Podcast appearances and mentions of Nita Lowey

On The Dominic Carter Show, Dominic discusses the NYC mayor's race, the passing of former Rep. Nita Lowey, trans-youth issues, Trump striking the Houthis and much more! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What do the results of the 2024 U.S. presidential election, a sweeping victory for President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President-elect J.D. Vance, mean for the U.S. Jewish community and Israel? How did the Jewish community vote? What are the top takeaways from the Senate and the House elections? Get caught up on all the latest election data points and analysis in this week's episode, featuring Ron Kampeas, JTA's Washington Bureau Chief and guest hosted by Julie Fishman Rayman, AJC's Managing Director of Policy and Political Affairs. AJC is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization. AJC neither supports nor opposes candidates for elective office. The views and opinions expressed by guests do not necessarily reflect the views or position of AJC. AJC's Policy Priorities: AJC Congratulates President-Elect Donald J. Trump Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  The Jewish Vote in Pennsylvania: What You Need to Know Sinwar Eliminated: What Does This Mean for the 101 Hostages Still Held by Hamas? From Doña Gracia to Deborah Lipstadt: What Iconic Jewish Women Can Teach Us Today Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Transcript: Julie Fishman Rayman:  Hello, I'm Julie Fishman Rayman:, AJC's managing director of policy and political affairs. Today, I have the pleasure of guest hosting people of the PA and speaking with Ron Kampeas, JTA's Washington bureau chief, to discuss the results and the implications of the 2024 US presidential election as the nonpartisan global advocacy organization for the Jewish people, AJC congratulates Donald J Trump on his election as the 47th president of the United States and Senator J.D. Vance as vice president. AJC looks forward to working with the president-elect and his administration on the domestic and foreign policy concerns that are AJC advocacy priorities to learn more about our policy priorities for the incoming administration. Head to the link in our show notes as a reminder. AJC is a 501(c)3 non partisan, not for profit organization. AJC neither supports nor opposes candidates for elected office. Ron, welcome to people of the pod. Thank you for being here Ron Kampeas:  Of course. Julie Fishman Rayman:  Well, I'd like to start in asking you if you have a sense about the Jewish vote, because there have been a number of different exit polls, which, I guess, not surprisingly, because exit polls are what they are, say vastly different things. There are some that say it's the biggest Jewish vote in support for a Democratic candidate ever, and then also the highest percentage ever for a Republican candidate. What do we know to be true? And what would you sort of be looking at in terms of, you know, as we're examining this moving forward? What are we looking for? Ron Kampeas:  So first of all, I know I've seen those very extreme assessments as well, and I know what they're based on, and even when what based on what they're based on, and we, I'll talk about that too. That's just not correct. So they're talking about a 79% turnout, according to a poll the consortium of a number of organizations like the CNN and the New York Times. And that poll is not reliable yet. It does show 79% and think 21% in other words, an even split. Nobody seemed to have voted for at least among the Jews for third party candidates. And I'm not sure what number of Jews who were included in that poll were. I mean, it's a vast, vast poll. They do talk to a lot of people, but even they will say, and I think they put it on their things, that it's just preliminary, the more reliable analysis is considered to be the one that came out of the Fox AP analysis that showed 66% 67% for Paris, 32% 31% for Trump. And I think that's what the Trump people are talking about in terms of the highest for Republicans. It's just not the highest for Republican. I think if you count in the margin of error, that's not even like recently the highest for a Republican. Nothing's changed in the last four years. I think what it is showing is that whereas Republicans, when I started at JTA in 2004 they were happy to get 25% they've gone up from 19% with George W Bush in 2020 to 25% with John Kerry a few years later, now they can comfortably say they're getting about 30% of the Jewish community. People love to attach everything that happens to the very current politics of the day. So however you count it, nothing seems to have changed. Julie Fishman Rayman:  So interesting, because for I think a lot of Jews around America, we feel as though so much has changed. But when you go to the voting booth, Jews consistently aren't necessarily thinking just about either Israel or antisemitism, AJC does a survey looking at American Jewish opinion, not every year, but almost every year. And we did it in June, and asked questions about political affiliation. Who are you going to vote for? And one of the things that we asked was, what drives your vote, and foreign policy is always low down on the list. On election night, CNN asked that same question, of course, to all Americans, and I think 4% said that their vote was driven by foreign policy. Has there been a moment where the American Jewish vote is more focused on issues that feel perhaps a bit more parochial. Ron Kampeas:  No, certainly within the Orthodox subset, and it's always difficult to tell, because it's the smaller the subset, the bigger the margin of error. But when