From WXXI news.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection this hour was made at a United Auto Workers rally, an event featuring workers from around New York State talking about how they were treated by then Governor Andrew Cuomo.

This was not a rally to endorse Andrew Cuomo for New York City mayor.

It was designed to warn against ranking Cuomo on the ballot.

The UAW said that Cuomo had turned his back on workers, and they wanted new political leadership that will prioritize workers.

Well, the UAW got the result they wanted in the mayoral primary.

So what is next?

Strangely, it might be easy to both understate and overstate the importance of the New York City mayor or primary in American politics.

And we wanted to get a better understanding of what labor leaders think is coming next, or should be coming next when it comes to political leadership.

You just heard my colleague Beth Adams talking about a possible future gubernatorial campaign.

What would a gubernatorial campaign look like that prioritizes workers in the minds of labor leaders?

New York City is, of course, a big part of the American political scene.

Big city.

What does it mean to stand with workers there?

What about at the state level?

What changes are possible?

Starring in that UAW video was Rochester's own Dan Maloney, a man who has never been shy about sharing his opinion.

So we asked Dan to join us on connections to talk about what workers need now.

And he is with us this hour.

Dan is president of UAW local 1097 and the Rochester and Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation.

Welcome back to the program.

Nice to see you, sir.

Good afternoon.

Thanks for having me.

And alongside Dan is Patrick Coyle, chief of staff for the Rochester and Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation.

Welcome back to the program to you.

Thanks so much for having me.

We're going to start by I want to listen to this video.

And in this video that the UAW put out before the New York City mayoral primary, listeners are going to hear Dan Maloney first and last.

He gets to open it and close this video.

And in between, you'll also hear Zoran Mamdani, Brad Lander and others.

Let's listen.

I'm sure other speakers will talk about the 15,000 seniors that died in New York State nursing homes due to Covid and the serious missteps of the Cuomo administration.

I'm not here to talk about that.

I'm sure other speakers will discuss the multiple sexual harassment charges brought against former governor Cuomo, but that's not what I'm here to talk about, either.

I'm here to tell you the one the United Auto Workers needed Governor Cuomo's help.

He turned his back on us.

Our members want a better, safer and more affordable city.

Someone who passes up the opportunity to support workers in a time of crisis.

That person is unfit to be mayor.

Of working class New Yorkers.

Our membership across the country went out on strike in September 2019 against GM, UAW region nine and nine.

Work hard lobbied the state legislature to get a bill passed that was sure that unemployment would come after one week.

Cuomo, as governor, had a chance to sign that bill into law.

Not only did he not sign that bill into law, he never stepped foot on any of our strike lines.

Let me repeat that.

He never stepped foot on any of our strike lines.

Cuomo was absent and ignored every one of our calls.

This is a man who wants.

You ought to believe he supports labor.

We're talking about a man who created tier six, which took more than $100,000 out of the pockets of working class public sector workers.

A man who I just saw for the first time in my life just last week, describing tier six as ancient history.

The only thing that's ancient history is Andrew Cuomo.

Hey, enough with the corruption.

Enough with the chaos.

I'm not with the yielding to corporate bosses.

Let's elect a mayor who works for working New Yorkers.

When we needed Andrew Cuomo.

Cuomo showed cowardice.

So New Yorkers don't get fooled again.

That's the UAW video, and that's Dan Maloney on the front and back end of that video.

Patrick Coyle did Dan Maloney single handedly, and Andrew Cuomo's career.

I would like to believe so, yeah.

I'm trying very hard to start that narrative.

I think the campaign would likely disagree with me.

Mamdani wants to credit.

You want to give it to Dan Maloney in UAW?

Well, I do think UAW, you know, it's obviously easy to, you know, say no.

You know, that the results are clear.

But that video came out, I think, well over six weeks ago now.

You know, that was still at a point where the polls and the, you know, conventional wisdom was still that Cuomo was going to win comfortably.

You know, that was a that was a very risky decision for them, to back, you know, such an unproven candidate and, you know, to do it in such a particularly vocal way.

You know, I thought it was a very brave call.

You know, and I'm proud, you know, that Dan was even able to play a small part in that, although, as your listenership just heard, was not that small of a part.

No, it was not a small part.

And, Dan, to Patrick's point, this is a former governor in a Cuomo family that is obviously one of or maybe the most powerful political family in a couple of generations in the state.

He remains a huge figure in New York politics, although the future of that is now debatable.

And but he has a famously long memory.

You know, we hear from people who've worked for him that he can be vindictive.

Did you feel any hesitation about putting your face and name and voice on on that particular video before the calm, before the voting happened?

No, not at all.

Because, again, like we said in the video, when we needed him, when it really counted, he he was not there for us.

What do you mean by that?

So we had a bill on his desk ready to sign that we worked.

Unemployment insurance.

When you go out on strike, it's, an insurance fund.

Workers pay into, employers pay into.

It's no harm, no foul to the corporation.

It would have helped level the playing field for workers.

We used to have to wait until after seven weeks to put in our waiting weeks, or eight weeks.

In reality, to be eligible for unemployment.

Corporations, large corporations like General Motors understand that.

And they could wait us out, try to starve us out.

So now we're just trying to balance it a little bit, put a little more fairness into the negotiating table by giving some financial resources to workers.

So we worked our legislature, the Assembly in the Senate agreed.

They put it, passed a bill.

It was awaiting Cuomo's signature before we went out on strike in 2019.

He refused to sign it all during that 40 day strike.

He refused to sign it.

Now, as seven weeks elapse, then the corporations come to their senses.

