Regular Session - January 10, 2000
34
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
January 10, 2000
3:03 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
LT. GOVERNOR MARY O. DONOHUE, President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
35
P R O C E E D I N G S
THE PRESIDENT: The Senate will
come to order.
I ask everyone present to please
rise and repeat with me the Pledge of
Allegiance.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
THE PRESIDENT: In the absence of
clergy, would we please bow our heads in a
minute of silence.
(Whereupon, the assemblage
respected a moment of silence.)
THE PRESIDENT: Reading of the
Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Sunday, January 9th, the Senate met pursuant
to adjournment. The Journal of Saturday,
January 8th, was read and approved. On
motion, Senate adjourned.
THE PRESIDENT: Without
objection, the Journal stands approved as
read.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
36
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: There will be an
immediate meeting of the Majority in the
Majority Conference Room.
THE PRESIDENT: There will be an
immediate meeting of the Majority in the
Majority Conference Room.
SENATOR SKELOS: Stand at ease.
THE PRESIDENT: The Senate stands
at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 3:05 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 3:39 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO: The
Senate will come to order.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
there will be an immediate meeting of the
37
Judiciary Committee in the Majority Conference
Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO: An
immediate meeting of the Senate Judiciary
Committee in Room 332.
SENATOR SKELOS: The Senate will
stand at ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO: The
Senate will stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 3:40 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 4:16 p.m.)
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
there will be an immediate meeting of the
Finance Committee in the Majority Conference
Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Immediate meeting of the Senate Finance
Committee in the Senate Majority Conference
Room.
SENATOR SKELOS: Stand at ease.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO: Also,
38
stand at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 4:17 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 4:25 p.m.)
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: The Senate will
come to order.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
if we could return to reports of standing
committees, I believe there's a report at the
desk by the Judiciary Committee and the
Finance Committee.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Lack,
from the Committee on Judiciary, reports the
following bill direct to third reading:
Senate Bill Number 6, by Senator
Bruno, concurrent resolution of the Senate and
Assembly proposing amendments to Article 7 of
the Constitution.
And Senator Stafford, from the
Committee on Finance, reports the following
39
bills:
Senate Print Number 7, by Senator
Bruno, an act to amend the State Finance Law;
762, by Senator Johnson, an act to
amend the State Finance Law;
1197, by Senator LaValle, an act to
amend the Executive Law;
1745, by Senator LaValle, an act to
amend Chapter 554 of the Laws of 1996;
And Senate Print 4433, by Senator
Fuschillo, an act to amend the State Finance
Law and the General Municipal Law.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
SENATOR SKELOS: Move to accept
the report.
THE PRESIDENT: Without
objection, the bills are ordered directly to
third reading.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Madam President,
I would hand up a privileged resolution, ask
that it be read, and move for its immediate
adoption.
THE PRESIDENT: Motions and
40
resolutions. The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator Bruno,
legislative resolution urging the Temporary
President of the Senate and the Speaker of the
Assembly to engage in discussions regarding
standards of conduct for all members and
employees of the Legislature with respect to
gifts from registered lobbyists and their
clients.
THE PRESIDENT: The motion is on
the resolution. All those in favor signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you, Madam
President. You're very fast and quick and
efficient up there, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course.
SENATOR BRUNO: By way of
explanation, we have adopted in the Senate a
ban on all gifts, all meals, voluntarily.
And I know that there are some that
feel that we should enter this into the formal
rules of the Senate. And we have been looking
at this for a couple of weeks. And we've had
41
some discussions with the counsel of the
Minority Leader. And we realize that it's
very, very difficult to put into language
wording that implements very specifically the
intent.
There is honor in this chamber, I
believe that. And I believe there is honor in
the other chamber.
The purpose of this resolution is
to really document our intent to put before
the Assembly as well as the Senate a rules
change that would become effective upon joint
adoption.
And if the Assembly joins with us,
as the Assembly joins with us in enforcement
in the Ethics Committee presently -- the
Senate, with its own rules with infractions,
would not normally go to the Ethics Committee.
So how do you enforce a ban that I know that
some of you have in mind that singles out the
Assembly? How do you enforce it? And if
there is no enforcement, well, then, we
already voluntarily have said we're going to
live by it. Then where are we? We are back
to politics.
