A conversation with New York Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado

People are really important to Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado. 

As a member of Congress representing District 19—a vastly rural 8,000-mile district spanning 11 counties—the lieutenant governor held dozens of in-person and virtual town hall meetings during his two terms as a House member, reaching out to thousands of his constituents. 

His dedication to his job and the people—again that word—he represents hasn’t wavered as the state’s second-in-command. Appointed by Gov. Kathy Hochul in May 2022, he won his first four-year term as lieutenant governor in November. 

But unlike many of his predecessors, the lieutenant governor hasn’t always toed the line set by his party—or by his boss. 

In December, he said this to the New York Times: “Being willing to speak your mind, being willing to say what you believe, even if it’s not always in lock step with whatever your party might say, makes it clear that you are only beholden to the people.”

On this episode of The Voice Podcast, Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado talks about his remarkable successes he's achieved—as a star athlete, a rapper, a Harvard-educated attorney, a member of Congress and as New York's lieutenant governor. 

He talks about the challenges he's faced in Congress and shares his thoughts on what it was like to be in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021, when the Capitol was attacked by a mob of supporters of President Donald Trump. 

He also talks about strong desire to serve in public office and to do what's right for the people of New York—even if it means upsetting the powers that be along the way. 

Transcript

Fred Kowal: 0:00

Hello. I'm Fred Kowal, President of United University professions, and this is the voice

Mike Lisi: 0:20

The Voice Podcast is a production of United University professions, the nation's largest higher education union, representing more than 42,000 academic and professional faculty and retirees at state operated SUNY campuses and public teaching hospitals in Brooklyn, Stony Brook and Syracuse. I'm Mike Lisi.

Fred Kowal: 0:56

People are really important to Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado. As a member of Congress, representing the 19th congressional district, a very rural, 8000 square mile district spanning 11 counties, and it is including Schoharie County, where I live. The Lieutenant Governor held dozens of in person and virtual town meetings throughout his two terms as a House member, reaching out to 1000s of his constituents and giving them opportunities to tell him what was on their minds. And I'm proud to say that I was one of those constituents very, very impressed by the work that Antonio Delgado did as our congressman. And really that goes for unions as well as lieutenant governor. And he is from, originally from Schenectady, he has twice addressed uups delegates at our delegate assemblies, and also been featured regularly on nice its annual representative assembly gatherings. He's a friend to labor. He's a friend to people across the state of New York dedicated to public service. In fact, going back to 2021 he took time away from his congressional duties to speak directly to our members at a UUP hosted virtual town hall. He had to leave a little earlier than anticipated to vote on a number of important measures, including the formation of the bipartisan January 6 committee. During his time in Congress, 18 of his bills were signed into law under two different presidents. Those included measures that helped veterans, small businesses and family farms, increased broadband access and created clean energy jobs. His strengthening financial aid for students, act extended Pell Grant eligibility and raised the income threshold for Title four eight, his dedication to his job and the people. Again, that word hasn't wavered. As the state's second in command, appointed by Governor Kathy Hochul in May of 22 he won his first four year term as lieutenant governor in November. But unlike many of his predecessors, the lieutenant governor has been outspoken, at times, clashing with his party and even his boss. In December, he said this to the New York Times. Quote, being willing to speak your mind, being willing to say what you believe, even if it's not always in lock step with whatever your party might say, makes it clear that you are only beholden to the people. We are very excited to have lieutenant governor. Antonio Delgado is our guest on The Voice today. So lieutenant governor, welcome to The Voice.

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 3:27

Well, thank you, sir. Appreciate the introduction and the kind words.

Fred Kowal: 3:32

Good to be with you. It's great to have you and and you know, I have to start with you. As some of us know, you're very much of a political animal, and clearly, by your terms in Congress, you knew how to read a district. You know how to read a room. So let's start with the election in November, because you have shared your thoughts publicly as to why the Democrats lost, why the results were as they were, and in your November essay for the New York Times, very cogent argument as to why the Democrats got defeated in the last election. You also earlier pointed out and called for President Biden to drop out of the race. And that was well, you were one of few voices who were calling for him to do that as a prime example of doing your own thing and speaking your mind and really reflecting where the vast majority of certainly where Democrats were. Why did you say it? And why then?

