time I take a vote, even. And it’s just that she said that she realized, with my campaign, that to cast a vote was to basically prove that you’re an American. Just, it’s the one act that makes you American.And for her, she never realized that until I was running. And then she saw how important it was to vote. And this is also why I have never missed a vote in Albany, never missed a committee vote or a floor vote. And I think that that’s why it’s so important for us to represent our people in that way.Patrick Healy: Do you think the Democratic elected officials are out of step with Democratic voters on immigration today, on L.G.B.T.Q. rights or on any other issue, as you talk to voters and listen to what party leaders and officials say?Maybe not in my district. In District 10, it’s going to be — it’s probably one of the more progressive districts in the state. So maybe that’s maybe not what I’m hearing as much in the district. I think a lot of people are definitely very much thinking the same when it comes to protecting our bodily autonomy, making sure to restrict — make sure that we have tighter gun laws, making sure that we have L.G.B.T.Q.I.A. protections, rights, making sure that we have a better answer to how we are looking at public safety.I think that my district cares the most about what The New York Times has to say. I think that it’s really about trying to make sure that we have a reason for also standing up for things that we do. And I think that that’s really what it is. I don’t think that Democrats are necessarily out of touch. But I think that what can be difficult for the rest of the state, maybe, and even the rest of America — I think that there are certain messaging pieces that are hitting home for my district, but maybe not necessarily for everyone else.Patrick Healy: Is there just, real quickly, an example of that?For example, I think that in my district, one of the things that we all care about is our bodily autonomy. I saw that almost all of my neighbors came out when Roe was overturned, right? We were all out there on the street. As I was walking through Washington Square Park, I kept on seeing neighbor after neighbor after neighbor. They’re like, ‘Hey, Line, what’s up? We knew you would be out here.’ It was like every single person that I knew was there.But it just seemed, I don’t know, just kind of shocking to me, in some aspects, because I live down here, that there were people who felt differently, obviously, elsewhere in America. And I also hear it sometimes in the very Christian Chinese community. I hear it sometimes in parts of the district.Like, we can talk to them, but it’s really about making sure that we actually answer people’s questions, give transparency and improve that messaging. But yeah, I think that’s one of the biggest things. I’m actually shocked when this has been law for so long.Eleanor Randolph: So we have some yes-or-no questions —OK.Eleanor Randolph: You mentioned —Is this the rapid-fire thing?Eleanor Randolph: No, Mara has that.Oh.[Laughter.]Eleanor Randolph: This is just yes or no. So you mentioned this, but do you favor expanding the Supreme Court?Yes.Eleanor Randolph: And what about ending the filibuster?Yes.Eleanor Randolph: And do you think there should be term limits for members of Congress?Yes.Eleanor Randolph: And what about an age limit?I don’t think that I would actually support ageism in any way, shape or form.Eleanor Randolph: So is that a no?No.Eleanor Randolph: A no. So should Biden run again?I think that it really depends on our party looking to see if there’s somebody who would make it so that we are represented by everyone. And that depends on a primary.Eleanor Randolph: OK, thanks.I obviously had supported the same person that you all supported, so —Alex Kingsbury: Can I ask you about Ukraine? I’m interested if —Sure.Alex Kingsbury: — you think there should be an upper limit on the amount of taxpayer dollars that go to that conflict and if we should ask for some more safeguards or conditions for the aid that we supply.I believe so. I think that — gosh. It’s a really big situation over there right now. And I think that we obviously do need to have transparency over all of the tax dollars that we spend on anything, I think. And so, for example, I would be supportive of the McCollum amendment. I think that there’s a couple of different things that would be good for us to do. And I think that it’s important for everybody to know where our tax dollars are going.We have to be extremely attentive to the possibilities of this conflict escalating and never forget that Russia is a nuclear-armed power. And I think that things have amped up recently, especially in the last couple days — I think this is, what, almost the anniversary of month five. Almost exact, right?I think that most wars ultimately don’t end with total victory and total defeat or anything like that, but with some kind of negotiation of peace. And I think that a real diplomatic solution to the conflict might not be possible at present, in what I’m seeing, anyway. And I don’t have all the information, obviously. I’m not sitting in the seat right now. But I would encourage, obviously, our government to prioritize peace and the preservation of Ukrainian sovereignty and hopefully not pursue certain dangerous aims.I think that there needs to be — yeah, there needs to be some point, I think, that we are making sure that national self-defense is appropriate, obviously, and that other things might not be as appropriate. So I will end it at that. It’s a very complex issue right now. I don’t have all of the information at hand. But from what I’m seeing, it’s very scary for us, actually.Alex Kingsbury: Great. Thanks.Jyoti Thottam: OK. So just moving to climate change, I know those congressional negotiations are still going on. But what else specifically do you think Congress could do, particularly given Republican opposition on so many issues, what could Congress do on climate change to meet America’s commitments there?