Regular Session - May 4, 1999
2572
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE
STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
May 4, 1999
3:04 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
SENATOR RAYMOND A. MEIER, Acting President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
2573
P R O C E E D I N G S
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senate will come to order.
I ask everyone present to please
rise and join with me in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
invocation today will be given by Bishop
Muriel Grant of the Mt. Olivet Discipleship in
Christ Church in Brooklyn.
Bishop Grant.
BISHOP GRANT: Let us pray.
Almighty God, our hope in ages
past, Who hast been with us from the formation
of this nation, Thou Who gave us this good
land for our heritage, this sweet land of
liberty, land of the pilgrims' pride, may we
also prove to be a people mindful of Thy
favor, glad to do Thy will.
Bless our land, O God, with
honorable industries, sound learning, and pure
manners. Save us from violence, discord, and
confusion, from pride and arrogance, and from
2574
every evil way. Defend our liberties and
fashion us into one united people, the
multitudes of many kindreds and tongues, yet
may we be one nation, indivisible.
Most gracious God, I have humbly
beseeched Thee as for the people of these
United States in general. Now also guide and
bless their President. Protect him in his
every walk.
But now, O God, I beseech you so
especially for our Senate here assembled,
Republicans and Democrats. Heal their
infirmities. Bless them. Enable them to
partake from Your fountain of wisdom. Thou
whose law is truth, guide and bless them. I
pray that Thou wouldest be pleased to direct
and prosper all their consultations.
May the Senate chambers, with its
rays of Your light, continue to elevate their
minds, that laws passed here will be to the
advancement of Thy church, the safety, honor
and welfare of Thy people. May all things
ordered here and settled by their endeavor be
upon the surest foundation, that peace and
happiness, truth and justice, religion and
2575
piety may be established amongst us for all
generations, young and aged alike.
This I beg in the name -- in Thy
name and meditation of Jesus Christ, my
Savior. Amen.
By the power of God vested in me,
may the blessings of God the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Spirit remain with you now and
ever. Amen.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Reading
of the Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Monday, May 3rd, the Senate met pursuant to
adjournment. The Journal of Sunday, May 2nd,
was read and approved. On motion, Senate
adjourned.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, the Journal stands approved as
read.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Stafford,
2576
from the Committee on Finance, offers up the
following nominations:
As a member of the State Liquor
Authority, Edward F. Kelly, of Holmes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could just wait one moment before we
take up the confirmation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell.
SENATOR STAFFORD: It's a
pleasure to yield to Senator Leibell for this
very fine nomination. Thank you.
SENATOR LEIBELL: Thank you very
much, Mr. President, and my colleague, Senator
Stafford.
If I may very briefly commend to
this body the renomination of Edward F. Kelly
as a member of the State Liquor Authority.
I have had the good fortune and the
pleasure to know Ed Kelly and his family for
over a couple of decades now. He brings to
this position a career of accomplishment.
That career has spanned working for one of our
2577
very largest corporations, International
Business Machines, for close to thirty years,
as well as running his own family business.
Add to this experience in business, both on
the large-corporation and the small-business
side, his many, many years of experience in
local government, and then top that off with a
lifetime of activities within our communities.
Over the course of years, the
Governor has sent to us many fine
appointments. I can assure this body from
personal knowledge that in this renomination
of Edward F. Kelly we have someone of the
finest character, someone who can -- is well
equipped to handle this position and will
bring great credit to the SLA as well as to
all state appointees.
With this in mind, Mr. President,
I'd like to move this nomination.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Edward F.
Kelly as a member of the State Liquor
Authority. All in favor signify by saying
aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
2578
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is hereby confirmed.
Mr. Kelly is present with us today
in the gallery. Would you please rise, sir?
And he is accompanied by his wife,
Nancy, his four sons -- Edward, Michael,
Thomas, and David -- and also his
grandchildren, Michael and Amber.
Mr. Kelly, we extend to you and
your family the courtesies of the Senate. We
welcome you, and we congratulate you and wish
you well with your duties.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As a member of
the State Liquor Authority, Lawrence J. Gedda,
of Lynbrook.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Stafford.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Mr. President,
again we have a very fine group of nominees,
2579
the entire slate.
And it is a pleasure to yield to
the Senator from Nassau.
SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very
much, Senator Stafford.
Mr. President, I'm delighted, as I
did not too long ago, although the days and
the years seem to be running together quickly
now, to move the confirmation of Larry Gedda
for his position as a member of the State
Liquor Authority.
I've had the pleasure of knowing
Mr. Gedda -- Larry -- for a number of years,
where he's earned this opportunity to, number
one, having been appointed and now
reappointed, serving on the -- or working for
the State Liquor Authority for over thirty
years.
With Larry you always know where
you stand. If something can be done to help a
constituent properly, it will be done. The
SLA has become, as we heard at the hearing
this morning of the Finance Committee, that it
is becoming more user-friendly. Which I think
is proper, and proper for all agencies of the
2580
state.
Larry is dedicated to his
profession. He's a fine, fine human being, a
family man. And I'm delighted to, with
Senator Stafford's approval, move the
confirmation of Lawrence J. Gedda as a member
of the State Liquor Authority.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Lawrence J.
Gedda as a member of the New York State Liquor
Authority. All those in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
Mr. Gedda is with us in the gallery
today.
Mr. Gedda, welcome to the Senate,
and congratulations. Good luck with your
duties.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
2581
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As a member of
the New York State Employment Relations Board,
Anthony C. Imbarrato, of Garden City.
SENATOR STAFFORD: At this time
it's a pleasure to yield to Senator Hannon.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hannon.
SENATOR HANNON: Thank you,
Senator Stafford.
It's with a great deal of pleasure
that I rise on this nomination for
reappointment to the New York State Employment
Relations Board. It seems that it was only
months ago -- in the beginning months of the
Pataki administration, however -- that
Mr. Imbarrato was first proposed for
nomination to this board.
Tony Imbarrato has been a wise
lawyer, a person to whom everybody would turn
for advice in sticky situations in Nassau
County for a number of years, and along the
way had been a counsel here to the Legislature
when he was a young attorney.
In the intervening years on the
2582
board, he has served with distinction. He has
helped establish a firm basis of policy for
the state. And it's with great pride that I
can move, again with Senator Stafford's
permission, his reappointment to this board,
where I am confident he will continue to
benefit the citizens of all of this state for
a full term.
And I so move, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President, I
just echo all the thoughts of Senator Hannon.
I've had the pleasure of knowing
Tony Imbarrato and his wife Vicky probably for
20, 25 years. And again, those years have
moved quickly.
Tony, we salute you. We thank you
for the fine job that you're doing on the
behalf of the people of the State of New York.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: I also rise
to second the nomination of Tony Imbarrato's
reappointment. It was a fine appointment by
2583
Governor Pataki, and I congratulate him for
seeking to reappoint Tony, who has served the
people of this state with distinction and
honor.
He's a personal friend, and I wish
him well, and good luck to him and his family.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, I just want to rise and concur with
the statements from my colleagues from Nassau
County.
I have known Tony Imbarrato for the
better part of my life, and my life certainly
been enriched by his friendship. He is
certainly an asset to the Employment Relations
Board, and I commend the Governor on the
appointment.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Anthony C.
Imbarrato as a member of the New York State
Employment Relations Board. All those in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
2584
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
Mr. Imbarrato, congratulations.
Welcome to the Senate, sir, and good luck with
your duties.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As a member of
the Workers' Compensation Board, Leslie J.
Botta, of Scotia.
SENATOR STAFFORD: It's a
pleasure to yield to Senator Farley.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Farley.
SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you,
Senator Stafford. I wish to nominate
Dr. Leslie Botta of Scotia, New York. She's
in the private practice of chiropractic at the
Shannon Chiropractic at 127 Mohawk Avenue in
Scotia, New York.
Dr. Botta was an honored graduate
of Lincoln High School, and she was among
2585
Who's Who of High School Scholars. She's a
graduate of the University of Illinois with a
Bachelor of Science in biology and is a
graduate of the National College of
Chiropractic, with a Bachelor of Science in
human biology and a Doctor of Chiropractic.
She has been well trained in the
area of chiropractics. And let me say that I
think it's so important in this day and age
that the Workmen's Compensation Board has a
knowledgeable chiropractor on that board,
because so many of the injuries and so forth
of workmen's compensation involve injuries to
the spine and so forth.
She has had a great deal of
experience working with injured people from -
on workmen's compensation, and I think she'll
be an asset to the board. And I'd like to
move her nomination.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Leslie J.
Botta as a member of the Workers' Compensation
Board. All those in favor signify by saying
aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
2586
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
Dr. Botta, welcome to the Senate.
Congratulations.
Dr. Botta is accompanied today by
her husband, Dr. David Cerniglia; her
daughter, Brenna, and also her father-in-law
and mother-in-law, Abe and Carmella Cerniglia.
Welcome to the Senate, and good
luck and congratulations.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you,
Mr. President. I appreciate you recognizing
me.
I was detained in getting to the
chamber here this afternoon. And perhaps it's
fortunate that I was, because I wouldn't have
wanted to prejudice the ability of a friend of
mine and a long-standing shining light of
Dutchess County, Ed Kelly.
2587
It's after the fact at this point,
but I had an opportunity to speak on his
behalf earlier in the Finance Committee. He
certainly has performed exceptionally well
since his appointment and certainly is
deserving of the reappointment that the
Governor has afforded him the opportunity to
complete.
He has, I think, distinguished
himself in a very, very difficult situation,
serving as a member of the board and as the
chairman, and dealing in a very, very
difficult area, at times being challenged
resource-wise.
My hat's off to you and to the SLA.
We appreciate everything you've done in your
capacity. Thank you.
(Applause.)
SENATOR SALAND: Continue the
best.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will continue to read.
THE SECRETARY: As a member of
the Board of Trustees of the State University
of New York, Patricia A. Stevens, of
2588
Rochester.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Stafford.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Mr. President,
it's a pleasure to yield to the Senators from
the west. We have, from Rochester, New York,
Senator Alesi.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Alesi.
SENATOR ALESI: Thank you,
Senator Stafford. Thank you, Mr. President.
I'm very honored to be able to look
up into the balcony today, with as weak a
voice as I have, but with very strong
sentiments of joy at this nomination of
Patricia Stevens.
I know Patricia is someone who will
bring excellence to any endeavor which she
undertakes. And it is with the greatest pride
that I support this nomination.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Maziarz.
SENATOR MAZIARZ: Thank you very
much, Mr. President.
2589
As another Senator from the west,
although I'm not personally acquainted with
Patricia Stevens, I certainly want to
congratulate her on her appointment. I have
reviewed her resume provided by the chair of
the Senate Finance Committee. She seems an
outstanding candidate for this position.
And I think that -- I congratulate
the Governor for reaching out to Monroe County
and to western New York for this appointment.