there's consistency over time and survey after survey after survey, I think you can conclude that, yes, Orthodox Jews do attach. Of more importance to the US Israel relationship and how it's manifesting, how they're perceiving it. The only time that a Democrat, at least since FDR, I think, a Democrat, didn't receive a majority of the Jewish vote was Jimmy Carter, who, in 1980 got a plurality of the Jewish one, I think, about 45%. People sort of conflate things in their head. In his post presidency, Carter became very identified with being very critical of Israel, and it's true, in 1980 he'd had difficult relationships with Menachem Begin, but he brokered the most important peace treaty in Israeli history. He saved a lot of lives. So I don't think people were feeling bad about Carter in 1980 because of Israel. I like to tell people, Jews are like everybody else. You know it's true that a majority of us vote for Democrats, and there are other subsets where, like a majority vote for Republican more majority for Democrats, but we vote for the same reasons as everybody else. Our votes will get more enthusiastic for a Democrat on one circumstance, just like everybody else's will, or might get less enthusiastic just like everybody else's will. We're susceptible to the same things. Julie Fishman Rayman:  It's really interesting. So at this moment, there's so much Monday morning quarterbacking happening, and I don't want to look too far in the rear view, but I do want to ask you for your take on this question of, would the result have been different had the Vice President selected Shapiro, Governor, Shapiro from Pennsylvania, as her running mate. Ron Kampeas:  Maybe it's hard to say vice presidents have had such a little impact on nominations. But on the other hand, Pennsylvania was close enough, and Shapiro is popular enough that perhaps it might have made the difference. She might have had Pennsylvania, and then if she had Pennsylvania, I don't know, she would have gotten to 270 but you know, Nevada and Arizona are still being counted. They might still go in her column. If they do go in her column, although I don't think they will, I think it looks like they're going to go into Trump's column if Nevada and Arizona go into her column and she missed out on Pennsylvania, you could say that her decision to go with Tim Walz instead of Josh Shapiro was faithful. On the other hand, everybody's a cynic. Nobody actually believes anything anybody says. But I tried to get away from that. I try not to be too much of a cynic. And when Josh Shapiro said afterwards that he had second thoughts about taking other thing because he's he's like a hugely successful governor so far in Pennsylvania is this is two years into his first term. You know, if I'm Josh Shapiro, I'm thinking about my legacy, and I'm thinking about running for president in the future and two years, just, yeah, I'm not going to make an impact in Pennsylvania in just two years. If I'm the 60% governor who can get Republicans to vote for me in the middle of the state, I'm thinking two terms will make me like, well, you know, get me a statue in some building at one point, there's this whole narrative that there was an anti semitic pushback. It was an anti semitic pushback against Shapiro. It was anti-Israel at times. I really believe it did cross over antisemitism. I'm not sure that that had the effect on the Harris campaign in terms of its decision making. She clicked with Tim Wallz. Shapiro wasn't so eager. Shapiro was going to be a co president. Walls wanted to be a vice president. He made that very clear. He had no intentions of ever running for the presidency. So if you're a Harris, do you want to have a Dan Quayle, or do you want to have a Dick Cheney kind of thing? You know as somebody who who's prone to take over, or somebody who's prone to do what needs to be done to be vice president. And obviously she preferred the latter. Julie Fishman Rayman:  It's a great analogy. Can we talk for a minute about sort of Jewish representation in Congress where Israel was on the ballot? What are your perceptions there? Ron Kampeas:  I think that it might have made a difference in Mark 17th, where Mike Lawler defeated Mondair Jones. Mondair Jones was perceived when he first ran into 2020, and he was elected. He was perceived initially as somebody who would be very different from Nita Lowey, who he was replacing because she's a very solid, long time pro-Israel and an AJC board member and an AJC board member. He actually declared before she retired, so he was a little bit confrontational with her, which happens, obviously, I don't know if Israel came up in that equation, though young progressive people thought he'd be a squatter, but he wasn't. In his two years in Congress, he wasn't a member of the squad, and he went out of his way to align with the pro-Israel community, and this because it was so important in his district. But Lawler is just like he's been. He's a freshman, but he's been out front. He's been very good at cultivating the Jewish people in his district. And he's not just led on a number of Israel issues, but he's always made sure to do it in a bipartisan way, partnering with Jared Moskowitz in Florida, or Josh got him or in New Jersey, and you know, that might have helped him in the district. It was a close race. He won by a close margin. So I think maybe that was definitely a factor there. I think that one of the group's decision desk that declares winners just declared for Jackie Rosen in Nevada. She's been reelected, according to them, but we'll wait. We'll see if and when AP calls it. But again, a state with a substantial Jewish population, she is, like, one of