Tuesday, March 28, 1995

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ALBANY, NEW YORK 9 March 28, 1995 10 3:01 p.m. 11 12 13 REGULAR SESSION 14 15 16 17 SENATOR JOHN R. KUHL, JR., Acting President 18 STEPHEN F. SLOAN, Secretary 19 20 21 22 23 2584 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 3 Senate will come to order. Ask the members to 4 find their places. I would ask all of the 5 members of the gallery, the members of the 6 Legislature, rise and join with me in saying the 7 Pledge of Allegiance. 8 (The assemblage repeated the 9 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.) 10 We're very pleased today to be 11 joined by Dr. Roger Ellison of the Mountainside 12 Bible Chapel in Schroon Lake to deliver the 13 prayer. 14 Dr. Ellison. 15 DR. ROGER ELLISON: Let us pray 16 together. Dear Lord, we call upon You at this 17 time to invite Your presence here in this 18 place. You tell us in Your word that these who 19 are before me are men and women who are 20 appointed at Your hand. They are ministers of 21 God. And so, Lord, I pray for them today, the 22 decisions that they must make, the things that 23 pull them in so many directions. Give O God, 2585 1 Your wisdom and may the decisions that are made 2 by this assembly be that which would honor You, 3 which would enable Your people to follow You. 4 Lord, we pray that in every need, 5 personal and public, that are possessed by these 6 dear men and women, that You might be very near, 7 meet those needs today. We pray it in the name 8 of our precious Savior who loved us and gave 9 himself for us in Jesus' name we pray. Amen. 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Reading 11 of the Journal. 12 THE SECRETARY: In Senate, 13 Monday, March 27th. The Senate met pursuant to 14 adjournment, Senator Kuhl in the Chair. The 15 Journal of Sunday, March 26th, was read and 16 approved. On motion, the Senate adjourned. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Hearing 18 no objection, the Journal stands approved as 19 read. 20 Presentation of petitions. 21 Messages from the Assembly. 22 Messages from the Governor. 23 Reports of standing committees. 2586 1 Reports of select committees. 2 Communications and reports from 3 state officers. 4 Motions and resolutions. 5 The Chair recognizes Senator 6 Cook. 7 SENATOR COOK: Mr. President, on 8 page 8, I offer the following amendments to 9 Calendar 108, Senate Print 1538, and ask that 10 said bill be recommitted to the Committee on 11 Education. 12 And on behalf of Senator Maltese, 13 please place a sponsor's star on Calendar Number 14 278. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Sponsor's 16 star will be placed on Calendar Number 278. 17 The Chair recognizes Senator 18 Bruno. 19 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, I 20 would like at this time to call an immediate 21 meeting of the Finance Committee in Room 332. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There 23 will be an immediate meeting of the Finance 2587 1 Committee in Room 332, Majority Conference 2 Room. 3 The Chair recognizes Senator 4 Bruno. 5 SENATOR BRUNO: And, Mr. 6 President, at this time I would ask that we move 7 to adopt the Resolution Calendar. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 9 motion is to adopt the Resolution Calendar. All 10 those in favor signify by saying aye. 11 (Response of "Aye".) 12 Opposed, nay. 13 (There was no response.) 14 The resolution is adopted. 15 Senator Bruno. 16 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, at 17 this time, can we take up the non-controversial 18 calendar? 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 20 Secretary will read the non-controversial 21 calendar. 22 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 23 205, by Senator Nozzolio, Senate Bill 601, an 2588 1 act to amend the Navigation Law, in relation to 2 public hearings prior to adoption of local laws 3 regulating vessels. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Lay it 5 aside. 6 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 7 210, by Senator Stafford, Senate Bill 624, an 8 act to amend the County Law, in relation to 9 authorizing the county of Franklin to appoint 10 three public defenders. 11 SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Lay the 13 bill aside. 14 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 15 214, by Senator LaValle, Senate Bill 1368, an 16 act to amend the Town Law, in relation to 17 expending from fire district revenue amounts. 18 SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside. 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Lay the 20 bill aside. 21 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 22 215, by Senator Larkin, Senate Bill 2090-A, an 23 act to amend - 2589 1 SENATOR LARKIN: Lay it aside for 2 the day. 3 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Lay the 4 bill aside for the day. 5 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 6 217, by Senator Present, Senate Bill 1930, an 7 act to amend the State Administrative Procedure 8 Act. 9 SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside. 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Lay the 11 bill aside. 12 Senator Bruno, that completes the 13 non-controversial calendar. 14 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, 15 can we now take up the controversial calendar? 16 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 17 Secretary will read the controversial calendar. 18 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 19 205, by Senator Nozzolio, Senate Print 601, an 20 act to amend the Navigation Law, in relation to 21 public hearings prior to the adoption of local 22 laws. 23 SENATOR PATERSON: Explanation, 2590 1 please. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 3 Nozzolio, an explanation has been asked for by 4 Senator Paterson. 5 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: This measure 6 is designed to provide additional notice to 7 those individuals and to provide public hearings 8 when a local law is adopted which would, in some 9 way, change those laws of nagivation in 10 particular areas. 11 I represent a large coastline of 12 Lake Ontario and, from time to time, there are 13 requests from local governments to change laws 14 governing the bays and harbors of my district. 15 What this bill does is that - 16 sets a requirement that -- rather than a local 17 government just deciding without having public 18 input, that prior to the adoption of a law 19 regarding a vessel, that they do go out and seek 20 that input and have the benefit of public 21 scrutiny before they engage in official 22 conduct. 23 This measure passed the Senate 2591 1 last year 51 to zero and we're hopeful that it 2 will pass the Senate again this year and seek 3 action in the Assembly. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 5 recognizes Senator Paterson. 6 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 7 would Senator Nozzolio yield for a question? 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Nozzolio, do you yield to Senator Paterson for a 10 question? 11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Certainly. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 13 Senator yields. 14 SENATOR PATERSON: Senator 15 Nozzolio, the required length of time for 16 posting of notices for village zoning issues, as 17 I understand, is ten days, and it's a pretty 18 important issue for a village to involve itself 19 in. The notice of time that varies on the 20 dissolution of villages is 10 to 20 days. So it 21 seems to me that you have an excessive length of 22 time for notification in your particular bill. 23 Can you explain to me why you arrived at that 2592 1 amount? 2 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I would be 3 glad to, Senator. I know you're most familiar 4 with metropolitan regions of the state, very 5 intensely populated regions that have a great 6 number of rules and regulations on their books. 7 I tend to come from an area of the state that 8 doesn't have as many complex rules and 9 regulations. Many areas in my district have not 10 adopted specific zoning yet. What we're saying 11 is that when -- we're getting to a point where 12 vessels in the use of nagivational waterways is 13 something a little bit different and we're 14 suggesting that that difference be recognized 15 with additional public input. 16 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 17 recognizes Senator Paterson. 18 SENATOR PATERSON: Would the 19 Senator yield for another question, please? 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 21 Nozzolio, do you yield for another question? 22 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Certainly. 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 2593 1 Senator yields. 2 SENATOR PATERSON: Has there been 3 a great number of complaints from local 4 governments about local governments setting 5 their own regulations when it came to vessels? 6 Is this something that we really need in light 7 of just a general interest, and even in Governor 8 Pataki's state-of-the-state message, he starts 9 talking about short-circuiting government. Can 10 you explain what the need is that met the 11 threshold that caused you to feel that we needed 12 to change the law? 13 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Whenever you 14 have changes in nagivation, those changes are - 15 can only be enhanced by having the people that 16 are most affected know about them. What we're 17 only suggesting here, Mr. Paterson -- Senator 18 Paterson, is that when there are laws regarding 19 the speed of vessel operation anchoring other 20 safety law changes -- it's not just the land use 21 that we're talking about, it's also speed 22 limiting and other questions of vessel operation 23 -- that we believe there needs to be more 2594 1 review, more input, and that when there is a 2 restriction on the navigable water that was 3 heretofore not made, we think that to welcome 4 public comment makes sense. 5 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 6 Secretary - 7 Senator Dollinger. 8 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes, Mr. 9 President. Would the sponsor yield for a 10 question? 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Nozzolio, do you yield to Senator Dollinger? 13 The Senator yields. 14 SENATOR DOLLINGER: I understand, 15 and I appreciate the explanation of this bill. 16 I think there's some very good things about it 17 that will provide additional notice, but my 18 question is this bill is really a form of 19 mandate, isn't it, to local governments to do 20 something? Aren't we telling them to do 21 something that they don't currently do? 22 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: We're 23 suggesting that local governments, when dealing 2595 1 with an issue of nagivation, extend a public 2 hearing process so that those who will be most 3 impacted would be most familiar with the 4 suggested change. 5 SENATOR DOLLINGER: But we're 6 telling them they must hold a hearing. We're 7 mandating that they hold a hearing. We're 8 mandating that they hold -- they require notice, 9 and we're mandating where they put that notice. 10 I guess my question, again through you, Mr. 11 President, if the sponsor would continue to 12 yield is - 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Nozzolio, do you continue to yield? 15 SENATOR DOLLINGER: I know that 16 this Legislature - 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 18 Dollinger -- excuse me. Senator Nozzolio, do 19 you continue to yield? 20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Yes, Mr. 21 President. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 23 Senator continues to yield, Senator Dollinger. 2596 1 SENATOR DOLLINGER: I know that 2 the Majority in this body has consistently 3 passed all three -- I believe all three years 4 that I have been here, that we would not pass 5 unfunded mandates on to local government, and I 6 think I've supported that. I think it's been 7 supported by the Majority. I think it's been 8 supported by members of the Democratic side, but 9 yet it appears as though we're passing a mandate 10 here that doesn't have any funds attached to 11 it. Local communities will have to pay for this 12 notice. They'll have to pay to hold the 13 hearing. They'll have to pay for the 14 administrative time, the help that's going to be 15 needed at this, and my question is, is this a 16 good mandate that should be unfunded or should 17 we put some funds attached to this? Through 18 you, Mr. President. 19 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Mr. President, 20 I'm not sure whether or not the Senator was a 21 member of this body last year and voted for this 22 measure, but the likelihood is that he was. I 23 would suggest that notice, when there is a law 2597 1 change, is a requirement that is in this case, 2 one, based on public safety, and that through 3 personal experience in communities that have 4 changed the Navigation Law, the expense of 5 properly administering that change has been a 6 costly experience that we believe could actually 7 be reducing in -- reduced in cost if proper 8 notice was provided. 9 So, my colleague, I would dare 10 suggest this measure, if implemented, would 11 actually save local governments cost because it 12 would provide adequate notice to those most 13 affected by the law that I should hasten to add 14 is to be changed not by a mandate from this 15 body, but by the local government's own 16 request. 17 It's the local government that's 18 asking the opportunity to change the speed 19 limit. It's the local government that may be 20 asking to change the Moorings Law, the other 21 laws that may impact on the nagivation of 22 vessels. It's the local governments that are 23 asking for this authority. It's the local 2598 1 governments that are making the decision that 2 the laws need to be changed. We're suggesting 3 to the local government, if you make that step, 4 if you take that step and wanted to change the 5 law, that at the very least you need to get 6 input from the public before changing the law. 7 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Again through 8 you, Mr. President, if Senator Nozzolio would 9 yield to just one more question. 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 11 Nozzolio, would you yield to just one more 12 question? The Senator yields to one more 13 question. 14 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: If the Senator 15 promises this is the last question, I would be 16 happy to yield. 17 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Absolutely. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: He's 19 happy to yield, Senator Dollinger. 20 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Is there 21 anything in current law which prohibits the 22 local communities from holding this hearing 23 themselves and paying for the cost themselves 2599 1 without this legislation? 2 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Not to my 3 knowledge. 4 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. Mr. 5 President, on the bill. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Dollinger on the bill. 8 SENATOR DOLLINGER: I guess 9 sitting in this chamber for the last three 10 years, two and a half years, I have become more 11 sensitive to the issue of unfunded mandates. 12 I've heard members of the other 13 side of the aisle talk about things we require 14 local governments to do that they could do 15 themselves, things that we require them to pay 16 for that they could decide to pay for 17 themselves, and I've heard lots of discussion in 18 this chamber, I think, from both sides of the 19 aisle in which people have said, "We shouldn't 20 require local governments to do that. They can 21 do that all by themselves", and most 22 importantly, if we're going to require them to 23 do something, we ought to pay for it ourselves. 2600 1 We ought to put funds attached to it so that we 2 don't run into the problem, the one thing we 3 don't want to give our local communities, 4 unfunded mandates, that you have to do something 5 but yet we don't have to pay for it. We're 6 going to tell you to do it but you pay for it. 7 I've heard the litany in this 8 chamber of all of those instances in which we 9 tell local communities, "Do it but don't ask us 10 for the money to support it." Maybe it's the 11 enlightenment that comes from sitting in this 12 chamber for the last two and a half years, but 13 it seems to me that this bill fits that exact 14 description. 15 My question to the Majority in 16 this chamber is, do you believe that we should 17 have no unfunded mandates? If you do, you have 18 to vote against this bill, or instead, do you 19 believe there are some good unfunded mandates, 20 and this is one of those good ones, and that 21 there's some bad unfunded mandates that it's 22 okay to vote against? It seems to me that what 23 I'm looking for is maybe a little tiny strand of 2601 1 consistency in this body's approach to the 2 concept of unfunded mandates. 3 If you vote for this, you're 4 voting for an unfunded mandate. You might as 5 well recognize it. I guess I've learned enough 6 in this chamber that I'm going to vote against 7 this unfunded mandate, and if local communities, 8 when they're changing the Nagivation Law -- I 9 agree with Senator Nozzolio, there ought to be 10 widespread publication of that. That's a 11 decision that can be made entirely by local 12 communities. Let them make it. Don't tell them 13 "You've got to make it. You've got to hold a 14 public hearing. You've got to spend your time 15 and effort. You've got to spend overtime. 16 You've got to spend publication cost, but we're 17 not going to pay for it." That's the prima 18 facie definition of an unfunded mandate. I'm 19 not going to vote for this one. 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 21 recognizes Senator Paterson. 22 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 23 would the sponsor yield for one more question? 2602 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2 Paterson, can I interrupt you for just a 3 moment? 4 SENATOR PATERSON: Sure. 5 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 6 DeFrancisco, is there something you would like 7 to announce? 8 SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Mr. 9 President, on behalf of the Majority Leader, I 10 would like to call a Rules Committee meeting, an 11 immediate Rules Committee meeting in Room 332 of 12 this building. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There 14 will be an immediate meeting of the Rules 15 Committee in Room 332 immediately. 16 Thank you, Senator Paterson. 17 Senator Paterson, you have the floor. 18 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you very 19 much, Mr. President. 20 I was inquiring as to whether the 21 sponsor would yield for another question. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 23 Nozzolio, do you yield to Senator Paterson? 2603 1 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Certainly. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 3 Senator yields. 4 SENATOR PATERSON: Senator, if we 5 take into account what Senator Dollinger is 6 saying, and we now want to explain to Senator 7 Dollinger why in a sense there is a supervening 8 cause that makes us create the demand that we 9 are in this legislation of local governments, my 10 question to you is who is really benefiting from 11 the adoption of this law? 12 The New York State Conference of 13 Mayors and Municipal Officials is opposed to 14 it. I think they think that this is burdensome 15 for local government. They say it's 16 unwarranted, it's unnecessary. In other words, 17 I don't understand who this legislation serves. 18 Maybe you can explain that to me. 19 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: This 20 legislation, my colleagues, is designed to save 21 local governments money, to make their jobs more 22 cost-effective. Unlike Senator Dollinger's 23 characterization, this is not a requirement on 2604 1 every local government. This is simply a 2 suggestion, a requirement, to those local 3 governments that are changing the Navigation 4 Law, that come to this body and ask this body 5 for the authorization oftentimes to change a 6 speed limit on a lake; to change a speed limit 7 on a bay; to change the Mooring Laws. The local 8 government is initiating this process. We're 9 saying to the local government, "If you want to 10 initiate this process, then you must ensure that 11 public input is first established." That is a 12 threshold predicate for the opportunity to 13 change the law. 14 The local government doesn't have 15 to engage in changing the law unless it wants 16 to. This is purely a voluntary situation. It's 17 purely a voluntary action by the local 18 government. To suggest otherwise is a coating 19 of this issue with a taint that, I believe, is 20 motivated more on other grounds than on the four 21 squared grounds of this legislation. 22 This legislation simply says 23 that, if the local government takes the 2605 1 initiative to change the law, we want to 2 establish some assurances that the public has 3 been given proper opportunity to present input. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 5 Paterson, you still have the floor. 6 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. 7 President. Thank you, Senator Nozzolio, for the 8 answer. 9 I'm not disagreeing with you, 10 Senator. What I am suggesting is that, you're 11 right, it does not make a requirement of local 12 governments, but what happens is that when local 13 governments make an attempt to regulate vessels 14 in a certain way, then there is the attachment 15 that these, I think, rather strict demands, as I 16 pointed out earlier, stricter than, in some 17 cases, the dissolution of a village, in some 18 cases some very important things, and this 19 pertains to the rules about vessels, and what I 20 just am not understanding is why is it that if 21 we're going to be this strict -- what was it 22 that caused us to want to be this way? Not the 23 local governments. They seem to be opposed to. 2606 1 Is it public safety? In other words, I'm just 2 trying to find an answer as to why we have to do 3 something that, in some cases we have quintupled 4 the time of notific... the written notification 5 is 60 days under your bill. 6 So I'm just trying to ask, what 7 was it that caused us to, in effect, for want of 8 a better expression, to come down this hard on 9 the local governments? 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 11 Paterson, are you asking Senator Nozzolio to 12 yield to the question? 13 SENATOR PATERSON: That's a 14 question for the Senator. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 16 Nozzolio. 17 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Mr. President, 18 I yielded to Senator Paterson's last question 19 four questions ago. I'll stand by my previous 20 answer. 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 22 Paterson, you have the floor. 23 SENATOR PATERSON: Then it was - 2607 1 if Senator Nozzolio would yield to a new 2 question. Would you like me to find a new 3 question, Senator? 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 5 Nozzolio, do you yield to a question from 6 Senator Paterson? 7 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Senator, I 8 will continue to yield. 9 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 10 Senator yields. 11 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you. 12 What constitutes a vessel? In 13 other words, how large is the ship before it's a 14 vessel? 15 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I believe 16 that's defined in the Navigation Law, Senator. 17 SENATOR PATERSON: I know that. 18 I just assumed that you read the Navigation Law 19 before you wrote the bill. I just wanted to 20 know. 21 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I don't have 22 that information in front of me, Senator. 23 SENATOR PATERSON: All right. 2608 1 Well, then - 2 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: It's a 3 definition that's in the Navigation Law that 4 governments have the authority to regulate the 5 operation of vessels, that's boats, could be 6 rowboats, could be powerboats, it could be ocean 7 liners. It runs the gamut, Senator. 8 SENATOR PATERSON: So it's not 9 the size of the ship; it's the motion of the 10 ocean, I guess. 11 Senator, the reason I was asking 12 the question was I wanted to know how many 13 individuals; what size of -- of the public is 14 actually affected by this legislation? 15 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Anyone, 16 Senator, that uses the navigable waterway that 17 happens to be subject to changes by those local 18 governments who wish to change the law 19 regulating vessel nagivation within their 20 jurisdiction. 21 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you very 22 much, Senator. 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 2609 1 Secretary will read the last section. 2 THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This 3 act shall take effect on the 100th day. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the 5 roll. 6 (The Secretary called the roll.) 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 8 Paterson to explain his vote. 9 SENATOR PATERSON: Actually, Mr. 10 President, I would like to ask for a slow roll 11 call on this issue. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Are there 13 five Senators in the chamber who are desirous to 14 have a slow roll call? 15 Seeing five, the Secretary will 16 call the roll slowly. 17 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Mr. President. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 19 recognizes Senator Nozzolio. 20 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Star the bill. 21 ACTING PRESDIENT KUHL: The roll 22 call is withdrawn. The star is placed at the 23 request of the sponsor on the bill. 2610 1 The Secretary will continue to 2 call the controversial calendar. 3 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 4 210, by Senator Stafford, Senate Print 624, an 5 act to amend the County Law, in relation to 6 authorizing the county of Franklin to appoint up 7 to three public defenders. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Stafford, an explanation of Calendar Number 210 10 has been asked for by Senator Paterson. 11 SENATOR STAFFORD: Thank you, Mr. 12 President. 13 I will attempt to explain what 14 appears to be a complicated situation in a rural 15 county which isn't complicated. 16 The problem now is they have one 17 public defender, one office, a number of 18 attorneys, and they have cases where they need 19 to have public defender-type people on both 20 sides. Due to the fact they're in that office, 21 they can't represent both sides in that office 22 even though there are two different attorneys 23 and, therefore, they have to go out and get an 2611 1 assigned attorney. It costs a lot more money, 2 and it's a real problem. 3 What this will do -- and it's a 4 pilot project, and I'm quite proud that some of 5 us thought this up together. Franklin County is 6 a very, as I say, rural, and it is a long, so to 7 speak, county, narrow. We can have three 8 separate public defender offices. Therefore, if 9 they do have cases where they have to have a 10 public defender on each side, they will be able 11 to use a public defender from another office to 12 come in. It's just like another law firm, just 13 like another law firm. It will save a great 14 deal of money, and I think it's good common 15 sense. 16 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 17 Abate. 18 SENATOR ABATE: Yes. Would 19 Senator Stafford yield to a question? 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 21 Abate -- Senator Stafford, do you yield to 22 Senator Abate? 23 SENATOR STAFFORD: By all means. 2612 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 2 Senator yields. 3 SENATOR ABATE: I agree with your 4 conclusion that it is admirable that what's 5 being considered through this bill is an 6 expansion of the public defender's office from 7 one office to three to allow them to handle 8 conflict cases when there are co-defendants, or 9 when one attorney may represent the victim and 10 cannot represent the defendant. There are a 11 number of conflicts, and I certainly understand 12 the need to have separate public defender's 13 offices. 14 My question is, however, under 15 County Law, though, it prohibits the sharing of 16 resources from one office to another. How do 17 you suggest that the two newly formed offices 18 will be able to operate without a new 19 appropriation since they cannot share resources; 20 they cannot share the one investigator; they 21 cannot share the library; they can't share 22 administrative staff? 23 SENATOR STAFFORD: Good 2613 1 question. I might add -- this is just my own 2 personal opinion -- I think that's some common 3 sense that we should put into the County Law, so 4 maybe we can work together so we don't even have 5 the issue, but this is different because of the 6 separate appropriations; it is two different 7 offices. Each office is taking their 8 responsibility, his or her responsibility just 9 as each department does in their county. I 10 answered that question in the beginning. 11 SENATOR ABATE: Is there a way 12 that you would consider amending it and not 13 amending it through the County Law but through 14 an executive budget bill so that we can allow 15 for the appropriation of these two newly formed 16 offices? 17 SENATOR STAFFORD: I certainly 18 will consider -- I think it's a very interesting 19 suggestion. Due to the fact this is a pilot 20 project, I really would like to try to do this 21 and get it -- get it into law. I think probably 22 law might be better than the budget. 