← Max Politics
Max Politics
Raj Goyle on His Campaign for New York State Comptroller
01:14:13
Raj Goyle, a candidate in the June 2026 Democrati…
Loading summary
Transcript81 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign. Hello and welcome to Max Politics. This is Ben Max coming to you from New York Law School and its center for New York City and State Law. Thanks for tuning in. Speaking here on Monday, June 15, 2026. Today on the show, we're continuing to dig into the New York State Comptroller race where there are three leading Democrats in the running in the primary being decided this month. Incumbent State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli and two challengers, Drew Warshaw and Raj Goyle, who is my guest today on the show. I've spoken at length here already with Drew Warshaw and Tom Napoli. So catch up on those if you missed them and be sure you're ready to vote in this primary for the very important office of New York State Comptroller. All Democrats across the state are eligible to vote in this primary. Happening now. Early voting is underway, running through June 21. Primary day is June 23, and voting by mail is ongoing as well. Raj Goyal with me in a moment. The job he wants, State Comptroller is the state's chief fiscal officer, responsible for oversight of state government and much more, leading an office of roughly 2,800 employees that include auditors, financial, business and policy analysts, information technology specialists, contract managers, investigators and others. The responsibilities include investigating waste, fraud and abuse to protect taxpayer money, including by auditing state agencies, authorities and services, including the MTA providing oversight of the state budget and reviewing state contracts and payments managing the state's massive public pension fund, which is worth roughly $300 billion, and ensuring that state employees and retirees get their paychecks and pension payments. And still more, the Democratic primary for state comptroller and Democratic and Republican primaries for many state and federal level races are on the ballot here in June 2026, including competitive races for state legislative seats in the Senate and Assembly and for the US House of Representatives in Congress. This is the only statewide race with a real primary this cycle. Democratic incumbents Kathy Hochul and Letitia James, the governor and attorney general, respectively, are headed to their general election matchups against the presumptive Republican nominees, and we'll dig into those races after the primaries. The winner of this Democratic primary for state comptroller will face Republican nominee Joseph Hernandez in the general election, and I'll have him on the show sometime between the primary and the general to make his case. And hopefully, whichever of these three Democrats wins, they'll come back on the show as well to discuss the general election matchup. But for now, the question is whether Comptroller DiNapoli will again be the Democratic nominee, or whether one of his two upstart challengers can somehow prevail in a race that's not getting enough attention. But we've been working on that with these in depth interviews with the three candidates. I'll also note that toward the end of May, dinapoli, Goyal and Warshaw had a debate on Spectrum News, likely to be their only debate of the primary, and it's available on YouTube if you'd like to watch it. DiNapoli has been state comptroller since 2007, when he was appointed to the position by the Legislature after the resignation of his predecessor under scandal. He went on to win statewide elections in 2010, 2014, 2018 and 2022. He has not faced a serious primary challenge until this year, and both of his main opponents in the primary say it's time for change, that DiNapoli is not an active and aggressive enough controller and they're laying out their platforms for how they would run the office and fulfill its very important role in differently While he's defending his record, of course, which he just did at length on this program, it's to be seen whether Warshaw and or Goyal are really that much of a threat to the Napoli, especially given it's not a head to head race and they could split the opposition vote. But there's been no public polling on the race at the time. We're recording here on June 15th and I don't know if we'll get a real sense as to how voters are looking at this race until the votes start to come in as I bring Raj Goyal on very briefly, if you missed any recent episodes of the show, they've included my conversations with control Dom dinapoli and challenger Drew Warshaw. I also just spoke at length here on the program with Michael Lang, an insightful writer about New York politics who joined me to discuss some of the major themes at play in this month's primaries, including Mayor Mamdani's endorsements, and to dig into the most high profile congressional primaries in the city, the races in New York's 7th, 10th, 12th and 13th congressional districts. Really good conversation there with Michael Lang, so check that out if you missed it. Also in the feed, two recent conversations on the now NBA champion New York Knicks. In case you missed those and you want to check one or both out, they are still very relevant, including one with a guest, Chris Herring, who wrote a book about the 1990s Knicks. The last time the Knicks made it to the NBA Finals in 94 and 99 before this year's championship winning squad. Those and many more good ones in the MAX POLITICS feed for after you listen to this one and a bunch of other good episodes to come here leading into primary day and its aftermath. All right. I'm pleased to welcome to MAX Politics Raj Goyle, a Democratic candidate for New York State comptroller, running in the primary taking place this month here in June 2026. Primary day is June 23rd. Early voting has begun. Mail in voting is ongoing. And it is time to get ready to vote in this statewide primary. If you're an eligible Democratic voter. Lots of other things potentially on your ballot as well. My guest is one of the challengers to incumbent Comptroller Tom Dinapoli, who's been in the statewide position as chief fiscal officer of New York since 2007. Raj, thanks for being here. How are you?
- [05:42]
B
Ben, thank you so much for having me. I'm excited to be on and, you know, Nick's in five. What can I say?
- [05:47]
A
Hey, it's exciting time in New York. Perfect enthusiasm to lead into these primaries, carry forward that energy, people get out and vote. So as I said, early voting's begun. Primary days coming up. We're going to get into your campaign platform. Just a minute. But start us off with just a little background on you. If you have two minutes with somebody, what do you want them to know about who you are, where you come from, you know, your background before this race?
- [06:15]
B
Sure. You know, I do say I'm running because I think we need better Democrats and we need someone who's a proven fighter. I am that. I'm a PTA dad. I live in lower Manhattan with my wife and two daughters who are 14 and 16 and people might find interesting. I also live in a multi generational household. So I live with my mother and my mother and my mother in law are on the block as well. Lost my father and father in law in the last few years. But we raised both daughters with all four grandparents, which was a very big thing that we wanted to do because I never knew my grandparents, having lived the immigrant story here. And so I've been a lawyer at the aclu. I have run a successful New York business. I've been a fighter my entire life. I've worked at the naacp, I've worked in South Africa. I've served in elected office. And I've been on the Planned Parenthood board here in New York. And so I've been very involved in civic and political life and the business community. And I'm very passionate about making the chief financial officer into an office that actually fights the affordability crisis and fights Donald Trump.
- [07:24]
A
So say a little bit about your decision to run for New York State comptroller. So you've had a journey from the Kansas state legislature to moving back to New York as you just got at. You started and ran a company for a while. We'll talk about that maybe for a minute soon. Getting more involved in civic life, doing advocacy work around the state's cell phone policy that wound up coming into fruition. We could talk about that more in a minute. But, but explain the decision to run for state comptroller, why that office? Why not continue to be a legislator, you know, run for the state legislature, the city council, why this office? And not something, something you're. You've been involved with in the past in Kansas as a state legislator. Why go to this type of office?