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
LaValle.
SENATOR LAVALLE: Mr. President,
I rise to second this nomination and just
congratulate the Governor on this excellent
appointment.
Ms. Stevens appeared before the
Higher Education Committee, as she did this
morning before the Finance Committee. But I
must tell you that the committee was very,
very enthusiastic after hearing about her
accomplishments and the things that she would
like to do as a member of the SUNY board.
She is truly a SUNY alum, having
2590
begun her education at Monroe Community
College, then going to Brockport. And she is
now finishing her Ph.D. at the University of
Buffalo. So certainly she has a vast
experience as a student. She has worked
within the SUNY system and understands the
needs of its students.
So I am sure -- and I look forward
to working with Ms. Stevens as a member of the
SUNY Board of Trustees.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Patricia A.
Stevens as a member of the Board of Trustees
of the State University of New York. All
those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
Ms. Stevens is with us today in the
gallery.
Congratulations. Welcome to the
Senate, and best wishes with your duties.
2591
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As a member of
the Rochester-Genesee Regional Transportation
Authority, Joseph A. Errigo, of Conesus.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Stafford.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Senator
Volker.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Mr. President, I
want to commend the Governor on the nomination
of Joe Errigo, who I've known for many, many
years.
Joe, for the information of the
stenographer here, was probably one of the
leading court reporters in the state of New
York for many years -- in fact, I think was
the head of the association -- and was the
chief court reporter in Geneseo, in Livingston
County, where the Supreme Court sits and the
County Court and so forth. And he retired
here a few years ago and has been active in a
2592
company that does highway work and so forth.
And he'll make an excellent member
of the commission, and I commend the Governor
for choosing him. And I wish Joe the very
best of luck.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Nozzolio.
SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you,
Mr. President and my colleagues.
I rise to second the nomination of
Joe Errigo to the Rochester-Genesee Regional
Transportation Authority with a great deal of
pride and enthusiasm for this appointment.
I have had the privilege of knowing
Joe for a number of years. And as Senator
Volker so eloquently said, Joe has been just
an outstanding individual in the community,
very active in business, active in his
community, a wonderful family man.
And he also has a sense of the
entire Rochester region; not coming from
Monroe County, has the perspective of
seeing -- but working in Monroe County, has
the perspective of seeing both the rural areas
and the urban areas served by the greater
2593
Rochester-Genesee Transportation Authority.
That I am extremely pleased that he
has volunteered of his time to take up this
very important cause of transportation, and
that I certainly look forward to working with
he and other members of the board as they're
working hard to ensure transportation is of
utmost consideration in our region.
Congratulations to Joe. And I
thank him for his service and thank the Senate
for confirming this nomination.
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Joseph
Errigo as a member of the Rochester-Genesee
Regional Transportation Authority. All those
in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
Mr. Errigo, would you please rise,
sir, and receive the recognition of the body?
2594
And good luck with your important duties.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will continue to read.
THE SECRETARY: As members of the
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Barry
Feinstein, of Scarsdale, and Edward Vrooman,
of Garrison.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Senator
Marchi.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi.
SENATOR MARCHI: Mr. President,
these are reappointments. I would like to
speak to the reappointment of Barry Feinstein,
who was appointed by Governor Cuomo. And I
was delighted when Governor Pataki -
recognizing the fact that one good turn
deserves another.
And Barry Feinstein has been an
enlightened member of the stability in labor
relations and has brought this unique quality
to a fine art in his role as a member of the
commission. And certainly the Governor is to
be congratulated on his renomination.
2595
I move that in confirmation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Leibell.
SENATOR LEIBELL: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I'd like to just comment, if I may,
on Edward Vrooman, who lives in my home
county, who has served with great distinction
on the MTA board and is up now for
reappointment. He brings a great background
in the business community to his talents to
bear from that -- his experience. He will be
a great appointee again, and I congratulate
the Governor for this nomination.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Barry
Feinstein and Edward Vrooman as members of the
Metropolitan Transportation Authority. All
those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
2596
nominees are confirmed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As member and
chairman of the New York State Thruway
Authority, Louis R. Tomson, of Voorheesville.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Move
confirmation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Louis R.
Tomson as a member of the New York State
Thruway Authority. All those in favor signify
by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nomination is confirmed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As director of
the Municipal Assistance Corporation for the
City of New York, Joel B. Mounty, of
Scarsdale.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Move
confirmation.
2597
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Joel B.
Mounty as director of the Municipal Assistance
Corporation for the City of New York. All
those in favor signify by saying aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER:
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As members of the
Medical Advisory Committee, Ruben P. Cowart,
of Syracuse, and Louis Goldberg, of Buffalo.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Move
confirmation, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Ruben P.
Cowart and Dr. Louis Goldberg as members of
the Medical Advisory Committee. All those in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
2598
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominees are confirmed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As a member of
the Minority Health Council, Maggie Blackburn,
of Harpersfield.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Move
confirmation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Maggie
Blackburn as a member of the Minority Health
Council. All those in favor signify by saying
aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As members of the
New York State Hospital Review and Planning
Council, Richard S. Aronson, of New York City,
2599
and Barry Bruce Perlman, of New York City.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Move
confirmation, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Richard
Aronson and Barry Bruce Perlman as members of
the New York State Hospital Review and
Planning Council. All those in favor signify
by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominees are confirmed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: As members of the
Council on Human Blood and Transfusion
Services, Alicia Elena G. Garcia, of Staten
Island, and Lazaro Generoso Rosales, of
Fayetteville.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Move
confirmation, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Alicia
2600
Elena Garcia and Lazaro Generoso Rosales, as
members of the Council on Human Blood and
Transfusion Services. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
say nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominees are confirmed.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: As a member of
the Board of Visitors of the New York State
Home for Veterans and Their Dependents at
St. Albans, Elizabeth R. Carr, of Glen Oaks.
SENATOR STAFFORD: Move
confirmation, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the confirmation of Elizabeth
R. Carr as a member of the Board of Visitors
of the New York State Home for Veterans. All
those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
2601
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
nominee is confirmed.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Farley.
SENATOR FARLEY: Motions, thank
you. I've got to pay attention here.
Mr. President, on behalf of Senator
Seward, who sits next to me here, on page 37 I
offer the following amendments to Calendar
660, Senate Print 4381, and I ask that that
bill retain its place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received, and the bill will
retain its place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
SENATOR FARLEY: On behalf of
Senator Alesi, who's not here, on page 47 I
offer the following amendments to Calendar
Number 775, Senate Print 4554, and I ask that
2602
that bill retain its place.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received, and the bill will
retain its place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
SENATOR FARLEY: Mr. President,
on behalf of Senator Wright, on page 49 I
offer the following amendments to Calendar
792, Senate Print 4258, and I ask that that
bill retain its place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
amendments are received, and the bill will
retain its place on the Third Reading
Calendar.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could at this time adopt the Resolution
Calendar, with the exceptions of Resolutions
1198, 1199, 1202, and 1239.
And Resolution 1197 is open for
sponsorship at the suggestion of Senator
Trunzo, and 1260 at the -- with the consent of
Senator Sampson.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All in
2603
favor of adopting the Resolution Calendar,
with the exception of Resolutions 1198, 1199,
1202, and 1239, signify saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Resolution Calendar is adopted.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could take up Resolution 1198, by
Senator Maziarz, I ask that the title be read
and move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
Maziarz, Legislative Resolution Number 1198,
memorializing the Honorable George E. Pataki,
Governor of the State of New York, to proclaim
May 4, 1999, as Senior Citizen Day in the
State of New York.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the resolution. All those in
favor signify by saying aye.
2604
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
resolution is adopted.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could take up Resolution 1199, also by
Senator Maziarz, I ask that it be read in its
entirety and move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
Maziarz, Legislative Resolution Number 1199,
honoring Annette Bettinger upon the occasion
of her designation as the recipient of the
1999 "Senior Citizen of the Year" Award by the
County of Orleans Office for the Aging.
"WHEREAS, Senior citizens bring a
wealth of experience and knowledge to the
increasingly active roles they play in today's
society, their past contributions and future
participation a vital part of and valuable
asset to the fabric of community life and
2605
activity;
"WHEREAS, This Legislative Body is
justly proud to honor Annette Bettinger upon
the occasion of her designation as recipient
of the 1999 "Senior Citizen of the Year" Award
by the County of Orleans Office for the Aging;
"This prestigious award is bestowed
upon a senior citizen who has tirelessly
advocated on behalf of seniors within their
communities. The Senior Citizen of the Year
has assisted in providing needed support
services and activities which have enhanced
the lives of senior citizens;
"Annette Bettinger is one of the
most active seniors in Orleans County. She
serves on the Office for the Aging Advisory
Council and the Nutrition Program Advisory
Council. She has been involved with Orleans
County Hospice, the United Way of Western
Orleans County, and served on her local school
board. Her spare time is spent working with
her horses;
"Annette Bettinger, as a past
teacher of the blind, is constantly looking
for ways to incorporate the lives of seniors
2606
with those of students. One of her
initiatives was to have the high school
students teach the seniors how to use
computers. It was a success for both
generations;
"However, her crowning glory of
this past year was being the first and only
representative from New York State to attend
the Silver Haired Congress in Washington, D.C.
She spent weeks studying the issues they would
be dealing with before attending. Now she is
speaking to senior groups in the Western New
York area in the hopes of generating more
interest in the Silver Haired Congress. She
also speaks on the issues that were brought
before the Congress;
"Throughout her impressive lifetime
and distinguished career, Annette Bettinger, a
very active, energetic and industrious woman,
has inspired and enriched the lives of her
family, friends and colleagues through her
love and respect for others, and the wisdom
which comes from many years of experiencing
life to its fullest;
"It is the intent of this
2607
Legislative Body to publicly recognize those
who have reached such a significant milestone
in their lives, and who have witnessed and
contributed to the developments and
achievements of our Country, State and
individual localities during a most
fascinating period in history. Now,
therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative
Body pause in its deliberations to honor the
exceptional person, Annette Bettinger, upon
the occasion of her designation as recipient
of the 1999 "Senior Citizen of the Year" Award
by the County of Orleans Office for the Aging;
and be it further
"RESOLVED, That a copy of this
Resolution, suitably engrossed, be transmitted
to Annette Bettinger."
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Maziarz.
SENATOR MAZIARZ: Thank you very
much, Mr. President.
Mr. President, I just would like to
start off by welcoming my colleague from the
New York State Assembly, the chairperson of
2608
the Assembly Aging Committee, Assemblywoman
Barbara Clark.
And also, representing Annette
Bettinger from Orleans County in the State
Assembly is my colleague, Assemblyman Dave
Seaman.
Mr. President, you outlined very
well all of Annette's work on behalf of
seniors. And I think, most importantly, in
the resolution you read not just about
Annette's work with seniors but her work with
young people and interaction with the seniors,
teaching them computer skills, teaching them
nutrition skills, working with the United Way
of Orleans County, all of the good deeds that
you outlined.