23 SENATOR ABATE: M-m h-m-m. But I 2614 1 -- would the Senator yield to another question? 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 3 Abate -- Senator Stafford, do you yield to 4 another question? The Senator yields. 5 SENATOR ABATE: My concern is 6 that any time a county would have a problem such 7 as this, would we want to intervene in 62 8 counties to resolve this problem; and wouldn't 9 we be better off doing it through Executive 10 Law? 11 SENATOR STAFFORD: Well, of 12 course, I would say that I'm sure if you had 13 this problem in your area, you would be 14 intervening just like I'm intervening. I think 15 overall we should probably revise the law. I 16 would go toward the County Law. 17 SENATOR ABATE: I have one last 18 question if the Senator would yield. 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 20 Stafford, do you yield to one last question from 21 Senator Abate? 22 (Senator Staffords nods head.) 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 2615 1 Senator yields. 2 SENATOR ABATE: I'm told the 3 Office of Court Administration objects to this, 4 opposes this bill. Do you know why? 5 SENATOR STAFFORD: I guess right 6 now they are not evidencing opposition. They 7 opposed it last year. I say this with all of 8 the good humor and good will that I can muster, 9 because like you, I have some very good friends 10 involved in the Office of Court Administration, 11 but we find ourselves, quite often, not agreeing 12 completely when you get the rural courts. 13 SENATOR ABATE: On the bill. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 15 Abate on the bill. 16 SENATOR ABATE: Although I will 17 probably support this bill, I hope that Senator 18 Stafford will look to amend this bill in the 19 future, because my concern is, although the 20 intentions are good and there is a need because 21 of ethical rules to establish three separate 22 public defender offices, without appropriation, 23 now the county I'm told has three part-time 2616 1 attorneys and one investigator and 2 administrative staff for only one office. So, 3 in essence, we're encumbering the delivery of 4 defense services through this bill in the short 5 term if it's not followed by an appropriate 6 appropriation bill. 7 So, Senator Stafford, I would be 8 willing to work with you and your staff to see 9 that we have adequate follow-up to this piece of 10 legislation. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 12 recognizes Senator Paterson. 13 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 14 would Senator Stafford yield for a question? 15 SENATOR STAFFORD: By all means. 16 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 17 Stafford, will you yield? The Senator yields. 18 SENATOR PATERSON: Senator 19 Stafford, in the Governor's veto message from 20 last year, the previous governor, they pointed 21 out that the Public Defenders Association had 22 some implementary problems with this particular 23 bill, some related to the 18-b panel that it 2617 1 sort of compromises the value of 18-b. I wanted 2 to know, since that time last year, have you 3 talked to the Public Defenders Association? Do 4 you have an idea what it is that disturbs them 5 so much about this legislation? 6 SENATOR STAFFORD: Of course, any 7 good organization -- we're interested in a 8 statewide program and statewide funding. I've 9 worked with the defenders. It's an excellent 10 organization. This is a pilot program. The - 11 as far as the veto message goes, again, we 12 thought at the time that -- that the Governor 13 was getting some very poor advice, and I guess 14 that was proven right. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 16 Paterson. 17 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you, 18 Senator. 19 I'm just a little unclear. The 20 advice that he got was not the best advice 21 because of what? 22 SENATOR STAFFORD: Senator, the 23 way we want to do it and do something sensible 2618 1 to have a program where they have three separate 2 entities, save the county money and not 3 necessarily be interested in just building a 4 statewide organization that I've supported and 5 you have. 6 SENATOR PATERSON: That's right, 7 Mr. President. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Paterson. 10 SENATOR PATERSON: The -- if 11 Senator Stafford would yield for just another 12 question. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Stafford, do you yield for another question from 15 Senator Paterson? The Senator yields. 16 SENATOR PATERSON: Is there 17 equity in the three separate offices that would 18 be set up? In other words, have we researched 19 this enough to know that there -- if Senator 20 Stafford can hear me - 21 SENATOR STAFFORD: Yes. 22 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you. 23 SENATOR STAFFORD: There is, and 2619 1 you being a good lawyer, you're pointing out, if 2 you're going to have three separate law firms, 3 you have to have three separate law firms all 4 with the same power, all being a, as I say, 5 individual entity, and this is what we have 6 here. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 8 Paterson, do you wish to continue to have the 9 floor? 10 SENATOR PATERSON: Yes. Thank 11 you, Mr. President. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 13 Paterson, excuse the interruption just a 14 minute. 15 Ladies and gentlemen, it's 16 getting kind of noisy in here, and it's a little 17 difficult when you have some soft-spoken people 18 trying to answer questions and ask questions, so 19 if we could just kind of keep it down. I know 20 it's a very busy day. We've got a lot of work 21 ahead of us. Just keep it down so we can show a 22 little respect for the members who have the 23 floor. 2620 1 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you, Mr. 2 President. 3 A point well taken. I'm glad you 4 advised us of that. If Senator Stafford would 5 continue to yield. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 7 Senator continues to yield. 8 SENATOR PATERSON: I just have 9 this question when it comes to the savings to 10 the county. I didn't really feel that the 11 public defender's office's real nature was to 12 save the county money, Senator Stafford. I 13 thought what we are really doing in these types 14 of situations is to fulfill our constitutional 15 protections to individuals who are in the legal 16 predicament that they're in and to provide legal 17 counsel to the indigent. 18 SENATOR STAFFORD: That's right. 19 I agree with you. When I was chairman of Codes, 20 I worked very closely with the public defenders, 21 and I think that they are -- where they are 22 right now is because of hard work by your 23 father, you, myself, and many others, and I am a 2621 1 supporter of the public defenders, and that's 2 the way it should be in this country. 3 This, I only pointed out, was 4 that the county, rather than having to go out 5 and get a separate assigned counsel, would use 6 someone who is paid a yearly salary and, 7 therefore, you wouldn't have these additional 8 costs. That's all. 9 SENATOR PATERSON: Okay. Mr. 10 President. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Paterson. 13 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you. 14 Senator Stafford served in the 15 Senate not only with me but also with my father 16 so he can see the diminished capacity as it 17 passes down through my family. 18 SENATOR STAFFORD: That's not 19 true. 20 SENATOR PATERSON: I just have 21 one other question, subpoena -- no, that's not 22 it, Mr. President. 23 My question to Senator Stafford 2622 1 is that there is a reporting requirement 2 inherent in this piece of legislation, and my 3 final question, Senator, is that we notice in 4 the reporting requirement that it does not 5 include the Minority Leader of this Senate. Do 6 you think that in the future you could amend 7 this bill to provide that? 8 SENATOR STAFFORD: Certainly, I 9 don't -- I remember -- I'm trying to think out 10 loud here, the Minority Leader of the Assembly 11 or Senate is not in it, but I certainly would 12 consider a chapter amendment. 13 SENATOR PATERSON: Thank you. 14 That's very gracious, Senator, 15 and thank you for answering my question. 16 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Is there 17 any other Senator wishing to speak on this 18 bill? 19 Senator Waldon. 20 SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very 21 much, Mr. President. 22 Would the good Senator Stafford 23 from the great north country suffer -- Warren 2623 1 County, Washington, Essex, Clinton and Franklin 2 and Hamilton -- suffer a question or two? 3 SENATOR STAFFORD: By all means. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 5 Stafford yields. 6 SENATOR STAFFORD: Every once in 7 a while my bills gets these good brilliant 8 minds. I consider you one of them. 9 Thank you. 10 SENATOR WALDON: I appreciate 11 your generosity, Senator. I'm glad that you 12 would think of anyone in this chamber equal to 13 such a high calling as to be brilliant. 14 SENATOR STAFFORD: Not everyone. 15 SENATOR WALDON: Not everyone? 16 Well, I appreciate that too. 17 Senator, would you please advise 18 us of the fiscal impact? You may have done that 19 while I was out of the chamber and I apologize 20 for my ignorance. What is the fiscal impact of 21 the creation of these new offices? 22 SENATOR STAFFORD: Senator, to 23 the state, none, and as we explained earlier, as 2624 1 far as the separate budgets from each county 2 attorney's position and then when you added them 3 up for the county, we suggest it will be less. 4 SENATOR WALDON: Okay. I thank 5 you for that. 6 Would the Senator yield to 7 another question? 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Stafford, do you yield to another question? The 10 Senator yields. 11 SENATOR WALDON: I again 12 apologize for my ignorance. I tried to quickly 13 read the bill as you were speaking with the 14 learned Senator from the very nice town of 15 Harlem, David Paterson, in regard to the types 16 of people who will be defended by this 17 defender's office. Is it only the criminal 18 element? 19 SENATOR STAFFORD: Excellent 20 question. No. Also, you would have -- some 21 Family Court proceedings would be involved 22 here. Good question. 23 SENATOR WALDON: So this would be 2625 1 a rather universal office in terms of taking 2 care of the needs of all of the people? 3 SENATOR STAFFORD: Right. 4 SENATOR WALDON: Okay. Thank you 5 very much, Mr. President. Thank very much, 6 Senator. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 8 Secretary will read the last section. 9 THE SECRETARY: Section 7. This 10 act shall take effect - 11 SENATOR PATERSON: Slow roll 12 call. 13 THE SECRETARY: -- immediately. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the 15 roll slowly. Are there five Senators wishing to 16 have a slow roll call? 17 Seeing five, call the roll 18 slowly. 19 THE SECRETARY: Senator Abate. 20 SENATOR ABATE: Yes. 21 THE SECRETARY: Senator Babbush. 22 (There was no response.) 23 Senator Bruno. 2626 1 SENATOR BRUNO: Yes. 2 THE SECRETARY: Senator Connor. 3 (Affirmative indication.) 4 THE SECRETARY: Yes. 5 Senator Cook. 6 (There was no response.) 7 Senator DeFrancisco. 8 SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes. 9 THE SECRETARY: Senator DiCarlo. 10 SENATOR DiCARLO: Yes. 11 THE SECRETARY: Senator 12 Dollinger. 13 (There was no response.) 14 Senator Espada. 15 SENATOR ESPADA: Yes. 16 THE SECRETARY: Senator Farley. 17 SENATOR FARLEY: Aye. 18 THE SECRETARY: Senator Galiber. 19 (There was no response.) 20 Senator Gold. 21 (There was no response.) 22 Senator Gonzalez. 23 SENATOR GONZALEZ: Yes. 2627 1 THE SECRETARY: Senator Gonzalez. 2 SENATOR GONZALEZ: Yes. 3 THE SECRETARY: Senator Goodman. 4 SENATOR GOODMAN: Yes. 5 THE SECRETARY: Senator Hannon. 6 SENATOR HANNON: Yes. 7 THE SECRETARY: Senator Hoblock. 8 SENATOR HOBLOCK: Yes. 9 THE SECRETARY: Senator Hoffmann. 10 (There was no response.) 11 Senator Holland. 12 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 13 THE SECRETARY: Senator Johnson. 14 SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 15 THE SECRETARY: Senator Jones. 16 SENATOR JONES: Yes. 17 THE SECRETARY: Senator Kruger. 18 (There was no response.) 19 Senator Kuhl. 20 SENATOR KUHL: Aye. 21 THE SECRETARY: Senator Lack. 22 (There was no response.) 23 Senator Larkin. 2628 1 SENATOR LARKIN: Yes. 2 THE SECRETARY: Senator LaValle. 3 SENATOR LAVALLE: Aye. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator Leibell. 5 SENATOR LEIBELL: Aye. 6 THE SECRETARY: Senator Leichter. 7 SENATOR LEICHTER: Yes. 8 THE SECRETARY: Senator Levy. 9 SENATOR LEVY: Aye. 10 THE SECRETARY: Senator Libous. 11 SENATOR LIBOUS: Aye. 12 THE SECRETARY: Senator Maltese. 13 (There was no response.) 14 Senator Marcellino. 15 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Aye. 16 THE SECRETARY: Senator Marchi. 17 SENATOR MARCHI: Aye. 18 THE SECRETARY: Senator 19 Markowitz. 20 (There was no response.) 21 Senator Maziarz. 22 SENATOR MAZIARZ: Aye. 23 THE SECRETARY: Senator Mendez. 2629 1 (There was no response.) 2 Senator Mendez. 3 (There was no response.) 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator 5 Montgomery. 6 SENATOR MENDEZ: Yes. 7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. 8 THE SECRETARY: Senator Nanula. 9 SENATOR NANULA: Aye. 10 THE SECRETARY: Senator Nozzolio. 11 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Aye. 12 THE SECRETARY: Senator Onorato. 13 SENATOR ONORATO: Aye. 14 THE SECRETARY: Senator 15 Oppenheimer. 16 (There was no response.) 17 Senator Padavan. 18 (There was no response.) 19 Senator Paterson. 20 SENATOR PATERSON: Yes. 21 THE SECRETARY: Senator Present. 22 SENATOR PRESENT: Aye. 23 THE SECRETARY: Senator Rath. 2630 1 SENATOR RATH: Aye. 2 THE SECRETARY: Senator Saland. 3 SENATOR SALAND: Aye. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator Santiago. 5 (There was no response.) 6 Senator Sears. 7 SENATOR SEARS: Aye. 8 THE SECRETARY: Senator Seward. 9 SENATOR SEWARD: Aye. 10 THE SECRETARY: Senator Skelos. 11 SENATOR SKELOS: Aye. 12 THE SECRETARY: Senator Smith. 13 (There was no response.) 14 Senator Solomon. 15 (There was no response.) 16 Senator Spano. 17 (There was no response.) 18 Senator Stachowski. 19 SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Yes. 20 THE SECRETARY: Senator Stafford. 21 SENATOR STAFFORD: Aye. 22 THE SECRETARY: Senator Stavisky. 23 (There was no response.) 2631 1 Senator Trunzo. 2 SENATOR TRUNZO: Yes. 3 THE SECRETARY: Senator Tully. 4 (There was no response.) 5 Senator Velella. 6 (There was no response.) 7 Senator Volker. 8 SENATOR VOLKER: Yes. 9 THE SECRETARY: Senator Waldon. 10 SENATOR WALDON: Yes. 11 THE SECRETARY: Senator Wright. 12 SENATOR WRIGHT: Aye. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 14 Secretary will call the absentees. 15 THE SECRETARY: Senator Babbush, 16 excused. 17 Senator Cook. 18 (There was no response.) 19 Senator Dollinger. 20 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Aye. 21 THE SECRETARY: Senator Galiber. 22 (There was no response.) 23 Senator Gold. 2632 1 (There was no response.) 2 Senator Hoffmann. 3 (There was no response.) 4 Senator Kruger. 5 SENATOR KRUGER: Yes. 6 THE SECRETARY: Senator Lack. 7 SENATOR LACK: Aye. 8 THE SECRETARY: Senator Maltese. 9 (There was no response.) 10 Senator Markowitz. 11 SENATOR MARKOWITZ: Yes. 12 THE SECRETARY: Senator 13 Oppenheimer. 14 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Yes. 15 THE SECRETARY: Senator Santiago. 16 (There was no response.) 17 Senator Smith. 18 (There was no response.) 19 Senator Solomon. 20 SENATOR SOLOMON: Yes. 21 THE SECRETARY: Senator Spano. 22 (There was no response.) 23 Senator Stavisky. 2633 1 (There was no response.) 2 Senator Tully. 3 SENATOR TULLY: Aye. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator Velella. 5 SENATOR VELELLA: Aye. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Announce 7 the results when tabulated. 8 THE SECRETARY: Ayes 50, nays 9 zero. 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: A close 11 vote. The bill is passed. 12 Calendar Number 214, by Senator 13 LaValle - 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 15 recognizes Senator Bruno. 16 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, 17 can we return to reports of standing 18 committees? I believe there's a report from the 19 Rules Committee. Can we move its adoption at 20 this time? 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: We'll 22 return to reports of standing committees. The 23 Secretary will read. 2634 1 THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno, 2 from the Committee on Rules, reports the 3 following bills: Senate Print 1552-A, an act 4 making appropriations for the legal requirements 5 of the state debt service and lease purchase 6 payments. 7 Senate Print 1826-B, budget bill, 8 an act to amend the Social Services Law, in 9 relation to eliminating reimbursement to Social 10 Services districts for brokers' fees, finders' 11 fees and rental security deposits. 12 Senate Print 3682, by Senator 13 Bruno, an act to amend the State Administrative 14 Procedure Act, in relation to agency review of 15 existing rules and their effectiveness. 16 Senate Print 3683, by Senator 17 Bruno, an act to amend the Environmental 18 Conservation Law, the State Administrative 19 Procedure act, the Public Health Law and the 20 State Finance Law, in relation to enacting the 21 Environmental Regulatory Reform Act of 1995. 22 All bills ordered directly for 23 third reading. 2635 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 2 recognizes Senator Bruno. Motion to accept the 3 third reading -- the reports of standing 4 committees and Rules report, Senator Bruno? 5 SENATOR BRUNO: Move to accept 6 the report, Mr. President. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: All those 8 in favor signify by saying aye. 9 The Chair recognizes Senator 10 Paterson. 11 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 12 regrettably, I object to the acceptance of this 13 particular report. This report has a lot of 14 reforms in it that it proposes, and since we're 15 speaking of reforms, I think that one of the 16 issues that we wanted to reform, all of us as a 17 government, as a state Senate, is the process by 18 which we make decisions. 19 We are in the week in which we 20 would hopefully pass the budget on April 1st, 21 and with that seasonable period approaching us, 22 there are some very specific items in which I 23 think we have to be scrupulously fair to each 2636 1 other's opportunity to address certain issues. 2 The Rules report that we are 3 about to accept, from what I understand of it, 4 contains four bills that will direct very much 5 the progress of our citizenry within the next 6 fiscal year, 1995-96. However, with these four 7 reports or four bills included in one report, we 8 are going to make a lot of social and economic 9 reforms; reforms of which our conference was 10 unfamiliar until roughly the past few days. 11 There have been no hearings on 12 these bills. There's been no proper use of the 13 committee process on these bills. We do have a 14 process -- there's nothing wrong with the 15 process of reporting the bills to the Finance 16 Committee, the Finance Committee then voting on 17 it and then reporting it to the Rules Committee 18 and then reporting it to the floor, and we can 19 use the broad supervisory power of the Senate to 20 do that in emergency situations, but these are 21 issues that we all know very well and that we 22 will be presumably debating, discussing and 23 dialoguing about in this particular process. 2637 1 I don't understand how we can do 2 that without a proper and a fair period of time 3 to analyze all of these bills, and I wanted to 4 get up at this time and express that sentiment 5 and move to oppose the Rules report, Mr. 6 President. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Motion is 8 to -- Senator Leichter. 9 SENATOR LEICHTER: Yeah, Mr. 10 President. I think that Senator Paterson made a 11 very persuasive point. I want to say that I'm 12 particularly distressed as the ranking Minority 13 member of the Environmental Conservation 14 Committee that a bill which is so important to 15 the environment did not get a chance to be 16 considered by that committee. 17 Mr. President, I'm sorry to say 18 that we're establishing a very bad precedent of 19 bypassing committees on important measures. 20 Earlier this session we had the bill reimposing 21 capital punishment that did not go to the Codes 22 Committee. Now, eventually another bill was 23 fashioned which did come before the committee. 2638 1 Now we have two substantive bills 2 dealing with regulations that affect each and 3 every person in the state, and I think that 4 we're going to show you that it affects people 5 in a very deleterious, harmful manner. That 6 ought to be considered. 7 Senator Bruno, if you want to get 8 rid of committees, let's just get rid of 9 committees, but to have committees there sort of 10 as supernumeraries, you know, send them 11 unimportant bills, but if there's something 12 important, you rush it out to the floor; you 13 ignore members who have some expertise in these 14 areas who can contribute to the committees. I 15 think it's un... I think it's unfortunate. 16 There's no reason these bills have to be rushed 17 to the floor for vote at this time. And I would 18 hope very much that on reconsideration, that we 19 would not accept the motion to move these to 20 third reading and that we would follow our 21 procedures. 22 I just want to point out, you can 23 trample on procedures because your ideas -- we 2639 1 can always trample on the Minority, but when you 2 trample on procedures, you not only trample on 3 this Minority, but you trample on the tradition 4 on the integrity of the Senate. You trample on 5 protections that exist for the public. That's 6 why we have committees. That's why we hold 7 discussions. That's why we deliberate. That's 8 why sometimes we have hearings so that there is 9 a process so that what eventually comes out of 10 this chamber is passed by the Assembly, goes to 11 the Governor, is a considered measure. We are 12 foregoing that protection to the public and I 13 think it's regrettable and should not be done. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 15 recognizes Senator Bruno. 16 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, I 17 was hoping that we might avoid this kind of 18 rhetoric that we're about to engage in for the 19 next maximum of one half hour on this 20 resolution. 21 We all know that we are starting 22 a budget process here. We all know that there 23 are rules and regulations that this Senate 2640 1 abides by, and we all know that the rules and 2 regulations establish a procedure to move 3 legislation to the floor when necessary, when 4 appropriate, exactly through the procedure that 5 is established by the rules and reg's of this 6 house. 7 This is not extraordinary, Mr. 8 President. This is ordinary procedure under the 9 circumstances that we find ourselves in today. 10 We have two messages of necessity from the 11 Governor who thinks what we're doing is 12 important, and he represents not one district, 13 but the entire state of New York. 14 So we can engage in rhetoric. We 15 can engage in a procedure to delay the Senate 16 moving forward in passing a budget. I only 17 wish, Senators, that you might have been able to 18 relate to the Speaker of the Assembly, a 19 colleague of yours, to engage in meaningful 20 discussions that would have allowed us to move 21 these bills with three-way agreement rather than 22 two-way agreement. That would have been 23 preferable. 2641 1 SENATOR LEICHTER: Mr. President. 2 SENATOR BRUNO: And we are still 3 waiting -- we are still hoping that the Speaker 4 will engage in meaningful discussion. 5 So I am standing, Mr. President, 6 so that we establish very clearly that we are 7 following the rules and regulations of this 8 house and nothing else, and at the same time, I 9 am very pleased, Senator, that you want to 10 follow the procedures that are the regulations 11 and rules of this house because I totally agree 12 with you, Senator, and I will remind you, Mr. 13 President, that any bill that comes before the 14 floor, the maximum for debate including 15 amendments is two hours, and there will be two 16 minutes to explain your vote. And on a motion 17 such as this one, we have one half hour debate 18 on that side and one half hour debate on this 19 side. And we can stay here and listen to the 20 delays for whatever the appropriate hours are, 21 but I'll ask you, Mr. President, to be diligent 22 in helping us abide by the rules of the Senate. 23 We are not a mob. We're not a 2642 1 mob. We don't make up rules as we go along. We 2 don't make up rules to suit ourselves. We don't 3 make up rules when we think they're appropriate. 4 We follow the rules established by this body 5 that goes back decades, and that's the rule that 6 gets this bill before this house. 7 Mr. President, I only say this to 8 remind my very, very distinguished colleague, 9 Mr. Leichter, that I see the Senator is still on 10 his feet and apparently has something to say. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Before 12 Senator Leichter, Senator Waldon. 13 SENATOR WALDON: I have a 14 question also, Senator Leichter. 15 SENATOR LEICHTER: Ask your 16 question. 17 SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very 18 much. I appreciate your deference. 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 20 Bruno, do you yield to a question from Senator 21 Waldon? The Senator yields. 22 SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr. 23 President. 2643 1 SENATOR WALDON: The 2 distinguished Leader of the Senate from 3 Rensselaer and Saratoga County, I too am aware 4 of rules and procedures, and in reviewing the 5 material -- excuse me -- contained in Budget 6 Bill Number 91, I believe is the designation 7 which deals with income maintenance, I became 8 aware or reflected upon Article 17 of the 9 Constitution. Are you familiar with that 10 article, Senator Bruno? 11 SENATOR BRUNO: I am not 12 intimately aware of it, Senator, but I would 13 appreciate you making me more familiar with it, 14 if you would. 15 SENATOR WALDON: I'll try in my 16 fumbling way, Senator, to do that. I am not 17 overly familiar, but my staff did remind me that 18 it says that there's an obligation of the state 19 to take care of the indigent. That's the basic 20 tenet of that portion of Article 17 that I would 21 appreciate your addressing, because in the bill 22 which is part of the package that you've asked 23 us to accept, we are going to do -- if passed as 2644 1 it is written, do some extraordinary things 2 which, in my opinion, would violate the 3 Constitution of our state, and if we're going to 4 conform to procedures, then I would beg that we 5 also conform to the Constitution of the state of 6 New York. 7 Would we, by now changing the 8 manner which we take care of the indigent in 9 this state, not be in violation of the 10 Constitution of the state of New York? Mr. 11 President, if I may through you, ask that 12 question of the learned Senator. 13 SENATOR BRUNO: Senator, thank 14 you. 15 My very learned colleague, 16 Senator Holland, was whispering in this ear 17 while I was listening to you with this ear, and 18 he says that that same article indicates that it 19 is up to the Legislature to change the rules as 20 they deem appropriate, and that's what this bill 21 on the floor will do if you, Senator, in your 22 wisdom, allow us to proceed to discuss the 23 merits of the bill rather than a procedural 2645 1 question on getting the bill to the floor. 2 SENATOR WALDON: Well, Mr. 3 President, if I may. I assure you, Senator, 4 that this is - 5 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 6 Waldon, are you asking Senator Bruno to yield? 7 SENATOR WALDON: Yes. Would he 8 continue to yield? 9 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 10 Bruno, do you continue to yield? 11 SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr. 12 President. 13 SENATOR WALDON: I assure you, 14 Senator Bruno, this is not a cavalier act on my 15 part. It's a genuine interest. I am very 16 sensitive to the Constitution of this state. 17 I'm also sensitive to our needs as a Legislature 18 to take care of the needs of those who are at 19 least able to take care of themselves. 20 So I would ask, could you as a 21 leader of our body, have an official decision 22 rendered in regard to what the true intent of 23 the Constitution is regarding Article 17, 2646 1 because I have such a great variance in my 2 understanding with the learned Senator, Senator 3 Holland from Rockland and Orange Counties, so 4 that I would be totally edified as well as all 5 of our 59 colleagues, your 59 colleagues and my 6 59 -- 59 colleagues which make you and I 61. Is 7 that possible? 8 SENATOR BRUNO: Senator, it is 9 not practical. I would like to accommodate 10 you. If it was within my power, I would, but I 11 really think that that is a matter that could 12 only be decided in the courts because we feel 13 that we are proceeding within the range that the 14 Constitution affords us. 15 SENATOR WALDON: Mr. President, 16 in closing. I thank very much the learned 17 Senator - 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 19 Waldon, are you asking Senator Bruno - 20 SENATOR WALDON: I'm going to sit 21 down. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: I'm going 23 to suggest, Senator Waldon, that you then sit 2647 1 down because Senator Bruno had the floor and 2 Senator Dollinger was next on the list. So if 3 you would like to speak, I would be happy to do 4 that, but we're trying to follow the rules of 5 procedure here. 6 SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very 7 much, Mr. President. 