Title: Answering the Texas Redistricting Strategy

[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. Depending on where you are, you may be thinking about this year's big elections for mayor of New York, for governor of New Jersey and Virginia and maybe a few others. The Democratic and Republican parties are already fighting the crucial fight for control of Congress; Trump's midterm election in next year's midterms. One way they're doing it this week is with a redistricting war.

Now, districting is traditionally only supposed to happen every 10 years after that decade's census. The Republicans who control things in Texas have been making news this week by trying to redraw Congressional lines there now to add five more areas likely to go Republican right away. Five is a lot in a House with currently just a seven-seat Republican majority. Now there's a process being launched by Democrats in New York to try to flip some red districts to blue.

Seeing the Texas developments, Governor Kathy Hochul told POLITICO this week, "We're not going to sit by while Donald Trump and Texas Republicans try to steal this nation's future. I've been in active talks," she said, "with local and national leaders. In the coming days, we'll meet to align our next move," from Governor Hochul to POLITICO. Some New York Democrats aren't waiting even for that. This week, State Senator Michael Gianaris of Queens and Assemblyman Micah Lasher of Manhattan introduced a State Constitutional Amendment to make it easier to draw redistricted lines mid-decade if another state does so first.

Now, this may not be able to happen by next year's midterms, but could even things out in the long run. With us now are both sponsors of this amendment, State Senator Michael Gianaris of Queens and Assemblymember Micah Lasher of Manhattan. Senator Gianaris, as some of you know, is also the Deputy Majority Leader, the number two person in the State Senate under Andrea Stewart-Cousins. He represents Western Queens in a district that overlaps with Zohran Mamdani's Assembly District. We'll touch on the mayoral race, too.

Assemblyman Lasher is a freshman just elected last year, but previously says his bio page, "He has been Chief of Staff to the New York State Attorney General, Director of State Legislative Affairs for the city of New York that was under Mayor Bloomberg, an aide to Congressman Jerry Nadler and Director of Policy for the State of New York that was under Governor Hochul. He lives in Manhattan's Upper West Side. His district runs from there up through West Harlem. Senator Gianaris, welcome back. Assemblyman Lasher, welcome to WNYC.

Assemblyman Lasher: Thank you. Great to be here.

Senator Gianaris: Good morning, Lehrer.

Brian Lehrer: Senator Gianaris, just tell our listeners more to start out about the State Constitutional Amendment you've both introduced. What would it do and why?

Senator Gianaris: Well, look, we pride ourselves in New York on having a process that is among the fairest and most independent in the country. When it comes to Congressional Redistricting, we're playing a game that has 49 other players. It's unfair to the people of New York that we essentially are doing this process with one hand tied behind our back when other states like Texas are manipulating the process for nakedly partisan reasons. What Assemblymember Lasher and I have put together is a tweak to the way we do things, triggered only when another state does a mid-decade off-cycle redistricting. That would give us the opportunity to do the same thing.

Brian Lehrer: Some people have called the current situation unilateral disarmament. Assemblyman Lasher, anything to add?

Assemblyman Lasher: I just think it's important to understand that this is about stealing the next Congressional election so that Trump can enact his reactionary program in Congress. That program has enormously painful consequences for the people of New York. Redistricting can be seen as a technical issue. This can be seen as partisan warfare. The reality is that there are enormous interests of the people of the State of New York at stake, and this is an action to protect those representational interests.

Brian Lehrer: I understand that New York and Texas law are different in ways that allow Texas to do partisan redistricting much more easily than New York can. Senator Gianaris, can you confirm that and maybe explain it in a little more detail?

Senator Gianaris: Yes, I made passing reference to it just a moment ago. We have an independent process in New York. We have a commission that has hearings. It's very difficult to come up with something that's truly independent. We are miles ahead of most other states in having a process that's fair. We don't want to lose sight of that. That's why what we're proposing doesn't touch the way we do State Senate or State Assembly lines, which are internal to New York.

When you're talking about Congressional lines and you're talking about other states that are throwing the idea of fairness out the window for purposes of a strict power grab, then at that point, we have an obligation to step in and respond. That's what we're trying to do. This is something that would only come into play when another state has an off-cycle redistricting; the way Texas is imminently going to do. Then that would give us the opportunity to respond in kind.