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 4:24

Well, I think part of the issue I've learned since I've been in political life, it's important for folks to understand that I came into politics really as an outsider. I had no prior experience running for office, even involved in, you know, campaigns explicitly. I wasn't involved in party politics. And you know, when I decided to run back in 2017 I had to figure out quickly what it meant to campaign, what it meant to be inside of a party, what it meant to locate yourself within the power dynamics. That make up a party, and a lot of the things that I learned made me realize that it's very easy, once you're in political life, to get captured by power centers when you allow yourself to orient your point of view or how you want to engage or be a public servant from the vantage point of your personal power or your professional power relative to other power centers, but not relative to the people's power, right? If you're more concerned about where you fit in the party machinery, then, over time, you lose touch with the very people who sent you there in the first place. And I think this is a real epidemic within our political system, and it is not exclusive to any party. I think as more and more money captures our democratic system, it also accelerates that, because now it's not just the power dynamics within the party, but those power dynamics are centered around the outsized influence of money, and so fewer and fewer people actually are dictating how the party operates on the half of the people. So it can be a lonely place if you try to operate based on the will of the people, which is the irony, how is it only operate from a place where you're trying to reflect the will of the people, because the will of the people isn't fully entrenched in the thinking. And so to me, as much as I admired Biden, and I still admire Biden and the work that he did in office, what he came to represent by staying in as long as he did, not just staying in, but deciding to run when many believed he ran the first time as a transitional figure. True. I feel like he reinforced people's view that the folks in politics, including the Democratic Party, many of them aren't really thinking about them. They're just thinking about their own survival, their own location within the party. And I as someone to bring this full circle who did not come up within the political machinery, who doesn't owe any allegiance or obligation to anybody but the people ask myself, well, if you stay quiet, you're going to be subsumed. You're going to be associated with this in a way that really isn't reflective of who you are. So why would you not say something? Yes, it will upset people within the power structure, but better to be true to who you are and to convey to the people where you stand on things, because I refuse to be in this without being so on my own terms, and my own terms means on the people's terms. And so that's where that came from. It was definitely a process, you know, that was challenging only because it is difficult to speak truth to power. It is not an easy thing to do, but the people deserve that. The people deserve that.

Fred Kowal: 8:09

Not drawing a total equivalence, but in Yeah, September of 23 I did a I do commentaries every now and then on WAMC and I did a commentary and called on President Biden not to run and full disc disclosure, there was some heavy weight, pardon my French that came down on me in the union movement being told that, look, Joe Biden is the best friend labor ever had. How could you say that? And the reality is, you have that while at the same time, when you speak about the center of power, the centers of power and money. What is the way forward, especially given an election where, to her credit, Kamala Harris raised what was it? One, $2 billion whatever it was, in less than 100 days, which was great, because I thought that was going to help her win. I'm a political scientist, but boy, was I wrong. But on the other side, it's so blatant. I mean, Elon Musk spending hundreds of millions of dollars controlling one entire source of media, directly influencing voters, it clearly, I'm stating the obvious. It's getting worse and worse. How do we get out of this money trap, given Citizens United and the fact that money does rule in politics. How do you see, do you see a way forward?

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 9:27

I think it's a combination of institutional reform, but also reform when it comes to leadership, and the kinds of leaders that we really want to rally ourselves behind and pushing forward a new vision. It takes courage. It takes a vision. But I do think it's possible, from a standpoint of leadership, to make decisions, whether it's you decide to not take corporate PAC money as to signal to the people you know where you stand, not because you are against capitalism, but because you are against the outsized influence of corporate power. More, right? And so you have to signal that to the to the folks so they can make an informed decision. It's about how you make decisions. As a leader, who are you inviting to the conversation and based on what, how are you democratizing the process to ensure that everybody, no matter their wealth, you know, has the ability to be heard, to be seen, to be accounted for, to make sure that you are collaborating across the aisle, collaboratively in a way that demonstrates that you're bringing all the different voices to the table. And just because you have the power doesn't mean you should just force it down people's throats, because that's not how you make sustainable change, right? So again, there is a mode of leadership that I think is required. It is not easy leadership, but I think there is a mode of leadership, and yes, overturning Citizens United, making it easier for folks to vote, creating Election Day as a holiday, making sure that we're doing everything in our power to give complete access to the ballot box. So we can't just think of it as getting money out of politics, which no question is important, but it's a Herculean task. It's also about, how do we make it easier for people, all people of all means, to get out there and vote to be engaged. And part of it is a lot of people right now don't believe the system is working for them anyway. Yeah, and so they're checking themselves out. So we're worried about money, and we should be. But what are we doing to make people inspired again on the ground, to connect with them in a real way, to deliver results for them so they feel a connection between themselves and the government to get out there and do the work and want to maintain that work for themselves and for their communities. I think that's the piece that we can't cut this up and just make it about one piece. It's got to be holistic. We got to look at the money piece, which is obviously very important, but we gotta look at the engagement piece with those communities on the ground who feel, you know, detached and disconnected, and we gotta look at the leadership piece. What are our leaders willing to sacrifice? Who are they willing to upset? You see, because if you don't have that willingness, then you've already given up the game. You're already bought in, and you're already compromised. And so it's a combination of factors, and it's almost sometimes I get upset when I hear certain folks just for not just not you, but political leaders who just want to focus just on the money piece, because it takes responsibility off for themselves. Yeah. What can you do? What do you have the power to do? You're in this position. The people gave you the power. How are you making it clear to people how they should look at their leaders and measure their leaders?

Fred Kowal: 12:32

Donald Trump, I always have, I got to admit it, and listeners have heard me say this, I just have a lot of trouble referring to him as the president. I realize people as well. He was duly elected. I understand that. But we go back to January 6, and it might have been Bob Woodward who talked about the fact that January 6 was not a single day. It was the beginning of the attempt to return to power that then turned into a four year long campaign. So I'd like to ask you a two part question. Part one is you are there. You are in Congress while these incidents were taking place, and then the aftermath, and in those heady days afterwards, where there seemed to be a bipartisan condemnation that quickly evaporated. And then part two is when Trump pardoned everyone, and inside information leaked through various media are saying he wasn't going to pardon everybody originally, but then when there, he felt some blowback about that limited pardon. He said, effort, I'm going to pardon all of them, including those who assaulted police officers and are now threatening reprisals. So it's that two part question, Lieutenant Governor, and it's not an easy one, one your memories, your reaction to those days, but then second to Trump's massive pardon of well over 1000 people.