- [08:07]
B
Well, I my belief, Ben, is that the biggest sin is wasted political power. And if you were to look in the dictionary for wasted political power at a moment in which our democracy is facing a five alarm fire, we are the New Yorkers are choking under an affordability crisis. That wasted political power would be the state comptroller in Tom DiNapoli, the living embodiment of it. It is such a powerful office that is currently frankly asleep at the switch and not engaging in the fights that we need to have right now to help New Yorkers live the best life possible. So I've long looked at this office actually in the sense that as I observed the how our political system and government works, I thought, my gosh, that office is something that could be such a powerful tool and it's being wasted right now. So I look at and I try to solve problems wherever I am. Well before I served in office, I was at the ACLU as I mentioned earlier. And so I've been a fighter on the front lines of change for my entire career. And I go to where I think I can make the biggest contribution.
- [09:15]
A
The powers of the state comptroller. I went over those in the intro that you didn't get to hear. But rank them in terms of those powers. You're saying there's a ton of wasted political power here. What are the most powerful tools of the state comptroller, in your view that you would look to leverage better than it's being leveraged.
- [09:33]
B
So number one, of course it controls a $300 billion pension fund. So as an investor and has the state auditor, literally every dollar of state contracts goes through this office and should be evaluated, looked at and seen how it can be made helpful for New Yorkers to live a better life. When you look at the powers of this office, it's truly. Unprecedented, frankly, in terms of what could be done with the office. One thing I've talked, mostly I've really focused like a laser on is utility rates. So let's even unpack that, if we could, Ben, which is some might say, well, okay, the state comptroller. What does that have to do with my Con Ed bill? Well, that's the entire essence of the argument, because the state comptroller can audit the Public Service Commission. Tom Dinapoli says he can't. He can. Well, actually, I guess he claims that he's sort of done it, but of course he hasn't done it in any comprehensive way. He, of course, receives campaign contributions from National Grid, from Con ed, from corporate PACs. He's not interested in actually uncovering the books of what's happening in our utility crisis right now that is so powerful in which you could actually find out what's happening with these utility companies, be transparent about it, expose that. And then on the public pension side, Ben, the pension fund is a major shareholder. And these publicly traded companies. So right now we have a utility crisis. I've said that I want to be the affordability watchdog. I want to be the people's watchdog here using that office. And that's a great example of how you should conceive of political power in the moment that we're in. But of course, he doesn't view it that way. And he views himself, frankly, as a bystander, a caretaker, and I couldn't disagree more.
- [11:31]
A
So what are the steps, concretely, that a New York State comptroller can take to make utility rates either go down, down or break the curve? You know, we talk, of course, about, often about housing costs, and people say, oh, we're going to, you know, reduce the rent. But, you know, mainly the goal is like to stop the increases from being so. Yeah, you know, voluminous so often. But. But generally speaking, to rein in utility cost growth. What can a New York State controller actually do?
- [12:01]
B
Yeah, it's a great question. So, number one, the Public Service Commission, which your listeners would know about, a small but very powerful obscure agency largely controlled by the governor. It is the body and the regulator that the utility companies, all of them across New York State, they go to the PSC and they say, hey, I want to raise the rates. And remember, we grant them essentially a monopoly. And if you step back for a minute, Ben, and You just think about what is the role of a public utility. It is to take, take as much energy from the planet as possible that you extract in a reasonable and thoughtful way. You would give it to as many people as possible for as cheap a unit price as possible. That is the essence of a public utility. But right now, Wall street has jazzed up these companies. So you have a CEO making $20 million a year. They have a guaranteed rate of return. So imagine I ran a business and for every dollar of revenue I got, I was guaranteed a 10% profit. Sign me up. That's the books they have. They trade at 2x book value. It's often said that that industry is the only industry in which you're paid to decorate your office. And by that, all of the expense side goes into the financial equation and they get a guaranteed rate of return. All of these things, Ben, should be exposed. And the state comptroller, to be clear, can't directly go to Con Ed or a private company and say open your books. But the rate request, the rate approval request, as you said, they go through the psc and the PSC can be audited and should be audited. Tom Dinapoli doesn't dispute that, that he has that power. He just says he shouldn't use it. And then of course, the comparable can propose legislation. We can get rate clawbacks. We can have AI data center segregation so that right now the legislature was going crazy with all sorts of proposals about utilities. Some really good. The governor did rebate checks. We had a litany, dozens of proposals. Because the utility crisis is absolutely echoing across the state from Buffalo to Binghamton to Brooklyn. And the root of the cause, the best lever to fight this crisis would be the comptroller's office. But he's just not doing it. And of course, as a public shareholder, he could make an incredible amount of noise around the CEO. Compensation, rising rates for ratepayers. He does none. And in fact, in the past he has approved compensation. You know, he is as a shareholder, he's not objected and he's voted for resolutions that approve the compensation packages. Now he's had a little bit of difference during the election year conversions, but frankly, he's not been in that fight.
- [14:45]
A
Now he says to you and your other competitor in this race, Drew Warshaw, that you guys really want to be executives or legislators and that you're putting on to the comptroller's office powers that it really doesn't have or sort of politics that it really shouldn't look through in its lens. How do you respond to that critique?
- [15:05]
B
Use his, use his, sorry, use his own words. He says, I have audited the Public Service Commission. So he's saying he has the power, he just hasn't done anything with it. He claims he doesn't politicize the pension fund. But, you know, and I'm glad he finally did this, he got out of gun manufacturing. He claims he doesn't politicize his investments. But his Israel bond position is only seen through the prism of politics. There is no rational money manager on planet earth that with 220 countries or so in the world would put the overwhelming majority in one country, Israel. Especially when the bonds are risky and the rate of return isn't great and they have very unusual structures to the bonds. No one would do that. But he's doing it for political reasons. In fact, he was bragging the other day that he was investing to help the peace process in Northern Ireland. Now I support the peace process in Northern Ireland, but you can't have it out of both sides of, out of your mouth, out of, out of his mouth in which he basically says, I don't, I only, I only focus on, on, on, on a certain approach to the office. But yet then he, but, but yet then he does the other, he does
- [16:10]
A
the other thing when it comes to divestment. He, his, his argument basically is that the bar is extremely high for how much you can infuse political, social, you know, environmental, even values into your investment decisions and that any look at divestment really needs to be a very carefully, slowly done process that really is all about the dollars and cents. You seem to have a different view of that, that there is more sort of social, environmental, political evaluation to be done about investments. Can you say where your, on that? Like, how do you explain to people, not specific companies or foreign bonds that you would or would invest in, but how would you determine where that line is? And do you worry at all when you start to make a list of these companies or countries that you don't want to invest in? It's a very slippery slope. And I think that's a key piece of his argument. Whether you can poke holes in his argument is one thing, but the other piece is like, how do you really set those lines and decide how you would approach the idea of divestment or even investment decisions in companies that you don't like their politics or you don't like some of the social impact. But it also has to be sound financial decision making.
- [17:30]
B
The North Star of the pension fund is to return A strong investment for the retirees. And frankly, Tom DiNapoli over the years has underperformed the market. The Citi pension fund did, New York City pension fund did successfully divest from fossil fuels over a reasonable time period and proved to the world, and frankly to New Yorkers that it can be done.
