Program transcript:
Grant Reeher: Welcome to "The Campbell Conversations." I'm Grant Reeher. Today we're hosting an interview that's related to the race for the New York State 129th Assembly District. It's a seat made open by Bill Magnarelli’s defeat in the Democratic primary. The candidates are Democrat Onondaga County Legislator Maurice, or Mo, Brown, who currently represents the 15th district in that chamber and who chairs the Ways and Means Committee. And Republican Shawn Fiato, a longtime community activist. In anticipation of a possible complaint, I want to take some time here at the beginning to explain how these interviews and what we had hoped today would be a debate are scheduled. Our policy that's clearly stated to the candidates at the outset when we make our initial invitations, has always been that if one candidate agrees to a debate and the other declines, we go ahead with an individual interview of the candidate who agreed. This is what we did this year with Kailee Buller, for example, when John Mannion declined our invitation, which was made by, quite early in the cycle, by the way. Now, these times are obviously negotiated beforehand. In this particular instance, it was difficult to find a time that worked for Ms. Fiato, and it required several changes in the times that Legislator Brown and myself made ourselves available for. We finally found a time that worked for everyone, it was later in the election cycle than I would have liked, that's why you're hearing from me now, and it was recorded on Thursday, October 29th. This date and time was in place for a couple of weeks. However, 20 minutes before the debate was to start Ms. Fiato emailed me stating that she would need to do the debate later that day. At this late time, another change was no longer possible. I am therefore going ahead with this interview of Legislator Brown individually, and that is what I'll be talking to the rest of the half hour. The 129th Assembly District includes the North side, West side, East side, Strathmore and Valley areas of the city of Syracuse, as well as the towns of Geddes and Van Buren. Legislator Brown, welcome back to the program, and I appreciate you being willing to engage in this. I am sorry it is just the two of us, but I think it's out of our control.
Maurice Brown: Yes, sir. Thank you for having me. I'm looking forward to the conversation.
GR: So let me just start with a basic question for you. What are going to be your top priorities if you are elected to the Assembly? What are you going to focus on first?
MB: So, the big one, affordability. So, you know, every door I knock everybody I speak to, affordability is top of mind. Affordability looks like a lot of things in this community. National Grid has taken the brunt of the blame because those National Grid bills have skyrocketed. But affordability is also housing, you know, we've seen rents increase since 2024, drastically. Affordability is, also, you know, transportation inequity where we have people having to take Ubers to work and things like that. So, it's a potpourri of things that I want to do, but affordability is, you know, what I hope to tackle day one or honestly, even before elected.
GR: And I wanted to also ask you at the outset kind of a big picture question about how you view representation in a legislature, and how you would view it in the state legislature as opposed to the county legislature. So, what's the balance in your view, in terms of the role, as you see it, between providing service to constituents, and I will say, the person who has held this position for over two decades, I think, was known for conscientious and good, constituency service, so what would you see as the balance between that kind of service to your individual constituents and initiating policy? I know that you are animated by policy ideas. So, tell us about that.
MB: I think a good balance is necessary. You are correct, my predecessor, Assembly member Magnarelli was amazing at constituent service. I would always say, you know, he'll give you a straight answer. I've called his office, he's picked up, we've disagreed. And just the fact that, you know, there was an elected official that would tell you, you know, hear you out, but here's why you're wrong, I think that's, you know, commended because, you know, that's what you want from your representative, someone who'll listen. I think that I'm going to be someone who, you know, also take the calls and I may, you know, say, here's why that won't work, but where I'm going to go a step forward is I'm going to say, here's how we can make that work. So I view myself as more of like a collaborator, bridge maker, but like a problem solver. I think there's a lot of problems in this community and the constituent services kind of marries to policy making, because we can use the policy to impact a lot of what, you know, people are going through. A good amount of the constituent services I'm told are around things like unemployment insurance or like benefits and the changes in it, and if we have the ability to use, you know, policy to address those things, I would like to explore that. But for me, I think they go hand in hand and I want to use policy to help this community, because I do think policy is, you know, a really strong tool in addressing the needs of this community.
