20th Anniversary of EdNotesOnline - Some Issues Never Go Away

The iron law of institutions states that people who run an organization care more about keeping their own power than helping the organization succeed....political analysts use this concept to explain why progressive or liberal groups, labor unions, and activist spaces sometimes prioritize internal control, ideological conformity, or leadership survival over winning broader elections or achieving their stated social goals.  

The institutional Dem Natl Comm are so threatened by a statewide win by a progressive in Michigan, they spend more time attacking him than his Republican opponent --- thus you see the name Hassan Piker being raised in every media, both Republican and Democrat circles.  Dem Doyone Neera Tanden who heads the misnamed Center for American Progress (I prefer Regress) had 15 tweets about Piker over two days. She'd  rather see a Republican win in Michigan and lose the Senate because a win by Abdul will negate her influence and power. Tell her to GFH with a donation to him.

Keep these points in mind while I switch gears.

The first EdNotesOnline post on Aug. 27, 2006: 

An attentive class size of three

Sadly, all 3 cats are gone, the last one in 2011 - but we did have two more after that, but they are gone too -- so, we are catless for the first time in 55 years.

Monday, August 31, 2026 - Celebrating 20 years of blogging.

Education Notes has been around in print and online for almost 30 years. I began publishing the print editions in 1998 but they are not online yet.

An item I published 20 years ago (see below) turns out to have some relevance to the sturm und drang taking place in the world of UFT retirees over the differences between the Retiree Advocate/New Action tandem and Fix Retiree Benefits. The discussion broke out in the RTC Ex Bd and beyond on some listserves when a group of independents unaffiliated with either group, seeing a Unity retake of the RTC as an existential threat to retiree healthcare, began demanding there be a united slate in the spring 2027 RTC election.

RA/New Action group dominates the 25 member RTC officers and Ex Bd with 9 out of 10 officers (Arthur Goldstein of FRB is the only non RA member) and also occupy 6 of the 15 EB. Given the level of outreach to a broader level of retirees, with the help of Marianne Pizzitola's NYCOPSR, FRB is asking for a 50-50 split of the 25 seats with the odd position going to the group that doesn't choose the chapter leader. The response has not been encouraging, indicating that the current RTC leadership is happy with the status quo and wants to maintain control. 

(See above, The iron law of institutions).

One concern with the RTC leadership over the past two years has been a lack of pushback against the UFT/Unity leadership - the subservience to Mulgrew and Unity Caucus retirees who are scheming to take back the chapter and are getting little resistance. 

Recently RA put out a proposed platform with no mention of Unity Caucus, who they are supposedly running against. There's a history at play here - the long-time dozen year relationship between NAC/RA and Unity. 

I helped form the Independent Community of Educators in late 2003 to run in the 2004 election because of the NAC deal with Unity - details another time - but search this blog for New Action if you want to know more. Let's go back 20 years to August 31, 2006 when I included an item on the upcoming UFT elections in the spring of 2007 https://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2006/08/ednotes-online-august-31-2006.html, with this snippet.

With New Action not revealing their intentions at this time other than to give strong indications they will not run with the ICE-TJC slate despite an offer that was made to have them join the slate, there is an opening for them to play a spoiler for Unity by dividing the opposition vote and allowing Unity to regain control of 100% of the Executive Board. Of course, New Action could choose not to run at all but without some statement from New Action affirming that position, ICE-TJC must now go on the assumption New Action might agree to be a stalking horse for Unity. ICE-TJC welcomes individuals in New Action who wish to run with them.

What is old is new again. 

The co-chairs of New Action 20 years ago were Michael Shulman and Jonathan Halabi, both leaders of the current Retiree Advocate (Shulman is still co-chair of NAC) and are among the 10 officers of the RTC and viewed as the major resistors to running a united slate in the RTC election to prevent Unity from regaining control of the chapter. 

(See The iron law of institutions).