Today is a great day in New York
State. It was a day that was started by my
colleague, the first chair of the Senate Aging
Committee, Senator Farley, on Senior Citizens
Day.
I told Annette and the people that
are joining her today from Orleans County that
two of the things we would do a lot of today
is eat and get our picture taken. And I think
2609
that we did not disappoint her. We had lunch
at the Governor's Mansion, along with seniors
that were being honored from across the state
of New York.
Annette has done great work with
the Silver Haired Congress in Washington,
D.C., and asked me on our way over here if we
would take the recommendations made from the
Silver Haired Congress and push that agenda
here in the State of New York. And I know
that Assemblywoman Clark and myself are going
to do that.
Joining Annette today, and having
nominated her for this very prestigious award
of Senior Citizen of the Year in the State of
New York, is Grace Denniston, the director of
the Orleans Office of the Aging, and Ann
Neilans and Pamela Canham from the Office of
the Aging.
We also have one of the people who
was honored, as a "Mature Worker" in the State
of New York from Orleans County, at noon at
the Governor's Mansion, Mary Brumbaugh.
And we have Annette's very good
friend, Sarah Brinsmaid, who joined Annette in
2610
coming to Albany today and has taken part in
all of the festivities, including a joint
meeting of the Senate and Assembly Aging
Committees.
In fact, someone was -- made the
remark that if the entire Assembly and the
entire Senate got along as good as the
Assembly and Senate Aging Committees do, we
would have had a budget out by March 1st. And
we'd be getting paid today, Mr. President.
So I certainly want to add my
congratulations to Annette, welcome her here
to Albany, congratulate her for all the good
work that she does year-round with individuals
that are blind in Orleans County, with the
seniors, with the young people of Orleans
County.
And I know that Senator Breslin is
going to speak on behalf of Clara Johnston,
who is receiving an award for the "Outstanding
Contribution by a Senior" this year. This is
a great program started by Senator Farley
recognizing some really great New Yorkers.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2611
Breslin.
SENATOR BRESLIN: Mr. President,
I rise to salute Clara Johnston from Albany.
As many of you know, Albany has a
rather significant elder population. And
Clara is more significant than the others in
terms of her volunteer service, in particular
to the Westview Apartments.
And Clara, from my experience and
from what others have told me, downplays her
role. She volunteers there on a daily basis,
contributing much to the seniors, and does it
without any look towards praise.
So this is a particularly
pleasurable task for me to stand and honor
Clara Johnston as an outstanding senior
citizen.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi.
SENATOR MARCHI: Mr. President, I
want to compliment Senator Maziarz and Senator
Breslin for speaking up for this splendid
group, because I'm a member of your group. I
am a senior citizen. And you are an exemplary
2612
example of what senior citizens can contribute
and can continue contributing to this state.
In fact, Mr. President, our motto
is: "The past is prologue. You ain't seen
nothing yet." And they're proving it.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Farley.
SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I also rise to salute Annette
Bettinger as Senior Citizen of the Year, and
Clara Johnston. My congratulations to you
both.
Let me just say that one of the
thrills of my Senate career was chairing the
Committee on Aging. I know that Senator
Skelos, who succeeded me, did an outstanding
job as chairman of the Aging Committee. It
has truly been a bipartisan, nonpartisan labor
of love for anybody that has served there.
And I'm sure that Assemblywoman Clark, you
would tend to agree with that.
And we've had a lot of great people
that have served on that committee. Senator
2613
Maziarz, you're doing a fine job. We are very
proud of you.
But so many things have happened in
New York State and have been done for the
seniors. We are an exciting state. So much
of the legislation that has happened in New
York State has been landmark legislation for
the rest of the nation. We're very proud of
our seniors. And this -- the Senior Citizen
of the Year is one of the highest honors that
this Legislature can bestow.
And Clara Johnston, generally
speaking for the "Outstanding Contribution,"
that is truly a significant award also.
And let me just offer my
congratulations to both of you, and
particularly to the people that you represent.
And thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the resolution. All in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
2614
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
resolution is adopted.
Our distinguished guests mentioned
in the resolution are seated here to the left
of the chair. And we welcome you to the
Senate and extend to you our courtesy and our
congratulations.
(Applause.)
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: On behalf of
Senator Bruno, we want to congratulate both
honorees.
But I think we still have to take
up Resolution Number 1239, by Senator Breslin.
So I ask that it be read in its entirety and
move for its adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
Breslin, Legislative Resolution Number 1239,
honoring Clara Johnston upon the occasion of
her designation as recipient of the 1999
"Outstanding Contribution by a Senior Citizen"
2615
Award.
"WHEREAS, Senior citizens bring
their special wisdom, experience and
enthusiasm to countless endeavors, helping to
shape and strength the character of the
communities of the State of New York and the
quality of our lives;
"WHEREAS, It is the sense of this
Assembled Body to recognize and honor the
senior citizens of New York State for their
diverse talents and generous service on behalf
of others;
"In conjunction with the
celebration of Senior Citizen Day in New York
State on May 4, 1999, this Assembled Body
takes great pleasure in honoring Clara
Johnston for the 1999 'Outstanding
Contribution By A Senior Citizen' Award;
"This prestigious award recognizes
a senior citizen who has tirelessly advocated
on behalf of seniors and has assisted in
providing needed support services and
activities which enhance the lives of senior
citizens;
"Clara Johnston of Albany, New
2616
York, truly exemplifies these qualities;
"As a member of the Westview Senior
Center, Clara Johnston works tirelessly
'behind the scenes' receiving little or no
recognition for her volunteer efforts;
"In 1998, Clara Johnston was
recognized by the Retired Senior Volunteer
Program for her many years of dedicated
service;
"In a time of limited resources, it
is only through volunteers such as Clara
Johnston that our senior citizen programs
continue to flourish;
"Through her endeavors, Clara
Johnston has demonstrated an unflagging
commitment to improvement of the quality of
life of senior citizens; now, therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative
Body pause in its deliberations to joyously
recognize the significance of Clara Johnston's
contributions with its 1999 "Outstanding
Contribution by a Senior Citizen" Award; and
be it further
"RESOLVED, That a copy of this
Resolution, suitably engrossed, be transmitted
2617
to Clara Johnston."
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the resolution. All those in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
resolution is adopted.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
at this time could we please -- oh, I'm sorry,
we have one more resolution.
May we please have the title read
on Resolution 1202, by Senator Marchi, and
move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the title of Resolution
1202.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
Marchi, Legislative Resolution Number 1202,
honoring the memory of the late Dominick L.
DiCarlo, Senior Judge of the U.S. Court of
International Trade and former New York State
2618
Assemblyman.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi.
SENATOR MARCHI: Mr. President,
this is indeed a tragic loss that not only -
for not only those who knew him through the
years and were in his circle of friendship but
the people of the State of New York and indeed
the people of the United States.
He was chairman of the -- he was
president of the Court of International Trade
and was known worldwide. He served with great
distinction as counsel to the New York City
Council after his -- after his successful
career as a prosecutor in the Eastern District
of New York -
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Excuse
me, Senator Marchi.
Could we have some order in the
house, please, particularly in light of the
subject matter of the resolution before the
house.
SENATOR MARCHI: Thank you,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2619
Marchi.
SENATOR MARCHI: Judge DiCarlo
was a prosecutor for the -- in the federal
courts before he was counsel to the minority
in the City Council and before he came to the
Assembly of the State of New York.
And, to anyone who has had the
privilege of listening to him, one of the most
brilliant, persuasive, endowed orators of our
time. He was a splendid champion of his point
of view and greatly respected.
He was Deputy Minority Leader and
Chairman of the Codes Committee at one point,
and then went on to serve on the International
Court of Trade, when he was appointed by
President Reagan, and was appointed chairman
by George Bush, President George Bush. And he
served there until -- he still serves as a
member, but he had reached the retirement age
of 70.
A brilliant, brilliant speaker.
Wonderful insights. Anyone who has ever
associated with him or served with him can
attest to his acumen, his mastery of the law,
his dedication to public service, not only in
2620
his local sphere and state sphere but also in
the national and international arena, where
his voice was, until his last moments, a
respected and valued voice.
So it is with great sadness that I
submit this resolution. And there are members
here -- Senator Velella, who is a cosponsor.
But I'm sure that we would all -- anyone that
wants to join, or if it's open for membership
unless they indicate to the contrary. I know
that there will be others that will want to
join in that sponsorship.
So I yield to Senator Velella, who
also has had hands-on experience and knowledge
of this great, distinguished public servant
who passed away.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Velella.
SENATOR VELELLA: Thank you,
Senator Marchi, Mr. President.
From 1973 to 1981, it was my
privilege to serve in the State Assembly with
Assemblyman DiCarlo. And even to his final
days, when I last saw him just several months
ago, he still cherished the title of
2621
"Assemblyman" and the days he served as our
Minority Leader -- Deputy Minority Leader in
the Assembly.
Those of us who served with him
remember the great debates in the Assembly
where Dom DiCarlo was on one side and Al
Blumenthal on the other. And let me tell you,
if you are any student of government, to have
listened to those debates in those days, two
people from absolutely opposite ends of the
spectrum debating the critical issues of the
time -- the criminal justice system, where
we're going, all the issues that we still
debate today -- it was really an experience
that I consider something that I will always
cherish.
They were both great men, both very
vicious debaters on the floor but good, close
personal friends. And both Al Blumenthal and
Dom DiCarlo did a great service for the people
of this state in their service in the
Assembly.
Dom was the man who trained our
present cochairman. When Dale and I were
freshmen together, Dom DiCarlo was the
2622
Chairman of the Codes Committee, and we served
with him on that committee. And he was very
inspirational to all of us.
Of course, he chaired another
committee, which the Republican -- there are
not many of them today, but in those days
there were probably about 14 of us, Republican
New York City assemblymen. There were 14 of
us. And we used to meet. And my great friend
here and colleague, Senator Padavan, gave us
the name "F Troop."
And Dom DiCarlo was the leader.
And we had a great time together, and we did a
lot of good things for the people of this
state. And certainly those of us who served
with him realize the contribution he made.
And we'll miss him.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Maltese.
SENATOR MALTESE: Of course,
listening to my good colleague, Senator
Marchi, extol the virtues and enshrine the
memory of Dom DiCarlo brings to mind many,
many pleasant memories.
2623
Among those, working side by side
with Dom DiCarlo in John Marchi's mayoral
campaign in 1969, and working out of various
Brooklyn clubs. I remember the Ed Sergi club
was one. That's when there were a great many
more Republicans, I guess, in Kings County
than there are right now.