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 13:53

Yeah. So it's deeply personal. You know, at the time of January 6 happened, my kids, my wife, they were all in DC with me. You know, the whole point was, we get sworn in. And so, you know, second term. Want the whole family there be a part of the experience. And I live back home in the district, but whenever I came to DC, I had a small apartment that was about, you know, seven, eight minute walk to the Capitol. Okay, so I said to say I was trying to wait as long as I could before, before, you know, just be the family, you know, get myself ready before going to the proceedings. Yeah. And as I'm getting ready right to go, you know, this is when all hell breaks loose, and we're looking out at TV screens. My phone is blowing up. My staff is calling me saying, don't leave. Stay where you are. I'm trying to figure out why I need to stay where I am. I'm tracking the news. This is in real time. You don't know exactly what's going on. You're seeing the images. My wife, Lacey is looking at me like, what's going on or. Kids, we're trying to, like, shield them from what's happening, but the same time, keep ourselves informed. It's not like we're, you know, what a big space here. We're all in one room, yeah, trying to figure out how to, you know, deal with this. So just even thinking about that moment and the the real anger that I felt, and for us to deep frustration and just sickening feeling of what was happening in that moment. It's hard to actually put it into words the emotions, because I was very protective mode as a husband, as a father. There was a very protective mentality that I went into. I was protective of my colleagues. I felt survivals guilt for not being there at the time, like I had a lot of different emotions raging through me that were very hard to contain, very hard to contain. But I stayed where I stayed. There was no reason for me to go into the chaos, but I had to sit there and process it and wrestle with all those feelings. And I stayed ready for the moment when it was time to go, because I knew, I knew at some point I was going to have to get to the Capitol. Yeah, we had to certify the election, so I didn't know when. I didn't know what time, but I was ready to go whenever it was going to be time, no matter what. And that call came in very, very late, wee hours, you know, the next day, if I'm not mistaken, and I remember having to take off my suit, take off the pin on my lapel, put on a sweatshirt, put on a hat. My wife was like, Whatever you do, keep your head down, you know, and just get there. I'm trying to exactly if I drove her, if I walked. I can't remember now, so I'll blur, but I just know that I just remember sneaking is the best way to put it back into the people's house, yeah? Having to sneak in America to certify the damn election, yeah? So yeah. You know it's, I don't think about it that much because it's a hard thing to have to process that that happened, that happened in America, but it did happen. And thankfully, we were able to certify the election. We were able to come together in that moment and recognize, you know, this is unacceptable, unacceptable. And it was a real moment. As low as we felt, I felt, I felt very high at the end of the process, being able to stand there with my colleagues and certify the election and make sure that our democracy was protected and sustained against all odds, and so yeah, to be here now, years later, and to have a president who clearly has no he is emotionally numb, and That's putting it mildly. He's emotionally numb to the events of that day. He has no heart to the pain that was caused to the country, to the wounds that were created, to the impact that was felt by law enforcement, the assaults, the violence, the pain that they still carry to this day, the trauma that all of us feel. He doesn't care. And now, what does he not care? It appears that he's emboldened by it. So what does that make him? What does it make him? Well, when you're emboldened, when you look at that and you say, I want to double down on that, you know? And let's just say, for the sake, because I always try to give grace. I always try to give mercy. And I think it's important that we try to always think about the whole picture. There might be folks, and there probably were folks that got swept up in the moment, that walk through open doors that found themselves wrapped up in the chaos. And as with any human instinct, sometimes you just sort of follow the herd, right? And you look up, oh my gosh, look where I am. I'm in the cap. So I don't dismiss that. There might be a number of folks that got swept up, and we should acknowledge that, yeah, not to and to the extent that there was overreach, or that there's been a coming down on top of those individuals that is disproportionate, then I think it is appropriate to look at those situations and to figure out, you know how to account for that, because that's not appropriate either. But let's not act like there weren't individuals there who had other intentions, who came there with violence on their mind. Let's not act like that didn't happen. And so to conflate those two folks, right? Those two groups of people, is dishonorable. It truly is. And so that that for me, is what I carry, because you gotta keep in mind, and this is the problem with our politics. Everybody wants to just make the case from their limited standpoint and not try to account for the whole picture. Yeah, there are folks who got treated wrongly, probably right, or where justice was applied to aggressively, but let's not act like you. There weren't people there who were there to cause real harm, right? And then to pardon them just because you can and you don't feel like dealing with the issue. You don't feel like taking the job serious. That's what it is. You don't feel like doing the hard work of trying to figure out, okay, well, you know, really, who shouldn't have been locked up all this time, and who should have to still be in jail. You don't find doing the work, you take the easy road. And that, to me, is part of the problem. And as much as he's a problem, I think what I just diagnosed is a problem of a lot of our elected officials and leaders. He's at the worst end of it, but there's a tendency to not be willing to articulate the entirety of the problem, just just because you want to talk to your base, yeah, you want to talk to the group that you feel like matters the most to you, and you basically siphon off anybody else. And I think I had to learn when I was serving in New York 19 I need to make sure that I talk to everybody, that I hear everybody, because there's a lot of you can learn a lot from other people's point of view and perspective, not that you're going to agree on it per se 100% but you can't discount it. You can't act like their reality isn't lived like some of those families right now, maybe it was a father or a wife who's been locked up all this time and and they were there, legitimately just getting wrapped up in the mix, not excusing their behavior, right? But it's not the same as going in there as others did to cause real harm.

