Regular Session - January 11, 2000
66
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
January 11, 2000
1:03 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
LT. GOVERNOR MARY O. DONOHUE, President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
67
P R O C E E D I N G S
THE PRESIDENT: The Senate will
come to order.
Would everyone present 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, could everyone please bow your heads
in a moment of silence.
(Whereupon, the assemblage
respected a moment of silence.)
THE PRESIDENT: Reading of the
Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Monday, January 10th, the Senate met pursuant
to adjournment. The Journal of Sunday,
January 9th, was read and approved. On
motion, Senate adjourned.
THE PRESIDENT: Without
objection, the Journal stands approved as
read.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Madam President,
I'd like to announce an immediate meeting of
68
the Labor Committee in Room 332.
THE PRESIDENT: There will be an
immediate meeting of the Labor Committee in
Room 332.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Volker,
from the Committee on Codes, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 103, by Senator
Volker, an act to amend the Penal Law;
538, by Senator DeFrancisco, an act
to amend the Penal Law;
539, by Senator DeFrancisco, an act
to amend the Criminal Procedure Law;
760, with amendments, by Senator
Johnson, an act to amend the Penal Law;
809, by Senator Volker, an act to
amend the Penal Law;
853A, by Senator Balboni, an act to
amend the Civil Rights Law;
1232A, by Senator Wright, an act to
69
amend the Penal Law;
1588, by Senator Johnson, an act to
amend the Criminal Procedure Law;
2005, by Senator Padavan, an act to
amend the Penal Law;
2320, by Senator Saland, an act to
amend the Criminal Procedure Law and the
Family Court Act;
3689, by Senator Rath, an act to
amend the Civil Practice Law and Rules and the
Executive Law;
3715A, by Senator Bonacic, an act
to amend the Penal Law;
4163, with amendments, by Senator
Johnson, an act to amend the Penal Law;
4259A, by Senator Hoffmann, an act
to amend the Penal Law and the Criminal
Procedure Law;
5706, by Senator Bonacic, an act to
amend the Penal Law;
5787, by Senator Rath, an act to
amend the Penal Law;
And 5831, by Senator Volker, an act
to amend the Criminal Procedure Law.
Senator McGee, from the Committee
70
on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, reports:
Senate Print 971, by Senator
Skelos, an act to amend the Vehicle and
Traffic Law;
1014, by Senator Skelos, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
4113A, by Senator McGee, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
4179, by Senator McGee, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
4952A, by Senator McGee, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law.
Senator Marcellino, from the
Committee on Environmental Conservation,
reports:
Senate Print 2543D, by Senator
Marcellino, an act to amend the Environmental
Conservation Law;
4810, by Senator Maltese, an act to
amend the Environmental Conservation Law;
5401, by Senator Marcellino, an act
to amend the Environmental Conservation Law;
And 5916A, by Senator Johnson, an
act to amend the Environmental Conservation
Law.
71
Senator Trunzo, from the Committee
on Transportation, reports:
Senate Print 860, by Senator
Balboni, an act to amend the Vehicle and
Traffic Law;
2765, by Senator Kuhl, an act to
amend the Highway Law;
2948, by Senator Rath, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
3665, by Senator Maziarz, an act to
amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law;
4408A, by Senator Trunzo, an act to
amend the Public Authorities Law;
And 5577, by Senator Trunzo, an act
to amend the Public Authorities Law.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
THE PRESIDENT: Without
objection, all bills reported direct to third
reading.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Meier.
72
SENATOR MEIER: Madam President,
I move that the following bill be discharged
from its committee and be recommitted with
instructions to strike the enacting clause:
Senate 5439.
THE PRESIDENT: So ordered.
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
I'd like to move, on behalf of
Senator Breslin, that the following bills be
discharged from their respective committees
and recommitted with instructions to strike
the enacting clause: Senate 2846 and Senate
2847.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: So ordered.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Madam President,
can we at this time adopt the Resolution
Calendar.
THE PRESIDENT: All in favor of
adopting the Resolution Calendar signify by
saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
73
THE PRESIDENT: Opposed, nay.
(No response.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Resolution
Calendar is adopted.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Madam President,
can we take up the noncontroversial calendar.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print 7, an act to
amend the State Finance Law, in relation to
changing the state fiscal year to May 1st
through April 30th.