the premier Democrats. She's Jewish, but she also is like, very, very upfront about Israel. She co chairs an antisemitism Task Force. She has a bill that would designate a domestic antisemitism coordinator. So in such a close race or such close margins with the Jewish community, that's actually much larger than the margin that might have helped put her over the top. On the other side, you. Know, you have Michigan, which might have also, like we looked at Pennsylvania and Josh Shapiro, Michigan also might have cost Kamala Harris the presidency because of her support for Israel, because, you know, President Trump managed to peel away Muslim American and Arab American voters in in Michigan, in a kind of a weird slate of hand, because he said that he would be more pro their issue than Kamala Harris was, even though he's more pro Netanyahu, definitely than Kamala Harris is. But also, there were third party voters, people who voted for Jill Stein. Julie Fishman Rayman:  Pretty significant numbers for Jill Stein from Michigan. Ron Kampeas:  Pretty significant numbers for Jill Stein. But Elissa Slotkin over the top, very pro Israel, centrist Democrat Jewish. Very much a foreign policy, you know, specialist. She came out of the CIA and the Defense Department. Also very partisan. She was meeting with red constituents, like veterans, and she was doing a good job of it. She had that appeal. And I think that's why she ran for Senate. I think that's where Democrats are excited to have her run for Senate. And then October 7 happened, and she had to navigate a very difficult situation in her state, which has a substantial Jewish community, has an even bigger Muslim American and Arab American community. She had meetings with both leaders. She put out sensitive statements after the meetings. I think one of the most interesting sort of developments with her is that Rashida Tlaib, the Palestinian American Congresswoman attacked Dana Nessel for prosecuting people who were violent were allegedly violent at protests. She put out a statement that, without saying it was because Dana Ness was Jewish, she was said that Dana Nessel had other sort of considerations. When she brought these prosecutions, Dana Nessel outright accused her of antisemitism, and then Rashida Tlaib was the subject of a lot of Islamophobic, anti Palestinian vitriol. And it was interesting because there were two letters that went out at the time from Congress members, one condemning anything that insinuated that Dana Nessel had dual loyalties, or anything like that, and one condemning the anti Islamic rhetoric that Rashida clade faced, and the only person who signed both letters was Alyssa Slotkin. That was interesting. Julie Fishman Rayman:  I want to to turn a little bit if we can, to the expectations for for the next administration, even for the next Congress. When we last spoke, right after the Republican National Convention, JD Vance had been selected as the running mate, and you and I, we talked about what that means for a Trump foreign policy in the next administration. Will it go in a more isolationist direction, more aligning with JD Vance's world view? What do you think now and what might we expect? Ron Kampeas:  But still a potential for sure, there are names being rooted about for Secretary of State. One of them is Rick Grinnell, who's completely a Trumpist, who will do what he wants, his former Acting CIA director. And the other is Marco Rubio, gave one of the best speeches at the convention, I thought, and who is very close to the pro Israel community, who's an internationalist, but who has tailored his rhetoric to be more to make sure he doesn't antagonize Donald Trump. He was, you know, he was a came close to being the vice presidential pick himself. I mean, if Marco Rubio becomes Secretary of State, I think that's a good sign for internationalists. I mean, you know, Israel has kind of a buffer, because the Republican Party is very pro Israel. And there are people like JD Vance says, who say, you know, Israel is the exception when it comes to what I think about pulling United States back from the world, even though he says it's not so much the exception. And then there are people like Marco Rubio who are internationalists. Does Marco Rubio get to run an independent foreign policy? That would be very good news, I think, for for internationalists, if, if Donald Trump doesn't get in his way. But I don't know if that that happens. There's a view of pro israelism that says internationalism is necessary. I always like to say when a pack used to have its policy conferences, and it's a shame it doesn't any more, they would have a little brief talk before on Tuesday morning, before going up to the Hill, they would have, like, some prominent Senator come out and give a rah rah speech, and then like, three officials would come out on the stage Howard core, late Richard Fishman, and Esther Kurz. And Esther Kurz had handled Congressional Relations, and they would talk about the three items they were bringing up the Hill, usually two laws in a letter or a resolution or something like that.  