They're like, oh my God, these people were hanging out with no money.

Now they're going to get money in their pocket.

They're going to hang out longer.

We better go negotiate.

And there is some stats that show giving workers that insurance fund they paid into right?

Unemployment.

It will help shorten strikes in the long run.

Just for that reason.

Corporations will stop playing games.

They'll come in earnest and bargain in good faith from day one, as they should.

So let me ask both of you, and I'll start with you, Dan, just that issue, which I know is a been a big one for labor.

Did you have a chance or did your leadership have a chance to talk with Governor Cuomo about why he doesn't believe that there should be insurance when you go on strike?

Why or why he decided not to sign it?

If he just thinks that that would have put too much power in the hands of of those threatening to strike.

If if there was something else, did you have a sense to understand where he was on that?

So those discussions were above my pay grade.

Right.

There was our regional director and UAW, president's office having those discussions with Cuomo.

And he would just never say no.

He just would not sign it.

So passive aggressively, you know, kind of well, I mean, so, I mean, again, maybe the cynical part of me or maybe just sort of the political observer would say he wouldn't say no to you in a meeting because he didn't want to say no and lose your support.

But when it came down to whether he would sign it, he showed you where he was on it.

Is that exactly right?

Show me by your actions, not your words.

And his actions told us all we needed to hear.

What do you see there, Patrick?

I see probably the same, you know, and I think this is, an issue we see, you know, with a lot of politicians, you know, in New York State and around the world is that, you know, everybody says they want to be pro-labor and pursue pro-labor policies.

But oftentimes when it comes, you know, for the rubber to meet the road, you know, and they have to stare down the barrel of, you know, making a donor or, you know, a very powerful force in this state upset often, you know, many people, you know, we'll do that despite, you know, we'll be reticent to do that despite, you know, being the first person to talk about how they love to be a champion of labor, you know, and, you know, uplift the organized labor and working people in this state.

They're influenced by corporations.

They're influenced by big corporate America.

It does keep happening.

I've noticed.

Okay, you're seeing a trend anyway.

So, and so, Dan, when you decide, okay, we're going to do this, I will put my voice on this video.

Did you hear anything from the Cuomo campaign or from Cuomo?

Again, not me personally, but I'm sure this is region nine a where this occurred.

New York City, Long Island and New England is region nine.

Eight were region nine where I'm out of right.

New York, Pennsylvania, new Jersey is region nine.

So nine.

A leadership invited me to speak because they've heard me speak about this issue here in Rochester.

So they're like, this guy is going to be spicy.

So look for him on the camera.

It was in front of, City Hall, right in New York City.

And, you can see on the video a little bit of rain coming down that day.

But that did not deter us at all.

By the way, at that point, Jessica Ramos was my favorite horse in the race.

And this is before, she was her polling numbers were not good at all, so I don't know who whispered in her ear that endorsed, Cuomo.

He looks like he's going to win this thing.

And, she did.

The next day, UAW pulled our endorsement of Jessica Ramos as well, and that was disappointing to me.

We had a good rapport with our Senate Labor chair, Jessica Ramos at the time.

And she worked well with Harry Bronson, our assemblyman, in that, labor position.

And I just want to say, you know, Danny's always very blunt here.

And Patrick, too, although, Patrick, you know that depending on what his current job is, he has to edit himself.

Too much for my taste, but not too much in my current job.

Don't worry.

But I always appreciate the fact that I know when you guys are here, you're going to speak bluntly.

So I'm going to be blunt here as well.

There was definitely a risk six weeks before this campaign.

It is easy now to say, well, Cuomo is sort of a political dinosaur.

And of course, a young, fresh face like Mamdani would win.

And that was by no means guaranteed the night before the primary.

Right, Patrick?

Oh, absolutely.

And, you know, like, I am a person, you know, I, I've worked as on in my time, in the assembly, or in the Assembly.

In the Senate.

And, you know, like I'm, you know, done left wing electoral politics, you know, for a long time, in this state and I truthfully did not believe he could win until I saw the early voting electorate, you know, and just like, yeah, it was that was the longest of longshots and truly, like, a pretty much flawless and perfectly executed campaign.

You know, the face, like impossible odds, you know, a deeply unfavorable media environment.

And, you know, also like millions upon millions of dollars and some of the most powerful forces in this in the city in this burg, others from the establishment, so to speak.

Yeah.

Who did not want Mamdani, specifically Mamdani, to win.

And so it was a risk for your organization, although I say to risk, what's the worst that could happen if Cuomo wins and you guys did what you did, what do you think, Patrick?

I think, you know, UAW region nine.

Certainly we have a lot more to lose.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Dan.

I believe they do have a lot of like legal service workers in New York City.

Again.

Nine.

Yeah, that's what you have a lot to lose.

Yeah.

Your education, the public defender's office, that kind of stuff, you know, and so the Rochester and Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation, you know, are UAW local.

You know, I'm sure we people would have been annoyed, you know, but there would have been relatively limited in what they could do.

But, you know, the people, the unions that live and work and have to negotiate with the city, like there's there's a lot, you know, and I think you can see that in a lot of the, behavior patterns of some of the unions this election.

Okay.

So Cuomo himself didn't call you.

Did anybody in politics call you and say, what are you doing?

I did hear from a congressman.

They told me maybe I was, kind of hanging out there a little bit.

And, maybe you're sticking your neck out.

You just kind of saying, wow.

It was, a strong move.

Well, not the exact words he used.

Well, so.

So here we are.

And so I want to do a couple things I want to talk a little bit about, you know, I, I can't resist talking to Patrick a little bit about where he thinks what he thinks this does and doesn't mean for politics generally.