8 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President. 9 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 10 Paterson, why do you rise? 11 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 12 I thought that Senator Leichter was next in 13 line. I'm not sure. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Are you 15 asking Senator Bruno to yield, Senator Leichter? 16 SENATOR LEICHTER: I sought to, 17 Mr. President. I then yield to -- my 18 distinguished colleague from Queens had a 19 pressing question that I - 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Would you 21 like to - 22 SENATOR LEICHTER: -- instead of 23 side bar, I would just like to ask Senator Bruno 2648 1 a question. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 3 Bruno, do you yield to Senator Leichter? 4 SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr. 5 President. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 7 Senator yields. 8 SENATOR LEICHTER: Senator, let 9 me first say, I'm delighted to be part of "Camp 10 Bruno" but, Senator, you made a point about the 11 budget and we need to pass the budget, and so 12 on, and I want to make it very clear that no - 13 nothing that I said or Senator Paterson said at 14 all questioned two of the bills which happened 15 to be budget bills, whether we liked the bills 16 or not. We're going to comment on that, but we 17 did not object to moving those to third reading, 18 but there were two bills here, Senator, that are 19 being sponsored by you, 3682 and 3683. Those 20 are not Article 7 bills. Those are not budget 21 bills; isn't that a fact, Senator Bruno? 22 SENATOR BRUNO: Senator, I, with 23 great pleasure, inform you that those two bills 2649 1 were introduced last Thursday, and they are aged 2 and they are appropriately before this house 3 without cutting any corners at all, and I'm 4 surprised that you haven't been staying up 5 nights studying those bills so that you would 6 have known they were introduced last Thursday. 7 SENATOR LEICHTER: Senator, I 8 don't think you understood my question. 9 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 10 Leichter, are you asking Senator Bruno to 11 continue to yield? 12 SENATOR LEICHTER: Yes. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Bruno, do you continue to yield? 15 SENATOR LEICHTER: If my good 16 friend, Senator Bruno, would yield. 17 Senator, I don't question the 18 fact that these bills are aged. That wasn't the 19 point I made at all. The point that we made, 20 Senator, is that we have committees, and from 21 your very answer, it does seem to me as you 22 forget in times that there are committees. 23 The point that I made, sir, was 2650 1 that these bills ought to go to committees, and 2 since they affect particularly the environment 3 where I am the ranking member -- we have a 4 wonderful chairman in Senator Tully, what -- the 5 point that I made and Senator Paterson I thought 6 made it very well beforehand is that we have 7 procedures. The procedures we're talking about 8 is the committees system and these bills ought 9 to go through committees, and they need not be 10 passed by April 1. They're not part of the 11 budget, and that's the point we're making, 12 Senator Bruno. 13 SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you very 14 much, Senator Leichter, for the point that 15 you've just made. I appreciate your making that 16 point. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 18 Paterson, why do you rise? 19 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 20 on this motion -- I'm sorry. Senator Dollinger 21 is before me? 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 23 Dollinger -- I have a list going, Senator 2651 1 Paterson. Senator Dollinger would be the next 2 scheduled - 3 SENATOR PATERSON: Then I gladly 4 yield. 5 Thank you, Mr. President. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 7 recognizes Senator Dollinger on the motion. 8 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you, 9 Mr. President. 10 To the Temporary President of the 11 Senate, I agree as a lawyer that we are 12 operating within the rules. I understand that 13 there are rules that allow the Senate to 14 consider this. I think at least from my 15 perspective in objecting to the Rules Committee 16 report is not because the rules aren't 17 necessarily being followed in their black letter 18 form, but the spirit which guides bringing the 19 two bills, the Administrative Procedure Act and 20 the EnCon bills to the floor today, and I agree 21 with you that these are very important bills. 22 I would simply say to the man on 23 the second floor, these were obviously very 2652 1 important bills in January when we sat here and 2 did license plate bills, and they were very 3 important bills in February when we sat here and 4 did all kinds of resolutions and minor changes 5 and technical changes and extenders. They were 6 very important in February. They were very 7 important for the first 27 days of March, and we 8 sat here and we did four bills of calendar and 9 we took $89 from the people of the state of New 10 York to come in and do the peoples' business, 11 and we passed, I think, every one-house bill 12 that we have passed in the time that I've been 13 here. 14 Yet these important matters were 15 sitting down on the second floor, important 16 changes in the Administrative Procedure Act, 17 equally important changes, if not devastating 18 changes in the Environmental Conservation Law. 19 These were at the top of the Governor's agenda, 20 and we did nothing. 21 We did nothing until today when 22 the Governor, I think, because perhaps some 23 people outside walking around this building have 2653 1 carried a message that he doesn't like, have 2 brought it right to this Capitol that says, 3 "Gee, Governor, you're a question of the polls, 4 Governor. You might be looking at the polls." 5 Maybe the second floor might be looking at the 6 polls, and that might explain why today the 7 second floor decides, in conjunction with the 8 Senate Majority, to bring two very significant 9 bills to the floor, get them before us Thursday 10 night just under the wire, just to get the three 11 days worth of aging, allow them to go over the 12 weekend which seems to be a continuing pattern 13 in this house. I know we ran into that with 14 respect to the death penalty. The same exact 15 process was followed, all within the rules, but 16 we didn't have a chance for the Environmental 17 Conservation Committee to sit down and wrestle 18 with these, what I think will be historic 19 changes in that bill. We didn't allow the 20 Senate Finance Committee or subcommittees of the 21 Senate Finance Committee to consider the 22 extensive changes in the Administrative 23 Procedure Act. 2654 1 I think what -- the purpose of 2 doing this today may be for a post-vote press 3 conference and not for the substance of these 4 bills. But I guess I'm disappointed. I was 5 talking to Senator Leibell who reminded me of 6 his military service and brought back an old 7 military term that seems to have meaning to me 8 today. 9 Remember the old military term 10 about "hurry up and wait"? Well, it seems here 11 in the Senate we have just the opposite 12 approach. We wait, we wait, we wait, and then 13 all of a sudden we have to hurry up. Well, I 14 guess we're in the hurry-up phase part to what 15 may be historic changes to the Administrative 16 Procedure Act and the Environmental Conservation 17 Act. 18 I have only one solace as I sit 19 here objecting to this report, and that is 20 because I know, at least I understand from the 21 leadership on this side, that these bills aren't 22 agreed to. That this is simply a one-house 23 bill, and when I go back home tonight, I can 2655 1 say, "Gee, I did a lot of one-house bills in 2 January. I did a lot of one-house bills in 3 February. I did a lot of one-house bills in 4 March", and sure enough, I came to March 28th, 5 three days before the budget deadline, I'm now 6 about to do three or four more one-house bills. 7 It seems to me that's what this is all about. 8 I'm disappointed, although as I 9 acknowledged to the Temporary President, we're 10 within the rules. It seems to me we would be 11 better off to operate in the spirit of governing 12 and if we did that, I wouldn't be standing here 13 complaining about even though we're within the 14 rules, it doesn't seem to me we're in the spirit 15 of trying to achieve a compromise that will make 16 changes in this state's law, and we can have a 17 legitimate debate about whether those changes 18 are beneficial or not. We're going to be denied 19 that opportunity today because we're going to do 20 it in a one-house fashion, and it's too bad that 21 we seem to wait and then all of a sudden hurry 22 up. 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 2656 1 recognizes Senator Connor. 2 SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you, Mr. 3 President. 4 Mr. President, I think it's clear 5 that what the Majority is doing here is within 6 the rules and the rules do permit it. The fact 7 that the rules permit it, though, doesn't mean 8 it's the right thing to do or the wise thing to 9 do. For example, the rules of the Senate I 10 think quite wisely provide for a shortcut in 11 urgent situations where bills can come directly 12 from the Rules Committee to third reading, bills 13 that have to be enacted. 14 Traditionally, that's the way it 15 was unwisely used in all-night sessions at the 16 end of the session just to pump out 17 legislation. We didn't like it, but we all 18 wanted to go home, and we knew it was the end of 19 session, so it was the only way to get the bill 20 out here. 21 In this case, just because the 22 rules permit it, it doesn't mean it's the best 23 way to go. We have important bills here dealing 2657 1 with administrative regulations and with the 2 Environmental Conservation Law, and I feel badly 3 for the very fine chairs we have of committees 4 who deal with those areas. We have a committee 5 system here. We have committee staff. Indeed, 6 we take extra compensation for being committee 7 chairs, the Ranking Minority members on 8 committees; and, in fact, we find that this kind 9 of procedure makes it appear like perhaps we're 10 not earning our keep because we have a 11 committee, for example, that deals with 12 Environmental Conservation matters and one of 13 the most important and sweeping changes in that 14 law doesn't even come before the committee, 15 doesn't even get considered by the committee 16 much less, frankly, with legislation this 17 sweeping. I'm sure it would be quite 18 appropriate -- I believe it would be appropriate 19 for such a committee to hold a public hearing. 20 Let the public come in. Let interested groups 21 come in and say, "Now that you have an omnibus 22 kind of bill, lots of old ideas, a few new 23 ideas, here's what we think of the package." 2658 1 What's wrong with that? What's 2 the hurry? Surely, we're not ending the session 3 this week. Surely, there is no rush. So while 4 the rules permit it, it's just not wise to do 5 under these circumstances. Why short circuit 6 the committees when there is time to do 7 otherwise? Why do it in a hurry-up fashion when 8 there's time to do it the right way, the best 9 way? 10 And I know the rules say a lot of 11 things. The one thing I would point out is the 12 rules do not say debate is limited to two 13 hours. They don't say that. In the history of 14 the Senate, they never said that. They have 15 never said debate on a matter is limited to two 16 hours. What the rules say is no motion to cut 17 off debate can be made or entertained until two 18 hours have elapsed. The rules don't try and 19 limit debate. They guarantee to the members at 20 least two hours. If any member or group of 21 members wish to use the two hours, the rules 22 guarantee a two-hour debate, but there is no 23 requirement that anyone move to cut off debate 2659 1 at that time, and we've had a long tradition in 2 this house on very, very important legislation 3 of allowing debates to run longer as long as 4 they haven't become repetitious, as long as we 5 don't have the same members standing up 6 repeatedly, and as long as we're hearing from 7 all of our members about something important. 8 So I do want to set the record 9 straight, Mr. President, on that. There is no 10 limit of two hours in the rules. There is a 11 guarantee of at least two hours debate in our 12 rules. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 14 motion is to accept the Rules report. All those 15 in favor, signify by saying aye. 16 (Response of "Aye.") 17 Those opposed, nay. 18 (Response of "Nay.") 19 The motion is adopted. The bills 20 are ordered directly to third reading. 21 Chair recognizes Senator Bruno. 22 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President. I 23 would now like to call up Calendar Number 288. 2660 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 2 will read. 3 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 4 288, Budget Bill, Senate Print 1826B, an act to 5 amend the Social Services Law, in relation to 6 eliminating reimbursement to social services 7 districts for brokers fees. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Bruno. 10 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President. 11 Is there a message of necessity from the 12 Governor at the desk? 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Bruno, there is. 15 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President. I 16 now move that we accept the message of 17 necessity. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 19 motion is to accept the message of necessity. 20 All those in favor, signify by saying aye. 21 (Response of "Aye.") 22 Opposed, nay. 23 (Response of "Nay.") 2661 1 The message is accepted. 2 Senator Paterson, did I 3 understand you wanted an explanation of the 4 bill? 5 SENATOR PATERSON: Yes, I did. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Stafford. The chair recognizes Senator Stafford 8 to explain the bill. 9 SENATOR STAFFORD: Senator 10 Holland, who - 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Stafford, excuse me just one moment. I'm trying 13 to get Senator Bruno's attention behind you. 14 SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President and 15 Senator Stafford, forgive me for the 16 interruption, but I am notified that we should 17 call a joint meeting of Crime and Corrections 18 and Children and Family Committees in Room 332 19 immediately. 20 SENATOR STAFFORD: There will be 21 an immediate meeting, a joint meeting of the 22 Crime and Corrections Committee and the Children 23 and Families Committee in the Majority 2662 1 Conference Room, Room 332. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Thank 3 you, Senator Stafford, for that interruption. 4 Senator Stafford for an 5 explanation. 6 SENATOR STAFFORD: Mr. 7 President. Senator Bruno a few moments ago 8 referred to Senator Holland as a learned 9 colleague. He is, and he will be giving us an 10 explanation and will discuss the bill that we 11 are about to take up. 12 Mr. President. I would ask if I 13 could please just emphasize and summarize what 14 we are attempting to do as we begin our budget 15 process our Majority Leader, Senator Bruno, 16 referred to today. 17 We are going to be taking steps 18 to make sure -- to make sure that we have a 19 state that is viable, that is alive. We have an 20 economic engine in this state, and that is our 21 economy; and if we continue to take away from 22 the economic engine so that it no longer 23 produces, we are not going to have the funds to 2663 1 carry out some of the very, very needed services 2 and functions that our budget will support. 3 And, Mr. President, we all know, 4 but I think we have to be -- we have to 5 emphazise today, we have a $5 billion deficit. 6 We have to work with that and, Mr. President, 7 each year for the past years we've had a deficit 8 of $5 billion. We will learn from Senator 9 Holland and others during these days, exactly 10 where that deficit has come from and how we 11 intend to deal with it. 12 We have had three-way 13 negotiations, Senator Bruno, the Governor, and 14 the Speaker, and I assure you -- I assure you 15 that we have a situation where, in those 16 negotiations, we're going to have to understand, 17 and the Governor does and Senator Bruno does, 18 that we can't have business as usual, and I 19 assure you, we will not. 20 In the next few days, many of us 21 will say to ourselves, "Things aren't as easy as 22 they were. We don't have really the funds that 23 we did have," and that is exactly right and that 2664 1 is what we're going to have to correct, but we 2 have a budget here that we're going to pass, 3 that we agreed with the Governor on, and we're 4 doing our work. This is very serious. 5 For too many years we've had 6 irresponsibility, and this agreed-upon position 7 takes us away from that irresponsibility and 8 makes us realize that we're going to have to be 9 with other states compatible and we're going to 10 have to have business in our state rather than 11 having it leave. We will then be able to 12 provide the services that are so needed in our 13 state. 14 And with that, Mr. President, for 15 the bill that we will consider, I refer to 16 Senator Joseph Holland. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 18 recognizes Senator Holland to continue the 19 explanation. 20 SENATOR HOLLAND: Thank you, Mr. 21 President. 22 First thing I would like to make 23 clear is this is just a welfare reform bill. It 2665 1 does not include Medicaid. 2 Without cost-containment, state 3 spending for welfare in 1995-96 is projected to 4 be close to $2.5 billion. This welfare reform 5 proposal would reduce state welfare spending 6 based on projected costs by approximately 16 7 percent to $2.1 billion. The savings for the 8 state is projected to be approximately $359 9 million and the savings to local property 10 taxpayers about $280 million. 11 Public criticism of welfare is 12 widespread. This bill will remedy many of the 13 most significant problems in the public 14 assistance system, such as welfare dependency 15 and the incentive not to work rather than to 16 work. 17 Welfare rolls have increased by 18 about 30 percent since 1980 and currently nearly 19 one in ten New Yorkers receive public 20 assistance. Clearly, something is wrong. Today 21 we have before us a bill that will eliminate 22 dependency and promote self-sufficiency. We 23 would do this through the following measures: 2666 1 Workfare. Workfare will save 2 millions and encourage personal responsibility. 3 Westchester has saved -- Westchester County has 4 saved $30 million and cut their rolls by 30 5 percent since they went into Workfare. 6 Time limits. 60 days per year 7 for employable home relief recipients without 8 children. Only 19 other states provide any type 9 of general assistance to able-bodied 10 individuals. Nine states do not provide any 11 type of general assistance, whether it be 12 handicapped or aging, et cetera. 13 One of the states that supports 14 -- to provide support to the able-bodied - 15 other states that support -- provide support to 16 the able-bodied, the great majority place a time 17 limit on how long these individuals can receive 18 assistance. By limiting the duration of the 19 assistance to 60 days, 85,000 recipients would 20 leave the rolls as of 1 June 1995, saving 21 approximately $163 million. 22 Finger imaging and other fraud 23 and abuse proposals. Through statewide finger 2667 1 imaging for applicants for all types of welfare 2 benefits and stricter fraud and abuse sanctions 3 and penalties, New York State will be able to 4 target our scarce resources to those who are 5 truly in need. Even after the cuts in home 6 relief and AFDC are taken into account, New York 7 will remain one of the most generous states in 8 the nation in taking care of our needy. 9 New York -- New York has by far 10 the largest general assistance case load of any 11 state in this nation. Even with grant 12 reductions, New York will still offer the fourth 13 most generous benefits for able-bodied single 14 home relief recipients and will remain in the 15 top ten for the largest AFDC grants. 16 New York has a history and a 17 Constitution that requires us to provide support 18 for those in need. We can, however, no longer 19 afford to be as generous as we have in the past 20 without expecting anything in return. 21 This bill ensures that New York 22 State will continue to provide the necessary 23 support for those who are in need. It 2668 1 transforms the welfare system into a means of 2 temporary support for those who have the ability 3 to become self-sufficient. It promotes those on 4 welfare to act as responsible and productive 5 members of society, and it does not shirk the 6 state's responsibility to care for those who 7 cannot care for themselves. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Paterson. 10 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 11 I have an amendment to this bill that's at the 12 desk. I would waive its reading and be willing 13 to explain it. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Without 15 objection, the reading of the amendment is 16 waived. 17 The Chair recognizes Senator 18 Paterson to explain the amendment. 19 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 20 in this amendment, one of the measures in a 21 sense freezes the state participation in the 22 cost of living assessment that the federal 23 government gives to the in-community living 2669 1 elderly, disabled and the blind. The freeze 2 will constitute approximately $13. 3 So, in other words, what we are 4 saying to those elderly and -- who live in the 5 community is that we are going to freeze the 6 amount of money that the state participates in 7 the supplemental cost of living assessment and 8 deny them that $13. 9 Now, at the end of the last 10 session, we passed three pieces of legislation, 11 in fact, that pertain to adult care facilities, 12 and these adult care facilities will get through 13 the operator the actual finances such that those 14 seniors and those who are in need will, if they 15 are in a facility, receive the supplemental 16 value. However, for those who are living at 17 home, for those who may have the additional 18 encumbrance of being at home, the fact that 19 they're home does not always mean that they are 20 that much independent; it just means that they 21 meet a threshold by which they can stay at 22 home. They will not get an extra $13 a month. 23 I think that this measure is 2670 1 especially punitive. It's especially unfair, 2 rising to a level that we can almost describe it 3 as being unjust. There is certainly a lot of 4 reform that we have to investigate in our social 5 service system, but this is certainly not one of 6 them. I don't think there really is anybody in 7 this chamber that would like to deny to the 8 frail, elderly, the massively disabled, those 9 who are visually impaired and totally blind, the 10 meager amounts that the state matches the 11 federal government, $13 a month. $13 a month. 12 It's about $2.30 a day, and I don't understand 13 why we would want to take that money out of the 14 pockets of our seniors, people whose tax dollars 15 provide the broad revenue base that the state 16 has derived for years, and it just doesn't make 17 any sense. 18 And so I'm offering this 19 amendment in the hope that my colleagues will 20 recognize that this is just one piece that's in 21 the legislation that shouldn't be there. It's 22 egregious, and it is something that we should 23 address. We can address it right here on this 2671 1 floor right now. There is a lot of good that 2 this bill may do. We can debate the rest of it, 3 but this particular section denying people who 4 are massively impaired at times, even though 5 they're living at home, they can't come up here 6 to lobby today to let you know how they feel. 7 Hopefully, you will listen to my 8 words and understand that they can't afford to 9 lose that $13 a day. It will create a 10 detrimental effect on them. It will inure to a 11 very negative situation if they are asked to 12 endure this freeze which will manufacture a 13 cutback of $13 per month. I guess I have been 14 saying a day. I really mean $13 a month. 15 And so I submit this amendment in 16 the hope that my colleagues will consider it and 17 perhaps will, after discussion and dialogue 18 which we still have in this chamber, will 19 consider that we should not -- we should not 20 unfund this cost of living assessment which is 21 about three percent that the federal government 22 provides, that the state has always matched, 23 that will not add up to a lot of money. Your 2672 1 relatives, our friends need it very badly. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 3 question is on the amendment. All those in 4 favor of the amendment. 5 SENATOR PATERSON: Party vote in 6 the affirmative. 7 SENATOR BRUNO: Party vote in the 8 negative. 9 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the 10 roll. 11 (The Secretary called the roll.) 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 13 Secretary will read the party line vote. 14 Announce the results. 15 THE SECRETARY: Ayes 38, nays - 16 nays 36, ayes 23. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 18 amendment is failed. 19 Senator Espada. 20 SENATOR ESPADA: I move in order 21 to ask a number of questions of Mr. -- of 22 Senator Holland's overview of the Senate bills 23 before us. 2673 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: It will 2 be in -- Senator Leichter was prior to you on 3 the list. 4 Senator Leichter. 5 SENATOR ESPADA: May I be placed 6 on the list? 7 Thank you. 8 SENATOR LEICHTER: Mr. President, 9 the biggest myth and the biggest falser of this 10 Capitol is that the bill that we're considering 11 is welfare reform. It is not. This is 12 scapegoating the poor and that's what this is. 13 It's an effort to blame the poor for the 14 financial difficulties that this state is in. 15 And that's wrong. It's unfair, unjust. It's 16 easy to scapegoat. It's easy to talk about a 17 failed system, but it's another thing, Senator 18 Holland, to come up with a fair response, and 19 this bill clearly and definitely is not. Yes, 20 welfare is unpopular and, yes, welfare has 21 certainly not been an answer for society at 22 large for the people on welfare, and I think we 23 know some of the things that need to be done, 2674 1 and we ought to know why you're not doing them. 2 The things that need to be done 3 is to provide jobs and to train people to have 4 these jobs. This bill does none of that. This 5 bill pure and simply slashes benefits for the 6 very vulnerable, fragile population, and not 7 helping society, this bill will only add to the 8 problems that we have in urban areas, in rural 9 areas throughout the state because you're going 10 to worsen the condition of poor people. You're 11 going to create more homelessness. 12 I just would focus on one aspect 13 of the bill and my colleagues will ask me 14 certain aspects, the provision after 60 days you 15 will cut off benefits for people on home 16 relief. The Governor originally proposed 90 17 days. We thought that was harsh. Yours is pure 18 and simply heartless saying after 60 days that's 19 it. 20 Let's take a look at the Michigan 21 experience, and we have the dubious benefit in 22 this state of having the budget director of 23 Michigan now using her slash and scorch 2675 1 techniques here in this state. 2 The Ford Foundation made a study 3 of what happened in Michigan where they had a 4 90-day cut-off on home relief. What they found 5 is that most of the former relief clients are in 6 precarious shape, but most are trying to work. 7 Only a small fraction can find or hold a regular 8 job. Those considered, quote, "young and 9 able-bodied", unquote, are doing better than 10 others but they are hardly thriving, and a 11 surprisingly small number, about a quarter, are 12 young and able-bodied. The great majority are 13 elderly, disabled or ill, and while Governor 14 Engler tried to discredit this report, the 15 Department of Social Services of Michigan later 16 said that "We don't think the report is 17 flawed." That's an actual quote. 18 Now, the mix of population in 19 this state of the people on home relief is no 20 different. Most are elderly. Most are sick. 21 Most are not able to go out and get jobs, and 22 even for those who can get jobs, there are 23 precious few jobs in this state. We have a 2676 1 fairly high level of unemployment in this state, 2 and we have a particularly high level of 3 unemployment or lack of jobs for people without 4 skills. 5 You want to come in with a bill 6 that provides for -- serious training for those 7 who can work, that provides for jobs creation, I 8 think you'll find a lot of support on this side 9 of the aisle, but I think it's unfortunate to 10 get up as Senator Stafford did and say, "We've 11 got a $5 billion budget gap" and then start 12 talking about welfare as if welfare is the cause 13 of this budget gap. The fact is that the 14 benefits that we pay people on social 15 assistance, particularly Aid For Dependent 16 Children, has decreased in the last few years by 17 17 percent. We have, in effect, slashed 18 benefits in this state by failing to keep up 19 with inflation, and if we have more people now 20 on welfare than we had in the late '70s or the 21 beginning of the decade of the '80s, it's 22 because of national programs during the Reagan 23 and Bush years which have put us in recession 2677 1 for a good portion of those years which has not 2 created the sort of economic client -- climate 3 that would allow people to have jobs and to 4 prosper. 