And she would always say, and this was like the one moment like they would sort of reveal this. They'd be very candid about this. You have to push not for assistance for Israel, but foreign assistance generally, because there is no such thing as sort of singling out Israel and saying, Okay, we're going to take care of Israel, but nobody else in the world that it's all it's all interconnected, and it's such a true thing now, because you can say, you know, let's just cut off Ukraine. But if you're cut off Ukraine, you're bolstering Putin. If you're bolstering Putin, you're bolstering somebody who has a substantial and military alliance with Iran, if you're bolstering Iran, that is not good for Israel. And it's like it's kind of circuitous to get there, but it's also very substantive point. I think those are the things the pro Israel community is going to be looking at with genuine concern. Julie Fishman Rayman:  Indeed, it's all about sort of the strength of the American global leadership regime. And when you start to whittle away at one, the overall package ends up being weaker. Speaking of Israel, I can't speak to you this week and not ask you about the news out of Israel, about Netanyahu firing the defense secretary, gallant and what that means. And also, if we can extrapolate, if we can prognosticate what might happen vis a vis Israel in this lame duck session, while we still have Biden as president, but moving through the transition towards a future Trump administration. Ron Kampeas:  Yeah, you know, there a lot of Israelis are actually worried about that. Like, Oh, Biden's gonna take his frustrations out on VB in the lame duck doesn't have anything stopping him. I don't think that's going to happen. I think what's interesting is, like, you had a couple of instances in American history where a lame duck president used the fact that he didn't care, you know, what anybody thought of him, to push something through in 1988 Ronald Reagan recognized the PLO because it's something George H W Bush wanted him to do. George H W Bush wanted to push like more Israel Palestinian peace he did with the Madrid Conference, but he didn't want to be the one to invite the PLO into the room, so he got Ronald Reagan to do it in his last two months in office. In 2016 Barack Obama allowed through a Security Council resolution of that condemned the settlements. The United States didn't vote for it, but it also didn't veto it. That really kind of shook Israel up. But was interesting. I've done the reporting on this. When he was taking advice, Should I, should we vote for the resolution? Should we veto it, or should we just allow it through? There were people voicing opinions on all sides. Joe Biden and Jack Lew, who was then the Treasury Secretary, is now the ambassador to Israel, both said, veto it. Don't let it through. Don't let it through because, partly because it's going to really upset our Jewish supporters. If you let it through, you're not going to be president anymore, but somebody in the room is going to probably try and be president. I think that Joe Biden still has that sense of responsibility. I could be wrong. You know, four years or a year of like, from his perspective, being very strongly supportive of Israel and not getting anything back. From Bibi, from his perspective, might have changed his mind. Something might occur now. But the question is, like, you can tell Israel if they hit anything, but if they hit, if they hit anything, if they elevate it at all, they're going to need US assistance. And Trump hasn't said he's going to give that. Biden has. Biden's proven he's going to give it. So you've got two months of a president who will, who will back up Israel with American might, and then you have a president who has isolationist tendencies and who doesn't want to get involved with wars for another four years. Julie Fishman Rayman:  Is there anything else that you're hearing, perhaps, from the Israeli perspective, about Gallant departure, and what that signal? Ron Kampeas:  I think, that Netanyahu, you know, he's just trying to keep his government intact. Gallant is very vocal in opposing or in supporting drafting the ultra orthodox the Haredi orthodox Netanyahu government relies on Haredi orthodox parties. So there's that he's also facing a kind of spy scandal from his own circle. Just a weird, weird story. Somebody who's in his circle is alleged to have tried to help Netanyahu politically by leaking highly classified documents and altering them as well to foreign news outlets. The allegation is that whatever the guy's motivation was, he's actually put Israel at risk. So Netanyahu is suddenly in a position of facing allegations that he put Israel at risk. Now he's faced a lot of scandals in his time. Israelis have a high level of tolerance for people who are alleged to have skimmed off the top, alleged to have helped themselves, and that's what the scandals are about. They have no tolerance for anybody who puts Israel's security at risk. So if this comes back to Netanyahu that could be more damage than than any other scandal that he's endured so far and so notably, I think, you know, when he was firing Galant, he said he accused Galant of leaking information, although, I mean, what he was seemed to be referring to was Galant didn't leak anything. Galant openly said that he disagreed with Netanyahu on certain tactics, and that, you know Netanyahu is casting is putting Israel at risk, which is not to say that Netanyahu is necessarily going to be implicated by the scandal, but it's certainly not of a piece with leaking, actually classified documents that reveal methods and sources can put Israel's intelligence gathering methods at risk. Julie Fishman Rayman:  As always, there's so much more to the story, right? Ron Kampeas:  Yeah, yeah. There always is. Julie Fishman Rayman:  Ron, we could probably talk for a very long time about the American elections and what's going on in Israel and the degrees of various scandals and how populations will take them, and what the future of our country in the region looks like. But I know that you're very busy, especially this week, and I just want to say how grateful we are they always make time for AJC and for people of the pod. Ron Kampeas:  Of course.