But then we're going to spend a lot of time just talking about what this means for, the sort of political class and are you authentically for working people, are you not?

I already have an email about public grocery stores and things like that.

And Dan and I talked a little last night about that.

So we'll get there.

Coming up here, listeners, you can call the program.

It's toll free.

844295 talk.

It's 84429582552636.

And if you call from Rochester 2639994, you can email the program connections at Dawg connections@wxxi.org.

You can join us if you're watching on the news YouTube.

You can join us in the YouTube chat.

There.

We're talking to Dan Maloney, president of UAW local 1097 and the Rochester and Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation, and Patrick Coyle, chief of staff for the Rochester and Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation.

UAW decided to I mean, really, what that video was was a don't vote for Cuomo video, but mom is in it.

Brad Landers in IT.

And UAW really did stick their neck out before a voting that did look to favor Andrew Cuomo for New York City mayor.

And so there's a lot of talk about what this all means.

And what does it mean, Patrick?

Well, I mean, when you think about Mamdani, when you think about, what he represents, what he wants to do, what Democrats writ large are supposed to do, what do you see?

I can answer this question.

I think for the remaining 40, I know, you know, 46 minutes we have on the show probably the rest of the week.

You know, but one thing I will caution against that, I think, is one of the biggest mistakes everybody makes.

You know, when doing any level of political analysis is, you know, looking at the results of one election and saying, hey, this happened because of the things that I fervently believe the day before the election.

And it just confirmed all.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

And, you know, so I'm trying very hard not to do that, you know, but, you know, I think the biggest thing is, you know, there's authenticity, you know, in that I think all too often the trap Democrats make, you know, is not saying anything that hasn't been focus grouped or poll tested, you know, 17 times over.

And I think it was very clear, like Warren did not do that, you know, and he was like speaking two candidates.

He was being and I think he was unapologetically like, hey, the world is very hard for a lot of us right now in the state has a role to play in, you know, improving people's lives, you know, and I and I think, you know, there are a lot of people who are feeling the crunch or feeling, you know, the unaffordability of the world, you know, in Rochester, in New York City, you know, and but I'm sure there are a lot of Dems who would not have wanted to focus on that because they would have, you know, thought that they were attacking, you know, Adams or, you know, the dumb establishment or, you know, Biden or, you know, people who have lied to, you know, some of these policies, not that they, you know, it was their doing necessarily, but just, you know, they were the ones in charge of the government at that time, you know.

And so I think he spoke to something that a lot of elected officials or candidates often do not, you know, which is just like, hey, I see how hard things are for you, and I see how bad things are.

And I want to help, you know, in like a genuine, unfiltered way.

And I think the other thing, you know, and it is really difficult to overstate how seismic of a shift this was from a traditional primary electorate.

You know, it was I, I think the three biggest, like five year age groups were 20 to 20.

I think it was 25 to 29, 30 to 34 and then 35 to 39, which is just like it is unbelievable.

You know, I have not heard how young this election.

Yeah.

It is genuinely like hell freezes over pig pigs fly kind of stuff.

You know, it's just like how a traditional primary electorate looks.

You know, I saw something like 45% of the electorate was under 40 years of age, and 30% of them had never vote in a Democratic primary before.

It genuinely doesn't like it is.

That is the one thing where you just like, you know, Cuomo got, I believe, 40 or 50,000 more votes than Adams got in 2021, you know, and he lost by 12%.

You know, you know, it was a seismic shift in what primary electorates traditionally consist of and who votes in them, you know, which I think will ultimately be the singular achievement of the Mamdani campaign.

But, you know, that didn't happen.

You know, lots of people tried to do that, you know, every candidate I've ever met, which is why I'm curious to know if you think Mamdani is sort of sui generis here.

He's a unicorn.

He is a one off.

He is a, he is a very charismatic, dynamic, attractive 33 year old who understands the changing media landscape in a way that a lot of candidates don't.

And so you can try to do that elsewhere.

But it takes a mamdani ask candidate or, you know, people want a change in policy.

People want to change in approach.

What do you think?

I think it's both.

And I do think that, like, there is some level of yes, like he is one of the singularly gifted, you know, political orators, and communicators we have seen in our, in our lifetime, you know, like, I cannot ever remember just like seeing a guy who has the juice.

So clearly, we just like that.

That guy's got it.

You know, there there's a very short list of people in my lifetime who I've seen, you know, and be like, oh, wow.

You know, that guy's got every, every tool in this in the shed, you know, and he, he's on that list.

But yeah, also, I do think there were some stuff in terms of just like, you know, looking at everybody else's plans, you know, it's just like, hey, here's my, you know, 17 step tax credit, you know, for what I'm going to do for small business owners who live in.

And that was kind of Brad Lander.

I mean, like lander was very detailed on policy, but but but that's what I mean.

Like if you if you hear five pitches and they're all, you know, like, hey, here's something to do for policies in these 25 affected zip codes, you know, and you know, here's the slightly different tax credit I'm going to do for the next bro over versus like, hey, I'm going to make the busses fast and free and I'm going to freeze the rent, you know, like what appeal.

Which is, which is easier to understand, which is easier to activate new voters.

You know, and I'm not saying so so I think there is a simplicity and an elegance in, you know, his in his campaign, as well as just like a level of authenticity that, you know, like it is very clear that he was a big driver in, you know, what the campaign was doing.

And what the campaign was putting out.