- [17:53]
A
It's still in process, but it's been a very long laborious process. And I think no
- [18:00]
B
public equities is out of fossil fuels. And it took several years. Yes, Scott Stringer started, Brad Lander finished it. And so it was successfully done, Ben, and it can be done. And so to the larger question, which is a very fair one, which is where do you draw the line? What we talk about is take Palantir, for example. Our campaign broke the story that DiNapoli that the pension fund has $180 million worth and then he tripled the position. I know you asked him about this and it's very important to point out that he claims he has no control over the investment. Yet on your show he says we manage the indexes in house. Again, it is this duplicity which, which is the hallmark of how he's campaigned because the reality is that we know a company like Palantir in its core business model is a data surveillance company which is powering a reign of terror by ICE that's not disputable and of course human rights abuses abroad. So of course we don't willy nilly throw stocks overboard because we disagree with a thing here or there. But that is a core foundational aspect of the company. And so therefore it does merit and of course it has now become a sin stock of sorts. And so that does merit removal from the pension fund. On fossil fuels, we've had a generational debate, decades of saying, are we going to transition away from a carbon based economy, a fossil fuel based economy? And so we know we passed the point of no return and that the best thing to do and other countries, other pension funds, other endowments have made that decision. And that's one that we should follow on other issues, of course, shareholder activism is very, very important. I don't think that anyone thinks that Tom DiNapoli is remotely effective at that in that community. I don't think anyone looks to Tom DiNapoli. For example, take SpaceX. Right now, SpaceX has completely perverted very important investor protections that you've got even very mainstream. You have the Wall Street Journal and others writing about the fact that SpaceX and Elon Musk in collusion with the indices and the Trump administration are Subverting decades of investor protections. And now millions, hundreds of millions of people are going to be forced to buy a company that is so hypervalued, the valuations on its multiples are unjustified. And where is the New York State Common Retirement Fund this? Tom DiNapoli should be the natural leader as the most important financial officer in the most important financial state in the country, in the United States of America.
- [20:42]
A
He should say, what about SpaceX? He should say he should stand up
- [20:46]
B
to BlackRock and Vanguard and to the index funds and sound the alarm. And he should get out there and he should say, what is we are going to stand against the fact that Elon Musk is perverting investor protections.
- [21:02]
A
Add X and Y investor protections, or none of the New York State Retirement fund will invest in space X.
- [21:09]
B
That is one possibility. And it's also using the bully pulpit to the index funds because he has enormous sway. He controls a $300 billion pension fund. And you know, one of the things that an example that I'd point out is the Attorney General's office of New York was long considered sort of minister and a paperwork office until we realized, until holders of the office realized that the powers of the office, it wasn't inconsistent with their fiduciary or their legal or their constitutional duties. It was actually consistent to use the powers of the office. Did Franklin Roosevelt during the New Deal and the Great Depression, he didn't simply sit back and say, well, Herbert Hoover had it right, people are dying, there's nothing we can do. We just need to sit back. Of course he didn't. He said, we're going to use the full throated powers within the rules to make life better for Americans and New Yorkers.
- [22:01]
A
Let me ask you two things that you said. One, so Palantir, so obviously it's become, as you said, sort of one of these sin, you know, stocks right now companies. It's become sort of a poster child for this question right now of, you know, if you don't like some of the politics or, you know, of, of a regime, which in this case is the Trump administration, here's a government contractor doing X activity for the government. And this is now the company that public funds should be getting out of and investors should be leaving to sort of take a stand against the Trump immigration policies.
- [22:39]
B
But there are many. If I could, I would respectfully say that's not the premise, the way you framed it. The premise is not we need to go take a stand against ice, which of course we do. And we're going to go look at all the panoply of companies and we're going to pick Palantir. That's not it. Palantir is inextricably intertwined with ice. The ICE Agents app is powered by Palantir. Palantir is, is now synonymous and is the technology backbone of ice. So therefore, Palantir plays a special role in the way that ICE is, is, is, is conducting itself. And therefore it has crossed that line. But of course, there are government contracts with many, many public companies and, you know, from Amazon to Microsoft and so on. And there, there is a role for shareholder activism in which the state comptrollers should be saying, hey, listen, I'm going to stand up and say, why are you doing this? And let's draw attention to it. But that doesn't cross the line the way that Palantir has.
- [23:46]
A
Now, Palantir has been a government contractor for a long time. You and others would argue, once you're being asked to power something like these immigration crackdowns and this type of ICE behavior, that's when you say to the government, no, no matter how much money you're offering us as a government contractor, we're not going to perform those tasks.
- [24:08]
B
I think that what it is clear that Palantir's behavior now and its conduct has crossed the line. And that's why I and many others have called for, for it to be out of the pension fund. And I don't think it's really a close call. And as you're getting at, then, of course it is a fluid analysis. And companies do change over time, but on this one, we just have a clear, the balance is very clear.
- [24:33]
A
So right now, your list for divestment is fossil fuel companies, Palantir, Israel bonds. Anything else on the list?
- [24:40]
B
Well, to be clear, I said that I would kill, and I was the only one in the race, the first in the race to say this, to say that I would kill the entire foreign bond portfolio. So we should bring that money home. And of course, because I have been the only candidate in this race, especially the consistent one, to talk about the fact that there is a genocide in Gaza occurring with our public tax dollars and therefore we should cancel the foreign bond portfolio. And we obviously should not invest in something that violates our values that way. To your question, those are the things that, of course, I've talked about on the campaign trail and we will, when elected, happily review. And I've talked about having a human rights screen in which we will, of course, evaluate other investments in the pension fund and review it and we will be transparent about it. This is not something that is unusual. It's often done. And I think it's also important to point out, Ben, that you know, part of the problem with the Democratic Party has been this, this weakness and this frankly, this fear that. And that's why we're seeing these primary challenges all over New York and we're seeing it all across the country and the red states. The chief financial officers have an organization, I'm sure you may know this, it's called the sfof. I'm the only one who's been talking about this. The State Financial Officers Foundation. They have their industry funded booze cruises. They are all allied and they have come after ESG DEI and vilified these things along with the right wing media echo chamber. Well, it is time for progressives and Democrats to stand up and say wait a second here. We actually are going to defend these principles. And it is not at all unusual for we should be in alliance with other blue state pension funds to talk about the things that we should stand up and expose and stand up for these principles. That is what. That's the progressive moment we're in right now.
- [26:44]
A
That's actually where I was going to head next. Say a little bit more about the progressive moment. I mean, it seems like part of your campaign has taken inspiration from the Mamdani campaign, obviously winning a remarkable victory in the primaries in the general election for mayor last year. Lots of Democratic campaigns and candidates have been looking at that campaign to take lessons. But, but what else besides anything you already mentioned, what else have you taken from the Mamdani when activating voters? And what's the difference or what difference have you experienced trying to activate and excite people about a state comptroller race which we know does not galvanize the same attention excitement as a mayoral race? I mean there's almost nothing you can do about that gap. But you're obviously trying to interest people, excite people. But say a little more about what you lessons you took from the Mamdani campaign and how that's bumping up against the challenges of running for state comptroller.