Fred Kowal: 21:35

What scares me, and I'd like to hear your, I guess, prescription advice, or how you're approaching this. You know the reality is, whether it's the leader of the proud boys or any of the militia groups, they're benefiting from this action of the pardons. And what is legitimately frightening to me is these are individuals who now feel absolutely emboldened. They feel like the President of the United States has their back. That in their mind, they are the personal army of Donald J Trump, and are threatening revenge on the judges and those and even the law enforcement who testified against them are getting threats. And then there was that all the other executive orders that were handed down full information, not only president of UUP and obviously heavily engaged in union work, Chair elect of the National Wildlife Federation, a big national conservation organization. So obviously, when I see all of the executive orders on the climate crisis, it is deeply depressing. Not that I didn't expect it. So for those of us who, at times feel paralyzed already in this first week of actions, or I also feel this, which is just intense anger and trying to figure out a way of a way forward, where do you see those of us who believe in a progressive nation, in a united nation that works to improve the lives of everyone, especially leaving a better world for our children and our grandchildren. What do you use to move yourself forward in a position that you know you have some some power, you have a voice, clearly. So how are you approaching this? I'm just going to let you go ahead with it, because I'm thinking. I don't. I'm not thinking about four years, because that too long a time. I can't deal with four years.

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 23:28

Listen, man, I think it's an important question, and I think, I don't think there's a there's one uniform answer, but I My hope is this will resonate with a lot of the listeners. You know, I think it's always important to have to not lose sight of history and where we've come from and what we've been able to accomplish here in America. I do think that at times where my progressive friends in the left don't fully articulate enough is and I think it limits our capacity to have a aspirational vision that is truly captivating for all of the folks who are hurting right now across America, be they white, black, brown, you name it, we have to keep An open mind and a deep, profound appreciation for the way that through the efforts of people, just individuals, just human beings, we've moved mountains, we've changed laws, we've ended systems of hate that were far more explicit and violent and ugly and degrading, not that we've completed the work by any stretch, but let's not act like we haven't done that work, that there are those before us who were facing mountains that were insurmountable, it would seem, and yet they climbed them and broke through new barriers and. And made what was viewed as impossible at that time possible. So if you start from there, when you say, Well, how did they do it? How what did they tap into? What was it that gave them the energy, the determination, the will to keep pressing forward, to collaborate, to build to coalition around a view of the world that was more compassionate, more just, more fair. It was love. It was a deep, abiding love of each other, of country, of democracy. It was love of our values and our systems. And love is something that when I say love, I don't mean, you know, Cupid type love. I'm talking about the kind of love that makes you determined to have a better world, and to do it in a way that's not destructive. You know, it's easy to be a quote, unquote, change agent, if your intention is just to destroy and destruct and to tear down that doesn't take a lot of effort. You just got to bang on stuff. But Love makes you want to do things carefully and constructively and thoughtfully. And ultimately, it is the mode of change that is sustainable. We just celebrate Dr King, if ever there was a example of the power of love, the power of person to person interaction, and what that can translate to on the social, societal macro level, yeah, if we all collectively embrace that ethic, the challenge We have right now is we're losing our connective tissue, institutionally, systemically speaking, we're too isolated, we're too detached, we're too disconnected, these cell phones that we walk around with all the time, watches, iPhone, all these things that we are constantly head down. We're not connecting anymore with each other, and we're losing a sense of objectivity, right? We don't have a a set of truths and facts that we can orient ourselves around. And so it makes the there's there are obstacles in place now that weren't there in the past that make it harder for us to tap into this shared power to love each other. So that is a real obstacle we have to overcome, but leadership, I think, can help with that in the same way that our current president has a real ability to tap into fear and to pain and to anxieties, I think that leaders of a different kind of a different ilk, should do everything in their power to tap into a different set, a different kind of energy, and you've got to Be willing to tap in and do it without inhibition. That's the key. You can't do it constrained or restrained, right? You have to lean into it so people can feel it, and some might be dismissive of it, yeah. Okay. Another person talking about love, whatever. Do it over and over again. Don't stop and not just talk about it. Try to live it, try to do it, if through actions and through deeds, you know. So there's no easy answer, but look at where we've come from. Look at how we've got to where we are. And then, of course, you got to work your ass off and deliver outcomes, you know, that affect people's lives, and have the courage to say no to people that are getting in the way. And not just to be clear, not just corporate power. You know, there are a lot of so called liberals and progressives that make a fuss about a lot of things when it's in their backyard. You know, everybody's proud to be something until it personally affects them, yeah, so that sense of like shared sacrifice and shared responsibility, what happened to that? Where's that very into individualism and identity? Where are we with a collective, shared sense of responsibility and sacrifice? We don't even use those words anymore, and we think we're liberal because of that. Listen, I'm here to call all that out because I'm tired of it, and I think it's moving in a direction that is harming our ability to really deliver for people in a way that's true and authentic and genuine to the people's pain. Most folks believe this stuff, by the way, they don't just they don't hear it from anybody

