WITH EARLY VOTING UNDER WAY, AND ELECTION DAY RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER, WE ARE BRINGING YOU AN ELECTION PREVIEW HERE ON CONNECT NEW YORK.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ WELCOME ON CONNECT NEW YORK.

I'M DAVID LOMBARDO, HOST OF CNY'S THE CAPITOL PRESS ROOM, DAILY PUBLIC RADIO SHOW BROADCASTING FROM THE STATE CAPITOL O.

THIS MONTH'S EPISODE, WE ARE LOOKING AT SOME OF THE PEOPLE AND ISSUES ON THE BALLOT HERE IN THE EMBEAR TIGHT.

EMPIRE EMPIRE STATE AND LATER WE'LL SHINE A SPOTTED LIGHT ON NEW YORK'S 22nd DISTRICT AREA AND CHECK IN WITH TWO POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OPERATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE.

WHILE NONE OF THE STATEWIDE ELECTIONS IN NEW YORK ARE LIKELY IN DOUBT, VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS EXPECTED TO WIN NEW YORK'S ELECTORAL VOTES AND SENATOR GILLIBRAND POISED FOR A COMFORTABLE REELECTION, PROPOSITION ONE WHICH VOTERS ON FIND ON THE BACK OF THE BALLOT WOULD ENACT THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT EXPANDING DISCRIMINATION PROTECTIONS IN THE STATE CONS FUSION FOR DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND CERTAIN ACTIVITIES SUCH AS AN ABORTION.

CONNECT NEW YORK PRODUCER DOVE INTO THIS BALLOT MEASURE EXAMINING THE BACK STORY, SUBSEQUENT POLARIZATION AND WHAT IT COULD MEAN IF IMPLEMENTED.

HERE IS THE STORY.

>> SENATOR KRUEGERER TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

>> THANK YOU, Mr.PRESIDENT.

VERY PLEASED THAT WE ARE TODAY PASSING FOR THE SECOND TIME THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WE'VE NICKNAMED THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT.

I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE OUR FEDERAL AND STATE CONSTITUTIONS WERE WRITTEN AT A TIME WHEN THE PROMISES OF EQUALITY ONLY PROTECTED THE INTERESTS OF A FEW AND SO OUR CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS ARE WOEFULLY INADEQUATE.

IN FACT, OUR LAST VERSION WAS ADOPTED IN 1938, IN THE NEW YORK'S CONSTITUTION EQUAL PROTECTION AND CIVIL RIGHTS PROVISIONS FAIL TO REFLECT OUR CURRENT VISION OF EQUALITY.

THIS MEASURE PROPOSES AMENDING OUR CONSTITUTION'S CURRENT EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE IN ARTICLE 1 SECTION 11, TO CREATE BROADER PROTECTIONS AGAINST DISCRIMINATION BY THE STATE AND ITS INSTITUTIONS.

THESE PROTECTIONS, UNDER THIS REFORM, WOULD ALLOW NEW EXPLICITLY-- WOULD NOW EXPLICITLY PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATION ON THE ACCOUNT OF A PERSON'S ETHNICITY, NATIONAL ORIGIN, AGE, DISABILITY, OR SEX, INCLUDING SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, GENDER EXPRESSION, PREGNANCY, PREGNANCY OUTCOMES AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE AND AUTONOMY.

>> WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS WERE TRYING TO DO HERE WITH THIS AMENDMENT WAS IN LARGE PART, REACT TO THE LIKELIHOOD THAT ROE V. WADE WAS POISED TO BE OVERTURNED, WHICH NOW WE KNOW IT WAS.

NEW YORK GENERALLY SPEAKING, HAS VERY STRONG ABORTION RIGHTS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS.

BUT THE THINKING HERE IS THAT ONE DAY IN THE FUTURE, THERE COULD BE A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR, THERE COULD BE A REPUBLICAN STATE LEGISLATURE.

IT SEEMS CERTAINLY UNLIKELY WHERE WE ARE SITTING NOW THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD EVER COME TO PASS BUT AT SOME POINT, THERE PROBABLY WILL BE REPUBLICAN RULE ONCE AGAIN IN NEW YORK.

SO THE CONCERN IS THAT IT'S A LOT EASIER TO CHANGE A STATE LAW THAN IT IS TO CHANGE THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

>> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PROTECTING REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS IN OUR-- IN PROP 1, REMEMBER WE ARE ALSO TALKING ABOUT ACCESS TO CONTRACEPTION AND IVF.

YOU KNOW, WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT FIVE YEARS AGO THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO SOMETHING SPECIAL TO PREGHT ACCESS TO CONTRACEPTION OR IVF?

BUT WE'VE LEARNED THE HARD WAY, AND WOMEN HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES BECAUSE OF IT.

>> PROP 1 DOES TWO IMPORTANT THINGS.

IT PROTECTS OUR RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS INCLUDING RIGHT TO ABORTION IN OUR STATE CONSTITUTION.

AND IT ENSURES THAT NO NEW YORKER CAN BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST BECAUSE OF WHO THEY ARE.

NOW OUR OPPONENTS KNOW THAT ABORTION IS REALLY POPULAR.

THEY KNOW THAT WE LIVE IN AN INCREDIBLY PRO-CHOICE STATE.

A STATE THAT SUPPORTS OUR REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOMS AND ABORTION.

AND SO THE OPPOSITION IS DOING EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING EXCEPT ABORTION.

PROP 1 PROTECTS US AGAINST DISCRIMINATION WHETHER WE ARE LGBTQ, A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY, WHETHER WE ARE AN OLDER ADULT, OUR RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

WE NE KNOW THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING TO DO IN NEW YORK IS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS AS WELL.

>> THE LEGISLATIVE MEMO IN SUPPORT SEEM TO INDICATE THAT THE WORDING IS INTENTIONALLY VAGUE TO HIDE THE ISSUE OF JUST WHERE NEW YORK IS PUTTING ABORTION RIGHTS IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

THAT REPRODUCTIVE AUTONOMY IS MEANT TO BE MUCH MORE THAN WHAT IS EXISTING ON THE BOOKS ON THE ROE V. WADE SORT OF FRAMEWORK.

>> THE WORD ABORTION IS NEVER MENTIONED IN THE BALLOT QUESTION INSTEAD, VOTERS ARE ASKED TO SUPPORT AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD GUARANTEE RIGHTS FOR QUOTE UNQUOTE PREGNANCY OUTCOMES.

IF YOU ASK A TYPICAL VOTER IF THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT PREGNANCY OUTCOMES MEANS AND IF THEY KNOW THAT THAT WOULD TRANSLATE TO ABORTION RIGHTS, I'M VERY DOUBTFUL THAT YOU WOULD HEAR FROM A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE SAYING THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WILL PRESERVE ABORTION RIGHTS NO NEW YORK.

>> IT'S FORTUNATE THAT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS DID NOT USE THE WORD ABORTION IN DESCRIBING THE IMPACT OF THIS AMENDMENT.

BUT IT IS ABOUT ABORTION AND IT WILL PROTECT ABORTION RIGHTS AND IT WILL PROTECT FULL EQUALITY FOR ALL NEW YORKERS NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE.

>> SO THERE ARE THESE CATEGORIES OF PROTECTED CLASSES THAT ARE BEING ADDED IN THE AMENDMENT.

LET'S SAY AGE.

AND SO NOW THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY GIVE ANYBODY ANY PARTICULAR RIGHTS BASED ON AGE.

IT'S ABOUT HOW WHAT LAWS ARE PASSED THAT RELATE TO AGE.

SO YOU DON'T GET RIGHTS FROM THIS AMENDMENT.

WHAT YOU GET IS THE ABILITY NOT TO BE CRIMINAL NATEED AGAINST IN YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ON YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS.

>> IT DOESN'T HAND OUT CIVIL RIGHTS OR GIVE SOME COMMUNITIES BENEFITS AND OTHER COMMUNITIES DIFFERENT BENEFITS.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE COMMONSENSE LAWS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS.

THIS AMENDMENT IS ABOUT PROTECTING THE RIGHTS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO ABORTION.

SO THAT WE ARE NOT LEAVING THOSE DECISIONS UP TO OUT OF TOUCH POLITICIANS.

>> WHAT REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF AUTONOMY IS SUPPOSED TO NEGATE THE FETAL VIABILITY ARGUMENT FOR ANY RESTRICTION ON NEW YORKERS F. NEW YORKERS KNEW WHAT THAT REALLY MEANT, THAT THEY WEREN'T ENSHRINING THE EXISTING ROE V. WADE FRAMEWORK, THEY MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT ATTITUDE TOWARDS PROP 1 AND THAT'S NOT TALKED ABOUT ENOUGH.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE PARENTAL RIGHTS AND, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS ARGUMENT, WE HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL SUPREME COURT AND COURT COURT OF APPEALS PRECEDENT RECOGNIZING PARENTAL RIGHTS BEING PARAMOUNT AND FUNDAMENTAL.