- [27:42]
B
Sure, I appreciate the question. Look, I think it's, I'm proud of the fact that I created, I founded and I created and co founded something called impact, which was one of the is now the largest South Asian progressive organization in the country. We've elect hundreds and hundreds of progressives up and down the ballot and we were one of the first checks into Zoran Bomdani in 2020 for his assembly campaign. And so of course, nobody would have predicted his incredible rise. And I think, and I've said this in many occasions, that aside from the policies which are very, very important and we all know them, I think the most important thing that Zoron did for the political moment that we're in is remind people that you can actually expect government to work for you and not for the insiders. I happen to be running against somebody who's been a politician who's been for 53 years longer than I've been alive. And so that's what I think. Zoram has touched a nerve and electrified people to say that we can actually expect the government's concerns to be my concerns. The fact that it's too expensive to pay my rent, it's too expensive to pay a Con Ed bill, it's too expensive to pay for groceries, and that actually there's somebody who's going to stand up and do something about it. But to your point about it now applying to the comptrollers race, obviously we're running our own race. And I was well aware, getting in, that there are very few people who have ever thought about the comptrollers race. And I think unfortunately that's by design by the Albany insiders. They don't want people to know about the vast powers of this office. They don't want this office to actually be activated and energized to fight the Trump administration, to fight the affordability crisis. Crisis again. I listened to your interview with Tom and on every core issue, a hem and a haw. Taxing the rich, a hem and a haw. The New York City municipal budget, a hem and a haw. And so that is of course a challenge politically. And I think we are doing, I'm very happy that we've raised essentially the same amount of financial resources. A 40 year Albany incumbent. We've got a lot of grassroots energy and we're excited for what will happen next Tuesday.
- [29:53]
A
I don't know how much you dug into, you know, the policies of the Mamdani campaign and such, but you know, one thing that strikes me that's interesting, I'm interested in your philosophy on this, especially as someone who's, you know, been in government before and, you know, thought about these things, is a lot of people even who agree with his diagnosis of some of the problems, obviously tuned into his focus on the affordability crisis, say that some of the platform items that he put forward are not really the right solutions. Government run grocery stores or, you know, one or maybe two in each borough are not really the right antidote to high grocery prices. That freezing the rent on all rent stabilized apartments might provide some relief to a percentage of rent stabilized tenants who really need it. But there's plenty who don't need frozen rent the same way and could afford a very small increase that would then help those buildings, you know, maintain their ability to pay their bills, those types of things. Free buses is not necessarily the best idea to make transit more affordable when the majority of riders are riding the subway and even bus riders are riding to the subway. I could go on here, right. How do you think about sort of taking a technocratic approach to government policy and taking that into a role like state comptroller, where a lot of times some of the sort of progressive groups or policy advocacy is kind of detached from a very clear eyed analysis of what the right public policy program to achieve a certain goal would be. How do you think about balancing those sort of political calls with actually taking a technocratic approach to what works in government?
- [31:40]
B
Well, I don't know if I necessarily agree with the notion that the policy prescriptions are, didn't fit the, you know, to fit the larger problem. So I guess what I would say is that right now I would never argue for technocratic solutions. I argue for solutions that work and that are clear and understandable by the average person. I think one of the problems with the Democratic Party for too long is governance by white paper. You know, you have candidates who brag about the footnotes in their reports. Well, you know, footnotes have never solved somebody's housing crisis. Footnotes have never got somebody excited about the fact that we can actually have government work for the people again and not the insiders. As comptroller I think it is, and as somebody who's been in public life, and frankly, this is true for any challenge, any systemic change that one wants to bring is it has to be clear and understandable by people. One of the things that I think is really terrific about what Zoron's doing right now, is it making government more efficient and effective and easier? For far too long, the efficiency framework has been dominated by the right. And in my experience, having run a business, having been in public life, having fought change, fought for change, and having a leader my entire life, I can't stand it when people make this false construct. Inefficiency should be. We should root against inefficiency everywhere we see it because it hurts the delivery of services for people who need it. My view and my Role and my vision as the next comptroller is to of course help govern the state's finances with a clear eyed absolute financial integrity at every step and to make sure that the office responds to the issues that are facing New Yorkers right now. That's why it's an elected position. That's why I talk utility rates, that's why I talk about investing in housing. Helping universal childcare become a reality through the audit power, perhaps even through some targeted investments. These are the things that people care about. Getting ICE out of New York is an academic or technocratic Ben, that's a real life concern that this office should be active on.
- [33:59]
A
Yeah, I think what I'm saying, technocratic. I'm defining it more as, you know, remove some of the politics and really look clearly at efficiency, at what the data says about what works and doesn't work. You know, things that you would do in an audit function of the state controller when you're really like evaluating policies and programs to say what works and what doesn't or what's a smart use of.
- [34:21]
B
I'll give a great example of that, which is take child care. And you know that I co chaired Five Borough here in, in New York and, and one of the things that we worked on a lot was childcare. Where is the audit that shows how much we lose in GDP and economic activity by lacking universal childcare? I know what it's like when you're hiring folks and you want to keep them and you have to be able to live in the city and afford the city and we would lose talented people because they said, look, I got to go to the birds or I got to get out of the metro area because I'm going to have my second kid or my first kid. And so that is not politicizing an office. That's actually doing the job of the office to write that audit and talk about how public policy affects people. That's the vision of a comptroller that is actually responsive and using the people's money in an effective way.
- [35:12]
A
You actually hit on something that I wanted to follow up on and ask you about originally, which is to say a little bit more about the company that you founded and ran and sold, which, correct me if I'm wrong, essentially is an AI powered service to help companies manage their spending on legal counsel and services. In other words, helping with better cost controls and efficiency and service provision, where for many companies of lots of sizes, legal spending can be extremely challenging and large and a big expense. Say a little bit about how the Essence of that work would actually you would, if you would take that into this Office of Comptroller, especially the piece about sort of using AI as a tool. I don't know if that's something you have a platform around. I mean, I haven't seen it on your website and I'm wondering, you know, would you deploy AI in the controller's office in a certain way? Do you have thoughts on that? So if you could connect those and. Yeah, go ahead.
- [36:13]
B
Oh, no, I appreciate that. So this company was, you know, technically a machine learning company. It was before the rise of generative AI that became most famous with the release of ChatGPT in the fourth quarter of 2022. So, yeah, you summarized it well, which is the legal. This is a whole nother podcast. But the legal world is a big problem in America. We are seeing it on the streets with, of course, the crisis with ICE and what the Trump administration is doing on its war on immigrants. And of course, being the first in my family born in this country, having had family members face deportation, having been an advocate for immigrants my entire life, you know, it's very, very personal and it's very concerning to me. But the legal system right now is really out of whack and it is something that frankly, the progressive movement should spend more time on. And I predict actually over time, and the rise of AI that will happen. And so legal budgets in big. In companies, there is a lot of. There is a lot of waste and there's a lot of spend and there's a lot of overrun there. So our technology was helping figure out where that waste was, and it was successful at doing that. And to your larger question of do I use AI, of course I do think it's interesting that Tom Dinapoli brags about the fact that he doesn't use a computer, that he has his assistant print out his emails for him. That's not a personal knock. I just think it is a. It's a window into sort of how he sees the world. And of course, that's why he's dependent on fossil fuel companies, because I think in his mindset, he thinks that's a normal. That is just a requirement that you have to have these stocks and these old oil giants. And so in the future, of course, we don't. So I will use whatever tools are available to make sure that we are delivering services in an efficient manner. And we, of course, need to make sure that we are. You know, I think there is a very strong, good workforce in the comptroller's office. And I don't think we need to add more people there, but I think we could yield more out of that office and I look forward to doing it.