Fred Kowal: 29:17

You mentioned, too, the challenge of the media. And as I like to tell folks that I talk about this stuff with and especially in my in my union work, but elsewhere is you look back at the success, the popularity that FDR enjoyed when he was president, or when Lyndon Johnson got in and he did all these great programs a great society. Why can't presidents do that now? Or, you know, liberal presidents, however you want to define it, they didn't have Fox spreading what they're spreading. And now Musk controlling, uh, X and its vast reach when you were in Congress, just speak on that.

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 29:52

Yeah, everything's been commodified. Yes, the piece here that's missing information is being commodified. So the veracity. Of the information, the accuracy of the information is irrelevant. That's correct. It's all about entertainment. It's all about engagement. It's all about attention. And so once you give up that game, once you give up truth, once you give up facts in the name of profiteering, right, then we lose our ability to stay connected, to stay grounded in a shared sense of reality. And I think that's the piece that we've lost, and it makes change very hard, because it frustrates that. And I do think, though, that there's a pendulum that's going to swing back, I think, and it's not just political, I think it's socially, I think it's culturally I think we are starting to see the limitations of technology in the sense that it's limiting our capacity to raise our children the right way, to maintain the integrity of our communities, to protect our kids, to have real conversations that are where we don't lose sight of our shared humanity, not to mention the economic dynamic of being dislocated, displaced. There's a by technology, I think there's just a lot of aspects. Again, I'm not saying technology doesn't have real value, but I do think that we've let it outpace our humanity, and I think by doing so, we're starting to feel the tension of that. And I think those of us who are trying to lead need to be very mindful of that that shift and to figure out how to create an off ramp into a new way to think about things, not to abandon technology, but to reinforce our commitment to each other beyond interfacing through technology.

Fred Kowal: 31:35

When you were In Congress, you had good working relationships with Republicans. Got a lot done, as I indicated in the opening, in a bipartisan way. You were re elected. And yeah, it was his purple district, but it leaned, it leaned Republican, and pretty much a landslide in 20 so the question now is two part one is, I don't not looking for specifics, but do you still have contact with your former colleagues? Do you ever, you ever have conversations with them, where they they speak about things in in a kind of a similar way, not in agreement on policy and disagreements are fine on policy. Do you still feel that connection, or in your role as lieutenant governor and working with both Republicans and Democrats here in New York state, are those lines of communication still open to such an extent where you feel like, yeah, you you could get stuff done?

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 32:31

Well, yes, the short answer is yes. You know, one of the things that I'm most proud of when I was in Congress was the relationships that I have with the state assembly or senators that were oftentimes Republican, you know, in my district, whether it was Chris tag or Ashby, you know, these are individuals who I, you know, was able to befriend, right and collaborate with and figure out how to deliver for our constituents, all of whom were relying on us, and I still maintain those relationships. And I think the piece that I've come to learn moving from Congress to state government, that I find very interesting is, and it all comes back to power, coming full circle with this conversation. It all comes back to power, you know, this idea that just because, and I think it applies to Trump. It applies to, you know, the any party in power. It applies to those who have seniority within a power structure. How do you use it? How do you share it? How do you democratize it? And I think when you decide that just because you have the power, therefore you can dictate everything, while celebrating diversity, while talking about how diversity is a strength, those two things don't really go together. Nope, you know. So if you really believe that diversity of thought, political points of view, is something that we shouldn't be short cutting or undermining, where's the process he's in place to create and facilitate that. I look at how we what we work in New York, and I find it very limiting. It's very siloed. You know? Yeah, we might not agree on a lot of stuff, okay, but you know what, if you and I are talking and collaborating on one or two different issues, and you're fully invested in that, and you see the humanity in me and that we really care about this issue. At the very least, it's going to make you a lot less likely to want to go off and personally attack me on something else that maybe we don't agree on. You figure out how to frame the issue in a way that's more respectful, right? Because you still want to be able to work with me on X, Y and Z, and when you take that off the table and just say, I got the ball and I'm playing and that's it, you're playing by my rules. Then what is the incentive for those who don't have as much power to even want to engage with you in a way that's constructive? There's no incentive. Positive. That's right. In fact, the incentives work the other way now, because their base of support views them as purely oppositional, so they're going to look for them to be oppositional, and he or she who is the most oppositional in the primary will win. So it's actually incentivizing folks to be more oppositional, and I find that a challenge. And again, I think leadership. I don't say this to suggest that it's gonna that it's ever easy because it's not. This is easy. Yeah, let's not act like, just because something is hard, it shouldn't be, you know, pursued, right? Come on. Like, if that's the case, if that's the standard, oh, it's gotta be easy to make to do it. Well, I mean, what are we doing

Fred Kowal: 35:45

And what kind of progress would we have made that you were talking about earlier, right?

