[MUSIC]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Now, Monday Morning Politics, Part 2. We talked about the national scene with the debate coming up, now let's turn to Primary day in New York, which is tomorrow. With nine days of early voting already in the books, the marquee race is the Democratic Congressional primary in lower Westchester in a little of the Bronx between Jamaal Bowman and George Latimer, member of the squad.

With all that implies versus a challenger being so heavily bankrolled by the pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC, with all that implies, and drowning Bowman in spending. It's widely being described as a bitter campaign on both sides at this point, but there are other things on the ballot, too, including another Democratic Congressional primary, John Avlon versus Nancy Goroff on Long island, as they each hope to take on Republican Congressman Nick LaLota, and flip that seat blue. Who has the better shot?

There's an interesting race to be a judge in Queens, or nominated to be a judge by the Democrats. There are candidates for something called the Judicial Convention that you may see on your ballot, and almost nobody knows what that is. We'll try to explain, and more. With us now are WNYC Senior Politics Reporter Brigid Bergin and Jeff Coltin, Co-author of the Morning Newsletter, the New York Playbook for Politico. Hi, Brigid. Hi, Jeff. Welcome back to WNYC, Jeff.

Jeff Coltin: Thank you for having me. This is like my Christmas, my Hanukkah, my Independence day. I love Primary day.

[laughter]

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, who has questions about anything regarding any New York primary for his Christmas, his Hanukkah, his Independence day, maybe it's Brigid's Eid, I don't know, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. Let's talk about the other Congressional primary locally first, John Avlon versus Nancy Goroff in Eastern Long island, as they hope to unseat Republican Nick LaLota in November at a time when the island has been trending more Republican.

Those Long island and northern suburbs seats are so crucial to control of Congress, overall. We're going to play a soundbite in a minute from each of them, Goroff and Avlon, but Jeff, where would you start on this race? Is electability a key issue? Because that's the ultimate goal here, is beat the incumbent Republican, or give our listeners a very brief 101 on Goroff versus Avlon.

Jeff Coltin: That is exactly the key issue. Yes, this is one of those six swing seat Congressional districts in New York, but this is the one that's considered to be the best for Republicans. Nick LaLota is in a decent position. It's definitely winnable by Democrats, but a lot of the ratings have called Nick LaLota, and said, "This is a likely Republican seat," that LaLota is likely to win.

The big issue here is just, who has the better shot of beating him in November? Is it John Avlon, first-time candidate, former CNN news anchor, somebody who's been in journalism for a decade, and before that worked for none other than Mayor Rudy Giuliani? Or is it Nancy Goroff? She's a PhD scientist who has actually run for Congress before, and lost in 2020.

It's a first-time candidate versus a returner. Yes, the main issue here is, which Democrat can actually win in November, and help the Democrats, potentially, to win control of the House. It's a fascinating one, and it's definitely been overshadowed by the Bowman-Latimer race, which is just getting national attention, but this one is also very interesting, and speaks to bigger issues.

Brian Lehrer: Let's hear 30 seconds of each of them making their essential case from their News 12 debate. Here's John Avlon first.

John Avlon: I think the swing district requires candidates who can reach out, who can fire up the base, but then win over independent voters. There are more registered independent voters in New York one than any other district in New York state. I think in this election, with LaLota as a Trump flunky, we can win even a sliver of Republicans who understand Trump's a threat to the Republic, but it requires a different kind of candidate.

It requires a different kind of approach to politics. Look, I voted for Nancy in 2020. I really wanted her to win, but she lost by almost double digits. We don't-- We need to recreate that dynamic.

Brian Lehrer: What was he referring to there, Jeff, with respect to voting for Nancy in 2020, was she the democratic nominee for Congress at that time?

