Provides that the senate shall be composed of 62 senators, each representing 1 county of the state

3 Co-sponsors

• Teresa Sayward
• David Townsend
• Joseph Giglio

1 Multi-sponsor

• James Conte

BILL NUMBER:A9494

Title of bill

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY propos- ing amendments to sections 2 and 4 of article 3 of the constitution, in relation to the number of senators and the apportionment of senate districts

Purpose or general idea of bill

To change the method of apportioning State Senators

Summary of specific provisions

Section 1 amends Sections 2 and 4 of Article III of the State Constitution to award each county of the state a single Senator to represent it in the state legislature.

Section 2 contains the effective date.

Justification

The "One man-one vote" 1964 Supreme Court decision of Lucas v. Colorado General Assembly invalidated the long established constitutional method of apportioning representatives to the New York state legislature. In many ways the pre Lucas methodology for apportion- ing representatives mirrored that prescribed in the Federal Constitution as a means to balance the interests of small densely populated regions in comparison to sparsely populated but geographically large rural regions. The bicameral legislature established by the United States Constitution was an ingenious means to assure fair representation for residents of both highly populous states (the House of Representative) and states with small populations (the Senate.) In short, Lucas v. Colo- rado General Assembly was arguably decided wrongly, in that it denied to the states the ability to enact this very same compromise and same protections for their smaller counties and more sparsely inhabited regions. Perhaps no state was more drastically affected than New York.

Because New York City and its immediate surrounding contain such a disproportionate amount of our state's population, the unintended conse- quence of Lucas has been to effectively disempower virtually any state resident outside of the immediate vicinity of New York City. While the motivation behind the Lucas decision was in many ways laudable, the decision itself ran counter to the example set by our own federal constitution as it established our National legislative bodies.

As the representatives of New York city quite naturally focus on the needs of their own constituents many issues critical to the prosperity of Upstate New York have been routinely ignored over the past few years. As Upstate New Yorkers have watched jobs, opportunities, and inhabitants leave their region due to excessive taxation and general neglect they watched in 2009 as the state legislature battled for days to prevent minimal subway fare increases in New York city while letting the state finances approach the point of near collapse. A more equitable distrib- ution of representatives might well lead to better and less parochial government for all New Yorkers.

Prior legislative history

New Bill

Fiscal implications for state and local governments

None

Effective date

Resolved (if the Senate concur), That the foregoing amendment be referred to the first regular legislative session convening after the next succeeding general election of members of the assembly, and in conformity with section 1 of article 19 of the constitution, be published for 3 months previous to the time of such election.