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 35:50

If everybody just was like, hey, you know what? Too hard. Just look for something easy to do. Yeah. Where do we go from there, yeah.

Fred Kowal: 36:02

And so, you know, this is a podcast that is sponsored by a union, and so I want to dip into that just for a second. Very strong supporter of organized labor throughout your career, and a great friend to labor. Your parents worked for GE grew up in Schenectady. Do you point to that as the start of your affinity for unions, and for that matter, because you know, this conversation has just been so great, I want to give you the time to talk about it. What role can unions play in approaching the politics as you have defined it, or as you have defined the need for us collectively to move forward? What do you think.

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 36:40

Unions are incredibly important. I hear you on growing up in Schenectady, and you're right. I did, and my parents were for GE neither one of them were actually in a union. But what I take away from that point in our lives was what was happening collectively and culturally around that time, the kind of jobs that were available, that paid certain kind of wages, with pensions, right and like what was happening in the before the age of greed set in, right? Because I'm a Gen Xer, so 77 so I remember my parents in the late 70s, up to 80s, they were able to leverage these jobs and leverage that period of time where collective bargaining wasn't under full on assault just yet before right when Reagan starts to come in right, like I was on the tail end of one era in the beginning of another one. And I feel like my generation benefited. Was one of the last generations to benefit from those stories of upward mobility, where you can come from cutting coupons like I did, or putting clothes on layaway, and your parents can say, we're going to double down your education and that's going to make you better off where my generation was, more than 50% had a better than 50% chance it was more likely to be better off than their family. It's not the case anymore, and then their parents. So my sense is, I asked myself, What was different in part, not everything, but what was a key building block to that time period. Well, you better believe unions and collective bargaining was a very important part of that story, and stories like mine being able to happen it created the cultural dynamic that allowed families, working families, to better themselves and to climb up the economic ladder as a building block, a very, very important building block to any narrative that is tied to upward mobility, and as that building block is attacked and crumbled and made more challenging to do, then the stories of upward mobility suffer as a result. The idea of the American Dream suffers as a result. We see that in the numbers. We see that in the loss of opportunity. We see that in the rural communities I used to represent, where you see the economics aren't what they used to be, where the manufacturing has been dislocated and there's no opportunity, and the wages are stagnant, and these right to work laws all across America, really, New York were a little bit different, but across the country, where you're seeing the assault on collective bargaining that speaks to why we can have increased productivity while wages stay put. So my passion for this stems from my passion for working people, my passion for what's right, my passion for what's fair. As I've said, and I'll say it over and over again, I believe in capitalism, and I can go on and on about what I believe are the tremendous benefits of a capitalistic system. No question that we need the dynamism, the innovation, the individualism that comes from manifest from capitalism. But let's not act like capitalism that is just left to its own devices that isn't put with guardrails, doesn't have the tendency to not account for those who don't have the capital in the first place, who don't have the means in the first place, and that balance when you don't have those guardrails, when you allow capital to reinforce. Force itself over time, right the interests of capital to concentrate over time, and then they have the capacity to influence how government works. Then it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out, oh, well, they can dictate how we solve for problems, whether it is housing, whether it is healthcare, whether it is how we regulate telecommunications, or how we regulate monopolies, or how we protect small farmers, or how we enable small business generation. All these things ultimately get dictated by very few who have concentrated wealth and power the interest of capital, overrun democracy and overrun the people, and so labor is an important counterweight yes to capital and democracy is the playing field upon which capital and labor, both legitimate interests, are working together to try to figure out how to strike the right balance. But what happens if the referees right, the folks on the playing field or try to make sure the game is done appropriately. Have been bought and paid for by one side so the outcomes are already determined. The game is already rigged. Yep, we know what's going to happen by the end. Would you want to play that game?

Fred Kowal: 41:14

Nope, but that's it. There you go. Yeah. So I can't believe we're coming towards the end of the time here, but I do have one more question, and I'm going to avoid the opportunity where you just ended to say something negative about the Kansas City Chiefs. I'm not going to go there, about buying referees. I'm not I promised Mike I wasn't going to go there. But seriously, so 2026 will be upon us real soon. And you know, as I'm sure you're listening, our listeners have appreciated, you know, you've got some brilliant ideas. You've got a real passion for the work and for politics and serving the public. First and foremost. Well, I mean just asking the general question, where do you see yourself in 10 years? So that's part of it. But then also, what are your plans for 26 do you intend to run for lieutenant governor again? Are you one? I'm just gonna leave it at that. I'm not gonna go anywhere else. I'm just gonna say, you know, where do you see yourself going forward? You got all these ideas, you got this energy, you got a career of service, and you're a young man. So