BUT WHEN THIS PASSES, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE IS ALL THIS, YOU KNOW, THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT GENDER IDENTITY AND AGE AND ALL THESE FACTORS THAT ARE GOING TO WEIGHED BY THE COURTS.

WE DON'T KNOW WHERE PARENTAL RIGHTS WILL COME OUT AFTER ALL OF THIS.

SO THE AMENDMENT ITSELF ISN'T DOING ANYTHING TO ANY OF THESE RIGHTS, ADDING OR SUBTRACTING BUT THEY'RE GOING TO, I PREDICT, BE COURT DECISIONS DOWN THE ROAD THAT WILL CHANGE THINGS.

>> FOR THE OPPONENTS, THEY HAVE SEIZED ON THE EXPANSE OF LANGUAGE.

IT HAS GIVEN THEM AN OPENING TO SAY THAT THIS AMENDMENT CAN, IN ESSENCE, OPEN UP PANDORA'S BOX FOR A VARIETY OF ASPECTS THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT NECESSARILY CONSIDERING OR THINKING ABOUT WHEN THIS AMENDMENT WAS DRAFTED.

CHIEF AMONG THEM IS, QUITE FRANKLY, AN ANTI-TRANS ARGUMENT THAT THIS WOULD LEAD TO TRANS PEOPLE PARTICIPATING IN WOMEN'S SPORTS AND GIRLS SPORTS, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY KIND OF A HOT BUTTON DUE JUR TOPIC IN THE CULTURE WARS RIGHT NOW.

SUPPORTERS HAVE CONTENDED THIS IS-- THE FEAR MONGERING THAT THE AMENDMENT IS NOT DESIGNED TO DO THAT.

TITLE IX PROTECTS WOMEN'S AND GIRLS SPORTS AND THIS IS NOT A CONCERN.

QUITE FRANKLY, ALL OF THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE DECIDED IN THE COURTS.

IT IS GOING TO BE UP TO THE STATE COURT SYSTEM TO DETERMINE WHETHER THIS AMENDMENT CAN BE BROADLY APPLIED.

CERTAINLY IN CASE LIKE THAT.

NEVERTHELESS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE FAR OFF INTO THE FUTURE AND ALL DEPENDENT UPON WHETHER THIS AMENDMENT CAN ACTUALLY BE APPROVED OR NOT.

>> NOW WE ARE TURNING TO OUR PANEL OF CAMPAIGN VETERANS AND ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SPECTRUM WE'VE GOT JACK O'DONNELL, MANAGING PARTNER AT O'DONNELL AND ASSOCIATES AND FROM THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE AISLE, WE ARE JOINED BY DAVID, PRESIDENT OF CAPITAL PUBLIC STRATEGIES MEDIA.

I WANT TO BEGIN OUR CONVERSATION BY DISCUSSING PROPOSITION 1 WHICH HAS BECOME, AS WE SAW, A POLAR SIZE-- POLARIZING ISSUES FOR THE TWO PARTIES DESPITE VOTERS INDICATING THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE MEASURE FROM THE SEE ENA COLLEGE POLLING INSTITUTE.

WE HAVE SEEN PROP 1 FAIL IN NEW YORK AND SAIL THROUGH.

WHAT DO YOU THINK WILL HAPPEN HERE?

>> I THINK BROADLY SPEAKING, IT WILL, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, SAIL THROUGH BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO EDUCATE ON AN ISSUE LIKE THIS IN A PRESIDENTIAL YEAR WHEN THERE ARE SO MANY ELECTIONS ON THE BALLOT.

AND I THINK QUITE FRANKLY, THE TERMINOLOGY OF THE AMENDMENT, WHILE CLEARLY A BIT MISLEADING SO FAR AS THE RAMIFICATIONS OF POTENTIALLY DOWN THE ROAD, MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT DIFFICULT FOR OPPONENTS TO BE ABLE TO TACK ON I SUSPECT IT TASS PASSES.

I SUSPECT IT DOES WHAT DEMS WANT IT TO DO WHICH IS TO KEEP THE ISSUE OF ABORTION ON THE FRONT BURNER AND ALLOW FOLKS TO HAVE ANOTHER REASON TO TALK ABOUT IT.

BUT THERE ARE REAL DOWNSTREAM, YOU KNOW, IMPACTS OF IT THAT POTENTIALLY COULD IMPACT DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF DIFFERENT LAW AND NEW YORK'S NOTICE WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN TALKED ABOUT ENOUGH AND NOT WITH STANDING, SOME OF YOUR PRESENTERS ON THE PIECE, THIS IS NOT A DOWN THE ROAD ISSUE.

THIS IS A RIGHT NOW KIND OF ISSUE THAT I THINK WILL PLAY OUT PRETTY QUICKLY.

>> DAVE, YOU THINK THE ABORTION NARRATIVE WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSITION HAS BEEN THE DOMINANT FOCUS WITH THIS AMENDMENT?

BECAUSE GRANTED, I'M IN KIND OF AN ALBANY BUBBLE, AND I'M INUNDATED WITH A LOT OF THE OPPOSITION.

BUT I GUESS OUT THERE SPEAKING WITH ACTUAL VOTERS AND HEARING FROM CAMPAIGNS, YOU FEEL LIKE THE SUPPORTERS EMPHASIS ON ABORTION IS WHAT IS RESONATING AT THIS POINT?

>> I THINK IF YOU ARE IN A CAMPAIGN LOOK, LET'S START WITH THE ISSUE OF ABORTION OBVIOUSLY IS A VERY POLARIZING ISSUE.

IT IS THE SINGULAR ISSUE THAT DEMOCRATS HAVE TAUGHT TO POLARIZE THIS ELECTION ON ON BOTH THE STATE, LESS THE STATE BUT CERTAINLY THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

I THINK IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO TAKE YOUR CANDIDATES AND HAVE THEM RUN AGAINST ARTICULATELY AN AMENDMENT LIKE THIS I THINK THAT IT IS BEING SOLD LOCALLY AS SOMETHING TO GUARANTEE WIMTION RIGHTS TO ACCESS TO ABORTION IN A CLIMATE WHERE THEY'RE CONCERNED AND FRANKLY DON'T TRUST REPUBLICANS ON THE ISSUE POST DOBBS.

THAT'S HOW IT IS BEING SOLD.

THE OPPONENTS ARE PEDDLING AND SELLING DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF ITS IMPACT WHICH I THINK ARE REAL BUT IT'S A REAL UPHILL CLIMB.

>> AND PRIOR TO THIS, THEY HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT PROPOSITION THROUGH THE LENS OF 2021, WHEN THERE WERE THREE ELECTION REFORMS THAT ENDED UP GETTING VOTED DOWN BY VOTERS, THAT ELECTION HAD 3.4 MILLION BALLOTS CAST HERE.

HERE WE ARE LOOKING AT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND FOR CONTEXT, I THINK THERE WERE MORE THAN 8 MILLION VOTES CAST IN 2020.

HOW DO YOU THINK THAT DYNAMIC IS GOING TO IMPACT THE VOTE ON THIS PROPOSITION WHICH, AGAIN, VOTERS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TURN OVER THEIR BALLOT TO ACTUALLY WEIGH IN ON.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I DO THINK THAT HAVING MORE VOTERS DEFINITELY HELPS WITH THIS.

BUT YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT TO BE A FOCUSED VOTER, RIGHT?

YOU HAVE TO KNOW TO TURN IT OVER BUT I ALSO THINK DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO LEARN THOSE LESSONS, RIGHT, OR MAYBE THEY FEEL SOME DAMPNESS IN THE BED TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE HEAR THE ABORTION ARGUMENT AND DRIVE TO IT PASSAGE >> DO YOU THINK THE MESSAGE HAS COME IN TIME BECAUSE WE ARE A CROWD THAT LIVES AND BREATHES THESE ISSUES.

MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT EVEN THINKING ABOUT HOW THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE OR WHAT IS ON THE BALLOT UNTIL, IN SOME CASES, THEY GET THAT BALLOT.

IS THE CAMPAIGN THAT IS IN SUPPORT THEN COMING TOO LATE?

IS THIS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE HAMMERING A MESSAGE HOME EARLIER IN THE SUMMER?

>> I THINK A LOT OF THOSE FOLKS WHO DON'T HAVE A PLAN TO VOTE AND AREN'T SURE WHO THEY ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR, THEY MAY NOT BE THE ONES WHO TURN OVER THEIR BALLOT, EITHER.

I THINK IT REALLY IS REMIND IS THOSE PEOPLE WHO DO CARE ABOUT ABORTION, ABOUT WOMEN'S REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM AND THERE ARE A LOT OF THEM IN NEW YORK, RIGHT?

WE TALKED ABOUT THE POLLING NUMBERS EARL EARLY-- EARLIER.

THERE IS A LOT OF SUPPORT HERE.

IS THERE A LITTLE LIGHTWEIGHT?

