Top House Dem sides with Mamdani critics on key controversy surrounding his campaign: 'Legitimate issue'
"Well listen, that's an issue for the state legislators and the state government to work out," Jeffries told CNBC on Thursday morning when asked about Mamdani living in a rent-stabilized apartment in Queens despite making close to $150,000 a year.
When pressed about New Yorkers who make far less and don't have access to rent-controlled apartments, Jeffries said, "It's a legitimate issue that has been raised, and the campaign is going to have to address it."
Mamdani has faced intensifying criticism for living in the rent-controlled apartment while campaigning on the need for affordable housing, including from his opponent, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has floated legislation that he has dubbed "Zohran's Law" to prevent high-income individuals from occupying rent-stabilized apartments.
Mamdani, who has previously acknowledged that he hails from a wealthy family, has said he rented the $2,300-per-month apartment before he became an assemblyman and did not know at the time he signed the lease that it was a rent-stabilized apartment.
This week, Mamdani was hit with an ethics complaint urging a probe into the situation and questioning whether the socialist candidate received improper assistance securing subsidized housing.
"Right-wing think tanks and MAGA billionaires' pathetic attempts to distract from Zohran Mamdani's mission to make NYC more affordable will fail, just as they did in the primary where New Yorkers resoundingly rejected Andrew Cuomo in a humiliating defeat," Mamdani spokesperson Dora Pekec told the New York Post regarding the ethics complaint.
Jeffries legitimizing the critique of Mamdani sparked some pushback online from users who suggested Jeffries was wrong to side against Mamdani.
"Starting to think this guy shouldn't be leader," former Democratic speechwriter Alex Bradley posted on X. "Weak where it matters, not a team player."
"What a coward," NYU's Institute for Public Knowledge Associate Director Michael Koncewicz posted on X. "It's deeply embarrassing that Jeffries is a leader of the Democratic Party."
A headline from Mediaite characterized Jeffries's comment as having thrown Mamdani "under the bus."
Cuomo and Mamdani have been going back and forth with jabs on the issue after Cuomo called Mamdani out in a social media post that has been seen over 30 million times, calling on Mamdani "to move out immediately and give your affordable housing back to an unhoused family who need it."
In the CNBC interview, Jeffries also declined to officially endorse Mamdani despite praising his primary performance where he "outworked" his opponents.
"But now, during the general election, of course, he's going to have to demonstrate to a broader electorate, including in many of the neighborhoods that I represent in Brooklyn, that his ideas can actually be put into reality, and that's the conversation that he's having with me and having with people who are community leaders and residents in the 8th Congressional District I serve."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
30 minutes ago
- Forbes
3 Ways Doctors Can Win Back Gen Z, Millennial Patients
Ask people how much they expect to change over the next 10 years, and most will say 'not much.' Ask them how much they've changed in the past decade, and the answer flips. Regardless of age, the past always feels more transformative than the future. This blind spot has a name: the end-of-history illusion. Researchers have shown that people of all ages underestimate how much they'll change in the years ahead, even as they readily acknowledge how much they've changed already. The result is a persistent illusion that life, and the values and behaviors that shape it, will remain unchanged. The illusion plays out not just individually, but generationally. Older generations assume that younger ones will follow the traditional, familiar paths. And, of course, they never do. Most of the time, these generational differences surface in harmless ways (e.g., at the dinner table during holidays). But the consequences prove far more serious when leaders in politics, the military and medicine make similar errors in judgement. Cracks In The Globe Two recent events reveal what happens when individuals and institutions fail to recognize that the world around them has changed. In New York City, a little-known 33-year-old Democratic Socialist, Zohran Mamdani, defeated a former governor and establishment favorite in the mayoral primary. Despite being massively outspent on TV advertising, Mamdani won by embracing Instagram, short videos and grassroots tactics to motivate and mobilize voters. Half a world away, in Ukraine, the most effective tool against the Russian military hasn't been fighter jets or tanks but cheap, camera-mounted drones. Some cost only a few hundred dollars, yet they've repeatedly destroyed military hardware worth millions. Analysts warn that future wars will be shaped by low-cost, decentralized technologies rather than the armaments of the past. This is a shift that traditional military powers like the U.S. have been slow to embrace. But these aren't just political and military anecdotes. They're examples of what happens when people assume the strategies that worked yesterday will deliver results tomorrow. In each case, when people failed to recognize that the environment had shifted, they lost their advantage and paid a price. The same risk now looms over medicine. With Gen Z and Millennials making up more than 40% of the U.S. population, clinicians must update how they communicate and deliver care. If they don't, their voice will go unheard; their influence lost. Medicine's Lost Battle For Attention For generations, physicians assumed that donning the white coat guaranteed them respect. And for decades, it did. Their intelligence, years of training and professional status earned them the trust of their patients. But just as circumstances have changed in voting booths and battlefields, so has the formula for capturing patient attention. While Boomer and Gen X patients continue to rely on information from medical experts, younger generations now turn to TikTok videos, Reddit threads and Google reviews for healthcare decisions. Whether physicians consider these sources credible is beside the point. Gen Z and Millennials increasingly use and trust them. 3 Ways To Win The Battle Of Trust This schism isn't about one generation being