[The Senate passed the climate, health and tax bill on Aug. 7 and the House on Aug. 12, both after this interview took place.]We’re in the middle of a negotiation right now, which is kind of exciting because we have a current plan that is — right now, we’re — yesterday night, I guess, at 6 p.m. or something. Was it 4 or 6? I don’t know. It was happening as we were talking. And so I was like, oh, no.But it was very, very exciting to actually see that we were actually putting together a plan, that there is something that’s going to be pushed forward for climate. And I think that right now, there is, I believe — I was reading about it and writing about it just a little bit earlier. But I think that it’s really great to see that there is going to be some help with making sure that there is some caps to some of the polluters.I think one of the things that I wanted to know — and I wrote this down for myself because it was so important. But obviously, if the legislation passes, it’s a huge victory. But I can’t remember what it was. But it was, I believe — the dollars that they were putting into making sure that there was going to be some money that would come back into $369 billion, I believe, for climate and energy, which is basically, I think, four times bigger than any kind of climate investment that we’ve ever made.I think that there was some kinds of need for — I don’t know. I didn’t like this part about the fossil-fuel subsidies and the new leases and the more pipelines that Manchin wanted, which I think is going to make us more dependent on fossil fuels. But I think that, overwhelmingly, this bill right now would help us to go towards our energy goals. And I think that it would be — experts are saying that it’s about 80 percent — would help us go towards 80 percent of our energy goals right now and climate goals right now.So I think that right now, I like the methane fee. And I think that I’m just hoping that Menendez or Suozzi don’t blow it up or obviously don’t not vote for it or something. So right now, it’s just something that we’re just seeing right now. So I’m trying to paraphrase it all. But I’m not very good at that. I like to dive deep.Kathleen Kingsbury: Mara, why don’t we go to the lightning round?Mara Gay: Great. OK. Here’s the lightning round for you. How does Plan B work?How does Plan B work?Mara Gay: Yes, in the body.It is a — yeah, so it basically helps you to get your period. So it basically forces you to your next period and is an infusion of hormones that will make it so that you are given your period or forced to shed.Mara Gay: It prevents ovulation.Yeah. Mhmm.Mara Gay: Do you own a gun?I do not.Mara Gay: Have you ever fired a gun?Yes.Mara Gay: Where?I was at a training where they — I was at R.A. training, where the police officers on campus took us to learn how to shoot a gun. It was strange.Mara Gay: This was —This was a college thing. I don’t know. It was very strange.Mara Gay: That will suffice. Thank you. What is the average age of a member of Congress?I actually don’t know that.Mara Gay: Take a guess. Any number.Sixty?Mara Gay: Fifty-eight. Pretty close. What about of a U.S. senator?I don’t know that, either. Probably around 70?Mara Gay: Sixty-four. And please name a member of Congress, either dead or living, who you most admire and would emulate if you are elected to serve.Elizabeth Warren, obviously. I think that she’s somebody that I greatly admire. I think that she and I are very alike in the way that we think about policy. I really like, obviously, a lot of her bills, when it comes to making sure that we are holding big corporations accountable, making sure that we are driving towards stopping cycles of debt, making sure that we have anti-poverty pieces into all of our legislation. And I really appreciate the way that she has a good lens on policy.Mara Gay: Thank you. What’s your favorite restaurant in the district?Oh, that’s hard. You know, I have so many lists. I would have to say probably — I’m going to be giving away my dumpling place — but Super Taste on Eldridge is the best dumpling place in all of New York.Mara Gay: Thank you. What is your pathway to victory in this exceptionally crowded race?I think I have a really great path to victory. My whole entire Assembly district is inside of this new New York 10. So I have a very large base. I think that it was really significant when the special master designated both Chinatowns to be inside of this New York 10 District for a reason. I think that I have the support of the Working Families Party. I’m endorsed by the Working Families Party. And a quarter of this district voted on the Working Families Party line in the 2020 election.I think that it’s really important to make sure that we have a lot of people turning out, even though I know this is a turnout election. I think that we excite people. We’ve helped people to come to the doors. And we have an incredible, incredible ground game. We have over 850 volunteers already. I think that it’s been really amazing to see how many doors have been knocked and how many people have been called.But I think that, yes, the turnout has been historically low. Because of the excitement that we generate, we will turn out what it takes to get our campaign the win. I think the other thing is that we have been endorsed by some folks who have already won this district before, multiple times, including Cynthia Nixon. We have an ability to be able to win this race, because —Eleanor Randolph: So can I ask you — you said that you support BDS, this movement to boycott Israel. You have a very large Jewish community in this district. How do you explain that to your Jewish voters?Well, I support the freedom of speech. I think that that’s really my point here, is that I think that people have the right to be able to exercise what we’ve always exercised in our American democracy, whether it’s the Great Boycott or the Montgomery bus boycotts or —I think that it’s really important to be able to exercise that freedom of speech. I think that it’s important to protect it. I think that it’s important to make sure that people have that. I think that the Jewish community is not a monolith, just like the A.A.P.I. community is not a monolith. And I think that there are a lot of people who also believe that Palestinian human rights are important in this moment and in all ways.I think that it’s really important that we are looking at protecting everyone. I think that it’s really about making sure that we have Israeli and Palestinian rights respected. It’s something that I strongly believe, because I think that no matter what I do, I look through a human-rights lens no matter what. That’s where we have to have that political courageous too.Eleanor Randolph: But does that mean you support boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel?I think that it’s important for us to be able to honor the fact that there is a movement of doing that. I think that that part is important.Eleanor Randolph: So you don’t —Kathleen Kingsbury: I have a question —Eleanor Randolph: Do you support it? Sorry. Sorry, Katie —Kathleen Kingsbury: Go ahead, Eleanor.Eleanor Randolph: Well, so you —Kathleen Kingsbury: You support BDS, the —Eleanor Randolph: Yeah.Kathleen Kingsbury: — BDS movement, correct?I support its right to exist. There are currently people all over the country who have put out laws that would prohibit people from doing certain things that are just their First Amendment rights. And I think that that part is really important to make sure that we are not prohibiting people from doing things that are protected by our law, right?We are allowed to criticize our government. We’re allowed to criticize how our government interacts with other governments. And I think that that’s something that must be protected, just like freedom of the press. We should make sure to