New Action spawned Retiree Advocate over 30 years ago and reps from both ran in UFT elections in cooperation with Unity by endorsing Randi for president in 2004 and 2007 and Mulgrew in 2010 and 2013 and ran on the Unity slate in 2007, 2010 and 2013, getting their reps elected to the Exec Bd with Unity votes, including both Shulman and Halabi.

While I criticized RA and NAC during those years, we made peace in 2016 when they left the Unity fold and I and others connected to ICE and MORE joined RA and worked hard in the election 2 years ago. We also worked together in the 2022 UFT elections. I make these points to those who claim we are driven apart by personal pique and egos. If we worked together over almost 10 years despite differences, we are still willing to see Unity as the common enemy. 

And therein lies the rub. NAC and RA people often chastise critics for pointing to Unity as an enemy. "They are just fellow union members," they say. "Sure," I reply. "Fellow union members who advocated for taking us out of Medicare." If they had succeeded, with my current medical condition I'm not sure I'd still be alive. Sorry, people who are willing to risk our lives are enemies. 

Like I said, some issues never go away. 

===== 

Both Halabi and Shulman are prominently mentioned in a recent post by Arthur Goldstein, the only one of the 10 RTC officers not in the Retiree Advocate steering committee.

Arthur Goldstein

RA Leaders Resist a Unified, Equitable Slate

One of their leaders opposes 1096/1008. Another criticizes aligning with Marianne Pizzitola.

There’s been a flurry of mail directed to RTC Executive Board members, urging we build a united front to fight Unity in the next retiree election. That’s a good idea, though not a new one. I started contacting people the day after the last election to try and organize.

My friends at Fix Retiree Benefits (FRB), an offshoot of ABC, agreed. We decided we’d have a better chance of beating Unity if we ran cooperatively with Retiree Advocate (RA). Newly formed ABC got 9,000 retiree votes last year, while RA went from 17,000 to 3,000. Unity edged us all out with 13,000. This told me that we needed to put aside our differences.

I thought of a way we could run together—a way that, to my mind, was generous. Rather than demand we get the three to one representation election results indicated, we’d split it right down the middle, 50-50. My FRB friends agreed.

After a year of no response, RA met with us twice. Both times, they said they had no authority to make agreements, and no proposals of their own. They canceled our third meeting, scheduled for June. Now RA’s Jonathan Halabi, who openly opposes 1096/1008, has emailed a proposal for something his caucus calls an “Open Election Slate.”

It’s open to the degree that any RTC member may apply. However, RA continues their policy of keeping total control in the hands of their now 15-member steering committee, in that “All nominees will be vetted by the Committee.”(Correction—They say they are forming a committee to do that, and it will not necessarily be the steering committee.) That’s a far cry from running cooperatively.

Continue reading: https://arthurgoldstein.substack.com/p/ra-fights-a-unified-slate-tooth-and 

 

And Marianne Pizzitola who has lead the NYC Retirees over the past 5 years to many court victories to stop the plan to put retirees in Medicare Advantage and also to fight co-pays, takes on NAC co-chair Nick Bacon (who replaced Halabi, and spends most of his writing time attacking Marianne, ABC and FRB while making excuses for Unity.)  

Is This Really About Retiree Healthcare or About Who Gets to Challenge Unity?

Protecting Retirees Shouldn’t Require Choosing Sides

If Retiree Healthcare is the main issue, why I am the focus of Nick Bacon?

Nick Bacon’s piece deserves a response, not because NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees needs to defend its independence, but because his argument appears to conflate two entirely different questions:

Should the UFT formally affiliate with NYCOPSR?

and

Should UFT members or opposition caucuses be free to work with an independent retiree organization on issues where they share common goals?

Those are not the same question. 

Nick spends considerable time explaining why the UFT shouldn’t formally partner with NYCOPSR. But who is actually proposing that? If the current question is whether different UFT opposition groups should work together, why is NYCOPSR being presented as the obstacle? If Daniel Alicea, Arthur Goldstein, or others want to work with NYCOPSR on retiree healthcare, that does not mean NYCOPSR controls their slate. It doesn’t mean they surrender their independence. It doesn’t mean they agree with us on every issue. We do not. It means they recognize that on one important issue, protecting retiree healthcare, they share common ground. That is called coalition politics. We align on what we agree with, and not where we don’t.

