Program transcript:
Grant Reeher: Welcome to the Campbell Conversations, I’m Grant Reeher. We're just over six months into John Mannion’s first term in Congress, so it's a good time to check in with him. A lot has happened in Washington since that time. He represents New York's 22nd congressional district, which contains all of Onondaga and Madison counties and portions of Oneida, Cortland and Cayuga counties, including the cities of Syracuse, Utica and Auburn. Congressman Mannion, welcome back to the program. How are you holding up?
John Mannion: I'm holding up, absolutely. You know, I signed up for this, I couldn't be prouder to represent the place that I love and the place that I've called home for a very long time. So it is, I would say, my classroom experience and my state legislative experience and having good people around me have all been essential to, you know, us getting off the ground. And, you know, my line is that being in the classroom for almost 30 years, I know how to work with juvenile behavior.
GR: (laughter)
JM: And participate in it apparently also.
GR: Yeah, I’ve got to ask you about that. But first, as someone who grew up in Washington, D.C. area, before the advent of universal air conditioning, I have to ask you, how are you adjusting to a D.C. summer?
JM: Well, listen, I loved winter because I would walk around with just my suit coat on and I would get a lot of attention. People would be like, oh, that's the guy from Syracuse, right there. So I've lost a little bit of that attention and now I'm just resigned to the fact that my blood's a little bit thicker than most of the folks that I serve with. And when I walk from one place to another in between buildings, I'm probably going to have some sweat on me by the end. So I remember to bring a handkerchief or some Kleenex and towel myself off, but it is, I will take an upstate New York level of heat and humidity any day of the week now, I can tell you that.
GR: (laughter) Well, we've had a bit here, too. So let me ask you, you just alluded to this when you first started speaking, you appear to have found your voice or I guess maybe your yell in recent weeks on the floor of the House of Representatives and also at an anti-Trump rally that was up here in the district. It does seem a departure from your style as a state senator. So I'm just curious, where is the change coming from?
JM: Well, we're in a different space in this country right now, you know, so, you know, as far as the audio being caught on C-SPAN, you know, I mean, that was not my intent at all. But what we're watching are a series of unprecedented acts and the following and checking off the boxes of Project 2025, which is all extremely concerning, I think, to the vast majority of people in the 22nd District. Now, Trump is going to have his true believers, and certainly many of those will believe that these are part of the targeted attacks against him. But when we talk about, you know, the release of January 6th insurrectionists, the blanket pardoning or the defiance of court orders, also the demonizing of the judges, many of whom were appointed and approved by a Republican president, Republican legislature. So all of these things are unprecedented. And I served in Albany in the majority, and I just didn't cede my power to the governor and allow for executive actions to rue the day. So I did a lot of back door and front facing negotiations because there were certain things that absolutely did not work for New York 22. Now, that's the state level, this is the federal level. People are terrified and they continue to be. And the feedback that I have received over and over again has been very positive in my pushback. Did you stand up for the Constitution and stand up for the institution of the House of Representatives, like, you know, when it comes to appropriated dollars? Initially, what the president did was throw out these executive orders that are beyond his powers to be able to do so, to stop appropriated dollars. Now, what I would give the legislature credit here, even though I disagreed and voted no, is they did put through a rescissions package where they did follow, you know, in a narrow way they can do that. That's what that's what should be done and that's what our democracy has done in limited instances. So I reference Albany because they didn't just stand there and go along I wasn't just a team player to be a team player. And I expect that of my Republican colleagues. I expect them to do the right thing, stand up for the institution and stand up for the co-equal branches of government.
GR: Have you had a chance to actually meet face to face with President Trump yet?
JM: I have not. I've been in the same room with him of a couple of times, but I have not met face to face with him.
GR: Okay, all right. This is still very early days, you know, as I said, we're just past six months, and you are in the minority party, but have you been able to push forward and get any traction on legislation so far? Any progress there?
