Andrew Cuomo vows to stand up to the far left — but his record says the reverse
It's no real surprise that Andrew Cuomo has shifted markedly left as he runs for mayor — since that simply continues the turn he took as governor.
Which at least undermines his claims to be running to save New York City from the extremists, and arguably makes that pose just laughable.
That is: Cuomo may not be an enthusiastic man of the left, but he's all too likely to side with the zealots rather than stand up to them.
Yes, Cuomo feuded with the Working Families Party — but he also worked with it as long it served his ambitions.
His infamous cat fights with then-Mayor Bill de Blasio were less about ideology and more about who'd get the media spotlight, as well as Cuomo's well-established mislike of any other politician with an Italian last name.
Yes, he intrigued for years to keep progressives from controlling the Legislature, helping engineer the centrist Independent Democratic Conference's alliance with Republicans in the state Senate.
But after the IDC gambit collapsed in 2018, Cuomo let the lefties run rampant.
In 2019 alone, he agreed to a host of ill-conceived and carelessly-written measures that have fueled disorder and decay, especially in New York City:
The 'no bail' law that puts most perps back on the streets after almost every arrest, prompting a crisis of retail theft and revolving-door justice even for dangerous perps.
The Discovery for Justice Reform Act that buried prosecutors in paperwork and let countless criminals walk on utter technicalities.
The Housing Stability & Tenant Protection Act, which is helping drive small landlords into insolvency across the city and reducing the affordable-housing supply.
A finalized deal to fund the MTA with 'congestion pricing' tolls.
After a year spent mismanaging New York's pandemic response, he followed up in 2021 by embracing a Rube Goldberg road to pot legalization that wound up producing the plethora of gray-market weed shops that still plague New York neighborhoods.
As Mayor Eric Adams has pointed out, the 'reforms' Cuomo signed into law are largely to blame for the city's spiraling recidivism problem. Yet the ex-gov insists he still stands by the no-bail law because it 'righted a terrible wrong.'
Cuomo has dubbed his pet third party (allowing him to fight on in the general if he loses the Dem primary) 'Fight and Deliver' — when as gov he didn't fight the left but instead delivered on its big policy pushes.
Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani may pose a truly toxic threat to the city's future, but we don't see why a Mayor Cuomo would be any greater check on a progressive-dominated City Council than Gov. Cuomo was to a prog-run Legislature.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
44 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Are the debt limit's days numbered? Trump and Warren hope so.
Advertisement Their reasons for targeting a mechanism that has become outdated in the hyper-partisan political environment are different, of course. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up For Trump, opposition by some congressional Republicans to raising the $36.1 trillion debt limit is an obstacle to passing his massive tax and budget cut legislation. For Warren, even though axing the debt limit would help Republicans in the short-term, it would benefit Democrats the next time they hold the presidency. 'The time to do it is now when it's not a huge negotiating issue,' Warren told the Globe, noting there was unlikely to be any Republican brinkmanship over raising the limit Advertisement But despite the backing of Trump and Warren, partisan politics still promise to make it difficult to get rid of the debt limit. A White House spokesperson said there was no additional comment beyond Trump's June 4 post. 'It's the only leverage we've got,' said Senator Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican who wants to significantly reduce federal spending. Another GOP deficit hawk, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, has said he won't vote for the Senate version of the tax bill in part because it includes a $5 trillion debt limit increase. 'That's a terrible idea,' he responded when asked about scrapping the debt limit. 'Will it be called the Trump/Elizabeth Warren bill?' On the other side of the aisle, some Democrats are loathe to help Trump out of a jam on legislation they strongly oppose and believe will hurt average Americans. 'I think we should ultimately get rid of it,' said The debt limit dates back to 1917. For decades, it was raised routinely and without controversy every year or two as an extension of the budget process to allow the federal government to continue borrowing. That changed in 2011, when Tea Party Republicans withheld their support until the last minute during the Obama administration. Advertisement The showdown led Standard & Poor's to downgrade the nation's AAA credit rating for the first time. There were standoffs again in 2013 and 2023, which occurred with Republican control of at least one chamber of Congress and a Democratic president in the White House. After the 2023 fight, another leading credit rating firm, The United States is a global outlier in having a debt limit. Denmark is the only other advanced economy with one and it is set so high that it rarely needs to be raised. Critics say the US debt limit is unnecessary because it authorizes borrowing for spending Congress has already approved and hasn't prevented US debt from skyrocketing over the past decade. 