Brian Lehrer: We have an early text from a listener, and I'll give out the phone number for everybody else in just a second. Assemblyman Lasher, this is a good question. Is it just New York and Texas that are redistricting, or are there other states that are going to play this silly game, as the listener calls it, as well?

Assemblyman Lasher: No, I think there are reports in recent days of at least three other states. I think Missouri was one of them, Florida may have been one that are considering doing mid-decade redistricting to advance the Trump regime. I think the reality is that this is a new front in the partisan wars in America. We are going to be seeing effectively continuous redistricting by certainly Republican states.

The question, I think, facing Democrats is, are we going to fight back? I think Senator Giannaris and I both would wish that this could take effect before the 2026 elections. That would be an ideal circumstance, but there's going to be this fight is going to rage on for years and many election cycles to come. We need to act now to secure New York's interests for the long term.

Brian Lehrer: The quickest that this could happen is what, being put on the ballot for voters statewide at the end of next November?

Assemblyman Lasher: It could be put on the-- It would have to pass twice through the legislature, once in 2026 and again in 2027, put on the ballot in '27 in time for the 2028 elections.

Brian Lehrer: To be clear and I know I mentioned this before, but you actually cannot counter what Texas is doing if they succeed in doing it for next year's midterm elections.

Assemblyman Lasher: That's right, but I think again, first, this is Republicans make plans in decades and lifetimes, and we need to start doing the same thing. Second, I think the way this is crafted, as Senator Genaris mentioned, with it only being triggered in the event that another state acts first, should send a message to states that are considering doing this that there will be a response. There will be-- we will return fire. In an ideal world, that would have a chilling effect.

Senator Gianaris: I would add something to that, Brian. The members of our Republican delegation in Congress, since Micah and I have introduced this proposal, have been running around like chickens with their heads cut off, hysterically and hypocritically complaining about this. The effect we could have in '26 is if they're really that concerned. They should pick up the phone and call their colleagues in Texas and elsewhere and tell them to knock it off.

Brian Lehrer: Now, listeners, we can take more of your comments and text messages, and questions on the phone as well about Congressional Redistricting. 212-433-WNYC 212-433-9692 for New York State Senator Michael Gianaris of Queens and New York State Assemblymember Micah Lasher of Manhattan. 212-433 WNYC 212-433-9692. In the meantime, and we'll go more into what you're proposing and pros and cons of that, and we'll talk a little bit about the mayoral race.

In the meantime, I don't know if either of you is a lawyer; maybe both of you are. Can anything be done to stop Texas or other states in court that are trying to redistrict mid-cycle when it's only supposed to be done every 10 years after the census, and take this unfair advantage when the rules in a state like New York prohibit it?

Senator Gianaris: I don't know, Brian, if they can challenge it on the grounds of doing it more than once. I don't know that there's a prohibition against that in Texas. What they certainly can do and I expect will happen will be a court challenge on the basis of the unfairness of the lines themselves, whether they have a racially discriminatory effect or violate the norms of redistricting in other ways. That's typical of every 10 years. You usually see a flood of litigation. We're not accustomed to doing it in the off years, but because Texas is moving now, I suppose that can be expected also.

Brian Lehrer: Here's Gary in Little Ferry, New Jersey, who I think is going to start to fill in some recent history on this that I was going to start to ask you about. We're going to let Gary do it. Gary, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Gary: Thank you for taking my call. Last time the Democrats tried to rig the game in 2--

Brian Lehrer: Whoops, did we lose you? Gary, you want to start over? I think your line popped off somehow. You can start over.

Gary: Okay. Last time the Democrats tried to rig the game in New York State in 2020, it backfired on them. It was taken to the appellate court in New York. This is a Democratic court. They ruled that it was unconstitutional, and the lines were redrawn, and it helped the Republicans gain the House. I suspect if Texas pulls funny business, the courts will rule it's unconstitutional, which is another question. If the courts rule it's unconstitutional, but New York changes its laws, what are they going to do? Go back to the old system?

