>> JANUARY MARKED THE START OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION AT THE STATE CAPITOL, WHERE WE RECENTLY HEARD GOVERNOR CUOMO AND THE LEADERS OF STATE LEGISLATURE LAY OUT THEIR LEGISLATIVE AND FISCAL AGENDAS FOR THE YEAR.

ON THIS EPISODE OF CONNECT NEW YORK, WE'LL EXAMINE THESE 2021 PRIORITIES AND CONSIDER THE STRUGGLES THAT LAY AHEAD IN ALBANY.

STICK AROUND.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

♪ ♪ HELLO AND WELCOME TO CONNECT NEW YORK.

I'M DAVID LOMBARDO, HOST OF WCNY'S THE CAPITOL PRESS ROOM.

EARLIER THIS MONTH, GOVERNOR CUOMO UNVEILED HIS $193 BILLION SPENDING PLAN FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK, KICKING OFF WHAT IS LIKELY TO BE A CONTENTIOUS FEW MONTHS BETWEEN HIM AND THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITIES IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

EVEN IN THE BEST OF THE TIMES, ONE PARTY RULE IN ALBANY HAS NOT ALWAYS PRODUCED A UNIFIED CHORUS WHEN IT COMES TIME TO PASSING A BUDGET.

THIS YEAR, WITH CUOMO AND LEGISLATIVE LEADERS AT ODDS OVER THE BEST WAY TO ERASE A PROJECTED MULTI-BILLION-DOLLAR DEFICIT CAUSED BY THE PANDEMIC, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT FINDING A SWEET HARMONY BY MARCH 31 WILL BE EASY.

ON TODAY'S EDITION OF CONNECT NEW YORK, WE WILL BREAK DOWN THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET, WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE SEEMINGLY EMBOLD ERNED LEGISLATIVE LEADERS AND MUCH MORE.

AND TO DO ALL OF THAT, I'M JOINED BY OUR TRUSTY TEAM OF REPORTERS, POLITICAL ADVISORS AND SOFTBALL SUPER STARS.

AND THEY ARE BERNADETTE HOGAN, CAPITOL REPORTER FOR THE NEW YORK POST, MONICA KLEIN FOUNDER OF SENECA STRATEGIES, A POLITICAL CONSULTING FIRM SUPPORTING PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATES AND CAUSES.

BILL MAHONEY LONG SUFFERING BUFFALO BILLS FAN AND CAPITOL REPORTER FROM POLITICO NEW YORK AND BILL O'REILLY, PARTNER WITH THE NOVEMBER TEAM, A POLITICAL CONSULTING FIRM THAT WORKS WITH REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES.

I WANT TO KICK OFF OUR DISCUSSION WITH A CLIP FROM GOVERNOR CUOMO'S BUDGET ADDRESS, WHERE HE LAID OUT A PROPOSED STATE TAX HIKE HE IS RELUCTANTLY ADVANCING AS PART OF HIS PLAN TO CLOSE THE STATE BUDGET GAP.

>> IF YOU RAISED INCOME TAXES TO THE TOP RATE WHICH IS CURRENTLY 8.8, IF YOU RAISED IT TO 10.8, AND THEN THE STATE RATE AT 10.8 AND THE CITY WOULD BE A TOTAL OF 14.7, WHICH WOULD BE THE HIGHEST INCOME TAX IN THE NATION, YOU WOULD RAISE $1.5 BILLION ON $9 BILLION.

YOU WOULD THEN HAVE TO CUT DRAMATICALLY.

>> BILL MAHONEY, THAT SOUNDED LIKE A SALESMAN WHO DID NOT BELIEVE IN HIS PRODUCT.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE GOVERNOR'S DECADE PLUS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE TOP INCOME TAX RATE AND BASED ON THE HISTORY, ARE YOU SURPRISED TO SEE HIM MAKE THIS PROPOSAL?

>> I GOVERNOR HAS NEVER BEEN TERRIBLY SUPPORTIVE OF RAISING TAXES ON THE RICH.

IT'S SOMETHING HE HAS HAD TO DEAL WITH A CHORUS OF VOICES FROM THE LEFT THROUGHOUT HIS ENTIRE TENURE.

HIS FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE, THEY DID DO THIS KIND OF EMERGENCY DECEMBER SESSION WHERE THEY EXTENDED SOME TAX RATES THAT HAD BEEN UNDER THE OTHER ADMINISTRATION, BUT SINCE THEN IT HAS NEVER BEEN SOMETHING HE SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED.

HE HAS BEEN ONE OF THE MODERATE DEMOCRATS WHO MADE THE ARGUMENT THAT IF YOU TAX THE RICH, THEY'LL LEAVE THE STATE AND LEAVE US OFF WORSE THAN BEFORE, MUCH TO THE CONSTERNATION OF LEGISLATIVE DEMOCRATS WHO DISAGREE WITH THAT.

AND IT'S NOT TERRIBLY SURPRISING EVEN IF MORE OF A BUDGET CRUNCH THAN EVER BEFORE, HE IS RESISTING THIS AND HE HAS BEEN SINCE THIS CRISIS STARTED LAST SPRING WHEN IT FIRST CAME UP AND HIS ADMINISTRATION, HE SAID THE RICH IS ALREADY FLEEING, YOU CAN'T SQUEEZE MONEY FROM A ROCK.

AND EVEN AS OF NOW, THERE IS CERTAINLY A CLEAR DEGREE OF HESITANCY ON HIS END.

>> MONICA, SINCE 2018, YOU HAVE HELPED GET A LOT OF DEMOCRATS ELECTED TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE WHO ARE VERY UNHAPPY WITH THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED TAX INCREASE, SAYING IT DOESN'T ASK ENOUGH OF WEALTHY NEW YORKERS.

WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE THEY'RE PROPOSING?

>> SURE, I MEAN NOT ONLY DOES THE TAX HIKE DOES NOT ASK ENOUGH BUT RETURNS MONEY TO THE WEALTHY IN 2024 AND 2025.

IT IS ESSENTIALLY NOT EVEN A TAX INCREASE.

IT'S MAYBE A TEMPORARY LOAN AND THEN WE GIVE THEM A REBATE.

THE CURRENT LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL CALLING FOR SIX TAXES THAT WOULD RAISE $50 BILLION.

THIS IS EVERYTHING FROM CAPITAL GAINS TAX TO FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAXES, WEALTH TAXES AND ACTUAL PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX THAT FIXES OUR FLAT INCOME TAX THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.

AND THE REASON THEY'RE CALLING FOR $50 BILLION IS BECAUSE WE DON'T JUST HAVE A DEFICIT OF $15 BILLION, LIKE THE GOVERNOR IS CLAIMING.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE SO MUCH MORE NEED THAT HE SORT OF DOESN'T ACKNOWLEDGE OR DID US NOT CARE ABOUT.

HE IS CONSTANTLY CUTTING MEDICAID, THE EDUCATION SYSTEM IS UNDERFUNDED, SUNY AND CUNY AND PRE-K-12.

THERE ARE SO MANY MORE FUNDING NEEDS THAT GROUPS BELIEVE NEED TO BE FUNDED AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE CALLING FOR SO MUCH MORE REVENUE THAN THE GOVERNOR IS.

>> AGREE, AND TO BE CLEAR, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET DEFICIT, IT'S BASED ON A PROJECT OF SPENDING CAPPED BY THE GOVERNOR TO ABOUT 2% ACCORDING TO HIS BOOKS, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE IF YOU LOOK TO OTHER ACCOUNTANTS.

THE NOTION OF RANK AND FILE DEMOCRATS IN THE LEGISLATURE CLAMORING FOR NEW AND HIGHER TAXES IS NOT NEW.

WHAT SEEMS NEW, AT LEAST TO ME, THE RHETORIC FROM THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS.

WHAT ARE THEY SAYING AND HOW SERIOUSLY DO YOU TAKE THEIR STATEMENTS?

>> RIGHT.

SO THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS, OF COURSE, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER ANDREA STEWARD-COUSINS AND CARL HEASTIE HAVE SAID THEY'RE SUPPORTIVE OF A MORE PROGRESSIVE TAX STRUCTURE AND THERE IS A MYRIAD OF BILLS THAT LAWMAKERS HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS BUT MORE SO WITHIN THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, YOU KNOW, THEY GO FROM STOCK TRANSFER TAX, TO TAXING SECOND HOMES OR MORE OF WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS, AND ALSO MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES TAX.

NEITHER LEADER HAS YET TO COMMIT TO ONE SPECIFIC PROPOSAL OR SEVERAL PROPOSALS, BUT, I MEAN AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE GOVERNOR HAS BEEN THREATENING THAT IF WASHINGTON THERE IS NOT ENOUGH FEDERAL AID THAT COMES THROUGH, THAT TAX HIKES IN SOME DEGREE WILL HAVE TO CUP.

BUT AGAIN COME.

BULL AS BILL SAID, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING HE WOULD WANT TO DO.

P HE WOULD REGARDS GET REVENUE FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE WHICH REMAINS TO BE SEEN OR GET THE FEDERAL DOLLARS.

THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS HAVE KIND OF BEEN KEEPING CARDS TO THE VEST.

ON THE ASSEMBLY SIDE THE RANK AND FILE MEMBERS ARE MORE VOCAL, IT SEEMS TO BE, ABOUT WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE.

AND OF COURSE THAT'S MORE ALONG THE LINES OF RAISING TAXES.