'We've had it for a little over 100 years or so and it's produced no fiscal prudence, so I think we should give up on that theory,' said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the former director of the Congressional Budget Office and president of the conservative-leaning American Action Forum think tank. But Rachel Snyderman, managing director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, said there's still a value to the debt limit and it should be reformed rather than scrapped. She pointed to a bipartisan House bill, Advertisement 'It's clear that our current debt limit process does not work,' she said, noting the fast-rising debt. 'However, I do think that we have to ask the question whether eliminating the debt limit and having really no check on that number would be the most responsible action for the world's largest economy and holder of the most stable investment asset.' Snyderman noted that the third leading credit rating firm, But Richard Francis, Fitch Ratings' lead analyst for the United States, said the elimination of the debt limit would be 'somewhat positive' because it would take the risk of a default off the table. That's the point that Warren has been trying to make. 'If we ever default, we can never undo the damage,' she said. 'We can never go back to being a country that always honors its promises.' Warren wouldn't say what kind of discussions she's had with her colleagues about eliminating the debt limit. But she thinks Republicans might support it since most of them will be voting for a huge debt limit increase in the in the tax bill. Senator Jim Justice, a West Virginia Republican, said he'd be amenable to scrapping the debt limit. 'You wouldn't have that loom over your head,' he said. 'I mean, for God sakes, don't we have enough things to contend with?' But Senator John Curtis, a Utah Republican, demonstrated the complexity of the issue with the debt continuing to climb. Advertisement 'The debt limit has not had any impact on reducing the deficit, so from that perspective, I don't see a lot of value to it,' he said. 'But I'm also hesitant to let it go because it's all we've got.' Jim Puzzanghera can be reached at
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Who is Brad Lander? A candidate used to getting arrested shakes up New York's mayoral race
Brad Lander is used to getting arrested. In 2015, Lander was detained during a protest in support of striking car wash workers. Two years later, Lander participated in an act of civil disobedience supporting the raise of the minimum wage in New York. Months after that, he was arrested at the US Capitol while protesting a tax reform bill he believed would favor wealthy corporations. In 2018, Lander protested outside a state senator's office as part of a campaign to renew a school-zone speed camera program. He was arrested there, too. But Lander's latest encounter with law enforcement immediately became his most famous. The New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate was arrested this week inside a federal building after he confronted federal officers to try to prevent a migrant from being taken into custody. The arrest pushed Lander into the center of a Democratic primary campaign for New York City mayor that's been dominated by rivals Andrew Cuomo and Zohran Mamdani. Images of his arrest were shared widely, even as critics questioned whether the incident was a publicity stunt a week before the June 24 primary. 'My goal yesterday was not to disobey,' Lander told CNN in an interview on Wednesday. 'But it was to show up, to put my body there, to bear witness to what was happening, to object to the lack of due process, to try to insist on the rule of law.' The 55-year-old Lander is New York City's chief financial watchdog. He previously was on the city council, where he founded the progressive caucus and helped pass legislation aimed at protecting workers, securing tenant protections and creating more affordable housing. Lander also helped pass a ban on employment credit checks. He is known in the city's political circles for his wonkiness and sharp command of municipal inner workings. He also has a nasally affectation that has been the subject of mockery by incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, a longtime rival whose office has faced multiple Lander audits. For months Lander's mayoral campaign has languished amid the political comeback energy of Cuomo, the former New York governor, and the upbeat and perennially online lefty campaign of Mamdani, the state assemblyman and Democratic socialist. Lander has sided with Mamdani. The two agreed to cross-endorse each other in New York City's ranked-choice voting system, which allows residents to select up to five candidates in order. Lander tore into Cuomo during the second mayoral debate last week, bringing up specifics around Cuomo's resignation as the governor and the findings of an attorney general's office's investigation that concluded Cuomo sexually harassed multiple women and violated state law. Cuomo has repeatedly denied the allegations. 'I think there is an important line right now – and it's not between moderates and progressives,' Lander said. 