protect our freedom of the press. We should make sure to protect our freedom of speech.Kathleen Kingsbury: OK. In the past, you’ve supported the movement to defund the police. Do you still? And if so, could you talk a little bit about how you talk about public safety to members of your community who are concerned about it right now?Yeah, and I think that one of the things that we obviously have seen — and I actually really appreciated Mara’s editorial on this. I think that we have to really look at how we are looking at facts, right? Our communities have been overcriminalized and overpoliced because of an obsession with crime, and when we really should have been focused on safety and real community safety.It’s important that we are looking at this problem just like we’re solving all other big problems, right? And we should be looking at what created that inequity and what created that unsafety, such as job insecurity, food insecurity, making sure that people have access to health care, right? We need to make sure that we have more security for people and safety for people, on a broad level.And I tell people this all the time, especially in our community, where we’ve been experiencing so much anti-Asian hate. And the anti-Asian sentiment and the anti-Asian hate is not new. It’s not something that’s new, and it’s not something that can be fixed with a silver bullet or a magic wand or some kind of instant kind of thing.It’s state-sanctioned racism, right? It’s built into our country, from the Chinese Exclusion Act, Japanese internment, from the anti-miscegenation laws. It’s built in. We can’t just throw more money or police at the issue. But what we need to do is actually invest in our communities to make sure that we have the language access services that will help people to actually get the services that they need.We need social services. I brought in $30 million last year and this year to our Asian American community organizations. We had never had a line item for Asian American community organizations inside of our state budget ever. And I was the first to bring in some dollars.And it was — it’s embarrassing, really. It’s $300,000, really, actually, the first time that I brought in some dollars for our Asian American communities. Then last year, we were finally able to get $10 million. Then this year, we got another $20 million. But again, it’s not a celebration. It’s money that’s owed to our communities, because it’s money that we should have been getting all along in order to make sure that our community organizations can thrive and grow and be able to get the services that people need every single day —Patrick Healy: Excuse me.Mhmm?Patrick Healy: Oh, yeah. We’re sorry. We’re just almost out of time. We just —Oh, no. I’m sorry.Patrick Healy: You live in Manhattan while most of the district is in Brooklyn. Why are you the best person to represent this district?I think that it’s 40-60, so it’s really even. But I will say that I think that I have the most of the district, more than anyone else. And I’ve represented this district for six years now. I obviously know my policies, city level, state level, federal level.I think that it’s been a really important thing to see that we have political courage in this seat in Congress right now. We are in crisis. We just talked a lot about what’s going on with the courts, gun laws, abortion. We’ve talked a lot about some of the other issues that have been coming down the pike that are really scary.And we need to make sure that we have people who are willing to have the political courage to be able to stand up. I have always had the political courage to do the right thing. And I promised Eleanor when I was first running that I was not going to be furniture ever. And I haven’t been.I think I’ve changed the way that Albany is shaped. And I know that I can change the way that Congress looks and Congress is shaped, because we don’t need people that are going to go along to get along. We need people who are going to fight for the things that we deserve. And right now, this seat is one of the most progressive seats in the state. This is one that we desperately need to be a change-maker seat. We have the ability to be able to make that change now.I have always been the person who stood up against Cuomo. I stood up against my own leadership, even. When it came to the austerity budget, I stood up and was the first to call out any kind of corruption, vetting issues from our own governor. It didn’t matter what it was that my constituents needed from me. I always made sure to be transparent and always led with accessibility and transparency and the ability to make sure that my constituents were heard.It didn’t matter what it was that was going to come down the pike at me, because I will tell you, it’s been scary for me. But I will say that it’s always important for us to have that powerful leadership in order to make sure to have the best representation. I think that this is an opportunity for us to weigh in in a way that will make change in history.I will be the first Asian American to represent this district. And I think that that’s a really big deal. We will be doubling the amount of Asian American representation that we have in Congress from New York, because it’s the first time that our two Chinatowns will be able to vote together. We are the most underrepresented racial and ethnic group inside of Congress right now. And I think that it’s important for us to be able to have representation.[After this interview took place, Ms. Niou’s campaign clarified her comment that this will be the first time Manhattan’s Chinatown and Sunset Park’s Chinatown in Brooklyn will vote together in an open-seat election.]I think that I come with a different kind of lens that looks at disability issues in a real way. I will be the first openly autistic legislator in Congress. And I think that it’s important that we are constantly centering our disability communities as well, because it’s actually every issue. Every issue is a disability issue. And if you’re lucky enough to go into a ripe old age, you’ll also have to — if you’re able-bodied now, you’ll have to have help sometime.So I think that it’s really important that we are centering all of our communities in that way. And I think that we have the ability to win, and we have the ability to make sure that we make that change for everyone.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. More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Carlina Rivera and Yuh-Line Niou Rise In Race for NY’s 10th District

      by