SENATOR PATERSON: Lay it aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is laid
aside.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
6, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print 6,
concurrent resolution of the Senate and
Assembly proposing amendments to Article 7 of
the Constitution.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will call the roll on the resolution.
74
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Lay it aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The resolution is
laid aside.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno,
that completes the reading of the
noncontroversial calendar.
SENATOR BRUNO: Madam President,
can we at this time take up the controversial
calendar.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print 7, an act to
amend the State Finance Law, in relation to
changing the state fiscal year to May 1st
through April 30th.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Madam
President, might we have an explanation on
that bill?
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno, an
explanation has been requested.
SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you, Madam
75
President.
The bill before us relates to the
budget process here in this state, and it
recognizes that the people of this state are
tired of excuses for late budgets. Fifteen
years in a row we have had late budgets in
this state. The people of this state deserve
more.
So this legislation before us
starts the budget process in the middle of
November, dealing with the revenues and the
expenditures of major areas such as health
care, education. And it designates that the
Governor would submit his budget by, instead
of the end of January, January 15th. It
shortens the 30-day amendment period from 30
days to 15 days.
And it allows the deliberations to
go forward between the Assembly and the Senate
on what is available to budget. If we can't
come to an agreement by March 1st, then the
Comptroller would establish what is available
for us to budget.
Conference committees then would
meet after the separate houses pass their own
76
resolutions or their own separate budgets. We
would then go to conference committee the
middle of March, March 15th, and that process
would take place. If we come to an agreement,
we'll have a budget by April 1st, April 2nd.
If we don't come to an agreement -
and this is what is operative in this
legislation, is that by May 1st, if we can't
come to an agreement, the people of this state
would have a budget, and it would be last
year's budget that had been negotiated in
public, in an open forum, that would become
the budget for the people of the state until
we did something different.
It also includes, in this budget
reform package, establishing 5 percent of the
General Fund as a reserve to be responsible
and prudent, as a rainy day fund. And it also
establishes that as a result of the
conference-committee approach to the budget
that we have a three-year fiscal plan that
deals with the ramifications of what we
legislate and create as a budget for the
people of this state.
It's an excellent proposal. The
77
Assembly has a proposal, they have a task
force that is presently out, has been studying
the budget process for weeks. I talked to the
Speaker a short while ago, and he indicates
that they expect a report out in a week or
two. So we look forward to working with them
to implement a budget reform proposal
together.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you, Madam
President.
I'm going to vote for this. If
anyone hasn't noticed -- you got me. If
anyone hasn't noticed that the process is
broken, then they haven't been around for the
last 15 or 20 years. And we do have to take
steps to restore credibility.
When I saw the original proposal, I
thought, aha, I can think of a great
amendment, because what do you do in the
default process if you have a projected
deficit? I learned yesterday that I guess the
Comptroller had the same comment.
And to his credit, Senator Bruno
78
has added a provision for across-the-board
cuts, which was going to be my proposal.
Because I don't think in the default process
there should be any policy choices. The whole
point is you're not making a budget. You want
to make policy choices, you want to prefer one
thing, you want to set priorities, that's what
you do when you make a budget. If you don't
make a budget, you're stuck with the policy
choices that were made the last time out.
But we will be offering -- Senator
Dollinger will be offering an amendment, and
Senator Stachowski will -- and if he's not
here by then, I'll offer it -- to address a
couple of concerns.
One of which, I have to say, Madam
President, Senator Bruno's bill does something
that I think perhaps was unanticipated, the
way Majorities think around this Capitol. But
it perpetuates sort of a three-men-in-a-room
mentality. Because if we look at the current
revenue-forecasting process, all four leaders
and their staffs are involved in the current
process.
Under Senator Bruno's proposal,
79
only the two Majorities and their staffs would
participate in the financial information
review, in the avails meeting in December, and
in the consensus forecast. And I think that's
the wrong direction.
I mean -- and I can't speak for
Assemblyman Faso, but I suspect he has
learned, as I have, what it means to be in the
Minority, and that even though you participate
in these processes, you obviously don't call
the shots. But it is important. I think it's
important to the credibility of the process.
It's certainly important to the public
perception of the Legislature that all the
members of both houses have representation in
this process.
We have it now. We have it now in
the revenue-forecasting process. And this
bill would change that. This bill would not
allow participation by the Minority staffs and
the Minority Leaders.
