Regular Session - January 14, 2003
64
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
January 14, 2003
12:35 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
SENATOR RAYMOND A. MEIER, Acting President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
65
P R O C E E D I N G S
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Senate will come to order.
May I ask everyone to please rise
and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance to the
Flag.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: In the
absence of clergy, may we bow our heads in a
moment of silence.
(Whereupon, the assemblage
respected a moment of silence.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Reading
of the Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Monday, January 13, the Senate met pursuant to
adjournment. The Journal of Saturday,
January 11, 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.
66
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
I'd like to hand up the following leadership
positions and ask that they be entered into
the Journal.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: They
will be entered in the Journal.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: And I would also
hand up the following Majority committee
assignments and ask that they be entered in
the Journal.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
committee assignments will be entered in the
Journal.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: And, Mr.
President, in consultation with Senator
Paterson, the Minority Leader, we hand up the
67
following Minority leadership positions and
ask that they be entered into the Journal.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: They
will be entered in the Journal.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, in
consultation with Senator Paterson, the
Minority Leader, we hand up the Minority
committee assignments and ask that they also
be entered into the Journal.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: They
will be entered in the Journal also.
SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we at this time adopt the Resolution
Calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All
those in favor of adopting the Resolution
Calendar signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Those
opposed, nay.
68
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Resolution Calendar is adopted.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we at this time take up the
noncontroversial reading of the calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the noncontroversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print Number 1,
Concurrent Resolution of the Senate and
Assembly, proposing amendments to Article 7 of
the --
SENATOR ADA SMITH: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay it
aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
2, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print Number 2, an
act to amend the State Finance Law --
SENATOR ADA SMITH: Lay it aside,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Lay the
69
bill aside.
Senator Bruno, that completes the
noncontroversial calendar.
Senator Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we at this time take up the controversial
reading of the calendar.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the controversial
calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print Number 1,
Concurrent Resolution of the Senate and
Assembly proposing amendments to --
SENATOR ADA SMITH: Explanation,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
what we have before us in Senate 1 is to
prioritize what we feel here in the Majority,
as we present Senate 1, which is a budget
reform package. It's the first of two bills.
The second bill will deal with the mechanics
of putting a budget in place if we fail to do
70
an on-time budget.
This is a priority here in this
house. It's a priority for the people of this
state. And what you will see in Senate 1 are
the constitutional requirements to change the
budget process here in this state.
And I would urge my colleagues to
participate and to vote in favor. Because
when we do Senate 1 and 2, we will be putting
in place a fail-safe system to get a budget in
place for the people of this state.
I don't have to tell you that we
have had a late budget 18 years in a row.
Eighteen years in a row the people of this
state have waited until early August, some
years, to have a budget. That is
unacceptable. We are looking at huge
deficits, ten to twelve billion dollars
combined, 2003 and 2004. And we as elected
officials have a responsibility to deal with
getting the budget in place.
We in the Senate have passed budget
reform before. You have joined -- both sides
of the aisle have joined in budget reform in
this house. We've sent the budget reform
71
packages to the Assembly. They have never
acted on a substantial budget reform package.
This is our number-one priority.
It's our number-two priority. There are a lot
of other issues that we have to deal with, but
this is number one, to start the process to
get an on-time budget in place and, if we can,
a budget.
The mechanics are these. The
budget starts -- the process starts October.
We ask that the state agencies, when they
submit budget requests to the Governor, they
also submit them to the Senate and to the
Assembly. That kick-starts the process a
couple of months early.
And the next thing that normally
happens, we have to deal with Medicaid and
what the Medicaid judgments are, the costs,
and school aid. Those are the two largest
parts of the budget. They comprise about
$45 billion worth of a $90 billion budget. So
we're asking in October that we get our arms
around, collectively, those substantial items.
We've got revenue that we start with, medical
expenses, and school aid.