JM: So, per our previous question, you know, I'm doing two things. I'm doing my, you know, standard operating procedure here of co-sponsorship of bills, submitting bills through committee. And then I'm also doing what I said I was doing, which is when things are unprecedented and unlawful, un-American, violate our norms, I'm calling those out. So we have, you know, I voted against the bill, the reconciliation bill for a number of reasons, increasing the debt, you know, passing tax cuts to the wealthiest, cutting SNAP and cutting Medicaid, which is going to have a massive impact and we can talk about that. But I've submitted multiple pieces of legislation or co-sponsored them. One of the most recent ones that I'll be submitting is a local journalism grant. We actually passed something similar in the state to make sure that our smaller local journalistic institutions can survive. It's just essential to make sure that there's reporting and truth on really, you know, issues that are that are local and beyond. I did it in the, I co-sponsored something that ended up in that bill was the reason I mentioned it, which was an enhanced tax credit for semiconductor chip manufacturers. I am not the lead sponsor on that, I was a co-sponsor on it. But it is going to help to make sure that we do onshore semiconductor chip manufacturing in this country and that we do it, you know, as we know here in Clay, New York. So, I’ve got another piece of legislation that is similar to John Katko legislation that didn't ever get over the line related to employment of our veterans, the name of it is Onward to Opportunity Act. It's along the lines of the Great Veterans Program at Syracuse University to enhance, you know, career development, post military service as our veterans, our heroes, enter civilian life, so I keep doing those things. As I mentioned, one piece of that legislation ended up in the larger bill. And that's a good thing for central New York. And that's what I'm committed to is to be a good representation of the district.
GR: You’re listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media. I'm Grant Reeher and I'm speaking with Congressman John Mannion. The freshman representative is in New York's 22nd congressional district. So you mentioned John Katko there just a second ago. So, is one of the approaches you're taking in the legislative efforts is to try to get Republican people on these bills as well as Democrats?
JM: Absolutely. It's going to be you know, existing in the minority conference here, that's absolutely going to be essential. And I just referenced that veterans bill, that's exactly what we're doing. We're going, moving, you know, building alliances with Republican colleagues, particularly those who served in the military, some of whom that we have connections to, either because they're members of the freshman class or they represent a similar district. So that's what you've got to do. And I know, living here my whole life is that's what the people of this district expect. I did not expect the level of unprecedented actions coming out of the executive office. So therefore, I've had to push back a little bit more. But I got in this to make sure that I was a good reflection of the district, like I said, but also to get us to a point where we are working together more frequently and we, and in a district like mine, I've got a history of doing so, and I believe a future of doing so with my Republican representatives that represent the vast majority of the municipalities. So, listen, I've got to build those alliances, and I do feel a duty to push back and call out the truth and speak the truth as we know that there's a lot out there that is untruthful and being perpetuated. And unfortunately, what I've seen here is we're actually building policy, not me, but others building policy based on some of those pieces of misinformation and disinformation.
GR: So I wanted to ask you a question about fundraising. Obviously, as a state senator, you had to do a lot of fundraising, but it's a whole different level here in Congress. Have the differences and the scale regarding that given you a bit of sticker shock or phone fatigue dialing for contributions so far?
JM: So it is certainly an unfortunate part of this, it's beyond unfortunate. Part of the dysfunction of this is that you have to raise money to get into office, stay in office. It's the one data point that, no offense, the media frequently focuses on at this point. And it's not the media's fault, it's the system's fault and we have to fix it. And I do believe that, you know, the Citizens United case has now put us in a better spot. I hope that when I do get back into the majority in the next term or future term that we can do something aggressive around campaign finance because it's absolutely essential. The dark money that comes in is, we just saw it in this presidential election, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars coming in. And then what happens after, the really the billionaire class comes in to a race like that aggressively is that we end up passing legislation or executive orders that benefit them at a time where, you know, people are really struggling in this country. I will say Albany versus DC, you know, some of my colleagues advised me not to do this just because of the calendar. You know, it's nice to be, to do your legislative work from January to June and then really be able to go around your district, meet people, hear their concerns, deliver on some promises. DC it's all year long, but I'm used to the travel and, you know, my wife and my team are fantastic in supporting me. There's not as much legislation that goes through, there's not as much as in Albany. And I do think in some ways that's preferred because you can focus on it. The other difference which may not fascinate people is the committee work, at least historically and hopefully in the future and to a degree still now, is really where a lot of positive things happen. It is true committee work and holding hearings and markups they call them down here to amend that legislation. So there is a thorough process of getting a bill to the floor. And that is one difference, lower volume, but more intensive in the actual work in the development of that legislation.
GR: That's interesting. That corresponds with what I have observed in the state legislature in Albany, that the committees are not as important as working units as they could be. So it's interesting to hear that, hear you corroborate that. Let me ask you this, too. This is a kind of a more personal question, but have you had any kind of positive chill-running-down-your-spine moments so far being in Congress? I mean, it's pretty heady stuff. Any time when it particularly hit you, like, wow, I'm really here?