GR: So, let me push you a little bit on that, though, and I understand what you're saying about the joining the concerns that constituents may come to you with and then the policies that you want to push forward. But let's say I'm your constituent and, you know, you mentioned unemployment insurance. Let's say, I call you and I say, you know, I'm having trouble getting my unemployment check. I assume that your office is going to help me get that, right? I mean, you're not going to talk to me about policy when I'm needing a check, or are you?
MB: No (laughter), I mean no. So, if you aren't eligible for unemployment because you didn't work a certain amount of hours at your previous job, or like, if you're not eligible for a certain reason, you know, we will articulate that. And if it seems valid that you should be getting unemployment based on the amount of work you've done, you know, like I said, I'll use policy, but if you're not getting it for a valid reason, and you deserve it, you know you've earned it, we're going to work with you to make sure you can get what you deserve, what you've earned because unemployment is earned, you know, you have to pay into it and you can get it back. But in general, when a problem presents itself, I'm not going to look at myself as like, you know, calling balls and strikes to say, no, you can't get it, sorry, yes, you can get it, congratulations. It's going to be more like, you know, no, you can't get it, here's why, here's what we can do to, you know, get you moving forward on the right path.
GR: I see, I see the connection you're making. Okay. So, let me ask the sort of the big question for you I think that voters are going to have to sort out. And that is, when one looks, you know, you're a democratic socialist, you're quite clear about that, you put yourself forward, you've argued for it. When one looks at the democratic socialist agenda, I think it's fair to say that there's going to be a lot of new government spending involved. And also, you have advocated for turning some things that are currently in the private sector over to the public sector, to government, housing is one that you have argued for in the past.
MB: Housing is the biggest.
GR: So, you know, New York already consistently ranks in the top three for taxes and spending, depending on who's doing the ranking, often it's number one. How are you going to address the concern I think that a lot of voters have, that if more people like you are elected, the state is going to go on even more of a spending spree than it's already on? What, you know, assuage my fears as a potential voter on that one.
MB: For sure. So, those fears are valid and traditionally the Democratic Party has put, you know, taxes in place on the middle class. So, I think where I defer is I don't think those taxes should go to the middle class, I think they should go to the higher end. But more importantly, what we spend the money on, I think can be different. So, the example I've been using, because it's the most concrete, but in New York City, Mayor Zohran Mamdani, another democratic socialist, he worked with Governor Hochul to pass a ultra millionaires tax, but it's pretty much a tax on second homes valued over $5 million. So, if you have a second home valued over $5 million in New York City, we're going to tax you disproportionately. And they're using that money to fund childcare. I want to bring that statewide. There's been a lot of conversations about bringing that statewide. The research hasn't been done to say how many central New Yorkers that will impact, I guess if folks are listening to this and you have a second home worth over $5 million, you know, we're going to have to have a hard conversation because we need those people to do a little more right now. But we're going to use that money to pay for childcare. So, the biggest difference between me and, you know, your average run of the mill Democrat, is we spend a lot of your tax money on economic development, we spend a lot of your tax money on tourism, on things that aren't necessarily to meet needs. I think the government has the, you know, it ought to. The government has a duty to address needs and I think that housing, healthcare and education are needs. And I would even put, you know, food access and childcare in those categories, but I want the government spending on needs, not necessarily wants.
GR: Okay, all right. And let me just go through some specific issues and ask what your positions are on them and then you can elaborate if you like, and then I want to return back to that big picture question about socialism a little later in our conversation. So, do you support the governor's executive order pausing the construction of data centers in the state?
MB: Is this like a lightning round, yes / no?
GR: Well, we'll start and then you can, go ahead, explain your position on it.
MB: So, yes, but I think she should sign the moratorium that was passed by, you know, both houses of the legislature. That's, it goes a little stronger. So, her moratorium only applies for data centers. I'm pretty sure it's a 50MHz, I'm not sure what the unit is, but the state legislature is one is 20. So there are some projects that are in the 30-40 range that aren't covered by her moratorium. But I do think her moratorium is better than nothing, I just want it to go a little further.
GR: Okay, gotcha. And, what about the state law that forbids local law enforcement from cooperating with ICE?
MB: Yes, I support that. And again, I don't think it goes far enough. I think there needs to be more punishment involved for when you see law enforcement breaking those, breaking that law like we saw in Oswego County.