WOULD IT HAVE BEEN BETTER TO DO IT SOONER?

I DON'T KNOW AS MUCH AS THE FACT THAT IT IS BEING DONE.

>> THERE IS A CHICKEN AND EGG CONVERSATION THAT IS BEING HAD WITH REGARDS TO THE RACES FOR SAY CONGRESS OR EVEN DOWNBALLOT GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THIS PROPOSITION OR ARE THE RACES FOR CONGRESS AND SAY THE STATE LEGISLATURE GOING TO IMPACT VOTE ON THE PROPOSITION?

DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF THE DYNAMIC AT PLAY HERE?

>> NEITHER.

I SUSPECT THE PROPOSITION PASSES BECAUSE OF ITS WORDING, WHICH I THINK FOLKS THE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN EDUCATED AND TO YOUR POINT, AND JACK'S POINT THERE HAS NOT BEEN-- THERE HAS BEEN WOEFUL EDUCATION ON IT.

I THINK IT PASSES BECAUSE OF THE LANGUAGE BUT I THINK THERE IS DOWNSTREAM LIABILITIES VIS-A-VIS WOMEN'S SPORTS, GIRLS SPORTS SPECIFICALLY.

DOWN THE ROAD, I DON'T THINK IT'S A PIPE DREAM SOMEONE CHALLENGING THE RIGHT TO HAVE NON-CITIZENS VOTE IN OUR ELECTIONS.

NEW YORK CITY TRIED TO PASS IT ONCE AND IT GOT THROWN OUT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE A BASIS IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

WILL THIS CREATE A BASIS THAT ALLOWS THAT TO HAPPEN?

SHE IT IS GOING TO GET CHALLENGED REALLY QUICK WOULD BE , WOULD I SUSPECT.

SO, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE REALICIOUS.

I THINK THEY'RE WRONG TO DISMISS THEM.

I THINK THE DEMOCRATS WRAP THIS UP IN THE ISSUE OF ABORTION LIKE WE CAN ACKNOWLEDGE HAS BEEN SUPER POLARIZING AND FOR GOOD REASON.

AND LIKELY PASSES.

AND THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS OF THIS ARE GOING TO BE FELT BY ALL NEW YORKERS WELL BEYOND REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE.

>> WELL, DAVE, I THINK ABOUT SAY, THE SO CALLED GREEN AMENDMENT PASSED IN 2021 GUARANTEEING NEW YORKERS THE RIGHT TO CLEAN AIR, CLEAN WATER AND HEALTHFUL ENVIRONMENT.

AND IN THE ENSUING TWO YEARS, WE'VE SEEN THAT PLAY OUT IN THE COURT SYSTEM.

IT HASN'T NECESSARILY HAD SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.

THIS AMENDMENT, IF ADOPTED, COULD WELCOME LEGAL CHALLENGES AS SOON AS 2025.

IF THAT DOES HAPPEN, DO YOU THINK THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR REPUBLICANS TO HAVE A BENEFIT IN SAY THE 2025 OR 2026 ELECTION CYCLE?

IS THIS SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO RUN AGAINST POTENTIALLY AT A STATEWIDE LEVEL?

>> POTENTIALLY, RIGHT.

LIKE WE NEED TO OBVIOUSLY SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT.

OBVIOUSLY A LOT DEPENDS IN THAT REGARD ON WHAT HAPPENS ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL IN THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.

BUT LOOKS, I MEAN YOU DON'T NEED TO BE A POLITICAL SCIENTIST OR CONSULTANT TO LOOK AT THE STATE AND LOOK AT THE NEWS AND BE LIKE, YOU HAVE A GOVERNOR WHO HAS HISTORICALLY LOW POLLING NUMBERS WHO IS STRUGGLING.

YOU HAVE THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, YOU KNOW, MOST IMPORTANT CITY IN THE WORLD, WHO IS UNDER INDICTMENT AND HAS INCREDIBLY LOW POLLING NUMBERS.

SO YOU SEE A STATE THAT IS ALL RUN BY DEMOCRATS AND HAVING, YOU KNOW, THESE ISSUES.

AND I THINK, DEPENDING ON SORT OF HOW THESE ELECTIONS GO AT THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE GOES, THIS AS WELL AS A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER ISSUES COULD BE IN PLAY FOR 25-26.

>> JACK, DO YOU THINK DEMOCRATS SHOULD #-B CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE GETTING THEMSELVES INTO WITH THIS AMENDMENT IN TERMS OF THE ELECTORAL RAMIFICATIONS DOWN THE ROAD?

I THINK DEMOCRATS HAVE TO ALWAYS BE CONCERNED ABOUT POTENTIAL OVERREACH AND REACTIONS TO THAT AND WHAT THAT MEANS BUT THESE ARE THINGS THAT DEMOCRATS BELIEVE IN SO THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENSHRINE THESE IN THE CONSTITUTION CERTAINLY ARE WORTH THAT RISK AND WE WILL SEE WHERE IT GOES.

I THINK IF ANYTHING, DEMOCRATS ARE DISAPPOINTED IT IS NOT HAVING A BIGGER I AM PACK ON THE RACES THIS YEAR.

I THINK THERE WAS SOME EXPECTATION THAT MIGHT HAPPEN AND I THINK THE DISAPPOINTMENT IS THAT IT HAS NOT.

>> PROBABLY TRUE.

>> NOW I WANT TO TURN OUR ATTENTION TO SOME OF THE BATTLE GROUND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS IN NEW YORK THAT COULD DETERMINE WHO HAS CONTROL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN 2025 THERE ARE SEVEN HOTLY CONTESTED RACES IN THE EMTIRE STATE INCLUDING RIGHT HERE IN NEW YORK WHERE BRANDON WILLIAMS IS RUNNING AGAINST DEMOCRAT JOHN MANNION.

THIS FALL WE HOSTED A DEBATE BETWEEN THE TWO CANDIDATES WHICH AT POINT WAS EMBLEMATIC OF THE FRACTURES OF CANDIDATES AROUND NEW YORK.

WE ARE GOING TO REVISIT SOME OF THE POINTS RIGHT NOW.

>> THE RIGHT TO CONTRACEPTION HAS BEEN AFFIRMED BY MULTIPLE SUPREME COURT CASES BUT NOTHING STOPS LOWER COURTS FROM NARROWING THE PROTECTIONS OR THE SUPREME COURT FROM REVERSING THE PAST PRECEDENTS LIKE WE SAW WITH DOBBS AND ABORTION IN 2022.

GIVEN THAT BACKGROUND SHOULD CONGRESS PASS LEGISLATION AFFIRMING A RIGHT TO BIRTH CONTROL SUCH AS HORMONAL CONTRACEPTION.

>> YES.

>> GREAT.

>> STATE SENATOR, SAME QUESTION.

>> YES.

>> FOLLOWUP AND I'LL START WITH STATE SENATOR.

FEDERAL REGULATIONS REQUIRE MOST PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE PLANS TO COVER CONTRACEPTION METHODS THAT REQUIRE A PRESCRIPTION.

IN LIGHT OF THE FDA WITH THE ORAL CONTRACEPTION AVAILABLE WITHOUT A PRESCRIPTION.

SHOULD IT BE EXPANDED TO COVER OVER THE COUNTER BIRTH CONTROL THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE PRESCRIPTION.

>> WE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY MAKE SURE CONTRACEPTION IS COVERED BY INSURANCE COMPANIES.

IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE AND PEOPLE OF THE 22nd DISTRICT WOULD SUPPORT THAT.

>> THAT'S THE OVER THE COUNTER PRESCRIPTIONS AS WELL.

>> I WOULD, YES.

>> CONGRESSMAN, SAME QUESTION.

DO YOU SUPPORT EXPANDING THE MANDATE TO OVER-THE-COUNTER BIRTH CONTROL?

>> I HAVE TO TELL YOU, WE HAVE TWO KIDS AND THAT'S PROBABLY A BROAD RANGE OF WHAT OVER THE COUNTER BIRTH CONTROL IS.

SO WITHOUT BULL KNOWLEDGE OF THAT, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY RESTRICTIONS THAT WOULD PREVENT INSURANCE FROM COVERING THAT.

>> NO RESTRICTIONS BUT A MANDATE TO REQUIRE.

>> IF THAT'S THROUGH A.C.A., THE MANDATED SYSTEM.

>> IT'S NOT PART OF IT NOW.

THEY ONLY COVER THINGS THAT ARE COVER THAT REQUIRE PRESCRIPTION.

THIS NEW O PILL DOES NOT REQUIRE PRESCRIPTION.

SHOULD IT BE UNDER A MANDATE.

>> THERE ARE A NUMBER OF RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE OPPOSED.

AND WHETHER WE GET INTO THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS, FEDERAL MANDATES, YOU KNOW, THAT FORCE PEOPLE THAT HAVE OPPOSITION OF PAYING IN THE SYSTEMS, THAT'S CURRENTLY IN REVIEW IN THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT FEDERAL MANDATES, I CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE ANY OPPOSITION TO BIRTH CONTROL AND NOR WOULD I TRY TO LIMIT THAT IN ANY WAY.

