Gov. Kathy Hochul, gearing up for reelection, is ready to ‘fight like hell’

Gov. Kathy Hochul likes a fight. That’s a good thing, because she’s in for several of them next year.

Over four years into her time as governor and three into her first full term, New York’s first woman governor has had her hands full. She had to settle into the role after her predecessor’s resignation amid various scandals, immediately prepare for an election, deal with the resignation of her first lieutenant governor (and a primary challenge from her second) and learn the contours of the state Legislature. Those may all ultimately pale in comparison to what the next few years promise to have in store.

After establishing herself not only as a worthy governor of one of the nation’s most populous states, but as a solid leader of New York’s Democratic Party, Hochul’s bona fides will be tested like never before as she navigates new political currents. New York City just elected a fresh-faced democratic socialist as its mayor, representing a wide ideological gap with the self-proclaimed capitalist and centrist governor. Hochul ultimately endorsed Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, but many members of her own party – including her own state party Chair Jay Jacobs – expressed deep skepticism, at best, about how the rising star fits into the future of the Democratic Party.

At the same time, Hochul is dealing with unprecedented federal cuts from an unpredictable president who has promised retribution just as easily as he has reversed course. Hochul has navigated the turbulence well – or at least publicly better than some other Democratic governors who have seen the National Guard deployed within their borders. The coming year’s fiscal needs would already be cause enough for concern, but the addition of Mamdani to the mix adds new weight to the careful balancing act Hochul has attempted to maintain. 

Add her own reelection into the equation on top of finding middle ground between splintering factions of her big-tent party, and Hochul is in for a doozy of a 2026. But as she likes to say, Buffalonians “fight like hell,” and she’s ready to bring that energy to facing the various obstacles in her path. She sat down with City & State to discuss lessons she intends to take with her in the years to come, her plans for navigating the upcoming political minefield and why Democrats should stop criticizing each other. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

You’re almost done with your first full term. How do you feel like you settled into the position?

I feel we’re in a strong position now. The way I ascended to the position was rather unusual, and having to build a government team at the same time you had to build a political team, because we were literally in election mode as soon as I took office. And making sure that we had to deal with some complicated situations that found their way to us immediately. So there were a lot of initial challenges that just came with the turf. But having now the rhythm down and understanding the dynamics of Albany, and having had some good successes, but understanding how we got to those successes and then examining the ones that did not get over the finish line (and) why they didn’t. So I think there’s been a lot of reflection from myself and my team about how to make sure that we’re always in the strongest position. So I feel really, really good about where we are right now.

What’s the biggest lesson you’ve learned so far that you are going to take into a potential second full term?

It’s basically how to be the strong governor without having everybody else have to be losers. And that’s a different attitude toward governing, and governing and power. The office holds enormous clout and influence over policy, but bringing more people inward and including others and a sense of sharing of success is a longer-term strategy. So that’s what I’m doing more of with the Legislature – bringing people closer, letting them know I’m listening to them about what their concerns in their districts are, what their priority projects are. I think that’s an important lesson, to build on the successes we’ve had, but recognizing that reaching out to people and finding how we can get to “yes” without a lot of conflict is important. I can fight like hell. I’m from Buffalo. I know how to fight, and it comes naturally to me. But I also focus on the general public, the voters, and I think that’s unsettling to them, to see their elected leaders in a constant state of conflict. It’s what people came to expect. So I wanted to change that dynamic where I will be successful, I will achieve my goals and my objectives, but there doesn’t have to be a public fight every single time.

How do you square that with the very drawn-out fights from the past couple budgets? And do you expect that to continue as a trend with your next several budget negotiations?

I think when you’re more concerned, as others have been, about that magic midnight deadline of March 31, you end up compromising and giving away a lot more than you may want. I have a firm idea of what I want to accomplish in each session, and I need to get to “yes,” and showing that I’m willing to go the distance while listening to the voices along the path is how I do that. I would like to hit the good deadline, yes. Let’s just get that out there. It’d be great to hit it. But is that going to tie my hands in a way that I’m not as successful to my objectives? Because I’m not going to let that happen. So when I was an Assembly intern decades ago, the budgets were done in July and August. I didn’t even know there was a March deadline. So we will not get to that dynamic, but just a little extra time. And sometimes the Legislature wants more time because the leaders need time to persuade their conferences that an idea is good too. So sometimes that extra time is helpful. It is actually a very abbreviated time frame to put together such a complex budget. I’m not looking to intentionally blow past it, that’s not my goal, but I’m not going to be constrained by it either.