42
And we feel that this issue is more
important than to just politicize it for
whatever purposes some people might have in
mind. We're very cognizant of the fact that
this is an election year, and we're also
cognizant of the fact that some of you are
very enthusiastic in trying to increase your
numbers. And I appreciate that, believe me.
And we'll do everything that we can to keep
you where you are, because you do such a good
job there. And that is the explanation.
Thank you, Senator Rath, for
appreciating the humor in that.
Lighten up. It's not that serious.
Okay? We can smile and we can laugh.
This is a serious subject before
us, and we want to deal with it in a serious
way. But we can also recognize that merits
and politics sometimes serve different
purposes.
We've got plenty of time for the
political season as we leave this session.
Right now we are doing the work of the people
on behalf of the entire constituency. We
believe that that constituency is well served
43
with a ban that we will continue to honor here
in the Senate, voluntarily. No one has to
force us. No one has to hold our feet to the
fire.
We passed a bill, we passed an
all-inclusive bill having to do with lobbying,
and the Assembly didn't pass it. And we
joined and signed in the bill that we did pass
because it was the only way we could extend
the Lobby Commission that the Governor signed.
So I like to deal in reality. And
we also understand in the political climate
that you deal politically. But I am
suggesting to you that we're here legislating.
We're dealing in reality. We're
not in the political end of the year. And I
would urge you to join with us in this
resolution so that we engage in serious
discussions with the Assembly and we are able
to jointly implement something that will be
very, very meaningful, enter it into the
rules, where we have enforcement.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: On the
resolution. All those in favor signify by
44
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
THE PRESIDENT: Opposed, nay.
(No response.)
THE PRESIDENT: The resolution is
adopted.
Senator Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Yes, Madam
President.
I call up my resolution amending
the Senate rules to which I gave notice last
week.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
Connor, Senate resolution amending the Senate
rules, in relation to ethical standards for
members, officers, and employees.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you, Madam
President.
Last week I stood on the floor and
I pointed out how credit is due to this side
of the aisle for a number of ideas that were
out there, like repeal of the gross receipts
45
tax and some of the other things the Governor
and the Majority were proposing.
And turnabout is fair play, so I
want to say this rule wasn't my idea, or the
provisions of this rule really wasn't my idea.
It was Senator Bruno's, who announced it in
December in the form of a bill. This rule
tracks really what was in his bill that this
house adopted.
And as I said at the time, once
this house adopted Senator Bruno's bill, it
was a collective statement by all of us -- and
we should all be proud of that -- that we
thought, given today where public perception
was and so on, that it was wrong for members
and staff of the Legislature, of this house,
the Senate, to continue to accept gifts of
meals and so forth from lobbyists.
Once we made that statement, then
of course it begged the question, if you think
it's wrong, don't do it.
Something doesn't have to be
illegal for you not to do it. If you think
it's wrong, you don't do it, whether it's
legal or illegal.
46
The language in this rule -- and
why a rule? Well -- and I applaud Senator
Bruno's efforts in the resolution he just
passed to engage the Speaker and the Assembly.
I know he tried to do that in December, and we
ended up with a bill that we had to pass about
lobbying that didn't deal with the gift ban at
all.
But I say, why wait? Why wait for
the Speaker? Regrettably, the Assembly, both
leaders over there, have been pretty
straightforward about saying they're not
interested in entertaining a gift ban.
And I accept that Senator Bruno has
announced on behalf of the Majority that the
Majority members were voluntarily observing
the provisions that will be embodied in this
rule. I might note that the Minority members
have individually, as well as collectively,
pledged to observe the ban. And I know
Senator Bruno almost invariably, when he
speaks for the Majority, speaks for each and
every member. But I speak for each and every
member on this, because I've got their names
on a piece of paper that says they agree to
47
it. I haven't seen that forthcoming anywhere
else.
What would this do? This wouldn't
do anything that Congress hasn't done, that
the U.S. Senate hasn't done. To much fanfare,
when the so-called Congressional revolution
of -- we don't mention Newt anymore, do we?
We just call it the revolution of 1994, 1995.
I know once it was Newt's revolution, but Newt
seems to have been nuked. But -- or nuked
himself, politically.
They did their great reforms by
rule. They govern themselves by rule. The
rules aren't the same in each house. They
stand or fall on what each house adopts.
And I think we ought to do a rule
because it will put in writing, in a formal
way -- and I don't mean this to become a
mechanism for harassing members, for attacking
members. Someone said to me, "Oh, well, what
if some cuckoo in your district writes a
letter to the Ethics Committee saying, you
know, 'I saw Marty Connor out to dinner with
so-and-so'?"