Most of the post-midterm commentary has been focused on how the Democrats pulled off a surprise win in holding the majority in the U.S. Senate, and only lost the U.S. House of Representatives by a slim margin. But former Clinton and Schumer strategist -- and current Bloomberg senior advisor - Howard Wolfson is asking something entirely different: why DID the Democrats lose the House? Suggesting that they could have bucked history altogether and won the House too. Howard answers this question in a provocative piece he penned for The New York Times (https://tinyurl.com/2zeh87a2). While a red wave may not have materialized nationally, there was a red wave in New York State, the bluest of blue states. Howard thinks it has major implications for Democrats nationally. Howard was the New York City Deputy Mayor for Government Affairs and Communications, under Mayor Bloomberg. Previously, he served as the communications director for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Earlier, he was Chief of Staff to Congresswoman Nita Lowey, Executive Director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and worked on campaigns at every level of government, advising Senators Schumer and Gillibrand, and former Governor Andrew Cuomo. Today he continues to work for Mayor Bloomberg, advising him on a number of political projects and overseeing education programs through Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Ann Lewis has had a legendary career as a Democratic strategist...from her time as Communications Director in the Clinton White House...as a Senior Advisor to Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate run and both 08 & 16 Presidentials...to her time as a Senate Chief of Staff and working at institutions like Planned Parenthood, the DNC, ADA, & more. In this conversation...Ann talks growing up in New Jersey in the shadow of the Hudson County Democratic machine, key moments in her career path as a woman in politics in the 1970s and 80s, intersecting with Bill and Hillary Clinton in the 80s, her work in both the Clinton White House and Clinton campaigns for 20+ years, and her best practices for smart communication strategies.IN THIS EPISODE…Ann grows up in New Jersey in a family who instilled in her the importance of politics…Ann's early political memories of Harry Truman's upset win in 1948…Ann talks the Hudson County, NJ political machine of her youth…A political light-bulb goes off for Ann when canvassing for JFK…Ann talks the challenges of working up the political ladder as a woman in the 1970s and 80s…Ann goes deep on the her time working for Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate race…Ann on the importance of Americans for Democratic Action…Ann talks her time as campaign manager and Chief of Staff for Senator Barbara Mikulski…Ann first crosses path with Bill & Hillary Clinton in the early 1980s…Ann gets to know then-First Lady Hillary Clinton in 1994…Ann gets pulled into the 1996 Clinton Presidential…Ann's time as Communication Directions in the White House, including during the Clinton Impeachment saga…Ann's communications best practices…Ann's involvement in the '08 and '16 Hillary Clinton Presidentials…Ann talks Bill Clinton's legendary retail skills and Hillary Clinton's intellect…Ann talks growing up with her brother, and fellow legendary political figure, Congressman Barney Frank…Ann's advice to the next generation of political operatives…AND Aunt Fanny, the Baltimore Museum of Art, basement offices, battlefield promotions, Bayonne, blankety-blank campaigns, George H.W. Bush, chattering classes, childish bullies, the Clinton Library, cocktail parties, the Colossus of Rhodes, Democratic Majority for Israel, Thomas Dewey, Bob Dole, Facebook, Fells Point, flaming parachutes, Boss Hague, the George Washington Bridge, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Margaret Hague, Jesse Helms, Harold Ickes, Jewish Women for Hillary, Junior Advisors, John Kennedy, Rick Lazio, Nita Lowey, Chuck Manatt, Mac Mathias, moderate ethnics, Pat Moynihan, the New York Post, Richard Nixon, NOW, one-and-a-half computers, Norm Ornstein, George Pataki, Planned Parenthood, Charlie Rangel, Joe Rauh, Walter Reuther, Eleanor Roosevelt, Adlai Stevenson, sturdy women, third wives, tugboats, the Unpleasantness, upstate winegrowers, Henry Wallace, Anne Wexler, Maggie Williams, the Women's Political Caucus & more!