      Two months ago, the megawatt contest for a rare open House seat in New York City seemed destined to be shaped by one of a handful of nationally known candidates.There was the former New York City mayor, an ex-congresswoman, a former federal prosecutor who helped impeach Donald J. Trump, and even a sitting congressman from the exurbs.But with the Aug. 23 primary less than three weeks away, the contours of the race have been redefined. Two women with local bona fides but little national stature have surged toward the front of the pack, upending early conventional wisdom and scrambling the race.In recent public and internal polling for the Democratic primary, Carlina Rivera, a councilwoman from Manhattan, and Yuh-Line Niou, a Manhattan assemblywoman, are running neck-and-neck with the two well-resourced men considered heavyweights: Representative Mondaire Jones, a recent transplant to the district, and Daniel Goldman, the impeachment investigator, who has never held elective office.Ms. Rivera and Ms. Niou have one particularly compelling advantage: they already represent parts of the congressional district, and have proven bases of support among voters and Democratic groups in the area — a likely boon in a late-summer contest where voter turnout and interest are expected to be low.Ms. Niou, speaking at a recent candidates forum in Brooklyn, is backed by the Working Families Party.Hilary Swift for The New York TimesIndeed, in a brief canvas on Thursday of would-be voters in Ms. Rivera’s district on the Lower East Side, the vast majority said they were not following the race. Campaign signs were almost nonexistent — save a couple for Mr. Goldman.But Wilfredo Lopez, a 73-year-old resident walking by Hamilton Fish Park, was an exception. He said he was voting for Ms. Rivera because “she’s from the neighborhood and she’s for the neighborhood.”On the surface, Ms. Rivera and Ms. Niou have similarities; both are 30-something women of color with far-left roots.When she was first running for Council, Ms. Rivera, a 38-year-old Lower East Side native of Puerto Rican descent, was a dues-paying member of the Democratic Socialists of America; her campaign said that she attended only one meeting.New York’s 2022 ElectionsAs prominent Democratic officials seek to defend their records, Republicans see opportunities to make inroads in general election races.N.Y. Governor’s Race: This year, for the first time in over 75 years, the state ballot appears destined to offer only two choices: Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, and Representative Lee Zeldin, a Republican. Here is why.10th Congressional District: Representative Mondaire Jones, a first-term Democratic congressman who faces a highly competitive race in the redrawn district, has won the endorsement of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.11th Congressional District: Recent Supreme Court rulings on abortion and guns are complicating the re-election bid of Representative Nicole Malliotakis, New York City’s lone Republican House member.State Senate: New district maps are causing some incumbents to run in neighboring districts, forcing them to campaign in unfamiliar territory and contemplate new living arrangements.She has since tacked toward the center, resisting the anti-development predilections of the left and defining herself as a pragmatic progressive, as someone who gets things done.Ms. Rivera has nonetheless won the support of the progressive Brooklyn political establishment — the borough president, Antonio Reynoso; Nydia Velazquez, the congresswoman whose current district overlaps with the newly redistricted one; and several unions — even as she has also more aggressively courted the real estate sector.Ms. Rivera has been endorsed by Representative Nydia Velazquez, whose current district overlaps with the new contours of the 10th District in Brooklyn.Kirsten Luce for The New York TimesMs. Niou, 39, has never been a D.S.A, member, but has retained her far left posture, winning the support of left-leaning organizations like the Working Families Party and the Jewish Vote, the political arm of Jews For Racial and Economic Justice. Since she was elected to the New York State Assembly in 2016, Ms. Niou has focused on combating racial discrimination and sexual harassment. In the past six years, she has been the prime sponsor of 15 bills that became law, according to her campaign, including one establishing a toll-free hotline for complaints of workplace sexual harassment.During the tail end of Andrew Cuomo’s tenure as governor, Ms. Niou could sometimes be found sparring with him and his staff. After The New York Times reported on a $25,000-a-couple fund-raiser hosted by the governor during the legislative session, Ms. Niou and two colleagues held a news conference to express their outrage. Mr. Cuomo’s spokesman responded by calling her and her colleagues “[expletive] idiots.”During this race, Ms. Niou has assiduously courted the left-most flank of the Democratic Party, even expressing support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement — a decision that may cost her votes in a district with a substantial Jewish population.John Mollenkopf, a political science professor at the CUNY Graduate Center who analyzes voter data, estimates that at least 16 percent of the primary voters in the 10th Congressional District will have Jewish surnames. He said those voters might take issue with Ms. Niou’s B.D.S. stance, “partly because there are other quite acceptable candidates to center-left Jewish voters in the race.”Ms. Niou’s and Ms. Rivera’s national policy stances are similar: They both champion federal abortion rights; the Green New Deal plan advanced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; and more liberal immigration and refugee policies.But at the local level, pronounced distinctions have emerged.Ms. Rivera staunchly backs the ongoing effort to tear down and then rebuild East River Park at a higher elevation, to make the neighborhoods it abuts less vulnerable to storms like Hurricane Sandy. Protesters booed Ms. Rivera for that stance at a recent environmental forum, but on Monday she won the backing of the forum’s host — the New York League of Conservation Voters.Ms. Niou took issue with the plan to make the area more resilient.Ms. Niou and Representative Mondaire Jones, embracing after the candidates forum, are among the more left-leaning contenders in the primary contest.Hilary Swift for The New York Times“The city and the way that the city operated raise a lot of questions for me,” Ms. Niou said.In the City Council, Ms. Rivera has acted as the first primary sponsor on 25 pieces of legislation that have become law, including a bill requiring restaurants give bathroom access to delivery workers.Ms. Rivera also supported a bid to build low-income senior housing in a wealthy neighborhood’s community garden, a project codeveloped by Habitat for Humanity. Ms. Niou sued to stop the development, alienating the former local councilwoman, Margaret Chin, who has endorsed Ms. Rivera instead.“I’m so disappointed in her,” Ms. Chin said of Ms. Niou.