Send us a text

Democracy requires watchdogs, but who's watching Albany? In this conversation with Akash Mehta, Editor-in-Chief of New York Focus, I uncover the hidden machinery of power in New York State.

Research shows that geographic isolation breeds corruption - when state capitals sit far from population centers, accountability suffers. While New York City teems with journalists, few eyes focus on the capital, where the real power resides.

Launched in 2020, New York Focus answers the crucial question: "Who runs New York?" Their investigations have revealed family dynasties controlling the prison system, secretive legislative committees determining which bills live or die, and law firms involved in judicial appointments. Most importantly, they've proven that when journalists expose these hidden mechanisms, change happens quickly.

As Akash explains, power in New York takes many forms - from predictable corporate influence to dysfunctional bureaucracies where "no one runs New York" and problems persist due to institutional neglect rather than malice. But their work also reveals the power of informed citizens to drive accountability when armed with knowledge.

Ready to understand who's really pulling the strings in your state? Subscribe now to hear what happens when fearless journalism meets democratic dysfunction. Then visit nyfocus.com to support their essential work uncovering the stories that shape our lives but seldom make headlines.

Send us a text

What if everything we've been taught about getting ahead in America is actually a trap? Yale Law professor Daniel Markovits drops a bombshell by revealing how meritocracy—our cherished national myth—has become the very system destroying both the middle class and crushing even those who "succeed" within it.

Markovits takes us on a fascinating journey through the transformation of everyday industries. Remember when working at McDonald's meant having actual cooking skills? Today, those jobs have been de-skilled to button-pushing, while a small elite of food scientists earns millions designing pre-packaged meals. This pattern repeats across retail, finance, medicine, and law—middle-skill jobs vanish while a small group at the top commands astronomical salaries and those at the bottom struggle with minimal wages.

The most surprising revelation might be how this system harms even those at the top. Unlike aristocrats of old who could simply collect passive income from inherited wealth, today's elites must exploit themselves through crushing work schedules. They spend entire lives being evaluated, tested, and molded to market demands rather than pursuing meaningful interests. Their wealth comes at the cost of their freedom and fulfillment.

Markovits offers practical advice for navigating this broken system, suggesting that starting businesses or relocating to areas with greater social mobility might provide alternatives to the elite credential chase. He leaves us with a powerful insight: "We can't make social policy for exceptional people. We have to make social policy for the rest of us who are ordinary." In a world that increasingly rewards only the exceptional, perhaps that's the most revolutionary idea of all.

Send us a text

A pivotal legal battle has unfolded in federal court, with profound implications for executive power and constitutional boundaries. When President Trump directed the Office of Management and Budget to freeze federal spending for programs related to foreign aid, diversity initiatives, and environmental causes, he triggered an immediate showdown over the separation of powers that define our government.

The judge's injunction against this freeze cuts to the heart of our constitutional structure. Congress alone holds the "power of the purse" through the Appropriations Clause, and presidents who wish to impound funds must follow specific procedures established after Nixon's similar attempts in the 1970s. Trump's administration bypassed these requirements completely, leading the court to find his actions likely unconstitutional and "arbitrary and capricious" under administrative law.

What makes this case particularly significant is how it exemplifies the tension between presidential authority and constitutional constraints. The administration's transparent attempt to escape judicial review – technically rescinding the memo while publicly declaring the freeze remained "in full force" – failed to convince the judge. Meanwhile, real organizations faced immediate layoffs and financial hardships as a result of this constitutional power struggle.

The case resonates with Francis Fukuyama's observation that even the most authoritarian systems require some principle of legitimacy beyond raw power. As our democracy navigates these challenges, the courts remain the primary institutional check against potential overreach – but for how long? This battle over federal funding reveals the fragility of our system when founding principles face determined challenges.

Have you considered what happens when presidents test the boundaries of their constitutional authority? Follow along as we examine more pivotal cases shaping our democracy.