Brian Lehrer: Great questions, Gary. I think his piece of history there, Assemblyman Lasher, is correct. New York tried, you guys, New York Democrats in the legislature aimed for a partisan redistricting after the 2020 census that got struck down by the New York State Court of Appeals, where the judges were appointed primarily by Democratic governors. Then you had to start over, and you lost control of that process because it was ruled too partisan, and therefore some more Republican districts came in. That did help Republicans take the House. That's all fair the way he laid it out, correct?

Senator Gianaris: No, not fair at all. Let me thank Gary from New Jersey for paying so much attention to what's going on here in New York, but there was a lot of misinformation about that last process. First of all, the judges on that Court of Appeals, the Chief Judge in particular, was corrupted and had to resign under a huge cloud of suspicion shortly thereafter. This was her parting act to us as issuing one of the worst decisions the Court of Appeals has ever issued. They may have been appointed by Democrats, Democrats like Andrew Cuomo, by the way. What Democrat is that? Also confirmed by--

Brian Lehrer: That's a burn. We'll talk more about that in a minute.

Senator Gianaris: I'm sure we'll get to that, but also confirmed by a Senate that was Republican-controlled at the time. These are not strictly Democratic judges who issue this decision. The head of it, the author of the decision, is disgraced. Fortunately, we have a new court now. That decision, which is one of the worst that's been issued by the Court of Appeals in its history, was partially reversed by the subsequent court already.

In my opinion, that's an illegitimate decision, the Harkenrider decision that the court reached. The reason why ultimately the maps drawn by the Special Master were also thrown out was because the legislature has the power to do this, and it was given back to us. We did draw lines, and the lines that are in place now were, in fact, legislatively drawn.

Brian Lehrer: Our Political Reporter Brigid Bergin wrote a newsletter about this this week with some of the history. The way she put it is that "Back then, Cuomo's idea was to take the redistricting process away from the legislature and put it in the hands of an independent redistricting commission. Then, in 2014, voters adopted the ballot measure over the objections of some good government opponents who argued the structure of the commission was doomed to fail. Those warnings proved prescient," Brigid, wrote.

For the reasons that we were just talking about, those next lines got thrown out. I'm just curious, did you vote for that at the time? Senator Gianaris, as a legislator, and Assemblyman Lasher, did you as a New York voter? That did go to the voters statewide and got approved, Senator Gianaris.

Senator Gianaris: No, we, in fact, we were in the minority in the Senate when that happened, and we were opposed to what they were trying to do. Look, the concept of independent redistricting is a good one. I and many others have been championing efforts to make a really fair and impartial process. What came out of it was not that, and as predicted, it was designed to fail. It was designed for gridlock. We ended up where we ended up. Part of what we're dealing with now are the consequences of that poor effort back in 2014. We're here now, and we're trying to do what we can to make sure that the country is not damaged by it.

Like I said, the Senate and the Assembly are things that are within our control. Texas or New Jersey, or anywhere else, has nothing to say about it. When we're talking about Congress, there are 49 other states that are also redistricting. If we're playing by different rules, it's going to be to the detriment, not just of New York, but of the country. You're going to have a House of Representatives that is not adequately reflecting where the country is.

Assemblyman Lasher: I think I wouldn't swear to it. My rough recollection is I did vote for that referendum with a recognition that it was a pretty flawed construct. I think it's important to emphasize just how vastly different the landscape is today than it was 10 years ago. 10 years ago, independent redistricting could really be seen as an incredibly important priority in preserving Democratic norms in New York and elsewhere.

Today, we are facing so much more fundamental threats to our democracy from the Trump administration. At the end of the day, the damage that can be done if states like New York unilaterally disarm and sit on the sidelines dwarfs the questions that were being wrestled with in 2014. If we don't adapt, that will be to the enormous detriment of our constituents.

Brian Lehrer: Mark in Westchester, you're on WNYC. Hi, Mark. Mark in Westchester, you there? Mark in Westchester once, Mark in Westchester twice. All right. What he was telling our screener was, "Two wrongs don't make a right. People want to have fair, impartial districts, not partisan districts." Here's a text to that effect. Listener to writes, "There is a principle. Voters select a candidate. Candidates should not get to select their voters. Do you mention this in the bill?" Assemblyman Lasher, you want to take that?