GR: Okay, all right, and what would you have in mind for that if you were rewriting the law? What would you do?
MB: Penalties. So, the state, we provide funding to municipalities and that funding would now be in jeopardy. You know, we would have to have frank discussions about how we're never going to do this again. For those who don't know the story I'm referring to, in Oswego County, there were two roofers that were, you know, suspected of being here wrongfully by ICE, and they were on the roof, static. And then the, was it the police department, provided a ladder and they defended it by saying, you know, we're not aiding in ICE's investigation, we're just, you know, being a good neighbor. I disagree, and I actually applaud the people of that community. I'm told they were knocking the ladder over, like they were really making it impossible for them to kidnap their neighbors, which is true. These are our people, these are our family members. You know, I totally commend that community for the work they've done. And I hope the governor, I know, the attorney general is looking into it to see if, you know, any laws were broken. But I hope we are able to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law, because I think they broke the law.
GR: All right. You're listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media. I'm Grant Reeher, and I'm talking with one of the candidates for New York's 129th Assembly District. It's the Democratic Onondaga County legislator, Maurice Brown. And this was originally intended to be a debate, but due to Ms. Fiato, who is the Republican candidate not being able to join us at the appointed time, we are going forward with an individual conversation. So, one of the things I wanted to ask you about is there is this intriguing ballot proposition in California, I don't know if you're familiar with it, to put a 5% wealth tax.
MB: Oh, yes.
GR: Billionaires. So if you have a billion or more dollars in net worth, my understanding of it is the state will tax you 5% for that year. Is that something that you like the sound of?
MB: Yes. I think that should be nationwide. Commend California for going forward. Maybe we need to be exploring that in New York State, if we're not already. I think we are. I feel like I've seen a bill to that nature, I don't know if it's exactly that, but I am definitely in support of that in this moment, because right now we need it. Like, it would be one thing if everyone was thriving, this was a prosperous society and people weren't going bankrupt just for simply getting in a car accident. But we do have that situation right now, and I believe billionaires are perfectly suited to give a little more right now.
GR: It's going to be interesting with California if it passes, I think it's expected to pass, actually, but it will be interesting because it'll be a natural experiment on the arguments against it, that all you're going to do is send a lot of your billionaires out of state, you're going to hurt your tax base, they may even move their businesses, you know, with them if they're not publicly owned. So, is that why you initially said to me, this needs to be nationwide so you don't have that dynamic?
MB: Yes, 100%. I think that, you know, we've seen when taxes come in place, they like to go to Florida or Texas to, you know, to “tax havens”, and I think doing it nationwide would remedy that. And, you know, if Facebook wants to move their entire operations to a different country, I think they're going to find that a lot of the world taxes at much higher than 5%. So, they're going to be struggling to find a place that would give them the kind of leeway we have.
GR: Okay. And let's come back to the 3 or 4 big areas where you think that more government involvement can help. That was healthcare, housing, you even said perhaps food security, and I think there was maybe a fourth one, what was it?
MB: Yeah. So I think housing, healthcare and education are human rights, fundamentally. But I also think food access and transportation should be in that conversation as well as childcare.
GR: So, give me some examples, if it doesn't take too long, in each of those 4 categories of things you would like to see the state change where the government becomes more involved.
MB: So, for education right now, we do, you know, education as a human right for K through 12. So, you can go to public school in the state of New York, in the country of America, I'm pretty sure, tuition free everywhere. I'm advocating that gets expanded from K to 12 to K to 16. You see, we've moved to make community colleges free for certain professions. I think that community colleges should be entirely tuition free. I'm not even sure why that's like, being hotly debated, I think that's an easy one. And I think that even four year institutions should be tuition free. As far as housing, I think that we need to, de-profit, like, I don't think that housing should be for profit. I think that a lot of times people, you know, become landlords, they buy properties thinking that it's an easy job. And I've spoken to the landlords, and it's a hard job, it is tough to be a good landlord because you got to take care of the property, you know, you got to be up to date, you’ve got to get on a rental registry, you have to do all of these things and it's this tough job. And I think that if there was a, you know, good public option next to the private market we've had out of that's, you know, run out of control at this point, I think that it would incentivize, you know, better behavior from the private market. Housing, health care, education, I think that we need to pass the New York Health Act. Even my predecessor and I agreed on that, like, that's not a radical democratic socialist platform. And then…
GR: And just for our listeners, New York Health Act is essentially establishing a single payer health insurance system that is universal in the state of New York, correct?
