As the November 4th off-year elections are now just days away, New York City voters appear likely to elect a young, charismatic Democratic socialist vowing to raise taxes on the wealthy as their new Mayor. But, as discussed on today's BradCast, that's not the only place where voters may finally have a chance to begin to even the score against the runaway wealth gap between the rich and...everyone else. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

FIRST... A few quick news items today, including...

• Hurricane Melissa's record-shattering path of destruction through the Caribbean --- including Jamaica, Cuba, Haiti and The Bahamas --- and now on toward the Canadian Atlantic coast (with effects likely to be felt across much of the U.S. Northeastern Seaboard this weekend.)
• Breaking news on Donald Trump firing all six members of one of the federal commissions that was otherwise set to review the building plans for his threatened, privately-funded 90,000 square foot ballroom at the White House --- for which he has already demolished the East Wing with neither approval nor permission from anyone --- and a giant "Arc d'Trump" that he wants to build somewhere on the National Mall in D.C.

THEN... Just days from Tuesday's off-year Election Day, New York City's Democratic candidate for Mayor, Zohran Mamdani, appears to be well ahead in pre-election polling. If those polls are correct, it seems that NYC voters are offering enthusiastic support for the "Affordability Agenda" on which Mamdani's remarkable campaign has been built, including promises for a rent freeze, universal child care, free buses and for city-owned grocery stores in food deserts across the city's five Boroughs. Some of those programs, according to the candidate, will be paid for by a small surcharge on the income taxes of those earning more than $1 million per year. Though, even if he wins next week, many of those programs --- including the new surcharge on millionaires --- would need approval from the City Council and/or State Legislature before implementation.

Meanwhile, out here in California, some progressives are already looking toward a straight-on wealth tax for the state's 200 billionaires that voters would need to approve in 2026. But there are some unique elements to this ballot proposal that may distinguish it from other such programs forwarded by progressives in the past.

Last week, one of the state's largest unions, SEIU's United Healthcare Workers West, along with U.C. Berkley economist Emmanuel Saez and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, unveiled what our guest today, HAROLD MEYERSON of The American Prospect, described last week as "The First Politically Viable Wealth Tax" in the nation.

The proposal, which its proponents are hoping to place onto next year's statewide ballot, would levy a one-time, 5% tax on the state's billionaires to help fund California's Medicaid program (known as Medi-Cal) following the massive, historic, trillion dollar cuts to the program enacted by Trump and Congressional Republicans in their so-called "Big Beautiful Bill" this past summer.

Meyerson is careful to delineate between Mamdani's income tax proposal of the wealthy (which he also supports), and the one in CA which would tax wealth itself, including assets owned such as stocks, etc. So, why does he see this one as the "first politically viable" such tax? For one reason, one of the well-worn critiques of such programs is that it would lead wealthy residents to flee or deter other wealthy people from moving in. In fact, Mamdani's main opponent in the NYC mayoral race, former state Gov. Andrew Cuomo, running as an independent after losing the Democratic primary, has repeatedly made that case against Mamdani's plan.

But, whether Cuomo's attack is true or not (Mamdani calls it exaggerated), the CA proposal introduced last week undercuts the critique entirely.

"First, it only applies to the wealth of people from this year, calendar 2025," explains Meyerson. And the "5% tax on wealth can be paid, spread out, over the next five years. It takes effect [if adopted by voters next year] in 2027. If you move into the state and you're ridiculously wealthy anytime after the end of this year, this doesn't apply to you. It only applies to the wealth of this year. If you move out of the state, you're still liable, under the terms of this tax, for paying it. So it is structured in such a way that it eliminates the argument that it will cause billionaires to move out --- because it only applies to billionaires in the state as of this year --- and that it will keep billionaires from moving in because, assuming they move in after Dec. 31st of this year, it doesn't apply to them."

That element alone of this proposal is likely to take the wind out of the sails of many of those who will certainly oppose the measure next year, if it qualifies for the ballot (supporters have until June to gather enough signatures). Meyerson believes that, especially in this blue-leaning state, the idea will be so popular that even conservative billionaire (and former Republican turned Democrat) Rick Caruso, who is likely to run for Governor, would have little choice but to support it. "It would look awfully self-interested, and against the interests of those Californians --- of whom there are gazillions --- reliant upon Medi-Cal, if he were to oppose it, or not take a stance on it," Meyerson tells me. "The optics would look pretty damn bad."