BUT YOU ARE ASKING THE OPPOSITE.

YOU ARE ASKING FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO TAKE A HEAVIER HAND.

IN GENERAL I LIKE FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE, TO BE ABLE TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES.

>> YOU HAVE 15 SECONDS FOR FOLLOWUP.

>> THIS IS ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL'S HEALTHCARE.

THIS IS A DEMOCRACY, NOT A THEOCRACY.

WE MUST MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ASSURING THE HEALTH OF INDIVIDUALS IN THIS COUNTRY AS THEY PREPARE FOR THEIR FAMILIES.

>> IT'S A DEMOCRACY, IT'S NOT A DICTATORSHIP.

SO I THINK IN A MARKET, FREE MARKET, PEOPLE SHOULD DECIDE.

>> FOR A DECADE AND A HALF, MINIMUM WAGE HAS BEEN SET AT 7:25.

AND NEW YORK'S MINIMUM WAGE HAS BEEN INCREASING INCREMENTALLY RECHING $15 EARLIER THIS YEAR IN UPSTATE NEW YORK SCHEDULED TO INCREASE.

IS IT TIME FOR CONGRESS TO RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE?

CONGRESSMAN?

>> AS YOU MENTIONED, NEW YORK STATE, MINIMUM WAGE IS ALREADY TWICE THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

AND SO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MANDATING HIGHER PRICES WON'T AFFECT NEW YORK STATE.

AND I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE OF CENTRAL NEW YORK, SO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOESN'T MATTER MA THEY DO.

WHAT THEY DO.

NEW YORK STATE IS GOING TO SET THE PREVAILING MINIMUM WAGE.

>> TO FOLLOW UP AND BE CLEAR.

YOU ARE SAYING CONGRESS NOWED SHT ACT?

>> IT WON'T AFFECT THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK STATE.

SO NO.

>> SENATOR, PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY ACROSS THIS COUNTRY DESERVE A LIVING WAGE IN THIS STATE WE HAVE PROVIDED AS BEST AS WE COULD WITH THE RISING MINIMUM WAGE.

THERE ARE MANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE CARE COMMUNITIES, SPECIFICALLY DIRECT SUPPORT PROFESSIONALS IN THE DISABILITY SPACE, WHERE WE HAVE TRIED TO INCREASE THEIR WAGES.

I DON'T KNOW WHO CAN LIVE ACROSS THIS COUNTRY ON $7: 25, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE IN A DEMANDING PROFESSION LIKE ONE OF THESE AND TALKING TO MY COLLEAGUE AS CRO-- ACROSS THIS COUNTRY, THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN SOME STATES.

>> THE ISSUE OF HOMELESSNESS AND DRUG ADDICTION AND THE INTERSECTION BETWEEN THE TWO PROBLEMS.

YOU GOT 60 SECONDS.

DO WHAT YOU WILL WITH IT?

>> SUR, ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO I WAS ASKED TO VOLUNTEER AT THE SYRACUSE RESCUE MISSION TO DO JOBS TRAINING FOR HOMELESS MEN.

AND WHAT IT ALLOWED ME TO DO IS ENGAGE WITH THEM ON A WEEKLY BASIS OVER I THINK A COUPLE OF MONTHS TO REALLY DIVE IN AND HELP THEM ESTABLISH THE TOOLS OF GETTING BACK ON, YOU KNOW, BACK ON THEIR FEET AND BACK INTO THE WORKFORCE.

SO I ENCOUNTERED FIRSTHAND WHAT THE CHALLENGES WERE.

I LEARNED A LOT.

AND AS WAS MENTIONED IN THE QUESTION, IT GOES HAND IN HAND WITH SUBSTANCE USE SUBSTANCE ABUSE.

ONCE OF THE CHALLENGES WE FACE IN PARTICULAR IS AN OPEN SOUTHERN BORDER SINCE BIDEN AND HARRIS HAVE TAKEN OFFICE AND THIS HAS LED TO A FLOOD OF FENTANYL AND OTHER DANGEROUS ADDICT ADDICTIVE AND HARMFUL DRUGS THAT IS EXPANDING THE HOMELESS POPULATION.

I WAS JUST AT SYRACUSE RESCUE MISSION A COUPLE WEEKS AGO AND SAW THE INCREDIBLE WORK THAT THEY DO, THE AMAZING SERVICES THAT THEY PROVIDE, AND HOW MUCH ADDICTION AND MENTAL HEALTH IS TIED INTO THAT.

I HAVE BEEN DIRECTLY ENGAGED AND INVOLVED IN THAT AND I THINK SECURING THE BORDER, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WILL AT LEAST START STEMMING THE FLOW OF DRUGS INTO OUR COUNTRY.

>> STATE SENATOR, SAME QUESTION, INTERSECTION OF DRUG ABUSE AND HOMELESSNESS?

>> LISTEN.

WHEN PEOPLE ARE ADDICTED TO DRUGS, IT CAN LEAD TO HOMELESSNESS AND THAT IS A TRAGEDY AND CERTAINLY A CYCLE THAT PERPETUATES ITSELF.

SO WHEN SOMEONE HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH A CRIME RELATED TO POTENTIALLY DRUG USE, CERTAINLY DRUG TRAFFICKING IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS VERY SERIOUSLY, BUT IF SOMEONE-- WE NEED TO FUND OUR DRUG COURTS.

WE NEED AN EXPANSION OF OUR DRUG COURTS IN A REAL PLAN TOWARDS TREATMENT, TOWARDS HEALING.

WE WANT INDIVIDUALS TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

WE WANT THEM TO BE ON A PATH TOWARDS WELLNESS AND SOMETIMES WE ARE BASICALLY PERPETUATING THAT CYCLE.

SO WE NEED PROGRAMS TIED TO OUR DRUG COURTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE TRULY INVESTING.

AND WHEN INDIVIDUALS MAY NEED IN-PATIENT CARE, WE SHOULD MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN REMAIN WITH THEIR CHILDREN.

THERE ARE PROGRAMS AROUND THIS STATE WHERE WOMEN AND CHILDREN CAN STAY TOGETHER IN A FACILITY AS THEY ARE GOING THROUGH TREATMENT.

AND LAST THING I'LL SAY ABOUT THE COMMENT ON THE SOUTHERN BORDER IS MY OPPONENT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE A BIPARTISAN BILL THAT WAS PASSED BY THE SENATE THAT WOULD HAVE DONE A LOT, WHICH WOULD HAVE FUNDED OUR COURTS, WOULD HAVE MADE SURE WE FUNDED OUR BORDER PATROL.

THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT BUT AT THE DIRECTION OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT, THE CONGRESSMAN REJECTED THAT AND WE STILL HAVE A BROKEN BORDER AS A RESULT.

>> CONGRESSMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE 30 SECONDS?

SCH SURE.

>> SURE.

THIS IS THE MOST FLIMSY OF ARGUMENTS WHATSOEVER.

WE ACTUALLY PASSED IN THE HOWPSZ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MORE THAN A YEAR AGO.

H.R.-2 THIS THE WOULD HAVE SECURED OUR BORDER, ENDED THE CATCH AND RELEASE, IMPLEMENTED THE REMAIN IN MEXICO AND UNDONE THE DAMAGE DONE BY THE BIDEN-HARRIS ADMINISTRATION.

IT IS THE WEAKEST ARGUMENT AND EVEN NOT BASED IN FACT.

THERE WAS NEVER A VOTE IN CONGRESS THAT WAS FOR THE OUTLINE THAT HE DESCRIBED.

IT NEVER MADE IT THROUGH THE SENATE.

IT DIDN'T EVEN HAVE ENOUGH DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE TO PASS BUT YET THIS IS HIS ARGUMENT WHICH IS FRANKLY JUST BASED ON A LIE.

>> SENATOR, 15 SECONDS THEN HOPEFULLY WE WILL MOVE ON.

>> THE BILL THAT THE CONGRESSMAN IS REFERRING TO WAS DRACONIAN AND LACKED FUNDING TO PROPERLY SUPPORT OUR BORDER PATROL AGENTS.

OUR PORTS, OUR COURTS, AND AS A RESULT, IT WASN'T GOING TO GET ANYTHING DONE.

IT HAD ZERO CHANCE.

IT WAS DONE SOLELY FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES AND IT WAS NEVER NEGOTIATED IN A BIPARTISAN WAY.

NEARLY TWO DECADES AGO, CONGRESS CREATED A LAW EFFECTIVELY SHUTTING THE LAW FOR CIVIL CLAIMS AGAINST GUN MANUFACTURING AND DISTRIBUTORS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

>> THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO GO AROUND CURRENT LAW AND TO ACTUALLY USE THE LAW TO SELECTIVELY GO AFTER POLITICAL OPPONENTS.