And you know, that everything was not being run through 15 layers of staff and consultants before, before they did stuff, you know, and I think that resonates with people, especially in a world, you know, where all too often it seems that, you know, candidate, particularly on the downside, like, won't want to say anything if they have a focus group that 15 times already.

Yeah.

And so Dan part of what I want to understand from your perspective is this what Patrick is saying is it's not just that Mamdani is an outstanding or an extraordinary political candidate or talent, it's that he combines that with understanding where people are actually hurting and listening to them in ways that if he wants to get wonky, he can he.

I don't think Patrick's saying he's not substantive.

No, absolutely not at all, but substantive in a different way that communicates cuts through a lot of wonky noise.

And so, you know, Patrick was saying, I think I can share this before the program, get ready for a bunch of political candidates to try to just do the Mamdani where, you know, I'm just going to do TikTok, like whatever that means to you.

That's yeah, like I think that will be the takeaway for a lot of bad candidates and bad campaigns is like, oh, we just have to do a lot of videos, just get on TikTok.

Whereas what Mamdani did walking the length of Manhattan, but putting out videos where he's actually just hearing from people on what is angering them or what is frustrating them about the way government does or doesn't work, right?

I mean, like, that's and that's demonstrating active listening in a substantive way.

The very first video, I think he, he put out, you know, I think this was before he even officially announced.

But, you know, he he basically went into, you know, he was like, hey, New York City is, went under one of the biggest right rightward swings in the country from 20 to 2024.

Right?

I'm in the neighborhoods.

You know, that experience, these swings, talking to people who voted for Trump and trying to figure out why and trying to figure out, you know, what they would like to see change, you know, and I think that's just like, very clear is he makes people feel heard and listened to, you know, in a way that, like many people often do not.

And so, Dan, New York City, despite its reputation, it was the city that elected Giuliani a bunch of times, Bloomberg a bunch of times and had this rightward shift that Patrick just talked about.

Now, this was a dem primary.

We'll see what happens in November.

I think.

Mamdani it looks good, but you never know.

Cuomo says who he's considering running.

Eric Adams thinks he's going to be an independent.

You know, you never know.

So what is it about that candidate or that campaign that stands out to you, policy wise or idea wise, for workers?

What resonates with people who say this isn't working and this person seems to get that?

What is that?

Mamdani channeled his inner Bernie.

This is my takeaway right at our annual meeting, my comments were on for us to win, us being progressives and unionist to take back after what happened with Trump.

Trump stole the populist message, right?

And he had gains in the black community, in the Hispanic community, upticks in women voters for Trump.

Right.

Stealing our message.

He lied.

He didn't follow through on a lot of stuff that he said, you know, interest rates coming down, day one, food prices coming down, all that stuff.

Right.

Sure wasn't true.

But Mamdani kind of plugged in that, again, channeled his inner Bernie.

This is a class struggle, and we can't afford housing.

We can't afford food.

We we need a plan.

The the wealthy elite are getting fatter and fatter and not paying their fair share of taxes.

We're hoisting up the whole burden on the tax base, right?

Working class folks and working poor.

We need to change this dynamics.

And so my comments at the annual meeting were we need three ways to hammer this out is, you know, you need a good candidate, you need the issues, and then you need messaging, right, to make those issues resonate among the voters.

So the candidate you guys spoke at length about it.

All right.

Good looking young guy.

He's you know, very charismatic.

So people attract to him.

Anyhow, the issues he spoke about was affordability.

I can't afford to live in New York under these circumstances.

People just keep jacking up the rents.

Artificial buying up blacks, buying up buildings again, that the people with the big money, the billionaires, and they're getting fatter and fatter and the working poor are getting worse off.

Right.

So this wealth inequity that Bernie really coined, and, you know, we saw what happened with Hillary kind of stole the Bernie election in 2016 and people didn't want to see a repeat.

Now, with Cuomo being what, Elon Musk is calling the uni party, right.

The Republican Democrat Unity Party.

So, you know, we need to differentiate what are we going to do for the voters and bring down the cost of, prescription drugs and food and hold the line on housing prices?

People gotta live.

They need to go to the doctor.

They need energy.

We don't need to be raked over the coals and kept in this, continual cycle of poverty, working our tails off and never going forward.

So one other point here, and I'm going to take your phone calls.

Dan, when you talk about the Unity Party, you know, there's been some flavor of this for years saying, well, there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats or both supported by, you know, corporate sponsors, etc., etc.

and certainly there are obvious differences between Republicans and Democrats.

But I also understand the critique that says largely when it comes to wages, when it comes to the working class, there's maybe less of a material difference than there is on social issues where there's huge differences, things like that.

I mean, Patrick, give me looks.

I have no idea where he's going to go.

But no, I, I just disagree.

I think I think like, you know, I understand, you know, the, you know, maybe you can say like the Democrats not want to do more to make things better, but like I do think by and large, the Republican Party broadly wants to make things worse.

And I do think there's a significant, you know, gap between where the party stand, especially on economic issues.

I would just push back on that.

No, no, no, I'm simply observing for the people who, in the last decade have voted maybe for Bernie and for Trump.

And those people do exist.

Absolutely right.

And for people who feel like there's the Union Party thing that Dan talked about, that Elon Musk was talking about this week, saying if this bill passes, no one should ever vote Republican again.

And, you know, there's no difference.

They're all just going to, you know, do the same bad things so that that feeling exists and there is an opening to tap into what will appeal to people who are hurting is what I'm saying.

Now, Dan, you say Trump campaigned on a lot of that.

Yeah.

And it worked pretty well.

Populist candidate.

He won more labor support or at least more individual union workers than any Republican in a long time.