72
And then we ask the Governor to
move his time frame from submitting a budget
February 1st to January 15th. And we ask the
Governor not to take a 30-day amendment period
but a 15-day amendment period so that by the
end of January the Legislature has the
Governor's budget, the committees start
meeting, we do all the public hearings,
everything that normally takes place.
And the next operative thing would
be -- and this is different -- by March 1st we
have trouble agreeing on revenues, the
Assembly, the Governor, and the Senate. In
this reform package, we will mandate that if
we can't agree by March 1st, we ask the
Comptroller of this state, who is elected by
the majority of the people in this state, to
mandate a revenue number. And that would
happen by March 5th.
We then take that number, meet in
conference committees -- which we've all
agreed, the Assembly and the Senate, to do --
you meet in public discussion on what is
available for us to budget, starting
March 15th. We publicly discuss, come to an
73
agreement on what's avail. Then those avails
get assigned to the various conference
committees that will meet in public and
discuss the respective issues -- the Assembly,
the Senate, with most of the members in the
Legislature participating in that process.
If we can't agree in that public
process -- this is different -- the fiscal
year would move to May 1st. If by May 1st we
can't come to an agreement between the two
houses, last year's budget becomes the
operative budget for the people of this state.
We have a budget; it will be last
year's budget. We negotiated last year's
budget between the two houses and the
Governor, so that would become the budget of
the people in this state until the Legislature
agrees on a budget. And that, when passed and
signed by the Governor, replaces the budget
that gets put in place automatically by this
reform package.
The other caveat would be that in a
year like this, we have an $89.6 billion
budget. The revenues aren't expected to be
there; we're going to be about $10 billion
74
short. This reform package takes that into
consideration, allows the Governor, through
his executive power, to make adjustments to
match the revenue with the expenditures,
through the state agencies and as he sees it
appropriately.
You all know that constitutionally
we have to have a balanced budget in this
state. That's how it gets balanced.
We also create a fiscal
stabilization reserve fund where 5 percent of
the revenues that flow, excluding bonding,
excluding federal money, will go into a
reserve for contingencies for emergencies. If
we had that in place now, we'd have about
$2.7 billion instead of about $700 million in
reserve.
This also puts into place a fiscal
responsibility program so that we project out
the ramifications of what we do for three
years.
So it's very comprehensive. It's
well-thought-out. It's thought out because we
first passed a package like this in '85, 1985.
Seventeen years ago, this chamber, with
75
bipartisan support, passed a budget reform
package.
So those are the highlights. There
may be differences of opinion on what, when,
how. We welcome those. This is a package
that's been put together. This would work. I
urge my colleagues here in this chamber to
support it.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Liz Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
If the sponsor would yield for a question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno, do you yield to a question?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Senator Bruno, Mr. President.
I certainly support budget reform.
I think that everyone in this Legislature
recognizes that what we have been doing and
where we have been going is not getting us
where we need to be. And I agree with Senator
76
Bruno that particularly in a year where we're
facing such an extreme fiscal crisis, the
importance of reevaluating how we have been
approaching our budget is time -- it is the
right time to be moving forward.
But I have some questions, so I
think it's more than one question, about this
specific proposal. One, I have a concern that
under this model the Legislature is in fact
simply taking itself out of the process and
giving the Governor almost exclusive authority
to move forward with an extender of the
previous year's budget.
Because rather than increasing the
incentive for us to get a budget done on time,
which I agree is critically important, we are
actually putting ourselves potentially in a
default position where, because we don't get
it done on time, we remove ourselves from the
process and it simply becomes the authority of
the Executive branch only to move forward with
the budget.
So I suppose my question is how do
we address the fact that we, yes, need to have
a balanced budget on time, but I don't think
77
that this house or our colleagues in the
Assembly want to remove ourselves from the
process, and I don't think that's a good model
for moving forward with budget reform.
SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you,
Senator. And thanks for your support for the
concept of budget reform and for your
recognition that it's timely and necessary.
Thank you.
