Michael Goodwin: Don’t be fooled by Hochul’s act — she’s just as radical as Mamdani

New Yorkers who pay close attention to such things have long understood why Gov. Hochul deserves her reputation for being the Waffler-In-Chief.

Time and again, she’s revealed herself to be the consummate weather vane, shifting her stance on important matters depending on which way the wind is blowing.

For novices interested in seeing a prime example, I recommend an article about an interview the governor gave last week to The New York Times.

True to the Gray Lady’s political tilt to the left, the resulting article is puffery to the extreme.

So, too, is a longer Saturday article where the paper goes to great lengths to separate Hochul from City Hall’s nasty and incompetent roll-out of the pied-à-terre tax.

Despite the Times’ obvious efforts to boost her, the lasting image it inadvertently leaves in both articles is that of a shape-shifting governor who pretends to be a moderate but is actually in sync with comrade Mamdani and his socialist radicals taking over the Democratic Party.

But when bad press follows, Hochul rushes to wash her hands of any and all responsibility.

Her track record rips the artifice to shreds.

Her main Mam

Recall that she was the only top Dem in New York to endorse Mamdani in both the party primary and the general election last year.

Others, including Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, were appalled by his anti-Israel bigotry and war on wealth.

But Hochul voiced no worries and apparently has no second thoughts.

She has actively encouraged and even helped to fund his explosion of free this and free that by sending him billions in state taxpayer funds.

One result is that state spending under Hochul has rocketed upward by about 30% since she took office five years ago.

Make no mistake, her motive in helping the mayor is strictly business.

Mamdani got 1.1 million votes in the city’s general election, and if she can get most of those people to turn out for her in the fall, Hochul would probably defeat her Republican opponent, Bruce Blakeman, by a significant margin.

The Times doesn’t mention the self-serving politics behind her actions, but instead focuses on portraying her as something of a big sister and the grown up in the room in her dealings with the novice mayor.

It quotes her as saying she privately scolded Mamdani several times, including after his latest round of attacks on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

I encouraged him to “focus on the blocking and tackling of city government,’” the governor told the paper.

“That is where I believe the main focus should be.”

She said something similar happened after Mamdani outlandishly posted a video of himself taunting Ken Griffin, the billionaire founder of Citadel Securities, about the pied-à-terre tax Hochul shepherded through the Legislature.

She claims to have secretly told the mayor, “There’s a better way to do it” and suggested he single out “Saudi Princes and Russian oligarchs” as more fitting targets.

Meanwhile, with many homeowners now up in arms over the city’s confusing and threatening letters about the new tax, Hochul again claims she reprimanded the mayor, this time about what she calls “clumsy messaging.”

Telegraphed flip-flop

“Absolutely, I said the rollout has to be cleaned up and fixed,” she told the Times.

Despite the fact that many in the business community have warned that the tax will discourage high end real estate buyers and builders, Hochul is not repentant.

Inadvertently, the examples she cites reveal her idea of what being a moderate means: Raise taxes and spending relentlessly, but appear to be doing it reluctantly and be sure to do it competently and with a smile.

Hochul’s self-puffery aside, the real gold in the interview comes in how the governor opens the door to yet another round of ruinous Albany tax hikes next year if she is re-elected.

The bombshell comes in this paragraph from Times reporter Grace Ashford:

“The governor said that she had ‘no intention’ of raising taxes or implementing new ones in the coming year, but indicated that could change if there were unforeseen cuts in federal aid to New York.”

Paging Bruce Blakeman!

The Nassau County executive has been relentless in attacking Hochul’s record on sky-high taxes and spending, and she’s just revealed a plan to stay the course if she gets four more years.

Her words demonstrate that the governor is effectively repealing her oft-repeated promise not to raise another round of broad income taxes on state residents by advertising that she is open to negotiation.

Rolling over

That is a classic example of the Hochul New Yorkers know.

She loudly opposed congestion pricing before an election, but imposed it as soon as the votes were counted and congressional Dems had managed to hold their seats.

Recall, too, that last March, she firmly rejected the huge income tax hikes that Mamdani and the lefty Legislature wanted to impose on affluent families and corporations in the city.

“New Yorkers can’t pay anymore. We have to cut their cost of living,” she declared, adding that would be “Job number one in this budget.”

The same day, she also said this: “There are some patriotic millionaires who want to step up. OK, cut me the checks. If you want to be supportive, the first step would be, OK, go down to Palm Beach and see who you bring back home because our tax base has become eroded.”

So she understands that New York’s sky-high taxes have driven many wealthy and even middle-class families to Florida and other lower-tax states, but rolled over when Mamdani pushed for more of the same.

Her flip-flop came less than a month later, when she revealed that she supported the pied-à-terre tax.

She justified the change with a simple insistence that the rich could afford to pay more.

It sounded like an approach straight out of the Mamdani playbook, as when she declared: “They’re all welcome to stay. They’re here because this is a great city and it has so much to offer. But those come at a cost and I think it’s fair to ask them to contribute.”

Notice how she soft-pedals the new tax by calling it “fair” and a contribution.

She would soon estimate it could yield $500 million a year for the city, an eye-popping sum that is hardly an insignificant “contribution.”

In reality, her coded language is just window dressing designed to make it appear that there are big differences between her and Mamdani.

There aren’t.

New Yorkers shouldn’t be fooled.