My view of that would be the Ethics
48
Committee ought to dismiss it. We're not
passing a rule saying you can't keep company.
We're passing a rule saying they can't pay for
it. And unless somebody could file the kind
of complaint that says, Here's my evidence
that the lobbyists paid for it, I don't think
members ought to be harassed and asked to
bring in credit card receipts, you know, on
every Monday morning for what they did the
week before.
I note the Lobbying Commission has
sent out an advisory to lobbyists asking them
to keep a record of each and every instance
where they provide a gift, even under $75.
While they don't have to disclose, on an
itemized basis, gifts unless they exceed $75,
the lobbyists are now being told by the
Lobbying Commission that they're to keep a
record of each and every instance, whether
it's $20 or $30.
And the lobbyists are also being
told, by the way, that no matter the amount of
the gift, they are to notify the member as to
what they received.
So, I mean, there will be
49
documentation to support our rule and that the
Ethics Committee could rely on in dismissing
frivolous complaints. Because I would say,
you know, if you don't have evidence that,
like, the lobbyist gave the member a notice
saying "I spent money on you," just the fact
that you were seen having a drink with someone
doesn't even rise to the level of an
investigation. You'd need something more
solid, certainly, to proceed.
The rule -- and I two or three
weeks ago noticed a rule, certain language.
Upon reflection, after hearing Senator Bruno
on the floor back in December, I revised the
whole rule, and it has all the exceptions that
Senator Bruno had in his law. I think it's a
good-faith effort to copy exactly what our
Majority Leader proposed and put it into rule
form and give the Ethics Committee the power
to adopt some guidelines to advise members.
I don't think any members in any
gray area ought to be criticized if the Senate
itself doesn't provide appropriate guidelines
to the member. Again, the committee can spell
out all those exceptions, when you can go to
50
meetings, receptions, and so on -- the kind of
things we all agree are not a gift, in fact,
but are part and parcel of our official
business as Senators.
Also a provision that the Ethics
Committee can give a written waiver upon
application, and an admonition that -- the
most important -- the most important sentence,
in my mind, in this rule is the one that says
"Members, officers, and employees shall adhere
to the spirit as well as the letter of this
rule and refrain from all attempts to
circumvent or otherwise evade the application
of the rule." And I didn't get that from
Senator Bruno's bill, but I lifted it from the
Congressional rule, to tell you the truth.
That was in Newt's rule.
So I think what we have before us
is a rule that will arm the Majority Leader in
his negotiations with the Assembly. Because
we have just all joined in passing a
resolution urging both the Majority Leader and
the Speaker to work together to come up with
something of application to both houses, and
that's fine.
51
But we don't have to wait for them,
and we don't have to judge the ethical
standards -- or set the ethical standards of
this house, of the Senate, based on waiting
for the Assembly to come along. I think if we
strike out with this kind of rule, the time
will not be too long in the future before the
Assembly has a similar rule. I think that's a
political reality.
And, my colleagues, this is not
about winning a seat or not winning a seat, or
politics. If there's any damage to be done in
the past perception, it's all been out there.
It's all been out there. Not for nothing that
some people called the lobbying law we passed
Sharon's Law. Whatever's out there is out
there. Whatever political hay is to be made
is going to be made or not made.
This is about how we're going to
conduct ourselves in the future. And I
daresay -- why a rule? Senator Bruno is
correct, this is an election year. There will
be new faces here. There will be two new
faces probably in a couple of months in this
chamber. And they didn't sign a pledge, and
52
they weren't part of Senator Bruno's
conference that took a voluntary pledge. But
I would expect them to adhere to the ethical
standards that we set for the entire body.
And people this year may retire, may lose
seats, who knows. Back here next January, a
new Legislature with some new faces not bound
by a voluntary rule announced by the Majority
Leader in 1999.
In fact, I harbor a little
secret -- a little secret hope that Senator
Bruno isn't the Majority Leader in 2001.
That's my job. He's probably my second or
third choice. Well, no, he's my -- whatever,
27th choice or something.
But so let's not delude ourselves
into saying a voluntary ban is enough, a
voluntary ban is enough. You might not be
here. Your successor may not adhere to it.