“Normally I would support an Asian woman, we need more representation, but in this case,” Ms. Chin said, trailing off.Ms. Rivera has also backed a bid to allow more density, including affordable housing, in the Manhattan neighborhoods of SoHo and NoHo, an initiative Ms. Niou says she had doubts about.This year’s unusually messy redistricting process fundamentally reshaped the 10th District. Where the district once stretched from the Upper West Side of Manhattan to Bensonhurst Brooklyn, the new map makes it more compact, encompassing only Lower Manhattan and the northwest precincts of Brooklyn.Jerry Nadler, the congressman now representing the district, opted to run in the 12th District against a longtime colleague, Representative Carolyn Maloney, after his Upper West Side home base was moved there. The result was a rare open seat in the heart of New York City, and a political gold rush that drew a dozen or so candidates, including Mr. Jones, the congressman who currently represents Rockland County and parts of Westchester.Mr. Jones and Mr. Goldman are by far the race’s best-resourced candidates. At the end of June, Mr. Jones had $2.8 million to spend. Mr. Goldman had $1 million, though he also has a vast reservoir of personal wealth to draw from and told NY1 he intends to use it. He has up to $253 million in personal wealth, according to Bloomberg News.“I am extremely grateful for the opportunities I’ve had, and that is why I’ve committed my life to public service,” Mr. Goldman said in a statement. “I’m running for Congress to continue that service, to build a better future for all of our children, and to give everyone the opportunity to succeed.”His financial disclosures with the House, which cover an 18-month period ending June 30, indicate that he has a line of credit from Goldman Sachs worth up to $50 million, and hundreds of investments, including in weapons manufacturer Sturm, Ruger & Company; in oil companies, including Chevron and Exxon Mobil; and even in Fox Corporation.A spokesman for Mr. Goldman said he will put his assets into a blind trust upon entering Congress, as he has done in the past, and that he has such a wide breadth of investments because his portfolio is structured to mirror the S&P 500. “How the hell can this guy claim to believe our democracy faces a five-alarm fire, and to care about public safety, when he’s got investments in Fox News and deadly gun manufacturers?” Mr. Jones said in a statement. (On Friday, after the article had published online, Mr. Goldman’s spokesman said that the former prosecutor no longer holds any stock in Sturm, Ruger and Company.)Even so, Mr. Goldman’s paid role as a legal analyst on MSNBC, and his time as an impeachment prosecutor have won him supporters, including Joan Manzioni, a 67-year-old restaurateur who on Thursday said she was considering voting for Mr. Goldman or Ms. Holtzman.Mr. Goldman and Mr. Jones are the only two candidates with television ads, according to Ad Impact, an advertising analytics firm. As of Thursday, Mr. Goldman had spent $2.2 million on television, while Mr. Jones had spent $684,000.The third presumed heavyweight, former Mayor Bill de Blasio, dropped out of the race in July, citing his inability to sway voters. Elizabeth Holtzman, the former congresswoman, is doing better than expected in some of the polls, but is far behind in fund-raising and is combating doubts about her age, 80.Ms. Rivera trails two Democratic rivals in fund-raising, but has $150,000 more than Ms. Niou.Jeenah Moon for The New York TimesAs of late June, Ms. Niou had $202,000 on hand; Ms. Rivera had $354,000. In an effort to compete financially with Mr. Jones and Mr. Goldman, Ms. Rivera has raised money from major developers, including the CEO of Two Trees, which is based in the Brooklyn neighborhood of Dumbo. In recent weeks, she has reached out to at least two other executives in the real estate industry for donations, according to recipients of her outreach.And, in apparent expectation of super PAC support, she has also put a so-called “red box” on her website, which candidates use to communicate indirectly with super PACs. More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      How Many N.Y. Democrats Does It Take to Fill a House Seat? Try 15.

      by

      A congressman, an ex-congresswoman, an ex-mayor, a Trump prosecutor and several state and city officials are eyeing an open congressional seat in New York City.Beneath a maple tree by a red brick elementary school in Brooklyn, a lanky, recognizable figure lingered on a recent morning, hoping to catch the attention of moms, dads, the custodial worker mowing the lawn.“Registered Democrat?” asked Bill de Blasio, the former two-term mayor of New York City, as he cajoled potential voters to help him get back in the game.Mr. de Blasio, who once believed he could be elected president, has now set his sights lower, aiming to represent a newly redrawn House district in New York City. But he is far from alone.Others contesting the seat include a Levi Strauss heir who helped impeach Donald J. Trump; rising stars from the City Council and State Assembly; a Chinese American activist involved in the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests; and a pathbreaking liberal who was the youngest woman ever elected to Congress — 50 years ago.There is also a sitting congressman currently representing a suburban region, who only recently moved into the district. Exactly when, he couldn’t say.“Time is a blur,” said the congressman, Mondaire Jones, pivoting away from questions about his new residency, “when you’re fighting to end gun violence in America.”Nature abhors a vacuum, and so do politicians. So when New York’s redistricting fiasco last month unexpectedly opened up a House seat in a safely Democratic area, stretching from Lower Manhattan through much of brownstone Brooklyn, the political floodgates opened wide.A total of 15 Democrats, representing a broad range of ages and backgrounds, have taken steps to enter a summertime primary that may prove to be one of the largest and most freewheeling in the nation.“It’s like a sweepstakes contest,” said Steven M. Cohen, a longtime government official and frequent donor from the district who said he has been inundated with fund-raising requests. “Everyone can potentially be a winner, no purchase necessary.”Bill de Blasio hopes his name recognition as the former mayor of New York City will carry him to victory in the race.Andrew Seng for The New York TimesThe candidates only have until Aug. 23 to win the sympathies of primary voters who represent some of New York’s most politically engaged and diverse neighborhoods: Greenwich Village, Wall Street, Chinatown, Park Slope, Sunset Park and even parts of Borough Park, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish stronghold.A Guide to New York’s 2022 Primary ElectionsAs prominent Democratic officials seek to defend their records, Republicans see opportunities to make inroads in general election races.Governor’s Race: Gov. Kathy Hochul, the incumbent, will face off against Jumaane Williams and Tom Suozzi in a Democratic primary on June 28.Adams’s Endorsement: The New York City mayor gave Ms. Hochul a valuable, if belated, endorsement that could help her shore up support among Black and Latino voters.The Mapmaker: A postdoctoral fellow and former bartender redrew New York’s congressional map, reshaping several House districts and scrambling the future of the state’s political establishment.Maloney vs. Nadler: The new congressional lines have put the two stalwart Manhattan Democrats on a collision course in the Aug. 23 primary.Offensive Remarks: Carl P. Paladino, a Republican running for a House seat in Western New York, recently drew backlash for praising Adolf Hitler in an interview dating back to 2021.The result is not so much a contest of ideas — almost every major candidate has condemned threats to abortion rights and bemoaned the lack of strict limits on guns — as of brute force, blunt ambition and identity politics.