>> WELL, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, IS THE REAL INDICATOR OF HOW SERIOUS LAWMAKERS ACTUALLY ARE ABOUT THIS, THEIR BUDGET PROPOSALS, YOU KNOW, THE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY WILL ACTUALLY INTRODUCE THEIR OWN PROPOSALS, IS THAT GOING TO BE THE FIRST EXAMPLE OF THEIR ACTIONS MATCHING THEIR RHETORIC?

>> RIGHT, WELL, AT THE END OF THE DAY IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN TO BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE LEADERS, THE THREE PEOPLE.

SO AND THIS, WE SAW LAST YEAR WITH SEVERAL OTHER ISSUES; NAMELY BAIL REFORM, WHICH YOU HAD A LARGE NUMBER OF VERY VOCAL MEMBERS WHO WERE SAYING, YOU KNOW, THEY WEREN'T SHY ABOUT WHAT THEY WANTED BUT WHEN IT CAME DOWN TO NEGOTIATIONS, IT WAS DONE BETWEEN THE GOVERNOR, THE LEADER OF THE SENATE AND THE LEADER OF THE ASSEMBLY.

SO WHAT YOU ARE HEARING ON ONE END, WITH, YOU KNOW, THE GAG WILL OF MEMBERS, WAY NOT BE P EXACTLY WHAT THE LEADER OF THE ASSEMBLY OR SENATE ARE WILLING TO ORDER AND BARTER AND TRADE FOR AND NEGOTIATE WITH THE GOVERNOR.

AND P I MEAN THE BUDGETS THE BUDGET IS DUE TO BE PASSED APRI.

THERE IS A LOT OF TIME BEFORE THEN.

>> A LOT OF TIME IN ALBANY DEFINITELY.

BILL O'REILLY FOR THE LAST DECADE, NEW YORK REPUBLICANS RUNNING FOR STATE OFFICE INEVITABLY BRING UP THE TAX INCREASES DEMOCRATS ADOPTED IN RESPONSE TO THE LAST MAJOR BUDGET CRISIS FOLLOWING THE GREAT RECESS.

DO YOU SEE AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE CONVERSATION AMONG THE DEMOCRATS IN POWER WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY ABOUT WHETHER TO RAISE INCOME TAXES BUT HOW MUCH TO DO IT, OR AM I BEING TOO CYNICAL AND DO YOU, LIKE LONG ISLAND REPUBLICAN STATE SENATOR BILL BOYLE THINK STATE LAWMAKERS SHOULD GET BEHIND HIGHER TAXES FOR MILLIONAIRES IF IT MEANS LESS PAYING FOR OWS THOUSANDAIRES.

>> WHAT PROGRESSIVES WANT IS NOT FAIR TAXATION FOR THE WEALTHY.

THEY WANT P UNFAIR TAXATION FOR THE WEALTHY AND THEY MAY VERY WELL GET IT IN NEW YORK STATE.

THE HIGHEST MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES AND MANY OF THEM TRULY AR ARE, PAY A GRADUATED RATE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, NOT AT THE STATE AS MONICA POINTED OUT.

WHAT THEY WANT IS TAX UNFAIRNESS FOR A WHOLE GROUP.

WHETHER THAT'S WHAT WE DO POLICY WISE TO GET THROUGH THIS, LET'S BE STRAIGHT ABOUT IT.

I THINK REPUBLICANS, THE MILLIONAIRE AND BILL BILLIONAIRE TAX POLL REAT WELL AMONG REPUBLICANS IN LARGE PARTS OF NEW YORK STATE.

IT'S NOT POLITICALLY ADVANTAGEOUS TO JUMP OUT AGAINST IT IN MOST OF THE STATE, PARTICULARLY IN CENTRAL, WESTERN UPSTATE NEW YORK.

BUT I THINK REPUBLICANS SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS IN NEW YORK, FOR EXAMPLE, GETTING-- THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY, THIS WHOLE CRISIS, IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE ENTIRE STATE, STATE COMPTROLLER CANDIDATE HARRY WILSON IN 2010 SPOKE A LOT ABOUT DOING A FULL AUDIT OF THE STATE WHICH HASN'T BEEN DONE IN NEARLY A CENTURY WHERE YOU WOULD, USING DATA, WOULD YOU CHECK THE EFFICACY OF ALL THE PROGRAMS IN THE STATE AND SEE IF YOU COULD DO, CONSOLIDATIONS, DO MAJOR STRUCTURAL THINGS BECAUSE THE REAL PROBLEM IN THE STATE IS THE STRUCTURAL PROBLEM.

WE'LL GET THROUGH COVID EVENTUALLY.

THE FEDERAL DOLLARS THAT WILL COME TO US, I ASSUME, ARE GOING TO RUN OUT EVENTUALLY AND WE ARE GOING TO BE STUCK WITH THE SAME SITUATION.

SO I THINK REPUBLICANS SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT STRUCTURAL THINGS AND THEY SHOULD AGAIN BE A PARTY OF IDEAS, NOT JUST A PARTY OF GRIEVANCES HOWEVER VALID SOME OF THOSE MAY BE.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO BE OFFERING SOLID SUGGESTIONS THAT ARE APPEALING TO THE PUBLIC EDITORIAL BOARDS AND EVEN SOME DEMOCRATS IN THE LEGISLATURE.

>> AND MONICA, I WANT TO TURN TO YOU ABOUT SOMETHING BILL BROUGHT UP, THAT WORD OF FAIRNESS.

HE WOULD TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, INCREASING TAXES, WE HEAR THE SAME THING ON THE LEFT ABOUT THIS IS WHAT IS FAIR.

WHERE DO YOU DAW DRAW THE LINE?

WHERE DOES A TAX ON A MILLIONAIRE STOP BEING FAIR?

HOW DO YOU DETERMINE HOW MUCH THEY SHOULD PAY?

>> SURE, I MEAN, SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A RELATIVELY UNFAIR REGRESSIVE INCOME TAX SYSTEM IN NEW YORK.

IF YOU MAKE 2 IS THOUSAND DOLLARS OR A MILLION DOLLARS, YOU PAY 6.5% IN STATE TAXES.

WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S FAIR.

>> IS THE TAX RATE OVER%.

>> IF YOU GO UP HIGHER THAN THAT.

IF YOU MAKE 21,000 IT'S 6.4.

IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME.

WHEN IT WAS CREATED A LONG TIME AGO, IF YOU MADE $21,000 VERSUS $50,000, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A LARGER DIFFERENCE.

AND SO WHAT WE ARE CALLING FOR IS FAIRNESS IF YOU MAKE A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER AMOUNT OF MONEY, YOU SHOULD PAY A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER AM TO THE STATE.

WE ARE ALSO CALLING ON THINGS LIKE STOCKS AND BONDS, IF I GO BUY A CUP OF COFFEE, I PAY TAX AND THE MONEY GOES TO HELP BUILDS OUR SCHOOLS AND STREETS.

ABOUT YOU BUY STOCKS AND BONDS, YOU DON'T.

IT IS RELATIVELY SIMPLE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TAX CODE TO SORT OF BRING IT UP TO DATE AND MAKE IT FAIRER.

>> I JUST QUESTION THE WORD FAIR AND HAVE I FOR A LOT OF YEARS.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

AND MAYBE YOU ARE MAKING A MORAL ARGUMENT.

BUT FAIRNESS WOULD BE ONE TAX RATE F. YOU MAKE IT A BILLION DOLLARS AND YOU ARE PAYING 6%, YOU ARE PAYING 6% OF A MILLION.

$20,000 AND YOU PAY 6% IT'S 6% OF 20,000.

HOW IS THAT NOT THE DEFINITION OF FAIR?

>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR DEFINITION OF FAIR.

>> I THINK MONICA IS SAYING THAT FAIRNESS IS BASED ON PAYING WHAT YOU CAN PAY AND NOT NECESSARILY PAYING THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT.

>> I WOULD SAY I MEAN THERE IS NO CHANCE FOR A FLAT TAX IN NEW YORK.

BUT FAIRNESS IS A RATE YOU PAY A PERCENTAGE OF YOUR INCOME BUT THAT'S A LOSING BATTLE.

>> UNFORTUNATELY WE CAN'T HAVE THIS DEBATE TODAY.

HIGHER INCOME TAXES IS NOT THE ONLY REVENUE SOURCE EYED BY THE GOVERNOR WHO IS NOW ON BOARD WITH THE PUSH TO LEGALIZE ONLINE SPORTS WAGERING AFTER HIS ADMINISTRATION INITIALLY MAINTAINED FOR YEARS THAT IT WAS VER BOATEN UNDER THE STATE CONSTITUTION P HERE WHAT IS HE HAD TO SAY ABOUT HIS THIS TOPIC IN HIS BUDGET ADDRESS.

>> WE ALSO HAVE PROPOSALS TO ADD REVENUE, MOBILE SPORTS BETTING, WE THINK COULD RAISE $500 MILLION.

MANY STATES HAVE DONE IT.

HERE THE QUESTION IS NOT REALLY WHETHER OR NOT WE DO MOBILE SPORTS BETTING.

THE QUESTION IS MORE HOW.

WHO MAKES THE PROFIT.

AND THIS IS VERY LUCRATIVE.

UP WITH PROPOSAL IS WE ALLOW CASINOS TO RUN MOBILE SPORTS BETTING.

THAT'S VERY GOOD FOR CASINOS AND THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT CASINOS.

THE SECOND ALTERNATIVE IS TO HAVE THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ACTUALLY GET THE PROFITS FROM MOBILE SPORTS BETTING AND RUN IT THE WAY WE RUN THE STATE LOTTERY, WHICH IS IT IS STATE RUN AND THE STATE GETS ALL THE REVENUE.