Jeff Coltin: That's right. She was the Democratic nominee against none other than Lee Zeldin, who was the Congressman there before he ran for Governor in 2022 that we all remember. Yes, Goroff had her chance, and she lost by about 10 percentage points. It wasn't even particularly close. The district was slightly different then. This is the eastern end of Long island, all the way from the Hamptons, up into the Suffolk county line, North Shore leaning.

It was a slightly different district then, but it was basically the same. Then, the district was, it still leans Republican. Yes, Goroff had already ran. This is saying, "Hey, I'm coming back. I'm better, I'm smarter, I'm stronger this time, and this time I will win."

Brian Lehrer: As she says in this clip of her from the News 12 debate.

Nancy Goroff: I'm very proud of the work I've done here, and the accomplishments that I have for our community. From helping students at Stony Brook University build a better life for themselves, to the work we've done with the Long Island Strong Schools Alliance to fight back against MAGA extremists, who are coming to attack our kids, and attack our schools.

To the work I've done defending reproductive freedom, for which I am very proud to have gotten the Planned Parenthood Hudson Peconic Impact Award last year. All of this work reflects my concern for this community, and I am running because our community deserves better than the representation we have today.

Brian Lehrer: What strikes me, Jeff, and Brigid, be patient, we'll bring you in here in just a second, but Jeff's on this race. What strikes me about those two clips, is that Goroff is mentioning particular issues that she's for, and has a record on. John Avalon was saying, "Well, we need a different kind of candidate in a swing district, if we're going to beat a Republican."

As you indicated, people may know John Avlon from his work on CNN, from when he was a Rudy Giuliani aide, when Giuliani was mayor. John is the author of a book promoting centrism in politics from a few years ago. People may be confused about who he is. He's also been, I think, very anti-Trump as a political centrist. He was a Rudy guy. It was a long time ago.

It was a different Rudy Giuliani in certain respects, when Giuliani was mayor, but he was a Giuliani guy. He's stated nonpartisan, centrist guy, but he's an anti-Trump guy. Now, he's running in a Democratic primary. People may be confused. Who is this John Avlon?

Jeff Coltin: Yes, exactly. Look, he is running a charisma campaign. He's a TV guy. He's charming. He has won over a lot of endorsements, local endorsements, too. It's not just big national TV names, but he's won over a lot of the local assembly members, and former Congress members and even the New York Democratic Party leader, Jay Jacobs. He's kind of the charisma.

Yes, Goroff is, to oversimplify things, she is talking more about policy, but elections are won on both of these things. I will say, yes, Avalon does have this national perspective of being on CNN, but his team is cautioning that, "Look, Goroff, she ran for office before. Her name recognition among primary voters is pretty good." This is not a celebrity campaign. This isn't Donald Trump running for President, where everybody in the country knew who he was already. John Avlon is just a local TV guy. [chuckles] They both have relatively high-- Well, she might have higher name recognition in the district. There's an interesting aspect there.

Brian Lehrer: As we talk at 11:00 about the New York primary with Jeff Coltin from Politico, and our Brigid Bergin. We can take your phone calls, listeners. I guess we're close enough to primary day that we can say, your election hearing welcome here for any candidate in any race, but also your questions, especially, about some of these down ballot races that Brigid has been reporting on.

212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. Brigid, let's start here. There's an interesting race to be a judge in Queens. I know you've written a little bit about this race. This is the only borough-wide primary that there is in Queens, I believe, this judicial campaign. Tell us about this.

Brigid Bergin: Well, so, Brian, there is a pretty competitive race between Cassandra Johnson and Wendy Li for Surrogates Court judge. Now, that's a 14-year position. Once you're elected to that position, and that Court deals with people's assets when they die, or with or without a will, they also handle things like guardianships and adoptions. This has long been seen as one of the most politically powerful positions within the judiciary, particularly, in Queens, going as far back as 2011.