“Let me start by saying this: I fear no man,” said Mr. Jones, the sitting congressman who decided to try his hand in the reconstituted 10th District, rather than run for re-election in the 17th District or contest the neighboring one to the south. Either option would involve competing against a House incumbent.Mr. Jones did not have to move to Brooklyn to run for the seat; House candidates must live in the state they represent, but not the district. Mr. Jones, who grew up in Rockland County, contended that his status as a newcomer was irrelevant. He suggested that he is sufficiently tied to the district by virtue of his time living elsewhere in the city and socializing in Greenwich Village, as a young gay man of color trying to discover his “authentic self.”In any case, he said, regular voters care more about what a congressional candidate has done and whether he can fight for their interests rather than where he hails from or when he moved. (A spokesman later clarified that the move occurred June 6.)“Harping over the length of someone’s residency in a district and lines that were just drawn a few weeks ago is something that the political class, including many journalists, give outsize weight to,” Mr. Jones said.Jo Anne Simon, a former disability rights lawyer who currently represents parts of the district as a state assemblywoman in Brooklyn, adamantly disagreed as she pitched her own candidacy.State Assemblywoman Jo Anne Simon’s district in Brooklyn is part of the newly redrawn 10th Congressional District.Hans Pennink/Associated Press“People vote for people that they know, that they trust and they have reason to know show up,” said Ms. Simon, referencing her decades of activism on local issues like pollution from the Gowanus Expressway. “Nobody here has voted for Mondaire Jones.”Then again, in such a crowded race, there may be no such thing as home-field advantage.Take Carlina Rivera, a city councilwoman who lives just outside of the district, and Yuh-Line Niou, another state assemblywoman. Both are up-and-coming progressive women of color representing parts of Lower Manhattan and could end up cannibalizing each other’s base of support.Ms. Niou said she had more than 600 volunteers eager to carry petitions for her. Ms. Rivera on Friday won the endorsement of Representative Nydia Velázquez, who currently represents much of the new district and is expected to wield substantial sway among voters. She is expected to win re-election in a neighboring redrawn district covering parts of Brooklyn and Queens.Carlina Rivera, a New York City councilwoman.Jeenah Moon for The New York TimesYuh-Line Niou, a state assemblywoman.Elizabeth D. Herman for The New York TimesThey, in turn, will face off against a progressive rising star from another era, Elizabeth Holtzman, spurred to re-enter the arena by the threat to abortion rights.In 1972, Ms. Holtzman became the youngest woman ever elected to Congress, when she defeated a 50-year incumbent at age 31. Now, at age 80, she is trying to become the oldest non-incumbent elected to the House of Representatives in history.In between, she had a trailblazing career as the first woman elected district attorney in Brooklyn and as New York City comptroller, racking up experience that she argues positions her to make an immediate impact in Washington. Still, she has not held elected office since 1993, when several of her competitors were in elementary school.“Somebody said to me, your slogan should be something like ‘Google me,’” Ms. Holtzman said.Former Representative Elizabeth Holtzman.David Dee Delgado/Getty ImagesMs. Holtzman, in 1974, with President Gerald Ford.Bettmann Archive, via Getty ImagesThe Chinese American activist, Yan Xiong, who after his role in Tiananmen went on to become a chaplain for the U.S. Army and now believes he can attract a significant number of votes from large Asian populations in Manhattan’s Chinatown and Brooklyn’s Sunset Park.Voters can be forgiven for being overwhelmed. There was not even supposed to be a primary race in New York’s 10th District until a court-appointed expert so thoroughly scrambled New York City’s congressional map in May that the technical incumbent, Representative Jerrold Nadler, decided to run in the 12th District in Manhattan instead.That decision set him on a collision course with a longtime ally, Representative Carolyn Maloney, but it also left a rare open seat in Manhattan and Brooklyn — political gold to which no one had a rightful claim.“Anyone who tells you that they know what’s going to happen in this race, or that there is an obvious outcome, is lying to you and themselves,” said Chris Coffey, the chief executive of Tusk Strategies, who is unaffiliated in the race.Mr. de Blasio has his claim. He enters the race with near universal name recognition, years of electoral successes and some policy triumphs too — most notably, universal prekindergarten. But Mr. de Blasio does not have a fund-raising advantage. That belongs to two other candidates.As of March 31, Mr. Jones had $2.9 million on hand — a huge sum in a race so short it will make fund-raising difficult. Last week, he dropped his first in an expected deluge of television advertising, a placement of at least $169,000, according to Ad Impact, an advertising analytics firm.Daniel Goldman, the chief investigator for House Democrats in the first impeachment of Mr. Trump, and a frequent legal analyst for MSNBC, is running on his record fighting for democracy and public safety.He is also a former federal prosecutor who spent a decade working in the Southern District of New York, a lesser-known part of his résumé that may help him stand out with voters as the city confronts what Mr. Goldman called “the biggest public safety crisis in decades.”