But there are other critiques that wealthy opponents will try to levee as well. Socialism! If it passes, Dems will just want to make it permanent! etc. etc. Meyerson speaks to all of those and offers his insights into the NYC election next week (and establishment Dems such as Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, who have remarkably failed to back the city's Democratic candidate for Mayor), the Prop 50 redistricting referendum in CA, and the gubernatorial contests in both New Jersey and Virginia...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

Welp, Election 2022 continues into its second week of counting on today's BradCast. But it's our first chance to open up the phones to listeners after last week's historic midterm face-plant by Republicans and its associated very very good news for Democrats and American democracy itself. [Audio link to full show follows this summary.]

Before we go to the phones today, a bit of a monster "rant" on the accomplishments of Joe Biden and the Democrats after two years in office; a few updates on races called since we signed off last Friday; what they all mean; and some of the races still being tallied (which will also determine, among other things, which party controls the House of Representatives next year.)

The big races called since our final show last week include the U.S. Senate contests in Arizona and Nevada, both of which went to the incumbent Democrats in each state (Sen. Mark Kelly in AZ and Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto in NV). Those victories ensure majority control for Democrats in the upper chamber of Congress once again in January. Dems will have at least a 50/50 majority with Vice President Kamala Harris as the tie vote, even before the December 6 Senate runoff in Georgia between incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock (D) and Herschel Walker (R).

But there are a ton of reasons for Democrats in GA to not let down their guard. Dante Atkins, over the weekend, detailed just some of the reasons why a 51-49 Senate is much better for Dems (and democracy) than a 50-50 Senate.

While Dems were celebrating retaining their Senate majority over the weekend, we were celebrating the fact that the last of the 2020 Election liars running for Secretary of State in battleground states were declared to have lost. In AZ, Democrat Adrian Fontes will become the new Sec. of State after defeating Trump-endorsed insurrection enthusiast and voting opponent Mark Finchem. And in NV, Democrat Cisco Aguilar was declared the winner over Trump-backed election liar Jim Marchant, founder of the "America First Secretaries of State coalition," featuring all of those Republican SoS candidates who, thankfully, were rejected by voters in last week's elections across the country in every single swing-state in which they ran. That alone will make the 2024 Presidential election indescribably safer.

Throughout the program, we also take care to call out a few of the folks from the Republican Party, the corporate media, and the even some on the lazy, knee-jerk far-left who ignored the available data and facts in order to misinform American voters that the GOP see a red wave, or even red tsunami, in last week's midterms. They didn't. They lost a seat in the Senate; will be lucky to win the narrowest of majorities in the House; lost Governorships in Maryland and Massachusetts (and, perhaps, Arizona, which is still close); took full control of both the Michigan and Minnesota state governments and may do the same in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, just to detail a few of the GOP's remarkable failures in a year that Conventional Wisdom suggests they should have owned the night.

Also, mid-hour today, we get an update in the tallies of the very right Los Angeles Mayoral race where progressive Rep. Karen Bass just got a big boost from the latest numbers in her contest against "former" Republican billionaire real estate developer Rick Caruso.

Then, we turn to the phones for the first time since last week's midterms to get some thoughts from listeners on what the lack of "red wave" means for both Democrats and Republicans and whether any of it will help break the GOP's Trump Fever that is destroying both them and our democracy along with it (though not this week, at least!)...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)

We've got yet another jam-packed BradCast for ya today, with results of note --- as we have them so far --- from the 7 states which held primaries on Tuesday. Then, we're joined by our guest with some helpful insight on what Democrats and progressives should learn from this year's elections to date and some of his critical concerns about the upcoming hearings by the bipartisan U.S. House Select Committee investigating January 6, 2021 insurrection. [Audio link to full show is posted below this summary.]

First, we fly through an extremely curated selection of results from several key races on Tuesday. Among them...