And if someone believes that working with NYCOPSR should disqualify an opposition group from participating in a broader UFT coalition, then they should simply say that directly. Don’t disguise a political decision as a legal necessity 

Continue: https://mariannepizzitola.substack.com/p/is-this-really-about-retiree-healthcare

RTC Chapter Representatives

Officers

• Bennett Fischer — Chapter Leader RA
• Gloria Brandman — Secretary RA
• Gregory Di Stefano — Vice Chair Leader RA
• Novelette Foote — Vice Chair Leader 
• Arthur Goldstein — Vice Chair Leader FRB
• Michael Shulman — Vice Chair Leader RA
• Sheila Zukowsky — Corresponding Secretary RA
• Jonathan Halabi — Assistant Secretary RA
• Bobby Greenberg — Treasurer RA
• Michelle Rayvid — Assistant Treasurer RA

Executive Board

• Fred Arcoleo
• Joel Berger NAC
• Regina Gori NAC
• Doug Haynes NAC
• Scott Henstrand
• Prudence Hill RA
• Bruce Markens
• Herb Michael
• Dacio Quintana NAC
• Denise Rickles RA
• Roque Ristorucci
• Norm Scott FRB
• rAlan Stein
• Doris Wallace
• Mary Therese Whelan

1096 is now 1008 - Retirees Rally (Again) on Healthcare - Who was there, UFT/Unity MIA

I posted about this event just as I was leaving to attend Thursday morning: 

NYC Retirees Press Release - Legislation Introduction with Council Member Christopher Marte to Protect Retiree Healthcare

No one from the UFT/Unity was there (of course) but we had 4 members of the RTC Exec Bd at the event and a nice crew from Fix Retiree Benefits, which has been working closely with NYC Retirees.

Fix Retiree Benefits in the house

 

 

Saturday, August 15, 2026 

DSA had a bunch of social events going on today and I intend to go to a beach party in Rockaway where I will stand around and try to find someone over 30 to talk to. There is also a local Rockaway DSA group meeting elsewhere which actually includes older people. Oh, the choices.

I attended the Thursday morning NYC Retiree rally and presser near City Hall along a nice sized crowd where the new bill replacing 1096 was announced by Democrat Chris Marti, one of the most liberal city council members from the lower East Side who was joined by Staten Island Republican Frank Morano, one of the most conservative members.

Only Marianne Pizzitola could accomplish such a feat of unity. I find it more than ironic that certain forces inside the current leadership of the Retired Teachers Chapter of the UFT have been critical of her efforts to unite all sides of the political world in the the support of the healthcare of retired NYC workers because they would rather people whose politics they abhor not to support us and castigate Marianne for getting them to work in our interests. The level of support for working with Marianne is one sticking point in the disagreement between the 30 year old Retiree Advocate, which won the 2024 election with Marianne's massive support, and the new kids on the block, Fix Retiree Benefits (FRB), which has been working with her organization to battle on issues like co-pay and para pensions.

After it was over and we took photos, I was one of the few people left when Rockaway lifeguard legend Janet Fash showed up. 

 

She came by subway, so no surprise that the A-train would get here there late. She was disappointed in not getting to meet Marianne and Arthur Goldstein. I had just bought her book the day before and she signed it. (CBS Saturday morning just did a major feature on her and she has been appearing on NPR and other media). Her book goes beyond her life story and explores the corrupt lifeguard union. I remember reading about her battles with the union leader, who was also her boss. (Yes she was retaliated against). She was also active in the UFT as a chapter leader in a Queens middle school and had gone to UFT DAs and borough meetings and was aware the UFT is not democratic.

She is very up to date on the doings in the retiree chapter. I ran into her at the June RTC meeting and she attended the FRB zoom in late June and signed up to be more involved. She decided to take the ferry back to Rockaway and I considered going with her. I was trying to decide whether to go back to Rockaway or go back uptown to Bryant Park for a 12:30 Broadway in the park. I also had tickets for an Art Cart drawing class at 2:30. Having had chemo the day before, I had to make sure I had the energy to keep going. I decided to stay in the city and take a late afternoon ferry home. 