The New York Times's Michael Powell wrote a really fascinating column looking at how this particular judge, and the role that they play, particularly, for people who do not have wills, and the need to have their assets administered by court-appointed referees, that connection can be very powerful. There's a particular law firm that has played that role for a long time, and has benefited from their connection to Surrogate's Court. It's a law firm by the name of Sweeney, Reich & Bolz, and they're very connected to the Queen's Democratic Party writ large.

Through the lens of this particular Surrogate's Court race, Cassandra Johnson is endorsed by the Queens County Democratic Organization. Has the support of people like Congressman Greg Meeks, and several elected officials from the Queens Democratic Organization. Then, Wendy Li is running, essentially, is the insurgent candidate, not unlike when she ran for her current position, she's a Civil Court judge in Manhattan.

When she ran for that position, she was also running against the Democratic Organization. The candidate who she ran against had been endorsed by many of the Manhattan elected officials. That is a little bit of how they're framing it. Now, what's challenging with judicial races is, the candidates aren't running on issues, per se. Then, it becomes incumbent on voters, particularly, engaged voters to try and figure out who these people are, what do they stand for?

My colleague, Samantha Max, wrote a great story about a new database that is still growing, and is being developed. It's called scrutinize.org. They have profiles of some of the judicial candidates, and links to their judicial profile pages. Both Cassandra Johnson and Wendy Li, are currently sitting judges. There is some information up there available for voters to find out where they went to school, and some of their background, but that will be something that I think will be more likely useful for people in the general election when there are some other races, and when there'll be other candidates on the ballot in November.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. I was in somebody's apartment in Queens over the weekend. There were mailers in their mailbox this week for both Johnson and Li. It's hard if you're coming in cold to something like this. As you say, judges aren't allowed to campaign on issues, then they would probably have to recuse themselves, once cases that pertain to those issues actually come up, although I think as we know from recent developments in Washington, not every judge with a connection to an issue actually does recuse themselves. [chuckles] The mailers are a kind of general. Here's one for Cassandra Johnson, that I took, that says, "Integrity, experience, and qualifications matter, especially, in our courts." Then, it goes on to some of the qualifications, and a Wendy Li one says, "We need an independent judge working for you. It's time for a change. Elect Judge Wendy Li." Then, what the Li flyer does is, clipped to a few stories from Politico and The Times and Gothamist, "How a tiny election-," says Politico, "-could send shockwaves through Democratic politics. The Times article is a court, not votes, sustains a political machine in Queens."

Wendy Li is running as some kind of challenger, even if she's running for what sounds like a fairly pedestrian job, Surrogate Court judge where you're dealing mostly with family matters and stuff, but-

Brigid Bergin: It's interesting, Brian-[crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: -like she's running against an insurgent the Queens County Democratic machine.

Brigid Bergin: Exactly. It's interesting because, as a Queens resident myself, I have received all of those flyers as well. When I saw that particular flyer, I had to go and look at that Times article, because I thought, "Is this something that I've missed?" I mean, not really, because it's an article from 2011. It's just an interesting idea that she is framing her candidacy against something that obviously has legs.

It's been around for a long time, this connection between this particular law firm, and the Surrogate's Court. For a voter who might think, "Oh, wow, this is something The Times just covered," that is actually a Michael Powell column from 2011.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. It is pretty hilarious for people to read the fine print, because the little excerpt from that does have the date by Michael Powell, November 28, 2011, right there on the flyer, but it's still the way that Wendy Li is making that point.

One more like this, Brigid, so much of what people see on their primary ballots this year, is delegates to the Judicial Convention, which is even more obscure. I see on the Democratic primary ballot in Upper Manhattan, for example, it is, "Vote for any eight delegates to the Judicial Convention." There are two slates of eight each, all Democrats. Who's supposed to cast an informed vote for that, and how, and what even is a judicial convention?

Brigid Bergin: Well, the Judicial Conventions are held in August, and that's where the party will select their nominee for State Supreme Court. We don't have primaries for state Supreme Court, they're picked through these conventions, and the slates of delegates often come from political clubs. These are registered Democrats who live in Manhattan, and who have come together as this particular slate, and then when they are elected, depending on who was elected, they will go to this convention in August, and then select the nominees for State Supreme Court that appear on the ballot in November.