JM: Yeah, I will reference one thing early on, which was, I had spoken to a lot of these folks on the phone, of course, and some I had met in person but between Election Day and swearing in day, I went into the Democratic Caucus meeting. It's a morning meeting and, you know, the newly elected, the Congress members elect her there. But 200 Democratic members of Congress are there. And you know who keeps coming out with a cup of coffee out the door into the main room? You know, here comes the Hakim Jefferies, here comes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, here comes Nancy Pelosi. And that was a moment where you're like, you know, I'm here, I'm here, and that was significant. And then, you know, there was some other moments that, again, were unexpected, the passing of President Carter and being able to attend his funeral and hearing particularly what some of his family members said about him, which was just a great experience. And then, you know, I'll finish off by saying we got to take a White House tour before we get sworn in and who's there but Flavor Flav.
GR: (laughter)
JM: So, you know, not on my bingo card.
GR: You're listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media. I'm Grant Reeher and I'm talking with Congressman John Mannion, he represents New York's 22nd district. So I wanted to ask you about this new development for the Democrats, the candidacy of Zohran Mamdani for mayor of New York City. It seems to have really set the Democratic Party in a frenzy and also created some division within it. What's your take on his campaign? Are there things for the Democratic Party to learn from it?
JM: So a few things here. As I think many of us would agree, New York City is a world away, but certainly in our state. And I worked in Albany with people who would, you know, defined themselves by certain titles like a Democratic Socialist. So I worked with people with that title. I think what we saw from candidate Mamdani is that he delivered messages that resonated with people and he did the work. And the message that resonated was an economic message. People are finding it harder and harder to make ends meet. They don't see their wages increasing at the same level that costs are going up. So he delivered a message and, you know, if he becomes mayor, some of those promises are going to be a challenge to deliver. But for me, you know, listen, I understand New York 22, I got elected in New York 22, I know some of my predecessors who did, and I know not just, I know the core values and beliefs and priorities of the people here, I believe that I do. If you drop me in Asoria, Queens, I don't think I'm going to probably be the perfect fit. So, you know, this is what democracy does. And this was a Democratic primary, we'll see what happens in the general election. But I think there's great consensus that the message that delivered was effective and also authentic and genuine. And that's the reason why the support was there. If if wasn't authentic and genuine, we wouldn't be talking about it. So you know, again, are there shared values there? Absolutely. Do I want to make sure people have accessibility to health care and they're not in food deserts and there's transportation available so that they can get to their work and their doctor's appointments and their kids’ schools? Absolutely. And I'm fighting for the people who have barriers in place where they can't access those things.
GR: Yeah. I think your observation that it was very economically focused is right on point. You mentioned this earlier, I wanted to come back to it. It does seem likely, at least to me as a political scientist, that Democrats will be able to retake the House of Representatives in the midterms. Both past history and what I'm seeing and some of the current reactions to many of the Trump administration's moves suggests this to me. I wanted to get your sense of the probability of that outcome. You spoke about it as if it would happen. And what do you think, though, more importantly, what would it mean for the final two years of Trump's term?
JM: Well, those are great questions. First of all, you know, I think what we've seen, even on an issue that this presidency was above water on immigration is, you know, the lack of due process, the detainment camps, people actually having a connection to individuals who have been treated unfairly, mass gang of federal agents, all these things are not popular. And that's just in one area that people, you know, found compelling from the Trump candidacy and have asked, for many, is stronger immigration policy. That's just immigration, but when we talk about the economic policy, our standing in the world, the tariff dynamics and the lack of predictability the treatment of President Zelenskyy in the White House, you know, listen, I said there are true believers that will probably never break from the president, but independent voters, younger voters, they are not buying this. People do not, you know, can't get behind some of these actions and policies and the defiance of court orders. What does that mean if we take back the House? I am expecting to and that will certainly, you know, if we take back the house, we'll see what happens in the Senate. That is a heavier lift. But I think what's necessary is a check on the executive office. And we are right now expecting, I certainly was expecting more of a check from my Republican colleagues where it was a bridge too far. We haven't seen that. You know, you don't see hearings frequently, House hearings where individuals are being called to testify. You know, one thing I've neglected to mention was the creation of a meme coin and a crypto coin, you know, cryptocurrency that is benefiting, stable coin that is benefiting the president's family. You know, there's no hearings, there's no pushback, there's no acknowledgment even that this is corrupt or illegal. So we've got to provide that check. And, you know, time flies and we're already almost through July here. Before you know it, it will be November of 2026 and then January of 2027. And people are asking for that oversight and that you know, that transparency and House Democrats are here to provide it. And we were hoping and believing we could work with our colleagues on the other side to stand up for the institution of the House but we're not seeing that happening to the level that it needs to. So we're going to provide that check when the time comes.
