‘What Stood Out Was What Wasn’t Said’: Antonio Delgado on Hochul’s Speech

New York Focus: So first of all, I wanted to ask about what stood out to you from the Governor’s State of the State speech this week. Did anything surprise you?

Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado: What stood out was what wasn’t said. She didn’t call for taxing the rich. She didn’t back [immigrant protection bill] New York for All. There was no bold measure to address housing or the fact that Trump has gutted our health care system. That, to me, is what stood out.

NYF: Governor Hochul has always been a proud moderate. When you accepted the invitation to be her lieutenant governor, did you think she would govern differently?

AD: I did. When I decided to run for lieutenant governor … we had very, very open, frank conversations about the nature of my role, and being a partner, and being able to bring a perspective to bear, and helping to shape how to govern things differently. The governor acknowledged that she had lacked that kind of partnership with the previous governor, and had understood and appreciated that it was important to try to do things differently and to govern in a way that was more transparent, accountable, collaborative, and certainly more connected.

NYF: Can you be specific about how you thought she would govern differently?

AD: I thought she would be more collaborative, not just with me, but more collaborative with the folks that are impacted by her decisions. So it was clear to me that when you’re talking about housing, for example, the partnerships that she makes in housing have more to do with developers than they do with fighting for folks who are impacted by the affordability crisis, or, if we’re talking about health care, it became clear to me that a lot of the folks that she was more interested in engaging with were the hospital conglomerates and the insurance companies.

A lot of it was window dressing. And I didn’t believe that was the appropriate way to serve the people of New York.

NYF: Governor Hochul’s headline policy this year is a major boost to child care funding. She pledged billions of dollars towards programs for pre-school-age children, especially in New York City, but also elsewhere in the state. What did you think of this, and what would you do differently on child care?

AD: One, I want to applaud the mayor for pushing the governor to do something in this space. The governor has had a good while to do something, and only chose to step up and meaningfully pursue any remote attempt at universal childcare on the heels of his efforts. He has certainly been able to secure a meaningful investment in New York City.

I’ll point out, though, that there remain significant challenges when it comes to this entirety of the state, and the governor seems to have lost or forgotten the fact that she is the governor of the state and not just the city.

It also should be noted that nowhere in her platform does she suggest that we should pay childcare workers an actual living wage, despite the fact that one in 10 are in poverty. How do you expect to get universal childcare statewide if you can’t pay childcare workers a living wage?

NYF: Mayor Mamdani is obviously very happy with the governor’s investment in child care in New York City, and he’s been pretty friendly with her, in general, even though he was one of her most frequent critics before he ran for mayor. What do you make of their relationship?

AD: I think it’s always healthy to try to figure out, particularly in his position, how to build relationships that could benefit the folks who you’re fighting for, right? He’s doing what he needs to do to ensure that the people of New York City are served under his leadership.

NYF: You’re running a come-from-behind campaign from the left, just like he did, but both Hochul and Mamdani have indicated that he’s likely to endorse her campaign. What do you think of that? And have you met with him during your campaign?

AD: My focus is actually on connecting with the people on the ground, and I’ve been able to do so in a real, meaningful way. This week alone I’ve been in Rochester, Syracuse, Buffalo, and Brooklyn. People, ultimately, are the ones who decide whether they want certain kinds of leaders.

I’m very proud of the fact that I’m the first statewide candidate to ever qualify for public matching funds, which I think is also reflective of the ability to really connect with people in a grassroots fashion.

NYF: You’ve criticized the governor for not supporting the New York for All Act, which would ban local police departments from collaborating with ICE. Beyond that legislation, what else would you do differently to protect immigrants?

AD: I would do two other things that the governor has not acknowledged. One is to ban ICE from wearing masks. If you’re enforcing the law, you shouldn’t have to wear a mask.

Two, I think we should provide [legal] representation to our immigrant community statewide that is facing deportation proceedings. So those are two things that the governor has not backed, as well as Dignity not Detention legislation [which would ban New Yorkers, including local governments and corporations, from owning or operating immigrant detention facilities].

NYF: You’ve also criticized the governor for not doing enough to help the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who will lose Medicaid coverage due to cuts by the Trump administration. What in particular would you do to protect them?

AD: The Medicaid cuts have been devastating, and the governor has done nothing. In fact, she’s just essentially letting folks who were on the [federally-funded] Essential Plan and otherwise would have been subsidized by the federal government, lose their health care. And as I did last year, I would have called for a special session, and I would have raised revenue. I would have increased taxes, either on our most profitable corporations or on the ultra-wealthy to attempt to fill in part the gap that is a result of these cuts, so that the state itself could figure out a way to provide meaningful care.

NYF: Do you have a sense of how much that would cost?

AD: I would have sat down with the legislative body to figure that out. I mean, we know we’re going to be in the deficit of $10 billion, not this cycle, but the next fiscal year. I think this fiscal year it’s more like $3 billion. So it’s about trying to figure out how much of that is wrapped up in the Medicaid portion — that would have had to be calculated. But I do believe that we could have the money.

NYF: Governor Hochul embraced nuclear energy in her speech, announcing plans to build more nuclear energy infrastructure in New York than the entire country has built in the last three decades. You called this a waste of money and time. Can you say more about that criticism?

AD: We don’t need nuclear. It’s incredibly cost-burdensome, it’s labor-intensive, time-intensive. In some cases, it can take up to a decade to build. And there’s also the challenge of waste and nuclear waste.

We have some of the strongest climate laws in the country, and we’re not leveraging those laws to the fullest extent. We’re not leveraging the public renewables act to double down aggressively on investing in public renewables and green energy. We’re canceling green energy projects that would otherwise allow us to meet our [emission reduction] goals. The governor has not released the cap and invest rules and regulations, and instead, she’s fast-tracking water quality permits for Trump’s fracked gas pipeline, and reversing course on air quality permits on data mining facilities on Seneca Lake.

So it’s just a complete reverse course on her part, at a time where not only do we need to have urgency behind climate action, but also at a time where people’s energy bills are going up considerably. And we can create good-paying jobs and drive down the cost of energy with real investment in green energy.

NYF: On another topic, it’s been a year of crisis for New York’s prison system, which didn’t come up in Hochul’s speech. What steps would you take on prison reform?