On this year-end edition of Press Conference USA, Carol Castiel brings you excerpts from conversations with some of our most distinguished guests from former director of the US Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Thomas Frieden; leading scholar on race in America, Peniel Joseph; Ali Soufan, former FBI agent, CEO of the Soufan Center and author “Black Banners,” and Chairwoman of the House Appropriations Committee, Nita Lowey and much more.

Broadcast originally aired on October 19, 2020 at 9:30am (eastern) on WRCR Radio 1700AM and WRCR.comCrossroads of Rockland History continued our year of Women’s History in celebration of the centennial of the ratification of the 19th Amendment with two guests!First, the Hon. Nita Lowey joined Clare Sheridan to discuss her distinguished career in the U.S. House of Representatives. Lowey shared her reflections on the importance of women’s voices in the political process and memories of her historic career. Congresswoman Lowey has served as a U.S. Representative from New York since 1989. In 2018, she became the first woman to chair the House Appropriations Committee. She will retire at the end of this term.Then we turned our attention to the preeminent historian Isabelle Savell, whose comprehensive research documented the history of the women from Rockland County who spent seven decades fighting for the vote. Savell wrote Ladies Lib: How Women Got the Vote, the go-to text for those interested in suffrage history in Rockland County. Savell’s granddaughter, Becky Savell, phoned in to discuss all of the important research that her grandmother did as Senior Historian at the Historical Society of Rockland County; she’ll share fond memories of her grandmother, as well."Isabelle Savell was a lovely, brilliant, beautiful lady, “said Gene Setzer of South Nyack. "She was one of the stalwarts, and one of the finest history researchers we’ve ever had around here—a beautiful writer so useful to the community.”_____Crossroads of Rockland History, a program of the Historical Society of Rockland County, airs on the third Monday of each month at 9:30 am, right after the Steve and Jeff morning show, on WRCR radio 1700 AM and www.WRCR.com. Join host Clare Sheridan as we explore, celebrate, and learn about our local history, with different topics and guest speakers every month. During 2020, our focus is Women’s History in celebration of the Suffrage Centennial. We are pleased to announce that we have begun loading our archived podcasts to the Apple Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify platforms.The Historical Society of Rockland County is a nonprofit educational institution and principal repository for original documents and artifacts relating to Rockland County. Its headquarters are a four-acre site featuring a history museum and the 1832 Jacob Blauvelt House in New City, New York.www.RocklandHistory.org

Early and absentee voting is underway in the New York primary and one of the most hotly contested races is the Democratic primary to fill the House seat left open by Rep. Nita Lowey's retirement in New York's 17th Congressional District (Rockland/Westchester Counties).  Mark Lungariello, government and politics reporter for the Journal News/Lohud, previews the candidates on the ballot.

On this episode of the podcast, I interview Elijah Reichlin-Melnick, a State Senate candidate for the 38th District. We discuss: Why he's running for State SenateHis early lifeWhat he's learned from Barack Obama, Nita Lowey, and othersThe biggest issues of our dayShow NotesOpening and closing music: "Jaguar Ultra" by Jared "Royal Coke" Adams Featured music: Floating Cities by Kevin MacLeodElijah's campaign website

8a

On this week’s episode of People of the Pod, U.S. Congresswoman Nita Lowey joins us to discuss her decision to retire after 32 years on Capitol Hill. We also talk to Ilan Orzy, Director of Advocacy for Hillel Ontario, and Zev Hurwitz, AJC Director of Campus Affairs, to compare the challenges facing Jewish students on American and Canadian college campuses. And finally, we hit the streets of Manhattan with AJC’s new glossary of antisemitic terms, Translate Hate, to give New Yorkers a pop quiz. Music from https://filmmusic.io "Sad Trio" by Kevin MacLeod (https://incompetech.com) License: CC BY (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) Music from https://filmmusic.io "Wish Background" by Kevin MacLeod (https://incompetech.com) License: CC BY (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Please join the Center for Strategic and International Studies for a Smart Women, Smart Power conversation with House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-NY) and Ranking Member Kay Granger (R-TX). They will discuss U.S. foreign aid and international affairs spending.   Chairwoman Lowey is currently serving her sixteenth term in Congress. She was first elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1988 and served in the Democratic leadership in 2001 and 2002 as the first woman and the first New Yorker to chair the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. She is also the first woman to chair the House Appropriations Committee, where she is also the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations.   Ranking Member Kay Granger is serving her twelfth term in Congress. Granger is the first and only Republican woman to represent Texas in the U.S. House of Representatives. Granger currently serves with Chairwoman Lowey as ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee. Prior to this role, Granger was the first woman mayor of Fort Worth, Texas as well as the first female chair of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. She also served as chairwoman of the State and Foreign Operations Subcommittee.   