Yeah.

The question is, do they now feel like that was a good idea because what are the policies look like?

What are the effects of that?

But he clearly tapped into that frustration or that perception.

So what you're saying is you think that opening still exists and people will gravitate towards those who they think will authentically seek to materially change their lives for the better.

Yes.

Correct.

And that authenticity we spoke about, you see that and very few candidates you did not see that in Hillary.

You did not see that.

And Cuomo I can't wait for the phone calls.

Good.

Let's call them.

Relitigate this whole thing.

They call them corporate corporate Democrats.

Right.

And so and you agree with that.

Yeah.

They're not really progressives.

They're not real.

Everyone like Patrick let off here wants to say, you know, my grandfather was a coal miner United Mine Workers.

I love the unions and what they did for my family.

But do they really mean it?

Again?

Show me by your actions.

And, you know, Cuomo did that as we spoke about earlier.

Okay.

So let's, let's take a little, little feedback from listeners starting in Brooklyn.

This is Liddy.

Hey, Liddy.

Go ahead.

Oh, it's really funny.

Hey, really, I really I should know that voice.

It's really.

I got the letter.

Yeah.

Hey.

You ready?

Go ahead.

Yeah.

This is really I. I work on tenants rights and housing issues.

And so glad to be hearing this conversation in Rochester.

I, I guess I, I actually what we did in Brooklyn, with the New York State tenant block, is we brought together 20,000 voters who would only vote for a candidate who would freeze the rent.

And in the end, that became their own money.

And I just want to share a few observations and and ask what folks think about what this might mean for 2026.

Just like really quick, I think something that's interesting that they're on is that he had the freeze, the rent demand as like his leading thing to get folks excited.

But he actually had a very detailed longer term plan to loosen zoning restrictions, to put in public investments, to strengthen code enforcement.

So, like, there's this interesting thing where folks were like, does he have a real plan to address the housing issues?

And he really did like he was his, like, populist messaging genius, but he needed to lead with the thing that would get folks excited.

But it's coupled with something.

But to address short term and long term, but I guess like to go back to this election.

We talked to voters in like, immigrant neighborhoods and black and brown neighborhoods.

She went to Trump, who went to Cuomo, who were going to go to Cuomo.

And what we found is that talking to people about their number one issue, which is housing costs, you know, it's the biggest expense folks have every month, actually changed how people thought about the election, but was like exciting them to actually vote and moving them away from Cuomo.

And in the last three weeks, Cuomo got a $2.5 million donation from landlords.

And just talking to people about that, suddenly they might not have been moved by some of the other issues in some of his record.

But soon as you talked about the fact that, like, landlords were trying to buy the election and like Cuomo, it really spoke to people.

And so we saw like, these are real things that can turn people over to progressive candidates and help with that upset.

So I'm curious, you know, Rochester is a majority renter city, every major city, majority renter.

But tenants are also have to stay.

I'm curious about like looking ahead to next year or races.

Hochul, Lawler or maybe Delgado.

Obviously state races and congressional.

How can folks how do you think this is going to play out, whether we're looking at housing affordability or labor, what are these candidates going to need to earn, like the tenant and worker votes?

Good questions.

Really.

Thank you very much for the phone call.

I'll, I'll start with Patrick Coyle on this one.

I'll ask both of you if you're in Kathy Hochul campaign or if you're in any of the statewide leaders, what are you learning from this, especially on housing?

I think that, you know, and I think really brings up a great point that I, wanted to say earlier, but decided I'd talk for too long.

You know, is that.

Yes.

You know, and I think that's really crucial information and context is that.

Yes.

Like, well, you know, freeze the rent, rent stabilized buildings, you know, was like the main thing, you know, that that Lauren led with on housing.

You know, there was a lot of like really substantial tough stuff, you know, to make it easier to build new housing and places where people want to live in New York City, you know.

And so I do think that there was, you know, a lot of stuff there as well.

And yes, I think it is clear, you know, certainly in New York City, you know, that that tenants are becoming a real, you know, organized tenants are becoming a real political force, you know, and I think any candidate willing to write that off or say, that's not a phenomenon that, you know, is happening more and more and getting stronger is doing that at their own peril.

Dan, what do you think?

So I think a lot of times these contractors get a lot of government money, much like Elon Musk.

Right?

So they get a lot of free government subsidies and tax breaks to do the right thing.

And we should as a government, we be controlling and regulating their worst impulses a little better than we do.

And when they're jacking up rents, if inflation's running at 3% and they're jacking up rents 10%, right.

We can't have that.

So there's got to be better regulations and controls.

And that's just on housing.

But again the larger issue is the bread box issues.

The whole thing.

It's housing.

It's food insecurity.

It's medications, doctor visits for my kids, dental vision, the whole package things everybody needs the basics of life to get by.

And these vultures are making a fortune off of us, off of human misery.

And that's what we're after.

Trying to get to the root causes of and control and stop.

Well, I don't know how abundance pilled Patrick Coyle is, but, you know, we just saw the state of California roll back a decades old.

I think when Reagan was there, an environmental law that has been blamed for blocking affordable housing.

For decades, environmental advocates have said that it's a very important piece of environmental legislation.

They just rolled it back last week saying that, you know, we've got to find a way to build more affordable housing.

And there's there have been overreaches and regulation, etc..

So we're going to see the Mamdani approach if he wins put into practice.

And it will be a very interesting test case because it takes a ton of courage to go in this direction and try to change the, you know, there's a lot of inertia on housing.

And there's a lot of money.

So that will be interesting to see.

And really, I do appreciate that that point in that call.