And the -- his good colleague, Guy
Velella and my good colleague, Guy Velella,
spoke about "F Troop." And I remember at the
time that the 14 assemblymen, seven of them
were from Queens County, counting Vito
Battista, who was half in Brooklyn, half in
Queens, and all over the place.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR MALTESE: But those were
the times -- I think many of us look back
nostalgically on "F Troop" and the collegial
atmosphere in the Assembly and the collegial
atmosphere across the aisles and reaching to
this house.
Dom was part of all that, as were
some others that have since passed on -- Vito
Battista and Rosemary Gunning.
And looking back, though,
2624
remembering some of the debates that Guy
Velella spoke about, we realize that Dom was
in fact a -- had no peer in his debating
skills. And his debates were the talk of the
Legislature for weeks after.
And he was not afraid to take an
unpopular position. I recall his opposition
to the Rockefeller Drug Laws. And I know when
speaking to Bob, his son recalled that he
received a standing ovation and then I believe
was the only vote in the Republican Majority
for -- I think that was the Majority at that
time -- for his position. So it was a
testament not only to his debating skills but
a testament to Dom.
Certainly as an eminent jurist and
as a preeminent legislator, he will be sorely,
sorely missed.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Gentile.
SENATOR GENTILE: Yes, thank you,
Mr. President.
I too knew Judge Dominick DiCarlo
as a judge and also as an assemblyman,
although I didn't have the pleasure or the
2625
honor to serve with Dom DiCarlo in the
Legislature.
I recall as a young teenager
being -- having the opportunity to go visit
Assemblyman Dom DiCarlo in his district office
and speak to him about educational policy.
And quite impressed -- I believe I was about
15 years old at the time, quite impressed with
just his presence and his ability to know the
issues that I was concerned about.
Indeed, I recall during our
conversation in his office he received a fax
from his Albany office. And I think that was
the first time I actually saw a fax machine in
operation, that he would get something from
Albany. And he -- I was quite impressed with
that.
And I must say that he was, as has
been told, a great debater. He was also a
great politician, a great community leader in
Dyker Heights and in Bensonhurst. Indeed, I
was told by his son last week at his wake that
when they first installed microphones in the
Assembly, because of his booming voice and the
advantage he's always had with that booming
2626
voice, he refused to use the microphones for
many years after they were installed in the
Assembly.
So he indeed was a leader in my
community. He was a leader here in the State
Legislature. And he was a leader on the
bench. So my condolences to the family, to
the DiCarlo family, also to those he served
with.
So it is my pleasure to join this
resolution, Senator Marchi.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Mr. President,
as Guy Velella said, it is rather difficult to
talk about now in many ways.
I knew Dom extremely well. We -
for about a year for various reasons, we were
together a great deal. I have to be a little
careful with some of the things I say here,
because it may sound strange. But we went
through a great deal together. We had our
lines tapped together, we had some threats
made against us and all sorts of things in
those days.
2627
They were pretty wild days. You
know, it is real ironic that I am tabbed as a
defender of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, since
Dom DiCarlo and I were the two guys who fought
the Rockefeller Drug Laws.
In fact, I was just looking the
other day and I remembered the initial
Rockefeller -- you have to understand
something. Friends of Nelson Rockefeller have
told me that Nelson Rockefeller felt that the
amendments to the Rockefeller Drug Laws
represented the greatest legislative defeat
that he suffered in Albany. I don't think -
you think that the drug laws as they are now
are draconian? You ain't seen nothing yet.
In fact, I was looking -- the other
day my counsel went over to the library
because I couldn't remember any -- he pulled
out the old laws. By the way, under the
initial Rockefeller Drug Laws, every single
seller went to prison for life without parole.
What had happened is Dom DiCarlo
was Chairman of Codes, and a young
whippersnapper named Dale Volker came off the
streets of Depew, was taking a leave of
2628
absence as a police officer. What had
happened is when the Rockefeller Drug Laws
came, I was a member of the committee and
somewhat active, and Guy and I were both very
much involved.
The largest freshman class in the
history of the New York State Legislature at
that time, 43 people, Republicans and
Democrats, was our group. And we had a
tendency, both Republicans and Democrats, by
the way, to get together sometimes, and we
could stop just about anything. I mean, and
it really irritated some people, particularly
in the Governor's office. And on this one,
they got especially irritated.
But Dominick, who, as was said by I
think John and Guy, in my opinion -- and I,
having been around the Legislature since I was
four years old -- my father was here 22 years,
before me -- and I saw all the great orators.
And I want to tell you, there were some great
orators around here. And there are still some
very good speakers.
But Dom DiCarlo was, in my opinion,
the best debater. Now, he may not have had
2629
the polish, say, of a Joe Gallagher -- that
is, with the intonation and all that sort of
stuff. But for a guy that you would not want
to debate with who could just chop you apart
point after point, Dom was the guy that you
didn't want to face. Because he was good, he
was tough.
And yet he was really a gentle man
who felt very strongly -- the real reason that
in the end he could not bring himself to vote
for the amended Rockefeller Drug Laws was -
and I know it, because I sat with him -- was
that he felt so strongly about everything that
had happened. And although he didn't think
that it was that terrible, he felt that there
were still some refinements that should have
been made. I -- in all honesty, I happen to
agree with him.
But the decision was made that he
was going to move ahead. He gave a speech on
the floor of the Assembly. And remember,
virtually everybody else was voting for this
bill. And yet he gave a speech, basically
went through for, about 25 or 30 minutes,
point by point the original bill, point by
2630
point the new bill. And just -- it was a
devastating speech. People were just
mesmerized.
The place -- the Assembly at the
time, as Guy will tell you, was a pretty crazy
place. I mean, there were actually -- I don't
want to say some assaults on the floor, but
there was some pretty nasty stuff in that
place. It was pretty wild in those days.
But the place quieted down, and
when Dom spoke, you could hear a pin drop.
Everybody just sat and watched. And when it
was done, he sat down and there was quiet for
about 20 seconds. And all of a sudden,
everybody just got up -- and remember, these
people were all going to vote the other way
from him, all of us -- we got up and we gave
him a standing ovation for about five minutes.
Because it was such a principled and such a
brilliant speech that you had to just admire
it.
Dominick through his entire life I
think was one of the most principled and
genuine men that I have ever met. As was said
before, he went on the bench, on the, what is
2631
it, the International Court of World Trade or
whatever it was.
I was in his court several times,
by the way, and saw him. Boy, I'll tell you,
that's the way to live, as the saying goes.
It's a beautiful courtroom, a very important
courtroom that most Americans have no idea
even exists, which is kind of sad. I'll admit
to you that I hardly knew much about it until
I went to New York City and was in that
courtroom.
But if you asked me who were -- who
were the most towering legislators around this
place since I've been here, certainly Dom
DiCarlo would be at the top of the list, would
be one of the top people. His loss is
certainly difficult, although, you know, I've
seen him on and off over the years, not really
as much as maybe I would have liked to. But
he was a super man.
And while I'm on the subject, just
let me just finish and do a little pitch here,
as I said I would do for Dean. Tomorrow
morning at 8 o'clock at St. Mary's Church -
it's ironic we're having this resolution
2632
today -- we're having a memorial service for
deceased legislators. We'll have an
ecumenical service.
For those of you that are new, we
have a service for the -- an ecumenical
service with a rabbi, a priest, and a minister
there. And we do various tributes to the
Legislature and to the people who are deceased
from the Legislature during the past year.
And several members do readings.
We would like anyone that would
like to come to please come. And then we have
a little breakfast afterwards downstairs in
the LOB. So that will be at 8 o'clock
tomorrow at St. Mary's Church.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the resolution.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: I want to thank
Senator Marchi for, number one, presenting
this resolution, opening it up for
sponsorship.
I had the opportunity, as did
Senator Kuhl -- we were elected to the
2633
Assembly in 1980. That explains why we look a
lot better than Senator Velella.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR SKELOS: But I had the
pleasure of serving one year with Dominick
DiCarlo in 1981 before he resigned from the
Assembly.
And he would be taken aback by
today, and he would say "Stop the B.S." in his
gruff way. But he would be thankful to this
chamber for having this resolution brought up.
What an incredible debater. I've
never seen to this day anybody that could cut
apart his opponent, dissect his opponent. In
fact -- in a respectful way, because he
respected the institution of the Assembly and
the Senate. In fact, once in a while when
he'd come into chambers I'd say, "Dominick,
did you have lunch?" And he'd say, "I'm going
to have lunch now." And, you know, God forbid
the person that debated him that day.
He was a very, very special person.
He always did his homework. He was a good
family man and loved, loved being in the
Assembly.
2634
So, Senator Marchi, again, thank
you for this resolution. And I know on behalf
of Senator Marchi and Senator Bruno, I'd like
to have the resolution open for sponsorship by
the entire Senate body.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Skelos, shall we follow our usual custom and
include everyone unless they specifically ask
to be excluded?
SENATOR SKELOS: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Any
other Senator wish to be heard on the
resolution?
The question is on the resolution.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Opposed,
nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
resolution is adopted.
Senator Skelos, also before I
believe you mentioned Resolution 1197, by
Senator Trunzo, and 1260, by Senator Sampson.
Shall we do the same on that?
2635
SENATOR SKELOS: Yes,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All
right. All members will be included on those
two unless they specifically direct the desk
otherwise.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: On behalf of
Senator Maziarz, there will be an immediate
meeting of the Aging Committee in the Majority
Conference Room.
And I believe there are now some
substitutions to be made.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There
will be an immediate meeting of the Aging
Committee in the Senate Majority Conference
Room.
The Secretary will read the
substitutions.
THE SECRETARY: On page 7,
Senator McGee moves to discharge, from the
Committee on Agriculture, Assembly Bill 6547
and substitute it for the identical first
report, 824.
On page 7, Senator Hoffmann moves
2636
to discharge, from the Committee on
Agriculture, Assembly Bill 6546 and substitute
it for the identical first report, 825.
On page 7, Senator Balboni moves to
discharge, from the Committee on Environmental
Conservation, Assembly Bill 5590 and
substitute for the identical first report,
830.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
substitutions are ordered.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
if we could take up the noncontroversial
calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the noncontroversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
44, by Senator Johnson, Senate Print 977A, an
act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law and
the Education Law, in relation to the
receiving and discharging of passengers.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
2637
act shall take effect September 1, 2000.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
80, by Senator Balboni, Senate Print 1241A, an
act to amend the Criminal Procedure Law, the
Family Court Act and the Penal Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
128, by Senator Alesi, Senate Print 87A, an
act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law, in
relation to prohibiting.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Lay it
aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
2638
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
267, by Senator Trunzo, Senate Print 3278, an
act in relation to requiring the commissioners
of motor vehicles.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
322, by Senator McGee, Senate Print 3319, an
act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law, in
relation to the operation of school buses.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
July.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
2639
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
518, by Senator LaValle, Senate Print 1745, an
act to amend Chapter 554 of the Laws of 1996.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
588, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 3601, an
act to amend the Tax Law, in relation to
extending the sales and use taxes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
2640
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56. Nays,
2. Senators Dollinger and Gentile recorded in
the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Dollinger, why do you rise?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Nothing,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Just
stretching your legs, huh? Okay.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
619, by Senator Alesi, Senate Print 3965, an
act to amend the Economic Development Law, in
relation to allowing the Commissioner of
Economic Development to sell advertising.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
2641
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
678, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 4161, an
act in relation to authorizing the conveyance
of certain real property of the State of New
York.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
683, by Senator Saland, Senate Print 3362.