“The core experiences of my professional career, which has been devoted entirely to public service, happen to be very timely for the circumstances we are in now,” he said in an interview.Daniel Goldman served as the chief investigator for House Democrats in the first impeachment of President Donald J. Trump.Anna Moneymaker/The New York TimesStill, he is a relative newcomer to electoral politics and starts the abbreviated race with few of the institutional relationships other candidates will draw on. To try to make up the difference, Mr. Goldman, the Levi Strauss heir who rents a Tribeca apartment listed for sale for $22 million, said he was prepared to “put some of my own money into this to level the playing field.”But given the timing of the contest, and its brevity, the race is also widely expected to turn on get-out-the-vote efforts, which may help candidates like Ms. Niou.“Field is the most important thing,” she said. “We’re running against folks with 100 percent name recognition.”Labor unions and outside political groups could also help turn the race. The retail workers union has endorsed Mr. Jones. Aspire PAC, an outgrowth of the Asian American and Pacific Islander Members of Congress, has been reviewing candidates and will make a decision soon, according to Grace Meng, the Queens congresswoman and PAC chair. It remains unclear if other unions will engage.It is also difficult to gauge how many voters will be in the district in late August, when the city gets torrid and all those who can, leave town. Matthew Rey, a prominent Democratic consultant who is unaffiliated with any of the campaigns, estimated voter turnout could be between just 70,000 and 90,000 in a district of 776,000 residents.The other Democratic candidates are Brian Robinson, John Herron, Maud Maron, Peter J. Gleason, Quanda Francis, Laura Thomas and Jimmy Li.Given the overcrowded field and the late summer election date, the race is hard to pin down.Last week, after dropping off his two children at school in Windsor Terrace, Brooklyn, Nicholas McDermott said he would absolutely consider voting for Mr. de Blasio.“I think it’s great to have someone with experience who’s from the area,” Mr. McDermott said.He was less certain if he would be around in August to vote.“That’s a good question,” he said. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      An Accusation Blew Up a Campaign. The Media Didn’t Know What to Do.

      by

      Handling a delicate allegation of sexual misconduct is a lot more challenging than covering a horse race.Two days after coming in fifth in the election night count of votes for New York mayor last week, Scott Stringer was sitting in a high-polish diner in TriBeCa, drinking his second bottle of Sprite and trying to figure out what had happened.He held up his iPhone to show me a text message he had received on Election Day from one of the progressive elected officials who had endorsed him and then dropped him after a woman accused him of sexually assaulting her more than 20 years ago. In the text was a photograph of the official’s ranked-choice ballot. Mr. Stringer was ranked first.“This profile in courage,” he began, half laughing. “You can’t make this up. Who does that?”Mr. Stringer, the 61-year-old New York City comptroller, isn’t the only one trying to puzzle out what happened over a few days in April in the campaign. Mr. Stringer, a geeky fixture in Manhattan politics, had been among the leading candidates when the woman, Jean Kim, accused him of touching her without her consent in the back of taxis. Suddenly he, the media covering him, his supporters and Ms. Kim were all reckoning with big questions of truth, doubt, politics and corroboration.The allegations against Mr. Stringer did not divide a nation, as Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations against Brett Kavanaugh did. Nor did his candidacy carry the kind of high national stakes that came with Tara Reade’s allegations against Joseph R. Biden Jr. last spring. But maybe for those reasons, Ms. Kim’s claim that Mr. Stringer assaulted her when she worked on his New York City public advocate campaign in 2001 offers an opportunity to ask how journalists, political actors and, most important, voters are supposed to weigh claims like Ms. Kim’s. They also raise the question of how and whether to draw a line between those claims and the ones that helped ignite the #MeToo movement.As much as the exposure of police brutality has been driven by cellphone video, the #MeToo movement was powered by investigative journalism, and courageous victims who chose to speak to reporters. The movement reached critical mass with articles by Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey of The New York Times and Ronan Farrow of The New Yorker on the movie producer Harvey Weinstein, which the Pulitzer Prize committee described as “explosive” revelations of “long-suppressed allegations of coercion, brutality and victim silencing.” Those stories and other notable sets of revelations — about the financier Jeffrey Epstein, the sports doctor Larry Nassar, the singer R. Kelly, the comedian Bill Cosby — drew power from rigorous reporting that helped develop new standards for covering what had long been dismissed as “he said, she said.”Crucially, reporters honed the craft of corroboration, showing that an accuser had told a friend, a relative or a therapist at the time of the episode and that the accuser wasn’t simply relying on old memories. The reporters also looked for evidence that the accuser’s account was part of a pattern, ruling out a single misunderstanding.Those technical aspects of the stories weren’t always widely understood. But the landmark investigations were, even in this divided moment, unifying. There was no serious partisan division over any of those men’s guilt because the journalistic evidence was simply so overwhelming. But not every allegation — and not every true allegation — can meet that standard. Not every victim is able to talk about it immediately; not every bad act is part of a pattern.In the case of Mr. Stringer and Ms. Kim, observers were left simply with his claim their relationship was consensual, and hers that it wasn’t. Ms. Kim’s lawyer had circulated a news release, which didn’t mention Ms. Kim, to reporters the evening of April 27.At her news conference on April 28, Patricia Pastor, Ms. Kim’s lawyer, read a statement based on Ms. Kim’s recollection, which didn’t include contemporaneous corroboration, which Ms. Kim said didn’t exist, or a suggestion of a pattern. And the lawyer angled the statement for maximum impact: The statement referred to Ms. Kim, for instance, as an “intern,” when she had been a 30-year-old volunteer. And Ms. Pastor claimed, incorrectly, that Ms. Kim had been introduced to Mr. Stringer by Eric Schneiderman, who was forced to resign as New York’s attorney general in 2018 after a report that he had physically abused at least four women.Mr. Stringer said he had a passing, consensual relationship with Ms. Kim and was stunned by her claims that they had never had a relationship. But he said that he understood why the media picked up the story, even if it hadn’t been corroborated.