Reflections on Political Standards and the New York Mayoral Election
Back when I was a young journalist at the New York Times, I had the privilege of working with a seasoned political editor named Sheldon Bing. A World War II veteran, he had a straightforward way of evaluating politicians.
“All I ask is that you don’t make the situation worse,” he used to say. “That’s the best you can hope for.” I remember this clearly. As an idealistic newcomer, I thought his standards were disappointingly low. But now? Well, I find his perspective surprisingly relevant.
Take for instance the upcoming New York mayoral election, where Democratic candidate Zoran Mamdani is advocating for some quite radical changes. If voters make the mistake of electing him on Tuesday, I fear his leadership might cause more than just minor setbacks.
His proposals could lead to significant issues—from deteriorating public safety to escalating financial woes. Education budgets are expected to get slashed, and his pledge to hike taxes could hurt businesses, families, and employment. Furthermore, his stance on issues related to Israel makes him, in my opinion, an unsuitable leader for a city with a substantial Jewish population.
One particularly troubling promise of his is to shut down Rikers Island, despite there being no space for the 7,000 inmates currently held there. This would surely lower the quality of life for the city’s residents, workers, and visitors.
Such outcomes wouldn’t be short-lived, either. Historical patterns show that the effects of a mayor’s decisions can linger for years—even decades—after they leave office. Beyond mere policies, mayors play a pivotal role in shaping the civic landscape, influencing how nonprofits and private philanthropy operate.
Mamdani’s plans, which echo those of failed socialist regimes historically, necessitate harsh tax increases that could contribute to a long period of economic decline. Look at Cuba and Venezuela—many have fled those countries in search of better lives in places like New York. If socialism were indeed superior to capitalism, one wonders why celebrities and critics of the current system don’t simply move there.
This ongoing situation leads me to support former Governor Andrew Cuomo, despite his flaws. Measuring him against Bing’s standards, he appears to do less damage than Mamdani would. The harm that an inexperienced, 34-year-old like Mamdani could inflict might not even be easily reversed, even if he was to be ousted after a single term.
A Cautionary Tale
Four years is a substantial amount of time for New York to dig itself into a hole it may not easily escape from. Looking back, it reminds me of a major crisis from 50 years ago. The Daily News had a famous headline declaring, “Ford to city: Drop Dead,” after President Ford refused to approve federal aid for the struggling city.
New York had been living beyond its means for years. Eventually, banks cut off lending, signaling serious trouble. It took time for that debt to accumulate.
During Republican Mayor John Lindsay’s eight years in office starting in 1966, there was rampant spending and a severe decline in law and order. By his last year, the murder rate tripled compared to when he began. Even Democratic city auditor Abe Beam didn’t raise any alarms, yet he managed to win election as mayor in 1973, ultimately hastening the city’s financial woes.
Ford’s hesitation to lend a helping hand was justified unless the city could show real reform. Beam lost his re-election in part because the necessary budget cuts, especially affecting the NYPD, hurt the city’s safety. New York became a crime-ridden shell, pushing nearly a million people to relocate, primarily to suburban areas and Florida.
Ed Koch took over as mayor and emphasized spending cuts while bolstering public safety. His approach was a hit, showing New Yorkers and the federal government that there was indeed capable leadership. Nevertheless, the underlying problems persisted, and crime remained rampant under the strained NYPD.
It wasn’t until Rudy Giuliani’s tenure in 1994 that a comprehensive plan to fund the police correctly and implement effective strategies emerged. With Giuliani and his police chief Bill Bratton enacting the “broken windows” theory, crime rates plunged drastically within four years.
This trend continued through Giuliani’s second term and into Mike Bloomberg’s as well. The outcome? A two-decade-long period of relative peace and economic growth, transforming New York into one of the safest and strongest cities globally.
But then Bill de Blasio came along—a mayor whose record bears resemblance to that of Beam and who unfortunately left behind rising crime rates once again.
Mamdani’s admiration for de Blasio is, frankly, concerning. His plan to downsize the NYPD highlights a lack of understanding of the situation. Reports of de Blasio advising Mamdani only exacerbate the worries surrounding his campaign.
If current polls show Mamdani in the lead, it’s a stark reflection of the notion that doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome is, well, a bit insane. New York, don’t make this mistake again.