So our amendment -- and I know
Senator Bruno is a fair man, so this may be
the first time an amendment is accepted in a
long while -- we would simply provide for the
80
participation of both Minorities' staffs in
the financial-information review in November,
in the December avails meeting, and in
preparing the consensus forecast.
So Senator -- I would yield to
Senator Dollinger -- well, oh, Senator
Stachowski is here. I would yield to Senator
Stachowski to present his amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Stachowski.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Madam
President, I believe I have an amendment at
the desk.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wish to
waive the reading, Senator, and explain it?
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: I'll waive
the reading. And a short explanation, please.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
SENATOR STACHOWSKI: Madam
President, my amendment merely, as Senator
Connor has mentioned, would ask that, as
currently is the practice, that the Minorities
in both houses would be part of the economic
forecast, and in this case also add the
Minorities to the economic report.
81
It's a practice that goes on
currently. I don't think that when the
Majority Leader drafted his bill he meant to
exclude the Minorities from the economic
forecast. I've got to believe it was an
oversight. And this amendment would take care
of that oversight and leave the
economic-forecast part of the budget process
as it currently is, with getting a diverse
view.
And of course, then again, the only
thing I can think of is maybe he took us out
because our forecast was the most accurate
just this past year. So that could be the
reason. I don't know.
But other than that, I just think
it was an oversight. And hopefully this
amendment will pass, and I urge its adoption.
THE PRESIDENT: On the amendment,
all those in favor signify by saying aye.
SENATOR CONNOR: Party vote in
the affirmative.
SENATOR BRUNO: Party vote in the
negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
82
will call the roll on a party vote.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 21. Nays,
33. Party vote.
THE PRESIDENT: The amendment is
defeated.
Senator Dollinger.
Senator Bruno first, excuse me.
SENATOR BRUNO: I would like to,
on that amendment, just explain, Madam
President, that some great thoughts and some
great ideas come forward in this chamber as we
deliberate. And as I listened, I had a great
idea, that the Minority be included in the
discussions when we get to the avail question.
And we're going to incorporate
that, and I'm going to ask the staff to put
together some kind of an amendment or some
legislation so that when this bill is amended
eventually, as it will be, that we incorporate
the thoughts that are representative in this
chamber.
Thank you, Madam President.
SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you.
(Applause.)
83
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
Is it possible after 40 years to
say we're on a roll?
(Laughter.)
SENATOR DOLLINGER: No, I didn't
think so.
Madam President, I also have an
amendment at the desk. I'd waive its reading
and ask that I be heard on the amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead,
Senator.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Madam
President, this bill that's about to roll off
the line here in the Senate is a good bill.
It has got lots of good things in it. I just
have a little suggestion via this amendment
that would put a final little bit of spit and
polish on this car before we roll it over to
the Assembly line. Which is I think what
happens, it goes from the Senate to the
Assembly line.
This is an amendment that will set
84
up a time frame under which we trigger the
creation of the joint conference committees.
Under this amendment, 21 days prior to the
start of each new fiscal year, the Senate and
the Assembly shall adopt budget resolutions
indicating the preference of each house as to
the next fiscal year's budget.
The adoption of these budget
resolutions become the triggering event that
calls for the convening of the joint
conference committee on the budget. It's
simply a technical amendment that says we
won't allow the failure of the houses to pass
budget resolutions to stall the deliberation
of the joint conference committee to get the
budget done on time.
Senator Bruno, I commend you, as I
have previously on this floor, for chartering
the whole concept of joint conference
committees. This is something we had never
done before. It was certainly not done under
your predecessor. It happened when you came,
it has continued to happen. In my judgment,
it ought to happen more frequently. But I'm
pleased that it does happen.
85
But I think the critical thing we
have to do is avoid the possibility of
stalemate, that both sides or one side would
simply say, "We're not satisfied," or "We
don't want to put forward our budget agenda,"
and therefore they don't pass the budget
resolution. And as a consequence, we end up
stalled in the creation of joint conference
committees because there is no budget
resolution from the Senate or no similar
budget resolution from the Assembly.
This bill would be self-policing.
Because I have no doubt that if we amended
this law and put in this provision, if for
some reason the Senate didn't pass their
budget on time, the Minority would be doing
what occasionally we do, raising perhaps a
suggestion that you weren't doing your
responsibilities on time.
Similarly, if the Assembly didn't
do it on time, I have no doubt that the
Minority there would provide a political check
to make sure that the budget process works.