AND THIS IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF TRYING TO ENACT NATIONWIDE GUN CONTROL BY IMPLEMENTING, YOU KNOW, TORT LIABILITY ON TO THE GUN MANUFACTURERS.

WE HAVE A CRIME PROBLEM IN AMERICA.

WE HAVE A CRIME PROBLEM IN IN NEW YORK STATE.

THAT CRIME PROBLEM COMES FROM CASHLESS BAIL.

IT COMES FROM THE HALT ACT.

IT COMES FROM RAISE THE AGE.

IT CULLS FROM THE INCREDIBLY RECKLESS POLICIES THAT HAVE COME OUT OF ALBANY UNDER THE PARTICIPATION OF MY OPPONENT.

AND THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT GOT TO CHANGE.

IN FACT, MY OPPONENT SAID THAT RESCINDING CASHLESS BAIL WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO REPEAL CASHLESS BAIL.

DISAGREE WITH HIM AND I DISAGREE ON THE LAW FARE THAT IS TRYING TO GO AROUND THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT THAT WE HAVE.

>> SENATOR, TAKE 90 SECONDS TO ANSWER THE QUESTION AND RESPOND TO ANYTHING IN THAT QUESTION YOU WOULD LIKE.

>> YES, THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

FIRST OF ALL, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP.

IN FACT THERE WERE ONLY TWO COUNTIES IN THIS STATE WHERE RIFLE HUNTING OF BEAR AND DEER WAS NOT ALLOWED.

IT WAS LIVINGTON AND ONONDAGA AND IT WAS MY LEGISLATION THAT CHANGED THAT.

IT TOOK YEARS TO DO IT AND WE DID IT.

ALSO I HAVE A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR SPORTSMAN'S CLUBS AND I HAVE HONORED THEM AND SPOKEN AT THEIR MEETINGS.

SO I'M FOR RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP BUT THERE IS GREAT CONSENSUS ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND CERTAINLY IN THE 22 SND DISTRICT THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WEAPONS OF WAR ARE NOT IN THE WRONG HANDS AND A PIECE OF THAT HAS DO WITH IRRESPONSIBLE MANUFACTURING AND SALE OF GUNS.

AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.

AS IT RELATES TO THE COMOMENT ABOUT BAIL, FIRST OF ALL,-- THE COMMENT ABOUT BAIL.

THERE WAS CONSENSUS THAT BAIL LAWS NEEDED REFORM AND THAT CONSENSUS DID NOT JUST COME FROM THE ADVOCATES.

IT KALE FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT.

IT CAME FROM DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.

I WAS NOT IN OFFICE WHEN THOSE BAIL LAWS WERE PASSED.

IF YOU WATCH MY OPPONENT'S MESSAGING AND HIS COMMERCIALS, HE WILL MAKE IT SEEM LIKE I WAS.

BUT THAT SIMPLY IS NO THE TRUE.

>> THANK YOU, SENATOR.

>> CONGRESSMAN, DO YOU WANT 15 SECONDS ON THE ISSUE?

>> SURE.

THESE ARE HIS WORDS, THAT REPEALING CASHLESS BAIL WOULD BE A MISTAKE.

THOSE ARE NOT MY WORDS, SENATOR.

THOSE ARE YOUR WORDS AND I DON'T KNOW A SINGLE LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONAL IN NEW YORK STATE THAT AGREES WITH YOU.

>> SENATOR, 15 SECONDS AND WE WILL MOVE ON.

>> IN MY FOUR YEARS IN THE STATE SENATE, THREE TIMES I WAS A VERY STRONG VOICE IN ADVANCING CHANGES TO THOSE BAIL LAWS THAT WERE FLAWED.

WE GAVE JUDGES GREATER DISCRETION, WE MADE MORE CRIMES BAIL ELIGIBLE AND WE ADDRESSED THE REON FUNDING ISSUE.

I LISTENED AND I RESPONDED AND I HAVE DONE WHAT I HAVE DONE TO MAKE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THOSE LAWS THAT WERE PASSED PRIOR TO ME BEING IN OFFICE.

>> SO, JACK, THOSE WERE SOME OF THE FOUGHT LINES THAT HAVE EMERGED HERE IN NY-22.

WHAT OTHER POINTS ARE DIVISION ARE CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT AND WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE MESSAGING THAT WILL BE MOST EFFECTIVE FOR WINNING VOTES?

>> GOOD QUESTION.

I MEAN THOSE ISSUES THAT YOU ARE HEARING IN CENTRAL NEW YORK ARE THE SAME ONES WE ARE HEARING ACROSS THE STATE.

BORDER AND BORDER SAFETY IS REALLY TOPS, AS IS JUST ANY SAFETY.

BUT WE TALKED A LITTLE ABOUT IT BEFORE, DEMOCRATS ARE REALLY PUSHING ON ABORTION.

THEY'RE PUSHING ON BIRTH CONTROL AND IVF, AND TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE FACT THAT THERE ARE REPUBLICANS IN PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THAT HAVE PUSHED BACK ON THESE.

AND THEN WE ARE ALSO HEARING A LOT IN THIS ELECTION ABOUT RESIDENTS.

AND I FEW OF THESE REALLY HIGH PROFILE, THE SWING DISTRICTS, THERE ARE FOLKS WHO HAVE NOT LIVED IN THE DISTRICT FOR A LONG TIME WE HAVE A MEMBER OF CONGRESS WHO DOESN'T LIVE IN THE DISTRICT ONE WHO LEFT AND CAME BACK AND IN BETWEEN RAN SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO THAT'S BEEN ONE OF THE MORE FUN ISSUES THAT I THINK WE ARE FOLLOWING IN THESE SWING RACES.

>> DAVE, THAT IDEA OF PUBLIC SAFETY WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS A REAL MAJOR FOCUS IN 2022 IN NEW YORK AND WAS SOMETHING THAT REPUBLICANS WERE VERY SUCCESSFUL RUNNING ON.

IN 2024 IT IS A SIMILAR DRUMBEAT WITH THE IDEA OF IMMIGRATION BEING LUMPED INTO THAT AS A PUBLIC SAFETY MESSAGE.

HOW FAR CAN THAT GO IN NEW YORK WHEN THERE ARE DEMOCRATS PUSHING THINGS LIKE ABORTION RIGHTS OR TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT THE PRESENCE OF TRUMP ON THE BALLOT?

WHAT IS THE BALANCE THERE.

>> A COUPLE THINGS.

BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE ISSUES, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE VIEWERS TO HAVE A SET LOOK AT THIS WHAT IS GOING ON HERE AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT A BUNCH OF CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS THAT WERE RESTRICTERRING, BASICALLY AT GREAT POLITICAL COST TO THE DEMOCRATS, ACTUALLY GOING ALL THE WAY UP TO THE TOP COURT IN AN UNPRECEDENTED MANEUVER TO TAKE A BUNCH OF DISTRICTS THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN WON FROM MARGINS BETWEEN 5 AND 15 AND MAKE THEM MORE DEMOCRATIC.

THIS IS NUMBER ONE.

THEN THEY ACTUALLY CHANGED THE COURT SYSTEM SO THAT IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM OR ANYTHING HAPPENS ON ELECTION DAY.

YOU HAVE TO GO TO A DEMOCRATIC COURT IN ALBANY, ERIE, NEW YORK CITY OR WESTCHESTER COUNTY TO HAVE AN ELECTION CASE LAW RAISED TO GET A DEMOCRATIC JUDGE AND THIRD, THIS IS STILL TO PLAY OUT.

WE SEE IT IN NEW YORK CITY.

THE INFLUX OF CRAZY OUTSIDE DARK FOREIGN MONEY.

THEY FOUND IT WITH ERIC ADAMS AND WHEN THIS ELECTION OVER, THEY'RE GOING TO FIND IT IN AMERICA IN A LOT OF RACES.

SO THAT IS THE BOX THAT WE LOOK AT WITH THESE ELECTIONS IN THAT THESE SCALES ARE TILTED AND IF PEOPLE THINK THEY'RE GETTING QUOTE UNPHOTO CARE ELECTIONS IN NEW YORK, THEY'RE NOT, NOTWITHSTANDING THAT, DO I THINK THAT THE REPUBLICANS WILL STILL BE THE HOUSE MAJORITY MAKERS?

I DO.

I DO.

AND IT IS BECAUSE OF THE ISSUES AND SOME OF THE THINGS THEY TALKED ABOUT.

THIS IS RACE HAS BEEN POLARIZED, ALL THE RACES HAVE BEEN POLARIZED ALMOST ALONG GENDER.

YOU CAN CALL IT THE BOYS VERSUS THE GIRLS KIND OF ELECTION, BUT THE ISSUES THAT ARE REALLY SORT OF DRIVING VOTERS ARE BOTH ABORTION AND IMMIGRATION.

IMMIGRATION AS IT RELATES TO A WHOLE LOT OF ISSUES, NOT JUST CRIME BECAUSE CRIME IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE SEEN PLAYED OUT IN COMMUNITIES LIKE IN MONROE COUNTY, WE SAW IT WITH THE MURDER OF TWO YOUNG CHILDREN WITH THEIR PARENTS.