- [38:26]
A
And what AI? I mean, it seems like this. It seems like the State Comptroller's office would actually be an incredible place to see how well government could harness artificial intelligence and machine learning. Now, you have to be obviously very careful with how you view it.
- [38:41]
B
Very transparent. That's right. I agree with you. Very transparent. Huge guardrails are needed to make sure, of course, that we have data privacy, that we have the ethical constraints up. But absolutely, there is going to be. We are in the midst, in the very early innings of the AI revolution. And I think that gets. As the Chief Financial Officer, we need somebody who's actually is foot forward on those issues. I'll give you a great example, which is Uber came in and of course there was huge consumer demand for ride sharing. Nobody can deny that. But at the same time, the political system was bought by big venture capitalists, by big tech oligarchs. Billions of dollars coming in to subsidize, to pay drivers, to pay off the political system. And what did we have? Driver suicides, bankruptcy, the crashing of the medallion market. And the political system was not prepared to put the guidelines in place to secure workers. And then they had rushed headlong into the ride sharing revolution. And what happened was we had an incredible amount of pain that wasn't necessary and we're still dealing with that. We need to avoid that happening here with what's happening with AI. That could, that could, that could absolutely be traumatic for sectors of the New York economy. Remember, this is the publishing capital, the legal capital. There are so many, the media capital. So there are so many industries here that are subject to disruption, very profound disruption that we need to get ahead of that. You did mention the law firm thing. I'd be remiss. Not to mention, I know you didn't ask Tom about this, but you get back to law firms. I will never allow what he's allowed to happen, which is half a million dollars of campaign contributions in exchange for very lucrative contracts that he gives to litigation firms. And I'm an expert in legal procurement and in procurement generally. And that is the appearance of impropriety. It's inappropriate. It's pay to play. It's flat out pay to play. Everybody knows that. There's no reason these law firms would be bankrolling them that heavily without getting the contracts in return.
- [40:48]
A
I mean, I think a lot of officials who are involved in Contracting, would you flip it around the other way? Right. And say they're evaluating contracts and awarding contracts, and then if executives from those companies wind up donating to their campaigns, then that's part of the campaign finance system. Not necessarily saying the donations are coming in exchange for the contracts.
- [41:12]
B
I would respectfully say that's not what's happening here at all. Ben, on the issue of those on the pension fund litigation, it is known in the industry that, of course, those law firms want access to the panel of law firms that are empowered by DiNapoli's office. They are selected that way. And then, of course, if they get litigation, and then some of those settlements are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. And so there is no way that that doesn't really pass the smell test that the firms would give. Many of them give in hopes of getting eventual contracts.
- [41:45]
A
Well, yeah, there's some interesting campaign finance reform ground there to discuss. But let me come back to AI for sure. As state controller, what would you try to do on this AI front in terms of guardrails? What would you be looking at most closely pursuing in terms of whether it's shareholder activism or it's just using the bully pulpit? How would you be thinking about avoiding these disruptions or ensuring certain protections in all these industries you mentioned that are very vulnerable to AI? And then also, I mean, one thing that strikes me, though, that you were talking about, you know, around sort of the introduction of Uber and then other, you know, companies like Lyft, etcetera, into especially the New York market, is that when there was an attempt to regulate, the initial attempt to put a cap on Uber, you know, for our vehicle licenses, out of concern for the traditional yellow taxi industry, there was a huge amount of advocacy, and again, of course, funded in part by the companies, but a huge amount of advocacy among consumers who wanted choice. And there was actually a lot of advocacy coming out of black and Latino communities and leaders who had always had traditional problems with the, you know, taxicab industry.
- [43:11]
B
Yeah, of course. Yeah.
- [43:12]
A
And so there was that advocacy, and then there was also a worker side of it where there were a lot of people getting jobs in the foreign economy. Yeah, so.
- [43:22]
B
So to be clear, ride sharing is here to stay. And when there is such untapped consumer demand, the market is saying something. So there's no question. And of course, that's why, remember when the city did the outer borough taxi with the green taxis and so on? They were trying to be responsive and it wasn't enough. And so the point is not to be Anti innovation we needed, right, we needed ride sharing. And it's clear that with everybody with a mobile phone that it was a natural extension to say, wait a second here, why can't the car come pick me up? But I'll give you another example of that, which is the city of Austin, Texas had a dispute on the background checks with Uber drivers and set up a nonprofit called Ride Austin. I happened to be visiting Austin. It functioned exactly the same as Uber did. And so the existence of ride sharing is terrific. The point is that the political system was completely unable and was ill equipped to handle the real life impact on people and on the industry and on how it affected workers. And so that's the kind of things to get to. Your question about the guardrails I'm talking about is to say we need to make sure on the. Again, as a shareholder advocate and as an activist, what should. The pension fund. The pension fund should be out there. And as comptroller, I would be saying, listen, we're not going to just, again, let me bring up SpaceX. SpaceX is a wonderful example, or I should say actually a tragic example of what unbridled wealth is doing in perverting our political and economic system the markets have clearly failed to corral. The markets on paper are making somebody a trillionaire. You realize that if Elon Musk was his own country, he'd be the 20th largest country on planet Earth. And his wealth, Jeff Bezos, is worth $250 billion, but his wealth is closer to zero now than it is to Elon Musk's. Our heads can't even get around the staggering amount of wealth of the oligarchs we were talking about before. But now we've even reached astronomical intergalactic levels. And so the markets have clearly failed at restraining this. This is the Reagan revolution gone on steroids. And so the political system is what's left. And so that's the role, as I believe, of somebody as state comptroller should be standing up and saying, wait a second here. I am going to call out that the economic markets, the financial markets are out of whack and therefore we need to understand what it's doing to us as a society and as an economy. And similarly, when it comes to AI, we have. And that's why I'm very proud to have been. You mentioned it earlier. I helped get the cell phone down through as the leading outside advocate for that through an organization called Phone Free New York. That's been a hugely successful initiative. I was also a fan, or sorry involved in Andrew Gonardis bill on regulating social media algorithms from the previous session and this session had a variety of bills to rein in big tech. And I've made a huge centerpiece of my campaign, the fight against AI data, data centers, which there's almost 30 data centers planned around New York. And it's popping up in community after community, a right left coalition, Republicans, Democrats, you know, all sorts of Democrats saying, listen, we need to stop and put a moratorium on this because this is moving too fast and we need to put some guardrails in place. Again, Tom DiNapoli absent from every single one of the issues I just mentioned over the last two.