In reducing public fights, you’ve strived to have a better relationship with the mayor of New York City. How do you plan on working with the incoming Mamdani administration, while balancing ideological differences that you have with him and that other Democrats in the state have with him, in your dual roles as governor and leader of the state party?

Obviously, it’s a complicated situation, on the many dynamics you raise. However, I remain optimistic about the future of this city. I will make sure, as I did with the current mayor, that New York City has an ally in Albany, not an enemy. But also I’m cognizant of the rest of the state as well. The politics seem to demand that there be an enemy, that there’s someone to demonize, there’s someone to be the other, and that is very unhealthy in this environment. The election is over, and people need to understand that I’m going to roll up my sleeves and work with the new mayor and find areas where we can collaborate. I think he’s very thoughtful. I think he understands the possibilities and also limitations about what can we accomplish in certain time frames. That’s why we’ve had many conversations, starting during the summer, in person and on the phone, about this shared responsibility we have to protect New York City and to make sure that we’re dealing with the affordability issues that he raised, that we have been raising. If others around the state choose to demonize him, that has already happened. That’s just going to be the way it is. But if he can demonstrate – and we’ll make sure that he has what he needs from us to demonstrate – just the basic blocking and tackling of governing the city. I encouraged him to get a very experienced team that can take care of that. And he seems very willing to do that. People just need to give him a chance. That’s my message. Give him a chance. To the business community and others. Let’s not root against him.

Is that your message to fellow Democrats as well? There have been those, like Rep. Laura Gillen on Long Island and others in Nassau County, who have been pretty negative toward Zohran Mamdani. Is your message to those Democrats to “give him a chance”?

That’s my message to New York City residents, the ones who actually have him as their mayor. There were others who did not support him. I want everyone to give him a chance as their new mayor. The politics outside the city, everybody’s going to have to take the positions they need to take in their areas. That is just a fact of life. We are not a true blue state. We are a purple state, and what they have to do on Long Island – my preference is that we don’t have a circular firing squad, but we also can’t have a purity test. You could be a Democrat and disagree with us on individuals’ policies, but let’s not make it personal. Healthy disagreement as you represent your different part of the state that has different views is why we have a big-tent party. And I could live with that, but let’s not attack each other personally.

You have had a better relationship with the president than many other Democratic governors, but he promised retribution on New York City if Mamdani won. How do you plan on maintaining and parlaying that relationship moving forward?

The difference between myself and the other governors is that I can appeal to him as a New Yorker who has financial interests here, who has property here, who has employees here. And that is a strategic advantage that I’m using to protect New York and to ensure that programs that I fought for, like congestion pricing, are not shut down, or that we can get the Second Avenue subway and Gateway tunnel back online. I talked to him about where New York is versus the perception he may have of New York. Where he thinks it’s failing and that congestion pricing has destroyed the city and that the crime is out of control, I try to give them a sense of the reality here. And having that communication allows me to stand up and fight for New Yorkers. My job is laser-focused on do no harm. And so I’ll keep the relationship going. But he knows, and he gets frustrated with me about my attacks on him. It’s a relationship of necessity. So I can be in a position to be able to try and stop harm to the city and state.

Have you spoken with the president since the election?

I haven’t talked to him since then, but I think everyone knew Zohran would likely be the next mayor. I’m encouraged by the mayor-elect’s desire to have a conversation with him. That’s smart, that’s savvy. He should. While Donald Trump will always view it in his interest to denigrate and demonize Zohran Mamdani, perhaps there can be some accommodation linking again his financial interest to the city and the fact that we are the economic engine for the nation. That harm done here – mass chaos and creating an unstable situation – is not healthy for the business community and his friends.