It's very much a reflection of the party machinations, and people who are very involved with their party. I think for a general election voter, that's where things can get a little bit--General, meaning, not a hyper-involved, primary voter, this can be a little bit challenging, but that is what those slates represent. Again, these aren't necessarily people who are out campaigning, other than potentially in this small universe of people that they're talking to.

Brian Lehrer: Lawrence in Brooklyn has a question about electing judges in the first place. Lawrence, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Lawrence: Hey, hi. Yes, I called in just because we're talking about judicial elections. Actually, they all campaigned in my neighborhood, Brooklyn Heights, to go up to Cadman Plaza where the courts are, and they want to shake your hand, and meet you. I'm just shocked by the idea that someone who wants to be a judge will go out there, and make campaign promises about what they're going to do.

It's worse than other states. You can see in the southern states, "I'm going to be tough on crime, I'm going to be pro-business." Your guests also alluded to the party machinations on this, and I'm not saying anything about anyone in particular right now, but I come from a family where we would know these things, political issues, there was a price for a judgeship with the Democratic Party.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. Fair point.

Lawrence: That's how it worked. Some years ago was $15,000. We're going back to the '70s now, inflation is probably taking [unintelligible 00:18:06] The feds are a bit better. We get our clunkers with the feds for sure, but they're independent. They are independent, they are not beholden to, once they're appointed anyway, not to a party boss.

Brian Lehrer: Lawrence, thank you. Thank you for your call. Yes, Brigid, we've talked on the show about-- Jeff, I'll get your take on this, too, how there's no good way to select the judge, because if the judge is appointed by a politician, then that judge might be political, and politicized. Look at the conversation we all have about the Supreme Court these days.

On the other hand, electing a judge has, yes, it can come through the County Committee, and maybe even explicitly for a price like the caller was alleging, but in general, coming through the County Committees when nobody knows what we're really voting on, when we're voting for. This is like, there's no good way to select a judge.

Brigid Bergin: Yes, Brian, I feel like you and I have had this conversation pretty much at every primary in recent years when there are judicial candidates and judicial delegates on the ballot. I think when you talk to voters, you will hear a lot of that, why am I voting for something where I don't really know where this person stands on issues? It's hard to get information.

Most of these candidates, all have websites. You can Google them, and look them up, and find out a little bit about their background. Places like the New York City Bar Association, and some of the local bar associations, the Queens Bar Association, they will do some ratings for some of these judges, but again, I've seen some people talk about how it's not always clear what those ratings are based on, and so whether or not that's actually useful for a voter who is not a legal expert. It's unclear. At this point, the thing that we try to do is, at least, make sure that when people go into that voting booth, they are not surprised to see some of these positions on their ballot for the very first time. We're trying to give a little bit of context, so that you can have a little bit of preparation when you go there, and try to make the best decision you can based on what you can find out.

Brian Lehrer: You have anything on this, Jeff, real briefly?

Jeff Coltin: Yes. Another complication for picking judges here, and I'll keep this complicated situation brief, is that, while Cassandra Johnson has the full support of the Queens Democratic Party, Wendy Li has the full support of Hiram Monserrate. He is a former state senator, former city council member, who actually serves time in prison for corruption charges, he has been building back his political power in Queens through the judicial system.

He has been running and supporting judges to run against the county picks. Wendy Li has distanced herself from him, but it's pretty clear that he is helping her, he is supporting her. Yes, she may say that she's running against the machine, and she is. However, she has her own political system here that is also helping her get elected. Part of that is the very controversial Hiram Monserrate.