'It's between fighters and folders, between people who will stand up against creeping authoritarianism and people like Eric Adams, who will side with Donald Trump and allow creeping Gestapo tactics to scoop people off our streets and arrest and deport them with no due process.' During an interview with the Reset Talk Show, Adams declined to join the chorus of Democrats who condemned Lander's arrest. 'I think it was more politics instead of protecting people,' said Adams, who is seeking reelection as an independent in the November general election, bypassing the Democratic primary he won four years ago. 'It's unfortunate that he took that action, because that is not the role of the elected official, what he did today.' Cuomo holds 38% first-choice support in a new Marist poll of likely Democratic primary voters, about the same as in Marist's May survey. Mamdani stands at 27%, up 9 points since last month. No other candidate in the large field reached double-digits in first-choice votes, with Lander at 7%, New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams at 7% and all other candidates below 5% support. The poll was completed before Lander's arrest. Lander, who spent nearly four hours in federal detention, said Wednesday that he would continue to bring attention to the issue of migrants facing immigration court proceedings without guaranteed access to counsel. Most of Lander's opponents gathered after his arrest to support him – though not Cuomo, who rallied with labor leaders a few blocks away from where Lander was being held to tout his union support. The former governor's camp did quickly issue a statement condemning Lander's detention. But Lander noted to reporters after his release that Cuomo hadn't been with the other candidates. 'This is a critical time to have a mayor that will stand up to ICE and stand up to Donald Trump and insist on due process and the laws of this city,' Lander said. Many in the city's Democratic political circles suggested the arrest was a last-ditch push for attention by Lander's campaign. One lawmaker noted privately that Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, who was arrested during a protest outside of an immigration detention center in his city, lost in the primary for New Jersey governor earlier this month. Others were quick to praise the move. 'Thank you to Brad Lander,' Jumaane Williams, the city's public advocate and a close ally of Lander, said as supporters gathered to await his release. 'Sometimes all the power we have is to be present and to witness what is happening and everyone of any moral character, any moral consciousness will be thanking Brad Lander for being that witness, doing what he could where he was to try and help someone.'
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Letters: The future of Illinois and our nation is carbon-free energy
Edward Cross ('Global demand for energy is rising. There's no better place to produce it than America,' June 10) is absolutely correct that global energy demand is rising. In Illinois alone, data centers could increase annual electricity requirements by 30% by 2040. I agree that oil and gas will be necessary for the near future, and producing them here in the U.S. is the best option for our energy independence and national security. It's unfortunate Cross' fossil fuel argument doesn't touch on Illinois, where we rank fifth in the nation for installed wind capacity. Illinois produces over half of our electricity from no-carbon sources, primarily nuclear and wind. and investment in battery storage and grid improvements can help integrate existing and future sources more effectively. Just like oil and gas, these industries provide good jobs to Illinoisans. While it's true the oil and gas industry has made great strides in reducing its carbon emissions from production, don't let those numbers mask the fact that those fossil fuels still produce the same amount of carbon when they're burned. On top of that, fossil fuels alone cannot keep up with increasing energy demands, especially now that natural gas turbines are facing years of delivery backlogs. Restricting renewable energy will only increase the demand on oil and natural gas, raising their prices. These factors would combine for a nasty increase in energy prices. Allowing no-carbon energy sources to flourish lowers everyone's electric bill. The future is here, and it's no-carbon energy. Solar and batteries accounted for 80% of new U.S. electricity generation capacity in 2024. Illinois clearly has options beyond fossil fuels to address our energy needs. Strengthening nuclear reliability, expanding renewables and improving grid efficiency can reduce dependence on oil and gas while keeping the lights Republicans are scrambling to find $800 billion to help fund the extension of President Donald Trump's $3 trillion tax cuts — overwhelmingly benefiting the wealthiest Americans. Their plan? Slash Medicare and Medicaid, moves that could strip 12 million or more people of health insurance and force rural hospitals to close. There's a better solution: Eliminate the 45Q tax credit for carbon capture, a bloated, ineffective giveaway to the fossil fuel industry. According to the nonpartisan Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, 45Q will cost U.S. taxpayers $835 billion by 2042. If the industry's demands for higher credit rates and longer durations are met, that number could balloon to $3.8 trillion. Ask yourself: Would you rather your legislators vote to preserve Medicare and Medicaid, or hand billions more to fossil fuel