And I will be very, very curious to see what Governor Hochul and other people, you know, if they are feeling emboldened or if they feel very hesitant to go down that that path that they're on.

Mamdani is going, after we take our only break, we're going to get Betsy and Hoover's phone calls.

I've got, let's see here.

I've got an email.

Tim, I'll read your email.

Got a lot more coming up with Dan Maloney and Patrick Coyle from UAW.

Well, Dan's from UAW, Patrick's chief of staff for the Rochester and Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation, where Dan also happens to be the president.

And he was the guy who just ended Andrew Cuomo's campaign.

You know, that's what Patrick wants you to think.

UAW came out with the video six weeks before voting in the primary in New York City, took a very bold stand against Andrew Cuomo.

And we're talking about what that means for the future.

On the other side of this break.

Coming up in our second hour, Assembly member Josh Jensen joins us in studio for the hour.

It's part of our series of conversations with elected leaders on the state level, talking about the recently passed New York state budget, what's in it, what's not, what's getting prioritized, what is getting left out?

Assembly Member Jensen, we'll talk about health care, affordability, access and more.

Next, our.

Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Mary Carey Ola Center providing education and life skills solutions designed to empower individuals and the families of those with complex disabilities.

Mary Carey, Yola Center Transforming Lives of people with disabilities More at Mary Carey, ola.org and Corning Museum of Glass, where guests can discover brilliant color.

An exhibition exploring color innovation in modern glass, brilliant color with live hot glass demonstrations and other glass creations awaits.

More at CMO g.org.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson and this is Betsy in Brighton.

Next on the phone.

Hello, Betsy.

Hi.

I want to congratulate these people for having the guts to do the right thing because they think that if more of us did that, we wouldn't be stuck in this situation that we are in with our current government.

If the Republicans had had the guts to do it over ten years ago, we'd be so much better off.

But I think it, one of our big problems is that corporate media owns the airwaves in all venues now, with the exception of public radio and public television.

And that's why they're working so hard to get rid of it.

So we have to fight with all we have.

So thank you very much, Betsy.

Thank you for the phone call.

You heard some feedback like that in the last six weeks.

Dan Maloney is spot on.

And you can tell why this current administration is coming after public radio, right?

Because I don't I don't need you to come on here and fight for me here.

You don't have to pander to me.

That's doing the fundraising truth.

Truth tellers matter.

So, no, we can't clear channel and whoever else has taken over the airwaves.

Right.

We used to have a lot of good programing.

I liked Ed Schultz meat eating, gun toting, progressive.

All right, I miss them.

You do strike me as an Ed Schultz progressive.

You guys have lost me the late.

You know who the late Ed Schultz is?

Yeah.

Air America, he was like the Rush Limbaugh.

The left.

Okay, you take your word for it.

Yeah.

Well done.

Evan, I come on, Patrick Coyle Hoover in Pittsford next on the phone.

Hey, Hoover, go ahead.

Hey, this is a good program.

Dan on fire today.

Dan?

Daniel.

Recognize me?

I use my pseudonym, but he knows this Cornell buddy from the U of our medical center health and safety committee.

Go.

Bills.

Right, Dan.

Go.

Bills.

Yes.

I was just going to say Evan.

Does he have his bills jersey on it?

He's got a UAW on today.

But there's usually some bills swag with Dan Malone.

Well, he's he's probably got bills jockeys on that.

Yeah.

Top here.

Yeah.

Here's the here's the question.

People who run for office, they are looking to run again and again and again and again.

And I have lived in a state where they had term limits and where they had a state legislature that only met every other year for no more than, 60 days.

So my question is, if people had term limits.

And what you're going to see with Trump is he's but he's term limited.

He's going to do exactly what he wants to.

He doesn't care about reelection and getting reelected and posturing and being on talk shows and making people laugh at him and, you know, all kinds of stuff.

He's not doing that.

And if more candidates would just say, I'm a one termer, or at least we had some legislation that limited people to one for one six year term or whatever.

I think people would actually want to do what they really said that they wanted to do, you know, keep rent controls or lower this price or lower that because Dan's making some really good points and he and I don't agree on everything, but we certainly have a good time when we're talking.

And what about that, Danny?

How would how would term limits affect people's ability to be honest and just go ahead and push their agenda and not think about the reelection first?

As we all know, the first thing a politician thinks about is getting reelected.

So I'll get up and I'll listen to my bills, buddy.

Thank you.

Hoover.

Go ahead.

Dan Louise Slaughter used to have that that statement that we are all term limited by the voters.

Yeah.

If I'm doing the wrong thing, throw me out of office.

Pleased that you're right that your civic duty and follow through with it.

So she was not a fan of term limits for that reason.

Because what if you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

What if you're throwing out a Louise Slaughter who has done nothing but good and 100% AfL-CIO pro union voting record?

What if we're kicking her out of office just because she's been there?

A couple terms?

I wouldn't agree with that on a local level.

Yeah, maybe we could use some churn, like in the town of grease where I live.

So, yeah, I don't know.

Maybe we can look at it at a local level, make that the pilot and see where we can go from there.

But, Patrick, part of Hoover's point there is that, yes.

The Louise Slaughter line about we're all term limited by the voters.

It's technically true.

Voters can decide at any point that they don't want the incumbent.

But Hoover is concerned that the way people govern would be different if there were actual term limits, and that you couldn't run again, and that you wouldn't govern in a way that just seeks to try to entrench yourself and that you might actually be either emboldened or at least wizened about trying to pursue better policies.