5 In this state, we've seen that 6 where jobs are created -- real jobs are created, 7 that people will respond to them, but what I 8 would like to see is that effort of creating 9 jobs, of helping people and not what we find in 10 this bill. 11 And let me say, Senator Holland, 12 there are provisions in this bill that I can 13 support, very few of them. I think the 14 provision that you take away a license from a 15 father who refuses to pay child support, I can 16 support that. I can support finger imaging, and 17 many of us have supported finger imaging, but 18 the key elements of this bill is a punitive, 19 harsh effort to cut benefits for people who are 20 in dire need. It does really nothing 21 significant for our budget deficit, and it's 22 only going to add to the burden that cities such 23 as mine have, New York City, who are going to 2678 1 have to take care of all the additional homeless 2 that are going to be created by your bill and, 3 by the way, in Michigan, they found out the 4 homeless situation in Detroit became much worse 5 and Detroit was further burdened by having to 6 take care of these homeless as my city will be. 7 We've had now for some months, 8 you know, government by sloganeering. We've had 9 these promises of down-sizing government, of 10 cutting taxes, of jump starting the economy, but 11 when we take a look at the specific proposals, 12 what we see are these harsh, punitive cuts on 13 people who certainly are not responsible for the 14 financial problem that we -- that we have in 15 this state and they are going to sorely beset 16 and greatly hurt and be damaged by this sort of 17 an approach. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The Chair 19 recognizes Senator Espada. 20 SENATOR ESPADA: Thank you, Mr. 21 President. 22 Would Senator Holland yield to - 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2679 1 Holland, do you yield to Senator Espada? 2 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 3 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 4 Senator is happy to yield. 5 SENATOR ESPADA: Thank you very 6 much, Mr. President, Senator Holland. 7 Just to get a baseline of what 8 we're talking about, because I too fear the 9 sloganizing and the kind of campaign rhetoric 10 that replaces really responsible debate here. 11 So, to the facts, how many ADC 12 recipients do we have in our state? 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: One second. In 14 1994, 1,263,278. That was 1994. 15 SENATOR ESPADA: How many of - 16 if I may, through you, Mr. President -- how many 17 of those are children? 18 SENATOR HOLLAND: Are there 19 children on here? November 1994, children, 20 819,283. 21 SENATOR ESPADA: And again 22 through you, Mr. President, how long does the 23 average ADC recipient continue on the case loads 2680 1 continuously? 2 SENATOR HOLLAND: The average is 3 about two years but many are on much longer than 4 that, and you know that, Senator. 5 SENATOR ESPADA: I'm sorry? 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: The average is 7 about two years, but many of them are on much 8 longer than that. 9 SENATOR ESPADA: And of the 8-, 10 almost 900,000 children - 11 SENATOR HOLLAND: 819,000. 12 SENATOR ESPADA: Pardon? 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: 819,000. It's 14 not almost 900,000. 15 SENATOR ESPADA: We'll take your 16 figure because we're dealing with facts. How 17 many women are in the total of 1.3 million - 18 SENATOR HOLLAND: I couldn't tell 19 you. 20 SENATOR ESPADA: -- now that 21 we've established children? 22 SENATOR HOLLAND: Many of them 23 are single women families, and there are 449,000 2681 1 adults. I don't know how many are men and how 2 many are women. 3 SENATOR ESPADA: You don't know 4 how many women we're talking about? 5 SENATOR HOLLAND: I don't know 6 whether the families are dual families or 7 single-parent families; I can't tell you, but 8 there are 449,000 adults. 9 SENATOR ESPADA: Would you say 10 that -- that most of those -- if I may, Mr. 11 President, most of those qualify for this 12 program because there is no male around? 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. Most do. 14 SENATOR ESPADA: So I don't want 15 to invent things here, but we do want to have 16 conservative estimates. Would you say that, of 17 those 400,000 or so, the great majority are 18 women? 19 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'll give you 20 that, yes, sir. 21 SENATOR ESPADA: And would you 22 also conclude, Senator Holland, that when we 23 talk about welfare in this state and attach 2682 1 welfare dependency to the budget deficits, that 2 that really isn't an honest or even factual 3 statement because, in fact, we are -- by your 4 facts, we're dealing with children, babies and 5 women who care for those children who are on ADC 6 rolls. 7 SENATOR HOLLAND: I don't know 8 what the point of your question is, Senator. 9 SENATOR ESPADA: Just factual 10 questions. Would you conclude on the basis of 11 your facts that when we talk about budget 12 deficits, getting people off the dole, people 13 who have been on average two years, women and 14 children, that we're not really talking about 15 jobs and people who could otherwise be employed 16 in our private sector, that, in fact, we're 17 talking about babies, children, for the most 18 part? 19 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'm talking 20 about families. I'm talking about families, and 21 I think we've done the wrong thing with families 22 in this state for the last 40 years. I think 23 we've ruined family values. We've ruined the 2683 1 work ethic. We don't encourage kids to go to 2 school in your city, and I went there with you. 3 The graduation rate in four years of high school 4 is only 43 percent, and that's been four years 5 and nothing is done about it. 6 So we're not on the right track, 7 Senator. You can talk about the 900- -- 819,000 8 children. We want to protect those children and 9 we have not been doing that for 40 years. 10 Instead, we have been breaking up families, 11 encouraging fathers not to stay with their 12 families, and we want to turn that around, and I 13 think it's way past time to turn that around. 14 SENATOR ESPADA: Through you, Mr. 15 President. 16 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 17 Espada, are you asking Senator Holland to 18 yield? 19 Senator Holland, do you continue 20 to yield? 21 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, sir. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 23 Senator yields. 2684 1 SENATOR ESPADA: I think this can 2 be very fruitful because, in fact, I agree with 3 your analysis. In fact, I agree that some of 4 these negative outcomes have to be changed. 5 It's your conclusion, sir, and even more so the 6 premise that guides your analysis that I differ 7 with. And we were just in -- you know, by way 8 of this colloquy and the process of really 9 destroying once and for all this myth, that what 10 we're really talking about is some guys that are 11 driving Cadillacs or some women that are wearing 12 mink coats. We're dealing with the facts, and I 13 thought that maybe with your indulgence we could 14 continue talking about the facts, but I think 15 we'll get a clearer picture of what we're 16 talking about and, in fact, get to some of those 17 results that you and I want. 18 Just -- just one other -- just 19 one other question that I think is really 20 germane and key to this whole debate is the 21 issue of employability. How, sir, do you 22 determine in your legislation or even in your 23 perceptions and your analyses what is an 2685 1 employable person, and how is that determined? 2 SENATOR HOLLAND: You want the 3 definition of "employable"? 4 SENATOR ESPADA: I'll take yours. 5 SENATOR HOLLAND: It's not mine. 6 It's from the Federal Jobs Program, I believe. 7 "A person shall be deemed employable if they 8 are not unemployed due to one or more of the 9 following: 10 (A) A person who is ill or 11 incapacitated or 60 years of age or older; 12 (B) A child under 16 years of age 13 or under 19 and attending full-time or secondary 14 vocational or technical school; 15 (C) A person whose presence in 16 the home is required because of the illness or 17 incapacity of another member of the household; 18 (D) A parent or other relative 19 personally providing care for a child under six 20 years of age -- I certainly would look at that 21 one, and; 22 (E) A parent or other relative or 23 child under three years of age; 2686 1 (F) A pregnant woman that has 2 been medically verified that the child is to be 3 born in the month in which such participation 4 would otherwise be required or within the 5 six-month period immediately following such 6 months. 7 I would certainly look at that 8 one too, but that's the definition. 9 SENATOR ESPADA: You just defined 10 "employability", sir? 11 SENATOR HOLLAND: Employable, 12 yes; definition of "employable". 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Espada, are you asking Senator Holland to 15 continue to yield? 16 SENATOR ESPADA: Yes, I am. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 18 Holland, do you continue to yield? 19 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 21 Senator yields. 22 SENATOR ESPADA: And how many of 23 the current home relief recipients are 2687 1 employable? 2 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'm sorry. I 3 missed the first part of it. 4 SENATOR ESPADA: How many of the 5 home relief recipients are employable using your 6 definition, sir? 7 SENATOR HOLLAND: From the 8 experience of the county of Westchester and 9 their Workfare program, approximately 35 to 40 10 percent of the able-bodied recipients are 11 employable. 12 SENATOR ESPADA: And how is that 13 determined, sir, if I may? 14 SENATOR HOLLAND: It was done 15 actually by fact in Westchester County. They 16 have it on the computer by how many people came 17 to their Workfare program. 18 SENATOR ESPADA: To be 19 recertified for benefits or as a result of - 20 what participation are you referring to, sir? 21 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'm talking 22 about the Workfare program that was implemented 23 in the county of Westchester in 1989, and they 2688 1 put in the computer all of the people and what 2 their qualifications were. They found that 3 approximately 35 percent of the home relief 4 recipients are employable, 35 to 40 percent. 5 SENATOR ESPADA: Are you familiar 6 with - 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 8 Espada, are you asking again for Senator Holland 9 to continue to yield? 10 SENATOR ESPADA: Yes, I am. 11 Are you familiar, sir, with some 12 of the assessments and evaluations that have 13 been done of the jobs programs that you borrowed 14 the definition of "employable" from, 15 "employability" from? Are you familiar with 16 some of those? 17 SENATOR HOLLAND: I don't know, 18 Senator. 19 SENATOR ESPADA: If you would 20 allow me. 21 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 22 SENATOR ESPADA: The most salient 23 point that comes out of a thorough analysis that 2689 1 was conducted of those programs indicates that 2 the people on home relief or, for that matter, 3 on ADC, that participated in these job searches 4 and in these various programs after they went 5 through them -- I'll give you the statewide 6 total -- the percentage of those individuals 7 that actually ended up in an employment 8 situation is 7.4 percent statewide. The 9 percentage of those individuals that were 10 sanctioned were 17.2 percent. New York City, 11 the statewide -- the rest of the state, similar 12 numbers. Upstate, more sanctions; less jobs 13 downstate. 14 But it doesn't change the point 15 drastically, the point being that this seems - 16 these programs that you talk about, whether they 17 be in Westchester County or other variations of 18 that, seem to be sanction mills because they 19 don't, in fact, put people back to work. In 20 fact, by the statistics I just read to you and 21 I'll share, if you'd like, they really don't put 22 people back to work. 23 Are you interested at all, sir, 2690 1 in why that is the case? 2 SENATOR HOLLAND: I couldn't 3 agree with you more, Senator. I think you're 4 absolutely right. I think the programs that we 5 have operated in this nation and in this state 6 have not put people back to work, and the 7 American Works Program and many of the other 8 programs are -- are a much better way. Jobs 9 First is a much better way rather than putting 10 people on the dole, trying to get them a job. 11 We have an example here in Albany 12 County that Senator Hoblock can tell you about, 13 where a man was on the dole for 35 years and 14 never, never given a job or found a job by the 15 Department of Social Services in the county of 16 Albany, and when American Works came in, they 17 got him a job and he's still with that job after 18 four months so that they got paid. 19 There is no question that the 20 system was not working, still is not working and 21 that's what we're trying to correct, and I think 22 that people would feel much better about 23 themselves if we can find them a job, and we 2691 1 haven't. 2 SENATOR ESPADA: Mr. President, 3 if I may. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 5 Holland, do you continue to yield? 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 8 Senator continues to yield. 9 SENATOR ESPADA: I think in a 10 critical point, I think we agree then that 11 people that go out of their way and participate 12 with these programs -- those that don't 13 participate get sanctioned and that seems to be 14 working. Those people that go through it don't 15 seem to end up with a job, yet through some of 16 your legislation or through your conferences 17 legislation, we have these automatic cut-off 18 periods. 19 And my question to you is do you 20 think we're sending the right moral signal, the 21 right -- the right -- not only moral signal, but 22 the right workable and practicable solution to 23 the problem. If, in fact, people are trying to 2692 1 get jobs; if, in fact, they're participating 2 with our various work participation programs and 3 sanctions, then why would you just cut them off 4 and make believe like on the 61st day somebody 5 is going to take care of their needs? Doesn't 6 that violate the state's Constitution, the 7 provisions that were cited by my colleague? 8 SENATOR HOLLAND: Senator, I 9 believe that the taxpayers of this state have 10 been violated for years. I believe that we have 11 encouraged people to stay on home relief, 12 able-bodied people such as yourself to stay on 13 home relief, and I think that's the wrong thing 14 to do. I think we are breaking down society. I 15 think that's the wrong message to give, and I 16 think it has to be turned around. 17 And I'm saying -- we're saying to 18 the people now, it is individual 19 responsibility. You have to take care of 20 yourself. It's a temporary -- Medicaid and 21 welfare is a temporary situation. We want to 22 help you just as our Constitution says, if you 23 need help for a short period of time, but we 2693 1 don't want you or two or three generations to 2 stay on this program, that is all, and our 3 training programs have not been working and, in 4 fact, there are, I think like 160 federal 5 training programs. I don't know how many there 6 are in the state of New York. 7 And people are being stolen from 8 left and right. I don't know whether you saw a 9 small article in the paper, Senator, recently. 10 The FBI did a study on the fraud and abuse in 11 the Medicaid and welfare system nationally, and 12 their figure was $44 billion. Now, if New York 13 State takes 20 percent of the Medicaid costs, of 14 the long-term costs, then who -- when we had our 15 hearings many -- four years ago and we were told 16 that there was $2 billion of fraud and abuse in 17 this system, in this state, there is so much 18 stealing it's unbelievable, and we have to turn 19 it around. 20 SENATOR ESPADA: Point of 21 information, Mr. President, on this -- this is 22 the kind of stuff we hear all the time, these 23 assertions of -- about fraud and abuse. You 2694 1 know, we have a trillion dollar federal budget, 2 a little over -- I'll give you whatever highest 3 number you want. You want a billion, you want 4 two billion, you want -- ten percent -- two 5 percent of that goes to that kind of thing. How 6 you come up with $50 billion in fraud, I'll 7 never know. 8 But with your permission, if we 9 could just -- you indicated you visited my 10 district, and indeed you did, and let me just 11 say that that's more than most of your 12 colleagues will ever accomplish. That's most - 13 more reality that will visit -- that will be 14 visited upon them in terms of what we're talking 15 about than they'll ever get, so to that, kudos 16 to you; but let me introduce you, because it was 17 in Newsday, to Elisa Arguello, and she has two 18 children, teenagers, some of them -- who are 19 seventeen and six. Some of them will be subject 20 -- in fact, both of them, I guess, will be 21 subject to your LearnFare legislation. 22 AFDC grant, $577. This is 23 current welfare income we're talking about. 2695 1 Food stamps, $241; child support allowance, $50, 2 and that is sporadic. The total income to this 3 woman who is raising her children in our 4 district, $868 per month. 5 Current expenses. She pays $740 6 rent; phone is $50; utility is 40; food 140; 7 household supplies $15; shoes and clothing $10; 8 transportation $7.50, for a total in expenses - 9 mind you, she takes in 868 in income -- her 10 expenses are $1,002.50. 11 Does any of that sound like fraud 12 and abuse? Does any of that make sense to cut 13 by 15 or 25 percent? 14 SENATOR HOLLAND: Senator, you 15 are absolutely right. Most of the clients are 16 in need of assistance and they don't steal, 17 absolutely right. We are giving that woman an 18 additional possibility with the waiver of 19 earning an additional $200 and which will be set 20 aside and not affect her grant at all, in fact 21 20 percent of everything she earns above that. 22 Don't you know there are many 23 hard-working families in your district who are 2696 1 not on Medicare and welfare who don't make it 2 every month, either, who still struggle and work 3 three jobs. That's all we're saying to you. 4 Everybody is struggling. Our taxpayers are 5 struggling, and we have to turn this system 6 around. It's not working. It's not fair to the 7 hard-working -- which is most of your district 8 -- the hard-working people down there who are 9 struggling and don't make it every month. 10 SENATOR ESPADA: I think, Mr. 11 President, if I may. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Are you 13 asking Senator Holland to yield again? 14 SENATOR ESPADA: Yes, sir. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 16 yields. 17 SENATOR ESPADA: Senator, I'm 18 deeply heartened by that comment, but you know 19 when times are bad -- and you indicate they are 20 bad and I agree they are bad -- they are bad for 21 working-class folks and they are bad for poor 22 folks that can only wish, as we've indicated 23 here, that they could have a job. 2697 1 So let's just deal with the 2 realities. The realities are that these 3 working-class people are hurting and we have 4 certain amendments. The amendments here will 5 restore $13 per month to somebody who is blind 6 and can't get out of their apartment. 7 How on earth in the name of 8 frugality, in the name of austerity budgets, in 9 the name of anything sacred could you justify 10 our Constitution, the 1938 amendment, into being 11 to stop this kind of thing you are trying to 12 promulgate here today? 13 The constitutional amendment in 14 essence, and this is its essence, not verbatim, 15 was adopted to ensure that the poor do not go 16 without food, clothing, shelter and other 17 essentials. We can not penalize the poor. We 18 can not scapegoat the poor because somehow you 19 and I have not done a good enough job of 20 providing jobs so that the working-class people, 21 the able-bodied working people can have the kind 22 of economic security that they deserve. 23 You know, there is this whole 2698 1 premise to your argument that, somehow, because 2 working people, whoever they may be, don't have 3 it as good as they should, that economic 4 security, the ability to put their kids through 5 school, that somehow we have to lower our 6 standards, that somebody is going to have to pay 7 for this, and that it has to be those people on 8 public assistance. 9 I will give you some other 10 alternatives. I only wish you would study some 11 of the other options that we have at our 12 disposal because the big tax breaks that the 13 same newspaper covered just a day ago had some 14 of these women that want to be hard-working 15 people going to Republic National Bank. They 16 got $6.4 million from Guiliani. They said they 17 were going to save 2400 jobs and, in fact, laid 18 off hundreds of people after they got our 19 millions, the taxpayers' money, the ones that 20 you and I are sworn to protect. 21 Viacom International, 15 million 22 they got. They said, "Give us the millions, 23 we're going to create 4,000 jobs." They laid 2699 1 off people. I could go on and on. 2 This job seeker, Janet Montalbo, 3 went to each and every one of those corporate 4 welfare recipients and she could not get a job 5 even though they promised you and I that they 6 would deliver on that promise. Is there any of 7 your legislation here to stem that kind of 8 rip-off in our system? 9 SENATOR HOLLAND: Senator, I have 10 to go back to when you and I visited your area, 11 and I have to go back to education, particularly 12 in the City of New York, and where some of the 13 schools we visited the graduation rate in four 14 years was 2 and 3 percent, in my area it's 95-98 15 percent. 16 So I sent for the report from the 17 city, and it averages 43 percent graduation from 18 your high schools in four years. If you don't 19 have an educated work force, people are not 20 going to come in and bring jobs in the area in 21 the first place, and that's the first problem 22 that the City of New York has. 23 But going back to the overall 2700 1 problem, what we're trying to do here is we're 2 trying to reduce the size of this government. 3 We're trying to reduce the taxes that this 4 government imposes on its individuals and 5 corporations. We have lost 600,000 jobs in the 6 last five years, and I know you are sick to 7 death of hearing that, but that's an absolute 8 fact; and unless we can stop these taxes, unless 9 we can encourage more business and industry to 10 come back here, unless we can educate 11 generations of the kids in the City of New York, 12 then it's not going to turn around. We are just 13 not doing it right. 14 Let me tell you about SSI. You 15 talked about SSI. Oh, one other thing before I 16 talk about SSI. 17 We spend the most money of 18 anybody in this nation and probably in the world 19 on social services and Medicaid; and after we do 20 these cuts, where do we go from number 1 in 21 spending? We will still be number 1 in 22 spending. We won't have lost anything. We are 23 very generous and try to protect our people. I 2701 1 don't want to be ripped off, but people who need 2 help we like to help. 3 SSI -- the federal government 4 gives to each individual on SSI in the 50 states 5 $446. Utah adds an additional one, so they get 6 $447. We add $86, so the individuals get $532. 7 There are 25 states, Senator, who give 8 absolutely nothing. And going from fourth place 9 at $432 when the rest of the world gets a $13 10 increase, we will go to sixth place. We're not 11 losing here. We're not losing here. We're not 12 cutting a great deal. We are asking everybody 13 to help us because we have a $5 billion deficit, 14 and we're asking everybody to help us because we 15 have to turn around this government and this tax 16 picture. 17 SENATOR ESPADA: Thank you. 18 Mr. President, I would like to 19 continue just for a little longer. I know some 20 of my colleagues want to get in on this debate. 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 22 Holland, do you continue to yield? 23 SENATOR ESPADA: If Senator 2702 1 Holland will continue to yield. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 3 Espada, please indulge me for just one moment. 4 The chair recognizes Senator 5 Skelos. 6 SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you. Mr. 7 President. On behalf of Senator Seward, there 8 will be an immediate meeting of the Energy 9 Committee in Room 332. 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There 11 will be an immediate meeting of the Energy 12 Committee in the Majority Conference Room, Room 13 332. 14 Thank you, Senator Espada. 15 Senator Holland continues to yield. 16 SENATOR ESPADA: I just want to 17 respond to some of the points Senator Holland 18 asserted. One of them was, again, back to the 19 visit to my district and the educational system 20 in my district and the results of what's 21 happening there. 22 You visited two systems. You 23 visited a system that really had as its class 2703 1 really the best that we have in my district, and 2 that is a sad commentary in terms of outcomes. 3 But we need to understand that reality before 4 you and I conclude anything negative about the 5 people who are struggling through that system. 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: We visited 7 Adlai Stevenson High School which has about 4500 8 kids. The class we visited was the cream of the 9 crop, no question, and they'll do well under any 10 circumstances. They'll carry themselves. 11 SENATOR ESPADA: Repeat that 12 number, because I think it will astonish some 13 people in your district. 14 SENATOR HOLLAND: 4500. 15 SENATOR ESPADA: They have 4500 16 kids in one building. 17 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. That's 18 not unusual, I don't think. It happens in the 19 rest of the state. Then we visited another 20 school, I'm sure you're going to talk about, 21 too, where there were only six in the class and 22 maybe four instructors. 23 SENATOR ESPADA: Yes. But with 2704 1 respect to the educational realities in my 2 district what the youngsters that I presented to 3 you were telling you and what was most 4 unfortunate about that whole lesson was you just 5 didn't get it, my respected Senator. You just 6 didn't get it, because what they were saying was 7 that they would have liked to have finished in 8 four years, but that it was that issue with the 9 HIV mom or it was that issue of that part-time 10 job or it was that issue with the gun toting 11 people out in the front. It was the issues of 12 them getting a little more cooperation from the 13 police. A little had to do with the kind of 14 commitment that teachers were making to them. 15 They visited upon you a reality about their 16 homes and their neighborhoods; and yet, 17 throughout all of that, they were determined to 18 continue through their school experience and 19 graduate. 20 And wouldn't you agree that under 21 all that adversity, who really cares if at the 22 end of that you don't have a dropout but in fact 23 you have a high school graduate going on to 2705 1 college? So why do we continue to look at that 2 when in fact if your statistical analysis would 3 be kind of more longitudinal in nature, you 4 would see that they do finish. They stay on a 5 couple of more years than they do in your 6 district; but, boy, should we reward that kind 7 of determination with something more than the 8 kind of penalties you want to impose to 9 learnfare, because, in fact, these kids stayed 10 on there. They wanted to stay on there. 11 Their mothers didn't deserve any 12 sanction for their perseverance. What they were 13 asking you is to understand that their mom 14 didn't have a dad in their home, that their mom 15 maybe had a dad or an abusing husband or 16 somebody else that had to intercede on mom's 17 behalf, I mean a host of problems that add up to 18 a real reality that for some reason you either 19 got or you choose to dismiss in your analysis 20 and your recommendation and in fact in your 21 legislation. These kids were telling you that 22 they want to finish, that they can finish with 23 more assistance. 2706 1 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'm sorry, 2 Senator, I don't buy that totally. I know that 3 the higher percentages finish in two or three 4 years, but it's still not a decent percentage as 5 far as I'm concerned. I still think your school 6 system is not delivering to the kids down there 7 the benefits that it should be delivering, and I 8 think that's the first step that the City of New 9 York and you should be straightening up is 10 getting education to those kids. 11 If you don't think that we have 12 the same problems in all of our districts, you 13 are absolutely wrong. There is no abuse in our 14 districts? There's no single parents in our 15 districts? Absolutely, Senator. They have the 16 same thing. They stay with it a little longer. 17 They stay with the kids, and that's what you 18 have to do -- or we have to do, not you. We 19 have to do. 20 We have to rebuild the family 21 which will stay with those kids, and the kids 22 have to stay at home even though they are 23 pregnant and delivering kids rather than putting 2707 1 them up in houses on the outside and paying for 2 that and blowing the family apart, and we have 3 to encourage them to go to school. Even if it's 4 taking $25 a month away from them, we want them 5 to go to school. It's not the $25. It's the 6 education that they and their families need to 7 support them later on in life and support their 8 families. 9 SENATOR ESPADA: Mr. President. 10 On the bill, if I may. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Espada. 13 SENATOR ESPADA: First, I want to 14 thank Senator Holland for responding as he did 15 to my questions. 