We only take ourselves out of the
process legislatively if we fail to do a
budget by May 1st. And the incentive is there
for us to do a budget by May 1st for those
very reasons that you point out. You're
absolutely right. But if the Governor is
activated, we can, on May 3rd, on May 4th, on
May 5th -- any time -- collectively put our
acts together and send the Governor a budget.
There's no prohibition.
So, Senator Krueger, we don't take
ourselves out of the process, we simply create
a date certain that a budget will go in place
if we're able to agree by May 1st.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Mr.
President, if the sponsor would continue to
78
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Mr. President and Senator Bruno.
So I think we do agree we want to
move forward with a timely budget, an
equitable budget. And under your analysis, we
wouldn't be taking ourselves out of the
process because the pressure would be on us to
make sure that we stayed in the process.
You also tie in -- I know this is a
very complex bill, so I'll try to keep it
coherent. And you were very helpful in
explaining all the details. You propose that
the State Comptroller have an obligation by a
certain date to set revenues if we have not
done so. And certainly that has been part of
the delay process for us year in and year out,
what are the revenues that we have to work
with.
79
I'm curious: Instead of the idea
of the Comptroller signing off, or in
supplement to, would you imagine a model where
we use something such as the Congressional
Budget Office, or what's been proposed in the
Assembly bill, an independent budget office to
assist us in making sure that we have
nonpartisan, outside analysis of our revenue
situation, so that we in fact are in good
stead to move forward with the budget timely?
And would you imagine tying that into this
constitutional amendment?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, I can
imagine that. And that's as good a suggestion
as using the Comptroller.
Frankly, with the politics of the
state, we thought that the Comptroller, being
the Comptroller, elected by all the people
here in the state -- the other group that you
mention wouldn't be elected by the people of
this state, not a representative of the people
of this state. So we thought it would be more
operative to go with the Comptroller. But
that's as good a suggestion as any. And, you
know, that became part of.
80
It's more cumbersome, it's more
bureaucratic, it would be more expensive. As
my colleagues are pointing out, we already pay
the Comptroller. And, you know, he has all
the information before him that he would need.
And if he saw fit to reach out and consult
with experts such as you describe, he'd be
free to do that.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Mr.
President, if the sponsor would continue to
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
Senator Bruno, it sounds like we're
actually agreeing on many points here today,
including your last reference of the
importance of ensuring that the people of
New York, the people who elect us, have
participation in this process, have an
81
opportunity to find out what is going into the
budget proposal so that they have an
opportunity to address us, their elected
officials, to ensure that we are taking into
account the needs of our communities when
we're evaluating our budget.
And in that light, I was curious
why we don't include in budget reform, or the
proposal before us, the idea that we actually
have to provide specific details in a more
clarified way in the context of budget reform.
There's been much discussion in the
state of New York that budget reform should
include a more detailed line-by-line budget
analysis of expenditures and revenues in
advance that is made available to the public,
that gives the public the opportunity to feed
in their concerns, their analysis. And also
that we have formal budget conference
committees that actually, piece by piece, over
a reasonable period of time -- but certainly
more than the one day we traditionally have
given to the budget -- ensure that we have an
opportunity to discuss as a house, with our
colleagues in the Assembly, and with the
82
public the details of the budget.
So since we do seem to be in
agreement on so many things here today, I was
wondering whether I could also make the
recommendation that this kind of resolution
going forward, or technically a constitutional
amendment, would include obligations for
timelines for dual-house budget conferences,
bill by bill within the budget, with public
participation.
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes. And that's
an excellent suggestion. Some of what you are
suggesting I believe is incorporated. And the
other things she's talking about all make
sense.
The Governor details -- but you're
pointing out that it's late. We're talking
about moving that process into October, where
the agencies now send most of their
information to the budget office of the
Governor. We are saying in this reform
package that at the same time they send it to
him, they send it to the Senate and to the
Assembly. That then becomes public
information as to what the requests are. And
83
we also talk in this package about the revenue
as it's flowing in. That will all be public
information.
So I think we're pretty well saying
the same things. And you're talking about a
little more detail, and we're certainly open
to that.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Mr.