- [46:55]
A
So you want, you want Governor Hochul to sign that data center partial moratorium bill?
- [47:02]
B
No question.
- [47:03]
A
And it'll be very interesting to see what she does on that one.
- [47:06]
B
Absolutely, absolutely. So again, we're having a great broad ranging discussion around a variety of issues that are facing our state, our city, our country. And to get back to this race and to get back to what we're doing with this comptroller's office, Tom is unfortunately just not in any of these fights. And I think that's what we're talking about when Democratic primary voters have a real choice on Tuesday.
- [47:34]
A
We don't have time to get into all the details of the state budget that just passed, but give me your two minute. Good, bad, ugly. The state budget is coming in now at roughly $277 billion for the fiscal year that is ongoing now that started April 1st. There was a lot of policy in there. The process, you know, was delayed. There were a lot of, a lot of aspect to this, whether it's policy, fiscal or process, but highlights knowing we can't get to every piece of your thoughts on it. Good, bad, ugly. What do you think of this budget and what stands out to you?
- [48:09]
B
Obviously a mixed bag. Very disappointed in the rollback of the clcpa. I was arrested in Albany on that issue. Very disappointed. Not more done to save the people on the essential plan. We got half a million New Yorkers going to be cut off because of the horrible Trump budget. I think again, the comptroller's office has been woefully inadequate to sound the alarm to travel the state to advocate. You know, I hope again, as I mentioned on the data centers, I'm hopeful that the governor does sign that. I'm happy to see that there was a lot of attention around this utility bill crisis. But as I said, the real those are all band aids, unfortunately, because the real driver of how you get structural reform of utility prices, of Con Ed and National Grid, and all over the state is the state comptroller's office. So, you know, I was asked on a debate about sort of the overall size of the budget. And what I say to that is it depends if there's value to it. You know, you mentioned my company experience. Somebody said, my company spends $100 million on litigation, said, well, do you get $150 million of value for that 100 million? Then you got a good deal. If you're getting $20 million for $100 million, you're getting a bad deal. And so I would say there's obviously, and I look forward to as the, as computer, as the auditor and someone who reviews the budget when there are programs that aren't working, when there's waste and there's inefficiency, I'm going to be all over it like a hobby.
- [49:29]
A
Yeah, the, I mean, as you know, the two biggest areas of the state budget being Medicaid and education aid to localities are two of the areas that just keep growing significantly in different ways. Lots of fiscal hawks and watchdogs are saying different things. I mean, these are two very different buckets. So it's hard to pull them together any more than I already have here. But that there's inefficiency, there's waste, there's money being, you know, sent places that don't need it. In the case, you know, of education aid, for example, that a lot of the wealthier districts around the state don't need this amount of state aid. But politically, that's very, you know, very hard nut to crack. You know, there's, there's, there is this question that you're getting at. And actually Mayor Mamdani, as you talked about, spoke about this a lot in his campaign and now in government that New Yorkers don't feel like they're getting their bang for the buck, whether it's at the state level or the city level. And this seems to be one of the animating principles always of some of the Republicans running statewide or for state legislative seats. They don't seem to be convincing enough voters to take power. But it'll be coming up again in the general elections this year, certainly that, you know, Albany is overspending and under delivering. Do you have thoughts on where you see some of that inefficiency right now in the state spending? Where is the state either spending too much money or not getting the bang for its buck? And I understand you haven't had the power of the comptroller's office to be looking into these things. But you must have one or two ideas about where the state is not getting the bang for its buck.
- [50:57]
B
Well, I've always said that I would, of course, audit the mta. And of course, there have been some improvements. I'm a fan of congestion pricing and was strongly advocating for it when I was at Five Borough. But of course, I think there is a great opportunity there for extracting unnecessary costs. There's no reason that we should be spending so much per subway mile late compared to other major cities that are older and equally as complex as New York City. So that's a great example. And of course, on the Medicaid front, if we are, when we do have waste and when we do have, frankly, fraud in the system, it hurts us all. You know, I'm the son of two mom and pop physicians. My parents came from nothing and ran a mom and pop medical clinic. And one of the things that chaps my hide the most is when Republicans talk about people getting, you know, fat on the hog with Medicaid. I mean, have they ever been to a Medicaid clinic? Do they have any idea, you know, what these safety net clinics are, how difficult life is there? And frankly, we have, sadly, a tale of two cities. When it comes to our healthcare system. We have huge healthcare disparities. Covid made that tragically clear. The political system has had a very, very weak response to that. Very little discussion of that around how basically where your zip code determines whether or not you'll live or die. And that's what Covid laid bare. So all of these are issues that I look forward to tackling a state comptroller. And I will have to say, again, you know, of those things, again, we just rattled off, we went through in terms of the death rates and the disparity in the healthcare system. You know, no one is looking at the Tom Dinapoli right now for leadership
- [52:36]
A
on that because, again, the New York Health act, that would be a, you know, any year. You do? I do, yeah. Have you looked at it closely in terms of whether you think it would really be a smart sort of overall fiscal decision for New York State?
- [52:53]
B
I have a very strong belief, and again, having been raised in a system where ever since I was a little kid being told that healthcare is a human right. And I suspect my father probably gave away. He was a mom and pop doc, but I suspect he was successful, but he probably gave away sometimes more care than that. He actually was paid for. And I would say that it is such an imperative that we move toward a system in which we actually have consolidation and efficiency gains. Because right now the healthcare system is really like it's the Balkans and it is fiefdom after fiefdom after fiefdom, with trillions of dollars in the balance and all those fiefdoms vying for power and access and money is what is keeping the system from reforming itself. And so yes, it will not be an easy transition, but I fundamentally believe that it must happen. I think it is somewhat analogous to when we say that we have to finally get over the hump and transition from fossil fuels. That is an important societal transition that we have to make. We need to move on from a carbon based economy. And similarly in healthcare, we just have to move beyond the fiefdoms right now in which every cost center and every clinic and every hospital and every provider and every company is vying for this piece of the pie, rather than looking at, in a holistic, comprehensive way, which is the whole point of the healthcare system is to deliver health for people and as cheap a unit cost as possible.
- [54:34]
A
Can a state really do a single payer system though? I mean, do you think that's really viable as opposed to having, having to do it on a national level? Because when you, if New York were to implement this, you're probably talking about, you know, raising significant taxes on, on quite a few people. You also favor other tax increases. I'm wondering sort of on, on taxes generally and on major policies like a shift to a single payer health system, how you think about this question of risking New York losing a lot of those folks whose tax money of course does support the $277 billion state budget and beyond, I think two things.