Assemblyman Lasher: Again, I would emphasize two things about the way the bill is constructed. One, it is triggered only if other states act first. This is not New York firing the first shot. This is saying, "We're not going to sit on the sidelines at the expense of New Yorkers." Second, we actually retain the principles of fair configuration of districts in our proposal. We are balancing the imperative of standing up for New Yorkers with basic principles of fairness.

I need to emphasize that it, I think, borders on willful blindness, to say that the right answer here is to sit back and let states like Texas trample on all of the Democratic norms that we hold dear, and us hold onto them as our democracy crumbles and New York is damaged enormously. Democrats have got to start fighting back this mentality of, "We're going to play by some set of rules that nobody else is playing by." We've got to move past that. I really believe that as both as a party and to the extent that New York represents a strong Democratic state. We need to move past it here.

Brian Lehrer: It's sad, though, isn't it? I understand what you're saying about unilateral disarmament, and you can't let states like Texas, that are controlled by Republicans, redistrict for extra Congressional seats and do nothing in states like New York.

This used to be considered good government, taking redistricting out of the hands of politicians and aiming for a more objective way, if there can be such a thing, to draw district lines, less protection of incumbents for their own benefit, the politicians choosing their voters, as the listener's text put it, and more drawing of lines that make community sense and that might reduce polarization, which is an important aspect here of this whole independent redistricting movement of the last few decades.

Reduce polarization by not grouping all the Democrats and all the Republicans into safe districts where then their representatives have no incentive to make political compromises in Congress or in the State Legislature. Senator Gianaris, how much do you at least regret that this is where you feel you have to go in order to make things fair?

Senator Gianaris: I do regret. I think you pointed out that it's sad. I agree with you, but we're playing a game that has 49 other players. We're not doing this by ourselves. If there was a federal norm that mimicked all the principles that we believe in here in New York, I'd be all for it. I think the odds of that happening with this Congress are pretty much zero. If the rules are the same for everyone, then you're talking about a fair process. You can't have only certain states.

It happens to be those on one side of the aisle doing it a certain way, and then the other side taking complete advantage of the fact that the blue states are doing it that way. That just ends up corrupting Congress. At this incredibly dangerous time in history, that's the last thing we want to allow to happen.

Brian Lehrer: I did look up, not today, but for a previous segment on this topic, the rough ratio of Democrats to Republicans in Congress, compared to the rough ratio of total Democratic voters and total Republican voters for Congress in the country. I was surprised to find that it's actually pretty close. I thought with the imbalanced rules that are in place in the ways you've been describing from one state to another, that we would see a larger percentage of Republicans in Congress than there were Republican voters for Congress nationwide. Senator Gianaris, I don't know if you've looked at this closely, but it seemed to me that it was actually pretty close as of a couple of years ago.

Senator Gianaris: Right. That's because we haven't been seeing the kinds of things that Texas is currently planning on doing. What's going to happen is more and more red states start following Texas lead, and the ratio you're discussing will no longer be accurate. That's why we have to keep the scales balanced by putting New York in the game if this is the thing that's going to be happening.

Assemblyman Lasher: I think also on that question of math, if the Texas plan prevails, you are likely to have a state that was a 46% Joe Biden state. 46% of the voters of Texas voted for Joe Biden. You would have 18% of the Congressional seats likely to be held by Democrats. We are moving away from that map that you talked about of rough justice, Brian. We're moving very far away from that, and it's not New York leading the way.

Brian Lehrer: I mentioned in the intro, the quote from Governor Hochul to POLITICO this week, "We're not going to sit by while Donald Trump and Texas Republicans try to steal this nation's future. I've been in active talks with local and national leaders. In the coming days, we'll meet to align our next move," the governor said. We have this text from a listener that writes, "Do either of your guests know what Governor Hochul can do about redistricting?"

Assemblyman Lasher, while your process is going through, let's say it even gets approved, but not in time for next year and not until for the 2028 Congressional elections, is there anything Governor Hochul and the other Democratic leaders she's going to talk to, do in the meantime?

Assemblyman Lasher: I think the reality is that the prospects of making changes in time for the '26 elections are limited. They would require a court to throw out some of the existing Congressional districts. I know that that question, that possibility is being explored. Again, I think one of the weaknesses historically of the Democratic Party in fighting these battles is shortsightedness and a short attention span.