I stopped for breakfast at a Dunkn on Chambers St. and took the subway uptown to Bryant Park (one of the great wonders of NYC and only a few blocks from my pied... er apartment (don't tell Mamdani - lucky I have a cheaper one). The night before I missed the 6PM yoga class but this Monday I'm going to the City of God movie. 

Anyway, I'm so glad a went because I met two ladies with health issues, one with Type 1 diabetes (she was wearing a dexcom patch) and later at the Art Cart a cancer survivor who had a lot of knowledge and was very encouraging. We talked so much, my drawing of the buildings surrounding the park look like a Jackson Pollock. 

Back to the rally and presser, this is an updated version of Intro 1096 that was proposed during the 2024-25 Council session.

The bill summary states: This bill would maintain the health insurance coverage of eligible retired employees of the city of New York and their dependents by prohibiting the City from increasing the total costs for healthcare above the rate paid by each retiree as of December 31, 2021, or by decreasing the level of coverage that was provided to each such retiree as of December 31, 2021.

The full text of the bill reads as follows:

Int. No. 1008

 

 

A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to protecting the health insurance coverage and contribution for Medicare-eligible retired employees of the city of New York and their Medicare-eligible dependents

 

Be it enacted by the Council as follows:

 

Section 1. Subdivision a of section 12-126 of the administrative code of the city of New York, as amended by local law number 9 for the year 2010, is amended to read as follows:

a. Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings [hereinafter stated]:

[i. “]City employee.[“] The term “city employee” means [A] a person: (1) who is employed by a department or agency of the city; and (2) is paid out of the city treasury; and (3) is employed under terms prescribing a work week regularly consisting of twenty or more hours during the fiscal year; and (4) is not employed by the board of education. 

[ii. “]City retiree.[“] The term “city retiree” means [A] a person who: (1) is receiving a  retirement allowance, pension or other retirement benefit from a retirement or pension system either maintained by the city or to which the city has made contributions on behalf of such person pursuant to subdivision (g) of section 80-a of the retirement and social security law; and (2) immediately prior to such person's retirement as a member of such system, was a city employee, or was an employee of the board of education employed under terms prescribing a work week regularly consisting of twenty or more hours during the fiscal year; and (3) had at the time of retirement, at least five years of credited service as a member of such retirement or pension system, except that (A) such requirement of credited service shall not apply in cases of retirement for accident disability, (B) the requirement of credited service for vested retirement and service retirement shall be at least ten years for a person who was not an employee of the city or the board of education on or before the effective date of the local law that added this clause, and (C) notwithstanding the provisions of clause (B) of this subparagraph, the requirement of credited service for vested retirement and service retirement shall be at least fifteen years for a person who was not an employee of the city or the board of education on or before the effective date of the local law that added this clause, is receiving a retirement allowance from the New York city teachers' retirement system or the New York city board of education retirement system, and held a position represented by the recognized teacher organization for collective bargaining purposes on such person's last day of paid service. 

[iii. “]Dependent.[“] The term “dependent” means [T]the spouse of a city employee or city retiree or any child of a city employee or city retiree during the period of eligibility of such child for coverage under the insurance contract applicable to such employee or retiree; provided, however, that no spouse or child of any such employee or retiree shall be deemed a dependent after the death of such employee or retiree. 

Diminish. The term “diminish” means to cause any change in health care offered that could potentially make it harder for city retirees residing anywhere in the United States, including its territories and possessions, to access their health care than before such change was made. These changes include increasing the total costs for healthcare paid by each city retiree, including with respect to premiums, deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments.

[iv. “]Health insurance coverage.[“] The term “health insurance coverage” means [A] a program of hospital-surgical-medical benefits to be provided by health and hospitalization insurance contracts entered into between the city and companies providing such health and hospitalization insurance. 

