NYC comptroller hopeful Justin Brannan gets first congressional endorsement from Rep. Velázquez
Rep. Nydia Velázquez, a powerbroker of Brooklyn and Queens politics, is throwing her weight behind Justin Brannan's city comptroller run, giving him his first endorsement from a member of New York's congressional delegation.
In a statement to the Daily News announcing her endorsement, Velázquez credited Brannan's push as City Council Finance Committee chairman to reverse budget cuts to libraries and other public services enacted by Mayor Adams over the past few years.
'Justin didn't just speak up, he led the charge to restore that funding and won … I've seen firsthand how hard he fights for working families, especially in neighborhoods that have too often been overlooked,' said Velázquez, who has represented a section of Brooklyn and Queens in the U.S. House of Representatives for more than three decades.
'Justin has the backbone, the values, and the vision to make sure our city's budget reflects the priorities of the people — not the powerful. I'm proud to endorse Justin Brannan because I know he'll always put working New Yorkers first.'
Brannan, whose Council district spans a part of Brooklyn that includes Coney Island, is facing off against Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine in the June 24 Democratic comptroller primary. Levine has to date raised more money than Brannan for his comptroller run and racked up high-profile endorsements, too, including from Rep. Adriano Espaillat, who's highly influential in Manhattan politics.
Neither Espaillat nor Velazquez have endorsed yet in the June 24 Democratic mayoral primary, which has been upended by incumbent Eric Adams' corruption indictment and a late entry into the race from ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo. The two congressional lawmaker's endorsements in the down-ballot comptroller race, though, could indicate they're nearing decisions on who to back in the mayoral race, too.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘Bring in the troops!': Trump raises the stakes as ICE tactics spark protests in L.A.
For those concerned about Donald Trump and his authoritarian-style agenda, the last few days have been, at a minimum, unsettling. On the East Coast, for example, military vehicles, including tanks, are getting into position to roll down the streets of the nation's capital, for a June 14 military parade to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army — which also happens to coincide with Donald Trump's birthday. And then, of course, there's the West Coast. As The Associated Press summarized: Tensions in Los Angeles escalated Sunday as thousands of protesters took to the streets in response to President Donald Trump's extraordinary deployment of the National Guard, blocking off a major freeway and setting self-driving cars on fire as law enforcement used tear gas, rubber bullets and flash bangs to control the crowd. In recent months, federal officials, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, have engaged in overly aggressive and legally dubious tactics while executing the White House's deportation agenda, sparking a predictable public backlash. As NBC News reported, it was against this backdrop that ICE officers on Friday carried out raids in three locations across the city, where dozens of people were taken into custody. California Gov. Gavin Newsom condemned the raids, calling them 'chaotic federal sweeps' that aimed to fill an 'arbitrary arrest quota,' and protests soon followed. It was the next day when Trump announced that he was calling up 2,000 National Guard troops to quell the protests, ignoring the objections of the state's Democratic governor. As The New York Times reported, 'Governors almost always control the deployment of National Guard troops in their states,' and this marked 'the first time since 1965 that a president has activated a state's National Guard force without a request from that state's governor.' (Sixty years ago, it was Lyndon B. Johnson who sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators.) Last year, while serving as South Dakota's Republican governor, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said that if Joe Biden tried to federalize National Guard troops, it would constitute a 'direct attack on states' rights' and spark a 'war' between Washington and GOP-led state governments. Over the weekend, however, Noem took the opposite position. Around the same time, by way of his social media platform, Trump proceeded to celebrate the 'great job' National Guard troops did in Los Angeles before the troops actually arrived, which was bizarre but consistent with the incumbent president's general approach to reality. For his part, Newsom — whom Trump keeps describing as 'Newscum' because the president has the temperament of an ill-tempered tween — accused Trump of 'inciting and provoking violence,' 'creating mass chaos,' and 'militarizing cities.' The California Democrat added, 'These are the acts of a dictator, not a president.' After Tom Homan, the administration's 'border czar,' raised the prospect of arresting state and local elected officials, Newsom effectively dared Homan to try. There's no reason to believe that conditions will improve quickly. The governor has formally asked Trump to pull Guard troops, an appeal that will likely be ignored. In the meantime, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has suggested he's prepared to deploy U.S. Marines onto American streets — a point that was echoed by U.S. Northern Command. Asked whether Americans might soon see active-duty Marines on the streets of Los Angeles, House Speaker Mike Johnson told ABC News that he doesn't believe such a step would be 'heavy-handed.' Soon after, the president told reporters that he's meeting with U.S. military leaders, and after publishing a statement about Los Angeles having been 'invaded and occupied,' there was renewed speculation about whether the Republican might be preparing to invoke the Insurrection Act. Indeed, Trump also wrote that he was directing Noem, Hegseth and Attorney General Pam Bondi, 'to take all such action necessary to liberate Los Angeles from the Migrant Invasion.' Shortly after midnight, on Monday morning, Trump also wrote online, 'Looking really bad in L.A. BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!' He similarly told reporters that he expects to have U.S. troops 'everywhere.' In his latest New York Times column, David French concluded, 'It's too early to declare a constitutional crisis, and in any case, debating the label we attach to any new event can distract us from focusing fully on the event itself. But each new day brings us fresh evidence of a deeply troubling trend: America is no longer a stable country, and it is growing less stable by the day.' A few weeks before Election Day 2024, as he referred to Americans he disagreed with as 'scum,' then-candidate Trump talked about the possible deployment of the National Guard or the U.S. military on American soil to be used against those he labeled 'the enemy from within.' At the time, it led many to wonder whether Trump, if returned to power, might be willing to use — or in this case, abuse — military resources to stifle dissent. Republicans characterized such concerns as hysterical and paranoid. Eight months later, those fears are suddenly relevant anew. This is a developing story. Check back for updates. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Democrats ignore Nevada's upside down, regressive, and unfair tax structure. Again.