Lt. Gov. Delgado: 42:15

Well, I think life has taught me that it's very hard to predict the future. You know, even in my own life, when I was a hip hop artist after law school, if someone said to me, Oh, you're going to do this for about five years, but guess what? Five years later, you're going to be working at a corporate law firm, I would have said, yeah, right, yeah. But there I was, you know, five years later, working at a corporate law firm. If someone told me in year two or three of my time at the law firm, okay, you'll be here for about six years, but then guess what, you'll be in Congress, yeah, okay. Like, how the hell is that gonna happen? Like, I just there was, there would be no way for me to think that that was possible, right? And then, if you told me while I was in Congress at the beginning of my second term, guess what? A year from now, you're gonna Lieutenant Governor of New York, I would have said, okay, like, how? Like, what are you talking about? So in every situation I've been in, I've learned to, yeah, you could, you could, you know, have aspirations and hopes, but oftentimes, you know, God, there's another plan, right? And you got to figure out, you know, what that plan is, and how to just stay true to yourself. And I think that's where I've landed, right, where I've landed through all of this, because at every turn, what I've tried to do is stay true to myself. And whenever I have felt like where I was was too far removed from the truth of myself, that's when I feel tension and feel like I need to adjust accordingly. And so I will say that for myself, I'm always of the mindset to never lose touch with who I am and my own voice, and anytime I feel like that is at risk, I need to figure out, you know, how to account for that. And what I've also learned is that by doing that, by staying true to myself, opportunities, at least up to this point, have presented themselves. You know, sometimes because I've made them happen or pursue them, but other times, because they have just manifested on their own. And so I just try to keep an open mind. I want to keep serving. I want to serve New Yorkers. I want to lead. I want to, you know, do everything I can to push back against tinkering around the edges, reinforcing a broken system, doing the same old thing, like I don't want that. I don't like that, and I think it's important that we have the commitment and the will. You know that I have it, and hopefully can lead in this fashion to push the envelope. So what I know more than anything, I don't know the future, but what I do know in the now is I'm gonna stand on that, and I'm gonna not I'll. Allow my voice and who I am to be silenced. I have agency. The people have elected me to this position. It is an independent position, and it is one that I will intend to continue to operate, you know, in a fashion that reflects that independence and that hopefully is genuinely tied to the people that I serve.

Fred Kowal: 45:24

Well, I appreciate that very much. I think an old saying that my parents taught me a long time ago is, yeah, talking about your plans is a great way to make God laugh Exactly, yeah, you know, and it's truth so well, listen, I really appreciate you taking this time. I've enjoyed this very much. And I had me too, had a whole slew of questions. I never even got to him, because conversation was so great. Conversations, you know, let it flow. Yeah, absolutely. So. Thanks very much, Lieutenant Governor. It's been a pleasure. Look forward to encountering you in our common work to make New York state a better place for everybody, as do I. Yes, keep working. You got it. Thanks very much. You take care now. Take care Alright.

Mike Lisi: 46:17

Welcome to Labor LookBack where we take a look back at Labor's storied past, from strikes and uprisings to colorful union leaders and huge union wins. We'll cover it all. Here's a look back at labor history from the months of January and February

Music: Bread and Roses: 46:37

are touched with all the radiance that a sudden Sun discloses for the people hear us singing, Bread and Roses. Bread and Roses.

Mike Lisi: 46:54

On January 11, 1912, workers at The Everett mill in Lawrence, Massachusetts opened their paychecks and quickly realized that their pay was lower than it was a week before, 10 days before Massachusetts enforced a new law that cut the work week from 56 to 54 hours for women and children working in the mills. Workers were horrified, and they were angry when you're making less than $9 a week, which is what most workers took home, getting a 32 cent per paycheck cut can be the difference between eating one night and going hungry the next. So they stopped working and walked out the Bread and Roses strike had begun. By the end of the week, more than 20,000 workers, most of them immigrants from 51 different countries, were on strike. Some shouted short pay all out over the noise of the looms. Others carried banners that read, we want Bread and Roses too. A not so subtle demand for fair wages and for dignity. City officials ordered the local militia to patrol the streets, and mill owners turned fire hoses on picketing workers. On January 29 a mob of strikers attacked a street car filled with scabs as they tried to cross the picket line. A garment worker, Anna lopizzo, was shot and killed, the first of the strike's three casualties. On February 10, striking families sent 119 children to Manhattan to live with relatives, or in some cases, complete strangers willing to feed them and provide safety. The children were met by a crowd of 5000 people at Grand Central Station, a second train load of children paraded down Fifth Avenue after arriving from Lawrence, which won even more sympathy for the strikers and their cause, things turned violent on February 24 when the mothers of 46 children tried to put their kids on a train to Philadelphia. Lawrence police blocked their way. Mothers who dared to defy them were beaten, dragged by their hair and arrested as the children watched the horrific scene, Americans recoiled in horror. President William Howard Taft launched an investigation, and Congress convened a hearing on the strike. At the hearing, strikers, including children, some younger than 14, described the poor pay and awful working conditions they faced daily the mill owners now eager to end the strike, agreed to many of the strikers demands, including a 15% wage hike, increases in overtime compensation and promises not to retaliate against the strikers. The strike was a major victory for organized labor. It helped to boost pay for workers in other cities, and marked one of the first times that unions came together through organization and collaboration. It also shined a spotlight on child labor, workplace safety and. Low pay for workers, take this

Music: Take This Job and Shove It: 50:01

Take this job and shove it.