We may end up with two standards in
this house, those who were here in December in
1999 who took the pledge and those who walked
in thereafter who decide, no, they like the
Assembly rule better, they want to be wined
and dined. Hey, it's understandable that new
53
members would want to be wined and dined.
They've never had the experience that some of
the people who took the pledge in 1999 have
had.
Once you have two standards, once
you have two standards in the Senate, you have
no standard.
So, my colleagues, all politics
aside, I urge we adopt this rule. I don't
think the rule as a practical matter imposes
any more or less of a burden or a standard on
the members of this house than we all in this
room now -- than we all in this room now have
bound ourselves to. What it does do is it
binds our successors, it binds the people who
come in next year to these ethical standards,
whether we're here or not.
Oh, yes, if they want to ignore
them, then they'd have to stand up on this
floor and publicly repeal the rule. But to
leave it voluntary, they just merely have to
show up here next January, remain silent, and
let the good times roll.
Madam President, I urge we adopt
this rule.
54
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Madam President,
I just rise to really commend Senator Connor
in that he has now adopted the policies in the
party of Newt Gingrich. And I quickly remind
him, look what happened to Newt Gingrich.
(Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Duane, do
you wish to be heard at this time?
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Madam
President.
Oftentimes in this body we hear
members, and particularly on the other side,
claiming that votes on motions to discharge or
amendments to legislation are just procedural
and not really votes. But in fact, every vote
that we take here is a real vote with real
consequences, both good and bad.
I think that we need to take very
seriously our role as legislators, and I think
we really need to put our money and our rules
where our mouths are and to pass these rules
so that we make them part of this institution
for real.
Thank you, Madam President.
55
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
I rise in support of Senator
Connor's proposed rule, which I'm going to dub
the "Senate Public Credibility Act of 2000" -
our first action in the new millennium to do
the one thing that I think is most critically
important for this body, to preserve and
defend its credibility in the eyes of the
people.
What this rule does is it takes the
one power that we have exclusively in this
chamber, the one legislative power that we
hold that no one can take away from us. We
don't need the accord of our colleagues in the
Assembly, and we certainly don't need the
accord of the second floor. We can do this
one all by ourselves. The power rests right
here.
And I've watched this body in the
course of the last seven years use that power
with invincibility, wielding it as it deems
fit, spending billions of dollars, ruling
56
motions out of order, cutting off debate on
amendments. That power rests right here in
this chamber. It is omnipotent within the
context of this chamber. And in fact, it
exists to create the "Senate Public
Credibility Act."
I would suggest that what this bill
does is this gives us a standard that we can
all abide by, and it eliminates the public
perception that this body would be unduly
influenced by the extending of gratuities of
any sort to any one of its members.
I would strongly suggest what we
ought to do is adopt this amendment, set a
standard for ourselves just like we set
standards for everybody else in this state,
set a reasonable standard and agree to abide
by it. Let's vote for the "Senate Public
Credibility Act of 2000" now.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President.
I think that this is an extremely
important moment for this house, and I think
57
it's an important moment to follow up on
Senator Bruno's words, which are that we deal
in reality here.
The question is, are we going to
deal with reality? Because I was very -- you
know, admittedly, I'm not in the Majority, but
I was proud of the fact that our house took
the lead on the lobbying reform bill with the
law we passed in December. And I am saddened
by the fact that our colleagues in the
Assembly are not following suit.
But what we have now is an
opportunity to show the public -- that is
incredibly cynical about what's going on in
this building -- that we do deal in reality,
that we are not just about passing one-house
bills that cross each other in the night and
we can say, "Oh, I voted for it" and they say,
"We voted for it," and nothing happens and the
public gets more and more disaffected. We
have the opportunity now to do what both
houses of Congress have done. We can set the
rule.
And I will say that, you know,
frankly, the rule that Senator Connor has
58
proposed, I was among those who have advocated
for a stronger rule, for something that's a
broader ban. And Senator Connor said, "No,
we're going to do what's in Senator Bruno's
bill that we passed last month."
This is what we have already voted
on. It doesn't go any further, although it
could have. This is what our house has
already said we believe in.