• IOWA: Retired Navy Admiral Mike Franken upset former U.S. Rep. Abby Finkenauer in the state's Democratic U.S. Senate primary. He will face off against 88-year old, six-term U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley. Also noteworthy in the Hawkeye State: progressive Democratic criminal justice reformer Kimberly Graham won the Democratic primary for prosecutor in Polk County (Des Moines), where she is likely to win this November.
• MISSISSIPPI: Two-term Republican Rep. Michael Guest was forced into a runoff by GOP voters as punishment for having voted in favor of a bipartisan, outside Commission to investigative the January 6th insurrection.
• MONTANA: Donald Trump's disgraced, scandal-plagued, forced-to-resign Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is locked in a tight race to win his old job back as a U.S. Congressman. The final results of the close race with state Sen. Al Olszewski, which Zinke leads by about 1,000 votes as of airtime, will be held up by a day or two due to a ballot printing error that will require, under state law, that all ballots now be hand-counted.
• NEW JERSEY: While there may have been races of note there, we didn't have time for ANY of them today! Sorry about that, NJ! (I know. Always the bridesmaid...)
• NEW MEXICO: Seasoned TV weather guy Mark Ronchetti won the GOP primary for Governor after promising to increase the state's already record oil production, deriding new standards in state schools for increased instruction on race (in a state that is half Hispanic and has 23 federally recognized Native American tribes and nations), and by slamming his November opponent, Democratic Gov. Michelle Luhan Grisham, for closing in-person schooling during the worst pandemic in 100 years. Also: Progressive Democrat Gabriel Vasquez was victorious in the 2nd Congressional District race to take on GOP Rep. Yvette Herrell in what is seen by Dems as a possible House pickup this November.
• SOUTH DAKOTA: The state's only House Member, Republican Dusty Johnson, easily won his primary despite voting to certify the 2020 election results and in favor of the January 6 Commission. Shamefully, there is no Democrat running for the state's single At Large Congressional seat. Of greater note, a ballot proposition that would have raised the threshold for passage of certain future ballot propositions to 60% was soundly rejected by voters. That proposition was meant to make it harder to pass a ballot proposition this November that would expand Medicaid under ObamaCare to state residents. Similar expansions measures have been adopted by voter initiatives in about 7 other states. GOP lawmakers in SD must really hate their own constituents.
• CALIFORNIA: All statewide office holders are Dems, so there isn't much drama there. But two local contests have received quite a bit of national notice. The Los Angeles Mayoral race will go to a runoff, after Trumpy Republican real estate billionaire turned "Democrat" Rick Caruso failed to clear the 50% bar, despite dropping some $40 million of his own money into the race. He'll face progressive Rep. Karen Bass, previously seen as the favorite to win until Caruso and his money showed up, in the November runoff. But, interestingly, receiving as much or more notice from national corporate news outlets than almost any other race on Tuesday, voters recalled progressive criminal justice reformer, Chesa Boudin, after two and half years as San Francisco's District Attorney. Predictably, national media is (mis)reporting this as a story of "failed progressive policies" that resulted in rampant crime in the city, despite the fact that overall crime decreased during Boudin's tenure.

We're then joined by longtime progressive champion, journalist, and author JOHN NICHOLS of The Nation for analysis of Tuesday's contests --- and those from week's past --- along with his concerns and warnings about the upcoming January 6 hearings in the House.

As to the primaries so far this season, Nichols observes, among other things that while "Republican turnout is very spiked" and Dems "not so spiked", that is "not necessarily a complete disaster" for Democrats. He also notes that "progressives are winning a lot of Democratic primaries" and "in some unexpected and really interesting places".

"Despite what a lot of the pundits will tell you," he argues, means that "the grassroots Democratic voters seem to be sending a very clear signal that they want to go up against these Trump Republicans in this very tough year with clearly defined progressive candidates."

While he offers thoughts on the recall defeat of progressive District Attorney Boudin in San Francisco, Nichols also observes that criminal justice reformers are actually still winning elections in many other places around California and elsewhere. (See, for example, a progressive criminal justice reformer victories in neighboring counties to San Francisco and Kim Reynolds in Des Moines, IA, as mentioned above, as just two such examples.)

Then, it's on to the upcoming January 6 hearings, where Nichols has both advice and concerns, particularly about what the Committee will ultimately offer in their critical recommendations. His greatest concerns seem to center on what Democrats are willing to compromise on in order to find unanimity with the Committee's anti-Trump, but still hard-right Republican Vice Chair Liz Cheney.

Among Nichols' top hopes for the Committee: Recommendations that Congress adopt a resolution that bars insurrectionists like Donald Trump from office, as per Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment; and (in what will clearly be a much heavier lift for the Committee's Republicans like Cheney), a call to abolish the Electoral College.

But will the hearings ultimately make any difference to a divided nation, with so many already having hardened their positions on Trump and his attempt to steal the 2020 election? We've got a whole lot to discuss with Nichols today, so I hope you'll tune in!...

CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!...

MONTHLY BRAD BLOG SUBSCRIPTION	ONE-TIME DONATION
Choose monthly amount... $10 : $10.00 USD - monthly$20 : $20.00 USD - monthly$50 : $50.00 USD - monthly$100 : $100.00 USD - monthly	(Snail mail support to "Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028" always welcome too!)