- [55:16]
B
One is we of course don't have a single payer system in this country. But of course CMS acts as a de facto healthcare regulator and arbiter and administrator for the healthcare system and of course with other agencies and the FDA and so on. But if one state, I think it's analogous to, because of this Robert Kennedy madness on vaccines, what are we seeing? Interstate compacts around vaccine mandates and vaccine standards? That's a healthy sign. That's the laboratories of democracy. So I think it is again fundamentally important that we begin that transition and we execute it. Because what will happen is that other states will follow that model and there is a tremendous amount of efficiencies we can gain if we actually did it even within one one state. I would also point out that when you have a state moving toward A system like that, it will inherently in that process connect with other reforms that can be catalytic on many fronts. So for example, you mentioned that Zoran talks about the fact that we need to reconnect with our government. You mentioned taxes. So if we moved eventually toward a single payer system and people actually lived and saw the catalytic reforms that would happen, which is this absolute madness they deal with with their insurance companies. I'm sure you've lived at. Ben. Anybody listening to this has lived at with it. My father passed away. I was his full time caretaker. It was a very traumatic time. You know, he lived across the street and you know, then we got all the, we got bills for blood tests he hadn't even, that weren't even given to him. When my second daughter was born at St. Luke's she was in the NICU for four days and the doctors were out of network. How would we have known? We were obviously wanting to do everything to make sure my daughter and our baby was okay. They got these huge bills for $50,000 for out of network docs. When people start actually tasting and seeing a system that, that is, that doesn't have these abuses because that's what they are, I believe you will actually have more buy in for what's happening with tax revenue and you will actually see people investing in the system and I think you will have a catalytic force for actually trust in government and seeing. Because right now, now people are literally dying because of our healthcare system. And if we can improve that, we can improve public support for it as well.
- [57:59]
A
And someone who's been an entrepreneur, as we discussed with your business, do you worry at all about some of the tax increase proposals that you support hurting New York as a entrepreneurial destination? And we've obviously seen the rise of lots of other business communities in other states and there's been population shifts that don't even seem to relate to entrepreneurial opportunities or tax rates that are also, you know, challenging demographic shifts for New York and losing relative population to other states and therefore representation in Congress and all of that. Do you have any concerns though about, you know, sort of the ensuring the entrepreneurial environment in New York and where that balance is?
- [58:42]
B
The entrepreneurial environment in New York has never been better unless somebody who started a business here and made sure that it was in New York. And by the way, we paid full health, family healthcare benefits, which was unprecedented for a company our size. Even the big mega tech companies don't do that. They sort of discriminated against people with kids. And so I would Say that the most important thing when an entrepreneur starts a company, news flash here, they never think about the tax rate. They think about the vision they have for their business and how they can succeed and where the talent is. And that's what I've learned, lived. And so New York is. Look at the technology sector in New York from the last 20, 30 years is absolutely fantastic. And it has grown and grown and grown from the time of Silicon Alley to now becoming an international hub. And of course, it's only showing signs of continuing to grow because people want to be in New York. I've been out to Silicon Valley. It's boring. And people who would much rather be. Would much rather be in New York. And as long as New York can be affordable. So I worry about a tax base in which we. I mean, I do support taxing the rich. And I heard Tom on your show, you know, hem and haw on that. I couldn't. He talked for three minutes. I couldn't understand, you know, what his answer was. I'll just say it very clearly. I support taxing the rich. And again, you talked about it and we were talking about in the healthcare context, if people see a connection to childcare being universal and affordable, you know, good schools, a transit system that works, a place that they can live and raise their family, that is the natural driver of tech, of how an entrepreneurial and innovation mindset and ecosystem thrives.
- [60:25]
A
I've lived my recollection of what, what he said on the question was because he hasn't been out there giving an opinion on, you know, some of the various proposals is that he said he, he views it as, is decide what you want the services to be and what the goals are. And then if you need additional revenue, then you have a conversation about the tax increases that could fund those things. Is that not a fair view to take to say?
- [60:50]
B
Well, what I recall is what he said was he's like, well, I heard that there is some. He gave a nod to what I think is misinformation, though. You're going to have the drainage of people who leave the state. But then again, I understand that you need some services again. So that's what I recall him saying. And I'm going to just be very clear and I'll be unequivocal in saying that I am confident that if you have, if we tax the rich, we need that revenue, and if people tied it and it was actually tied to something like a universal child care system, people would be fine. We will not be losing people to other States we're actually losing people now because it's unaffordable to live here. And New York will remain New York because it is a hub for so many very things. If we lose the nature of New York because it's unaffordable to live here, that is a greater threat than what some of the critics say. I believe that.
- [61:51]
A
Let's spend our last five minutes here on the sort of state of the race here, the politics of all this. It's great to talk about all this policy and so we'll. Let's sneak a couple minutes in on the politics. So essentially this is a three person race. What's your sort of estimate about what percentage of the vote you need to win? Like, do you have a sense of what it's going to take here in a three person race to like what, what your target percentage of the vote is or target number of votes? Like you're hoping. I assume, going back to part of our prior conversation, that you're also activating some voters who may not have traditionally come out in Democratic primaries, you know, some of those attempts as you go around the state. So how are you, how are you thinking about like the votes you need and your path to victory and the sort of percentage it's going to take in this race with three candidates, including an incumbent who again is not sort of a renowned household name but has been winning races in New York for decades. And voters are very used to sort of pulling the levers, so to speak, for his name. How, what do you have to get to and how do you get there? There?
- [62:56]
B
Yeah, I think we're excited about where we stand. You know, probably in a three way race, if you're looking at a 35 to 40% plurality, you know, that's that, that, that, that might be what that win number looks like. I think that you mentioned what happened in the mayoral. Of course there is a very strong, to be specific South Asian interesting voter base that I think was very energized. We're very proud of having the first South Asian American mayor here. And that's a project that I've worked on for a long time. So I think there are some continue to be overlooked communities that will be, that will be turning out in this primary. And so I think that, and as far as Tom's history of being elected, of course he's never faced a primary and everyone would acknowledge, we've all acknowledged, I would as well. But the Kahn brothers race will never lead the front pages in headlines. But I do think that this Primary has been a healthy process to draw attention to the race, to these issues. And we look forward to next Tuesday.
- [64:02]
A
Say a little bit for people what you see as the biggest differences between you and Drew Warshaw, obviously, the path to victory for either of you would probably be a lot stronger, clearer, if it was only one of you running. So maybe you want to say anything about that dynamic, but what are the biggest differences between the two of you in your records, approaches, vision?
- [64:22]
B
Sure. Well, look, I've been a fighter my entire life. I didn't leave after my education. I didn't go to Albany and try to be a technocratic insider. And I think we need somebody who's been. I went out and won one of the biggest races in the country for the progressive movement and fought like a dog in the, in the hardest place and was successful. I've run a company, been at the aclu. I didn't turn to be a. I didn't turn to activism for purposes of a campaign. It's been authentic to who I am. And I don't think we really need technocrats right now, or, of course, a person who's been in Albany for 40 years like Tom DiNapoli. I think we need someone who's a fresh new vision, a fresh new voice who can connect with people and also has been consistent in this campaign. I think if you look at two interesting issues, which is on day one of this campaign, I got in in September and I said, I'm going to divest from fossil fuels. Drew had been in the race for seven months before he finally came to that, when he realized that it was politically useful. And I think on that issue, the Israel bonds and the issue of the genocide side is probably the most stark. I mean, up until a few weeks ago, Drew was in favor of the Israel bonds. And we were at a forum on December 13, and I said I'd kill the foreign bond portfolio. I called Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal, and he said he would index the bonds, which is just a technocratic way of saying you keep the bonds. And so I think that if you look at who's been the leader, I've of course, led the charge on the utility rates on Palantir. And so I think if you look at how we've campaigned, how we've governed, I think the vision that I've got for a true progressive champion in that office, someone who has a proven record of getting it done. You know, we talked about the cell phone ban as well. I wasn't even elected. And we were able to I was able to help accomplish one of the most important policy goals of the policy wins of the last few years. So I'm excited about where we stand.