But it won't work unless we put in
a trigger date that would require both houses
86
to pass their form of budget resolution 21
days prior to the start of the fiscal year and
give the joint conference committee plenty of
time to iron out those issues.
I think this bill is a good step.
This is the spit and polish that will make it
even more appealing to our colleagues in the
Assembly -- and, frankly, give us the ability
to drive the budget process better in the
future.
I move the amendment, Madam
President.
THE PRESIDENT: On the amendment,
all those in favor signify by saying aye.
SENATOR CONNOR: Party vote in
the affirmative.
SENATOR BRUNO: Party vote in the
negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will call the roll on a party vote.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 22. Nays,
34. Party vote.
THE PRESIDENT: The amendment is
defeated.
87
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 11. This
act shall take effect upon the effective date
of the amendments to the Constitution
contained in a concurrent resolution.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 56.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
6, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print 6,
concurrent resolution of the Senate and
Assembly proposing amendments to Article 7 of
the Constitution.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Can I ask for an
immediate meeting of the Children's and
Families Committee in Room 332.
THE PRESIDENT: There will be an
immediate meeting of the Children's and
Families Committee in Room 332.
Call the roll on the resolution.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Explanation,
88
please.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno, an
explanation has been requested by Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR BRUNO: Madam President,
this resolution is what establishes the budget
that would go into place on May 1st by
default. If the Legislature, through its
conference process, doesn't get together by
that date, then the people of this state would
have an automatic budget that would go into
place on May 1st.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President. Just a couple of questions,
if I could, through you, to the sponsor.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno, do
you yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Madam
President.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed,
Senator Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you,
Madam President.
89
Through you, was this
constitutional amendment submitted to the
Attorney General for his review and comment?
SENATOR BRUNO: I believe our
counsels -- who are extremely capable,
competent, qualified, as all of our counsels
have been through the ages -- have talked with
whomever they thought was appropriate to make
sure this met the constitutional test. I
don't know that they specifically got a
sign-off by the Attorney General.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Okay.
Through you, Madam President.
And, Senator Bruno, excuse me,
because I don't have the history in the house
that you do. But is it customary that we
would do an amendment to the Constitution, a
resolution amending the Constitution, without
some written approval from the Attorney
General?
SENATOR BRUNO: Senator, based on
your remarks and your question, we have just
had a sign-off by the Attorney General, who
says that this is the way to go.
Thank you, Senator.
90
(Laughter.)
SENATOR BRUNO: We aim to please,
Madam President. That happens to be a matter
of fact.
Does that answer your question?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: It does,
Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Dollinger, do you wish to be heard?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes, Madam
President.
I'll just make one very brief
comment on the bill. I made it in the Finance
Committee, I think, when we talked about this
bill. My concern about this bill is that
under it we are ceding an enormous power to
the Governor when we allow him to take the
default budget and alter the operation of law
of certain portions of the budget.
The way the amendment reads -- and
we talked about this, I believe, in the Rules
Committee or the Finance Committee when we
reviewed it -- is that this bill authorizes
the Governor to modify the operation of law in
order to meet the requirements of the default
91
budget, which he has complete prerogative
over.
I would just suggest that in a
house which prides itself on its prerogatives
and which prides itself on its coequal status
as one of the three legs of the stool that
makes this government work, I would suggest
that two of those legs are, if they pass this
resolution and this constitutional amendment,
are ceding an enormous power to the Executive,
and one that I daresay, when the Executive
begins to modify the default budget without
the approval of any member of either body,
when he unilaterally begins to repeal and to
modify state law without the power and
approval of this body, I would suggest that
that's a dangerous, dangerous way to go.
I think that we already have one of
the most powerful governors in the nation in
terms of his prerogatives of line-item vetoes
and other things. But we are giving him an
enormous power to unilaterally change laws
that are created only with the majority of
this house's concurrence. And I would suggest
that that's a very dangerous thing to do.
92
This bill has some very good things
in it, but I think that's far too much power
to cede any one person. I'll vote no.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: By way of
information, Madam President, the Governor
only has that prerogative if we are in a
deficit situation when that budget kicks in,
and only if the Legislature has failed to
negotiate and enact a budget on its own. So
that is a great compulsion for us to be
successful in our negotiations.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Madam President,
if Senator Bruno would yield to a question.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno, do
you yield for a question?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Madam
President.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead, Senator
Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you, Madam
President.