16 I think today we move beyond the 17 kind of meanness, the kind of effort to 18 criminalize our ability to assist people in 19 need. We move beyond taking away school 20 lunches. We move beyond taking away child 21 care. We shred the safety net. We are really 22 talking about calculated cruelty. 23 In this exchange, I think if most 2708 1 of New York State could have witnessed this, 2 they would have seen -- or they would have 3 witnessed that there is no answer to Elisa 4 Aguello. She wants a job. 5 There is this whole notion -- in 6 fact, it's true -- that we have lost 600,000 7 jobs, but we don't talk about that there was an 8 equal increase in the AFDC and HR rolls because 9 of the kind of economic conditions. That kind 10 of economic adversity visits the poorest in our 11 state before it visits anybody else, and that's 12 the reality we're talking about. 13 You know, what are the solutions 14 that are being proposed? Slash it. Slash the 15 AFDC budget by 25 percent. But Ms. Elisa 16 Aguello right now she has a deficit of over $200 17 per month and she's trying her best. When she 18 did get a job, our current policy that none of 19 this legislation really addresses would have 20 penalized her after four months if she had 21 stayed on the job. Her income with a job would 22 have been $869.12. Her expenses with a job 23 would have been $897. 2709 1 We have not figured out a way to 2 make work actually pay off for people who want 3 to work. Instead, what we do is we do things in 4 the name of cost containment like this kind of 5 cap that we want to put on the rent shelter 6 allowance which really interferes with a court 7 case now in progress in Manhattan and really 8 violates not only the spirit but the letter of 9 the constitutional amendment referenced 10 earlier. But, in fact, it replaces the kind of 11 allowance with a subsidy to landlords, $3,000 to 12 $5,000 to a welfare hotel or to a homeless 13 shelter. 14 Is that the kind of relief that 15 taxpayers went to the polls for when they wanted 16 change? No. I think what they wanted was to 17 put everybody back to work, to lend a hand to 18 people who were really trying. They never meant 19 to be as cruel, they never meant to do the kinds 20 of things that make absolutely no sense. They 21 never meant to be as indecent as we make them 22 out to be. 23 They, in fact, want us to be 2710 1 responsible. And, as indicated by Senator 2 Paterson, I think folks are reading the polls, 3 and all they can come back to is, since they 4 can't create jobs, since they want to give 5 corporate welfare to the business sector, since 6 they want to give tax relief to businesses that 7 don't create jobs and to the wealthy, there is 8 always the welfare poor that you can bash, and 9 that's what we will be doing here today. 10 I thank you, Mr. President. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 12 recognizes Senator Waldon. 13 SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very 14 much, Mr. President. If the learned gentleman 15 from Rockland and Orange Counties will indulge 16 me and respond to some questions, I would 17 greatly appreciate it. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 19 Holland, do you yield to Senator Waldon? 20 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 22 yields. 23 SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very 2711 1 much, Mr. President. Thank you, Senator 2 Holland. 3 Senator Holland, I want to talk 4 about workfare, but I need to take a circuitous 5 route to that if you will permit me. Are you 6 aware of a $950 million business surcharge 7 relief that's in this budget as proposed by 8 Governor Pataki? 9 SENATOR HOLLAND: No. 10 SENATOR WALDON: You're not? 11 SENATOR HOLLAND: No. 12 SENATOR WALDON: Are you aware of 13 a $440 million relief to G.E.? 14 SENATOR HOLLAND: It's not in the 15 welfare area, is it, sir? 16 SENATOR WALDON: I beg your 17 pardon? 18 SENATOR HOLLAND: It's not in the 19 welfare area, is it, sir? 20 SENATOR WALDON: No, no, but I'm 21 getting to that. 22 SENATOR WALDON: My colleague 23 Senator Oppenheimer said it is listed under AFDC 2712 1 "aid for dependent corporations." If that's 2 her aid, I applaud it. I accept it. I thank 3 you, Senator Oppenheimer. 4 SENATOR HOLLAND: Not 5 specifically, no, Senator. 6 SENATOR WALDON: You are not 7 aware of either of those situations? 8 SENATOR HOLLAND: No. 9 SENATOR WALDON: Are you aware of 10 a $720 million personal income tax which 11 benefits a very small percentage of people at 12 the top, somewhere around 5 or 6 percent? -- 6 13 percent. 14 SENATOR HOLLAND: I am aware, and 15 you are incorrect. 16 SENATOR WALDON: I beg your 17 pardon? 18 SENATOR HOLLAND: I am aware of 19 that, sir, but it's a percentage breakdown. The 20 first 24 percent don't pay anything. The rest, 21 it's a percentage breakdown which is similar, 22 but it certainly is financially better if the 23 percentage is same for a $200,000 earner than it 2713 1 is for a $30,000 earner. 2 SENATOR WALDON: Okay. I'll ask 3 a question, if I may continue? 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Does 5 Senator Holland continue to yield? 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, sir. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 8 yields. 9 SENATOR WALDON: I apologize. I 10 really do, Mr. President. I did not mean to not 11 go through you. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: I'm 13 feeling slighted, Senator Waldon. I just -- I 14 like to interject every now and then. 15 Senator Holland continues to 16 yield. 17 SENATOR WALDON: Senator Holland, 18 are you aware of a $158 million hit on the City 19 University of New York under this proposed 20 budget? 21 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, sir. 22 SENATOR WALDON: Now we're going 23 to get close to Robin Hood's barn. Are you 2714 1 aware that if that goes through as proposed that 2 not only will a number of students have to leave 3 the City University system but professors and 4 other employees of the City University system 5 will lose their jobs? 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: I think there 7 needs to be some culling out in the system, yes. 8 SENATOR WALDON: Okay. Mr. 9 President. If I may continue? 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 11 Holland, do you continue to yield? 12 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 continues to yield. 15 SENATOR WALDON: My learned 16 colleague, are you aware of 295 million or 17 thereabouts reduction in funding for the State 18 University of New York? 19 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, sir. 20 SENATOR WALDON: Mr. President. 21 If I may continue? 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 23 Holland, do you continue to yield? 2715 1 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 2 SENATOR WALDON: Senator, are you 3 aware that if these two cuts remain and if these 4 two systems are negatively and disparately 5 impacted as those cuts will be forced to happen 6 that about 40,000 students will leave the City 7 University and State University system? 8 SENATOR HOLLAND: Sir, I don't 9 buy that at all. I believe that the system 10 needs to be culled out. I think the Governor is 11 asking everybody that we need some help in 12 culling out and improving the management. I 13 have no doubt there are some people in that 14 system, whether they be in administration or 15 whether they be in the teaching aspects, that 16 should leave right now. Are you aware, Senator, 17 that it costs us about $11,000 per student to go 18 to the State University system and other states 19 don't spend that much. 20 We spend a lot of money on the 21 higher education portion of this budget, and I'm 22 sure Senator LaValle can do a better job at this 23 than I am doing, but there needs to be some 2716 1 culling out. And all we're asking of the higher 2 education people is: We're cutting. The 3 federal government is cutting. We're asking you 4 to look at it and cut too. 5 We're not asking you to close 6 eight campuses. We're not asking you to not 7 educate the kids, because we want them 8 educated. We want you to be realistic like 9 we're trying to be and the federal government is 10 trying to be and the other people are, because 11 the taxpayers are saying to us, "You have to 12 cut." 13 SENATOR WALDON: If I may? 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 15 Holland, do you continue to yield? 16 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 17 SENATOR WALDON: I'm not going to 18 be long, I assure you. 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 20 continues to yield. 21 SENATOR WALDON: I appreciate - 22 Mr. President. Please advise the Senator I do 23 appreciate his indulgence. Sometimes I'm slower 2717 1 than other times. I'm 58 now; these things 2 happen. 3 If I may, Senator Holland, are 4 you aware of a $1.2 billion Medicaid hit that's 5 contained in this budget, which really equals 6 $4.8 billion? And are you also aware, if you 7 are aware of that figure, of the number of home 8 health care providers and other hospital-type 9 medical-type employees who will lose their jobs 10 if the budget remains as proposed? 11 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, sir, I am, 12 and I would probably agree with you in some of 13 the instances that we have to make some 14 adjustments. I'm sure that when and if we get 15 together with the Assembly we will make some of 16 those adjustments. 17 SENATOR WALDON: I'm getting 18 close to conclusion. 19 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 21 continues to yield. 22 SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very 23 much, Mr. President. Thank you, Senator 2718 1 Holland. 2 Senator Holland, the people who 3 will lose their jobs under these figures that 4 I've shared with you, some which you agree with 5 and others not, and I can appreciate that, will 6 those who have no training because there is no 7 proviso for training under your workfare 8 proposal, will those who come out of that system 9 and who will be asked to find jobs, will they 10 replace the union employees who will lose their 11 jobs as the result of these budget cuts that 12 we've just discussed. 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: I really don't 14 know the answer to the question, Senator. I'm 15 told there is a part of the workfare law that 16 protects unions and that union people cannot be 17 displaced by other individuals. 18 SENATOR WALDON: Last question, 19 Mr. President. 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 21 Holland, do you yield to one last question? 22 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2719 1 yields. 2 SENATOR WALDON: I was glad to 3 hear you say that, because I'm now going to ask 4 you, are you aware that in the City of New York 5 that people who are under the aegis of workfare 6 as characterized in the City of New York have 7 replaced painters who were unionized painters in 8 the City of New York and are now working as 9 painters -- I may have mischaracterized where 10 they came from. They are work release people 11 who have replaced painters in the City of New 12 York. Are you aware of that? 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'm not aware 14 of that, but my understanding is that the unions 15 have met with the Mayor and they have worked out 16 their agreements in the area, but I'm not aware 17 of that specific case. 18 SENATOR WALDON: I thank you, Mr. 19 President. I thank Senator Holland. That is 20 not my knowledge base, Senator Holland, but I 21 thank you for your thoughts on it. 22 Thank you, Mr. President. 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 2720 1 recognizes Senator Abate. 2 SENATOR ABATE: Would Senator 3 Holland yield to a question? 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 5 Holland, would you yield to Senator Abate? 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, Mr. 7 President. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 yields. 10 SENATOR ABATE: While I have a 11 number of concerns around the welfare reform 12 proposal, I, too, believe it's ill-conceived and 13 will not produce the results that you think it 14 will. It will force more and more people into 15 more expensive institutions. They are going to 16 be forced into jails and prisons, into homeless 17 shelters. An arbitrary cutoff that tells an 18 individual they must get a job when no job is 19 available, they must get training and no 20 training is available, to me is unrealistic. 21 But there is one provision that I 22 think is particularly flawed; and that is the 23 provision that talks about requiring minors, in 2721 1 particular, pregnant teenagers under 18 who 2 would normally receive aid to dependent 3 children, saying to them that they must go home 4 unless -- under your provisions, you enunciated 5 some exceptions. 6 And my question is, are you aware 7 that only one percent of mothers on welfare are 8 teenagers under 18? And my question is, if 9 that's the case and my statistic is true, why 10 are you targeting pregnant teenagers under 18 11 because the majority of them who are pregnant 12 aren't on welfare? 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: I don't know 14 about your percentage, Senator, but assuming 15 it's correct or near that, our only point is 16 regardless of how many people it is that we 17 believe -- I believe that that young lady, 18 pregnant or not, if at all possible should stay 19 with her family, and I don't believe the state 20 should take over and set her up and pay for her 21 in an apartment where she has no adult 22 supervision. I just think that's the wrong 23 thing to do. 2722 1 SENATOR ABATE: Will the Senator 2 yield to another question? 3 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 4 Holland, do you yield to another question? 5 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 yields. 8 SENATOR ABATE: So then my 9 understanding of the goal of this bill is to 10 save dollars? 11 SENATOR HOLLAND: Well, as a 12 secondary thing it is to save dollars. 13 Primarily, I think, the best advantage is to 14 keep young people at home and to have the young 15 mother with her baby under the care and guidance 16 of her parents or guardians or whatever. I 17 would prefer to have her with her husband; but 18 that failing, parents are second. 19 SENATOR ABATE: Would the Senator 20 yield to another - 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 22 Holland, do you yield to another question? 23 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 2723 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2 yields. 3 SENATOR ABATE: In an ideal 4 world, that may be the case, but would you 5 acknowledge that many young teenagers and, in 6 fact, the teenagers that you are talking about 7 that are on welfare and not living at home, many 8 of them come from dysfunctional families and the 9 majority of them have been either sexually 10 abused or assaulted. 11 SENATOR HOLLAND: I wouldn't - 12 no. No. I don't know that, and I'm sure you 13 don't know that, either. We're not taking those 14 people and putting them back in the house. We 15 don't want them if that's the situation, but I 16 still feel that it's not only in the City of New 17 York. It's in your district. It's in my 18 district that those things may happen. I still 19 feel that they are better with the family if at 20 all possible. 21 SENATOR ABATE: Do you -- will 22 the Senator yield to another? 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2724 1 Holland, do you continue to yield to Senator 2 Abate? 3 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 5 yields. 6 SENATOR ABATE: Do you concede 7 that the ultimate outcome will be that these 8 young teenagers will not return home? They will 9 stay on the street, and their children will be 10 at risk, or many of them may even seek 11 abortions. Do you see that the two other 12 alternatives may occur as a result of this 13 legislation? 14 SENATOR HOLLAND: Anything can 15 happen, Senator. Do you think we have done the 16 right thing for the last 40 years? Do you think 17 we have encouraged families to stay together? 18 Do you think we've encouraged fathers to stay 19 with their children? We haven't done the right 20 thing, and we're trying to move this back into 21 more family values, more supervision, and it 22 just makes more sense to me that way. I don't 23 know any other way to explain my position. 2725 1 SENATOR ABATE: Can I respond? 2 Was that a question? 3 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: You have 4 the floor, Senator Abate. 5 SENATOR ABATE: I think the issue 6 is not around family values. The issue is 7 around education and showing young women through 8 education, through counseling to parenting 9 skills, to help them be productive and 10 functioning individuals. 11 SENATOR HOLLAND: Fine. 12 SENATOR ABATE: As you said 13 before, the key to our economy, the key to 14 economic and human productivity, is education; 15 and this bill completely avoids seeking what I 16 think is the appropriate remedy. 17 SENATOR HOLLAND: I don't think 18 so, Senator. I feel that if they're home with 19 their parents, maybe they have a babysitter 20 built in. I don't say it takes education away 21 from young women because they are home rather 22 than living in an apartment by themselves with a 23 child. I think they have a better opportunity 2726 1 of education if they are home with their parents 2 and their young child or their guardians rather 3 than by themselves. 4 SENATOR ABATE: Would the Senator 5 yield to another question? 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Holland, do you yield to another question? 8 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 9 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 10 yields. 11 SENATOR ABATE: There is another 12 part. There is a part that talks about 13 unmarried persons on home relief who are under 14 21, saying that they will lose their benefits 15 unless they return home. But that individual 16 wouldn't be eligible for home relief unless they 17 were able to show that their parent or guardian 18 was not willing to support them in the first 19 place. So I don't understand how this 20 legislation would work in reality. 21 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'm sorry. I 22 missed the end of the question. 23 SENATOR ABATE: Yes. In order 2727 1 for an individual to be eligible for home relief 2 they must show that their guardian and parents 3 do not want to support them, and yet this 4 legislation would force them back to that very 5 environment where those parents and guardians 6 don't want them. 7 SENATOR HOLLAND: I don't think 8 it does that, does it? 9 If the parent does not want them 10 in the household, they are not forced back into 11 the house. 12 SENATOR ABATE: Pardon me? 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: If the parent 14 does not want them in the household, they are 15 not forced back into the house. 16 SENATOR ABATE: And that is -- I 17 don't see that in the legislation. 18 SENATOR HOLLAND: That's my 19 understanding, Senator. I will be glad to back 20 you up on it if you have any questions when it 21 actually happens. 22 SENATOR ABATE: I will have to 23 look at that. 2728 1 On the bill. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 3 Abate on the bill. 4 SENATOR ABATE: I believe that 5 instead of reuniting families, which is, Senator 6 Holland, the goal that you conceive this bill 7 will produce, instead this bill will force young 8 teenage women -- and we're talking about a very 9 small percentage of them -- who are pregnant not 10 back to their families but putting their 11 children at risk; that these young women will - 12 instead of going to their homes will go to the 13 street. They will lose that financial benefit 14 and that the children will be raised on the 15 street and we will have to pay for these 16 individuals in shelters, so we will be putting 17 the young woman at risk as well as the young 18 child. 19 I think we have to get in the 20 real world. When we talk about picket fences 21 and we talk about babysitters and we talk about 22 functioning families and mothers and fathers who 23 care about their teenage daughters, we are not 2729 1 talking about a huge subset of population from 2 the city that I have come from, and that's New 3 York City. And if we're going to make a 4 difference, it is not through a punitive effort 5 such as this. That will not drive young women 6 back to their homes because the profile of this 7 young woman is one who does not want to go back 8 to the home because she's been subject to abuse 9 in that home. And even though there's an 10 exception that says that if the person can show 11 that she has been abused she could still be 12 entitled to benefits, this is the very 13 individual who does not want to go back to 14 social services, does not want to engage in a 15 hearing, does not want to confront their parents 16 around this abuse and neglect. 17 So what will happen in reality is 18 that the young woman will choose not to take the 19 benefits, will choose not to go home. She will 20 either remain on the street and maybe seek an 21 abortion, but, more likely, the woman will stay 22 with that child; because if you look at the 23 studies -- and I have worked with so many women 2730 1 at risk -- they have children not because they 2 want financial incentives. They have children 3 because of the need to have an identity. They 4 want to be needed. They want to be loved, and 5 they don't feel that they have another life 6 other than to raise a child. 7 So what we have to present to 8 young women are options, not punitive options 9 such as this that will put young children at 10 risk. Why -- and we should ask ourselves -- is 11 the New York State Catholic Conference against 12 this bill, and I would like to read two 13 statements. Their rationale is teen mothers are 14 not treated effectively under the current 15 system. Every effort must be made to assist 16 these young women in obtaining the requisite 17 education, training, child care and living 18 arrangements to enable them to escape a cycle of 19 poverty and welfare and to lead productive 20 lives. Forcing young mothers to live with their 21 families without evaluation and careful 22 provision for care and services will likely 23 subject them to abuse, and so what I'm 2731 1 suggesting -- this is again a bill that suggests 2 that the reality is maybe the reality in some of 3 our communities, but is not the profile of the 4 women that we are talking about. It does not 5 meet the realities of the women; and, again, 6 we're only talking about a small fraction of 7 teenage mothers under 18 on welfare. We must 8 look at their realities. Why did they leave 9 home in the first place? Why will they not seek 10 a hearing under the social services agency? Why 11 did they get pregnant in the first place? It's 12 well beyond the fact that they may receive some 13 financial assistance. 14 Until we get to the understanding 15 of why young women get pregnant, this bill is 16 superfluous. It will produce a negative impact 17 on young women and their children, and I hope, 18 Senator Holland, you will reconsider this piece 19 of legislation. 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 21 would interrupt the debate to recognize Senator 22 Skelos. 23 SENATOR SKELOS: Yes, Mr. 2732 1 President. At this time would you recognize 2 Senator Solomon for purposes of voting? 3 SENATOR SOLOMON: Thank you. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 5 will read the last section. 6 THE SECRETARY: Section 88. This 7 action shall take effect July 1, 1995. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the 9 roll. 10 (The Secretary called the roll.) 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Solomon, how do you vote? 13 SENATOR SOLOMON: No. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 15 Solomon will be recorded in the negative. The 16 roll call is withdrawn. 17 Chair recognizes Senator 18 DeFrancisco. 19 SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: On the 20 bill. 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 22 DeFrancisco on the bill. 23 SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: One of the 2733 1 arguments that is raised over and over again 2 about this particular bill, at least it's been 3 this afternoon, is that people want jobs. They 4 don't want to be on social services. They don't 5 want to be dependent on others for their support 6 or for the support of their family. I agree 7 with that argument. That's an excellent 8 argument, and I think that no one intentionally 9 wants to be dependent on anybody else, or nobody 10 wants to have the state take on their 11 responsibilities; or if there are some, it's 12 very few. 13 But in order for people who truly 14 want to have a future, want to have some 15 opportunity to raise a family, to take care of 16 themselves, there has to be jobs out there that 17 are real jobs, jobs that people are proud to go 18 to and that they can make a living wage; and if 19 we haven't seen what's happened in this state 20 over the last several years in the economic 21 climate as relates to other areas, then I think 22 we're not looking very closely. 23 There are a lot of individuals in 2734 1 low paying jobs that are struggling to make ends 2 meet and struggling so they don't have to start 3 a cycle of dependency; and what we have to do, I 4 believe, is make their futures and the futures 5 of those individuals on the border of being 6 pushed into a cycle of dependency to earn a 7 decent living; and the only way to do that that 8 I know of is to provide an economic climate that 9 creates jobs; and the only way to do that is to 10 make this state more responsible in how it 11 spends its money so that there aren't taxes, 12 fees, regulations and all these problems that 13 are devastating to job creation. 14 My area of the state has been 15 losing jobs substantially over time. Every day 16 of the week it seems there is another 100 jobs 17 going elsewhere; and what are we doing for our 18 citizens at that point but creating more despair 19 and more hopelessness and bringing more people 20 into that cycle, and I think we've got to stop, 21 and I think that's what this last election was 22 all about. You got to stop. You got to change 23 the direction. Give that young person an 2735 1 opportunity not to be dependent, to be the best 2 thing that that person can be. 3 Now, even if all of these cuts 4 that have been labeled to be so drastic occur, 5 we will still have the most generous social 6 services program in the entire country. So we 7 are in a situation where we are still 8 understanding the needs of people who truly need 9 help but we're trying to turn the corner, and I 10 think it's extremely important that we do that. 11 Education has been mentioned time 12 and time again as the answer; but if anyone has 13 really studied the budgets over the last five 14 years, five years ago 28 percent of every state 15 dollar was spent on education; 28 percent was 16 spend on social services. Last year, it was a 17 disgrace; 21 percent of all dollars spent on 18 education and 39 percent on social services - 19 39 percent. By the year 2000 if we kept that 20 direction going, half of our budget would be 21 spent on social services. 22 Now, I don't think anybody on 23 either side of the aisle is saying we're not 2736 1 concerned about that mother who is a teen or 2 that pregnant child, and no one is saying that 3 we're not concerned about those individuals 4 living on a fixed income or that need 5 assistance, but we've got to cut the cost of 6 this system that has gone totally out of control 7 for there to be any money for anything else 8 that's needed in this budget, especially 9 education. 10 The thing that I think is 11 extremely important that hasn't really been 12 emphasized is that this cannot be looked at in a 13 vacuum, because the Governor, at least in his 14 budget and I suspect we will do the same thing 15 and have done the same thing, has indicated that 16 we will provide more spendable income for those 17 people trying to get off of the cycle of 18 dependency by raising the earned income tax 19 credit if that becomes part of the budget. 20 Also, the Governor has proposed, 21 and I think it makes a lot of sense, those 22 individuals who are starting to lose some 23 benefits, let them save more, let them keep more 2737 1 if they are working. They don't lose benefits 2 up to $200 of earned income now rather than the 3 20 or 30 that they were allowed before, and 20 4 percent above that is kept; in other words, an 5 incentive to say it's better to be off of the 6 system and we're going to try to help you do 7 that, so I don't think we can look at this in a 8 vacuum. 9 Everyone here wants to make sure 10 that those who truly can not help themselves are 11 provided for, but we can just not continue doing 12 what we're doing. Business as usual is 13 destroying the economic climate of this state, 14 and I think it's essential that we move in this 15 direction; and for that reason and for the 16 reasons I have given, I'm going to support this 17 bill and urge those who may not be sure which 18 way they are going to go to give these thoughts 19 some serious consideration, because I think it's 20 essential for all of those individuals who want 21 opportunity and want the ability to have a good 22 paying job in this state, the direction of the 23 state has to change, and I support this bill. 2738 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 2 recognizes Senator Oppenheimer on the bill. 3 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Thank you, 4 Mr. President. I would just like to speak on 5 the bill. As the chair of the Senate Democratic 6 Task Force on Women's Issues, I feel I want to 7 speak to the effect that these cuts have on 8 women and children; and as a resident of 9 Westchester County, I would like to read for the 10 record some words that were written by the 11 county executive of Westchester County, who as 12 we know is a Republican and, indeed, had run 13 against Governor Cuomo about four years ago. 14 Governor Pataki's war on the poor 15 is also a war on women and children. It's a war 16 against the most invisible amongst us, poor 17 women and children, elderly women and sick 18 women. The fact is that the cuts to home relief 19 households severely affect women, especially 20 older women. As the population ages, it becomes 21 increasingly more female as we all know. Of the 22 57,000 home relief recipients over the age of 23 50, over 31,000 of them are women. 