§ 2. Section 12-126 of the administrative code of the city of New York is amended by adding a new subdivision e to read as follows:

e. The city shall not diminish the health insurance coverage provided to city retirees and their dependents or the contributions the city makes for such health insurance coverage below the level of such benefits or contributions made on behalf of such city retirees and their dependents by the city as of December 31, 2021. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to impair the ability of employee organizations to negotiate the terms and conditions of employment, including those concerning future retirement benefits, for their employee members.

§ 3. This local law takes effect immediately and is retroactive to and deemed to have been in full force and effect on and after December 31, 2021.

NYC Retirees Battle Back with New Bill to Protect Healthcare

Top Story

Aug 13

 

By Joe Maniscalco

New York City Council Member Chris Marte [D-1st District] reintroduced legislation on Thursday aimed at blocking ongoing efforts to chip away at the healthcare coverage municipal retirees earned after decades on the job—and this time, he said, the bill will pass. 

“I think there’s a lot of momentum on our side,” Marte told Work-Bites outside the gates of City Hall Aug. 13. “Whether it’s the recent [court] decisions, the [$53M] settlement, it really shows that this is a force to be reckoned with and we’re on the right side of history.”

In 2024, then Mayoral-candidate Zohran Mamdani told Work-Bites that Marte’s bill—then known as Intro. 1096— would not be needed if he was elected. But municipal retirees who have continued to press for legislation further codifying the healthcare package they had enjoyed up until the end of 2021, insist a new bill is needed. 

Last year, they successfully pushed Mayor Eric Adams to abandon a campaign—originally hatched between Mayor Bill de Blasio and the heads of the largest public sector unions in the city—to strip municipal retirees their tradition Medicare and Medigap benefits and herd them into a profit-driven Medicare Advantage plan.

The scheme was supposedly going to save the City of New York $600 million annually and cover long overdue raises for active city workers. 

Adams also imposed $15 copays on municipal retirees that many living on severely limited incomes could hardly afford.  Retirees fought them, too, ultimately convincing Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Lyle Frank to block the charges in 2023. 

Venerable New York City municipal retiree Evelyn Jones-Rich helps to rally supporters outside the gates of City Hall this week.

The Adams administration later responded and successfully managed to reinstate the copays. 

Just this month, however, municipal retirees won a $53 million settlement with the City of New York and EmblemHelath reimbursing them for the $15 copays they were forced to part with back in 2022. 

This week, Marte said his reintroduced bill will put a stop to any further efforts to diminish retiree healthcare. 

“Whether that’s limiting your network, whether that’s changing your provider to give you a worse system or increase your copays—that will not happen when we pass this bill,” he said on Thursday. 

Previous versions of the retiree bill, according to Marte, had to “side step” the legislative process and be introduced from the City Council floor because then-City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams opposed it. 

This time, he added, his team has been able to introduce the bill though the legislative process with the bill-drafting unit, “so [opponents] can no longer say that we did not look at this bill before it was introduced.”

Council Member Frank Morano [r] joins fellow Council Member Chris Marte [l] in calling for passage of newly-reintroduce legislation protecting the traditional Medicare benefits City retirees earned on the job.

“They can no longer say that our lawyers didn’t have an opportunity to look at every single word to make sure it was right or not. All those false narratives they’ve used in the past two years against us—they can no longer be used today,” he said.

Intro. 1096 largely failed to pass because District 37 Executive Director Henry Garrido, head of the largest public sector union in the city, also opposed it and actively worked to intimidate other City Council members against supporting it. 

“We are in the fight of our lives,” nonagenarian Evelyn Jones-Rich told Work-Bites on Thursday. “There are millions of us who believe in ourselves and the city we built—and we will prevail. We will fight to keep our traditional Medicare, we’re going to fight to keep our supplements, we’re going to fight to not have copays. We believe that we make this city and this nation—little people like us, ordinary people, ladies who have struggled behind the scenes. We have stood in the shadows for too long. Now we are standing up—we are speaking out.”