I'M WITH THE PEOPLE.

AND I BELIEVE THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE SHOULD GET THE REVENUES.

THIS IS NOT A MONEY MAKER FOR PRIVATE INTERESTS TO COLLECT JUST MORE TAX REVENUE.

WE WANT THE ACTUAL REVENUE FROM THE SPORTS BETTING.

>> BERNADETTE, DO YOU THINK THIS PUSH FROM THE GOVERNOR IS GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE ON THIS ISSUE, WHICH IS LANGUISHED IN PURGATORY OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS WITH ONLY SENATE DEMOCRATS ON BOARD?

>> AT THE END OF THE DAY, DEFINITELY A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION THAN WHAT HE HAS HAD IN THE PAST.

I MEAN IT CERTAINLY IS NEWS THAT HE SAYS HE SUPPORTS MOBILE SPORTS BETTING AND LEGALIZING THAT BECAUSE PRIOR TO THIS HE SAID IT WAS A CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE, SOMETHING THAT WOULD NEED TO BE RECTIFIED IN THE STATE'S CHIEF DOCUMENT.

THAT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IS MOVING THE NEEDLE; HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO ACTUALIZE AND BE, YOU KNOW, A SOURCE OF CHEAP REVENUE THAT WE CAN COUNT ON FOR THIS COMING BUDGET.

AND THE PROPOSAL IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS FAVORED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL SESSION CYCLES.

IT'S GOING TO BE RUN THROUGH THE STATE GAMING COMMISSION SO ESSENTIALLY THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE DETERMINING-- NOT THAT IT WOULDN'T ALREADY REGULATE, BUT FURTHER REGULATION AS OPPOSED TO HAVING IT HOW NEW JERSEY SETS IT UP WITH SEVERAL OPTIONS WHICH IS HOW THE LEGISLATURE FAVORS THIS.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE TO SEE, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING, AS I SAID, THAT WE WILL SEE WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR.

IT WILL BE SEVERAL BUDGETS IN THE FUTURE THAT WE MIGHT SEE REVENUE IN FROM.

BUT JUDGING FROM NEW JERSEY, IT HAS BEEN POPULAR.

NEW YORKERS HAVE BEEN GOING OVER TO NEW JERSEY TO ENGAGE IN THAT BETTING SO WE'LL SEE.

>> MONICA, SPORTS GAMBLING IS NOT A FORM OF PROGRESSIVE TAXATION BY ANY MEANS.

IN FACT, SOME COULD SAY IT'S REGRESSIVE BECAUSE OF THE POPULATION THAT MIGHT BE LEAST ABLE TO AFFORD THIS IS PAYING FOR SOME OF THESE BETTING EXPENSES.

BUT DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS, INCLUDING SOME WHO WERE PREVIOUSLY OPPOSED TO AN ONLINE EXPANSION, ARE WARMING UP TO THIS IDEA BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL REVENUE THAT COULD BE GENERATED A LITTLE BIT THIS YEAR, MUCH MORE IN THE FUTURE.

IS THIS AN ISSUE WHERE YOU THINK THEY'LL RAISE CONCERNS IN ALBANY OR NOT AN ISSUE FOR PROGRESSIVE LAWMAKERS?

>> I THINK IT IS AN ISSUE IN THAT THE GOVERNOR IS SAYING, SORT OF TWO THINGS AT ONCE.

HE IS SAYING $5 BILLION ON TAXES FOR THE RICH IS A DROP IN THE BUCKET AND NOT ENOUGH BUT SIMULTANEOUSLY WE HAVE THIS REVENUE AND WE NEED TO LEGALIZE MOBILE SPORTS BETTING AND MARIJUANA.

HE SAYS WE NEED REVENUE AND NEEDS TO MAKE A DECISION WHERE TO RAISE IT OR WE DON'T NEED REVENUE.

HE HAS TO EXPLAIN WHY WE ARE, YOU KNOW, MANHATTAN INSTITUTE, WHICH IS NOT PARTICULARLY PROGRESSIVE, IS SAYING THAT THESE ARE REGRESSIVE FORMS OF TAXATION, RIGHT?

A TAX ON OFTEN LOWER INCOME PEOPLE AND THE PROPOSAL THE DEMOCRATS ARE PUTTING FORWARD ARE TAXES ON THE ULTRAWEALTHY AGAIN.

I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE CLARITY ON WHY WE ARE CHOOSING REGRESSIVE VERSUS PROGRESSIVE TAXATION.

>> YOU MENTION THE OTHER POTENTIAL REVENUE RAISE THERE WHICH IS THE SALE OF MARIJUANA, WHICH, HE IS PROPOSING FOR THE THIRD TIME IN THREE YEARS.

MA HONE ON MAHONEY, DO THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS WANT TO LEGALIZE MARIJUANA, CUOMO SAYS HE WANTS IT.

IS THIS THE YEAR IT FINALLY HAPPENS?

>> THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF DEBATE OVER THE YEARS OVER WHAT TO DO WITH THE MONEY.

A LOT OF DEMOCRATS PUSH HARD THAT IT SHOULD GO BACK TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN ADVERSELY AFFECTED ON THE WAR ON DRUGS.

AND THERE HAS NEVER BEEN EXPLET CONSENSUS ON WHAT TO DO WITH THIS.

THERE HAVE BEEN SOME MODERATE DEMOCRATS WHO HAVEN'T BEEN SUPPORT OF OF IT IN THE PAST BUT ESPECIALLY IN THE SENATE THERE ARE ENOUGH DEMOCRATS THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE HELD BACK ESPECIALLY IF IT IS LUMPED INTO THE BUDGET.

ONCE THEY'RE DESPERATE FOR REVENUE, I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED THEY FIND A WAY TO DEAL WITH IT THIS YEAR EVEN THOUGH KIND OF LIKE ONLINE GAMBLING IS THE TYPE OF ISSUE THAT MAY NOT BRING REVENUE IMMEDIATELY BUT IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LONGER TERM BUDGETS IMPACTS OF COVID, IT COULD HELP DOWN THE ROAD.

>> THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THE OTHER BILL JUST TALKED ABOUT MARIJUANA WAS AS A CRIMINAL JUSTICE ISSUE AND AS A REVENUE RAISER.

DO YOU THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO BE FOCUSING THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT LEGALIZATION?

>> I DON'T, AND I THINK AT LEAST THE GOVERNOR IS BEING HONEST, BOTH WITH MARIJUANA AND WITH SPORTS BETTING.

THE ONLINE SPORTS BETTING.

THAT IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY.

IT'S ALL ABOUT REVENUE.

AND YOU KNOW, NEW YORK IS GOING INTO THE VICE GAME AND YOU WONDER WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT OTHER VICES.

ARE THEY GOING INTO THE SKIN GAME NEXT?

IT'S ALL ABOUT FINDING WAYS TO MAKE THE MONEY.

ON THE MARIJUANA SIDE, THE THING THAT TELLS ME EVERYTHING IS THAT YOU CAN'T DO HOMEGROWN MARIJUANA.

THAT'S LIKE-- THAT'S GONE.

I'M SOBER BUT THIS ROOM WOULD MAKE AN EXCELLENT PERSONAL GROW ROOM IF I WEREN'T.

I MEAN IT TELLS YOU IT'S ALL ABOUT THE CASH.

SAME THING WITH THE SPORTS BETTING.

AND YOU TALKED ABOUT, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH MONICA, ESPECIALLY ON THE GAMBLING SIDE, THESE ARE REGRESSIVE TAXES.

NEW YORK SPENDS TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EACH YEAR ADVERTISING THE LOTTERY IN POOR COMMUNITIES.

PEOPLE CAN'T GET OUT AHEAD OF IT.

THEY'RE SUCKING CASH FROM THE PEOPLE WHO CAN LEAST AFFORD IT AND NOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT WITH MOBILE BETTING.

WHEN DRUGS AND GAM GAMBLING OR THE SOLUTION, YOU HAVE REAL PROBLEMS IN THE STATE AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE HEADED.

>> THE POINT ABOUT HOME GROW IS AN IMPORTANT ONE BECAUSE THAT IS A COMPONENT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BILL BUT NOT A COMPONENT OF THE BILL WE'VE SEEN FROM THE LEGISLATURE AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES, BERN, DO YOU THINK THAT WE ARE AT A POINT NOW WHERE WE CAN BRIDGE THESE DIFFERENCES, WHICH INCLUDE THINGS LIKE HOMEGROWN AS WELL AS HOW TO SPEND POTENTIAL REVENUE?

>> RIGHT, WELL THAT'S AGAIN BEEN THE CONVERSATION THE PAST TWO YEARS.

AND LAST YEAR IF COVID HADN'T HAPPENED, I WONDER IF WE WOULDN'T HAVE SEEN A LEGALIZATION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA PASSED.

BUT IF THE LEGISLATURE REALLY WANTS TO FIGHT FOR THE KEY COMPONENTS IN THEIR BILL THAT HAS, AGAIN, BEEN POPULAR OVER THE PAST SEVERAL CYCLES, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE IT TO THE TABLE WITH THE GOVERNOR.

BUT, YEAH, HOME GROW IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

AND ANOTHER THING AS WELL, WHICH STATE SENATOR DIANE SAVINO WHO HAS BEEN A CHIEF PROPONENT OF THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM IN NEW YORK, HER BIG THING IS THE BARRIER FOR ENTRY IS SO HIGH WITH CAPITAL, AND HOW RESTRICTIVE NEW YORK'S OWN MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM.