Is it true to say that under this
93
concurrent resolution, should this become part
of the Constitution, the Governor would have
no discretion in reducing -- in going to the
default budget in situations where it was
necessary to reduce the expenditures because
of a forecast? He would have no discretion,
it would just be an administrative thing to
across the board reduce it by a percentage to
account for the deficit?
SENATOR BRUNO: As you stated, it
would be so.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Paterson.
SENATOR PATERSON: Madam
President -
THE PRESIDENT: Is this on the
bill, Senator?
SENATOR PATERSON: On the bill.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
SENATOR PATERSON: We have a
quadrennial referendum on issues and
presumably policy when we hold elections in
this state. What I'm afraid of is that a
change in leadership around the state would
give an unfair advantage to those who are in
position to block a budget from passing,
94
thereby instituting this alternative
procedure, which then becomes a policy rather
than something that actually assists us.
Though the legislation may have
been intended as a stopgap maneuver to make
sure that our debt is paid on time, the
phrasing of "the failure of the Legislature to
pass the budget" connotes that there was
actually a human failure -- in other words,
that there was some kind of incompetence or
inability to actually put a budget together -
when actually what it is is a protracted
different in policy.
Now, I think that there are a
number of ways to speed up the budget process,
as I've said over and over, including making
everyone sit here until it passes, which would
be far preferable than putting into procedure
something that would actually fulfill the
policy needs of some and would actually hurt
what would be the ideological point of view of
others.
So I don't see any way that I can
vote for legislation such as this, because -
while it may disappoint some that I can't vote
95
for it -- the fact is that it creates a notion
that we are solving a problem that's being
caused by human failure rather than that it's
being caused by the inability of humans to
agree.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Madam President,
I -- while I'm not firmly opposed to a default
provision, the way this constitutional
amendment is written I find rather confusing,
because it allows the Governor to make the
determination for the fiscal year that monies
and receipts available are less than monies
and receipts available for the preceding year.
When I thought in the reform -- in
the reform legislation we just did, we threw
the revenue in the absence of an agreed-upon
consensus revenue forecast. Under Senator
Bruno's legislation, the Comptroller makes the
revenue forecast as a binding revenue
forecast.
And I would think that this
provision should say, instead of saying "on a
determination made by the Governor," it should
say "on a determination made by the
96
Comptroller that there's insufficient funds"
irreducibly.
Later the Governor is bound in
doing that? Okay, it's in there. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will call the roll.
Senator Schneiderman, excuse us.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President. If Senator Bruno would yield
for one final question.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator, do you
yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Madam
President.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead, Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you.
Am I correct in understanding that
if there is a surplus, that money would all go
into a reserve fund? The Governor would not
have the authority under this to raise
spending or have discretion to raise spending
in a default situation, but would have
authority, if there was a deficit, to cut
spending; is that correct?
97
SENATOR BRUNO: That is correct,
Senator.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: So in
essence, what we're enacting here is a one-way
ratchet towards smaller government which may
in fact be a political agenda; is that
correct?
SENATOR BRUNO: That is
incorrect, Senator.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Well, one
out of two isn't bad, I suppose.
On the bill, Madam President.
Thank you, Senator Bruno.
On the bill -
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead,
Senator. On the resolution?
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: On the
resolution, excuse me.
I do have the same concern about
ceding power to the Governor. We've had
governors who were not terribly -- of both
parties who were not terribly cooperative with
the Legislature and pursued other agendas.
I also do have a concern that this
98
is -- some people believe that it's been the
policy of some in government to create
structural deficits for strategic political
purposes and to make it impossible to advance
spending on issues that some of us believe are
very important, on programs that we believe
are very important for the long-term growth
and social health and stability of our nation.
And I am concerned that there is a
one-way-ratchet aspect of this.
I think we are wrestling around
with very difficult issues here. I'm going to
vote against the resolution. But again, I
have to acknowledge that this is the most
serious effort to address these problems that
we've seen in a long time, and I do have to
commend Senator Bruno and the Majority for
that.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Duane.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you very
much. Actually just on the bill, Madam
President.
It just -- it seems to me that
there should be some in-between, just sort of
a gentlepersons' agreement on the timing of
99
the bill and actually taking the drastic step
of changing the Constitution. There are many
things which we could do by statute and not go
to the lengths of changing the Constitution.