MB: Yes, yes, sir.
GR: All right, and then go ahead to food now.
MB: Oh, no, you're fine, just, it would guarantee health care access. As far as food, on the county legislature, we actually put extra money in this year's budget to our food pantries because we're seeing with the SNAP cuts and, you know, the reaction from the federal government is that people are going hungry. And in our community, we have a lot of people with, you know, dietary restrictions. But we also have a lot of people with cultural restrictions where they aren't used to, you know, having to deal with pork or they aren't used to, you know, certain canned goods. So, we need to make sure that food is available to them because people need food to eat. Also, I think as the government making food, you know, human right is beneficial because what we're going to be doing is supporting the farmers, we're going to be supporting the producers of food. And a lot of them, you know, reside in this district, but they work in central New York. You know, we are one of the biggest exporters of milk in the state. I think that, you know, it's a good thing to do morally, but I also think it's good economic policy because you're going to put money into the pockets of farmers and they're going to spend money, and, you know, that gets the ball rolling. And then I mentioned childcare with the housing plan that they did in New York City. I just think that's another one where you're going to get paid twice because you have to pay people to do the childcare, but also you're going to allow a lot more people to get to work that can't currently because they have to figure out childcare options. So, I just think these are investments into the community. We always see it as like free stuff, but I think when you invest in a person, when you invest in someone to say, we're going to pay for your education, you get it back. And I think we should do that, more widespread.
GR: And a more personal question on all of these policy ideas. Where do you think you get your democratic socialism from? Why did it resonate with you?
MB: So, I didn't really know what democratic socialism was until Bernie Sanders ran. He was the first person I heard speak directly to the wealth inequality. But once he described it, it did, you know, share my views. So ,I grew up in a, you know, black household, black mother, black father, and you know, we idolized Doctor King, we idolized Malcolm X, we idolized, you know, Fred Hampton, Kwame Ture, a bunch of different people. And when you look into their, like, views, their values, they were very socialist in nature. Malcolm X was, you know, he talked a lot about spending money in your community and making sure that, you know, the women and children are fed. I just think that we owe it to each other, like, we are in this together. There's no world in which you are struggling but I'm thriving, like, we're in this together and I think government policy should reflect that.
GR: So, onto some things that have been in the press lately. You have made some comments in the past, either verbally or in writing, that I think most people would agree are controversial. I wanted to give you a chance to talk about those and explain those. I think the most glaring one, at least to me, is the statement at some point that you were like, I'm all in favor of armed revolution or something to that effect. What's going on there?
MB: Yeah, so it's funny, they took that from a tweet in which I was having a conversation advocating for voting, but the person, so, in the black community, but I think in all communities, a lot of people are fed up with voting. A lot of people are fed up with this, you know, the way we've been going about thing(s) and there are some people that want to take arms and stormed the streets and I hear them out, like, I get why they think that. The conversation was about the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is armed revolution. Like, when you go down to it, the modern definition, it's probably not what the founders intended, but the modern definition of it is, you know, a well-regulated militia for tyrannical government, like, the Second Amendment is armed revolution. You can go back and forth, but I am in favor of the Second Amendment. I am, and I hear where those people are coming from. I just don't think that's the most proper way to go about it, because any militia is going to be incredibly outgunned. So, I was in the military, I know the resources the military has, you are not going to keep up with that, you know, United States Army arsenal. So like, I'm in favor of armed revolution, I get why, you know, we need a second amendment, but at the same time, I think voting and changing the systems that have been oppressing us, I think that's a much more successful strategy. So obviously she didn't put the whole thing, she just put the - I'm in favor of armed revolution - because that makes me look like a scary black man and, you know, I get it. I get that's a strong electoral strategy. I just think that it was purposely taken out of context.
GR: Okay. And now, it's interesting that you bring up Second Amendment because, I'm assuming you've got some opinions then about, say, the New York Safe Act, which a lot of Second Amendment advocates think, you know, so are you for or against New York Safe Act?