right and another wrong. It's the classic pattern of cultural evolution creating a generational mismatch. If the medical profession fails to (a) recognize its existence and (b) close the gap, then these patterns will solidify. And if that happens, clinical outcomes will suffer and so will the health of our nation. Fortunately, at this point, the disconnect between doctors and younger generations of patients can be repaired. Here are three ways clinicians can move toward that goal: Most Gen X and Boomer physicians were trained to tell patients 'the right answer.' And many patients still want that. But with Gen Zs and Millennials, a top-down approach typically backfires. Researchers who study communication styles describe a key distinction between those who 'tell' the answers versus those who ask for input and share in decision-making. In general, older generations of patients tend to be comfortable with the former while younger ones expect the latter. Importantly, studies show that when a doctor's communication style doesn't match a patient's preference, trust and adherence suffer. In contrast, shared decision-making — where physicians present options and engage patients in choosing a path forward — is essential for younger generations, improving satisfaction, understanding and outcomes. When exchanging medical data, booking office visits and educating patients, most medical practices still rely on fax machines, printed handouts and phone-based scheduling. But for generations raised on smartphones, these traditional modes of communication require too much time and signal outdated thinking. Surveys show that Gen Z and Millennials prefer text-based follow-ups, digital scheduling tools and mobile health apps. A healthy reminder to doctors: Even the clearest message will be missed or ignored if it's delivered via the wrong channel. Older generations tend to value long-term relationships with a personal physician. Younger generations prioritize speed, convenience and flexibility. When they have a medical problem, particularly one that is routine or embarrassing, they are more inclined to visit urgent care, schedule a telemedicine appointment or consult AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude for quick answers. To remain a trusted source, physicians will need to adapt. Telehealth, asynchronous messaging and digital intake tools align with Gen Z and Millennial preferences while also saving physicians time, reducing overhead and improving efficiency without sacrificing outcomes. At a national level, if medical societies and public health institutions want to reach younger patients, they will need to modify how they deliver information. Long lectures and dense PDFs may satisfy academic audiences, but a mobile-native generation responds far better to short videos, Instagram stories and clear infographics. And rather than cautioning primarily about life-threatening medical problems like heart attacks and cancer, doctors should focus on the concerns facing individuals in their twenties, including mental health issues, dermatological challenges and sexual health. Across the country, doctors who build strong social media followings are able to educate thousands of people in a fraction of the time it takes a physician in the office to counsel a few dozen patients. In the past, physicians could expect to command attention through their credentials. Today, in a world shaped by digital platforms, diverse voices and shifting values, the most desired channels, topics and communication styles prove more effective for Gen Z and Millennials. Just as politicians must adjust strategies to win elections and generals need to revise tactics to win wars, doctors will have to evolve their approach if they seek to achieve the best clinical outcomes.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
What would happen if America started faking its economic data? Here's what happened when other countries did it
Donald Trump South America InvestingFacebookTweetLink Follow Lying to your lenders is a bad enough idea when you're an individual. It's even worse when you're a country. That's the specter critics of President Donald Trump have raised after he fired the head of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics this month after disappointing jobs data. While there's no indication the data has been rigged (assertions from the White House aside) – or will be rigged in the future – the White House's nomination of a partisan to lead the government's economic data agency was enough to worry global economic and financial circles. There's historical precedent for that fear. Countries like Greece and Argentina have been both been punished by investors for putting out manufactured numbers in the past. 'President Trump has just taken one very negative stop along a slippery slope,' Alan Blinder, a former vice chair of the Federal Reserve, told CNN. 'The next worry is going to be manipulation' of data. At stake is the health of an economy relied upon by nearly every person on earth, directly or indirectly. The US economy affects everyone from Americans in glitzy Manhattan skyscrapers to, quite literally, garbage pickers living in developing nation slums. But while Greece famously faked its way into the European Union and Argentina to this day remains embroiled in legal fights over its own sham numbers, there key differences here: The US economy is the world's biggest, buoyed by its global dominance and its years of strength. The Trump administration says firing Erika McEntarfer wasn't about politics but was instead about making BLS data more rigorous and accurate. 'Historically abnormal revisions in BLS data over the past few years since COVID have called into question the BLS's accuracy, reliability, and confidence. President Trump believes that businesses, households, and policymakers deserve accurate data to inform their decision-making, and he will restore America's trust in the BLS,' said White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers in a statement to CNN. Still, economists warn, the United States is at something of a crossroads now, waiting to see what happens to data series that economists have praised as the gold standard, even if many agree that model updating and modernization could make major improvements to the data's accuracy. 