Mike Lisi: 50:08

There's a story behind the hit 1970s country song, take this job and shove it made famous by country singer Johnny paycheck. The song spent 18 weeks on the country charts in hit number one in january 1978 it quickly became an anthem for working people and a popular catchphrase of the late 1970s paycheck who died in 2003 didn't write the song, even though most people figured he did. The song was penned by songwriter David Allen co who said it took him about five minutes to write it. Coe, who's now 85 got the idea for the song in 1977 as he was heading over to country icon Johnny Cash's house. Ko, who was living on his boat at the time, saw that a nearby dock was on fire, so he ran over and quickly cut the boats loose to keep them from the flames. The story made the national papers the next day, about two weeks later, Ko was hanging out with music producer and publisher, buddy Killen, when killin asked ko if he'd like to be a fireman, Ko's response, I said, they can take that job and shove it. Killin told ko that he should waste no time writing a song using the phrase, and that's exactly what he did. Country icon George Strait passed on the song, which eventually ended up with paycheck, who apparently called Ko and asked permission to record it. Ko said yes, and the rest is history for UUP, look back. I'm Mike Lisi, and now here's Fred with Kowal's Coda.

Fred Kowal: 51:46

So, earlier in this podcast, we had a wonderful conversation with the lieutenant governor, and as you probably heard loud and clear, he feels very strongly about the necessity for public service and for there to be responsible kind of leadership in this country and in this state. And I was fascinated by those comments, especially in the context of what is happening in the global arena, specifically since january 20. You know, there are a lot of those in this country. I've seen the polls, lot of those who say the United States should not be involved in the world. We should step away. We need to have a program of America first, which actually the way I've seen it, is America alone, the idea that somehow globalization and involvement in the international world is not our job anymore. Well, let me offer to you this reality, globalization, an interdependent world, is like gravity. You can't deny it. It exists not only because the United States is the world's sole superpower, although China is gaining fast that gives us a unique role as the world's superpower. It is in the interest of any superpower to have a role in the world so that it's stable, it's quiet, it's peaceful, because that's how superpowers remain in power and are able to make the world serve their interests. That sounds harsh, but it has worked in the case of the United States, not without great human cost, in terrible tragedies like the war in Vietnam, among others. But at the same time, doesn't matter if you're a superpower, you depend on trade in this world. You value stability, and you protect yourself against the insanity that rises up now and then, as we saw horrifically on September 11, 2001 we cannot withdraw from the world. We cannot deny our own role in this world, and it is against our interests to withdraw. One of the things that Donald Trump has campaigned on all three times is the desire and interest of withdrawing from the world, and for the reasons I've just articulated, I think it's a foolish idea, but what we have seen since january 20 is this new Trump doctrine, which is troubling to say the least. He has called for the United States to take over or buy Greenland, which technically is the territory of Denmark, even though there is a movement for Greenland to be independent, and the people of Greenland want to be their own country, and they should have the right to be their own country, but if they are maintained as a part of Denmark. Denmark is part of NATO, and when Donald Trump, before he was President, called the Prime Minister of Denmark and threatened her, he was ignoring the fact that after 911 the Danes, as part of NATO, sent troops to Afghanistan to fight alongside Americans. They fought and they died because the United States was attacked. That's what allies do for each other. With regard to Panama, for the President to say in his inaugural address that he intended to take back the canal, he was ignoring the reality that Panama is a sovereign nation and a stable democracy, and it is not in the interests of the United States to threaten its allies. He did the same thing, threatening Mexico and Canada with tariffs. And by the way, what ended up happening after the threats were launched and the tariffs delayed, the truth came out that Trump didn't get anything that the Canadians or the Mexicans were going to do anyway. But finally, and most troubling is what he said about Gaza, when he talked about all of those living in Gaza to leave, I suppose, by force, and then for Gaza to be leveled and turned into a resort capital. First of all, it's got obviously a blatant, get rich quick scheme for himself, and of course, his son in law has talked about that as well. What's most troubling is that this is the President of the United States talking about a program of ethnic cleansing of territory, the taking away of sovereign territory of the people of Palestine. And then what this is madness. These kinds of statements, serious statements, point to an eventuality, which is the loss of American prestige around the world, the making of enemies out of allies. These kind of steps will embolden enemies the United States has, in Russia, in Iran, in China, and many other places that will bring to the United States a cost in lives, in our economic well being and in our world. I'll end with this. When the President withdrew us from the Paris Climate Accords, he indicated to the world that the United States would not take seriously its role among the community of nations that is humanity, that is troubling, and all we need to know about this man, he cares not about the world or this nation. It's about himself and his own ego and the drive for attention and that endangers all of us. Good night and good luck.

Mike Lisi: 58:07

The voice Podcast is a production of United University professions. You can find UUP on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, at UUP info. UUP is on the web at UUP info.org, this episode was produced by Mike Lisi uups, communications director. UUP director of administration, Lynn Alderman is associate producer. Thank you for listening.

The Voice Podcast theme: 58:39

I am the Voice, I am the union...