SENATOR SKELOS: Lay the bill
aside for the day.
2642
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside for the day.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
736, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 1803 -
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
bill aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
770, by Senator Seward, Senate Print 4305, an
act to amend the Highway Law, in relation to
designating a portion of the state highway
system.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Skelos, that concludes the
noncontroversial calendar.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
2643
if we could take up the controversial
calendar, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the controversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
80, by Senator Balboni, Senate Print 1241A, an
act to amend the Criminal Procedure Law, the
Family Court Act and the Penal Law.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Balboni, an explanation has been requested of
your bill by Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR BALBONI: Thank you,
Mr. President.
My colleagues, this bill before us
is an amended version of a bill that we have
already passed. And the issue that makes this
bill different today is that this bill comes
before you representing the support of the
victims, the DAs Association, the Senate
Majority, and the Governor of the State.
This is significant in that this is
the first time any piece of legislation on the
issue of stalking has enjoyed that support.
2644
The negotiations that were conducted in order
to arrive at this bill print version included
extensive analysis of not only the statutory
provisions but the victim's perspective. I
refer to this version of the bill as putting a
face on stalking.
This bill before us is a difficult
bill because it takes on a difficult topic.
Stalking is the act of repeatedly following
another individual with the intent, with the
design, and with the effect of placing that
individual in reasonable fear that the stalker
is going to do some harm to them. That is not
a statutory definition, that's a practical
definition.
Today at the press conference that
was held earlier, the head of the District
Attorneys Association spoke about a case where
a woman, after breaking up with her lover,
received flowers for 45 days straight. And
when she went to the police, she said, "I'm
receiving flowers. I am fearful of this
behavior." And this is back in 1987. And the
police officer's response was, "How do we put
somebody away for sending you flowers?" On
2645
the 46th day, the stalker strangled the woman
with her own terry cloth robe.
And this is the type of behavior
that permeates so many different lives in our
society. Case in point, when we debated this
bill a month and a half ago and I concluded my
remarks, my debate, I had five people in this
chamber come up to me and say, "You know, I
was stalked, but I didn't know what to do
about it." You don't know if you're being
hysterical; you don't know if you're imagining
things.
And so the amendment that is before
us is so significant in that for the first
time it takes into account the needs of the
victims and their perspective, the needs of
the prosecutors and their perspective on how
to prosecute these crimes, as well as an
agreement between the Senate and the Governor.
Let me for a moment just go down
some of the different language changes. For
the first time, we would define the word
"distress," for the purposes of this measure,
to mean, in addition to the normal meaning,
"fear that the actor will cause material harm
2646
to the health, safety, business, career,
education, financial condition or property of
a person or of a third person."
Why is that significant? Today the
head of the Statewide Coalition Against
Domestic Violence spoke about a woman whose
ex, when he learned that she was attending
classes at school, enrolled in every single
one of her classes, never having previously
expressed any interest in pursuing an
education.
Now, if you go to the police and
you say "Help me, this is not natural," the
police look at you and say "What's the
problem?"
The enactment of this statute will
give law enforcement as well as prosecutors
the ability to identify and target this type
of behavior and intercede, perhaps not
necessarily with an arrest or an indictment,
but with a warning: "Your behavior signals a
disturbing pattern of behavior for us in the
law enforcement community. We are now enabled
by the Legislature to view this as a crime.
And if you do not desist in your behavior, we
2647
will arrest and prosecute you."
That's a part of the legislation
you don't really see. That's the practical
world, ladies and gentlemen, the practical
realities of being a victim.
In addition to which, the bill
talks about stalking in the fourth degree,
which is a B misdemeanor, less than a year of
jail time. And that is essentially knowingly
engaging in a course of conduct likely to
cause substantial distress to a reasonable
person under the circumstances. We put
ourselves in the shoes of the victim.
Stalking in the third would become
an A misdemeanor. And it would be a
repetition of the stalking fourth; in other
words, you do the stalking fourth again. And
then, if you had -- committed stalking fourth
within a ten-year time period, then you'd be
guilty of the third degree. If you committed
the act of stalking more than five times
against one person, that would be a
third-degree act, or against two or more
people in separate instances.
And lastly, that if you commit acts
2648
directed at a specific person likely to cause
physical injury or serious physical injury -
this doesn't talk so much about following
individuals, but rather about doing something
like sending dead roses, that is intended to
cause a reasonable fear and in fact does cause
a reasonable fear -- we move to the felony
statute -- the felony penalty.
And for purposes of felony, now we
get into a minimum of one year in jail. And
it's basically one to three years for an E
felony. And that would be stalking in the
second. Stalking in the second would be a
prior assault conviction where the victim is
the same or a member of an immediate family;
possession of a dangerous instrument, deadly
weapon, firearm, imitation pistol or
inseparable firearm; or against an individual
who's under the age of 17, as long as the
defendant is over the age of 21; or a
repetition of stalking in the third degree.
And lastly, a D felony for stalking
in the first degree. And a D felony, three to
five years, this is serious time. This is the
first time we've taken this step. And this
2649
would be stalking in the first degree. You
commit stalking in the third degree against
another person within the preceding ten years
and have a prior felony conviction where the
victim of that felony was of the same family
as the individual being stalked now. Or in
the course and furtherance of the stalking in
the third degree, the individual commits a
crime involving physical injury, serious
physical injury, or death.
I have memos in support which are,
like I said, very telling -- the New York
State District Attorneys Association, the
Victims Services, the Statewide Coalition
Against Domestic Violence, the Nassau County
Coalition Against Domestic Violence, and the
New York State Coalition Against Sexual
Assault. These memos in support are not
lukewarm. They are insistent and passionate
in their support for this bill.
Mr. President, I hope that our
actions today and hopefully the passage of
this measure will provide a clarion call for
the State Assembly and Assemblyman Scott
Stringer, who's carrying the bill in that
2650
House, to be able to move this issue forward
for eventual passage and signature by the
Governor.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: I'm
sorry, Senator Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: That's all
right. Thank you, Mr. President.
Will the sponsor yield to a
question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Balboni, do you yield to a question?
SENATOR BALBONI: Yes, I do,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I'd like to ask the sponsor, at the
time the earlier version of this bill was
introduced -- and I note that I'm very pleased
with the fact the Governor has now caught up
to the Senate, and I join you in hoping that
the Assembly, led by Assemblyman Stringer,
will follow on the issue of stalking.
2651
At the time that your earlier
version of this bill was introduced, there was
discussion of the relationship, if any,
between this stalking legislation and the
clinic antiviolence legislation, of which I'm
one of the sponsors in this house. I'm
wondering if any of the amendments made since
then incorporate anything that was in the
hostile amendment offered to add the clinic
antiviolence bill to the stalking bill.
SENATOR BALBONI: I do not
believe so.
But allow me to inform you that
during the press conference there was a
question about whether or not this has
anything to do with clinic access, and it was
made to one of the advocates. The advocate
specifically said, "This should not be linked.
This is a separate issue. This is what we
want to see. This is a new approach. Let's
focus on the terms of this particular bill."
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you.
If the sponsor would continue to
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2652
Balboni, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR BALBONI: Yes, I do.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you.
Actually, I don't have another
question, I could just make my comment on the
bill. Although it's a pleasure to exchange
questions with Senator Balboni.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Schneiderman, on the bill.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: On the
bill.
I am pleased to hear that. I think
that has certainly been my position all along,
and I think the position of most in our
conference, that these two positions should
not be linked.
At an earlier stage in this
session, Senator Bruno wrote to some
constituents of mine, and I shared this
correspondence with Senator Balboni,
suggesting that the stalking bill should cover
the issues addressed in the clinic
antiviolence legislation. I do not believe
2653
these are overlapping bills. I believe they
reflect similar innovative approaches to
updating the criminal law to reflect the real
problems we are facing today, and also to
provide law enforcement authorities the
ability to intervene at an early stage of the
cycle of violence, to prevent greater
tragedies from occurring.
I would -- I strongly support this
legislation. I look forward to seeing it
pass, with Senator Balboni and Assemblyman
Stringer's leadership. But I also look
forward in the near future to consideration of
the other part of this equation, which is the
clinic antiviolence legislation.
I note that we have just ended a
period in which violent demonstration was
threatened in Buffalo and Rochester. It ended
very peacefully, in large part due to the fact
that the federal Clinic Antiviolence Bill, the
face law, was in effect, an injunction was
obtained by the Attorney General's office, and
peace was maintained. That was because in
Buffalo and Rochester it's easy to get to
federal court and invoke the powers of the
2654
federal authorities.
We want, through our state Clinic
Access Bill, to make that same relief
available in State Supreme Court and to all
the people of this state, not just those in
the large metropolitan areas.
Once again, I commend Senator
Balboni for his work on this. I plan to
support the bill and hope that we'll also see
the clinic antiviolence bill in the near
future.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
Will the sponsor yield to one
question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Balboni, do you yield?
SENATOR BALBONI: Yes,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: If you could
turn to page 5 of the bill, lines 12 through
2655
14, I'd just like an explanation and I have a
question about the -- there's a unique
juxtaposition about -- I understand your
attempt here is to increase the penalties
depending on what prior crimes someone has
committed.
But it says with the sentence -
term of imprisonment in excess of one year or
a sentence of death was authorized. I'm not
sure I understand what that means. Could you
tell me what that means?
SENATOR BALBONI: Well, that
means that focuses on the initial charge, as
opposed to the actual final resolution,
whether it be by plea bargaining or
conviction.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Would that
apply -- again through you, Mr. President, if
Senator -
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Balboni, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Would that
apply -
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Wait,
wait, wait.
2656
Do you continue to yield, Senator?
SENATOR BALBONI: Yes, I do,
Mr. President. Sorry about that.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Would that
apply to crimes committed here in the State of
New York?
SENATOR BALBONI: I believe so.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Again through
you, Mr. President, if Senator Balboni would
continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Balboni, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR BALBONI: Yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: My question
is, how can you have authorized the death
penalty and be a death penalty case, yet
someone would be free to go do something else
under the stalking statute, when at least my
recollection is if you're charged with the
death penalty in this state, you can't plead
to anything else other than life imprisonment
without parole?