The Nevada Legislature Building underwent a face lift prior to this year's session, but the Democratic legislative leadership's economic agenda, inasmuch as there is one, remained the same as it ever was. (Photo: Richard Bednarski/Nevada Current) Democrats nationwide are awash in conflicting opinions about how to stanch the loss of young and working class voters before the U.S. backslide into autocracy is irreversible, if it's not already. Some Democrats blame 'wokeness.' Some Democrats say the party needs to lean in on kitchen-table issues. Some think they should do nothing and just wait for Trump and Trumpism to collapse under the weight of its self-generated slagheap of corruption, lawlessness, malice, and counterproductive policies. Some Democrats, including at least half of those in Nevada's congressional delegation, seem to think the best way to inspire the electorate is to make sure every sentence they mutter includes a noun, a verb, and the word 'bipartisan.' And on and on. And then there are Nevada's Democratic state legislative leaders. They chose to meet this inflection point by yet again allowing generous public subsidies for deep-pocketed Californians to serve as the featured attraction of this year's recently concluded Nevada legislative session. Yes, ding dong, the film tax credit bill is dead. Praise be, etc. But Democratic legislative leadership — Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro and Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager — whether by design or neglect, allowed a government giveaway scheme to film corporations to become the one and only thing about the 2025 Legislature working class voters, especially young ones, most likely ever heard about. Assuming they heard about anything legislative at all. Ever since it was plopped onto the Nevada policy landscape more than a decade ago by then-Democratic state senator, now Democratic state Attorney General Aaron Ford, the film tax credit has always been a predominantly Democratic production. One of the chief legislative sponsors of this year's version was state Sen. Daniele Monroe-Mareno, who also currently serves as chair of the state Democratic Party. To reiterate, a critical mass of voters nationwide, including voters on which Democrats once relied, are marinading in nihilism and cynicism, and evidently don't grasp the goals, agenda, priorities — the point — of the Democratic Party, or just cold stopped caring. Against that backdrop, Democrats in Nevada put on a big show about a scheme to use nearly $2 billion of public money to enrich two of California's largest film corporations and one of the nation's most prominent corporate developers of master-planned communities. Weird. In Nevada, Democrats over the last ten years have been very successful at doing what(ever) it takes to win and maintain majorities in both houses of the state Legislature, an endeavor which, luckily for them, had more to do with voter registration numbers and redistricting power than policy positions. As a result, mean-spirited reactionary policies that are racist, poverty-shaming, misogynistic, anti-LGBTQ, anti-democracy, anti-immigrant, and anti-rights — policies designed first and foremost to feed the MAGAfolk — are (mostly) not enacted here. Keeping such pernicious policies (mostly) at bay in Nevada is no small consideration. Winning enough elections to block Republicans from enacting that stuff is arguably the crowning state-level achievement of contemporary Nevada Democrats. But when it comes to pro-active progress, specifically on economic policy, the Nevada Democratic legislative agenda, inasmuch as there is one, is tired (they're 'for' education), and worse than useless (inveterate footsie-playing with industries, mischaracterizing public giveaways to private corporations as 'economic development'). In the meantime, with only the occasional exception, they can rarely be bothered to acknowledge, let alone confront, the fact that the state has one of the country's most upside-down tax structures, in which the smaller your income, the higher the percentage of it you pay in taxes. Giving working families a break by lowering the state's aggressively high sales tax rate would leave a budget hole that would have to be filled by generating revenue elsewhere (evergreen suggestion: raising Nevada's lowest-in-the-nation gaming tax). Under Nevada's constitution, raising or creating taxes requires a two-thirds vote of both legislative houses, majorities Democrats have not had and would probably be afraid to use if they did. In Washington state, which is bluer than Nevada but whose residents have also suffered under a regressive tax structure, it took 15 years of advocacy from organizations and politicians to finally enact a tax on the ultra-wealthy (another good suggestion). Reforming Nevada's tax structure would likewise be a long process. That's assuming Democrats and, for that matter, their most powerful progressive organizational allies, would do something they so far haven't: get started on a public education campaign advocating tax fairness that would also enable the state to be a little less cheap and a little more responsible when it comes to funding public services, programs, and projects. If only the state's Democratic legislative brain trust had spent as much time advocating for an equitable tax system as they've spent advocating and/or rubber-stamping government handouts