I don't disagree with him necessarily in the you know, certainly I think that, like basically the how difficult it is to govern and like pass meaningful policy changes, like the amount of veto points that exist in the American policy system is a huge problem for our political sphere, you know, and and one that leads to a lot of this disillusionment with politics and the political system that we've been discussing.

I just don't think that term limits are necessarily the best, mechanism to alleviate that.

Well, Hoover, thank you for the phone call.

I'm going to read Tim's email.

He says, Evan, I'm not a Democrat, but Andrew Cuomo, Andrew Cuomo would have at least have been a sane New York City mayor.

Instead, we're going to get publicly owned grocery stores, which are going to fail spectacularly.

When will the left ever learn it won't work to just put government in charge of everything.

Wow.

So I got it.

I got to answer this one on and behalf of Metro Justice with the Red campaign for RGA.

Right.

When I stood up and spoke at the county legislature legislative meeting and talked about we should take this over as a public entity, at least do the study and see if it's feasible and make sense.

A local utility like local publicly owned utility.

And I got a lot of pushback.

That's socialist.

That's communist, that's wrong.

But it now, in the same breath, the same legislature gave 4 or $4.5 million for our genie to expand the power grid in Henrietta.

That's why we pay rates to our genie.

That's why they take $120 million in profit each year out of the Rochester area, and it flows over to Spain.

That 120 million would go a long way to expanding the power grid, insuring it up against the harsh weather conditions that we have here in upstate New York.

So I agree that, you know, if you want it that way, that he's a nutjob, you know, publicly owned grocery stores, stop giving corporate welfare today.

Stop it.

Right.

And that's part of that bromance between, our president and Elon Musk.

Right now, they're broke because we're not, right now Trump is saying we're going to cut you off the corporate welfare gravy train, Elon, because you're speaking ill against me.

How dare you.

So yeah, we gotta have it both ways.

It can't be one way.

Republicans and alleged conservatives that are raising the debt ceiling by $5 trillion with this big, beautiful one bill, which is not so beautiful in our estimation.

I've got two things on this.

Which one?

You know, I think the the freak out over publicly owned grocery stores, like, I think, you know, really misses the fact that in almost half the states in the country, you know, like whether it's liquor or, you know, you know, some level of it is run by government owned retail shops.

You know, like, I think like most of the states in the Midwest, in the southwest, like liquor is almost entirely distributed through government run grocery stores, you know, as well as like a U.S. military base.

Right?

You know, like the these are not things that are not currently being done right now.

And also, just like, you know, nobody denies the existence of food deserts, right?

You know, and these areas that like, need these healthy, you know, fresh options and like it is clear that like the private market is not solving that problem.

You know.

And so I think it's kind of a basically do you think the state has a role, you know, to play in making sure everybody has access to.

And also it's a pilot program, I believe.

You know, the original plan is for five stores.

You know, like I think he's leading with it because it's interesting, innovative, but like, it is not as if he's saying, you know, on my first day we are going to personally, you know, I'm going to nationalize every single grocery store in New York City.

You know, it's I'm going to do a pilot program for five stores in these food desert neighborhoods.

On Mamdani, Dallas says Mamdani is just promising everything will be free.

Is that how you see his campaign, Patrick?

It is very much not.

No.

Like, certainly I think that, you know, I think there's a lot of daylight between promising everything will be free and saying, like, the world has become unaffordable.

And, you know, I'm going to see how I can help, make it less so.

How do you see it, then?

You know, I agree.

He wants people to pay for groceries, but take out that profit motive.

The again, the vultures that are profiting off of human misery.

And he said, I saw him on one of the talk shows Sunday.

It is five one in each borough, a pilot.

And these stores, city owned stores.

And he's going to tap into a fund that's already there, a corporate welfare fund that those grocery stores are already getting.

So it's not going to cost the taxpayer any more.

But when you talk about profit there and you talk about vultures, do you think there should be profit on automobiles?

Absolutely.

So.

But not questionable.

Reasonable profit.

Okay.

So so what you're talking about is the level of profit and where that profit is going.

And yes, regulate it.

And, the workers should share in the wealth they create.

Absolutely.

Yes.

So, you know, this is where I think Andrew Cuomo and others, more on the political right would say, Dan, if you shrink what the people who create these companies can make, you will disincentivize innovation.

That's always been the argument for decades.

Sure.

And, if you want to put a cap on what the CEOs or what the founders, the owners can make, then you think you're going to have those profits flow more to the workers, but you'll just get fewer companies innovating and creating real quick.

GM went bankrupt again.

We saw this.

Mary Barra is making 28 million a year now.

The Toyota and the Honda executives make far less and they have for decades.

They didn't go bankrupt.

So this I need this money to, retain the best in the brightest, captains of industry that are going to innovate and make it better.

It's not true.

They're in it for the short term to pillage as much money out of these corporations as they can and then get their golden parachute and get out.

They don't care about long term effects on the communities and the workers.

Do you think that if you run a company that goes bankrupt, the most you should be able to make is $27 million?

You know, you're on to something here.

Let's at least start going backwards a little bit for bad behavior.

What do you think, Patrick is at 27.

We should we cap it there?

Sure.

Patrick's like, I'm usually the snarky one.

What is going on?

I see, I turn the tables on you.

How's that?

I want to before we close here.

I just want to.

Keenan, one other point here, I there was a couple of emails about, like, you know, Trump didn't win union workers.

Look, I don't have all the data in front of me, but Donald Trump definitely performed better with union workers in my home state of Ohio, my native state of Ohio.

You know, which is it went from a purple state to a pretty solidly red.

That's a red state.