But really, this is just a matter of us doing
our jobs. And that's really what the issue is
here.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I'll yield to
Senator Connor, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Madam President,
this is sort of a work in process as I think
this out. But it just hit me -- and I know
it's difficult to come up with a default
budget, you know, that doesn't create
problems.
The obvious one is if one party to
the negotiations feels they made out
particularly well last year and this year is
going to be a tough year for whatever they
advocate, then stop the process and rest on
your laurels from the year before.
100
But I suppose what this really
says, if you think about it, is in 1994 George
Pataki -- had this been law when George Pataki
won an election -- he became governor in 1995.
He at least says that he then proposed a
budget that was radically different than in
the past. Certainly we had a long budget
battle then. There was clearly a change in
philosophy on the second floor. Yet the
Democrats controlled the Assembly and weren't
happy with the Governor's proposals. And
under this, they would have had to merely
stand pat and they get Mario Cuomo's last
budget? No?
And then when you go forward, as
you go forward, because none of those tax cuts
that we just heard the Governor go on and on
and on about -- what is it, six pages in the
back of the book? -- would have ever taken
effect. And by the way, I didn't agree
with -- I certainly opposed a lot of what
Governor Pataki proposed that year. Yet it
was the recognition that the public had
elected him Governor.
And I think when we try and tinker
101
with this, it's just not as easy as we think.
I think particularly in that case, where
there's a new Governor and/or a change -- I
know this hasn't happened in a while, Madam
President, but in the theoretical possibility
that there's a change in control, partisan
control of one of the houses of the
Legislature, it allows the other house, if
it's in other hands, to just -- or the
Governor, or whatever, any one of the three
players -- to just call a halt and get the
benefit of their political position of a year
before.
Democrats could have stopped Pataki
in his tracks in '95 and gotten the benefit of
the choices they got under Governor Cuomo as a
default budget. And if you look at that
year's cuts in Medicaid, in Medicaid cost
containment, the new tax cuts, that could have
all been thwarted had this been law.
So I commend the Majority for
bringing this out, but I think it requires
further thought. Because that really poses
not just how are we going to solve the budget
problems, that proposes serious governmental
102
philosophical problems. I daresay I don't
think the Majority in this house would have
been happy having the last Cuomo budget
perpetuated for another year. At least that's
not what they were saying in 1995.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Onorato.
SENATOR ONORATO: Madam
President, would Senator Bruno yield to a
question, please?
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno, do
you yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Madam
President.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead,
Senator.
SENATOR ONORATO: I'm a little
confused regarding what happens if both houses
agree to the budget and the Governor himself
rejects the resolved budget of both the
Assembly and the Senate and the Governor
rejects the budget in total. What happens
then?
SENATOR BRUNO: Then of course
our present prerogative is for us jointly to
override the Governor's veto. And then you
103
have a budget for the people of this state.
But if we fail to do that, then
this budget would go into effect on May 1st.
SENATOR ONORATO: Regardless of
the fact that both houses agreed to the
budget?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, because we
won't have a budget for the people of this
state that is the law on behalf of the people
of this state.
But we always have the prerogative
of overriding the Governor's vetoes if, as you
describe, we all had agreed on a budget.
SENATOR ONORATO: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Madam
President, just one final question to make
sure that I fully understand this. Through
you to the Majority Leader, if he would yield.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno, do
you yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Madam
President.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead, Senator
104
Dollinger.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Under this
proposal, if the default budget takes effect,
would the Legislature have the ability to cut
additional spending during the course of the
year?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Where is that
in the amendment?
SENATOR BRUNO: That's the
prerogative of the Legislature at any time
after a budget has been enacted in this state.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Would the
Legislature -- through you, Madam President,
if Senator Bruno would continue to yield.
Would the Legislature have the
prerogative of sending additional budget bills
to the Governor that increased spending beyond
the default budget?
SENATOR BRUNO: With the
Governor's consent, yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Correct.
Just so I make sure I understand
it, the default budget occurs and the Governor
has no role in that; his only job then becomes
105
as an administrator to balance off his
revenues and his expenses as he deems fit,
without legislative approval. And if there's
more money and then we still default, then the
extra money beyond last year's expenses go
into a fund to be used for some other day?
SENATOR BRUNO: That is correct.
That's exactly right. You have a great
understanding of this legislation.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Well, I'm
just trying to make sure I do.