On this special episode, we get reaction to New York Democratic Rep. Nita Lowey’s surprise retirement announcement from David Hawkings of The Fulcrum.

Hear a strong new position against standardized testing by Elizabeth Warren, stong position against charter schools by Bernie Sanders, all about Mondaire Jones who announced a primary challenge against Rep. Nita Lowey in Rockland + Westchester Counties for Congressional District 17. Plus more news headlines and a crazy clip of right wing radio shock jock Sebastian Gorka, a former advisor on the Trump campaign. Originally aired 7-9-2019

A conversation with Bronx high school English teacher Lola Osoria on her campaign against Nita Lowey in New York's 17th Congressional district. A resident of White Plains, Ocosia explains why she is running against a longtime incumbent, her views on education, climate, campaign finance, healthcare and much more. Originally aired June 28, 2019.

In today's Federal Newscast, the Office of Management and Budget is expressing its displeasure with the early versions of appropriations bills coming out of the House Appropriations Committee.

First, Chris goes one on one with Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-NY) to discuss Bill Barr's testimony on the Mueller Report. Then, Chris fact checks Trump's latest stance on family separation and the crisis at the border with Toronto Star Washington Bureau Chief, Daniel Dale. Next, Chris brings on Angela Rye and Steve Cortes for "The Great Debate," and goes one on one with California Governor Gavin Newsom. Chris wraps up the show with a Closing Argument on what to expect from the upcoming release of the Mueller Report after Barr's comments today.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

First, Chris goes one on one with Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-NY) to discuss Bill Barr's testimony on the Mueller Report. Then, Chris fact checks Trump's latest stance on family separation and the crisis at the border with Toronto Star Washington Bureau Chief, Daniel Dale. Next, Chris brings on Angela Rye and Steve Cortes for "The Great Debate," and goes one on one with California Governor Gavin Newsom. Chris wraps up the show with a Closing Argument on what to expect from the upcoming release of the Mueller Report after Barr's comments today.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

Kevin broadcasts live from The Rayburn House Office Building. He spoke with Erik Wasson, Bloomberg News Congressional reporter, Rep. French Hill, Rep. Nita Lowey, and Senator Cory Gardner, R-CO.

Kevin broadcasts live from The Rayburn House Office Building. He spoke with Erik Wasson, Bloomberg News Congressional reporter, Rep. French Hill, Rep. Nita Lowey, and Senator Cory Gardner, R-CO.

In today's Federal Newscast, President Donald Trump hints that another government shutdown is likely after funding runs out again in three weeks.

Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) is the first woman to chair the powerful House Appropriations committee since it was created in 1865. And she’s ready for the government to open back up. Plus, a conversation with Patrina Clark, president and founder of the government consulting firm Pivotal Practices and a longtime federal worker, on the real-life impacts the shutdown is having on her and her business.

While some pundits are declaring the Clinton political dynasty dead, sources tell us that it is far from over. Chelsea Clinton is being groomed for the New York seat held by Rep. Nita Lowey. (And Hillary and Bill have planned ahead for it) http://nypost.com/2016/11/10/chelsea-clinton-being-groomed-to-run-for-congress/*** http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/12/chelsea-clinton-reportedly-being-groomed-for-congressional-run.html

Fox TV show films in Ossining; US Rep. Nita Lowey tours Indian Point, saying that if it were a new facility, it wouldn't be approved; Croton-Harmon schools considers staff reductions to comply with state's "tax levy cap law."

Fox TV show films in Ossining; US Rep. Nita Lowey tours Indian Point, saying that if it were a new facility, it wouldn't be approved; Croton-Harmon schools considers staff reductions to comply with state's "tax levy cap law."