Yes, we would prefer to get this done by 2026, but before we know it, we will be at the next most significant elections in our lifetimes in 2028 and again in 2030 and so forth. We should not throw in the towel because we're frustrated that we can't get this done in time for 2026. We should make the changes we need to make because we are in for a long battle.

Brian Lehrer: We're talking about Texas's Republican redistricting push to add what they hope down there is five more Republican Congressional seats in time for next year's midterms. A response by Democrats in New York with State Senator Michael Gianaris from Queens and State Assemblymember Micah Lasher from Manhattan. Mike in Manhattan, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Mike: Hi. Thanks for taking my call. First of all, there are three empty seats in the House that are were held by members who have passed away. They are in states where there are Republican governors. They have not called to those special elections, but they're going to have their elections going to happen in the fall. The number in the House is even going to narrow, which is why the president and the Republicans are being so even more aggressive than they should be. Here's my premise, though. The Democrats have been in this situation for like 10 years now, where Trump keeps putting us in a situation where we're caught between a rock and a hard place.

We either do the right thing and try and do elections the way they should be run, but then have the Republicans do a power grab, or we do the wrong thing, and then we start playing by their rules, which just makes us look bad. We know we don't really want to do that. In this case, we're not going to be able to do anything until 2028 anyway, even if all this passes. My premise is that the Democrats have just been reactive for the last 10 years, and it's time to be more proactive.

For example, why not create a coherent message about how bad things are really going to get and then try and win back these seats in the House that we lost last time? I can give you an example if you want, but the Democrats are not making this message effectively. It's so frustrating to just watch the Republicans do the next crazy thing, and then the Democrats try and react, and then the next crazy thing. It's we're just so reactive rather than proactive. I can give you a couple of examples, if you want, of things we could be doing, but it's really frustrating to watch.

Brian Lehrer: Go ahead. People probably are interested to hear examples.

Mike: For example, Chip Roy, the Congressman from Texas who for years has been screaming about the debt and the debt ceiling, votes for the Big Beautiful Bill and raises the debt ceiling by $5 trillion. Why isn't someone like our Congressman Nadler, who's in a safe district, getting a couple of friends together and going to Chip Roy's district and making hell for him because his own constituents don't want a $5 trillion increase in the debt ceiling and call these guys out in a really dramatic big way, in a very confrontational way, to show what hypocrites they are and get their own constituents to light a fire under their feet, or what's going on with this Big Beautiful Bill and the money that's being spent towards ICE?

If you just take $10 billion of that ICE money that's coming down the line, and I think they've allocated $50 billion. If you just take $10 billion of debt and you pay $100,000 to people, you could have 100,000 ICE officers, ICE agents on the front lines. The DHS has posted something saying that they're going to do student loan forgiveness for these people, plus great benefits, and all of these other things. They're going to create an army. I'm not being hyperbolic. They have allocated the money already. There's going to be 100,000 ICE agents making $100,000 each.

Brian Lehrer: I hear the complaint and your objection to that. Come back to your original point if you can, which is you were trying to lay out some ways that Democrats can be proactive rather than just reactive, like on reacting to Texas redistricting. How in this respect?

Mike: For example, the only thing we can do about 2026 is win back the seats that we lost, like Mike Lawler's seat and some of these other seats. The only way to do that is to have a really coherent Democratic message where we go to those districts and we lay out how bad things really are in a clear, coherent way that's not overly academic and overly intellectual.

Brian Lehrer: Okay. I'm going to leave it there. Mike, I appreciate your call and all the detail that you went into. He ended, Assemblyman Lasher, on messaging in political campaigns. You can talk about that. Also, to his larger point earlier, that it always seems to him, as a Democrat, like his party reacts to crazy stuff as you see it, that Republicans do, rather than being more aggressive and making them react to you.

Assemblyman Lasher: I agree with him. I think Senator Gianaris and I are both in the fight wing of the Democratic Party, and we want more members. There's no question that we all need to get out there next year with a very clear message. I think in New York, that message is very much focused on the direct harm that the Trump regime is going to do to New Yorkers, to their health care, to their education, to their tax burden.