But the Governor would have the
ability, if he vetoed both the budget bills,
and there were more -
THE PRESIDENT: Senator, are you
asking the Senator to continue to yield?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes, I am,
Madam President. Excuse me.
SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you, Madam
President.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: It's a work
in progress. A thought in progress, too.
SENATOR BRUNO: I thought he was
thinking out loud.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Bruno, do
106
you continue to yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, I do, Madam
President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Dollinger, do you have a question?
SENATOR DOLLINGER: I do, Madam
President, if Senator Bruno will continue to
yield.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: If the
Governor vetoes the budget and it has
additional spending in it, that money goes
into the fund and it would be up to the
Legislature, then, if the Legislature could
send him back additional budget bills, at the
end of the process to spend that additional
money?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes. Yes.
SENATOR DOLLINGER: Madam
President, I spoke earlier about the bill
because I thought it gave the Governor too
much power in the process of manipulating and
changing laws that this body enacted. He can
do it unilaterally in positions of deficit.
I think in the dynamics that we
107
just discussed, we're also giving the Governor
an enormous power to control us in a position
where we would have a surplus. We are
fundamentally altering, in my judgment, the
power of the Legislature by this amendment.
That may be the Majority's intent.
But in the years that I've been here, I've
never heard that before. This is a
revolutionary concession of power to the
Governor. I still think it's a bad idea.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will call the roll on the resolution.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Paterson,
do you wish to explain your vote?
SENATOR PATERSON: Madam
President, to explain my vote.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
SENATOR PATERSON: The
irresponsibility of this resolution, though it
may be intended to cure a problem, does not
err in its fiscal inaccuracy, but it is really
unfair to the voters of this state.
As I said before, every four years
we have a referendum on position and
108
presumably policy. Any kind of action that we
would take in this Legislature which in any
way would diminish what would be the will of
the voters -- and after that, Senator Connor
got up and gave a very good example of it, the
1994 elections -- would actually be a tool
that would establish permanent government
rather than continuing government. Which is
what I think we go to the polls every year to
aver, that we want our elected officials to
change with whatever would be the elements
that would supersede what happened the
previous year and to enact those changes into
firm policy.
This bill is a step in the opposite
direction. It actually would negate the
opportunity to use any kind of flexibility for
that purpose, based on a presumption that we
can't pass a budget on time -- for which there
are many alternatives, none of them that would
conflict with our electoral process.
I vote no, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Connor,
do you wish to be heard?
SENATOR CONNOR: I'd like to
109
explain my vote further and just point out
something I forgot to mention before.
As I read all this, if this all
became law and we went to a default budget,
legislators would never get paid. But nothing
in here obviates the law that says if we don't
adopt the budget -- it does?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will announce the results.
Senator Mendez.
SENATOR MENDEZ: Madam President,
to explain my vote.
I oftentimes think that perfection
occurs only in heaven. For 15 long years,
both houses, and the Executive branch as well,
have been juggling and screaming and cajoling,
and the end result has been a lengthy,
tortuous process that has not benefited the
residents of New York State.
I really -- I am not a lawyer. All
these lawyers here that are constitutional
lawyers, so God bless them. I suppose that
I'm a pragmatist, Madam President. But I
believe that this is a wonderful first step.
110
If something goes wrong with the same three
activities that this change has been offered
to all of us, we'll go back to the drawing
table and redress and -- and redress whatever
is wrong.
So I for one, Madam President, I
want to congratulate Senator Bruno. I am very
happy with this. Because hopefully it would
force all the 261 legislators, okay, to really
get down to business and get done with the
work that we're supposed to get done every
year.
Thank you, Madam President. I vote
yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: We just
heard some debate that gave many, many
potential defects in this bill. And they're
all obviously considerations that we have to
have. But none of them, and all of them
together, don't even amount to anything close
to the deficit that we've experienced over the
last 15 years in not being able to have a
budget on time.
111
This is an excellent bill which has
some teeth in it so something bad happens if
we don't do our job. Without that, we will
still go on for years to come without having
budgets on time.
Now, this bill is long overdue.
And what's beautiful about this bill, in my
judgment, is that it's a bipartisan bill. It
puts the Comptroller, who happens to be a
Democrat at the present time, in charge of how
much money we have to spend. This isn't a
bill concocted by Republicans to try to
maintain all control. And who knows, several
years down the road there may be different
people in different parties in different
positions.