WE SAW IT IN SYRACUSE WITH THE MURDER OF A YOUNG WOMAN.

WE SAW JUST THE OTHER DAY, TWO MEMBERS OF ONE OF THE VENEZUELAN GANGS ARRESTED IN RENSSELAER AND IN BINGHAMTON, A GUY WHO WAS WANTED FOR 23 MURDERS IN VENEZUELA.

SO THE NOTION THAT, YOU KNOW, VIOLENCE AND CRIMINALS AND THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF ILLEGALS THAT WERE LET IN, WERE BAD PEOPLE, NEVER VETTED IS AN ISSUE.

IT MAKES SENSE AND PEOPLE ARE SMART ENOUGH TO SEE THAT.

BUT THE OTHER STUFF GOING ON HERE AND I SAW YOU ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT MINIMUM WAGE, IS THAT THE IMPACT ON LABOR AND THE FACT IS THAT THE DEMOCRATS, THEY NEVER EXPLAIN WHY THEY WANT TO OPEN THE BORDER AND I WILL TELL YOU THEY'RE DOING IT FOR THEIR PARTNERS IN BIG BUSINESS TO DRIVE DOWN AND HOLD DOWN WAGES SO THAT CORPORATE AMERICA CAN MAKE MORE MONEY.

TYPICALLY SOMETHING REPUBLICANS WOULD A-- PEOPLE WOULD ACHEWS REPUBLICANS ARE DOING.

BUT WHO ARE THE MAIN BENEFACTORS OF ILL ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

IT KEEPS PRESSURE ON WAGES.

THOSE ARE REAL THINGS.

AND FINALLY, THIS NOTION THAT DEMOCRATS ARE PEDDLING ALL AROUND THE STATE, THAT WE NEED A FEDERAL ANSWER ON ABORTION, 70% OF AMERICANS THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE A 15 WEEK LIMIT ON ABORTION.

TAKE THAT, TAKE THIS ISSUE TO WASHINGTON AND YOU ARE GOING TO SEE A DIMINISHMENT OF WOMEN'S RIGHTS IN NEW YORK.

A DIMINISHMENT.

IN A 50-50 WASHINGTON, WHICH WHAT YOU HAVE NOW AND WHAT WE HAVE HAD FOR QUITE A WHILE, YOU HAVE DEMOCRAT MEMBERS FROM STATES LIKE OHIO AND OTHER MORE CONSERVATIVE STATES THERE IS NO WAY THEY CAN SUPPORT A LAW THAT LOOKS ANYTHING LIKE NEW YORK'S LAW EVEN IF THEY CALL THEMSELVES PRO-CHOICE.

WOMEN ARE GETTING SOLD A BUNCH OF GOODS FROM POLITICIANS IN NEW YORK LYING TO THEM ABOUT WHAT THE OUTCOME IS GOING TO BE IF THIS GOES TO NATIONAL LEVEL THERE IS NO WAY IN THE CURRENT ENVIRONMENT OR ANY TIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE THERE WILL BE AN ABORTION LAW PASSED IN WASHINGTON THAT WOULD BE ANYWHERE NEAR AS EXPANSIVE AS NEW YORK.

>> THERE HAS BEEN SOME UNPREDICTABILITY WHEN IT COMES TO ABORTION RIGHTS BECAUSE NOR DECADES, THE IDEA WAS THAT ROE V. WADE WAS A SETTLED ISSUE AND THAT WAS NOT THE CASE WITH THE DOBBS DIVISION-- DOBBS DIVISION-- WITH THE DOBBS DECISION.

>> LET'S NOT COULD BE FUSE THE VOARS.

I UNDERSTAND WHY VOTERS WHO CARE ABOUT THE ISSUES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IT.

BUT THE REALITY OF IT, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE REALITY OF IT COULD THE SUPREME COURT TAKE ANOTHER ACTION.

I'M NOT RULING THAT OUT.

DO PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE CONCERNED?

I'M NOT TELLING THEM ON THE BASIS OF DOBBS THAT THEIR FEELINGS ARE UNWARRANTED BUT WHAT I'M TELLING YOU IS THE FACT IS AND THE TRUTH.

>> THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SPEAKER IS SOMEONE INTERESTED IN ... >> IS IS THERE ANY WAY THAT A MORE RESTRICTIVE-- LESS RESTRICTIVE ABORTION LAW COULD BE PASSED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL?

THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE.

>> I WOULD SAY NEVER SAY NEVER IN POLITICS, ESPECIALLY NEW YORK POLITICS.

BUT A COUPLE THINGS YOU DID BRING UP, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE CHANGES TO REDISTRICTING.

THOSE WERE UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEALS.

THE IDEA OF HAVING TO BRING CASES, SAY AT THE LOW LEVEL IS MEANINGFUL IN THOSE FIRST TRIAL COURT DECISIONS BUT ULTIMATELY THOSE DECISIONS HAVE TO GO TO THE COURT OF APPEALS AS WELL SO IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU ARE IN STEUBEN COUNTY OR ALBANY ALBANY COUNTY, THE COURT OF APPEALS HAS THE FINAL SAY.

>> THE COURT THAT IS STACKED THAT IN THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY DOING THE COURT OF APPEALS, THREW OUT A GOVERNOR'S CHOICE, RIGHT?

>> WHEN YOU SAY STACKED, THAT MAKES IT SOUND LIKE IT'S THEY WERE NOT FOLLOWING THE LAW.

THEY FOLLOWED AN ACTUAL PROCESS OF, WHAT WE SAY IS CHECKS AND BALANCES, YOU KNOW.

GRANTED MAYBE THAT JUST MEANS THE PROCESS WAS NOT AS BALANCED AS WE SHOULD HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST.

JACK, I WANT TO PIVOT TO YOU AND THIS IDEA OF ABORTION AND THIS IDEA OF IT BEING ON THE BALLOT BECAUSE IN 2022, GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL TRIED TO FOCUS ON ABORTION AND SEEMED TO HAVE NOT THE GREATEST SUCCESS.

NOW IN 2024, THERE LITERALLY IS LANGUAGE RELATED TO ABORTION ON THE BALLOT, BUT THE CONTEXT IS NEW YORK ALREADY HAS BROAD ABORTION PROTECTIONS.

SO DOES THAT MESSAGE RESONATE AT ALL WITH NEW YORKERS?

OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE JUST DON'T FEEL MOTIVATED TO VOTE ON FOR THE AVERAGE VOTER?

>> WELL, I GUESS WE'LL SEE THAT SOME OF THAT IN THE RESULTS.

BUT I THINK REALLY, I THINK VOTERS, MOST VOTERS ARE SMART.

AND THEY'RE SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT STATE POLICY AND WHAT IS FEDERAL POLICY AND THEY'RE HEARING, JUST LIKE YOU ARE SAYING, THEY'RE HEARING FROM REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS WHO ARE SAYING THEY WANT TO BAN ABORTION.

AND THEY'RE VOTING NOT BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE THE PRACTICALITY AS DAVE SAID ABOUT SOMETHING PASSING BUT THEY WANT TO VOTE FOR PEOPLE WHO SHARE THEIR VALUES AND SO I DO THINK THAT ABORTION IS GOING TO MATTER AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN SOME OF THESE FEDERAL CASES.

>> I 100% AGREE WITH JACK ON THAT.

I THINK THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THERE ARE CAMPAIGNS THAT ARE SAYING THAT MANY OF THESE CANDIDATES WILL BAN ABORTION.

THE CANDIDATES THEMSELVES ARE 1,000% CLEAR THAT THEY WILL NOT EVER VOTE TO BAN ABORTION.

SO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE, AND DAVE I PUT THIS TO YOU AND TO THE MEDIA, THE GUARD RAILS OF OUR DEMOCRACY ARE SOMEWHAT IN OUR HANDS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN LITIGATED.

ANYWHERE THE NATIONAL CAMPAIGN IS SAYING THE REPUBLICAN IS GOING TO BAN ABORTION.

WHEN THEY'RE ON THE RECORD SAYING THEY'RE GOING NOT GOING.

THEY NEVER WILL.

>> IS THERE A NATURAL THOUGHT PATTERN TO SAYING IF YOU ARE SUPPORTING SAY MICHAEL LAWLER, REPUBLICAN IN THE HUDSON VALLEY IS INCUMBENT, MARK MOLINARO, REPUBLICAN INCUMBENT IN THE HUDSON VALLEY, BY SUPPORTING THEM, YOU ARE THEREFORE SUPPORTING REPUBLICAN CONTROL OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES UNDERSTAND THEY MIGHT HAVE CERTAIN AGENDA, MARK MOLINARO MIGHT NOT GO FOR THAT AGENDA.