If the Trump program gets enacted, people are going to be faced with really painful changes to the services they depend on, and that will affect their pocketbooks. We need to go out there and make that case very clearly. I also think that part of being aggressive is for fighting back with tools of hard power. That is what we are trying to do here.

Senator Gianaris: I'll add to that, Brian. I think Mike is 100% correct. We can go on and on about the failures of the Democratic Party writ large in communicating with people where they're at. It's always a little too cute, and it's always a little reactive, as he pointed out. I know it's a separate topic, which we're going to touch on, but I think you want to answer to the question of why Zohran Mamdani is our nominee for mayor. That's why he took it to the streets and spoke to people where they are on the issues that they care about.

Of course, these issues are all related because you can't go to some Texas Republican Congressman's district and oust him because the district lines have been so bastardized that they're immune from challenge. If you don't have a redistricting process that's balanced throughout the country, you're going to have the tilted scales at the House of Representatives that prevent those Democratic efforts, small D, from working.

Brian Lehrer: Well, you just segued into the addendum to this conversation, which is a little bit of talk about the mayoral race. Again, for context of our listeners, we had Andrew Cuomo on earlier this week. We had Curtis Sliwa and Jim Walden earlier this month. We think we're going to have Eric Adams tomorrow. We'll see if that gets finally confirmed. We know we're going to have Assemblymember Mamdani on in not too long from now.

Now that he's back from his wedding trip. Senator Gianaris, some critics and political analysts, since you're in an overlapping district with Mr. Mamdani, some critics and some political analysts call your areas of Western Queens, the People's Republic of Astoria. That's AOC's area, too. Why so progressive?

Senator Gianaris: Probably [chuckles] the answer is gentrification, to be honest. I've represented-- I grew up in that district. I've watched it change over the years, but it has had, much like parts of Waterfront Brooklyn, an influx of young people. Young people throughout the generations tend to have different ideas about how they want things run than older people. I think you're just seeing that those parts of New York City that are changing the fastest demographically are also the epicenter of some of the progressivism you're talking about.

Brian Lehrer: I'll let you go on in a minute, but you just mentioned two different demographic things there. One is youth, the other was gentrification. That's one of the arguments that Republicans and Democrats like Cuomo would argue makes the Mamdani claim to represent the working class false or overstated, because so much of his support has come from more gentrified districts rather than less.

Senator Gianaris: Here's where I get furious with people who pretend to be Democrats, Andrew Cuomo, Eric Adams, what have you. We have a process. Democrats throughout the city voted. Working-class people throughout the city voted. They selected their nominee, very high turnout. You can't even claim it was some kind of misrepresentative electorate throughout the city. It wasn't just Western Queens and Waterfront Brooklyn that selected Zohran Mamdani to be the nominee. Over half a million Democrats in New York City made this choice. Who is Andrew Cuomo, and who is Eric Adams, to tell the Democrats of the city that they made the wrong choice? That's what they're running around doing.

They're trying to win now by cobbling together some fraction of a minority of Democrats who didn't support that outcome and Republicans. By the way, that's exactly what Andrew Cuomo did with the State Senate for so many years, piece a couple of disgruntled Democrats together with Republicans to keep Democrats from obtaining power. This is not some kind of academic conversation. Over half a million Democrats in New York City made this choice, and we should honor it and support our nominee.

Brian Lehrer: I knew who you're supporting. You're from that same district as we've been discussing. Assemblyman Lasher, I don't know if you've endorsed in the mayoral race. Have you?

Assemblyman Lasher: I have. Scott Stringer, I should say, was my candidate in the primary, but several days after Mr. Mamdani overwhelmingly won the Democratic primary, I said that I would support him and do everything I can to have the most successful Mamdani mayoralty that we can have. I think this is an important thing. I think what Senator Gianaris said is absolutely right. He won handily in neighborhoods throughout the city. He's the Democratic nominee. He's going to be the mayor.

There's also a function of we need to come together as a city, and we need this city to succeed, and we need the mayor to succeed. I think everyone who cares about New York City should see themselves as having a stake in the success of Mayor Mamdani, whether or not there are areas of disagreement, as I certainly have with him.