WHAT WE HAVE IN THE STATE COULD BE POTENTIALLY PROBLEMATIC LOOKING INTO THE FUTURE WITH LEGAL WEED.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO-- THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THIS IF THEY WANT TO SET UP A PROGRAM AND HAVE IT WORK.

>> MONICA, IF YOU WERE ADVISING THE DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATIVE LEADERS, IF THEY CAME TO THEIR SENSES AND RETAINED SENECA STRATEGIES FOR ALL THEIR CONSULTING NEEDS, WOULD YOU TELL THEM TO STAY FIRM ON THEIR POSITIONS OR IS THIS AN ISSUE WHERE IT'S WORTHWHILE FOR THEM TO COMPROMISE AND MAYBE GET CHANGES DOWN THE ROAD, WHICH THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO REOPEN THESE ISSUES?

>> SPECIFICALLY ON MARIJUANA?

>> YEAH.

>> I MEAN, I THINK THEY WILL HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT THEIR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY IS.

WHEN YOU ARE NEGOTIATING WITH THE GOVERNOR, EVERYTHING THAT HE THINKS YOU WANT HE IS GOING TO USE AS A WEAKNESS AGAINST YOU.

I DON'T KNOW IF MARIJUANA NEEDS TO BE THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE THAT WE DON'T NEGOTIATE ON WHEN THERE IS SO MUCH ELSE THAT THE WE NEED, SPECIFICALLY LARGER FORMS OF REVENUE.

SO PROBABLY I WOULD SAY PICK THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE THAT YOU WANT TO FIGHT ON AND THAT'S BASICALLY THE ONLY THING THAT YOU CAN HOLD AGAINST HIM WHEN YOU GO INTO THE ROOM.

THE THREE MEN, I GUESS ANDREA IN THE ROOM, YOU JUST HAVE TO PICK ONE ISSUE.

>> SO THE BUDGET PROCESS, SPOILER ALERT, WILL ULTIMATELY BE CRAFTED BY DEMOCRATS AND PASS THE DEMOCRATIC VOTES.

I'M CURIOUS HOW ROY RYE THINKS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SHOULD APPROACH THIS PROCESS AND I WANT TO PLAY A TIP OF A SOUTHERN TIER REPUBLICAN GIVING HIS THOUGHTS IN THE AFTERMATH OF CUOMO'S BUDGET ADDRESS.

>> THE PRESENTATION WE SAW FROM THE GOVERNOR TODAY WAS BIZARRE AND FRUSTRATING.

LACK OF SPECIFICS, HE FAILED TO MAKE DECISIONS ON PRETTY MUCH ANYTHING.

INSTEAD HE SEEMS TO BE DEPENDING ON WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL DO.

AND BEGGING FOR MORE RESOURCES AND NOT GIVING CREDIT TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR RESOURCES THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THROUGH THE TWO COVID PACKAGES OVER THIS PAST YEAR.

YES, WE NEED RESULTS FROM WASHINGTON AND WE NEED HELP FROM THERE.

BUT WE MUST HAVE A PLAN GOING FORWARD, A REALISTIC PLAN BASED ON NUMBERS THAT AREN'T JUST OUT OF THIN AIR.

$15 BILLION, THAT IS NOT THE TRUE DEFICIT OF NEW YORK STATE.

WE CAN'T EXPECT AN HONEST AND STRAIGHTFORWARD RESPONSE FROM WASHINGTON WHEN WE ARE SENDING MISGUIDED FIGURES, BASELESS OUT THERE AND NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT WHAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THUS FAR.

WE ARE NOT FULLY DEPENDENT ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

WE ARE NEW YORK STATE.

WE ARE NEW YORK TOUGH.

WE NEED THE LEADERSHIP IN THIS STATE RIGHT NOW TO MOVE FORWARD AS NEW YORK, WORKING TOGETHER, AND NOT POINTING FINGERS AT EACH OTHER.

WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER TO GET THROUGH THIS AND WE CAN GET THROUGH IT.

WE WILL WAIT TO SEE WHAT THE GOVERNOR COMES OUT WITH IN DETAILS.

I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A BRIEFING.

I DID NOT CATCH THAT PERSONALLY NOR DID I SEE THE BRIEFING BOOKS THAT ARE OUT SO FAR.

WE ARE EXPECTING BUDGET BILLS LATER TODAY TO GET INTO THE DETAIL.

BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THIS BUDGET THAT'S BEING OFFERED TODAY, IS NOT NEW YORK TOUGH.

IT'S NEW YORK WEAK.

>> NEW YORK WEAK.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT RHETORICAL TONE, BILL O'REILLY IN.

>> I THINK IT WAS A FAIR CRITIQUE.

AND I DON'T THINK HE WENT OVERBOARD IN THE TONE, WHICH I THINK THE REPUBLICANS SHOULD DO MUCH MORE OF.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD (INAUDIBLE) WE SHOULD START COMING UP WITH ALTERNATIVES AND WHERE THERE AREN'T, YOU KNOW, JOIN TOGETHER WITH THE GOVERNOR WHERE WE CAN.

I MEAN THE GOVERNOR-- IT IS HIS JOB TO CLAW BACK AS MUCH MONEY FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS POSSIBLE.

THAT'S WHAT HE IS SUPPOSED TO DO.

AND IT STILL WON'T-- BIG DONOR STATE, IT STILL WON'T, IF YOU GOT $SA BILLION, IT WOULD STILL BE ABOUT 25% SHORT THE REPUBLICANS NEED TO POINT OUT WHERE THINGS ARE WRONG.

I THINK THEY SHOULD DO IT IN A MORE ADULT MANNER THAN WE HAVE SEEN IN RECENT YEARS BUT THERE ALSO HAS TO BE ALTERNATIVES.

I MEAN THERE HAS TO BE POLICY ROLLOUTS THAT EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH.

YOU HAVE A DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATURE, DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR, AT LEAST YOU CAN PUT THEM THROUGH TO THE NEWS MEDIA, PUT THEM THROUGH TO THE PUBLIC, JUST REASONABLE THINGS THAT COUNTER WHAT IS GOING ON.

JUST CRITICISM IS NO THE ENOUGH BUT I THOUGHT THE SENATOR WAS FINE AND IT WAS A FINE CRITIQUE.

>> MAHONEY, WHAT ARE YOU EXPECTING REPUBLICANS TO DO WITH THIS BUDGET PROCESS OVER THE IN EXTWO MONTHS?

AS BILL O'REILLY JUST SAID, THEY'RE HANDICAPPED BY THE WAY POLITICS WORKS IN ALBANY, MAJORITY RULE.

DO YOU EXPECT THEM TO BE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM?

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> WELL, OBVIOUSLY I DON'T EXPENALTY THEM TO BE IN THE ROOM-- EXPECT THEM TO BE IN THE ROOM WHEN THEY'RE NEGOTIATING THIS.

THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS IN ALBANY, WHEN WE HAVE THREE MEN OR NOW TWO MEN AND ONE WOMAN IN THE ROOM.

THE MINORITY PARTIES ARE LEFT OUT BUT THEY CAN BRING ATTENTION TO SOME OF THE STUFF THAT MIGHT RESONATE WITH THE PUBLIC AND PUT PRESSURE ON THE DEMOCRATS TO MOVE.

I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF AS THE WEEKS MOVE AHEAD, WE START HEARING ABOUT THE OTHER REGRESSIVE TAXES THAT ARE IN THERE THAT NICKEL AND DIME THE PUBLIC.

THE GOVERNOR HAS ONE, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE YOU CHARGE A NEW DOLLAR FOR EVERY TRANSITION FEE WITH THE D.M.V.

>> THAT'S A CONVENIENCE FEE.

>> THAT'S NOT GOING TO BREAK ANYBODY'S BANK BUT THERE ARE A BUNCH OF THINGS LIKE THAT, BILL, THAT ADDED UP, MIGHT NOT, THAT THE AVERAGE PERSON IS NOT GOING TO MAKE AN IMPACT BUT ALL THESE REVENUE RAISERS THAT ARE COMING ON LOWER INCOME PEOPLE, I WOULD NOT BE SUR RICED IF REPUBLICANS ESPECIALLY-- SURPRISED IF REPUBLICANS HIGHLIGHT THOSE.

A MIDDLE-CLASS TAX BREAK THE GOVERNOR HAS BEEN PROMISING FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

THIS BUDGET CONTAINS LANGUAGE THAT PUSHES THAT BACK ANOTHER YEAR.

NOT A MAJOR DEAL ONCE AGAIN LIKE I THINK IF YOU MAKE ABOUT $50,000 A YEAR, BASICALLY YOUR PAYCHECK WILL NOT GO DOWN BY THE $2 PER PAYCHECK THAT WAS PROMISED FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS.

BUT THERE IS THE LITTLE THINGS I COULD PICTURE THE PUBLIC SAYING YOU PROMISED NOT TO ATTACK THE POOR OR RAISE TAXES ON THE POOR OR WORKING CLASS, MIDDLE-CLASS PEOPLE AND THEY CAN FIND EXAMPLES OF CERTAINLY WHAT IS OUT THERE THAT DO JUST THAT, IF NOT TO MASSIVE DEGREES, THAT IT WILL HELP THEM MAKE THEIR CASE.

>> MONICA, I WANT TO TOUCH ON WHAT BILL JUST SAID IN REGARD TO THE MIDDLE-CLASS TAX CUT.

IN THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET, WHICH IS BASED ON GETTING $6 BILLION IN EMERGENCY FEDERAL AID, HE IS PAUSING A MIDDLE-CLASS TAX CUT THAT IS STILL BEING PHASED IN.