MIKE LAWLER MIGHT NOT GO FOR IT, BUT UNLESS THEY'RE THE DECIDING VOTE, THE FACT THAT THEY VOTED FOR MIKE JOHNSON TO BE SPEAKER IS A DE FACTO SUPPORT OF SOME OF THE ANTIABORTION POSITIONS.

>> AND SO I DO THINK SOME OF THE MORE EFFECTIVE ADS THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE RUN TALK ABOUT HOW YOU CAN'T TRUST REPUBLICANS ON THIS ISSUE.

I THINK THAT'S FAIR.

I DON'T AGREE WITH IT, BUT I THINK IT'S FAIR.

BUT I THINK THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN ACTUALLY RUNNING AN OUTRIGHT LIE, WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN LITERALLY, DAVE, I MEAN TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TELLING LIES ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OUTRIGHT LIES, 100% THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF WHAT THESE CANDIDATES HAVE SAID THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT A BAN ON ABORTION.

AND YOU KNOW, DO I AGREE IT IS I AFFAIR,000?

I 1,000% AGREE IT IS A FAIR ISSUE.

DO I AGREE THAT YOU CAN CALL INTO DOUBT WHY YOU WANT TO PUT A REPUBLICAN IN THE HOUSE IF YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT THEN SAY THAT BUT DON'T LIE ABOUT IT.

DON'T-- I MEAN, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE CAMPAIGNS MOST OF THEM HAVE REALLY BOILED DOWN TO.

AND AGAIN I'LL GO BACK TO THE MEDIA.

THEY DON'T CARE.

THEY HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING TO FACT CHECK.

ZERO.

THAT'S A WHOLE SEPARATE CONVERSATION.

>> AND NOTHING I LIKE MORE THAN TALKING ABOUT THE MEDIA BUT WE CAN DO THAT OFF LINE.

JACK, ASIDE FROM ISSUES, THERE IS ALSO A LOT OF FOCUS ON PERSONALITIES WHICH HAVE DEMOCRATS TRYING TO CONNECT REPUBLICANS TO FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP WHO IS GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT THIS YEAR AND REPUBLICANS TRYING TO TIE DEMOCRATS, ESPECIALLY THOSE FROM THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND RUNNING FOR CONGRESS, TO GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL HERE.

IN NY 22, BRANDON WILLIAMS HAD ABOUT JOHN MAN MANNION SAYING HE WAS KATHY HOAK UM'S MAN IN ALBANY.

ARE THEERSDZ OF-- ARE EITHER OF THOSE MESSAGES RESONANT OR DOES IT DEPEND WHERE YOU ARE; FOR EXAMPLE ON LONG ISLAND IS IT BETTER TO BE ATTACHED TO DONALD TRUMP THAN HERE IN MAYBE THE UPSTATE AREA IS THE ABOUT ITER TO BE ATTACHED TO GOVERNOR HOCHUL.

HOW DO YOU THINK ABOUT THOSE RELATIONSHIPS?

>> WELL, I THINK THEY'RE BOTH EFFECTIVE, DEPENDING ON YOUR AUDIENCE, RIGHT?

I THINK-- I DO THINK A LOT OF REPUBLICANS DON'T LIKE GOVERNOR HOCHUL AND A LOT OF DEMOCRATS DON'T LIKE DONALD TRUMP.

I THINK THE REALITY IS IN THESE RACES, JUST LIKE IN EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE COUNTRY, THEY ARE CLOSE RACES.

THERE ARE VERY FEW UNDECIDED VOTERS.

AND SO IF YOU CAN FIND A WAY TO WEIGH DOWN YOUR OPPONENT-- AND ESPECIALLY FOR THE CHALLENGERS WHO MAY BE LESS KNOWN, HAVE, YOU KNOW, SMALLER PROFILES THAN PERHAPS THE INCUMBENTS, I THINK THAT CAN BE VERY EFFECTIVE.

>> LOOKING AT THE 2022 RESULTS HERE IN THE CENTRAL NEW YORK, BRANDON WILLIAMS GOT LESS THAN 51% OF THE VOTE IN THE HUDSON VALLEY REPUBLICAN MIKE LAWLER GOT LESS THAN 51%.

SAME STORY FOR MOLINARO AND LONG ISLAND GOT 52% AND AS DAVE POINTED OUT, WE HAVE HAD RESTRICTING-- REDISTRICTING MAKING SOME OF THE DISTRICTS MORE FAVORABLE FOR DEMOCRATS, LARGELY AROUND THE MARGINS.

SO JACK, WITH THAT BACKDROP, WHAT DO YOU THINK IS REASONABLE TO EXPECT FROM SORT OF A SHIFT IN THESE NUMBERS ALMOST WITHOUT EVEN DOING ANYTHING?

WITHOUT ANY OF THESE CAMPAIGNS?

WITHOUT ANY OF THESE ISSUE ADS?

>> DO I THINK THE REDISTRICTING HELP THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES?

BROADLY I DO.

AND AGAIN THIS WAS A TORTURED PROCESS THAT WENT THROUGH THE COURTS AND ENDED UP WITHIN AN APPROVED MAP.

GERRYMANDERING IS SOMETHING THAT IS BEING PRACTICED VERY VICIOUSLY BY BOTH PARTIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

BUT I THINK IN THESE CLOSE RACES, EVERY LITTLE BIT HELPS AND THAT HAS TO HELP THE DEMOCRATS A LITTLE.

>> DAVE, HOW DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE STARTING POINT FOR THESE RACES NOW?

>> WELL, LOOK, I THINK THAT'S ALL FAIR.

I AGREE WITH JACK.

OBVIOUSLY YOU WOULD RATHER BE IN A LITTLE BETTER POSITION TO START FROM THAN A WORSE POSITION.

I DO THINK THAT THE TWO ASPECTS IN PLAY IS ONE THERE IS CERTAIN POWER TO INCUMBENCY THAT WE ALL APPRECIATE AND BEING THE INCUMBENT HELPS VIS-A-VIS BEING KNOWN AND IF YOU DO A GOOD JOB, I THINK THAT HELPS TO TRANSLATE.

THE THINK THE SECOND THING AND IT GOES BACK TO WHAT YOU GUYS WERE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT BEFORE THAT IS THAT YOU KNOW, IN THIS ELECTION, OPPOSED TO SOME OTHER ELECTIONS, PRESIDENT TRUMP IS NOT A BOAT ANCHOR ON THESE RACES.

IN FACT IN A LOT OF THESE DISTRICTS HE IS THE OPPOSITE.

HE IS THE BALLAST.

THERE ARE MANY DISTRICTS IN NEW YORK WHERE HE IS UP, WHERE HE HAD BEEN DOWN BEFORE.

SO, YOU KNOW, IN THAT REGARD, YOU KNOW, CIENGD OF A KIND OF A BETTER ENVIRONMENT FOR THESE MEMBERS TO RUN IN THAN EXISTED BEFORE.

AND ALSO ON THE NEGATIVE SIDE FOR THE DEMOCRATS, I HAVE NEVER SEEN AN INCUMBENT GOVERNOR WITH NUMBERS LIKE THIS IN AS POOR AS GOVERNOR HOCHUL'S ARE AND HONESTLY I CAN'T PUT THIS ONE SINGLE THING TO ACCOUNT FOR IT.

BUT THEY ARE WHAT THEY ARE.

AND I THINK THAT COMBINATION AS WELL AS SORT OF THE IMPLOSION IN NEW YORK CITY CREATES A REALLY, YOU KNOW, CHALLENGING ENVIRONMENT FOR THEM IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE STATE, RIGHT, WHERE FOLKS LOOK AROUND AND THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY'RE SEEING.

SO I THINK THOSE THINGS SORT OF PLAY INTO REPUBLICANS FAVOR.

>> SPEAKING ABOUT GOVERNOR HOCHUL'S UNFAVORABILITY, THE ONLY POLITICIAN TITION WHO COMES CLOSE TO MATCHING HER IN NEW YORK IS FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP WHOSE UNFAVORABILITY RATINGS ARE A LITTLE HIGHER THAN THE GOVERNOR ACCORDING TO THE LATEST SIENNA COLLEGE RESEARCH INSTITUTION POLL.

>> OVERALL I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU LOOK AT IT BY CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS.

OVERALL YOU ARE 100% RIGHT.

THE NUMBERS ARE HEAVILY SKEWED BY NEW YORK CITY.

YOU GO OUT TO LONG ISLAND AND THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS AND AGAIN THESE CONTESTED CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS, RIGHT, WHERE IT ACTUALLY MATTERS.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IN THOSE DISTRICTS, THAT'S WHERE TRUMP ACTUALLY IS DOING BETTER THAN HE HAD DONE IN PREVIOUS CYCLES AND IS MORE COMPETITIVE.

HE DOES STILL HAVE HIGH NEGATIVES, SO DOES GOVERNOR HOCHUL BUT TRUMP'S NEGATIVES ARE NOT WHAT THEY ONCE WERE AND HAS CREATED A BETTER OPPORTUNITY FOR REPUBLICANS TO COMPETE.