2739 1 This budget is planning to 2 restrict home relief and Medicaid for employable 3 adults to 90 days and make this provision 4 retroactive to June of '94 which would 5 immediately cut 85,000 needy people from the 6 rolls. Now, most people don't realize that 40 7 percent of those needy people are women. 8 The Governor is also proposing to 9 reduce basic aid for AFDC families by 15 10 percent, and the Governor is pushing for a major 11 expansion of workfare. Actually, workfare has 12 been part of the welfare system in New York 13 State for fifteen years now. 14 There are already waiting lists 15 across New York State of women who want to work 16 and indeed have found jobs but are waiting for 17 child care -- a subject I speak a lot about. If 18 this budget is passed, some of those placements 19 may be used for workfare instead of allowing 20 these women to access these real jobs that they 21 have won but are unable to take because they do 22 not have child care. Child care is where we 23 should be putting our emphasis. 2740 1 The two biggest obstacles to 2 women getting off welfare is the lack of child 3 care and the lack of jobs. The overwhelming 4 majority of welfare recipients, however, are 5 single mothers with children. That's 87 percent 6 of our welfare recipients, and they live in 7 pretty dismal circumstances. Statewide, one in 8 five of our children in this state live in 9 poverty. Nearly half of all people fed by food 10 pantries are children. Two-thirds of the adults 11 who utilize our food pantries are women. We are 12 talking about serious, serious impacts to women 13 and children and also to another topic that I 14 have brought to this floor often, the victims of 15 domestic violence. 16 Battered women fleeing their 17 abusers will be classified as home relief 18 recipients. This budget destroys the little 19 support that exists for battered women. The 20 three-month limit ensures that women who lose 21 their home relief have no choice but to return 22 for financial support to that batterer. This 23 reverses all the moves that we have tried to 2741 1 make in the last year to assist the battered 2 woman. 3 Now, I would like to speak just 4 for a moment on the plight in Westchester; and, 5 here, I would like to just take a few quotes out 6 of a letter that was written to George Pataki by 7 the county executive of Westchester County, 8 Andrew O'Rourke. This was written in early 9 March. Much has been said about the great 10 success in Westchester County of some workfare 11 programs. I would like to point out another 12 area where this will be very damaging. 13 "Certain proposals in the 14 executive budget concern us," and this is a 15 quote from Andrew O'Rourke's letter, "because 16 they may well have the unintended consequence of 17 producing new costs in the area of homeless 18 services. Our analysis shows that they may do 19 so to a degree that will more than offset the 20 projected savings they are designed to produce." 21 Now, I have spoken on this floor 22 many times about the size of the homeless 23 population in Westchester County, which per 2742 1 capita is the highest in our state, and here is 2 our county executive supporting that contention 3 as well as talking about what these cuts will 4 mean to our county. 5 I will go back to quoting him on 6 rent supplementation, "Specifically, I am 7 referring to the planned elimination of 8 supplemental rent payments currently made to 9 recipients under the Jiggets, Strong and Love 10 cases." The Love case is the one that affects 11 Westchester County. "In Westchester, we have 12 452 households currently receiving monthly rent 13 supplements averaging $300 as the result of the 14 Love litigation. However, it is nearly certain 15 that all of these families are likely to become 16 homeless soon after the supplement is 17 eliminated. For each family of three that 18 becomes homeless, there is an additional monthly 19 cost of about $3400 that is beyond the benefits 20 provided to a family were they living in 21 permanent housing." 22 Another area that's mentioned is 23 the basic grant reduction of 15 percent, and 2743 1 this is another unintended cost increase as seen 2 by the county executive in Westchester, and I'll 3 quote him here. "In Westchester County, 64 4 percent of families living in private 5 unsubsidized housing are paying rent above the 6 maximum shelter allowance. In most cases, these 7 families are using a portion of their basic 8 grant to supplement the shelter allowance. 9 Reducing the basic grant by any amount will only 10 compound the difficult choice these families 11 already face between rent on the one hand and 12 food, clothing and utility expenses on the 13 other. Our greatest concern is that for some of 14 these families given Westchester's limited 15 market in low-cost rental housing homelessness 16 will result." 17 And I will give just one example 18 and then I think I will, yes, conclude. 19 Should only five percent of the 20 families in private, unsubsidized housing pay 21 more than the maximum shelter allowance for rent 22 -- that would be 281 households -- should they 23 become homeless, the county and state shares of 2744 1 the additional cost would be $2.9 million each 2 -- each family. Again, there are currently no 3 resources to house this number of newly homeless 4 families in Westchester other than commercial 5 hotels and motels; and, as you know, we have 6 been making good progress in Westchester County 7 bringing our homeless families back into our 8 county from other counties because there was 9 opposition raised in other counties to us 10 housing our homeless outside our county. 11 This budget, this proposed 12 change, will cause dire, dire consequences in 13 Westchester County, and we have to factor that 14 in. I'm sure it is not only in Westchester 15 county. 16 Thank you. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 18 recognizes Senator Skelos. 19 SENATOR SKELOS: Yes, Mr. 20 President. I just wanted to remind my 21 colleagues that the debate began at 3:15, and 22 it's up to -- if a member wishes, at 5:15 there 23 could be a motion to close debate at that time. 2745 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 2 would also recognize the fact that there have 3 been six Senators who have designated to the 4 chair that they wish to be recognized to speak 5 on the bill. 6 Next Senator is Senator 7 Montgomery. 8 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you, 9 Mr. President. I would like to ask if Senator 10 Holland would yield for a couple of questions? 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Holland, would you yield to Senator Montgomery? 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 15 yields. 16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Senator 17 Holland, I'm sorry we have such time 18 constraints. I would like to ask you a lot of 19 questions, but I will consider my other 20 colleagues. I want to just ask if you have any 21 idea about the job-readiness of the AFDC/HR 22 participants at this point in time? Is there 23 any indication from either the state or the 2746 1 city, the locality, as to what percentage and 2 based on their own definition of job readiness? 3 SENATOR HOLLAND: On the home 4 relief side, we're only talking about the 5 employable people, people who are able to work, 6 single employable people. 7 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I'm trying 8 to get some sense of what percent that is. 9 SENATOR HOLLAND: What 10 percentage? 11 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. 12 SENATOR HOLLAND: In the home 13 relief area about 35 to 40 percent of the home 14 relief people. 15 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And the AFDC 16 is it about the same? Is it more or less? 17 SENATOR HOLLAND: The AFDC people 18 can stay on the rolls. It's the home relief 19 that we're giving the 60-day requirement to. 20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: But you do 21 have a percentage of AFDC that are employable? 22 They may have children that are in school or out 23 of the house and you are assuming that they are 2747 1 also employable? 2 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, but we are 3 not forcing them out. 4 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: That's still 5 voluntary. 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. Home 7 relief is a different story. 8 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: All right. 9 Thank you. 10 Senator Holland, if you would 11 continue to yield. At one part of the 12 legislation that refers to employment, you 13 indicate or the bill says that we will require 14 not-for-profit entities and other entities that 15 contract with the state, not-for-profit concerns 16 that contract with the state would be required 17 to accept - 18 SENATOR HOLLAND: Oh, yes. Yes. 19 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Are you 20 aware that there is legislation to require 21 similarly that any for-profit corporation that 22 contracts with the state should accept a 23 percentage of welfare recipients? 2748 1 SENATOR HOLLAND: I did not know. 2 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: There is 3 legislation. Would you be interested in 4 sponsoring that, Senator Holland? Is that 5 something you would like to see happen? 6 SENATOR HOLLAND: I would be 7 interested in looking at it. 8 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Pardon me? 9 SENATOR HOLLAND: I would be 10 interested in looking at it. 11 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: There is 12 legislation. I can certainly get that to you. 13 It would help us. 14 SENATOR HOLLAND: Okay. 15 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I would 16 certainly like to see that kind of legislation. 17 I am sure that you would also. 18 Now, Senator Holland - 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 20 Holland, would you continue to yield? 21 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 22 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: -- would you 23 continue to yield? 2749 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2 yields, Senator Montgomery. 3 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I'm not 4 clear. I was trying to analyze this for myself, 5 but I couldn't quite figure out how we are 6 treating now the whole issue of training. I see 7 that you have a section in here that deals with 8 training, the institutions that you would accept 9 as training. Under what circumstances would an 10 AFDC recipient, for instance, be eligible to 11 select an institution of higher education as an 12 option? And would that person in addition to 13 being enrolled in a college, for instance, would 14 that person also have to meet the requirements 15 for the jobs, for the work, the work 16 requirements? 17 SENATOR HOLLAND: There are no 18 changes in this bill for AFDC recipients 19 training at all. 20 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: For work 21 requirements? 22 SENATOR HOLLAND: No. Mostly 23 home relief, Senator. 2750 1 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: That was not 2 my understanding, Senator. But, all right. Let 3 me just pursue. So that, it is your assumption 4 that any person -- because there is one section 5 in the legislation that speaks to seeking a 6 waiver for AFDC. 7 SENATOR HOLLAND: I'm sorry, 8 Senator, I'm listening to somebody else. Let me 9 go back to your last question. The training 10 programs that are in existence go on. They are 11 not deleted in any way, shape or form. 12 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Excuse me. 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: The last 14 question - 15 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. 16 SENATOR HOLLAND: -- training for 17 AFDC, the training programs that are in 18 existence go on. There is no deletion of those 19 training programs, if that answers your 20 question. 21 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: The second 22 part to the question is, would those 23 participants, those people who are participating 2751 1 in a training program, for instance, they are 2 enrolled in a community college or a two-year 3 college, et cetera, are they now also going to 4 be required to meet the standards in here that 5 are set for workfare? You have a workfare 6 section that seems to cover those people. 7 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 8 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So in other 9 words, they can be in training but they also 10 still have to have at least five face to face 11 contacts - 12 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 13 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: -- with five 14 different employers every week. 15 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Else they 17 will be cutoff. 18 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 19 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Okay. Thank 20 you for that clarification. Just one last 21 question. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 23 Holland, do you continue to yield? 2752 1 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 3 continues to yield. 4 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: If you will 5 continue to yield. The bill speaks to fraud 6 control, and I know you have been working on 7 this issue a long time. I am certainly very 8 interested in it. 9 Providers. How does it cover 10 providers, you know, stores that are involved in 11 this kind of fraud, in collusion with a 12 participant, a welfare recipient, you know, any 13 provider that also must apparently have some 14 role in this activity in order for it to take 15 place? 16 SENATOR HOLLAND: A 17 recommendation of the District Attorney of New 18 York County, Morgenthau, Food Stamp Fraud Act 19 raises the penalties for illegal food stamp 20 transactions and factors into the penalties the 21 values of such transactions which would 22 definitely have impact on store owners who 23 illegally deal in food stamps. 2753 1 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And any 2 other provider that participates in collusion 3 with a participant? 4 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 5 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: So the 6 penalties fall equally on providers and 7 recipients. 8 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. Depending 9 upon the value. 10 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Okay. Thank 11 you, Senator Holland. 12 Mr. President. I would like to 13 speak briefly to the bill. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 15 Montgomery on the bill. 16 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you. 17 Mr. President, as you know, I'm opposed to many 18 of the provisions in this bill, but mainly 19 because I agree on one level with Senator 20 Holland that work and the opportunity to work is 21 preferable to living in a state of dependence, 22 so that is my basic philosophy, and I am happy 23 that we want to reform this system, which I 2754 1 agree fosters dependence. 2 But, unfortunately, the direction 3 in which we're going does not lead to 4 independence, it seems to me, because while 5 we're talking about sending people out to find 6 -- to seek employment, we have not been able to 7 address the issue that you yourself have raised, 8 Senator Holland. Mr. President. Senator 9 Holland has raised this issue himself, that we 10 have lost -- we have lost over a half million 11 jobs in the last ten years; and, in particular, 12 we have lost those jobs in the areas where 13 people that we're talking about here would be 14 very likely to be able to work and earn a fair 15 income. So we have lost those job 16 opportunities. We have not been able to replace 17 them; and, hopefully, we will. Hopefully, we 18 are moving in that direction, but I certainly 19 have not heard it, and we certainly have not 20 spoken about that before we talk about throwing 21 people off of welfare because they can't find a 22 job in two months. 23 And at the same time, this budget 2755 1 that we are putting out while we don't have the 2 job market, we haven't created it, we're not 3 moving in that direction, we are eliminating all 4 of the avenues to allow people an opportunity to 5 get themselves prepared for other kinds of jobs, 6 the jobs in the service sector, where we are 7 moving more to service sector jobs but we are 8 not allowing people to prepare themselves. For 9 instance, we want to punish the children, 10 teenagers and their mothers, if they miss school 11 because we say we want to encourage them to stay 12 in school, but for what purpose? 13 And we are cutting out SEEK. We 14 are cutting out college Discovery. We are 15 cutting out HEOP. We are cutting out EOP. The 16 Liberty Scholarship is gone. The Liberty 17 Partnership has been possibly eliminated because 18 it's been block granted, I understand, and cut 19 by 60 percent. I don't see -- I don't see the 20 avenue for shifting from dependence to 21 independence. I don't see the invitation and 22 the support from us to people that we're saying, 23 "If you don't find a job, you will be cut off 2756 1 in 60 days," but we are not offering any other 2 opportunity. 3 So it sounds like this 4 legislation offers people not hope but death. 5 Now, I know that's a very strong way of putting 6 it, Senator Holland, and I had hoped that we 7 would have been able to debate this and discuss 8 it and come to some agreement between both 9 houses, both sides of the aisle, and what have 10 you, because I think we all want ultimately the 11 same thing. But this legislation is essentially 12 punishing people for being poor, and that 13 certainly I don't want. I think a lot of us in 14 this room don't want, but that's what it does. 15 And I really don't believe that 16 the people in the State of New York are prepared 17 to agree that in order to reach this goal of 18 having people become independent that we will 19 punish them, cut their legs off, throw their 20 children away, and give up, throw up our hands 21 and say, "There is nothing more that we can do 22 because they couldn't find a job that didn't 23 exist and we were not in a position to create 2757 1 the job, and so that's it. We're finished. 2 We've done what we're supposed to do." 3 I don't think the people in the 4 State of New York are prepared to do that. I 5 think this sends the wrong message to everybody 6 even people who want to see welfare reform 7 happen. I think that this is the wrong way to 8 do it, and the public is going to see through 9 this fraud soon enough. 10 I'm against this. I would vote 11 no, Mr. President. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The chair 13 would interrupt the debate at this time for 14 recognizing Senator Skelos. 15 SENATOR SKELOS: With the consent 16 of the Minority, I ask that the last section be 17 read for several members to vote at this time. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 19 will read the last section. 20 THE SECRETARY: Section 88. This 21 act shall take effect July 1. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the 23 roll. 2758 1 (The Secretary called the roll.) 2 SENATOR SKELOS: Would you 3 recognize Senator Hoblock. 4 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 5 Hoblock, how do you vote? 6 SENATOR HOBLOCK: In the 7 affirmative. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Hoblock in the affirmative. 10 SENATOR SKELOS: Would you 11 recognize Senator Santiago. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 13 Santiago, how do you vote? 14 SENATOR SANTIAGO: No. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: No. 16 SENATOR SKELOS: Would you 17 recognize Senator Gonzalez. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 19 Gonzalez, how do you vote? 20 SENATOR GONZALEZ: In the 21 negative. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 23 Gonzalez in the negative. 2759 1 Roll call is withdrawn. Debate 2 will continue. Chair would recognize Senator 3 Markowitz. 4 SENATOR MARKOWITZ: Thank you 5 very much, Mr. President. 6 Senator Holland, the words coming 7 from you and some of your colleagues not only 8 here in New York State but certainly in 9 Washington, government, in my opinion, that's 10 turning its back on those greatest in need, and 11 this really defines to me the differences, and 12 that is that I think we judge a society by the 13 compassion that it provides for those in need. 14 And I believe that the steps 15 we're about to take this afternoon -- and I'm 16 sure that you and your colleagues have a lot 17 more in store both here in the state and in 18 Washington -- concern me greatly. 19 You know, I remember growing up 20 in the '50s and certainly most of us can 21 remember "Ozzie and Harriet," "Leave It To 22 Beaver," "Father Knows Best" among other shows. 23 That was the viewpoint of a lot of Americans 2760 1 about their society, although people of color 2 would argue that the 1950s were not the greatest 3 days in their lives, believe me, nor -- nor was 4 it an ideal life for those of us like me, 5 Senator Holland, that grew up on welfare and on 6 Social Security with my mother living in public 7 housing. 8 Forgive me if I'm a tax and 9 spender. Tax from those who can afford it, or 10 should afford it, because we are our brother's 11 keeper, and spend for those that genuinely need 12 it. Yes, I will believe that from the day I was 13 born until the day the Lord calls me. 14 And I mean that, because I am a 15 product, and my family, of the benevolence, of 16 the care, and of the compassion. Although it 17 wasn't dramatic in those days, at least society 18 gave a helping hand. 19 Now, it is true that in today's 20 society we have to take steps to cut back on 21 abuse. Democrats and Republicans agree alike, 22 we have to cut back on abuse. But life in the 23 1990s, Senator Holland, is not life in the 1950s 2761 1 and '40s and '60s, when you were a younger man 2 and certainly when I was a younger man. Believe 3 me, it's nothing like that at all. 4 I think a visit into Senator 5 Montgomery's area, Senator Waldon's, my area, 6 even the east side of Manhattan, would begin to 7 show you a dramatic difference in lifestyles. 8 The society has changed dramatically. Not 9 everyone, Senator Holland, is successful or has 10 the tools to be successful or was given the 11 blessings, were given the blessings by the 12 proper direction of society, family, to strive 13 and succeed. 14 The problem here is that most of 15 us are living in terms of our income 16 significantly above the people we serve in the 17 state in general. How can any of you be 18 sensitive to those that don't have when most of 19 us eat in some of the fanciest restaurants that 20 Albany has, and when we're not here we eat in 21 the fanciest restaurants in whatever communities 22 we live in, in this state? Some of you have 23 beautiful summer homes. How can you possibly 2762 1 relate to the deprivation and despair that too 2 many people in our society have? And you think 3 that by taking away monies and assistance will 4 help them break out of a cycle of dependency and 5 poverty, and suddenly they'll pick themselves up 6 by their shoes and tighten their boots, make 7 their bed the right way and become all of the 8 successes that you and I would want to see in 9 this society? How I wish, Senator Holland, we 10 could do that. How I wish. How I wish. 11 But the reality is it's not about 12 to happen. And so what does a compassionate 13 society do? In my opinion, rather than talk 14 about decreasing services, we ought to be 15 intensifying services for those genuinely in 16 need, to provide the kind of day care services 17 and job training, to provide the kind of 18 assistance that make people independent, not by 19 throwing them off of assistance but by giving 20 them a helping hand. 21 One other thing, Senator, the 22 thing I fear most and you don't see it yet where 23 you live, the gap between the haves and the 2763 1 have-nots is growing, Senator. It's growing. 2 It's not decreasing. It's widening. Let me 3 just tell you, not everyone is as level-headed 4 as you are here, or any of our colleagues here. 5 When that gap, when a society's gap between the 6 haves and have-nots continues to widen, then 7 more and more people in our society say, "Hey, 8 this is not my game and, therefore, I don't have 9 to play by the rules of this game." 10 And I hope and pray, Senator 11 Holland, that the steps that you are about to 12 take this afternoon, this Senate, and what's 13 happening in Washington, as well, will not bring 14 my greatest fear of real problems even more 15 dramatic than our society has experienced over 16 the last number of years. 17 Now, I applaud any efforts to cut 18 back on welfare fraud. Who disagrees here? No 19 one should receive public assistance that are 20 lying, thieving, abusing, for sure, and I agree 21 that we should take every step to make sure that 22 public assistance goes into the hands of those 23 that truly need it. No one disagrees here. 2764 1 But as a society, sir, I got to 2 tell you something. Someone who is making 3 $250,000 a year or 300,000, I have crocodile 4 tears, Senator. We have an obligation in this 5 society for one another. I'm sorry. Maybe this 6 is where we disagree, but I believe we have an 7 obligation in society to help those greatest in 8 need in this society. Only by uplifting and 9 providing for those in greatest need will our 10 lives become even better. I really believe 11 that, Senator, and I'm very concerned that the 12 step we're about to take this afternoon leads us 13 down to a road that I shudder to think. I pray 14 not my greatest fears to be realized in society. 15 I'm certainly not going to be 16 supporting this bill. Of course, I will be 17 opposed to it. But, Senator, I hope if -- I 18 know that a good number of my colleagues that 19 are Republicans are not necessarily insensitive 20 people or uncaring people. I accept that. I 21 accept that, even though I know that business 22 and business interests are very important to 23 you; nonetheless, there has to be a way that 2765 1 business interests and the needs of the public 2 that is in need -- there has to be a marriage of 3 that. There has to be a way that we can 4 co-exist in this society together and in 5 harmony. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 7 recognizes Senator Dollinger. 8 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr. 9 President. I will be very brief. I was among 10 the homeless last night, so I'm tired, and my 11 colleagues have spoken eloquently about the 12 problems that these cuts create. 13 I will just make three quick 14 comments. One, Senator DeFrancisco talked about 15 the rising cost of social services. He is 16 correct. Those costs have gone up 17 significantly. The biggest cost, of course, 18 that has gone up is the one that isn't even 19 addressed here, and that's long-term care for 20 our elderly population. That is the one that's 21 keeping double-digit increases that's driving 22 significant social service dollars not only out 23 of our state coffers but out of our local 2766 1 governments, out of our property taxes. But it 2 seems to me that's the kind of mythology that we 3 often play with. It sounds very fancy to say 4 only 20 percent of our budget goes to education 5 and 37 percent now goes to social services, but 6 what we don't do is identify what that 37 7 percent is, and how much of it goes to the 8 elderly that we all agree we want to help. 9 I am also struck, I guess, by the 10 workfare proposal which talks about requiring 11 AFDC recipients and HR recipients to go to 12 workfare to try to get a job. I think that's 13 applaudable. I think what's interesting is that 14 my understanding is that the savings that come 15 out of this bill will be used for 16 administration, which is appropriate, and also 17 to increase the emergency shelter allowance, so 18 that there are more shelters. Why? Because we 19 know that when we cut HR recipients off after 20 two months, we know that if we require workfare, 21 we're going to lose people in the system. They 22 are simply going to become homeless. They'll 23 simply be living in Patakiville like I did last 2767 1 night. 2 What's the last thing that 3 bothers me most about this; and, Senator 4 Holland, I actually applaud your looking into 5 this issue, and I think that the Majority in 6 this house has done a number of interesting 7 things in the last four or five budgets that 8 have tried to cure the problem with chronic 9 welfare dependency. There are good things 10 happening, the Jobs First Program. There are 11 good things that this Majority, this house can 12 take credit for, because I think it's 13 demonstrated the kind of sensitive, caring 14 compassionate, but firm, approach that's 15 necessary to cure this problem, but it doesn't 16 happen overnight. 