'There's no substitute for credible government data,' said Michael Heydt, the lead sovereign analyst at rating agency Morningstar DBRS. In 2004, Greece confessed it had faked numbers on its national deficit and debt to qualify for entry into the eurozone in 2001. But the number-fudging didn't end there. Appointed to Greece's statistical agency in 2010, economist Andreas Georgiou made a bold decision: He worked to publish deficit numbers that aligned with reality. After years of untrustworthy numbers that made the idea of official Greek data a global punchline, his efforts were downright startling. What followed were years of legal fights, and he was prosecuted for allegedly inflating the country's deficit figures. Even the EU itself condemned Greece for the false data. The fakery made the effects of the global financial crisis of 2008 and 2009 significantly worse in Greece. Lenders, skittish of what Greece's actual public finances might be, shied away, demanding increasingly higher rates to hold Greek bonds. Austerity measures demanded by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to bail out Greece angered everyday citizens. Pictures of Greeks rioting in the streets, burning cars and expressing their rage, underscored the dangers. In Argentina, accusations of untrustworthy inflation and economic growth data have dogged Latin America's third-largest economy for decades, scaring off investors despite a wealth of natural resources. Then-President Nestor Kirchner demoted the person in charge of preparing inflation data because she (correctly) reported surging prices in 2007. Everyone from ordinary citizens to global investors treated official inflation data as suspect for years after. That contributed to the country's credit ratings staying in junk territory for years – one of the factors investors typically cite to charge a country more to loan it money. (In Argentina's case, previous sovereign defaults were also a major factor. The unreliable inflation data, after all, did not happen in a vacuum.) That matters to ordinary people because short- and long-term debt, whether from a federal government down to tiny cities and towns, can help fund everything from new schools to roads to essential services. When lenders turn off the money spigot – or charge dearly for access – that means regular people ultimately pay the price. But the United States is far from replicating either scenario, said Robert Shapiro, the chairman of economic advisory firm Sonecon and a former Under Secretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs under President Bill Clinton. When the data was revealed to be fake in both Greece and Argentina, those economies were already in terrible shape, Shapiro pointed out. 'So the impact of the markets no longer being able to rely on the data was a little less because the markets were already backing away from investment and employment.' The US economy is growing, hitting a relatively robust annualized rate of 3% in the second quarter. And at over $30 trillion, the US economy has a heft that both Greece and Argentina lack. 'We're the largest economy in the world. We are by far the greatest financial center in the world,' Shapiro said. Trump fired Dr. Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, shortly after the August 1 jobs report showed sharply slower jobs growth than expected for July – and significant downward revisions to data from June and May. Trump accused McEntarfer, without evidence, of manipulating the reports for 'political purposes.' Analysts begged to differ. The US is 'a world leader in providing high-quality data,' Heydt said. 'The BLS in particular is kind of a world class institution… The US for a long time has been kind of the gold standard for data.' William Beach, a former Trump BLS commissioner, told CNN previously that 'there's no way' for McEntarfer or others to rig the data. 'By the time the commissioner sees the number, they're all prepared, they're locked into the computer system,' he said. 'There's no hands-on at all for the commissioner.' But large revisions in the bureau's data have raised eyebrows, not just this month, but in the past as well. A preliminary annual revision in August 2024, for example, showed the US economy had added 818,000 fewer jobs over the past year than previously reported. Those kinds of large revisions might suggest deeper issues, like how the BLS gets their data and constructs their economic models, said Kathryn Rooney Vera, the chief market strategist and chief economist at financial services company StoneX. 'Several economists and research teams I personally engage with have flagged these as structural issues with the data long before Trump's involvement or the firing of the BLS chief,' Rooney Vera told CNN. And Shapiro noted another wrinkle: budget cuts. Already the BLS has said it will cut back on collecting some data because it has fewer people. That, in turn, means it can take longer to get to final numbers for data releases. In the case of the jobs report, big companies usually respond with information first. Smaller companies tend to trail. 'And so you get a lot of responses that come in after the date when the initial estimate is put out,' he said, leading to revisions. Still, the US has other sources of data, both public and private, to round out a fuller picture of the economy. Shapiro pointed to the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. 'These institutions are made up virtually 100% by statisticians and economists,' Shapiro said. 'They're utterly nonpolitical in their jobs.'
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Odd Lots: Lessons From the One Sovereign Wealth Fund in the United States
President Trump and others have talked about the idea of the US having a Sovereign Wealth Fund, a la the UAE or Singapore. It feels like a longshot, but as it turns out, there is actually one Sovereign Wealth Fund in the United States, which is the Alaska Permanent Fund. The fund was established in the 1970s to manage the state's booming oil fortune, and ensure that the boom benefitted the residents of the state for years into the future. Today the fund manages over $80 billion, contributing a substantial portion each year to Alaska's state budget, including an annual check paid directly to almost all residents of the state. On this episode, we speak with the fund's CEO Deven Mitchell and CIO Marcus Frampton about how the fund operates, its relationship with the government of Alaska, and how it's investing its money in order to fulfill its purpose long into the future. We also discuss what lessons from the APF could apply to any similar project done at a national level.