Marte’s reintroduced retiree bill also comes out of the gate with strong bipartisan support. In co-sponsoring the new legislation, City Council Member Frank Morano [R-51st District] has easily out-lefted the most progressive members in the legislative body and democratic socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani himself. 

“The government talks constantly about rebuilding trust,” Morano said on Thursday. “Here’s a good place to start: Keep your word. The $53M victory that we’re [also] talking about today proves something else: You can fight City Hall—and sometimes City Hall loses. Retirees should’t have to hire lawyers and spend years in court every time somebody in government comes up with another clever way to reinterpret a promise. That’s why we need legislation.”

Mariann Pizzitola, retired FDNY EMS first-responder and head of the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees, said the City of New York should never seek to achieve savings or balance the budget on the backs of active workers or retirees. 

“Here’s the deal,” she said, “these people worked for decades. They’ve been retired for decades. A promise was made to them. They kept their end of the deal and the city has to keep its promise. We’re going to hold them accountable to that.”

Mayor Mamdani, a close ally of Garrido, has so far ignored Pizzitola’s requests to meet and discuss retiree legislation.

Garrido, along with the other of the heads of the Municipal Labor Committee—UFT President Michael Mulgrew and Uniformed Sanitation Men’s Association President Harry Nespoli [retired]—have long insisted that legislation protecting retiree healthcare violates collective bargaining rights.

Marte, however, maintains that the newly-reintroduced retiree bill explicitly protects collective bargaining and that nothing in it limits the ability of employee organizations to “negotiate terms and conditions of employment, including future retirement benefits, on behalf of the active employees they represent.”

“We have heard the stories of retirees being frustrated, being scared, having anxiety every time they wake up, or every time they have to go to their doctor or provider—that is killing our people who have given so much for our city,” Marte said on Thursday.

 

A Mayoral Mess: Is Mamdani Support Fading Despite Cuomo Massive Transgressions, Sliwa Hangs In, UFT Retirees Battle Each Other

Which is the bigger threat to Mamdani's winning? Cuomo/Bloomberg/Trump - an unholy alliance -  or the UFT's perpetual loser mayoral endorsement? 

I just got a call from some of the few liberals in Breezy Point asking my advice on the propositions and I informed them on what an awful person Cuomo is -- I put him in Trump personality territory and may have won two votes for Mamdani. 

 Who knew, that Orthodox rabbis support and defend Mamdani for speaking truth to power? Their defense is so very smart and compassionate. https://youtu.be/7NmGPStXWl0?si=enDu0QNRIEphOZUU

While Mamdani has some big enthusiasm but there is not a lot of enthusiasm among some voters for either candidate - who do you hate more - Cuomo or Mamdani? No one really hates Sliwa.

NY Daily News: Trump backs Cuomo for mayor, says NYC must vote for him and stop Mamdani

President Trump urged Republican voters in New York City late Monday to cross party lines and support Andrew Cuomo for mayor as part of an 11th hour bid to stop Democratic front-runner Zohran Mamdani from taking over the reins at City Hall. 

Wow - looks like Trump is getting desperate - why is he threatened by Mamdani? My guess he fears his ability to mobilize people - imagine if he has 90K volunteers, imagine a million people on the street. Oh, and Eli Musk just joined the anti-Mamdani crowd. Even Trump backers admit Mamdani has run a disciplined effective campaign. That scares them.

Monday, Nov. 3 - Election Eve

I wanted to get this out before tomorrow and I hope to have a follow-up by tomorrow night. Surprise, surprise - It might be rambling just a bit.

Even as I finish this up, polls show the election tightening to 4 points and tomorrow it could be 2 points. Bloomberg has tossed millions joined by other billionaires in a desperate attempt to stop Mamdani -- thus joining Trump who endorsed Cuomo. The negative ads seem to be working. I hope he not only wins but wins big. 45% to 40% with Sliwa dropping to 15%. 

Yet another poll shows: The most recent polls place Mamdani 14.7 points ahead of Cuomo, according to a RealClearPolitics poll average. 