SENATOR BALBONI: Senator
2657
Dollinger, I'll be candid with you. This was
at the suggestion of the DAs Association. I
am not a district attorney. I'm not a
prosecutor. They wanted this really bad. I
said okay.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: The death
penalty language?
SENATOR BALBONI: That's their
language.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay. Thank
you.
SENATOR BALBONI: However,
Mr. President, in all candor, if a suggestion
is made, if you have language that you'd like
to -- for us to consider, I'd be happy to do
that.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr. Preside
nt, I appreciate Senator Balboni's offer.
I'm not sure I do, I just couldn't
understand why we would refer to the death
penalty as a prior statute or a prior activity
that someone has been engaged in and they were
somehow back out on the street stalking
someone. At least to my recollection in this
state, I mean if you're charged with the death
2658
penalty in this state, the rule is you can't
plead to anything other than life
imprisonment. Maybe I'm -- I've missed some
piece of it.
Mr. President, I'll just -- I want
to thank Senator Balboni, both for the offer
and for responding to my questions. I do have
one suggestion for him that I would just like
to make as a proposal. I'm not going to make
it as an amendment. But if this does go to
negotiations with the Assembly, I would hope
that he considers it.
And that is the specific problem of
child stalking. The bill deals with the
problem of what I would call teenaged
stalking. That is, it references the victim
being less than 17 years old and the
perpetrator being more than 21 years old. I
would just suggest there's a problem with
teenage stalking, and that is the 18-year-old,
19-year-old boyfriend who stalks the 15-, 16-,
17-year-old girl.
And I would suggest that what we do
is look solely at the age of the victim of the
stalking and take the penalties and make it a
2659
second-degree offense -- or, excuse me, a
third-degree offense if the victim is under
the age of 17 but over the age of 12, and that
you increase the penalty for stalking even
younger children.
The reason why I mention this, Mr.
President, is because there was an incident in
my community about three years ago in which
the same white automobile showed up at
elementary schools in the vicinity -- in the
suburbs of the city of Rochester. And the
same white automobile was stalking little
children, threatening them, following them,
following them home. Whoever the perpetrator
was, he never got out of the car, never had
the whatever it was to get out of the car.
But he was enticing them to get into the car,
and he harassed them all the way home.
I would just suggest that to really
make the child-stalking portion of this, if we
could increase the penalties for that conduct,
we would go a long way to making this bill an
even more powerful deterrent against those who
would prey on younger children.
So with that in mind, Mr.
2660
President, I'd just suggest that to Senator
Balboni. I've carried a bill similar to that
that affects the harassment statute. It just
seems to me that as we do with many other
offenses, where we grade them up as the child
gets younger, I would just suggest that we do
it here as well.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 11. This
act shall take effect on the first day of
November.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Balboni, to explain his vote.
SENATOR BALBONI: Thank you, Mr.
President. Just briefly.
I appreciate the comments made
today. I also appreciate the vote. But let
me say this to the body. This is an issue
that we spent a great deal of time, and it's
not done yet, in terms of there's going to be
more negotiations with the Assembly.
2661
Senator Dollinger has raised two
very good points. I will find out what they
are. And I would just offer all of you, in a
very bipartisan way, let's try to make this
proposal the proposal that will help the most
people. So keep the suggestions coming.
They're very, very good. And I'd like to
thank the body for its consideration.
I vote in the affirmative,
Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Balboni will be recorded in the affirmative.
The Secretary will announce the
results.
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
128, by Senator Alesi, Senate Print 87A, an
act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law, in
relation to prohibiting the placement of
advertising on school buses.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Explanation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Alesi, an explanation has been requested of
2662
Calendar Number 128 by Senator Montgomery.
SENATOR ALESI: Thank you,
Mr. President.
Very simply, this bill would
prohibit advertising except advertising that
is already allowed by DMV on any school buses
of seven seats or larger anywhere in the
state, with the exception of the City of New
York.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Mr. Presid
ent, that explanation is satisfactory.
I just want to make a comment on
the legislation, if I may.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Montgomery, on the bill.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Briefly.
I'm happy -- very happy to see that
Senator Alesi is addressing this issue of
commercial advertising to children in and
around vehicles and their schools.
I would -- I have a bill that would
also prohibit commercial advertising in
schools. And just to alert my colleagues and
2663
Senator Alesi -- hopefully we can even go
further than this -- that I have been looking
at textbooks in schools, in school
districts -- in my district, my Senate
district. And there is extensive, extensive
commercial advertising that is basically
unrelated to a lesson that the textbook is
dealing with. Math books and other books are
full of commercial advertising.
And obviously it's a captive
audience. And if it does not add to the
subject and the lesson, it certainly, I think,
should be banned by this Legislature.
So I just wanted to say I'm happy
to see that Senator Alesi is addressing this
issue. And I hope that we can go even further
than this in making commercial advertising
illegal in terms of school classes and -- as
well as textbooks.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
2664
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 57. Nays,
1. Senator Hevesi recorded in the negative.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
736, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 1803, an
act to amend the Criminal Procedure Law, in
relation to the defense of guilty but mentally
ill.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Mr. President,
I believe an explanation was asked for by
Senator Paterson.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
I would like an explanation. But I'd like the
chamber to know that I actually didn't say
that.
But Senator Padavan seems to know
what I'm thinking. So if he would give an
explanation and answer my first three
questions, I would like him to go ahead.
(Laughter.)
2665
SENATOR PADAVAN: I had suggested
to Senator Paterson that we take the debate
two years ago, simply enter it into the record
and call it a day. But he wouldn't bite on
that, being the dedicated, conscientious
Deputy Minority Leader that he is, and so we
will have to do it again.
There is a great deal of
dissatisfaction with the insanity defense in
New York State and has been so for many, many
years. Those of you I'm sure -- particularly
those who are attorneys I'm sure studied the
so-called M'Naghten Rule, the M'Naghten case
that took place in England in 1843 that first
established the concept that someone could be
acquitted, not held accountable for his act,
by reason of insanity.
Modern psychiatry, of course, has
evolved over that period of time. And today
we find much many, many instances where that
use -- the use of that particular option in
criminal cases has been abused.
What we have before us is a
proposal that is not unique in terms of the
law of the land. But actually it was first
2666
suggested as a result of a public hearing I
had in 1977, 22 years ago, when we became
aware of the fact that the insanity defense
was increasing in terms of magnitude.
Now, I hasten to say that if you
take the entire universe of criminal cases
that are dealt with in the State of New York,
the number of pleas that involve the insanity
defense are relatively small in percentage
terms. Yet, however, that number has steadily
increased. Go back to the '60s, there was a
five-year period where there were 50-some-odd.
And then you go up to the '70s, in a similar
period, there were 200-and-some-odd. And many
of those cases, many of them high-profile
cases, do occupy a great deal of the time and
energy of our prosecutors and the courts.
So while they are, if you take the
60-some-odd-thousand cases every year that
deal with serious crimes of violence that are
prosecuted in this state, a small percentage,
yet they are significant.
But more importantly, I think, we
want to address the issue of what is
appropriate, both in terms of the law and its
2667
fairness and equity and also the public
safety. And that's what this bill does.
What it says, very simply, is that
when you have an insanity defense offered
where judges or juries deal with what are
sometimes referred to as dueling
psychiatrists, and where the definition, which
is a matter of law as to whether or not a
person is conscious of the consequences of his
act or not, is not clear, or where a judge or
jury will feel quite certainly that there is a
level of mental illness and yet that person
still knew the consequences of his or her act,
that a third option should be available.
And currently we have two:
acquittal by reason of insanity, or guilty,
without any reference whatsoever to the issue
of mental illness.
By providing a third alternative,
guilty but mentally ill, we accomplish a
number of objectives. First, the level of
mental illness is acknowledged in the courts
in terms of diminishing capacity and other
prerogatives that are available to the courts,
and prosecutors will take that into
2668
consideration in sentencing. And obviously
the courts have the benefit of psychiatric
guidance in all of these cases.
However, the person will be
incarcerated in a state prison -- and we have
seven that have mental health satellites
within the confines of those institutions -
and his mental illness will be dealt with and
treated. Should that person be subject or
eligible for parole, a condition of parole
would be a continuation of that treatment to
the extent necessary.
So we deal and acknowledge the
mental illness, and at the same time we
provide a level of security to the public in
terms of where that individual is.
Now, there have been many
high-profile cases. It seems every couple of
years one pops up that is particularly
significant. I remember a number of years ago
we had one involving a police officer that
killed a very young, young boy. He was
acquitted by reason of insanity. He was
placed in a psychiatric center of my county,
Creedmoor. Seven months later, the
2669
psychiatrist said "He's cured," and he left.
And in my view, that was a -- certainly not
adequate and proper justice, and I think a
misuse of the insanity defense.
More recently, we had one you may
have read about, an individual who killed and
then cannibalized his victim who currently is
about to be released from a psychiatric
facility, having been deemed cured. Just two
weeks ago we had a 3.30.20 -- that's the body
of law that covers these individuals -- a
patient at Creedmoor who had slit his aunt's
throat, acquitted by reason of insanity, who
decided to leave the institution, and he's
still at large.
So we have a lot of problems with
this particular statute that I think this act,
this proposal would resolve.
Now, I said it's not unique,
because there are 19 states that have adopted
this legislation. And in law, many of them go
back quite a number of years, back to the
early '80s.
The bill is supported broadly by a
number of individuals as well as institutions:
2670
The New York State Law Enforcement Council,
which is all of our district attorneys in the
state of New York; the New York State
Association of Chiefs of Police; the New York
State Sheriffs Association; the Criminal
Justice Coordinator of the City of New York;
the Citizens Crime Commission; as well as the
previous three Attorney Generals of the State
of New York -- Mr. Abrams, Mr. Koppell, and
Mr. Vacco, all of whom supported this
legislation. In my conversations with the
Deputy Commissioner and Chief Counsel for the
Office of Mental Health, they too support this
legislation. The Governor supports this
legislation.
So we have broad-based support.
It's sponsored in the Assembly by Assemblyman
McLaughlin.
This is the seventh time I will
have presented it to this body for
consideration, and hopefully it will be the
seventh time it passes. And perhaps we will
get some action in the Assembly to move in the
right direction.
Without going into much more
2671
detail, that is the essence of this proposal.
And I'd be happy to answer any questions you
might have.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
Senator Padavan has given an excellent
explanation. He also answered my first three
questions. If he would yield for my fourth
question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes, I
certainly will.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: Senator, I
have a great deal of admiration for your work
in this particular field. And you have really
stayed on this for a very long time. I've
admired your work not only sitting in front of
you here in the New York State Senate but when
I was in the Queens District Attorney's
office, and was actually happy when you
introduced this whole concept some years ago.
2672
Now, upon further reflection, there
are some issues that I'd like to raise with
you. And they specifically relate to your
description of the definition of this
legislation. While the bill says "guilty but
mentally ill," the fact is that an individual
who is convicted of a crime is being
convicted, even under the language of this
legislation, because they were able to know
that the act that they committed was wrong and
that they knew the nature and the consequences
of their act.