The fact of the matter is that
there's ample opportunity for all parties to
be involved in this process. But there is
definitely, definitely a club hanging over all
of our heads if we don't do our job.
It's a great bill. And there's no
reason that both parties should not run to the
Assembly to try to get the leadership there to
put a similar bill in place so that we could
112
actually have a budget process that is not
dysfunctional.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator, you will
be so recorded as voting in the affirmative.
The Secretary will announce the
results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 6 are Senators
Connor, Dollinger, Duane, Hevesi, Onorato,
Paterson, Sampson, Santiago, Schneiderman,
Seabrook, Stachowski, Smith, and Senator
Stavisky.
Ayes, 44. Nays, 13.
THE PRESIDENT: The resolution is
adopted.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
if we could return to reports of standing
committees, I believe there's a report of the
Labor Committee at the desk. I ask that it be
read.
THE PRESIDENT: Reports of
standing committees.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Spano,
113
from the Committee on Labor, reports the
following bills:
Senate Print 830A, by Senator
Marcellino, an act to amend the Labor Law;
1143, by Senator Lack, an act to
amend the Labor Law;
1509, by Senator Stafford, an act
to amend the Labor Law;
2214, by Senator Farley, an act to
amend the Labor Law;
3704, by Senator Maltese, an act to
amend the Labor Law and the Penal Law;
3909, by Senator Spano, an act to
amend the Labor Law and the Civil Service Law;
4124A, by Senator Alesi, an act to
amend the Workers' Compensation Law;
And 4467A, by Senator Spano, an act
to amend the Labor Law.
Senator Alesi, from the Committee
on Commerce, Economic Development and Small
Business, reports:
Senate Print 550, by Senator
DeFrancisco, an act to amend the Economic
Development Law;
2063, by Senator LaValle, an act to
114
amend the Public Authorities Law;
3483, by Senator Alesi, an act to
amend the Economic Development Law and others;
3484, by Senator Alesi, an act to
amend the Economic Development Law;
3485, by Senator Alesi, an act to
amend the State Administrative Procedure Act;
3965, by Senator Alesi, an act to
amend the Economic Development Law;
4367, by Senator Alesi, an act to
amend the State Administrative Procedure Act;
4507, by Senator Alesi, an act to
amend the State Administrative Procedure Act;
And 4690, by Senator Alesi, an act
to amend the Executive Law.
All bills ordered direct to third
reading.
THE PRESIDENT: Without
objection, all bills ordered directed to third
reading.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
is there any other housekeeping at the desk?
THE PRESIDENT: No, there is not,
Senator Skelos. We are awaiting a report of
115
the Children and Families Committee.
SENATOR SKELOS: Yeah, there will
be one more committee report, and we'll stand
at ease pending the report of that committee.
THE PRESIDENT: The Senate stands
at ease.
(Whereupon, the Senate stood at
ease at 1:51 p.m.)
(Whereupon, the Senate reconvened
at 1:58 p.m.)
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President, I
believe there's another committee report to be
read at this time.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Reports of standing committees.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Saland,
from the Committee on Children and Families,
reports:
Senate Print 587B, by Senator
Skelos, an act to amend the Domestic Relations
Law and others;
1031C, by Senator Saland, an act to
amend the Education Law;
1531, by Senator Johnson, an act to
116
amend the Domestic Relations Law;
And 4887, by Senator Skelos, an act
to amend the Domestic Relations Law.
All bills ordered direct for third
reading.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Without objection, all bills will be
reported -
SENATOR SKELOS: I believe there
were some members of the Minority that were at
the committee meeting that wish to vote on the
prior bill.
Senator Markowitz.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Senator Markowitz.
SENATOR MARKOWITZ: Mr.
President, I request approval to be recorded
in the negative on Calendar 6, please.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Without objection, so recorded.
SENATOR MARKOWITZ: Thank you.
Thank you, Dean.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
117
Senator Oppenheimer.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: I wonder if
I could be recorded in the negative on
Resolution Number 6 today.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Senator Oppenheimer recorded in the negative,
without objection.
SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO:
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. President,
there being no further business, I move we
adjourn until Tuesday, January 18th, at
3:00 p.m., intervening days being legislative
days.
ACTING PRESIDENT NOZZOLIO: On
motion, the Senate stands adjourned until
Tuesday, January 18, at 3:00 p.m., intervening
days being legislative days.
(Whereupon, at 2:00 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)