Now the question is, do we really
believe in it or is it just more rhetoric? By
voting for this rule, we are sending a message
to the public that we deal in reality. We
have the power and we have, I believe, the
obligation to pass this to impose a gift ban
on ourselves. And I assure you that the
colleagues of mine in the Assembly who are
already twisting in the wind on this issue
will twist that much faster and harder if we
take this voluntary step. There's no question
in my mind that we should take Senator Bruno's
provisions and enact them as a rule today.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Lachman.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Yes. On the
rule, I strongly endorse my leader's
59
recommendation for this. And I want to bring
to everyone's attention that some time ago a
very well known chancellor -- and I don't mean
Rudy Crew or Howard Levy, but I mean Otto von
Bismarck -- once said that there are two
things one should never see being made,
sausages and laws. But the penalty we pay for
such squeamishness is bad food and bad
government.
On the federal level, we have the
Food and Drug Administration to protect us, as
well as rules and regulations of the United
States Congress. The State of California has
adopted similar laws and rules and
regulations.
We are the great state of New York.
We are the Empire State. Just last month we
witnessed a nonpartisan or bipartisan
coalition in this chamber coming together in
the first step to bring about change.
I predict whatever the vote is on
this amendment, it will eventually become a
reality. So let's make it a reality now,
today, rather than at the end of the session
or next year. Thank you.
60
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you, Madam
President.
Just briefly, I'm very confused
now. I really don't understand what's going
on here. You know, we voted last month on a
gift ban, I believe it was unanimous.
Everybody voted for it. But we all knew at
the time there's a chance the Assembly doesn't
pass it, it doesn't become a law. Okay?
That's number one.
Now we have a resolution today
saying that we should have discussions with
the Assembly Speaker to try and facilitate
enactment of something that would increase and
enhance the credibility here. That's all well
and good also, but there's a chance that that
might not happen.
Then we have a voluntary ban on
both sides of the aisle, which is all well and
good -- except for Senator Connor points out
that some of us may not be here and there may
be new members -- and we have an opportunity
here today to pass a Senate rule that would do
what we have all said we want to do.
61
And I have a sense that -- and I
don't know, maybe we're counting our chickens,
maybe this is going to pass here -- that it's
not going to pass and there are going to be
members who for some reason won't vote for it,
and I'm not sure of the rationale. I truly
don't understand. It was intimated that this
is political posturing on our part so that
some people may not vote the way they believe
and proved that they believe by voting for the
ban last month.
So if you believe it, vote for it.
I mean, everything we do here has some kind of
political context. But that kind of logic
just doesn't fly. It doesn't sit with me.
I'm voting for this rule. And I don't think
it will sit with the constituents of anybody
who votes no on this. I urge all of my
colleagues to adopt this rule.
THE PRESIDENT: On the
resolution, all those in favor signify by
saying aye.
SENATOR CONNOR: Party vote in
the affirmative.
SENATOR BRUNO: Party vote in the
62
negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 23. Nays,
36. Party vote.
THE PRESIDENT: The resolution is
defeated.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Is there any
housekeeping at the desk, Madam President?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, there is,
Senator.
SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you. Can
we take that up now?
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Madam President.
I move that the following bills be
discharged from their respective committees
and be recommitted with instructions to strike
the enacting clause:
Senate Number 820, Senate Number
5308D.
63
THE PRESIDENT: So ordered.
Senator Maltese.
SENATOR MALTESE: Madam
President, I move that the following bills be
discharged from their respective committees
and be recommitted with instructions to strike
the enacting clause:
Senate 2177, Senate 3701.
THE PRESIDENT: So ordered,
Senator.
Senator Hevesi.
SENATOR HEVESI: Thank you, Madam
President.
On behalf of Senator Breslin, I
move that the following bills be discharged
from their respective committees and be
recommitted with instructions to strike the
enacting clause:
Senate Print 2154, Senate Print
2366, and Senate Print 3871.
THE PRESIDENT: So ordered.
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
On behalf of Senator Connor, I move
64
that the following bill be discharged from its
respective committee and be recommitted with
instructions to strike the enacting clause:
Senate 6069.
THE PRESIDENT: So ordered.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
on behalf of Senator Bruno, I offer up the
following committee assignment changes and ask
that they be filed in the Journal.
And then also, in consultation with
the Minority Leader, on behalf of Senator
Bruno I hand up the following Minority
committee assignments and leadership changes
and ask that they be filed in the Journal.
THE PRESIDENT: Notices will be
filed in the Journal.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
there being no further business, I move we
adjourn until Tuesday, January 11th, at
1:00 p.m.
THE PRESIDENT: On motion, the
Senate stands adjourned until Tuesday,
January 11th, at 1:00 p.m.
65
(Whereupon, at 4:55 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)