The voting so far looks good for him -- especially this weekend's young people turnout, while last weekend it was the older folks which might favor Cuomo.

Given the attacks on Zohran, ask yourself why Trump is so desperate for him to lose? One would think he would be happy to have a foil. To me that is the best sign of the threat Mamdani represents ideologically to Republicans and the corporate Dems who run the party. And to the billionaires. Just looking at the line-up against him should get him votes.

The joy Mamdani's backers felt in June, though, has been morphing into some jitters, as his machine begs his 90k volunteers to go out and canvass to the last minute. (I hate canvasing but forced myself to do some.)

Today's NYT takes one more swipe at Mandani with this headline: 

Questions of Readiness Persists for Mamdani: Even some of his backers worry about his thin resume.  "He is not ready," said Maria Fattore (from his Astoria territory), saying she had unhappily switcher her vote from Mamdani to Cuomo. And in Manhattan, an old hippy who was leaning Mamdani, admitted to misgivings. I'm not sure he has the experience to deal with what's going on in this city..."

I'll admit to some worries, especially based on my conversations with liberals who are voting for Cuomo - mostly non-Jews by the way, so Israel is not a factor, though one close Jewish friend from Long Island is very concerned and told me Rabbis in many synagogues are railing against him. 

Some people just don't care for him - they see phony charm and a child of privilege - intellectual privilege for sure but also economic - if he hadn't been accepted to Bronx Science, he would have never gone to a public school - and a college few could afford. While he is adored by many, we need to keep some level of skepticism. 

I have fallen for his charm and love his interactions on long interviews - see the one he did with John Steward on The Daily Show last Monday. He was also on Sam Seder's Majority Report last Wednesday - he has no fear of talking to anyone. 

I voted Brad Lander #1 and Mamdani 2 in the primary, though my left-leaning instincts pushed me towards the latter and still does. But if it were Lander running instead of Cuomo at this point, I think he might win.

Even some leftists see Zohran as a privileged scion, reaching above his head, as we see in this comment from a mid-career NYC teacher:

I say this as someone who voted for Mamdani twice; with all due respect, I think he’s an arrogant little prick who thinks really highly of himself for little reason.  But, given the alternative, he’s got my vote. My frustration with Mamdani is that he has accomplished almost nothing in his life.  But, he talks big.  That’s all fine.  But, when he’s finally at the moment of actually accomplishing something big (for himself), he turns his back on pretty much one of the only people (Marianne Pizzitola) I’ve seen in this city who has actually done something for working people. [I will delve deeper into the Zohran/Marianne controversy in a follow-up).

I don't agree with his assessment but it shows how some of his voters are thinking. 

On the other hand, much of the left is still glowing, as this In These Times Oct. 31 piece indicates where so much of his support is coming from.

​“Why are you so excited to show him to everyone?” 

“Because we love him,” says Alam, who works the night shift from 5 p.m. to 1 a.m.

It’s a sentiment I hear from taxi drivers, nurses and restaurant workers.

Zohran Mamdani on the Night Shift for Mayor: As Election Day nears, the Democratic mayoral candidate returns to his base among New York City’s multiracial working class.

The article points to how many city unions support him, including our own beloved UFT - and that has caused more than a little rancor in the ranks -- but that gets complicated, which I will try to untangle further down. 

Based on my political instincts, conversations with liberals, and my usual pessimistic outlook, I'm worried. The continuous fear-mongering attacks on him with the influx of billionaire money has had an impact - their goal is not just to make him lose, but to weaken him and make him ineffectual to prove socialist thinking doesn't work is their goal. 

Last weekend most voters were on the plus side of 50, which did not look good. But this past weekend the younger people came out -- so maybe it's a wash. 

Warning signs ahead. 

I will feel more nervous than elated if he wins.

I see him as a unique political talent - his thoughtfulness in interviews even as he duck some issues and his likeability and sense of humor will carry him - but only so far. Thought and ideas are good, but as John Stewart pointed out to him last week: If you fail to deliver on the basics of running the city, there will be a harsh reaction -- remember Mayor Lindsay and the Feb. 1969 snow storm. 