corporations that are already raking in record profits? For decades, fossil fuel companies have enjoyed trillions in government subsidies — from tax breaks to unpriced environmental and health damages. These companies, among the most profitable in history, are also the leading contributors to climate change and deadly air pollution. Carbon capture sounds promising on paper, but 45Q won't meaningfully reduce climate change. Most captured carbon dioxide is used for enhanced oil recovery — prolonging fossil fuel extraction. Meanwhile, the environmental damage and emissions continue. Climate-linked disasters are rising, and air pollution already kills millions annually worldwide. Instead of throwing more public money at fossil fuel giants under the guise of climate action, Congress should invest in clean energy, resilient infrastructure and public transportation. Readers can tell their senators and representatives: No health care cuts. No 45Q subsidies. No support for any budget deal that sacrifices essential services to fund giveaways for fossil fuel polluters and billionaires. Let them know where you stand — before it's too a Lyft driver navigating Chicago's streets through all conditions, I've witnessed how ride-share services have transformed transportation in our city. With the proposed city ordinance now pulled and discussions moving to the state level, we have a real opportunity to get this right. I understand drivers' urgency about earning fair pay and having better protections. We work hard, often putting in long hours to serve our communities. The shift to state-level discussions opens the door for collaborative solutions that deliver results. Unlike city ordinances that may create conflicting regional regulations, statewide standards provide consistency and sustainability that both drivers and platforms need. Minnesota's experience proves this works. When Minneapolis passed a local ordinance with very high minimum pay rates, ride-share companies Uber and Lyft threatened to cease operations, warning that dramatically higher prices would price out riders and leave drivers with fewer opportunities. Instead, Minnesota lawmakers brokered an enduring statewide solution through extensive negotiations involving all stakeholders, improving driver compensation while keeping services accessible. Minnesota succeeded because stakeholders understood how this industry really works. They recognized that ride-share driving is fundamentally different from traditional employment — drivers value flexibility, work across multiple platforms and often drive part time around other commitments. Minnesota's solution reflected these realities rather than forcing ride-share into an outdated regulatory framework. Illinois needs this nuanced approach. Effective protections might include portable benefits across platforms, transparent earnings information and sustainable earnings standards that provide certainty without reducing valued flexibility. Companies are showing readiness to engage seriously. Lyft already demonstrates commitment through concrete actions such as guaranteeing drivers make at least 70% of weekly rider fares after external fees. As a driver, I want continued independence, better pay, clearer protections and earnings transparency. But solutions work best when developed with input from drivers who live this reality, companies understanding operational constraints, labor advocates fighting for rights and policymakers creating sustainable frameworks. The neighborhoods relying most on ride-share — historically, underserved areas — deserve policies that enhance rather than threaten reliable mobility access. I regularly drive Chicagoans depending on ride-share for essential trips where public transit is limited. Illinois lawmakers can follow Minnesota's example, bringing stakeholders together for genuine collaboration. Let's work on solutions reflecting how ride-share actually works while providing real driver benefits and maintaining affordable, accessible transportation for all Illinois Vallas' regular op-eds in the Tribune have displayed the ongoing political evolution of a man whose career began in 'lakefront liberal' circles. Like Ed Koch, the 1980s New York mayor who began his political career as an anti-machine liberal, Vallas evolved to the point that his race for mayor was supported by the city's most conservative elements. But Vallas' most recent op-ed ('We must not allow a repeat of 2020 George Floyd protests in Chicago,' June 11) on how Chicago should respond to possible protests against the Donald Trump administration's war against immigrants might point to one further evolution on his part. Vallas never mentions Trump, nor does he offer even a pro forma criticism of the gleefully thuggish approach Immigration and Customs Enforcement is taking. Maybe Vallas is ready to evolve again, from conservative Democrat to Trump you to Philip Milord of Western Springs ('Required reading') and Jon Boyd ('Waste a way of life') of Chicago for their very insightful and intelligent letters on June 13. I could not have said it any better! I moved to Illinois from the East Coast, and it has been mind-boggling how this state has such a disregard for simple economics. Our grandchildren will carry this burden — if they stay in Illinois — but that actually would not be necessary if the governor and the mayor of Chicago would simply use the rule of 'we can't spend what we don't have.'