GR: If you've just joined us, you're listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media. I'm Grant Reeher, and my guest is Congressman John Mannion. So, I had two questions related to what you just got into there in the last couple of minutes. The first one kind of quick, the second one, I think we’ll take a little more time on, but one possibility, it seems to me that if the Democrats take the majority in the House is, obviously things in Congress regarding legislative production are going to stalemate. You know, you'll have a likely divided Congress plus the Republican president, he's not going to sign anything that House Democrats are going to put forward, likely. And so one possibility is the president will just keep turning to executive orders and really just push out even more on those because that's the option that would be available. So any quick thoughts on that?
JM: Well, the first thing I will say is, it is unfortunate. And beyond that, that that's where we all are, that the majority party can't work with the minority party and I have seen that here, you know? You have Secretary Vought talking about ending the appropriations process, which is a very bipartisan action. We just saw some of that statements as we went through this rescissions legislation process. So I do agree that when we get to that point, it is going to be a challenge. This is where it is essential, in a bipartisan way, that not just because there might be a Democrat president in the future that could go rattle off a bunch of executive orders that could go unchecked, but this is how our democracy is functioning effectively, is that there are those checks. And that, you know, what we've seen by and large with these executive orders, not entirely, not unanimously, but attorney generals in the ACLU and labor unions have filed lawsuits and effectively stopped or paused many of these executive orders because it's been found to be beyond the bounds of the president. That's going to continue. Is the legislature involved in that? They are to a degree. I've signed on to multiple amicus briefs that have gone before the courts. And, you know, we have a rapid response team here in the Democratic conference that works on those things in partnership with some of those groups. So we can't leave it entirely up to the courts, but we also have to be respectful of the courts. When this administration wins a court case, I may disagree with it, but that is what makes us unique from many of the other countries of the world, is that we follow the rule of law, we stand up for the rule of law. Even if we disagree, we follow the process of an appeals process, if that is an appropriate pathway. But other ways, as President Obama said, when I listen to him at Hamilton College, you know, we've all agreed that these three branches of government are going to be a check on each other and we're going to respect all of those. So if those executive orders happen, if they are unlawful or unconstitutional, I expect the courts to do their job and I expect Congress to do our job in holding hearings and passing legislation to make sure that we keep the executive in check, regardless of party.
GR: I want to just push that out a little bit. I asked you previously on one of our earlier conversations whether you'd vote for articles of impeachment if the Democrats took the House and you said you would if those came up. If the Democrats retake the House, do you think that they'll be putting forward articles of impeachment?
JM: I'm going to take a couple steps back here. First of all, impeachment is not a not a popular process. Even in the second impeachment post, the insurrection, the second impeachment trial of President Trump found to be very unpopular with people in New York 22 and around the country. So this is serious business, the impeachment of president. And one of my colleagues did submit articles of impeachment, put them on the floor, they were voted to be tabled. And I voted yes on tabling and as you can imagine, I got some talking to about that from some of my constituents. What I have seen are actions that are clearly impeachable, acts like the creation of the stable coin and the meme coin and the president providing elevated levels of access when those are purchased or used as currency. That's unprecedented. That alone is troubling. So I'm going to take another step back, which is to remind that this president has been investigated in his previous term and indicted and impeached and gone to trial in the Senate unsuccessfully, twice, which means what is going to have to happen if there is a Democratic House, there's going to have to be investigations, there's going to have to be hearings, there's going to have to be a building of evidence. And only then will there be the potential to proceed. And I will do my job and listen to that testimony and listen to that debate and read the investigations and go from there. But at face value, I just mentioned one instance of the creation of this cryptocurrency by the Trump family that happened to be launched on Inauguration Day, of all things. It's that kind of actions that are beyond concerning. I believe they're unlawful and impeachable.
GR: Okay, just about 30 seconds left. I want to just to quickly give you a final chance. Looking forward to the next year and a half, can you just give me the topics of the areas you're going to be pushing on, what you're going to be trying to do?
JM: Sure. You know you don't want to always be responding. But listen, I was a public educator. I'm afraid that what could be coming next is another rescissions package to strip dollars away from what is still the Department of Education. I'm afraid that these title one and title nine grants that are essential to some of our most impoverished schools are coming. I'm going to push back against that and always fight for public education. And of course, we got a lot of other things to worry about as well. But thank you for having me on, Grant. I appreciate it. And I will always focus on the great equalizer: education.
GR: Well, I appreciate that. We'll have to leave it there, that was Congressman John Mannion. And again, Congressman Mannion, thanks for taking the time to talk with me, I know you're very busy.
JM: Thank you, Grant. Have a great day.
GR: You, too. You've been listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media, conversations in the public interest.