to corporations and billionaires. The first quarter of the 21st century has been economically harder on Nevada than any other state. It's perhaps a testament to the state Democratic Party's long-hailed organizational oomph that Nevada didn't go for Trump in 2016 and 2020, and only finally fell to Trump last year. It remains to be seen if and how Democrats nationally can generate enough trust and optimism to pull the country out of its degenerative spiral. If they do, there might be some Nevadans, including some state legislators, who will make a meaningful contribution to the effort. But if prior performance is any indication of future results, it's hard to imagine Nevada legislative and party leadership having much of a role in that. At least not in a good way. A version of this column originally appeared in the Daily Current newsletter, which is free and which you can subscribe to here.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
The Latest: Trump's travel ban takes effect as tensions escalate over immigration enforcement
President Donald Trump's new ban on travel to the U.S. by citizens from 12 mainly African and Middle Eastern countries took effect Monday amid rising tension over the president's escalating campaign of immigration enforcement. Meanwhile, scores of scientists at the National Institutes of Health sent their Trump-appointed leader a letter titled the Bethesda Declaration, a frontal challenge to policies they say undermine the NIH mission, waste public resources and harm people's health. In the 'Bethesda Declaration,' NIH scientists step forward en masse to denounce their agency's direction Scores of National Institutes of Health scientists have gone public to assail deep program cuts and upheaval at their agency under the Trump administration. On Monday, more than 90 current employees sent their leader a letter entitled the Bethesda Declaration. It's a frontal challenge to policies it says 'undermine the NIH mission, waste our public resources, and harm the health of Americans and people across the globe.' By signing their names, the NIH employees gave up the veil of anonymity common in Washington — and put their jobs at risk. Their declaration was endorsed anonymously by 250 other NIH researchers and staff. Altogether, employees from all 27 NIH institutes and centers registered their dismay with the agency's direction. Trump says Elon Musk could face 'serious consequences' if he backs Democratic candidates Trump is not backing off his battle with Elon Musk, saying Saturday that he has no desire to repair their relationship and warning that his former ally and campaign benefactor could face 'serious consequences' if he tries to help Democrats in upcoming elections. Trump told NBC's Kristen Welker in a phone interview that he has no plans to make up with Musk. Asked specifically if he thought his relationship with the mega-billionaire CEO of Tesla and SpaceX is over, Trump responded, 'I would assume so, yeah.' 'I'm too busy doing other things,' Trump said. The president also issued a warning amid chatter that Musk could back Democratic lawmakers and candidates in the 2026 midterm elections. 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that,' Trump told NBC, though he declined to share what those consequences would be. Musk's businesses have many lucrative federal contracts. Mike Johnson downplays Musk's influence and says Republicans will pass Trump's tax and budget bill Johnson took clear sides Sunday in Trump's breakup with mega-billionaire Elon Musk, saying Musk's criticism of the GOP's massive tax and budget policy bill will not derail the measure, and he downplayed Musk's influence over the GOP-controlled Congress. 'I didn't go out to craft a piece of legislation to please the richest man in the world,' Johnson said on ABC's 'This Week.' Johnson said he has exchanged text messages with Musk since he came out against the GOP bill. Musk called it an 'abomination' that would add to U.S. debts and threaten economic stability. He urged voters to flood Capitol Hill with calls to vote against the measure, which is pending in the Senate after clearing the House. His criticism sparked an angry social media back-and-forth with Trump, who told reporters over the weekend that he has no desire to repair his relationship with Musk. The speaker was dismissive of Musk's threats to finance opponents — even Democrats — of Republican members who back Trump's bill. Trump's new travel ban takes effect as tensions escalate over immigration enforcement Trump's new ban on travel to the U.S. by citizens from 12 mainly African and Middle Eastern countries took effect Monday amid rising tension over the president's escalating campaign of immigration enforcement. The new proclamation, which Trump signed last week, applies to citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. It also imposes heightened restrictions on people from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela who are outside the U.S. and don't hold a valid visa. The new ban does not revoke visas previously issued to people from countries on the list, according to guidance issued Friday to all U.S. diplomatic missions. However, unless an applicant meets narrow criteria for an exemption to the ban, his or her application will be rejected starting Monday. Travelers with previously issued visas should still be able to enter the U.S. even after the ban takes effect.