IT'S GOING TO COST ABOUT $400 MILLION.

WHEN WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT TAXES, WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT IN THE CONTEXT OF INCREASING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY.

SHOULD DECREASING TAXES ON MIDDLE-CLASS AND LOWER INCOME TAXPAYERS BE A PRIORITY AS WELL OR SHOULD THE EMPHASIS BE ON THE HIGHER END?

>> IT SHOULD BE-- I THINK WE HAVE BEEN SAYING WE NEED A FAIRER TAX CODE.

WE ARE NOT PARTICULARLY PUSHING FOR MORE TAX CUTS RIGHT NOW.

WE HAVE SAID PROPERTY TAXES ARE INCREDIBLY UNFAIR AND PROPERTY TAXES ARE GETTING WORSE THE MORE THAT WE PUSH ON LOCALITIES TO FIGURE OUT THEIR BUDGETS WHILE THE GOVERNOR IS TAKING MONEY AWAY FROM THEM.

I THINK IT IS A PRIORITY AND AGAIN IT IS PROBLEMATIC THAT THE GOVERNOR IS GETTING RID OF THE TAX CUTS FOR THE MIDDLE-CLASS AND INCREASING TAXES ON THINGS LIKE MARIJUANA AND SPORTS BETTING AND BREAKS TO THE WEALTHY.

VERY CLEAR WHERE HIS VALUES LIE.

>> SO ONE OF THE BIG CHANGES THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS THE MAKEUP OF THE STATE SENATE, WHICH SENATE MAJORITY LEADER ANDREA STEWARD-COUSINS REMARKED UPON DURING HER REMARKS ON OPENING DAY OF THE SESSION THIS MONTH.

>> I AM PROUD TO BEGIN THIS YEAR WITH 43 MEMBERS IN THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY, WHO REPRESENT COMMUNITIES FROM BUFFALO, SYRACUSE, ROCHESTER, THE CAPITAL REGION, MOHAWK AND HUDSON VALLEYS, WESTCHESTER, ROCKLAND COUNTIES, NEW YORK CITY AND LONG ISLAND.

I'M PROUD TO HAVE THE FIRST SUPER MAJORITY IN MODERN HISTORY AND THE LARGEST MAJORITY EVER.

I SAID IN MY FIRST REMARKS AS MAJORITY LEADER, THIS CHAMBER MUST ALWAYS TAKE THE PATH OF CREATING OPPORTUNITIES RATHER THAN THE PATH OF PUTTING UP BARRIERS.

AND THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK HAVE OVERWHELMINGLY AGREED WITH THAT PATH.

THIS MANDATE FROM NEW YORKERS OF ALL DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS AND BACKYARDS, IS AN INCREDIBLE RESPONSIBILITY TO DELIVER; ONE THAT WE STAND READY FOR.

>> A RESPONSIBILITY TO DELIVER.

BUT TO DELIVER WHAT, BERNADETTE HOGAN IN WHAT, BESIDE INCREASING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY, DO SENATE DEMOCRATS FEEL LIKE THEY WERE ELECTED TO DO THIS YEAR?

>> WELL, FOR STARTERS, AS THE MAJORITY LEADER SAID, THEY NOW HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY, MEANING THEY HAVE OVER 40 SEATS-- OVER 42 SEATS IN THE UPPER CHAMBER OF THE LEGISLATURE.

I THINK SHE IS SPEAKING IN GENERALITIES.

SHE IS SAYING LET'S GET PROGRESSIVE AND DEMOCRATIC POLICIES IN PLACE, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING DEMOCRATS HAVE NOT HELD CONTROL OF ONE, THE ENTIRE STATE, THE EXECUTIVE, THE ENTIRE LEGISLATURE, BUT THEY HAVEN'T HAD DEMOCRATIC CONTROL IN TOTALITY SINCE, I MEAN THEY BRIEFLY HAD IT IN THE EARLY 2000s BUT PRIOR TO THAT, YOU HAD SPLIT CONTROL BETWEEN THE DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS.

>> BUT TO YOUR EARS, YOU COVER THIS ON A DAILY BASIS, DOES ANYTHING POP TO MIND FROM SENATE MAJORITY LEADER COUSINS THAT THERE IS A POLICY THAT SHE SAID WE WERE ELECTED.

I HAVE THE SUPER MAJORITY WHICH GIVES US EXTRA GARGANO ANING POWER WITH THE ASSEMBLY AND I'M GOING TO DO THIS?

FROM MY EARS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE POLICY IS.

I CAN SAY IT'S ABOUT INCREASING EQUITY AND, YOU KNOW, INCLUSION AND A LOT OF OTHER BUZZ WORDS BUT WHAT POLICIES, AT THIS POINT, HAS SHE SPECIFICALLY COMMITTED TO?

>> NOTHING SPECIFIC GOING INTO APRIL, BUT NOW WHAT I THINK THE CHALLENGE MIGHT BE IS GOING OVER THE SPECIFICS, AS WE SAID, WITH MARIJUANA AND SPORTS BETTING, THE CONVERSATION WILL BE OW EXACT-- HOW EXACTLY TO HAMMER DOWN WHAT POLICIES THEY WANT TO IMPLEMENT SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE FIGHTING ON THE SAME SIDE BUT OVER THE NITTY GRITTY.

BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN IN CONTROL FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS NOW, AND THEY HAVE DONE THINGS LIKE ELECTION REFORM, CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM OR JUST CHANGES, OF COURSE, TO THE PENAL CODE AND TO ELECTION LAW.

BUT ALL IN ALL, THEY HAVE CHANGED THE LAWS BETWEEN THE PAST TWO YEARS.

AND WHAT THEY LAN ON DOING NOW REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT SPECIFICALLY THEY'RE SEEKING TO GET DONE BECAUSE THEY HAVE MADE CHANGES THE PAST TWO YEARS.

>> SO MONICA, YOU HELPED GET SOME OF THESE NEW PEOPLE ELECTED, WHETHER IT WAS BY KNOCKING OFF INCUMBENT DEMOCRATS IN THE ASSEMBLY OR SCOOPING UP SEATS FROM RETIRING G.O.P.

LAWMAKERS IN THE SENATE.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY WERE ELECTED TO DO?

AND DO YOU THINK THAT THESE NEW MEMBERS HAVE A CLEARLY DEFINED VISION EVEN IF MAYBE WE DON'T HAVE THAT YET FROM THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS?

>> YOU KNOW, I MEAN TWO THINGS.

I THINK BERNADETTE IS RIGHT THAT WE HAVE PASSED A LOT OF, I DON'T WANT TO SAY LOW HANGING FRUIT, BUT AS SOON AS THE NEW LEGISLATURE CAME IN IN 2019, A SLEW OF BILLS WERE PASSED AND IT WAS AN INCREDIBLE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

AND YET, BECAUSE OF A DECADE OF AUSTERITY BUDGETING AND BECAUSE OF COVID, SMALL BUSINESSES ARE CLOSING BY THE DAY, THE HUNGER LINES ARE GROWING, YOU KNOW, 1.4 MILLION HOUSEHOLDS ARE FACING EVICTION.

SO I THINK WHAT ANDREA IS SAYING AND THE NEW ELECTEDS ARE SAYING IS THAT REVENUE IS THE ONLY THING THAT WILL SOLVE THE CRISIS THAT WE ARE FACING, RIGHT?

WE CAN KEEP CHANGING LAWS BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE SUCH FUNDING NEEDS AND SO MANY PEOPLE STRUGGLING THAT WE HAVE TO INCREASE REVENUE OR NOTHING ELSE REALLY MATTERS.

AND I THINK IN TERMS OF WHO WAS ELECTED, IT'S A MIX.

THERE IS OBVIOUSLY LIKE THE VERY PROGRESSIVE, WHO ARE AGAIN SAYING OUR MAIN PRIORITY IS TAXING THE RICH BUT THERE ARE FOLKS LIKE ANNA KELLES ELECTED UP IN ITHACA, AND INCREDIBLE SLATE ELECTED IN ROCHESTER, EVERY SINGLE STATE SENATOR THAT FLIPPED A SEAT FROM RED TO BLUE RAN ON INCREASING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY.

SO THIS REALLY IS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY IS ABOUT RAISING REVENUE SO THAT WE CAN THEN DO THINGS LIKE FOCUS ON OUR PRIORITIES OF SCHOOLS AND SMALL BUSINESSES AND HEALTHCARE AND ALL OF THE OTHER ISSUES.

>> YOU MENTION D.S.A., FOR VIEWERS, DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA, A GROWING NUMBER OF ALBANY LAWMAKERS, YOU KNOW, IDENTIFY WITH THIS LABEL.

AND THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE FOND MEMORIES OF THE DECISIONS THAT THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS IN ALBANY HAVE MADE AND HAVE SAID THEY WANT TO SEE SORT OF A CHANGE TO THE STATUS QUO IN ALBANY.

BILL MAHONEY, HOW MUCH SORT OF, I GUESS TROUBLE, DO YOU ANTICIPATE THESE LAWMAKERS TO CAUSE?

DO YOU THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE A BIG HEADACHE FOR THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, HOW THEY WANT TO PROCEED ON SOME OF THESE KEY ISSUES THAT MAYBE HAVEN'T BEEN ADVANCED AND DO YOU SEE THEM AS BEING ABLE TO ADVANCE POLICIES IN ALBANY?

>> I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO DRAMATICALLY OVERHAUL EVERYTHING BY THEMSELVES.