That's correct, isn't it?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Insanity,
Senator, as I indicated earlier, is a legal
definition. It's not a clinical term. It
means that a defendant's mental disease is so
extreme that he cannot appreciate either the
nature and consequences of his conduct or that
such conduct was wrong.
Now, that's the law. Its
application, however, is far more complex, in
determining where the specific case falls
within the framework of that definition.
And so, Senator, juries and
2673
jurists, many of whom I've talked to -
many -- tell us that we need an option that
has served other jurisdictions. Here, as an
example, right now there are 159 people in the
corrections system in the state of Illinois
who were found guilty but mentally ill. We
need that option.
When and whether it will be used or
how it will be used would depend on the
individual case. We do not eliminate
acquittal by reason of insanity, we do not
eliminate the option of incompetency to stand
trial, both of which must remain. Although,
by the way, several states have eliminated
them entirely. They deal only with diminished
capacity and nothing else. But that's another
issue.
But, Senator, yes, guilty but
mentally ill will mean, in effect, that that
person did have a level of knowledge of the
consequence of his or her act, but yes, also,
mental illness was a factor and cannot be
eliminated from any consideration.
Keep in mind, if the decision is
guilty and the insanity defense is rejected by
2674
a court or jury, there is no mandate -- no
mandate for mental health care in the
correction system. There is no mandate for
follow-up mental health care upon parole or
early release.
So by doing this we not only
benefit the society at large, but I think we
also benefit the individual, in ensuring that
mental health care will be made available even
within the correction system as it's now
currently provided for.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
if the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: So, Senator,
when we have a situation now -- because we
already have the plea of not responsible by
reason of mental disease or defect. Since we
already have that defense, and we're saying
2675
that the jury or trier of the case has
rejected that -- they've now said that the
defendant is guilty, and under the definition
the person does understand the nature and the
consequences of their act and they know that
the act was wrong, so they could not be
insane -- we are now not really dealing with
the mental illness being a factor in this
trial. I don't understand how you can say
that -
SENATOR PADAVAN: But we are,
Senator. First, the plea could be guilty but
mentally ill. That could be the plea. That
could be a charge.
SENATOR PATERSON: Well, that's
if we make this law.
SENATOR PADAVAN: If this were
law.
SENATOR PATERSON: Right.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Now, if you're
saying without this as law, you're absolutely
right.
But with this as law, you provide
that opportunity both to prosecutors, defense
attorneys, and jurists. And you do all the
2676
things that I mentioned before in the course
of doing that, accomplishing that fact. I
think that's a move forward, Senator, in terms
of both the public's protection as well as the
individual who's incarcerated.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
if the Senator would continue to yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Yes.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senator yields.
SENATOR PATERSON: Senator, what
I'm saying is that what we are now doing is
curing a problem that I see as one that should
be handled administratively, by asking the
trier of fact or even jurors to determine what
the level of mental disease was, even though
we're admitting in this legislation that the
mental illness was not of such consequence
that it really changed the guilt or innocence
of this particular defendant.
In other words, what I'm saying is
that this person was guilty. They knew what
they did, they were wrong, they knew they were
2677
wrong, they're guilty. Also, ancillary to
that, they have a mental illness.
And what I'm saying is if a person
has a mental illness, why do we have to bring
that into the trial, since the trier of fact
has already determined that it did not
influence the individual's capacity to know
the nature -
SENATOR PADAVAN: But it did,
Senator. You're familiar with the term
"diminished capacity."
SENATOR PATERSON: Yes. And we
have that in the law.
SENATOR PADAVAN: We do have that
in law. That's the point I'm making.
So obviously, when someone is
deemed guilty but mentally ill, that part of
the law has effect. And when sentencing -
and where sentencing and where incarcerated -
not all prisons have this mental health
capacity, treatment facility -- where placed,
all become significant factors within the
total universe of what we're doing.
And so it is important, and it is a
fact. Now, if you're going to take the two
2678
extremes that you just articulated, then it is
not relevant. But when an insanity defense is
presented and the numbers -- even though
again, I repeat, within the total sphere of
things, they're a small percentage. But those
cases have become greater and greater in
number. And we're seeing some real abuses of
our system by virtue of them.
And we're seeing the public
endangered by virtue of them. That individual
is roaming around, presumably in Queens,
although he may be out in Manhattan now, for
all I know. He walked out of a psychiatric
center that's certainly not a secure place.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco, why -
SENATOR PADAVAN: -- that you're
talking about.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: One
moment, Senator Paterson.
Senator DeFrancisco, why do you
rise?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'd request
the opportunity to ask a question along a
different line, but I think what Senator
2679
Paterson is getting at, if he would yield and
if Senator Padavan would yield.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Are you going
to yield to him?
SENATOR PATERSON: I've yielded
to you. Why can't I yield to him?
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I have the
same concern, because the reasoning sounds
circular. And let me just read from the bill.
In order to be guilty but mentally
ill -- that's the extra category you're asking
for -
SENATOR PADAVAN: The third
option, yes.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The third
option. The third option gives the
introductory language. And Section A says the
first thing the jury's got to find to find
guilty but mentally ill is that the defendant
is guilty of the crime.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Did the act.
2680
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Okay. No,
no, this says -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Guilty of the
crime, yes.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No -
well -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Well, use your
terms. I'll use mine.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: No, no, no,
no.
SENATOR PADAVAN: My answer to
your question is yes, Senator. Go ahead.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: But will
you agree that it's not my terms, it's your
term in the bill -
SENATOR PADAVAN: Correct.
You're reading it properly.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: -- that the
defendant is guilty of a crime. Correct?
SENATOR PADAVAN: Correct.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: So my point
is, if the jury gets to that point where the
defendant is guilty of the crime, they have
already found him guilty, the second section
is meaningless. They've found him guilty,
2681
therefore he's guilty of a murder.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Senator, let me
answer your question. Is that a question?
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: Yes.
SENATOR PADAVAN: You're right,
he is guilty of having committed a crime
within the context of a degree of knowledge of
the result of his actions.
However, mental illness, as all the
prosecutors that I've talked to, many of the
judges -- including psychiatrists, such as the
Son of Sam psychiatrist, with whom we met and
spent practically an entire day, will tell
you, this is not a precise -- this is more of
an art than a science when you get to that
second half.
Now, Berkowitz, the Son of Sam, was
found guilty and incarcerated. However, it
was a very, very iffy situation. He was very
close to being acquitted by reason of
insanity. That psychiatrist and many others
who deal within the framework of our judicial
system are saying there has to be an option
where we guarantee mental health care when
incarcerated.
2682
And that's the part that you're
overlooking, that when we say guilty but
mentally ill, a number of other provisions
here are triggered. I repeat again -- for the
fourth time, I think -- when that person is
placed in prison, it is mandated by this
statute that he or she receive mental health
care. And there are seven prisons that have
satellites or components to provide that in
the State of New York today. In addition,
assuming parole or early release, mental
health follow-up care is mandated.
Now, if you stop where you wanted
to stop -- guilty -- those things would not
trigger at all. And that's part of what we're
talking about.
The second part of the question is,
if you recall what I said earlier, you have
juries who are dealing with dueling
psychiatrists. And they're really torn. They
look at this defendant and they say, "Well,
obviously this person has some level of mental
illness, but yet in my heart of hearts I know
that when he stuck that knife into his victim
or pulled the trigger, he knew that he was
2683
going to kill him. But do we just say guilty
and forget about the fact that he's somewhat
mentally ill?" Or he is mentally ill, not
somewhat.
And so this provides that option of
their considering an alternative. Which, by
the way, as I said to Senator Paterson, may be
part of the very plea. It may be part of the
prosecution. The district attorney might opt
to proceed in this way from the very
beginning, to facilitate whatever he feels is
best within the framework of the given case.
So I don't know if I've answered
your question. But you don't stop at guilty
if you want to take all those other factors
into consideration.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
on the bill.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Yes,
sir.
SENATOR PATERSON: I certainly
understand what Senator Padavan is talking
about. There was a time in this country, as
2684
Senator Padavan described, around the time of
the Supreme Court case Jackson versus Indiana,
where we had people in this country who would
be found not guilty by reason of insanity,
known in New York as not responsible by means
of a mental disease or defect, who would be
converted to civil commitment, they would go
into institutions, they would slip through the
cracks, they would come right back out of the
institution and in many cases would go out and
commit other crimes.
Senator Padavan described one of
those cases. It was an awful case. It
happened on Thanksgiving Day of 1977, when a
police officer named Torsney killed a
7-year-old child named Randolph Evans. And at
that time, he in his defense pleaded not
guilty by reason of insanity -- and his
argument was that he was suffering from
psychomotor epileptic syndrome, which was a
diagnosis not accepted by the American
Psychiatric Association -- and was acquitted.
So I understand what Senator
Padavan is getting at. But what we're saying
is since we're not really addressing that
2685
issue in this legislation, we are now
addressing what Senator Padavan describes as
something that has to be decided upon at
trial.
Now, interestingly enough, when I
look at this bill and under the issue of
fiscal impacts it says "none," Senator Padavan
is describing what I think would be some
substantial psychiatric treatment that some of
these inmates would require. I don't see that
as something that has to be resolved at trial.
That would be something that perhaps we, as a
part of the Department of Correctional
Services and the Office of Mental Health, need
to get together and decide what we want to do
where there are clearly cases of inmates who
are suffering from significant psychiatric
illnesses. And in those cases I think there
might be monitoring of them and certainly some
of the conditions placed on the parole that
Senator Padavan is describing.
But just in the pure discharge of
criminal law, as it affects these particular
trials, I don't see the need for the
guilty-but-mentally-ill plea or finding that
2686
as a possible alternative, because in my
opinion it addresses issues more
administrative than actually legal. We know
that intent is the real aspect of culpability.
And when we review that further, we
recognize that Senator Padavan concedes that
these individuals are found to have intent, so
therefore they are culpable. Now, to what
degree their capacity was diminished by a
mental illness does not affect this trial
anymore because the trial is over, the person
is already found guilty.
We're saying that in terms of
treatment, we have that now. We have that
treatment in these facilities. Senator
Padavan is saying we don't have enough. I
agree with him. And that's an issue I think
that we can certainly address in our two
agencies that deal with these types of
problems.
I would not like for those
legitimate cases where defendants are found
not guilty by reason of mental disease or
defect, under 3.30.20 of our Criminal
Procedure Law, I would not like to have those
2687
cases that are legitimate impacted upon by
this third alternative that would make one
think that because a crime was definitely
committed, that the defendant is more
responsible because the defendant did actually
commit the act and was at the time mentally
ill, didn't understand the nature of the
charges.