Brian Lehrer: On bringing the city together, as you just said, Assemblyman Lasher, Mamdani has come under criticism this week from his opponents in the wake of the Midtown Office Building mass shooting for his 2020 post, saying, "The NYPD is racist, anti-queer and a major threat to public safety?" That was the exact post. He now doesn't say those things, but can the city be brought together by a mayor who dismissed the NYPD in such a blanket way that recently?

Assemblyman Lasher: I think that Mr. Mamdani is about to make an enormous and important transition from being a legislator representing 1/60 of the city to an executive and a leader for the entire city. Those are very different jobs. I think it is reasonable to expect that and to hope that he will grow, and that the way-- I don't think we're going to see his core principles change. I think he's a principled person.

I think that it's reasonable to expect that anybody making that transition is going to speak about issues in different ways and be open to learning and adjusting their posture again without compromising core principles and beliefs. It's just it's a very different job. I think somebody who didn't make that transition wouldn't be doing the job of mayor the right way.

Brian Lehrer: Senator Gianaris, I'll give you a last word on this because of your position as Deputy Majority Leader of the New York State Senate. One of the biggest critiques of Mamdani, or at least talking points of his opponents, certainly including Andrew Cuomo, is that Mamdani's proposals, like universal childcare and some other things are too pie in the sky because he would need to get the funding for them, including tax hikes on millionaires, people making a million dollars a year or more all over the state and on corporations.

He would have to get these things through the New York State Legislature, which he's not likely to be able to do even if he has support in the city. You would be in a prime position to try to get those things through the Senate if you support them. Do you think they're realistic?

Senator Gianaris: Yes. I would say to that comment from Andrew Cuomo, how would he know? The last person to know what goes on in the State Legislature is the person who corrupted it in the Senate for so many years.

Brian Lehrer: Well, he would say he at least exercised a lot of power over the State Legislature and got a lot of things through.

Senator Gianaris: Well, if he actually knew that-- if he knew what the State Legislature was about, he would know that for the last several years, both the Assembly and the Senate have submitted budget proposals to raise taxes on the wealthy, to fund things exactly like universal childcare.

Brian Lehrer: Governor Hochul won't go there.

Senator Gianaris: Well, this is the budget conversation we're going to have next year. It's a dynamic process. There are multiple parties involved in it, and we'll get through it in a responsible way. Isn't this what's a great example of what's wrong with the Democratic Party? Here's something that would be enormously popular: universal childcare. So many families having trouble affording living in the city.

If that's not the message that came out of that mayoral primary, I don't know what is. Rather than say, "We're going to roll up our sleeves and figure out a way so you could afford to raise children in the city," they're pouring cold water and doing anything interesting. Then you wonder why people are disgruntled with the Democratic Party.

Brian Lehrer: One more thing about that. Cuomo said on the show on Monday that the tax hike proposal from Mr. Mamdani would apply to New Yorkers everywhere in the state, taking in more than a million dollars a year, even though all the money would go to the city. You'd never get the legislators from outside the city to agree to that, even a lot of Democrats. True or false on your understanding of the proposal?

Senator Gianaris: This is someone who wants to be the mayor of the city, complaining that the people of the city might benefit disproportionately on such a proposal.

Brian Lehrer: Well, his critique was political. How are you going to get even Westchester Democrats, where there are plenty of people making a million dollars a year, but that the money isn't even going to go to help people in Westchester? How are you going to get them to vote yes?

Senator Gianaris: No mayor ever submits a proposal and gets it adopted sight unseen and with no discussion. There could be changes. It could apply just to the city. It could apply statewide, but then have the benefits apply statewide. There are so many ways to tackle this problem, but what we should not do is dismiss the proposal. What's Andrew Cuomo's suggestion? Don't provide childcare help for people? He wants to run on that platform? Good luck.

Brian Lehrer: Michael Gianaris is the New York State Senate Deputy Majority Leader. His district is Western Queens. Micah Lasher is a member of the New York State Assembly from the West Side of Manhattan. Thank you both very much for coming on today to talk about mostly redistricting in Texas and New York, and a little bit on the mayor's race. Thank you both.

Senator Gianaris: Thanks, Brian.

Assemblyman Lasher: Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Much more to come.

 

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.