- [66:14]
A
So both Drew Warshaw and Tom DiNapoli have sort of of pointed to you and said when you were in the Kansas legislature, running for Congress in Kansas that your record is much more moderate to conservative than you're running on in this campaign. They point to comments you made about cracking down on hiring undocumented workers and opposing amnesty for undocumented immigrants and, you know, a few other sort of statements or votes you've taken. Have you had a political evolution that you, you can explain?
- [66:45]
B
Yeah, I understand how politics works and how campaigns work. I'll just be very clear about it. I was, you know, I won one of the, probably the biggest Democratic state house win in the country as the first South Asian elected in one of the hardest places in America. We raised the minimum wage, we funded education. We protected the right to choose. I was endorsed by Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, the AFL CIO of Planned Parenthood, and notably for this race, Drew Orshaw, who was an enthusiastic backer of all three of my campaigns and donated all of them host for events. He called me the real there's a
- [67:16]
A
difference between running as sort of a Democrat in Kansas and again, I think a lot of people would acknowledge that it's harder, harder to win.
- [67:23]
B
Well, yeah, but so you have to
- [67:25]
A
adjust your politics to the voters somehow. Sure.
- [67:28]
B
And of course, the language has changed. You know, the Obama coalition on immigration, that was the notion of the time, you know, to oppose amnesty and have a pathway to legalize citizenship and, and, and to secure the border. I'm happy that we, that the Democratic Party has evolved on that. We now have an existential crisis with Donald Trump. And I think it's got a, you know, my opponents have a lot of brass talking about immigration. When I'm the son of immigrants, I know what it's like. I've seen my parents discriminated against. I know what it's like to grow up and be other. They don't. You know, we fought for immigrants. I worked with the Latino Caucus and the Black Caucus each and every day. I was called a communist, a terrorist, a turban topper or I've got these scars of what it's like to live as an immigrant in America, what it's like to live in a very difficult place. And we still have a lot of work to do here in New York. So, you know, I fought every step of the way I'll give you one great example, which is they had a bill that would have made all government services English only. We gutted that bill, and we had some meaningless thing that was called English as an official language, which did nothing. Even some Republicans voted against it because it was so meaningless. That's how we held the line in a place like Kansas. And it's that commitment to championing the immigrants and workers is why I was endorsed by all these progressive groups out there, and also why, frankly, I've been endorsed by New York Communities for Change. Ali Najmi, you know, Pramila J. Paul, Ro Khanna, Steve Donzinger, New York Communities for Change, as I mentioned, the Sunrise movement. You know, I'm proud of our progressive, the movement we're building here in New York because it's very consistent with who I am and how we're going to govern as a comptroller.
- [69:05]
A
Since you brought that up, doing some preparation for this, I did watch some of your debate with Mike Pompeo in which you said that, you know, that you worked on and helped write a law that helped make English the official language of the state of Kansas. And Pompeo responded basically by saying, oh, it sounds like we agree on the lot. You know, I'm glad my opponent has sort of come around on these issues. Issues. Is that just the way politics goes and you're trying to win in a red state? You know, I mean that. I mean that. That sounds like you're right. Now you're talking about how you helped water down that bill. But you're in a debate.
- [69:39]
B
Which is what we did. Which is what we did. Right.
- [69:40]
A
But you're on a debate.
- [69:42]
B
I mean, that.
- [69:44]
A
Just politics or what?
- [69:45]
B
Yeah, well, I'm saying, of course, yes, there are there in Kansas. There it is obviously a different environment. And look here in New York. York. Remember when I remember you had Tom on, he was talking about how the Senate was always controlled by Republicans up in Albany and the Working Families Party had to make a bunch of compromises and decisions. So I'd say the language, obviously, there is evolution in language and politics, but the core of the issue is the work that was done every day to protect immigrants and our coalition, which is why it was endorsed by the afl, cio, Planned Parenthood, Pelosi, Obama, the Latino Caucus. So, you know, I would say right now, the focus. I understand why my opponents want to look backwards because Tom Dinapoli can't defend his record and Drew has no record to run on. And so I think that the primary voters here in New York are excited about the fact that there is somebody who can make history as the first South Asian elected statewide, who's got a proven record of being a fighter and accomplishing things as a real leader. And I'm excited for next Tuesday.
- [70:54]
A
Let me ask you in closing, there's a whole bunch of other primaries happening right now. So you've got the whole island of Manhattan has competitive congressional primaries. You've got, you know, other interesting congressional and state legislative primaries all over the five boroughs and beyond. Are there certain other campaigns that you're sort of of see yourself as aligned with? Are you sort of trying to ride a wave that's this anti incumbency wave that you talked about? I think at the beginning of this interview where people are frustrated with a lot of the status quo and there's lots of Democrats challenging other Democrats in primaries. Are there other candidates you see yourself as most aligned with? You know, other people running for either the state house here in New York or Congress who you see as sort of like kinship campaigns in this, in this effort that you're undergoing here, here?
- [71:45]
B
Well, I mean there's a whole bunch of candidates that I've campaigned with and we've done some cross endorsements with and so on. And I would just say more generally that I'm excited about this moment of change and I'm excited by what we're seeing all across the city, all across the state. And so yes, I would say that if people who I'm running against, a 50 year Albany, a 40 year Albany insider and a 53 year long politician. And so that's what I'm focused on. And I think for other candidates who are making that same case against the establishment, I think that's a very ripe argument right now. And you know, for example, I was happy to be, you know, I've been good friends with Brad Lander for a long time. I think I noted that you, I think Drew was, was waffling on who he'd vote for there. You know, I, I vote for, I vote for Brad in that race. Race.
- [72:36]
A
And you will, you're a New York 10 voter, right? You will vote for Brad or you did vote.
- [72:42]
B
Oh sure, sure, sure. Yes, I endorsed Brad when he got into the race. And I think it's an important race and I realize, acknowledging he hasn't endorsed in our race. But I think that, I think if you want better Democrats and Democrats who fight and affordability watchdogs like I'm going to be, I think Brad represents that tradition. So you know I'm excited about what's happening out there, and I think there's a lot of energy. And we're excited to tap into that and we're excited for next Tuesday.
- [73:10]
A
All right. Raj Goyal, Democratic candidate for New York State comptroller. Really appreciate the time and thoughts and good conversation about your campaign, your platform and a whole bunch of other things that we touched on here. Thanks for the time and thoughts. Appreciate it.
- [73:22]
B
Thanks, Ben. Take care,
- [73:30]
A
Sam. It.