WE ARE STILL TALKING ABOUT A VERY SLIM MINORITY OF MEMBERS IN THE DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCES IN BOTH HOUSES, WHO ARE EITHER D.S.

AMP MEMBERS OR KIND OF HAVE THE SAME WORLD VIEW.

P THEY CAN, HOWEVER, PUT PRESSURE TO CONVINCE THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS NOT TO BEND.

WE'VE SEEN A LONG HISTORY IN ALBANY DURING BUDGET SEASON OF NEGOTIATIONS, SOME CONFERENCES ARE NOT GOING TO BE HAPPY WITH EVERYTHING THAT MAKES THEIR WAY INTO THE FINAL BUDGET BILL.

I RECALL A FEW YEARS AGO WE DID THE MINIMUM WAGE HIKE WHERE SENATE REPUBLICANS, SOME OF THEM WERE NOT THAT HAPPY, BUT IN THE END, THEY KIND OF BIT THEIR TONINGS AND WENT ALONG WITH IT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT NEEDED TO GET DONE.

I CAN PICTURE SOME OF THE NEWER MEMBERS BEING VOCAL ABOUT THE FINAL BUDGET IF IT DOESN'T CONTAIN SOMETHING LIKE A MILLIONAIRES' TAX HIKE.

THEY HAVE ENOUGH MEMBERS TO SLOW THINGS DONE.

WE SAW IT PASS WITH A BARE MINIMUM OF VOTES.

A FEW MORE OF THOSE COULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

I DON'T THINK THERE IS ENOUGH TO RADICALLY OVERHAUL EVERYTHING, BUT BETWEEN THE PRESSURE THEY CAN PUT IN TERMS OF HIGHLIGHTING THE THINGS THEY'RE NOT HAPPY WITH AND LESS WILLING TO GO ALONG WITH WHAT IS HAPPENING BETWEEN THE THREE PEOPLE IN A ROOM, WHO KNOWS.

I GUESS THAT'S THE BIG QUESTION FOR THE REST OF THE SESSION.

>> ONE OF THE AREAS WHERE THESE NEW LAWMAKERS ON THE LEFT ACTUALLY FIND SOME AGREEMENT WITH THEIR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES IS THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT THE GOVERNOR'S HANDLING OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

THEY ARGUE ESSENTIALLY THAT HE HAS BEEN GRANTED REALLY BROAD SWEEPING EMERGENCY POWERS AND HASN'T NECESSARILY BEEN A GOOD STEWARD OF THESE POWERS.

AND HAVE ARGUED THAT THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS TO REASSERT ITSELF IN THIS PROCESS.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SENATE REPUBLICANS HAVE ADVANCED ALMOST EVERY SINGLE SESSION DAY THIS YEAR WITH A HOSTILE AMENDMENT CALLING FOR A REPEAL OF THE POWERS.

BILL O'REILLY, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS CRITIQUE FROM THE REPUBLICANS?

>> I THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT POINT BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST THE EMERGENCY POWERS FOR COVID, BUT THE EXECUTIVE HAS TAKEN ON MORE AND MORE POWER OVER THE YEARS.

AND THE LEGISLATURE REALLY HAS NOT SERVED AS A CO-EQUAL BRANCH.

AND THAT POWER, THE GOVERNOR KNOWS HOW TO ACCUMULATE IT.

HE KNOWS GOVERNMENT BETTER THAN ANYBODY AND HAS DONE THAT FOR A LONG TIME.

I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE THE PROGRESSIVES AND CONSERVATIVES ON THE RIGHT CAN COME TOGETHER BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS TO FLEX ITS MUSCLES MORE AND BE A CO-EQUAL BRANCH AGAIN.

I UNDERSTAND THE EMERGENCY POWERS.

WE'LL SEE WHEN THEY FINALLY GO AWAY.

THEY PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE ALREADY.

BUT MOVING FORWARD, THERE IS STILL THE ISSUE.

YOU LOOK AT HOW MUCH GOVERNOR CUOMO HAS EMBEDDED INTO THE BUDGET, THAT USED TO BE LEGISLATIVE FIGHTS.

EVERYTHING IS THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS NOW.

AND CUOMO HAS MANIPULATED THINGS VERY, VERY WELL.

BUT IF THE PROGRESSIVES AND THE TRUE LEFT WINGERS IN THE DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE ARE GOING TO GET ANYWHERE, THEY'RE GOING TO NEED TO CHALLENGE THE POWER AND THEY'RE GOING TO NEED ALLIES AND I THINK REPUBLICANS WILL HELP THEM IN SOME INSTANCES.

>> THOSE POWERS ARE SET TO EXPIRE IN A FEW MONTHS.

SO BERN BERNADETTE, I'M CURIOUS, DO YOU THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A CASE WHERE COME MARCH 31 AT 11:59:00 P.M.

WAITING FOR THE FINAL BUDGET BILL TO BE INTRODUCED, THAT THE TEXT WILL BE REVEALED AND SOMEWHERE TUCKED IN THERE IS GOING TO BE AN EXTENSION OF THOSE POWERS THAT LAWMAKERS ARE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, SHRUG AND APPROVE FOR THE GOVERNOR AND HE WILL GET A MUCH LONGER ABILITY TO EXERCISE THESE EXTREME POWERS.

>> IT COULD VERY WELL BE BECAUSE LAST YEAR WE DID SEE THAT.

HOWEVER, THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERS AGREED TO THAT CENTRALIZED CONTROL OF THE COAD CRISIS.

DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS HAVE CRITICIZED THIS KIND OF SIDELINING OF THE LEGISLATURE AND THEIR ABILITY TO PUT PRESSURE ON THE EXECUTIVES AS CO-EQUAL BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY DO, SOME HAVE ADMITTED, IT IS HELPFUL TO HAVE THE CONTROL COME FROM THE EXECUTIVE BECAUSE THIS IS A CRISIS THAT, YOU KNOW, SO MUCH HAS CHANGED OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS.

AND THE GOVERNOR CAN CUT THROUGH THE BUREAUCRATIC RED TAPE AND SAY EVICTION MORATORIUM OR LET'S EXTEND X, YZ FOR 30 DAYS AND HE CAN MAKE A DECISION AND HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, PLAY OUT.

HOWEVER, THE BIGGEST GRIPE AND THIS OF COURSE GOES BACK TO WHAT BILL WAS JUST SAYING, HAS BEEN THE POWER OF THE EXECUTIVE IN THE BUDGET PROCESS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM THAT LAWMAKERS HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT FOR YEARS BECAUSE HE DOES HAVE A LOT OF CONTROL IN THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, LAWMAKERS DO HAVE A POWER IN THEIR LEGISLATIVE LEADERS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE NEGOTIATING FINESSE AND THE BRILLIANCE OF THE LEGISLATURE IS ABLE TO SHINE WHEN THEY HAVE THE LEADER OF THE SENATE AND THE LEADER OF THE ASSEMBLY GO TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE AND SAY WHAT ARE OUR PRIORITIES THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE SQUEEZED ON AND NOT GOING TO BE ROLLED ON AND PRESENT THIS TO THE GOVERNOR AND SAY THIS IS WHAT WE WANT.

SO LAWMAKERS, AS RANK AND FILE CAN BE VOCAL IN THEIR CONFERENCE AND USE THEIR POINTED LEADERS TO MAKE THOSE CHOICES AND THOSE BIDS WITH THE GOVERNOR.

>> THOSE POWERS THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS WIELDED SO EFFECTIVELY OVER THE LAST DECADE PLUS, STEM FROM STATE COURT OF APPEALS RULING PATAKI V. SILVER WHICH SOME DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS WANT TO SEE REPEALED, HAVE A CHANGE IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION, ENSURE THAT STATE LAWMAKERS HAVE A LARGER SAY IN THE PROCESS, ESSENTIALLY PREVENTING THEM FROM GETTING ROLLED AT THE LAST MINUTE.

MONICA, THERE ARE A LOT OF DEMOCRATS WHO ARE PUSHING THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

IT HAS NOT EXACTLY GAINED ANY TRACTION IN ALBANY THOUGH.

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERS, DO YOU THINK THEY HAVE ANY APPETITE FOR PASSING THIS AMENDMENT, WHICH WOULD BE A REAL, YOU KNOW, PUSH TO THE GOVERNOR?

>> YEAH, I MEAN IT'S COMPLICATED.

SO PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.

SO IT'S HARD TO GET ATTENTION FOR LIKE THIS STRANGE, YOU KNOW, COURT CASE THAT WASN'T REALLY USED AS MUCH UNTIL CUOMO CAME IN AND DECIDED THIS IS GOING TO BE A MONARCHY AND HE WAS GOING TO CONTROL EVERYTHING IN ALBANY BY USING THE COURT CASE.

THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TOOK ME TO EXPLAIN IT, THERE IS NO QUICK SLOGAN IN THE WAY THERE IS LIKE TAX THE RICH OR DEFUND THE POLICE.

YOU DON'T GET AS MUCH ENERGY AND EXCITEMENT BEHIND IT, WHICH, IS SOMETHING WE COULD POTENTIALLY WORK ON BUT NOT NECESSARILY RIGHT NOW WHEN THERE ARE NURSING HOME DEATHS AND HUNGER LINES AND IT'S VERY HARD TO GET ATTENTION ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

AND IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY, IT IS NOT SOMETHING YOU CAN OVERTURN THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE.