MB: I am for the New York Safe Act. So, I think the Second Amendment is too far, I think we need to repeal it in some ways. Like, I don't think you should be allowed to have a tank. I don't think you should be allowed to have, you know, F-1 fighter jets. Just like I don't think you should be able to have a AK-47, you shouldn’t be able to have an M4, you know, assault rifle. I think that the Safe Act, you know, cuts down, and, you know, unless you're going up against aliens or zombies, there's no situation in which an intruder breaks into your house that an assault rifle is more effective than a shotgun. And you can have a shotgun.
GR: This seems to be going against what you just said about armed revolution. It seems like they don't fit, and I don't want to be accused of trying to rescue or sanitize your armed revolution comment, but it sounds to me more like you were engaging in a metaphor like, I'm all for, you know, to go back to what you said, I get why people feel this way, rather than I am saying we should all take up arms and overthrow the government.
MB: Yes.
GR: I just want to give you another crack at that one.
MB: Yeah. I mean, I think, I hope I've been clear, but I don't think that taking the streets with your weapons is a viable strategy at this moment, full stop. (laughter)
GR: Okay, all right. So, you mentioned, Doctor King, Malcolm X, some other folks who I think, for the most part, are not with us anymore. Other than Bernie Sanders, what current political figures that most of us might have some familiarity with do you think you're most similar to, you know, that you sort of travel in the same circles? Just so we can get some, you know, again, trying to get our hands around you as a candidate. Would it be like Elizabeth Warren or somebody else, who is it?
MB: So, Elizabeth Warren is definitely an idol of mine, but I think the closest is, Zohran Mamdani, New York City Mayor. We come from the same camp, we're part of the same, you know, DSA, it is a state group, a national group, actually. But that one, and then AOC, who has endorsed my candidacy, but AOC and I, you know, we see eye to eye as far as the ills in our society and it's the wealth inequality. I think that's the number one issue in our society.
GR: And we only got about a minute left or so, but I just want to pursue this a little bit further. So is Mamdani than the political, living political figure you most admire right now?
MB: Probably. either him or AOC. But honestly, it's Bernie because Bernie was the genesis. I think Mamdani and AOC, like Bernie, was what got me into it and the rest of us.
GR: Before it was cool. (laughter)
MB: Before it was cool, way before it was cool to be a democratic socialist. (laughter)
GR: And this is a personal question, but since you brought up Mamdani, I'm going to ask it. Do you have a faith tradition that you participate in?
MB: Yeah, I'm Christian. I grew up Baptist. I went to Concord Baptist in New York City. That was my church growing up and I never really found a church home here in Syracuse.
GR: Okay. And lastly, we just have about half a minute left or so. Is there a particular book that has had a profound impact on your political thinking and has sort of helped shape your views on democratic socialism?
MB: I mean, "Insider [Outsider] in the White House" by Bernie Sanders, also "Our Revolution" by Bernie Sanders. Those are two that jump out just as far as my political education. And then, you know, the "Autobiography of Malcolm X."
GR: Okay, all right. That sounds good, no, that all fits together, everything fits together. Well, I really want to thank you for making the time again. Again, I want to apologize on behalf of, I don't know, the world I guess, that we couldn't have this be a debate, but, it is what it was, and I think we had a good conversation. So, thanks so much for making the time to do this. That was the Democratic candidate for the 129th District in the New York State Assembly. His name is Maurice Brown, goes by the name of Mo. Mo Brown, thanks so much for taking the time to talk with me.
MB: Thank you for having me. If I can force it in, I guess, cut this out or if it's terrible.
GR: Quick, quick.
MB: But the way I, so I do disagree with the democratic socialist, but I also disagree with the Democratic Party and the Working Families Party on many things, like, none of us are a monolith. But I think the place where I disagree with DSA, most noteworthy, is the abolishment of prisons. I think that would be a terrible idea, because if we abolish prisons, where are we going to put Trump? Where are we going to put all these ICE agents that should be arrested? Where are we going to put Elon Musk, who should be arrested? So just fundamentally if we abolish…
GR: Okay, we'll have to leave it there. You've been listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media, conversations in the public interest.