In those situations, I think that
it would cause juries to probably vote for not
guilty but mentally ill, when actually, under
the current circumstances -- and there's only
1/10 of 1 percent of cases that come into
criminal court like this that are discharged
this way -- it would create a great deal of
confusion.
I don't think that the kind of "get
out of jail free" card which Senator Padavan
has described in the past is an issue that is
going to be resolved by passage of the
guilty-but-mentally-ill plea.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Padavan.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Mr. President,
taking what the Senator said as a question,
2688
first, this will not solve all the problems.
There will still be acquittals by reason of
insanity where prudent individuals would feel
that there was a miscarriage of justice. This
bill is not going to solve that in one fell
swoop.
But it will, in the case he talked
about and that I talked about, the young boy
being killed and the individual being released
six months later, having been cured -- it will
hopefully deal with that kind of situation.
And I believe it could well have had it been
law at that time. Can we say unequivocally?
And the answer is no. There's a good
possibility it could have been.
And I would suggest to Senator
Paterson and anyone else who's listening that
we have 19 states, including California,
Illinois, Pennsylvania -- a recent case in
Pennsylvania you may have read about, I think
it was last year, one of the members of the
DuPont family committing murder. The insanity
defense was presented in that state. It was a
major issue. It resolved itself; he was found
guilty but mentally ill. He's in a state
2689
prison in Pennsylvania receiving mental health
care. We ought to have that option.
Now, all of our prior Attorney
Generals -- the current one has not
communicated, so I won't speak for him. But
three Attorney Generals, two Democrats and one
Republican, strongly endorse this bill. The
Governor endorses this bill. The Deputy
Commissioner and Chief Counsel of the Office
of Mental Health of the State of New York
endorses this bill.
Now, you know, I have to suggest to
all of you that when every DA, through their
own association in this state, comes together
on an issue, we ought to consider the import
of that conclusion on their part. When one
district attorney after the other and when one
Attorney General after the other comes forward
and endorses this bill, I think we have to
consider that.
And while I respect fully the
points raised by Senator Paterson, I would
have to disagree with him that this can be
done on a civil-action basis. It can't be.
Not in every instance. Not in every instance.
2690
The person who cannibalized his
victim is going to be released from a
psychiatric center, apparently quite soon,
having been deemed cured, even though Attorney
General Spitzer is trying to stop it as we
speak. But he probably won't be successful.
And when an individual takes a walk
off the grounds of Creedmoor State Hospital,
in my district, having been placed there after
he killed his aunt -- and when I talked to the
chief psychiatrist there and said, "Why
weren't you guys watching him more carefully?"
they said, "Well, we were just about to
determine that he was cured, and so we were
giving him more latitude."
I suggest to you that those are
abuses that we have to address to the extent
that we can. And will we address all of them?
The answer is no. But I think we do owe to
the people of this state the opportunity to
have this option.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi.
SENATOR MARCHI: Yeah, I'm -- I
understand the problem that Senator Padavan is
2691
attempting to address, because we're not
apparently responsive to the issues that he
raised.
But there was one word that Senator
Paterson mentioned, culpability. You cannot
have guilt without being culpable, knowing the
nature and quality of your act if you take a
life, knowledgeably, and you know that you are
culpable. Culpable in the sense that you can
be punished because you had a criminal intent.
I find it difficult to see how
maybe this resolves a problem when he
mentioned California. I've been against the
death penalty all my life. And I know the
issue came up when the President of the United
States was Governor of Arkansas, the issue
arose about a person who was mentally ill and
was convicted. And the plea was made that he
was mentally ill at the time. I don't -
probably -- maybe the reason -- reasons that
the president had, because it didn't become a
major issue during the campaign, was that he
knew the nature and quality of his act. But
he refused to grant pardon under those
circumstances.
2692
But for a person to plead, if you
can answer that question or respond to it -
if the person knowingly, at the time he pulled
the trigger or plunged the knife or took the
life, knew the quality of his act and what he
was doing and that it was wrong, he was
culpable. Culpable meaning -- culpa is the
Latin, meaning fault. This is mea culpa, mea
culpa, my fault. Then there is guilt.
There is no guilt if I shoot you
and I -- I'm not guilty unless I know the
nature and quality -- I don't mean you,
Mr. President, of course. But if I shoot
someone and I don't know the nature and
quality of the act, am I guilty in any way?
I'm not guilty in any way. And that's the
problem.
On the other hand, Senator Paterson
is -- Senator Padavan is attempting to deal
with the question of what do you do with a
person -- and I'm not quite sure just what you
want to do with this person if they are
guilty. Because my sense of the word "guilt"
is culpability. Knowing the nature and
quality of the act, I take a life, I'm guilty.
2693
For which I don't believe he should be
executed, in my personal opinion. Life
imprisonment, but not executed.
But, I mean, do you understand the
problem I'm having? Maybe it's because, you
know, there are too many lawyers around here.
SENATOR PADAVAN: Well, Senator,
if that's a question, I do understand the
problem you're having. And it's not a unique
problem. It's a problem that legislators have
been wrestling with in this country for years.
As a matter of fact, going back as
far as 1981, the United States Attorney
General's Task Force on Violent Crime
recommended the establishment of a
guilty-but-mentally-ill provision. So this
has been not in only individual states but at
the federal level as well.
And as psychiatry has evolved -
remember, I said earlier the number of these
cases, while insignificant in terms of the
whole, have increased significantly by virtue
of their numbers, more than tripling every
five years. So we, I think, have found it
more and more necessary -- when I say "we" I
2694
mean the country as a whole -- more and more
necessary to protect the general public as
well as the individual by doing this sort of
thing. Which perhaps 30 years ago was not
necessary. But in more recent times, in the
last several decades, it's become so, because
of the increased use of the insanity defense.
And I talked earlier in my dialogue
with Senator Paterson about some high-profile
cases, a couple of which any prudent
individual could say was a gross miscarriage
of justice. I mean, for someone to shoot a
boy, a child, a young teenager, and then spend
seven months in a psychiatric hospital and
then be cured, like nothing happened, that had
to be a miscarriage of justice.
And we have to provide this option
for district attorneys to lead off with, for
judges to resolve cases with, for juries to
make determinations with.
And with all due respect to my
colleague right behind you, a trial attorney
with a great reputation, we -- and I'm not an
attorney at all, I'm just an engineer trying
to do something good. Trying to make a
2695
living. And I'm not doing a very good job at
that either.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR PADAVAN: So, Senator
Marchi, I do understand fully the conflict
that you feel. And this is a very complex
area.
But if you had sat with me for an
entire day on one occasion listening to
judges, former district attorneys and district
attorneys, and psychiatrists unveil their
trials and tribulations in this area and make
their recommendations, and read some of the
reports that have been rendered by various
individuals and organizations and listened to
the Attorney General and the district
attorneys and our mental health people and so
on, I think you could come to the conclusion
that while this is no panacea -- and very few
things that we do are -- this is a positive
move in the right direction.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Dollinger. No?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: No.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
2696
Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Time to read the
last section.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Amen.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect on the 90th day.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco, to explain his vote.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I vote no,
and I just wanted to explain the vote.
I understand the sincerity of
Senator Padavan, and the problem. It's a very
serious problem. But there has to be some
logic in the system. If an individual -- one
of the elements of the crime is that you have
the intent to do something wrong, and that's
an element of the crime.
And if the jury finds in that first
paragraph of the definition of guilty but
mentally ill that the person is guilty of that
crime, has the intent, then that person should
2697
be convicted. If not, that person is not
mentally culpable, the elements of the crime
have not been met. Therefore, it's not
guilty. You have to have mens rea, or you
have to have a mental intent as defined by the
statute.
So I'm voting no for that reason.
And there may be some other solution. But
there's got to be some logic behind the system
of mental culpability before you can have
someone found guilty of a crime.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Waldon -- I'm sorry. Senator DeFrancisco will
be recorded in the negative.
Senator Waldon, to explain his
vote.
SENATOR WALDON: Thank you very
much, Mr. President.
I want to echo Senator
DeFrancisco's statements, almost as if he was
reading what I had written down mentally.
The entire criminal intent,
historically, component of our law has been
that one has to understand the nature of what
he or she is doing at the moment that it's
2698
committed in order for it to become a crime.
So if this were to become a law in New York
State, in essence we are overturning our
entire structure in terms of what allowed us
to have a law and a criminal intent of mens
rea prior to this time.
And I just don't think that it
flies. I just -- I just don't think that we
should do that. So I'm going to agree with
Senator DeFrancisco and other learned
gentlemen and ladies in this chamber, and I
also vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Waldon will be recorded in the negative.
Senator Paterson, to explain his
vote.
SENATOR PATERSON: Mr. President,
I vote no. I basically echo the feelings that
Senator DeFrancisco and Senator Waldon
expressed.
I want to commend Senator Padavan,
who is an engineer who seems to read the law
much more carefully than those of us who
received some training, and is well
represented by counsel sitting next to him.
2699
But, Senator, I wanted to tell you
if you were looking for any other legal
advice, you might look behind you, to my
assistant, Jeanique Greene, who today was
accepted to Albany Law School.
And with that, I close and thank
all of you for coming here today.
(Laughter.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi -- I'm sorry, Senator Paterson will be
recorded in the negative.
Senator Marchi, to explain his
vote.
SENATOR MARCHI: Well, I have
just iteration of the reasons I assigned
before.
The assignment of guilt implies
that there is a criminal intent. You can't
establish -- I don't care how many states have
done it. California has had a death penalty
now since 1974 or '75, and I think they've had
two executions. That shows you how much -
and we passed a law, and there haven't been
any. And I hope there never will be.
But the question of establishment
2700
of guilt has to be tied very tightly to
culpability. A fault, meaning a criminal
intent. It's been iterated many times. I
just find it difficult.
But there is a problem that we're
not meeting, and I believe -- I certainly
don't want to discourage the effort, because I
think that we are not -- I think that we leave
some matters dangling, and Senator Padavan
properly attempts to address it.
I don't think that this legislation
at this point does, so I vote no.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marchi will be recorded in the negative.
Announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 736 are
Senators Connor, DeFrancisco, Dollinger,
Duane, Lachman, Marchi, Markowitz, Meier,
Mendez, Montgomery, Paterson, Sampson,
Schneiderman, Smith, Stavisky, and Waldon.
Also Senator Onorato.
Ayes, 41. Nays, 17.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
2701
Senator Skelos, that completes the
controversial calendar.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
would you please recognize Senator Hevesi.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you,
Mr. President.
I wish unanimous consent to be
recorded in the affirmative on Calendar 128.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Without
objection, Senator Hevesi will be recorded in
the affirmative on Calendar Number 128.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
there being no further business, I move we
adjourn until Wednesday, May 5th, at
11:00 a.m.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: On
motion, the Senate stands adjourned until
Wednesday, May 5th, at 11:00 a.m.
(Whereupon, at 5:18 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)