17 The problem I have, and it's best 18 epitomized by the proposal that minors live at 19 home. I know we had this debate. I asked a 20 number of questions last time. What troubles me 21 most about it is that what this will do is the 22 one thing that I thought the Majority did not 23 want to do, which is, this will bring government 2768 1 into every single AFDC household in this state, 2 because the very first thing that will happen is 3 someone will say, "My father doesn't want me to 4 live there. I don't have to go back." And the 5 next thing that the social service department 6 will say is, "Get a letter from your father or 7 your mother that says they don't want you back," 8 and somebody is going to forge that. Some 9 parent is going to say, "Sure, I will take them 10 back if you give me their benefit," and we're 11 going to put tremendous stresses on families, 12 and some poor Family Court judge or some even 13 poorer social service hearing officer is going 14 to have to decide whether this family really 15 wants the child back in the home. What happens 16 if it's just one parent? The father says, "Yes, 17 I want them back," but the mother says, "No, no, 18 no, I don't want my daughter back," or "I don't 19 want my son back." What's the hearing officer 20 to do? He's now got one parent saying one 21 thing, one parent saying another. Is some 22 social service hearing officer going to sit down 23 and say, "I'm the Solomon"? "I can cut this 2769 1 family in half. I will have the child come home 2 the days that the father is home but not the 3 days that the mother is home." That's what 4 we're talking about if we try to enforce this 5 kind of system. 6 I hate to say it, but the vision 7 that drives this bill, it seems to me, is 8 inconsistent with the population we're trying to 9 serve. Senator Markowitz, Senator Montgomery, 10 Senator Abate, people who -- Senator Espada who 11 spoke eloquently on this bill, Senator Waldon, 12 represent people, many people, who need AFDC 13 payments; yet their voice says, "Don't do 14 this." Don't do it because it's not the right 15 thing to do. 16 Let's take the longer path, the 17 harder path of the Jobs First Program and the 18 programs that we've got underway that are 19 working. Do it that way. Don't do it in this 20 draconian approach. Listen to the people who 21 represent significant numbers of people on AFDC, 22 as I do in the city of Rochester, and every 23 voice I get from the population I was elected to 2770 1 serve is, "This is the wrong way to do it." It 2 may fit everybody's political agenda, but it 3 won't fit the people agenda in this state. 4 We're doing a number of good 5 things. Let's continue to do those. Let's 6 forget trying to create a family police 7 department so that we can enforce workfare and 8 learnfare and homefare and requiring that the 9 government get involved in everybody's family to 10 try to keep it together. Let's figure out a 11 more compassionate system that achieves that 12 goal without intruding government into 13 everyone's lives. Seems to me that should be 14 something we can all agree on. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 16 recognizes Senator Skelos. 17 SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President. 18 I believe on the list we have Senator Marchi and 19 then Senator Jones. In consultation with 20 Senator Paterson, I believe they will be the 21 last two speakers, and then there will be a slow 22 roll call, I understand; and then perhaps at 23 that time if somebody wants to explain their 2771 1 vote, they can, because we're right about at 2 that two-hour limit. 3 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 4 recognizes Senator Marchi on the bill. 5 SENATOR MARCHI: Thank you, Mr. 6 President. My expectations on the bill that 7 will finally be or the legislation that will be 8 finally enacted, or the budget that's going to 9 be finally enacted, will not assume the form 10 that it was presented but, in great part, it 11 represents a very strong effort on the part of 12 the Governor and on the part of many people, I 13 think, to face certain harsh realities on terms 14 that will not leave New York behind any other 15 state in the union in terms of a disposition and 16 a commitment to meeting human need. 17 I think this is implicit. I 18 believe that the budget that we pass will not be 19 inconsistent with what I'm saying here now, but 20 that will be the case, in my estimation. 21 But there are changes taking 22 place. Go back to the '30s when we had 23 tremendous depression, and there were great 2772 1 pessimistic estimates made of the American 2 people and their ability to produce and their 3 work ethic. We had 10 million unemployed going 4 into World War II, with about 50 million 5 employable people, which was a very high 6 percentage. If we were to translate it now -- I 7 mean we're nowheres near that. 8 Nevertheless, we fought a war 9 around the world, and we were responsible for 10 the logistical miracle that America 11 represented. We outproduced all the other 12 nations of the world combined in securing 13 victory and rehabilitating the world after the 14 war was over with the Marshall Plan and the 15 other instrumentalities that restored, at least 16 in the free world, a higher standard of living. 17 What are we faced with now? I'm 18 not sure about Washington and what their 19 intentions are. Some of you may be enchanted 20 with Democratic rule down in Washington. Others 21 will say that it's the Republicans. I think the 22 jury is still out. Frankly, when it gets down 23 to our level, we see that although they control 2773 1 immigration, for instance, they will not accept 2 the responsibility for caring for the people 3 that may need help, may need assistance, and 4 this falls very heavily on those states that 5 have demonstrated -- and I make no apologies for 6 it. I think it's to our credit that we have 7 been sensitive to human need. But there is no 8 effort to meet us in that struggle, Titanic 9 struggle so that even legal immigrants don't 10 receive any assistance from the federal 11 government for the first three years of their 12 stay. 13 We go on to the invidious 14 comparisons that are taking place within the 15 states. We don't have a national view, and this 16 is a new, I think, an added factor, that we can 17 throw into this equation because many of the 18 things that have been said here today on both 19 sides of the aisle are not inconsistent, but we 20 live in a country where there are 50 21 jurisdictions. Maybe three have home relief. 22 The other 47 don't. 23 I read today in the Orange 2774 1 County, California, experience with I guess 2 derivative suits and unwise investments, where 3 Avery Willis, an executive with Scott Worldwide 4 Paper Company said, "Cuts in social services 5 might offer a benefit in disguise in persuading 6 the counties growing number of poor people to 7 move." "That's a crude way to talk about it, 8 but it's real," Mr. Willis said, "Let them go 9 live in New York." Now we don't have a national 10 view of human need. We have Mr. Willis telling 11 us, "move to New York". 12 It is not a discredit on our part 13 that we have been sensitive to that appeal. 14 Several years ago, I read about some nuns in New 15 Jersey who paid the way to people who were in 16 need of help, medical assistance, and they paid 17 their way into New York because New York would 18 take care of them. We simply have to come to 19 grips with reality. We have to ease the harsher 20 impacts that appear obvious to many of us; but 21 at the same time, there is an urgent need that 22 we recognize the problem for the dimensions that 23 it has. What is going to happen with the rising 2775 1 -- you know, I'm one of them -- rising age 2 median, median age in the United States, broad 3 phalanxes of people going into the 70s and the 4 80s, 90s, all needing assistance? Many of them 5 will need assistance desperately. 6 We have to -- we have to have a 7 national view. We have to have a more common 8 concept of human dignity and our willingness and 9 commitment to meet that. I think what the 10 Governor is attempting to do here is to husband 11 our resources with some imagination; and with 12 the help of the legislative process, I think 13 that we will produce an orientation that will be 14 healthful, and I think that process is going to 15 take place. 16 What we are doing in evolving a 17 budget, we are evolving a document that is the 18 expression of the Legislature and the Executive; 19 and I think the Governor has taken that very 20 much to heart. I believe that he is not 21 insensitive to these things. These things have 22 to be brought out. The Assembly -- the Assembly 23 should be passing some legislation if they 2776 1 represent some of the views that have been 2 expressed here today. Let's have it all out. 3 Let's put it all out on the table so that we can 4 reason intelligently. 5 I think that the Majority -- and 6 I hope that some of you may feel the same way 7 because you don't govern by brut force in 8 saying, "We won and you lost." We all have to 9 win, and we all have to be able to support a 10 policy that finally emerges. Even the Court of 11 Appeals, Judge Kaye, the presiding justice in 12 the Court of Appeals, in writing a unanimous 13 decision in the Lovelace case, and this is in 14 response to Senator Waldon's plea, which I was 15 certainly sensitive to. There's been a change 16 even in the Court of Appeals. They say that if 17 you are going to challenge a legislative act as 18 being unreasonable, then you must prove beyond a 19 reasonable doubt that it's unreasonable. Now, 20 that's -- you know, you are almost treating it 21 as we treat crimes. This is pretty strong 22 medicine that the Court of Appeals has arrived 23 at, but it is an indication of the circumstances 2777 1 in which we live in. 2 So I think that -- don't feel 3 anybody who has gotten up and said things - 4 because there isn't anyone who didn't stand up 5 and say things that didn't strike a responsive 6 cord with me, and I think that is a shared 7 feeling, but this is a new orientation which I 8 hope, and which I believe will be the case, will 9 still leave us as the state that's most 10 sensitive to the human condition. We will do it 11 with greater prudence with the desire and the 12 stimulus that we hope will produce a more 13 wholesome attitude, and I don't want to draw 14 invidious comparisons about the person who's 15 making 250,000. I'm not making it. I don't 16 think very many of us are making it, but we also 17 need an entrepreneurial atmosphere that will add 18 to our jobs, add to the economic -- and will 19 give a stimulus to the economic engine that we 20 have and provide the jobs so that there will be 21 an abundance, there will be an abundance upon 22 which we can make more enlightened, more 23 compassionate decisions. 2778 1 But we can't do it at the rate 2 and the pace that we are going now. If we have 3 40 percent of the unemployment and all the other 4 states are beginning to rise and they say, "Send 5 them to New York if we have a problem," we don't 6 want to accept that. We don't want to accept 7 Washington telling us that they are not going to 8 share some of the burden that we are carrying so 9 manfully -- or personally. How do I say that 10 politically correct? We can't do that. 11 And states like Florida, states 12 like California, they are in the same boat. 13 They are in the same boat. So that let's not be 14 too cruel with each other. Let's be enlightened 15 and understand the circumstances in which we 16 live, and I feel that -- I feel that the step 17 that is being taken today in the composite of 18 companion effort, because we seem to be the only 19 ones that are legislating. I don't hear of any 20 action going on down the hall. Maybe there is. 21 But the last time I checked, there wasn't any. 22 I believe that we will fashion a document that 23 will preserve our preeminence in terms of a 2779 1 desire to meet human need and at the same time 2 begin to turn this picture around, begin to turn 3 this picture around, so that we create the 4 premises for a more abundant society. 5 And for these reasons, I'm going 6 to vote yes, Mr. President, and we will come by 7 this issue again, I'm sure, and I believe that 8 out of all of this a growing consensus will grow 9 that will benefit this state. 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Chair 11 recognizes Senator Jones to close debate. 12 SENATOR JONES: Well, I would 13 leave that to my leader. But I do have a 14 question. 15 I would like to just focus for a 16 second on the learnfare piece, because, as you 17 know my background, that's probably the piece 18 I'm most interested in. I myself had a bill 19 last year because I do know there is a problem 20 in the system and, of course, if I find the 21 solution, it's not acceptable; but, last year, 22 it came to my attention that we had over 200 23 children in Rochester schools who were receiving 2780 1 public assistance, not attending school except 2 once in 21 days, signing up so that the school 3 was verifying they were there, then leaving and 4 collecting benefits. I put in a bill to try to 5 match that up because education is important to 6 me, and you either are getting one or you're 7 working. To me, that seems simple. 8 But let me just ask Senator 9 Holland a question about his learnfare piece 10 that's in here that has been brought to my 11 attention. Would you yield for a question, 12 Senator, through you? 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Holland, do you yield to Senator Jones? 15 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes, ma'am. 16 Yes. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 18 yields. 19 SENATOR JONES: I've been 20 speaking to some social workers about this 21 issue, how we get the children in school and the 22 issue of taking money away from the parents. 23 Would it be correct to say -- first of all, 2781 1 Senator, you are familiar with what a PINS 2 petition is? 3 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 4 SENATOR JONES: Would it be 5 correct to say that if I'm the user of this 6 system -- and I believe every one of us sitting 7 here, this is who we want to get at, the user, 8 the person who really doesn't care about the 9 issue or the poverty, the user. Would it be 10 correct to say if I were one of these people and 11 I have a child who doesn't go to school, all I 12 have to do is go get a PINS petition and my 13 money is fine, and then the court or somebody 14 else will take over the problem of the child? 15 SENATOR HOLLAND: It's probably 16 true. Is that true? 17 It may be true, but they don't 18 think it's that easy to get a PINS petition. 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Does 20 Senator continue to yield? 21 Senator continues to yield. 22 SENATOR JONES: I have been told 23 by the social workers in our community that this 2782 1 could very well be an issue. In fact, it's 2 becoming too easy to get a PINS petition. So I 3 guess what I would ask you, Senator, would you 4 be willing to take a look at that? 5 SENATOR HOLLAND: Sure. 6 SENATOR JONES: Because if your 7 intent is in school and a penalty there, then I 8 would hate to see a loophole for those who might 9 want to use that. 10 SENATOR HOLLAND: Absolutely. 11 SENATOR JONES: Okay. Then on 12 the bill. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Jones on the bill. 15 SENATOR JONES: I guess Senator 16 Marchi, probably, as he does very often always 17 crystallizes things for me in my own mind. I 18 really believe that all of us sitting here 19 clearly have a heart and we all have a brain. 20 Unfortunately, at times, politics seems to 21 prevent us from using one or sometimes both. I 22 would like to tell you what I think of this 23 whole bill. 2783 1 I supported many of the things, 2 and I continue to support some of the things 3 that are in this bill, but I would just 4 challenge us to look at some other issues that I 5 think are within this that we could fix and I 6 don't see this bill addressing. 7 For instance, job training. It's 8 ridiculous to say, "Go to work," if you're not 9 going to give somebody job training. But do you 10 know what we're doing with job training? And I 11 spent a lot of time looking at this. In the 12 city of Rochester, we put 100 people, let's say, 13 in a program to become a policeman. We tell 14 them, "Sign up here and you are all going to be 15 a policeman." Guess what? They're not going to 16 be a policeman because there aren't jobs to be a 17 policeman. We've got all kinds of programs out 18 there. Data processing, that's real popular 19 today. If you learn to use a computer, you're 20 all set. We're deluding people with many of 21 these training programs. It's not true. 22 They're not going to get a job. 23 I know people that are unemployed 2784 1 who have signed up for $2,000 programs that 2 we're paying for in data processing, who were 3 engineers, and are told, "There aren't any 4 jobs." But they did it. 5 So I would challenge you. Let's 6 start looking at these job training programs to 7 be sure that there are jobs out there, and that 8 there is a pot of gold at the end of this 9 rainbow we're telling people. 10 And then the drug treatment, all 11 of us want people to be cured of drugs today. 12 Certainly that's a goal. That's a goal that 13 would solve many of the problems that we're 14 trying to deal with in this bill. But do you 15 know what I'm told about that. We have people 16 seven, eight times joining drug treatment 17 programs purely to continue on the home relief, 18 and, out there, we have serious people who 19 desperately want to get cured of a drug 20 addiction and can't get in the programs. I 21 hope, Senator, there is a way to find these 22 people and deal with them because I think they 23 are part of the issue out there. 2785 1 I'm thrilled with your issue with 2 the child support. Bearing children takes two, 3 and for some reason today in society we keep 4 ignoring that, but I'm one of those people that 5 thank God for three jobs kept me from having to 6 collect welfare. But let me tell you, I'm very 7 supportive of whatever you have to do to find 8 the man responsible and see that he takes his 9 responsibility if he's not willing to. 10 The fraud in the system, I was 11 working with our own district attorney on this 12 issue and I would have loved to work with 13 Senator Holland, but we keep working in a vacuum 14 around here, and sometimes we don't even know 15 what each other is doing. But I think that's an 16 excellent -- we definitely have to get those 17 people, and I've heard everybody say that. I've 18 heard the people on this side of the aisle say 19 it and I've heard you say it. 20 And then I would challenge you to 21 find the good things, and let's capitalize on 22 them. We have always made welfare an all-or 23 nothing system. In Rochester, we have this CAT 2786 1 program that has had excellent results, where we 2 say to a woman, "You got to go to work, but 3 we'll still help you with a piece of the day 4 care; we'll still help you with the health 5 care," which an entry level job is not going to 6 give her, and it works. We do those pieces 7 until they get to the point where they can 8 work. But we've always made it, "We'll give you 9 everything or we'll give you nothing." Well, 10 then, what is the point? Where is the incentive 11 to go to work? We're not providing it. 12 I went and visited another group 13 in Rochester called Service Corps, where they 14 were having people come in, many of them people 15 that had been in prison. They were paying them 16 $85 a week or they had to be in training. They 17 could get -- but do you know what? They were 18 working. They were painting public buildings. 19 This winter and last winter, when we had a bad 20 one, they went out and shoveled every single 21 fire hydrant in the city of Rochester to earn 22 that money, and they took pride in what they 23 were doing. That's working. 2787 1 So I guess rather than a 2 punishment approach, I would really rather we 3 look at some of these good things, fix some of 4 the well meaning things that we put in there 5 that haven't worked, and let's remove those, and 6 let's try to look at the good things. 7 I will support you in some of the 8 things you are thinking of because I think, as 9 Senator Marchi said, we all know this will not 10 become the law, what we are looking at today. I 11 certainly support the concept, and I would love 12 the opportunity, you know, to work with some of 13 you on fixing some of these things, because if 14 we don't fix them, then the people you heard 15 Senator Markowitz talk about and Senator 16 Montgomery, those are the people that are going 17 to get hurt if we are not careful, and I really 18 believe in my heart that there isn't one of us 19 sitting here that do want to hurt those people 20 who need us. 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 22 will read the last section. 23 SENATOR PATERSON: Slow roll 2788 1 call. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Slow roll 3 call has been requested. Five Senators please 4 stand who request it. 5 Seeing five Senators stand, 6 Secretary will call the roll slowly. 7 THE SECRETARY: Section 88. This 8 act shall take effect July 1, 1995. 9 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 10 will call the roll slowly. Call the roll 11 slowly. 12 THE SECRETARY: Senator Abate. 13 SENATOR ABATE: No. 14 THE SECRETARY: Senator Babbush. 15 (There was no response.) 16 Excused. 17 Senator Bruno. 18 (Affirmative indication. ) 19 THE SECRETARY: Aye. 20 Senator Connor. 21 SENATOR GALIBER: Senator, suffer 22 a point of information? Mr. President, is the 23 bell ringing? 2789 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: I don't 2 know. Is the bell ringing? The bells are 3 ringing. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator Connor. 5 (Negative indication. ) 6 THE SECRETARY: Senator Connor in 7 the negative. 8 Senator Cook. 9 SENATOR COOK: Yes. 10 THE SECRETARY: Senator 11 DeFrancisco. 12 SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes. 13 THE SECRETARY: Senator DiCarlo. 14 SENATOR DiCARLO: Yes. 15 THE SECRETARY: Senator 16 Dollinger. 17 (There was no response. ) 18 THE SECRETARY: Senator Espada. 19 SENATOR ESPADA: Explain my 20 vote. 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 22 Espada to explain his vote. 23 SENATOR ESPADA: Mr. President, 2790 1 today we here adopt the Republican welfare law. 2 I think the premise, the guiding premise, the 3 legislative initiatives before us don't take us 4 in any measure to the kind of result that we 5 want. We make poor people presumptively 6 criminal through many of these initiatives while 7 leaving the Wall Street panhandlers alone. It's 8 O.K. to give out to them; after all, they're 9 elbowing their way to the welfare lines and, in 10 fact, are in front of the welfare lines these 11 days. 12 I think until we tackle that 13 problem, until we strip away this whole nonsense 14 that it's O.K. if you abridge; it's O.K. if you 15 promise jobs if you don't deliver; it's O.K. if 16 you can afford to have $1,000 fund raisers and 17 give, then you won't be cast as some kind of 18 pariah of the society. 19 My people, 50 percent of the 20 population that I represent can't make it to 21 those fund raisers. They send your humble 22 servant up here, and so we try to do our best. 23 We're against the tide. We understand that, but 2791 1 bad times are no excuse to be cruel. Bad times 2 are no excuse to be irresponsible and bad times 3 do not give us the right to violate the 4 Constitution of this state which very clearly, 5 very clearly says that we shall provide for the 6 needy. It doesn't give us the kind of 7 legislative discretion. It is not a legis 8 lative grace to deprive these people of their 9 basic human rights. 10 I vote no. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Espada in the negative. 13 THE SECRETARY: Senator Farley. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 15 Farley to explain his vote. 16 SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you, Mr. 17 President. 18 Let me just say I'm proud of this 19 side of the aisle, I'm proud of my party passing 20 a budget on time. We're doing our constitution 21 al duty. We're supposed to have a budget by 22 April 1st. This is the start of it. All I can 23 hope is that the Assembly will also start 2792 1 passing a budget this week so that we can, for 2 the first time in almost memory in 10 or 11 3 years, that we could have a budget by April 4 1st. 5 I vote aye. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Farley in the affirmative. 8 THE SECRETARY: Senator Galiber. 9 SENATOR GALIBER: No. 10 THE SECRETARY: Senator Gold. 11 (There was no response. ) 12 Senator Gonzalez voting in the 13 affirmative earlier today. 14 Senator Goodman. 15 SENATOR GOODMAN: Yes. 16 THE SECRETARY: Senator Hannon. 17 SENATOR HANNON: Yes. 18 THE SECRETARY: Senator Hoblock 19 voting in the affirmative earlier today. 20 Senator Hoffmann. 21 SENATOR HOFFMANN: May I have my 22 name called? 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2793 1 Hoffmann to explain her vote. 2 SENATOR HOFFMANN: Thank you, Mr. 3 President. 4 As is so often the case with 5 negotiated measures of this sort, there are 6 provisions within this bill that I support and I 7 know my constituents support. There are other 8 provisions with which I am most dissatisfied and 9 I fear that we will be revisiting them in the 10 not too distant future. 11 One of those provisions is the 12 oft-debated in this house LearnFare measure. If 13 I had my opportunity to vote against that 14 provision and support most of the others in this 15 bill today, I would be much happier casting a 16 yes vote, but I will reluctantly cast my vote in 17 the affirmative but not before I state my very 18 -- my very strong sense of abhorrence for a 19 bill that has as one of its components a measure 20 that would penalize poor families by taking food 21 off the table because one student is errant or 22 truant in school. 23 I would hope that all of my 2794 1 colleagues will watch as closely as I will to 2 see how this measure plays out in Onondaga, 3 Madison and Oneida Counties. It is simply not 4 possible in all families for the custodial 5 parents to ensure that every student in his or 6 her custody is attending school at all times and 7 when a student is delinquent, irresponsible or 8 simply not attending school, what possible 9 justice is there in taking food off the table 10 for the rest of the family by diminishing that 11 family's welfare grant? 12 Having said that, there are so 13 many other provisions in this bill that are 14 overdue and an important adventure or experiment 15 in addressing the outstanding problems of Med... 16 of welfare abuse in this country for so many 17 years, that I feel it's an important step to 18 undertake. But the license provision for the 19 parents or non-custodial parents should generate 20 an enormous amount of revenue to this state, 21 should generate an enormous amount of revenue 22 that the families who need it first, and we will 23 be watching closely to see that this is, in 2795 1 fact, carried out and that it does, in fact, 2 enrich the quality of lives of those children 3 who are -- by the provision of these support 4 payments right now. 5 So this is not the beginning, it 6 is not the end of the debate. The bill is going 7 into effect. It's certainly going to have some 8 modifications in the years ahead. I will 9 reluctantly vote yes for an experiment. 10 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 11 Hoffmann in the affirmative. 12 THE SECRETARY: Senator Holland. 13 SENATOR HOLLAND: Yes. 14 THE SECRETARY: Senator Johnson. 15 SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 16 THE SECRETARY: Senator Jones. 17 SENATOR JONES: Explain my vote. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 19 Jones to explain her vote. 20 SENATOR JONES: Again, just to 21 reiterate what I said before. I'm very 22 comfortable that this will not become the law 23 but I definitely support the concept and I 2796 1 certainly am not going to vote yes because of 2 something I think it's to be proud of. I just 3 think it's something that signifies there is a 4 problem and the problem needs fixing. 5 When the bill comes back again, I 6 hope, Senator Holland, you will have looked at 7 some of the things that I suggested and perhaps 8 we can get something that will certainly take 9 care of those who are using the system, but 10 continue to do what we want to do for the needy 11 out here in this state. 12 I vote yes. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 14 Jones in the affirmative. 15 THE SECRETARY: Senator Kruger. 16 SENATOR KRUGER: Yes. 17 THE SECRETARY: Senator Kuhl. 18 SENATOR KUHL: Aye. 19 THE SECRETARY: Senator Lack. 20 SENATOR LACK: Aye. 21 THE SECRETARY: Senator Larkin. 22 SENATOR LARKIN: Aye. 23 THE SECRETARY: Senator LaValle. 2797 1 SENATOR LAVALLE: Aye. 2 THE SECRETARY: Senator Leibell. 3 SENATOR LEIBELL: Aye. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator 5 Leichter. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Leichter to explain his vote. 8 SENATOR LEICHTER: To explain my 9 vote. 10 Two rationales have been given 11 for this bill. One is the state is in a 12 financial crisis. Welfare costs are out of 13 control. We need to do something to rein it in 14 because, after all, we've got, as my friend 15 Senator Stafford said, a $5 billion budget. 16 That's false. It's false in this 17 sense, because that deficit exists in large 18 measure because you, the Republican Majority and 19 the Governor, wanted to give a tax cut that will 20 go essentially to wealthy people. So you're 21 taking money from poor people, people in need, 22 infirm, the elderly, children, and you're giving 23 this in tax cuts to people who are essentially 2798 1 well off. 2 The second rationale is the 3 welfare system is broken and it doesn't work, 4 and so on, and I think we all agree that it's a 5 system that has problems. It's a system that 6 certainly hasn't brought people in the main 7 stream but this bill doesn't address that 8 problem because, as I pointed out, it is 9 essentially punitive. 