Brigid Bergin: Just picking up on that, down the ballot, there are also, if you're in Queens, Civil Court races. One of the candidates for a Civil Court judgeship, Glenda Hernandez, is also reportedly supported by Hiram Monserrate. You can see his influence, not just in the assembly primary that he is in, but in some of these other judicial contests as well.

Brian Lehrer: One more call, MJ in Westchester. You're on WNYC. Hello, MJ.

MJ: Hello there. First of all, thank you for the great service that you do. I'm calling from a resource perspective. I'm one household. There are three active campaigns in my district. Of the materials that I have received in our mailbox, there were 37 items from the Latimer campaign, 30 of them were anti-Bowman, and only 7 were pro-Latimer. Out of that, out of the anti-Bowman, that was one pound three ounces of material that's gone through the mail.

Brian Lehrer: [chuckles] You put it on the scale.

MJ: I did, and I counted them. Between-- Bowman sent out 10 items, 5 was pro-Bowman, and 5 was anti-Latimer.

Brian Lehrer: In making these measurements, what conclusion do you want to draw from them? What's the moral of the story, as you see it?

MJ: That incredible amount of resources are being put against Bowman, and a modest amount of resources being put pro-Bowman, anti-Latimer. It's a deep imbalance.

Brian Lehrer: MJ, thank you very much. Jeff, do you have the numbers? It is widely reported to be a deep imbalance in record spending for any House primary in the history of the United States. Do you have the relative numbers?

Jeff Coltin: That is correct. It is the most expensive House primary in the country's history. I know that it's roughly $24 million have been spent in total, $24 million. I don't have the number in front of me of what the split is, but I know that it is quite heavily towards Latimer. In fact, I would say roughly $20 million of that is Latimer, roughly $4 million is Bowman, but it might even be more balanced towards Latimer.

I love the numbers from that caller. Thank you. One pound and three ounces of paper, I mean, 37 items, 47 total just in the mail? It's incredible. It is an incredible race to see. The interesting thing is that, all of this spending, I guess to put it simply, I don't know if it's even going to affect the race, or whether the same outcome would have happened otherwise. It's fascinating.

Brian Lehrer: Can you tell anything from early voting, Jeff? Do they release turnout from various parts of the district, because they do have strongholds within the district, like so many candidates in so many races. Do we have that from the early voting, which could suggest who's succeeding more, and getting out their vote?

Jeff Coltin: Look, it's an imperfect science. We'll only have to find out on election day. There are some suggestions that early voting is going better for Latimer. However, that would make sense, because his voters are going to be more likely higher income, and more likely to vote early. It makes sense, but that said, I don't think that Team Bowman is feeling very confident going into election day. I think they are very worried, and I think Team Latimer is feeling a lot more comfortable about this race.

Brian Lehrer: Brigid, a last word.

Brigid Bergin: Just on those early voting numbers, I can give you the latest stats from Westchester County in Bronx County. Now, we know that this district is only a small piece of the Bronx, but so far, the turnout is 21,130 voters in Westchester compared to 6,445 voters in the Bronx. Now, again, the Bronx is a very small part of this district, but that is a very large delta.

Just something for us to have in the back of our minds, just under 30,000 voters altogether between Westchester and the Bronx. That may lend some support to what Jeff was saying for why the Latimer folks might be feeling a little bit better from the early voting numbers.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, if you're still undecided in that race, we had extended segments with both Latimer and Bowman in recent weeks. Just go to the Brian Lehrer Show archive at wnyc.org, and listen to them and decide for yourself. Our Brigid Bergin, Senior Politics Reporter, and my favorite democracy wonk, and Jeff Coltin, covering New York politics for Politico. He writes The Morning, New York Playbook newsletter. Thanks both.

Brigid Bergin: Thanks, Brian.

Jeff Coltin: Thank you. Brigid is my favorite policy wonk as well.

Brian Lehrer: [chuckles] Brian Lehrer on WNY-- Democracy wonk. Brian Lehrer on WNYC.

Copyright © 2024 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.