Some of the worst of the federal cuts are taking effect next year. You have repeatedly said that no one state could backfill all of those cuts. But what can New Yorkers expect to broadly see next year in terms of addressing those cuts? Is that higher taxes to fund some of those programs? Is that a return to a more austerity budget?

Already this year I’ve had to go back to my agencies, my budget director, and say, “Help us find $750 million that we already lost this year alone.” So that process already had to begin out of necessity. We’re looking at a $3 billion hit on Medicaid next year. We’re trying really hard to not have some programs (unwound) that we have in place that are helping fund health care in New York that we worked hard to get the federal government to approve. We honestly don’t have the full assessment of what it looks like. I don’t know what the end of year bonuses look like on Wall Street. So there’s just some major data points that are missing at this moment. (The legislative leaders) know and don’t encourage us to try and backfill all the cuts. They know that’s not in the realm of possibility, because it’s also letting the federal government off the hook in the long term. Once you do something, if you say you’ll pay for it, I can see them never again paying for it. Like if we picked up the full cost of SNAP, it’s $650 million a month. Someone would say that’s almost the entire cost of free buses, right? These are the Hobbesian choices that we’re facing with how we manage the services that we would provide now, how we find pathways to get to an expansion of some programs. As much as people want to believe that there’ll be universal child care starting in January, we don’t have the infrastructure in place. I wouldn’t have enough slots in child care centers for people to send their kids to. So we’ll work with him, and we’ll be having meetings very soon about how to manage this on that front. So I can’t give you a dollar amount or what the revenue sources will be. I’m not supportive of income tax increases, but what other revenue sources are out there, just even just to help us get through what we have to get through.

You have criticized Democrats in Washington, D.C., for caving on the shutdown deal, but you haven’t mentioned U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer specifically. Some are talking about the need for new Democratic leadership in the Senate in the vein of new Democrats ushering in change. Does your criticism extend to Schumer, and do you lend any credence to those calling for a leadership change?

Last I checked, the minority leader voted against (the spending deal). So he showed that he was standing up for the same values I have in New York, which is: Health care is everything to people. So I have a lot to do with the incoming from Washington, managing the state, assisting the city. I will let others think about leadership positions in Washington, but it has been enormously helpful to have our own senator in that position of power, whether it comes to major infrastructure projects like Gateway tunnel. A lot of this lift and a lot of the support we’ve gotten from the federal government has come from his position. So I think we should just be cognizant of that as well.

Looking ahead to your own reelection, you have both a Democratic primary challenge and a general election challenge from Republicans. How are you feeling about both of those? Your support of Mamdani could help in the primary, for example, but are you worried how it will impact your performance with general election voters?

People are recognizing that I take this business very seriously. I am committed to this state. I have a long list of successes, but we’re not done yet. I have a lot of ambition, and I’m excited about sharing that with the voters next year. And yes, it is a fascinating position to be in to have a primary and a general with the two extremes of the political spectrum, but people know me as just a fighter, a mom from Buffalo who understands that I’m not doctrinaire. When we did free lunches and breakfasts in all schools, that set the Republican social media networks on fire. Like, “Oh my God, she’s a socialist. She’s giving away free food.” I just think that’s the right thing to do. So don’t take me with a label, take me as someone who’s going to be pragmatic and deliver. I understand people’s anxieties on the center-right. We’ll get through it. I’m actually looking forward to the debate. I’ve been in 16 elections – it’s sort of my normal state of affairs to be in a campaign. And it seems strange when I’m not, so I take energy from seeing people. The reception I get on the street has been very positive. People know I stood up for congestion pricing. People thank me for endorsing Zohran on the streets. People come to me and they’re worried about that endorsement. When I go out for my early morning walk and stop at a diner, I get into conversations with these guys – and I’m not even wearing makeup yet. It’s early morning. I’ve got a baseball hat on. I’m trying to be incognito. It’s like, “Hey, governor, why’d you endorse that guy?” A couple of off-duty cops. Like, “Listen, guys, we’re going to be fine.” I say bring it on, because I’m ready. I am battle-tested, and nothing gets me off my game.