10 It doesn't have provisions in 11 there for effective training. There's no 12 overall plan or program for job creation which 13 is really what is needed. We have in this 14 country really a large number of people that are 15 outside of the -- of the bounds or the main 16 stream of this society that need to be helped to 17 be brought in. 18 I agree, just throwing money at 19 them is no answer, but certainly their basic 20 needs have to be met and what we're dealing with 21 is essentially economic problems and unless we 22 deal with those economic problems and we need to 23 deal with them on a national/international 2799 1 basis, we're not going to be able to solve the 2 problems of a growing number of people who 3 cannot find jobs in this society. 4 This bill in no way addresses 5 this. It ends up being, as I say, a heartless 6 bill. I vote in the negative. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 8 Leichter in the negative. 9 THE SECRETARY: Senator Levy. 10 SENATOR LEVY: Aye. 11 THE SECRETARY: Senator Libous. 12 SENATOR LIBOUS: Aye. 13 THE SECRETARY: Senator Maltese. 14 SENATOR MALTESE: Aye. 15 THE SECRETARY: Senator 16 Marcellino. 17 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Aye. 18 THE SECRETARY: Senator Marchi. 19 SENATOR MARCHI: Aye. 20 THE SECRETARY: Senator 21 Markowitz. 22 SENATOR MARKOWITZ: No. 23 THE SECRETARY: Senator Maziarz. 2800 1 SENATOR MAZIARZ: Aye. 2 THE SECRETARY: Senator Mendez. 3 SENATOR MENDEZ: No. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator 5 Montgomery. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Montgomery to explain her vote. 8 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, Mr. 9 President. 10 Briefly, I just want to remind my 11 colleagues that right now in New York City I 12 believe there are some 15- to 20,000 people who 13 are attending one of the SUNY campuses who are 14 on welfare and that says to me that there - 15 these are people who really want to get off of 16 welfare and to go to work. Since there is some 17 opportunity for them to do that now, small, 18 small window as it is, they make supreme 19 sacrifices and somehow they manage the B.S. in 20 college and preparing themselves. Many of them 21 bring their children to college with them 22 because there is a college campus child care and 23 so they can be in school, their children can be 2801 1 in day care and when they want -- once they 2 leave, it has been proven in no uncertain terms 3 that they will never, ever have to go back on 4 welfare, and they will earn a respectful decent 5 income and have as the reports that we have now 6 of people who have been able to go into higher 7 education based on some of the opportunity 8 programs that we've provided, they are 9 contributing tremendously to the economy of this 10 state, especially New York City, but all 11 throughout the state in terms of the earnings 12 that they have, the taxes that they pay back and 13 the tremendous contribution that they have made 14 to our state in many areas. 15 So it is pennywise and pound 16 foolish to cut off opportunity, and I am afraid 17 that this legislation really cuts off 18 opportunity. It does not encourage people to be 19 on the path of independence. So I am voting 20 against it because I believe in people having an 21 opportunity to work and earn a decent income and 22 until we do that, I am unalterably opposed to 23 punishing people, especially since obviously, 2802 1 based on your own statistics, Senator Holland's 2 own statistics, a third of the people who are on 3 public assistance are children. Two-thirds of 4 them are children. 5 And so, Mr. President, I am 6 voting against this legislation, but I want to 7 be on record that I am for welfare reform, but 8 I'm opposed to this kind of punishment of poor 9 people. 10 I vote no. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 12 Montgomery in the negative. 13 THE SECRETARY: Senator Nanula. 14 SENATOR NANULA: Explain my vote. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 16 Nanula to explain his vote. 17 SENATOR NANULA: In my estimation 18 what we're really seeing here today is another 19 example of what I believe this administration 20 and this form of policy is representing and 21 that's cuts in a vacuum. 22 I stood in front of this 23 Legislature before in this chamber many times 2803 1 and referenced the fact that I think virtually 2 everyone here can agree that we do need to 3 figure out ways to do more with less. We do 4 need to figure out ways to reinvent government, 5 to cut waste, to cut the tax burden, the 6 regulatory burden on businesses, on agencies, on 7 municipalities. I think we could all agree on 8 that. 9 But when we get beyond the 10 philosophy to the method of accomplishing that 11 is where we run into problems and where I feel 12 there are fundamental differences in approach 13 certainly on either side of the aisle. This, 14 again, in my opinion is one specific example. 15 We're talking about cuts. We're talking about 16 cuts to those who are poor. We're talking about 17 cuts to women, cuts to children. 18 In doing so, we're also 19 discussing or at least those on the opposite 20 side of the aisle the fact that we need to 21 stimulate a better environment for business. 22 Well, I believe these cuts are being made in a 23 vacuum, that instead of developing programs that 2804 1 are solution oriented, whether it be revolved 2 around health care that's affordable or day care 3 or education, all of which by the way are 4 looking also to be cut this year, we're instead 5 saying, Let's instead have people fend for 6 themselves. 7 Where are the jobs? Where is the 8 economic vitality? I feel it's irresponsible. 9 I don't see a responsible plan being developed 10 here, one that really is going to go after the 11 poorer aspects and developments that are going 12 to make New York State a better place for all of 13 us to live. 14 I do feel that we need reform 15 especially in regards to welfare, but until we 16 develop a system and a plan that addresses the 17 real causes, this type of legislation is only 18 going to hurt those who are currently really in 19 need most of government. 20 I vote no. 21 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 22 Nanula in the negative. 23 THE SECRETARY: Senator 2805 1 Nozzolio. 2 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Mr. President, 3 I ask permission to be excused from voting to 4 explain my vote. 5 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 6 Nozzolio to explain his vote. 7 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Mr. President, 8 my colleagues, we can no longer afford either 9 economically or ethically to continue supporting 10 a bloated welfare system which acts as a 11 disincentive to work, encourages a life of 12 public assistance, with dependency from 13 generation to generation. 14 What was constructed many, many 15 decades ago as a safety net has been turned into 16 a hammock by some and, as the Governor described 17 a few months ago, a bureaucracy created that has 18 entangled those who want to get out of a 19 dependency. He characterized it, I think, 20 appropriately as a spider web. 21 What we're trying to do is make 22 it a trampoline to get people off of public 23 assistance and to reduce the financial and human 2806 1 costs of welfare. In order to do that, Mr. 2 President, we must empower people to become 3 self-sufficient and provide an atmosphere where 4 they're going to be encouraged to enjoy the 5 dignity and freedom associated with working for 6 a weekly paycheck. 7 I did not hear any of my 8 colleagues who opposed this measure talk about 9 one of its very essential components, and that 10 is the objective of eliminating once and for all 11 the "deadbeat dad" syndrome that we have in this 12 state. We heard much rhetoric about children 13 but none about supporting this provision which 14 eliminates the right that an individual in this 15 state enjoys to drive a car or gain a 16 professional license if they are a "deadbeat 17 dad". Make no mistake about it, you are voting 18 against a major reform to stop "deadbeat dads" 19 in this state. 20 We have a choice this year. We 21 can either take action which is necessary to 22 break the cycle of welfare or we can continue to 23 spend excessively without any regard to reform a 2807 1 system that ends up accomplishing very little if 2 nothing. 3 Mr. President, my colleagues, 4 this measure needs to be adopted. It needs to 5 be adopted quickly. It needs to be adopted to 6 bring freedom and independence once and for all 7 to the people of this state. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: How do 9 you vote, Senator Nozzolio? 10 SENATOR NOZZOLIO: I support this 11 measure. Aye. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 13 Nozzolio in the affirmative. 14 THE SECRETARY: Senator Onorato. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 16 Onorato to explain his vote. 17 SENATOR ONORATO: To explain my 18 vote, Mr. President. 19 I reluctantly intend to support 20 this measure only because I feel it is a very 21 first step towards reforming of welfare, and I 22 also believe that we're not going far enough by 23 not including corporate welfare. You know, it's 2808 1 one thing to continually pick on the poor and 2 not look at some of the welfare benefits that 3 we're giving some of our richest industries in 4 the state. 5 I think we've got to take a 6 little closer look at their welfare benefits and 7 if we're going to share the pain, let's do it 8 across the board because I think the people of 9 New York State would have a much better 10 understanding if everybody was able to share the 11 pain equally because right now the way we're 12 presenting it is that New York State Legislature 13 is presenting cuts for the welfare, cuts for the 14 social services for the middle class, and cuts 15 in taxes for the most wealthiest people of the 16 state. 17 Again, I know this is a one-house 18 bill. Perhaps it will be the spurring motion 19 that will be needed for the Assembly to pass 20 their version of welfare reform and then 21 hopefully both of our houses will get together 22 and come up with a much more compassionate bill 23 that will benefit the entire state. 2809 1 So I, therefore, vote yes. 2 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 3 Onorato in the affirmative. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator 5 Oppenheimer. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Oppenheimer to explain her vote. 8 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Explain my 9 vote, please. 10 It's funny, I can't decide if I 11 should reluctantly vote yes or reluctantly vote 12 no. This bill has a lot that's good in it and 13 it has a lot that's terrible in it. 14 I think Senator Nozzolio was just 15 talking about empowerment and I feel empowerment 16 is to provide for the needs that folks have to 17 get themselves out of the poverty cycle and into 18 the mainstream and that, first and foremost in 19 my mind, is providing them with child care 20 because without child care nothing can happen, 21 and with education and training so that they can 22 get jobs and then, of course, most importantly, 23 jobs. We need to have jobs that these people 2810 1 that will be educated and trained for them will 2 fill. 3 Of course, all of us support 4 going after the "deadbeat dads", but I think I 5 have to listen to my County Executive when he 6 says, and we know it to be true, that the 7 subsidies received for shelter or just the cut 8 back in the general allowance will cause 9 considerably more homelessness and in our case 10 at least I know in my county a goodly number of 11 our -- our homeless people, maybe 15 percent are 12 working but the working poor cannot afford to 13 live in our county without this subsidy. 14 So I think I have to respond to 15 that, and I have to say that cutting the subsidy 16 is certainly not the way to go when we have the 17 Jiggets and the Lovelace case saying that we are 18 not providing presently enough allowance for 19 people to go out and purchase shelter. 20 So I will be voting no even 21 though there are many things I support, and I 22 would like to see a resolution between the two 23 houses that is a little more realistic. 2811 1 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 2 Oppenheimer in the negative. 3 THE SECRETARY: Senator Padavan. 4 SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes. 5 THE SECRETARY: Senator 6 Paterson. 7 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 8 Paterson to explain his vote. 9 SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President, 10 we have a piece of legislation here that 11 establishes a residency requirement around the 12 state. There have been several United States 13 Supreme Court decisions that have ruled that a 14 residency requirement interferes with the 15 interstate travel of an individual. 16 We have a requirement that has 17 also been struck down by courts, that that 18 person even if they are a legal resident who was 19 on any form of public assistance arose from a 20 residence outside this country and then moved to 21 New York, that we're going to deny them any kind 22 of service for six months. That's been struck 23 down. 2812 1 We have benefit limitations of 60 2 days for home relief. That is going to violate, 3 we feel, Article XVII of the Constitution as 4 Senator Waldon pointed out, where we are 5 required to help the indigent. We can not do 6 what they did in Michigan based on our New York 7 State Constitution. 8 We have benefit reductions that 9 fly in the face of several court decisions that 10 we've already had. We have the Jiggets 11 decision, the Lovelace case, and so I think if 12 we really want to find some workable, sensible 13 achievable ways to reform welfare, we've got to 14 stop putting out bills that are in some respects 15 unconstitutional, in other respects fly in the 16 face of our court decisions. In other respects 17 we are replacing statutes with what were agency 18 provisos that are unconstitutional and I think 19 that it is a shame that we are doing all this 20 just to scapegoat individuals who, for the most 21 part, are poor and are needy and need our 22 service. That's what government's credo is. 23 That's what government is supposed to do, to 2813 1 help people who can not help themselves. 2 The reform aspects of this bill 3 are good. I believe Senator Leichter and 4 Senator Hoffmann talked about what it does for 5 "deadbeat dads" to set the record straight and 6 also if we're going to talk about "deadbeat 7 dads" and we're going to talk about reform then 8 let's start piercing the corporate veil for 9 those fathers who shield themselves by being 10 married to women who own businesses. They are 11 listed as not making a dime. It's -- there's no 12 way to go after them. This bill does not 13 address it, and it's my opinion that they are 14 responsible for a great deal of the money that 15 is not paid to their children where they are 16 acting irresponsibly, and acting in an 17 irresponsible way. 18 Otherwise, I think there are a 19 lot of reforms that we should actually address 20 in all kinds of pieces of legislation, those 21 that are apt, that stop thievery and cheating 22 and the things that Senator Markowitz and 23 Senator Espada described earlier that are good, 2814 1 but for the most part to spend this amount of 2 time on really what are going to be revenue 3 raisers that are not in any way equalling the 4 amount of money that has put us in deficit at 5 this time, makes me unfortunately feel that it 6 is more of a political agenda and not a true 7 reform. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: How do 9 you vote? 10 SENATOR PATERSON: And I vote no, 11 and I have a phone call anyway. 12 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 13 Paterson in the negative. 14 THE SECRETARY: Senator Present. 15 SENATOR PRESENT: Aye. 16 THE SECRETARY: Senator Rath. 17 SENATOR RATH: Aye. 18 THE SECRETARY: Senator Saland. 19 SENATOR SALAND: Aye. 20 THE SECRETARY: Senator Santiago 21 voting in the negative earlier today. 22 Senator Sears. 23 SENATOR SEARS: Aye. 2815 1 THE SECRETARY: Senator Seward. 2 SENATOR SEWARD: Yes. 3 THE SECRETARY: Senator Skelos. 4 SENATOR SKELOS: Yes. 5 THE SECRETARY: Senator Smith. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Smith to explain her vote. 8 SENATOR SMITH: Mr. President, I 9 too support true welfare reform, but even our 10 colleagues who have voted in the affirmative on 11 this particular bill have noticed that it is a 12 sham. It's time that we stop deceiving the 13 people of the state of New York because soon 14 they're going to wake up and realize that the 15 charade that's been played upon them, and I will 16 not be a part of it. 17 Therefore, I vote no. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 19 Smith in the negative. 20 THE SECRETARY: Senator Solomon 21 voting in the negative earlier today. 22 Senator Spano. 23 SENATOR SPANO: Aye. 2816 1 THE SECRETARY: Senator 2 Stachowski. 3 SENATOR STACHOWSKI: No. 4 THE SECRETARY: Senator 5 Stafford. 6 (There was no response. ) 7 Senator Stavisky. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 9 Stavisky to explain his vote. 10 SENATOR STAVISKY: I am 11 disappointed and distressed that we appear to be 12 heading toward the adoption of a series of 13 one-house bills which will make a sham, as has 14 been pointed out and a shame of a budget-making 15 process in this state. 16 We know that we have to arrive at 17 negotiated agreement but why are we behaving 18 like the participants in the baseball strike, if 19 you want to call it the baseball lockout? 20 Haven't we learned that the art of government is 21 the art of the attainable, and that there are 22 compromises and agreements that have to be 23 reached between the two houses. 2817 1 Yes, I would like to join in 2 meaningful legislation to eliminate those who 3 abuse the welfare system and should not be 4 receiving payments because they file multiple 5 claims. Yes, I think we should be rounding up 6 deadbeat parents of either sex, because I don't 7 want to be sexist about this, who fail to accept 8 their responsibility towards the children they 9 have brought into the world. Yes, I think we 10 should be prepared to go after those 11 corporations that bleed us for money and then 12 fail to fulfill their obligations with regard to 13 the creation of economic opportunities and jobs 14 in New York State, and then blithely move out of 15 the state of New York in the hopes that they can 16 take the tax abatements and the money with 17 them. 18 When we have dealt with all of 19 these things fairly and when we agree that the 20 purpose of welfare reform is to make it possible 21 for people to go to work -- where are the day 22 care programs that are not being provided by 23 various levels of government? Where is the 2818 1 training opportunities for jobs that do exist, 2 not for jobs that don't exist? Where are the 3 opportunities to find jobs when the private 4 sector and the public sector seem bent upon 5 creating unemployment rather than job 6 opportunity. 7 Those people out of work may 8 replace the people on welfare whom we're trying 9 to get off welfare and that doesn't seem like a 10 very rational approach. I believe in honesty in 11 government, but what we are doing today is a 12 dishonest exercise in political gamesmanship and 13 it's no better on the Assembly side because I'd 14 be delivering the same speech if I were still 15 serving there. 16 We've got to come together. 17 We've got to agree upon what we can together 18 pass and then do it as a Legislature and not 19 like quibbling, quarreling one-house bill 20 advocates which I'm afraid the public will 21 perceive. 22 I think the Legislature is 23 capable of much more constructive decision 2819 1 making than I have seen this week. I vote in 2 the negative on this bill. 3 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 4 Stavisky in the negative. 5 THE SECRETARY: Senator Trunzo. 6 SENATOR TRUNZO: Yes. 7 THE SECRETARY: Senator Tully. 8 SENATOR TULLY: Aye. 9 THE SECRETARY: Senator Velella. 10 SENATOR VELELLA: Yes. 11 THE SECRETARY: Senator Volker. 12 SENATOR VOLKER: Yes. 13 THE SECRETARY: Senator Waldon. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 15 Waldon to explain his vote. 16 SENATOR WALDON: Mr. President, 17 my colleagues, on an island in a harbor in the 18 city of New York stands a great lady. On a 19 tablet under her arm in words and substance is 20 said, Send me your tired, your poor, your 21 huddled masses yearning to be free. 22 Philosophically that statement 23 says that this state, this great Empire State, 2820 1 is a place of inclusion. We welcome diverse 2 peoples from around the globe to come here, to 3 find sustenance and security and safety and the 4 good life. 5 I'm worried, even though this is 6 but a one-house bill, by the signal that it 7 sends that we're no longer about inclusion, that 8 we're no longer about welcome and welcoming to 9 those who are different from us, that we are 10 becoming a place which will not be remembered as 11 the Empire State but may be characterized as the 12 "vampire state" because when you take from the 13 poor and feed the rich you are sucking the blood 14 of those who are least able to fend for them 15 selves, and I find that troublesome, meddlesome 16 and worrisome. 17 I believe that we can do better. 18 I believe that the corporate structures who show 19 a profit margin of $4 billion do not need AFDC 20 from this legislative body, aid for dependent 21 corporations. I believe that that money is 22 better spent if we give it to the mother as 23 characterized by my esteemed colleague, Senator 2821 1 Espada, who has two children, who is struggling 2 to make ends meet but that they only are allowed 3 to receive less than a thousand dollars per 4 month, which throws her life into a state of 5 chaos. 6 I believe it is tacky for us as a 7 legislative body to support measures which will 8 cause people such pain and suffering. I think 9 that we ought to stop feeding the rich with the 10 poor. I think we ought to turn ourselves around 11 in terms of the philosophy which says that we 12 are now becoming the "vampire state" and return 13 to the time when we were in true fashion the 14 Empire State. 15 I beseech my colleagues to 16 recognize that we are better. We are better. 17 We are better than this, and I vote in the no. 18 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 19 Waldon in the negative. 20 THE SECRETARY: Senator Wright. 21 SENATOR WRIGHT: Aye. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 23 will call the absentees. 2822 1 THE SECRETARY: Senator 2 Dollinger. 3 SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr. 4 President, explain my vote. 5 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 6 Dollinger to explain his vote. 7 SENATOR DOLLINGER: I'll drop 8 back to the -- I guess the principle that we've 9 all talked about here, remember the TQM 10 principle, and what that says is you go to your 11 customers to find out how to change something 12 and, frankly, I don't know what your customers 13 are saying, but the people that are recipients 14 of AFDC and HR in my community don't come to me 15 and say, you know, "It's a great solution, Work 16 Fare, give me WorkFare. Give me LearnFare. 17 Make me live at home with my parents, that's the 18 way to get me off public assistance." They 19 don't say that to me. 20 They say, Give me some training, 21 get me into college, let me get to the HEOP 22 program which is now disappearing. Let me get 23 to the training programs. Those are now 2823 1 disappearing. Give me child care. Those are 2 now disappearing. All those things that those 3 customers tell me that they want in order to be 4 able to get real opportunity is now being taken 5 away. 6 Instead, this vision of what is 7 best for them is being imposed on them. There 8 could be no greater departure from the TQM 9 process. If we really believe in TQM, listen to 10 our customers, listen to the people that we all 11 acknowledge want to get off dependency. There 12 is a way to do it. Listen to them. This is not 13 what they are telling us to do. 14 I vote no. 15 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 16 Dollinger in the negative. 17 THE SECRETARY: Senator Gold. 18 (There was no response. ) 19 Senator Stafford. 20 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 21 Stafford to explain his rote. 22 SENATOR STAFFORD: Mr. President, 23 I just very briefly would like to compliment 2824 1 Senator Holland and his staff and other staff 2 people of the Senate who worked on this bill. 3 I would only again say, my 4 friends, this is a different -- difference in 5 philosophy. We're saying beginning -- before we 6 start any budget bills at all, we simply have 7 got to put this state in line with other states 8 if we're going to keep the economic engine 9 running, and this bill takes those steps. 10 We think it is necessary. We 11 think it's fair. It's equitable and, if we 12 don't do this, take actions such as we're taking 13 here today and become more in line with the 14 other states of this nation, we're going to be 15 in real serious, serious trouble. 16 I vote aye. 17 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 18 Stafford in the affirmative. 19 Announce the results. 20 THE SECRETARY: Ayes 41, nays 21 18. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill 23 is passed. 2825 1 The Chair recognizes Senator 2 Skelos. 3 SENATOR SKELOS: Yes, Mr. 4 President, would you recognize Senator Holland. 5 I believe he has some housekeeping. 6 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 7 Holland. 8 SENATOR HOLLAND: Mr. President, 9 on page 11, I offer the following amendments for 10 Senator Velella, Calendar Number 184, Senate 11 Print Number 2704, and ask that said bill retain 12 its place on the Third Reading Calendar. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: 14 Amendments are received and adopted; bill will 15 retain its place on the Third Reading Calendar. 16 Senator Maltese. 17 SENATOR MALTESE: Mr. President, 18 referring to Calendar Number 210, Senate Bill 19 624, I wish the record to indicate that had I 20 been in the house I would have voted aye. I was 21 detained elsewhere on Senate business. 22 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 23 Maltese, the record will reflect that had you 2826 1 been in the chamber when the roll call was taken 2 on Calendar Number 210, you would have voted in 3 the affirmative. 4 Senator Skelos. 5 SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President, 6 at this time would you please call up Calendar 7 Number 291. 8 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 9 will read Calendar Number 291. 10 THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number 11 291, Budget Bill, Senate Print 1552-A, an act 12 making appropriations for the legal requirements 13 of the state debt service. 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Secretary 15 will read the last section. Excuse me, Senator 16 Skelos. 17 SENATOR SKELOS: Is there a 18 message of necessity at the desk? 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: There is 20 a message of necessity at the desk. 21 SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President, I 22 move to accept the message. 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Motion is 2827 1 to accept the message. All those in favor 2 signify by saying aye. 3 (Response of "Aye.") 4 Opposed nay. 5 (There was no response. ) 6 The message is accepted. 7 Secretary will read the last 8 section. 9 THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This 10 act shall take effect immediately. 11 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Call the 12 roll. 13 (The Secretary called the roll. ) 14 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Announce 15 the results when tabulated. 16 THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in 17 the negative on Calendar Number 291 are Senators 18 Dollinger, Jones and Montgomery. Ayes - 19 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Not - 20 THE SECRETARY: Excuse me. Those 21 recorded in the negative are Senators Dollinger 22 and Jones. Ayes 58, nays 2. 23 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The bill 2828 1 is passed. 2 Senator Skelos. 3 SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President, 4 is there any other housekeeping? 5 Please recognize Senator 6 Hoffmann. 7 SENATOR HOFFMANN: Mr. President, 8 I was out of the chamber at the time the vote 9 was taken on Calendar 210. Had I been present 10 at that time, I would have voted in the 11 affirmative. I would like the record to so 12 reflect. 13 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: The 14 calendar will reflect, Senator Hoffmann, that 15 had you been in the chamber when the roll call 16 was taken on Calendar Number 210 that you would 17 have voted in the affirmative. 18 SENATOR HOFFMANN: Thank you. 19 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senator 20 Skelos, I'm informed by the Secretary that there 21 is no housekeeping at the desk. 22 SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President, 23 there being no further business, I move that we 2829 1 adjourn until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 10:00 2 a.m.,sharp. 3 ACTING PRESIDENT KUHL: Senate 4 will stand adjourned until tomorrow, 10:00 a.m., 5 sharp. 6 (Whereupon at 6:11 p.m., the 7 Senate adjourned.) 8 9 10