I THINK-- IT'S SOMETHING WHERE YOU WOULD SO AGGRESSIVELY IRRITATE THE GOVERNOR TWICE DURING BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS TO TRY TO GET SOMETHING DONE THAT THEN THE VOTERS MIGHT NOT EVEN SUPPORT, IT IS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT.

>> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

IT TOOK A STAB AT THIS IN 2005 NOT LONG AFTER THE COURT CASES THAT YOU REFERENCED AND THE VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY REJECTED IT AND SIDED WITH THE GOVERNOR.

I THINK THAT'S THE HESITANCY.

THEY KNOW THEY TRIED IT ONCE.

HAIB THINGS HAVE CHANGED.

TWO DECADES IS A LONG TIME, BUT IT OPENS THEM UP TO ARGUMENTS THAT THE LEGISLATURE GOING TO USE THE POWER TO TAX AND SPEND MORE THAN THE GOVERNOR WANTS AND THAT'S A CHECK.

AND THE BUDGET WILL BE OUT OF CONTROL.

SO EVEN IF THEY TRIED AND THE LEGISLATURE DID, IT'S FAR FROM A FAR GONE CONCLUSION THAT THEY COULD DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THE VOTERS COULD REJECT IT AGAIN.

>> IT WOULD TAKE SUCH AN INCREDIBLE PUBLIC EDUCATION CAMPAIGN, WHICH I BELIEVE A FORMER ASSEMBLYMEMBER WAS RAMPING UP TO GET THE EDUCATION CAMPAIGN RAMPED UP BECAUSE HE NOW-- BECAUSE HE KNEW HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS.

>> WHAT IF SENECA STRATEGIES AND THE NOVEMBER TEAM JOINED FORCES, COULD THIS GET US THROUGH THE FINISH LINE?

AM I MAKING THIS HAPPEN RIGHT NOW.

>> THE SPIRIT OF A TEAR DEAR FRIEND WHO PASSED AWAY FROM COVID FROM COVID, YEAH, YES, HE WAS MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION AND WOULD I LOVE TO DO THAT, TO HONOR HIS WISHES AND TO TRY TO HELP THE STATE.

BUT MONICA IS RIGHT, THE PUBLIC EDUCATION CAMPAIGN HERE WOULD HAVE TO BE MASSIVE AND THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT TIME FOR IT.

YOU ARE JUST NOT GOING TO BREAKTHROUGH.

>> I'LL LET YOU TWO CONNECT ON THAT AFTER THE SHOW.

BUT I'M GOING TO PIVOT NOW AND OVER THE LAST TWO YEAR, DEMOCRATS HAVE HAD A REAL TASTE FOR OVERHAULING NEW YORK'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

BUT DO THEY HAVE AN APPETITE FOR MORE?

WELL, BASED ON ASSEMBLY SPEAKER CARL HEASTIE'S REMARKS, THE ASSEMBLY EARLIER THIS MONTH, IT SEEMS LIKE THE ANSWER AT LEAST FOR HIM IS YES.

>> IN JUNE WE QUICKLY, ETHICALLY PASSED SWEEPING POLICE REFORMS THAT DELIVER TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

AND HELPED TO BUILD TRUST BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE COMMUNITIES THEY SERVE.

WE LOOK FORWARD TON'T COULDING TO WORK WITH ALL P P TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH ALL OUR PARTNERS IN GOVERNMENT TO REACH THAT GOAL.

I'M PROUD OF THE WORK WE HAVE DONE AND RECOGNIZE WE MUST CONTINUE TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER OTHER NECESSARY REFORMS IN THE FUTURE.

>> SO THAT'S SOME BIG TALK FROM THE SPEAKER, BUT BERN BERNADETTE, WHAT REFORMS IF ANY DO YOU THINK DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS AND CUOMO WILL BE WILLING TO GET BEHIND.

IT SEEMS LIKE CHANGES TO PAROLE AND SOLITARY CONFINEMENT ARE TOPICS DUE JURY ON THE LEFT ABOUT BUT WILL THEY BE ADDRESSED IN 2021?

>> IT IS SOMETHING THE LEGISLATURE WANTS TO MAKE A PRIORITY, WHICH FROM THE SPEAKER'S CONVERSATION OR HIS ADDRESS THAT YOU JUST SHOWED, THEN YES BILL WE ALSO HAD MASS PROTESTS AND CIVIL UNREST OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR STEMMING FROM THE GEORGE FLOYD DEATH BACK IN THE SPRING.

AND THE LEGISLATURE DID MAKE SOME PRETTY SERIOUS CHANGES OF BILLS THAT HAD BEEN SITTING FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

AND THEN WE SAW A MYRIAD OF OTHER DEATHS UP IN ROCHESTER, THE DEATH OF DANIEL PRUDE AND SOMETHING THE GOVERNOR HAS MADE A BIG PRIORITY AND THE LEGISLATURE HAS OF COURSE SUPPORTED IS IMPROVING COMMUNITY AND POLICE RELATIONS.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE TIED IN THE BUDGET.

IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON SOME SMALL AMOUNT OF STATE FUNDING.

BUT THEY ARE REALLY LOOKING TO CLEAN UP, AGAIN, POLICE AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND NOT HAVE THESE MASS UPRISINGS LIKE WE SAW OVER THE SUMMER.

>> WELL, BILL O'REILLY, IN 2020 WE SAW THE DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS AND CUOMO ROLL BACK SOME OF THE REFORMS IN THAT WERE PASSED IN 2019 IN REGARDS TO PRETRIAL DETENTION AND THE 2020 ELECTION NARRATIVE THAT WE HEARD GOING INTO IT WAS THAT THE DEMOCRATS WERE GOING TO SUFFER FOR THIS BECAUSE OF REALLY A LOUD BACKLASH BUT IT APPEARS MAYBE THE BACKLASH WAS FROM A VOCAL MINORITY CONSIDERING THAT DEMOCRATS GREW THE MAJORITY IN THE SENATE.

JOE BIDEN EASILY WON NEW YORK'S 29 ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES AND EVEN IN THE CONGRESSIONAL SEATS, WHILE REPUBLICANS LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE GOING TO PICK UP AT LEAST ONE SEAT, THEY STILL HAVE LESS SEATS THAN THEY HAD IN 2016.

SO DO YOU THINK THAT THIS IS AN AREA WHERE NEW YORK REPUBLICANS SHOULD KEEP THE PEDAL TO THE METAL OR DO YOU THINK THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS WHERE REPUBLICANS CAN FIND ACCOMMODATIONS WITH THEIR DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES?

>> I THINK FROM ALL THE POLLING I SAW DURING THE YEAR AND SOME OF IT WAS GOOD, CASHLESS BAIL WAS AN UNPOPULAR WITH A LOT OF NEW YORKERS.

THAT SAID, I THINK DONALD TRUMP TRUMPED ANY ISSUE, WHICH IS WHY THE REPUBLICANS ARE IN SUCH A MINORITY.

THAT SAID, I DO-- THERE IS PLENTY OF ROOM FOR REPUBLICANS TO GET INVOLVED WITH CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM.

BUT I THINK WHAT IS MOST IMPORTANT AND WHAT I THINK REPUBLICANS SHOULD ADVOCATE IS THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT BE PART OF THAT CONVERSATION.

YOU CAN'T JUST FORCE THINGS THROUGH.

THERE SHOULD BE-- AND THE LEGISLATE LEGISLATURE VERY MUCH SO, PUBLIC HEARINGS.

SOLITARY CONFINEMENT.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE CAN ALL TALK ABOUT WATCH WHAT COVID DOES TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY BEING LOCKED IN HOMES FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND THOSE ARE MUCH LARGER THAN A SOLITARY CELL.

SERIOUS PLEDGE DAMAGE CAN BE DONE AND IS DONE THERE BUT YOU WANT TO BRING IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CORRECTIONS BECAUSE THEY ARGUE IT IS A TOOL.

THEY NEED A TOOL.

MAYBE THEY CAN FIND ANOTHER TOOL WITH DISCUSSION.

BUT SURE, I THINK CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IS OPEN TO BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE AND BUT IT HAS GOT TO BE A FULL CONVERSATION AND NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, A DICK TUM COMING THROUGH.

>> ON THE TOPIC OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, WHAT ARE YOU EXPECTING FROM LAWMAKERS IN ALBANY?

DO YOU THINK THERE IS GOING TO BE THAT APPETITE FROM DEMOCRATS TO TAKE A BIG SWING AND ADDRESS A LOT OF ISSUES THAT HAS SAT ON THE TABLE FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS?

>> >> MY DOG IS SNORING LOUDLY BEHIND ME.

>> THANK YOU, LILLY.

>> I THINK THAT THERE IS AN APPETITE FOR MORE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM, LARGELY BECAUSE THE BLM PROTESTS MASSIVE ON THE STREETS LAST YEAR, THE HUNGER FOR DEFUND, THE AMOUNT OF FOCUS THAT THERE WAS ON THE CITY BUDGET, LITERALLY PEOPLE CAMPED OUTSIDE OF CITY HALL WATCHING THE BUDGET PROCESS AS IF THE CITY CONTROLLED THE BUDGET AND NOT THE STATE.

SO THERE IS A HUNGER.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF FOCUS IS BUILT ON SOLITARY AND ELDER PAROLE IS A BIG FOCUS.

BUT I ALSO THINK, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE REMEMBER WHAT-- THE DEMOCRATS ROLLED ON BAIL.

THE CONSERVATIVES HAD SUCH A BETTER STRATEGY THAN THE DEMOCRATS DID SO THERE IS A LITTLE APPREHENSION THAT IF WE ARE GOING TO DO MORE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM, THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER OVERALL STRATEGY OF HOW WE ARE GOING TO GET THIS THROUGH AND FIGHT BACK AGAINST SOME OF THE SCARE TACTICS FROM CONSERVATIVES.