And some of that's because of, you know, union households voting for Donald Trump.

Not all union workers want the same thing.

I wouldn't want to make a monolith.

And I get that.

And there's union workers who vote for Trump and love Trump.

There's union workers who vote voted for Trump and regret that vote.

There's union workers who voted for Harris.

There's union workers.

You wanted Bernie.

There's all kinds of things.

But we know that Trump has made gains in his three presidential campaigns.

So for the workers who felt ignored by the Democratic Party for years, Dan and did vote for Trump, what do you think in general, they do make of this administration's policies, whether it's you talk about big beautiful bill, but in general, how are workers doing and what do you think they are seeing after their votes for this administration?

So I do see a lot of folks that were disillusioned with the Democratic Party, with the NAFTA, the cast of the Free trades.

They seen all those factories close, in particular in the Midwest.

Ohio was hit hard.

I had friends at Lordstown.

So now they were looking for options.

They were lied to.

They were smiling and handshaking Democrats.

They lied to them and did the wrong things.

And now here comes this fake progressive Trump.

They voted for him.

But they're starting to see the reality, right?

Those interest rates didn't come down.

This big beautiful bill is not going to share any wealth with the workers on the factory floor, etc., etc..

So midterm elections, I think we need to get our message out there.

Again.

It's bread box issues.

Let's stick to the food, clothing, shelter, medical and let's message that properly with good candidates.

No more of this corporate Democrat food, shelter, accessibility, medical.

But what does that look like in policy?

If you're looking ahead to the midterms, what do you think a winning party needs to do better?

I do think that everyone you know is mostly broadly aligned on this, which is, you know, a focus on, you know, affordability like that, I think is the place that, you know, Zoran and the Democratic establishment have the most overlap, you know, is, you know, just like this, everyone has realized that, you know, people are frustrated.

The political system and feel that is not delivering, you know, the change that they would like to see to improve their lives, you know, and I think everyone is pretty committed to offering that, you know, and I do think that'll be it is just a relentless focus on affordability and, you know, improving these, you know, quality of life issues.

What would be the wrong message to take from the New York City primary?

Patrick.

I think, you know, it's easy.

I just think overreacting to one election is always the wrong play.

You know, if we if we run back four years, you know, I'm sure you were doing a panel about how the Eric Adams victory meant that, you know, cops were the future of the, you know, the Democratic Party, you know, and it was taking a strong rightward turn, you know, and so I would, you know, caution against any specific advice more than just like, do not elections are each one is different.

You know, each each one has their own specific set of factors, you know, and you know, don't like allow it to change your beliefs.

But you know, don't also be like, okay, well, it's time to, you know, rip up everything.

I thought, yeah, you know, I thought I, you know, I think that's, that's that's very wise.

And maybe this is a good place to end.

It's interesting you point to Eric Adams because you're right.

We could spend a lot of time looking at how what felt like a change election became a one off or sparked a backlash pendulum swing to use cliches.

But some of the conventional wisdom is while most Americans are somewhere in the middle, they're moderates.

They're, you know, they're in the political middle.

And so should we then view a Mamdani election saying, okay, that's a moment in time it will swing back, especially if he cannot pull off what he wants to pull off.

Brad Lander, I think, had the most illustrative line here when he said, you know, the biggest, the biggest divide in the Democratic Party right now is not between, you know, lefties, and moderates, but between fighters and folders, you know, and people are looking for a fighter.

And I think that will be that will be much more illustrative, you know, to where the party is headed and what the base wants.

I think people want somebody who is willing to stand up and say, hey, I see what's happening right now and this is not okay, and I'm going to try to change it, you know, unapologetically and without, you know, couch behind 6 or 7 weasel words, you know, and I think that is going to be one of the clear divides as we enter this next year.

Dan loves that line.

Absolutely.

The biggest difference is fighters and folders.

So in the last minute here I will make one prediction.

Mamdani will do very well if he becomes New York City mayor.

He'll do very well.

He'll get reelected easily.

If he is successful.

And I say that not to like state the most obvious thing ever.

But to say that governing is hard and promising during the campaign is easy, and it's going to take a fighter to get some of the big changes done, especially against the established forces that will try to stop those changes.

And if he can do it, he'll get he'll probably get reelected.

But if he fails, he won't.

I mean, it sounds obvious, but I mean, I don't think we should say right now this is the biggest change election ever until we see if this works.

Right.

So in my opinion, class warfare is inclusive, right?

There's no isms involved.

You could be old, you can be black, you can be a woman.

You can be a man.

We're all getting taken advantage of by the wealthy elite that one tenth of 1%.

So when you bring it together in class warfare, Bernie Sanders message, man, his message now, right.

It's a winning message.

And again, we need to channel that into the midterms.

Final thoughts from you.

I think, you know, we've covered it pretty much all you know, I think that this is it will change the way, you know, people think about primaries.

But I think a lot of it does depend on his governing.

Thank you very much to our guests this hour.

It's been an interesting discussion.

Dan Maloney, president of UAW local 1097 and the Rochester and Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation, Go bills go bill, it's July and you're going go bills.

You know, come on.

You're training camps right here.

Camping out at Fisher right after this is you're always you're always go Bill's thank you for making the time Dan.

My pleasure.

Thank you.

Good to see you.

Patrick Coyle, chief of staff for the labor federation.

Thank you for being here.

It's always a pleasure.

Always a pleasure indeed.

More connections coming up in just a moment.

This program is a production of Sky Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station, its staff, management or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience, any rebroadcast or use in another medium, without express written consent of Sky is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the connections link at WXXI news.org.