>> FOR VIEWERS, FORMER PRESIDENT'S NET UNFAVORABLES IN THE SUBURBS WHICH IS WHERE A LOT OF THESE CONGRESSIONAL RACES ARE OCCURRING IS SMALLER THAN SAY THE NET UNFAVORABLE FOR GOVERNOR HOCHUL.

JACK, I KNOW WE'VE SORT OF BEEN ABLE TO PLAY IT SAFE BY SAYING WE'LL HAVE TO SEE ON A LOT OF THESE THINGS, BUT NOW IS WHERE I'M GOING TO KIND OF HOLD YOUR FEET TO THE FIRE AND SAY, ARE THERE ANY RACES WHERE YOU ARE ANTICIPATING INCUMBENTS TO LOSE?

ARE THERE ANY DEMOCRATS IN NARROWLY HELD CONGRESSIONAL SEATS LIKE TOM SWAZY WHERE YOU THINK THEY HAVE A PICKUP OR REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED SEATS WHERE YOU THINK, YEAH, IT'S LIKELY THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO WIN?

>> YEAH, I MEAN LOOK, I DO THINK THE INCUMBENTS ARE BROADLY GOING TO DO WELL, BUT I TELL YOU, I THINK IN NEW YORK 22, I THINK JOHN MANNION IS GOING TO WIN THAT RACE.

I THINK HE HAS BROUGHT OF ENERGY AND RESULTS FROM HIS TIME IN ALBANY.

I THINK HE HAS GOT REALLY STRONG SUPPORT FROM ORGANIZED LABOR, WHICH IS GOING TO HELP PUT HIM OVER THE TOP.

AND I ALSO LIKE LAURA GILLEN TO WIN HER RACE IN LONG ISLAND.

I THINK THOSE ARE GOING TO BE THE TWO UPSETS.

>> WE RECENTLY SAW AS WE RECORDED THIS A FEW DAYS AGO, A POLL CAME OUT THAT SAID HAS GILLEN UP COMFORTABLY, A MARGIN BOTH CAMPAIGNS ARE QUICK TO DOWNPLAY BUT IT DOES SEEM IF, I TO BE IN A POSITION, I WOULD RATHER BE IN HERS.

DAVE, SAME BASIC QUESTION TO YOU.

ARE THERE ANY CHALLENGERS THAT YOU THINK ARE GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL ON NOVEMBER 5?

>> CHALLENGERS I THINK ITSELF BEST CHANCE MIGHT BE ESPOSITO VERSUS RYAN IN 18.

I THINK IT'S A TOUGH CHALLENGE FOR HER TO FACE POPULAR INCUMBENT THERE.

FORMER COUNTY EXECUTIVE.

HAS WORKED TO CRAFT A MORE MODERATE IMAGE.

BUT I THINK IF ANYONE MIGHT HAVE A CHANCE FOR AN UPSET, IT'S ALLISON THERE.

LOOK, I THINK REPUBLICANS HAVE A FAIRLY BROAD MAP IN NEW YORK, BROADER THAN MOST PEOPLE WOULD HAVE EXPECTED.

WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT IT EARLIER, RIGHT?

WE HAVE MEMBERS SITTING IN CONGRESS NOW WHO WON SEATS THAT WERE EVERYWHERE FROM BIDEN 7 AS BIDEN WON BY SEVEN POINTS TO SEATS LIKE MICHAEL LAWER'S WHERE BIDEN WON BY 14 OR 15 POINTS.

THAT IS A CHALLENGE TO HOLD ON TO ALL OF THAT.

ESPECIALLY IN A PRESIDENTIAL YEAR.

ALL THAT SAID, I THINK WE HAVE GREAT INCUMBENTS.

THEY'VE DONE THE WORK NECESSARY AND I THINK THEY'RE ALL COMPETITIVE RIGHT NOW.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, I THINK THAT THE ISSUE SETS ARE ON THEIR SIDE, FROM THE NATIONAL LEVEL WHICH I THINK WILL HELP BRING THEM OVER.

>> WELL, JACK, IF WE HAVE BEEN HAVING THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT DONALD TRUMP IN HIS FIRST ELECTION IN 2016, ONE OF THE THINGS WE WOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS CONTROL OF THE STATE SENATE AND WHETHER DEMOCRATS COULD FINALLY WREST IT AWAY FROM REPUBLICANS OR WHETHER THEY COULD MAINTAIN THEIR HOLE MAJORITY.

NOW THE DYNAMIC IS VERY DIFFERENT WITH DEMOCRATS HAVING ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF THE STATE SENATE.

ARE YOU ANTICIPATING THAT BOTH HOUSES OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE WILL REMAIN IN DEMOCRATIC CONTROL AFTER THE ELECTION?

>> I DO.

THERE MAY BE A RACE HERE OR THERE THAT SWINGS, BUT I CONFIDENTLY EXPECT DEMOCRATS TO HOLD THEIR TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY IN THE SENATE AND IN THE ASSEMBLY.

>> DAVE, ARE YOU FOCUSING ON THE STATE LEGISLATURE AT ALL, WHETHER IT IS MAYBE A HANDFUL OF CONTESTED RACES OR SOME SORT OF TSUNAMI THAT WE ARE ALL NOT ANTICIPATING?

>> I DON'T SEE A TSUNAMI ANYWHERE.

I DO SEE THE SENATE BEING COMPETITIVE AND ABLE TO PICK UP TWO SEATS; ONE ACTUALLY IN THE SYRACUSE AREA.

I THINK NICK CAN WIN SENATE SEAT 50.

AND THEN DOWN IN THE CITY, STEVE JN IS RUNNING A GOOD RACE AND I THINK THEY CAN PICK UP THAT SEAT AGAIN.

AND SO I THIS I THEY'RE POISED FOR A COUPLE PICKUPS THERE.

I THINK THEY HOLD EVERYWHERE ELSE WHICH I THIS I WOULD BE GREAT FOR THEM.

IN THE SCHLEP, THEY HAVE AN INTERESTING AND THIS IS AN OUTSIDE SHOT, THEY HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO ACTUALLY GET THE THREE SEATS THAT WOULD BREAK THE SUPER MAJORITY WHICH WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR BEING ABLE TO SUSTAIN VETOES.

>> OH VETOES.

WITH GREG THIELE RETIRING, THAT SEAT IS UP IN PLAY.

119.

BUTTENSCHON, THAT'S A VERY TRUMPY DISTRICT AND SHE COULD BE IN TROUBLE THERE AND THEN BACK TO SYRACUSE.

I KNOW STIRPE IS VERY POPULAR, BUT TIM KELLY HAS WORKED REALLY HARD AND I THINK HAS RUN A CEENT CAMPAIGN AND I THINK HAS THE CAMPAIGN TO-- HAS THE POTENTIAL TO SURPRISE AND THEN FINALLY MY OLD STOMPING GROUND NEW YORK 113.

THE ONLY REASON WHY-- THERE ARE A COUPLE REASONS WHY I THINK IT COULD BE IN PLAY BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT REASONS THAT IT HAS A SLIGHT REPUBLICAN ADVANTAGE.

AND IF REPUBLICANS ARE MOTIVATED AND DO TURN OUT AND DO COME DOWN THE LINE A BIT, THEN JEREMY MESSINO WHO HAS RUN A VERY NICE RACE COULD BE COMPETITIVE AND COULD BE A SHOCKER.

SO THOSE ARE THE FOUR IN THE ASSEMBLY THAT I HAVE MY EYES ON.

SOME BETTER CHANCES.

>> I'M THINKING ABOUT YOUR COLLEAGUE, IN THE STATE SENATE, ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR PICKUPS IN THE HUDSON VALLEY WITH THE CAVEAT, WE HAVE 30 TO 45 SECONDS?

>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

I RECOGNIZE THAT REPUBLICANS ARE RUNNING STRONG RACES IN THE THOSE PLACES THAT THEY'VE SAID, BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE STRONG DEMOCRATIC CHALLENGES PEOPLE, INCLUDING ONE FORMER INCUMBENT, WHO HAVE A CHANCE TO COME BACK AND TO ACTUALLY PICK UP SEATS, MAYBE NEGATING THAT OR MAKING A DEMOCRATIC WIN.

>> AND UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE TODAY.

MY THANKS TO DAVID CATALFAMO PRESIDENT OF CAPITAL PUBLIC STRATEGIES MEDIA AND JACK O'DONNELL, MANAGING PARTNER AT O'DONNELL AND ASSOCIATES.

IF WOULD YOU LIKE TO REVISIT THIS EPISODE OR DIG INTO THE CONNECT NEW YORK ARCHIVES, VISIT WCNY.ORG/CONNECT NEW YORK.

CHECK OUT THE CAPITOL PRESS ROOM OR WHEREVER YOU DOWNLOAD PODCASTS.

ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE TEAM AT WCNY, I'M DAVID LOMBARDO.

THANKS FOR WATCHING AND ONE LAST TIME, PLEASE VOTE BY NOVEMBER 5.