“Running for mayor, every part of your life is an open book,” he said. “I didn’t begrudge anybody, including The Times, from writing about the charge. That would be silly.”And victims, of course, have no obligation to tell their stories through skeptical journalists. Ms. Pastor pointed out in an interview that “once the story was out, you still have time” to report it out and check the facts, and said she and her client didn’t object to that fact-checking. The Times’s Katie Glueck did that on May 9 and found Ms. Kim and Mr. Stringer telling very different stories in the absence of definitive evidence.Jean Kim said Mr. Stringer assaulted her when she worked on his New York City public advocate campaign in 2001. He has denied her claim.Sarah Blesener for The New York TimesBut by then, the story had jumped out of journalists’ hands and into politicians’. Mr. Stringer had painstakingly assembled a coalition of young progressives, including a cadre of state senators who had partly defined their careers by pressing to extend the statute of limitations in cases of child sexual abuse and telling their own harrowing stories. In a video call the day after Ms. Kim’s news conference, they pressed Mr. Stringer to issue a statement suggesting he and Ms. Kim might have perceived their interaction differently.When he refused, and flatly denied the allegation, 10 progressive officials withdrew their endorsement.That decision got journalists off the hook. Most were covering a simple, political story now — a collapsing campaign — and not weighing or investigating a complex #MeToo allegation.The progressive website The Intercept (which had exposed a trumped-up sexual misconduct claim against a gay Democrat in Massachusetts last year) also looked into Ms. Kim’s accusations, calling former Stringer campaign aides, and found that a series of widely reported details from Ms. Pastor’s statement — though not Ms. Kim’s core allegations — were inaccurate. A longtime New York political hand who had known both Mr. Stringer and Ms. Kim at the time, Mike McGuire, also told me he’d been waiting to talk on the record about what he saw as factual errors in Ms. Kim’s lawyer’s account, but that I was only the second reporter to call him, after Ms. Glueck. Ms. Kim, meanwhile, had been open about her motives — she wanted voters to know about the allegation.It’s easy to blame the relative lack of curiosity about the underlying story on the cliché of a hollowed-out local press corps, but that’s not really true in this case. The New York mayor’s race received rich and often ambitious coverage, as good and varied as I’ve seen at least since 2001, often from newer outlets like Politico and The City. The winner of the vote’s first round, Eric Adams, saw reporters investigate his donors and peer into his refrigerator.In an article in Columbia Journalism Review, Andrea Gabor examined coverage of the race and found that the allegations had prompted news organizations to stop covering Mr. Stringer as a top-tier candidate. She suggested that reporters “recalibrate the judgments they make on how to cover candidates such as Stringer in their wake.”In May, Mr. Stringer’s aides told me they were in talks with some former endorsers to return, as well as with the progressive movement’s biggest star, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, when they learned of an allegation from another woman: that some 30 years ago, Mr. Stringer had sexually harassed her when she worked for him at a bar. The Times reported the account of the second woman, Teresa Logan, with corroboration. The next day, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez endorsed Maya Wiley, who came in second after the in-person voting ended. She said that time was running out and that progressives had to unite, a suggestion that the second allegation had made up her mind.But when you get beyond the reporters gaming out winners and losers, and beyond politicians weighing endorsements, here’s the strange thing: It’s not clear there’s anything like a consensus among voters on how the decades-old allegations should have affected Mr. Stringer’s support. Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, for instance, has weathered far more recent claims from his own aides. And even two of the legislators who dropped their support of Mr. Stringer told me they were still wrestling with the decision and their roles and that of the media. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez seemed to signal a similar concern when, on Election Day, she revealed that she had ranked Mr. Stringer second on her ballot.State Senator Alessandra Biaggi said that the moment had been “incredibly painful” but that she’d begun to feel that “my integrity was being compromised” by staying with Mr. Stringer. She also said that if she were a New York City voter, she would have ranked Mr. Stringer among her top choices, and wished there was space for more nuance in public conversations about sexual misconduct allegations.Yuh-Line Niou, a state assemblywoman from Manhattan, told me she thought the media had unfairly “put a lot of pressure on women who are survivors to speak up,” an experience that had been “scary and in a lot of ways violent.” She said she would have backed Mr. Stringer if he’d acknowledged that he’d harmed Ms. Kim, and added that his denial revealed that he had come from “a time when people don’t talk about what it is to be human, that you have to be perfect somehow.”“I ranked him, of course,” she said. “We didn’t have many choices.”Another progressive who had dropped Mr. Stringer, Representative Jamaal Bowman, said two weeks after Ms. Kim’s allegations became public that “I sometimes regret it because I wasn’t more patient and didn’t ask more questions.”Ms. Kim’s lawyer, Ms. Pastor, said she’d been perplexed by the pained progressives. “You ought to stick to your guns,” she said.It can be hard to separate the entangled roles of media and political actors.“The same way it’s obvious that the media didn’t make Adams rise, it should be obvious that the media didn’t make Stringer fall,” the Daily News columnist and Daily Beast senior editor Harry Siegel told me. “The decision by his lefty endorsers to almost immediately walk away, and before the press had time to vet Kim’s claim, did that. Understanding that the press — and media columnists! — like to center themselves, this is a story about the Democratic Party and its factions more than it’s one about his coverage.”Mr. Stringer said that he was resolved not to relive the campaign, but that he was worried about a progressive movement setting a standard that it can’t meet.“When I think about the future, there’s a lot of progressives who under these scenarios can’t run for office,” he said.Before he headed back out onto Church Street, I asked him what he was going to do next.“Probably just run for governor,” he said, at least half seriously. More