I believe that the honchos in both parties have a big stake in seeing a socialist failure as a way to put a stake into the heart of any progressive move to take over the Dem Party. That is what makes me nervous --- he will turn into Hope and NO CHANGE. Or worse, will be as unpopular as Chicago left wing mayor Brandon Johnson - though I don't follow Chicago very much nowadays and was proud when a Chicago union teacher was elected - but some of his speeches turn me off.

I've been working on a piece on this election for over a week and the more I talk to people the more confused I get. I voted and canvased for Mamdani, but I go from enthusiastic support to questions. What keeps me in line are his opponents - the awful Cuomo and the Republican Sliwa, who I would actually prefer to Cuomo, who is an awful human being and not to be trusted, especially around women.  

I found the attacks on Zohran over the Medicare issue coming from retirees disconcerting because those attacks pointed us to Cuomo.

Can I make a guess based on my own personal contacts or my own "feelings"? 

For instance, my sense of the Jersey gov race is that the Dem is an awful candidate and may lose - today's polls show a dead heat -- in some ways I think a loss for a center/right corporate anti- progressive Dem would not be the worst thing, though the Virginia gov candidate seems much better and will win. But I think Trump's cancellation of the Hudson tunnel helps the Dem.

In my circle of liberal friends I see danger signs. Last night I ran into a liberal friend (not many in my area), who is a neighbor. I reminded her of election night 2008 when she invited us over to celebrate the Obama victory. She is voting for Cuomo because she doesn't trust a guy as young as Mamdani. Another Rockaway liberal friend has mocked Mamdani and a couple we know from Brooklyn feel the same way -- even having a level of disgust towards him. None of these people are Jewish, so Israel is not a factor. My sense it is more about how young he is, their feelings he hasn't done much and is arrogant for running. In other words, his age and lack of a resume are resonating as much as the issues.

I get this from people -- they view Mamdani as a rich kid playing politics. So, how many people are voting for Mamdani or against Cuomo? 

If Brad Lander has run as an independent instead of Cuomo, I'd give him an even chance -- he would gather votes from the Cuomo haters and more Republican votes.

Last week, in conversations with people I met in some of my classes and tours I gave, including some UFT retirees, there was clear support and even enthusiasm for Mamdani. But I had lunch last week with a guy who was on my Murray Hill tour -- from Riverdale with an 11 year old daughter - not a teacher but a businessman running his own business in the city -- and he brought it up - he was excited at Mamdani -- he looked to be in his early 50s.

So, personal conversations are a mixed bag -- and I have to adhere to this dictum: judgments based on snippets of conversation may not reflect a person's considered, complete, or public stance, leading to misrepresentation.

NYC Retirees attack retirees who back Mamdani. 

Zohran Mamdani & his followers disrespect Retirees -- headline on NYC retirees

WTF - I'm a Mamdani follower, so I, who have fought for retirees from the day the attack on Medicare began in April 2020, before the NYC Retirees even existed, am now someone who disrespects retirees? That's so fucked up.

I was about to get into the retiree battles in the UFT over the anti-Mamdani position Marianne Pizzitola has taken and the reaction to it, but let's wait until tomorrow or the next day -- but I will say, she has taken a risk in dipping too deep into divisive politics and even some her most loyal supporters are disturbed -- Did she fail to follow her own advice she gave to UFT retirees to stick to the issue? Well, in some ways she did and in some ways she did not. I may even dip into my changing views on Israel -- which reflects growing feelings in the Jewish community, 30 or more % going for Mamdani.

I will attempt to untangle it all tomorrow - or maybe never.

Meanwhile check out these NYT articles:

Mamdani’s Candidacy Roils Jewish Communities Across the Country

Who Should Be Mayor of New York City?

Trump’s Greatest Ally is The Democratic Party - The Chris Hedges Report

The Democratic Party and its liberal allies refuse to call for mass mobilization and strikes — the only tools that can thwart Trump’s emergent authoritarianism — fearing they too will be swept aside.