>> BILL MAHONEY, LOOKING FORWARD TO THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO BE THE EBB AND FLOW OF ACTION?

IN A NORMAL YEAR, WE HAVE A QUIET JANUARY AND FEBRUARY.

THINGS RAMP UP IN MARCH, APRIL, WE TAKE A COUPLE WEEKS OFF.

GREAT JOB EVERYBODY.

MAY WE RETURN AND JUNE IS REALLY BUSY.

LAST YEAR WAS DIFFERENT, IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE OF COVID-19.

WHAT DO YOU EXPECT IS GOING TO BE THE PROCESS THAT HAPPENS IN ALBANY THIS YEAR?

>> >> I THINK IT PARTIALLY COMES DOWN TO THE SAME QUESTION OF WHERE COVID-19 IS AT.

IF WE GET TO APRIL-MAY AND WE ARE STILL SOMEWHERE SIMILAR TO WHERE WE ARE NOW, I COULD PICTURE THINGS DYING DOWN.

THEY'LL HOLD REMOTE SESSIONS TO DEAL WITH PRESSING ISSUES AND DEAL WITH THE BILLS THEY HAVE TO TO LET LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FUNCTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT SOME OF IT MIGHT COME DOWN TO WHETHER OR NOT LEGISLATORS ARE VACCINATED BY APRIL AND MAY F. THEY ARE, I CAN PICK PICTURE THEM COMING BACK HOO TOWN AND BEING EXCITED TO BE BACK IN NORMAL SESSION FOR THE FIRST TIME IN A YEAR AND USING THAT TO MEET WITH EACH OTHER, SOME OF THEM PROBABLY HAVEN'T MET THEIR NEW COLLEAGUES AT ALL IN PERSON.

BUT IF VACCINES ARE SLOW TO COME AND IT'S MAY AND JUNE AND WE ARE IN THE STATUS QUO, I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF IT WASN'T A WHACK A MOLE, DEAL WITH WHAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH BUT DON'T GO TOO FAR OUT OF OUR WAY TO PASS BILLS AND DEBATE BILLS AN HOLD COMMITTEE HEARINGS LIKE WE SAW LAST YEAR TO A LARGE DEGREE.

>> AND BERN, PRIOR TO 2019, WHEN WE HAD DIVIDED GOVERNMENT, WE BASICALLY SAW ALL THE MAJOR POLICY ISSUES EITHER TUCKED INTO THE BUDGET OR ADOPTED IN WHAT WE CALL BIG UGLY AT THE END OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION OMNIBUS BILL.

THIS HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE WITH THE DEMOCRATIC MARKETS IN THE LEGISLATURE WHO HAVE TAKEN UPON THEMSELVES TO LEAD IN CERTAIN CASES.

DO YOU THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE TAKING THE LEAD AGAIN IF 2021 OR HAVE THEY EXHAUSTED ALL THE ENERGY IN 2019 AND 2020 TO TAKE THE LEAD?

HOW DO YOU THINK THAT IS GOING TO PLAY OUT?

>> I THINK, AS BILL SAID, THAT THE LAWMAKERS DO RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS SO MUCH OF A BIGGER PICTURE THAN A NORMAL LEGISLATIVE YEAR AND PRIORITIES, YOU KNOW.

GETTING HEADLINES FOR REFORMING ELECTION PROCESSES AND REFORMING OTHER ASPECTS OF GOVERNMENT REALLY PALE IN LIGHT OF SLOVAKS OF SLOW VACCINATION RAMS IN THE STATE, DEATHS IN THE NURSING HOMES AND REGULAR PEOPLE.

P AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT IS GOING TO COME DOWN TO MONEY, JOBS, UNEMPLOYMENT IS NOT PROJECTED TO RESTORE TO PREPANDEMIC LEVELS UNTIL I THINK 2025.

IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN TO THE BASIC.

WHAT DO PEOPLE NEED?

WE NEED MONEY, WE NEED JOBS AND WE NEED THE VIRUS TO STOP INFECTING AND LEADING TO MORE DEATHS.

SO I THINK LAWMAKERS ARE REALLY GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON THAT AS OPPOSED TO THE SOME LITTLE THINGS BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE IS JUST TOO MUCH GOING ON RIGHT NOW.

>> BILL O'REILLY, IF YOU ARE ADVISING SENATE REPUBLICANS OR ASSEMBLY REPUBLICANS DURING THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WHAT ARE YOU TELLING THEM?

WHERE SHOULD THEIR FOCUS BE?

IS IT JUST ON KITCHEN TABLE ISSUES?

SHOULD THEY BE PROPOSING ALTERNATIVES ONLY, SHOULD THEY BE TAKING DOWN WHATEVER DEMOCRATS ARE PROPOSING?

SHOULD THEY BE JOINING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SO THEY CAN BE PART OF THE MAJORITY?

WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?

>> I THIS I A LITTLE BIT OF ALL OF THAT.

BUT CERTAINLY KITCHEN TABLE ISSUES.

I THINK HE SHOULD TABLING THIS TIME AND THEY'LL HAVE PLENTY OF IT, AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REGROUP AND RETHINK WHERE THEY AND THE TABLE ITSELF IS GOING TO MOVE.

REPUBLICANS ARE MESSAGING IN NEW YORK STATE CLEARLY HAS NOT WORKED.

WE ARE TOTALLY SHUT OUT OF POWER ALL AROUND THE STATE, THE STATE LEGISLATURE, THE CITIES AND THROUGHOUT.

WE NEED TO RETHINK THAT.

AND WE NEED TO, AGAIN, BECOME A PARTY OF IDEAS AND THINK OF ALTERNATIVES FOR THE STATE, THINGS THAT ARE EASY TO EXPLAIN THAT CAN BE MESSAGED YOU KNOW, COHERENTLY AND THEN BEGIN TO MOVE IT OUT DIRECTLY TO THE PUBLIC.

BUT YES, KITCHEN TABLE IN ALL THOSE THINGS.

I THINK IN ALL THINGS COVID, REPUBLICANS SHOULD WORK WITH GOVERNOR CUOMO AND WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATS.

WE HAVE TO BE UNITED ON THAT FRONT.

THERE ARE GOING TO BE LOTS OF GOTCHA OPPORTUNITIES ON THE VACCINE SIDE WITH VACCINES RUNNING OUT, TO TAKE CHEAP SHOTS AND IT'S NOT WORDS IT.

IT DOESN'T MAKE ANYBODY LOOK GOOD.

WE ALL HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF THE STATE AND IT'S POLITICALLY GOOD.

LET'S GET THIS ONE RIGHT TOGETHER.

AND HOLD BACK SOME OF THE SNACKERRINESS.

>> I THINK THE 2019 AND 2020 LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS WERE A LOT OF BILLS GOT PASSED, WERE SET AGAINST THAT BACKDROP OF THE POTENTIAL FOR DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES.

MONICA, WAVE' GOT ABOUT 60 SECONDS LEFT.

DO YOU THIS I WE'LL SEE THE SAME FEAR OF LAWMAKERS LOOKING OVER THEIR HOLDER THAT MIGHT GUIDE THEIR ACTIONS AND DO YOU PLAN ON LEADING SOME PRIMARIES IN 2022?

>> THEY SHOULD BE FEARFUL, YEAH.

>> AND HOW SERIOUS HIVE I MEAN IS THAT THE GOING TO BE.

ARE THEY GOING TO BE HELD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE OR DO THEY GET SOME ROPE TO POTENTIALLY HANG THEMSELVES?

>> THERE IS ONE SINGLE PRIORITY EVERY PROGRESSIVE GROUP HAS SAID IS THEIR PRIORITY, REVENUE.

EVERYONE WILL BE WATCHING TO SEE WHAT THEIR SENATE SENATOR AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER DOES AND THEY WILL BE CLEAR ABOUT THEIR FRUSTRATION IF THEY'RE SUPPORTING THE WRONG THING.

>> AND DOES THAT LITMUS TEST COME DOWN TO WHETHER THEY SAY YES OR NO ON THE BUDGET BECAUSE OFTEN WE HAVE PEOPLE SAY I VOTED YES ON THE BUDGET BUT I REALLY DIDN'T LIKE IT.

>> I MEAN I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE VOTERS OF NEW YORK BUT IT SEEMS THAT EVERY YEAR WE HAVE MORE PRIMARIES NOT FEWER.

>> WELL, UNFORTUNATELY-- UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE GOING HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE BECAUSE WE ARE OUT OF TIME.

AND THANK YOU.

THIS HAS BEEN AN ADDITION OF CONNECT NEW YORK.

OUR GUESTS HAVE BEEN BERNADETTE HOGAN, CAPITOL REPORTER FOR THE NEW YORK POST, MONICA KLEIN FOUNDING PARTNER OF SENECA STRATEGIES AND OWNER OF LILLY THE DOG, BILL MAHONEY CAPITOL REPORTER FOR POLITICO NEW YORK AND BILL O'REILLY PARTNER WITH THE NOVEMBER TEAM AND I'M DAVID LOMBARDO, HOST OF WCNY'S THE CAPITOL PRESS ROOM, WHICH YOU CAN HEAR WEEK DAYS ON YOUR LOCAL NPR AFFILIATE OR WHEREVER YOU DOWNLOAD PODCASTS.

UNTIL NEXT TIME, THANKS SO MUCH FOR WATCHING.