President, if the sponsor would continue to
yield.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno, do you yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Mr. President, Senator Bruno.
My, my, it's a new year for us
both. We're agreeing on so many things here
today. So I'll continue with an additional
suggestion for budget reform, particularly if
we're going down the road of amending our
constitution.
We take a great deal of money out
84
of our state budget, or off-budget each year,
and we put them into authorities. We put them
into the Empire State Development Corporation,
the Dormitory Authority, the New York State
Mortgage Agency, the Housing Finance Agency,
the Battery Park City Authority, the
Environmental Facilities Corporation, Long
Island Power Authority, Energy Research and
Development Authority. I'm sure there are
more, but I think you get the idea.
In your proposal you say that under
this analysis we will earlier in the year have
evaluations of where we project we're going in
expenditures. You talked about Medicare and
education and revenue projections. I have a
concern as a new legislator that each year in
the budget large sums of money get voted once
a year into these authorities and then we
never report back to the Legislature or the
people of New York how those monies were spent
or if those monies were spent.
And that in a world of shrinking
resources and not adequate resources,
Mr. President, to address all the needs of the
State of New York, that in the context of
85
budget reform we should also require that
there be annual reports of the dollars that
have gone into those authorities -- whether
they have been spent, how they've been spent,
or whether they should be reevaluated for the
continued use of those monies that were
allocated in previous years.
So I was wondering whether I could
also make that recommendation and see how you
felt about that idea in budget reform.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President, I
can't believe how agreeable we all are here.
Maybe we'd better quit while we're ahead.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR BRUNO: But all of the
things that you're talking about, Senator,
just make good sense, all of them.
And I share with you that many of
the authorities -- and there are billions of
dollars that flow through the authorities of
this state -- we hold accountable. The state
money that gets appropriated to authorities
goes through the legislative process to the
Governor as part of our budget, for the state
revenues.
86
Many of the authorities generate
their own funds -- through tolls, fines, you
name it. Grants. Most of those authorities,
by law, report now to the Legislature and to
the Governor.
But I think it's a good suggestion
that we review all of the authorities and, if
any of them don't report at least annually to
us, that we should incorporate that they do.
That's totally valid and appropriate.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Mr. President, if I could ask the
sponsor to yield to an additional question.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno, do you continue to yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President. I may run out of answers.
(Laughter.)
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: You're
answering very well, Senator Bruno. I don't
think you'll run out of answers.
Since we do seem to agree on so
many of the suggestions I'm making as to how
we should approach budget reform in the state
of New York, I'll go back to my earliest
87
concern that in fact in the absence of --
failing to take the other steps that I think I
am recommending today, and that I think others
here might agree on, that if we just go
forward with a default budget option for the
Governor without mandating into budget reform
specific requirements on ourselves for the
process, that we will find ourselves trapped
in a situation where we end up with default
budgets or, in the analysis you described, in
a bad fiscal year with default budgets with
across-the-board cuts.
And so I wonder whether in fact you
would consider, before moving forward down the
road in both houses, including specifically in
your legislation these other
recommendations -- and I have more, but I
won't spend all of our time on this today --
to reevaluate this proposal, which I
understand has been put out there for quite a
few years, I think you said starting in 1985.
That rather than simply going
forward with the same proposal, that we really
do take the opportunity of this year -- bad
fiscal situation, new session, new third term
88
of the Governor -- to do an across-the-board
look at how we could improve the budget
process, rather than moving forward with this
bill, which historically would end up being a
one-house bill.
And I would love to see us really
move forward with a complete reform of our
budget process, because I think the people of
New York want it from us and I think we can do
better and should do better. So I'm hoping
that you might consider reevaluating some of
the materials you have in your bill today.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
the bill that's before us now really pertains
to more the constitutional changes that are
required that we give first passage to.
And the questions that you're
asking don't really pertain to Senate 1.
They're more germane to Senate 2.
But I think, and in all fairness,
this bill, these bills are thick and wordy.
And there's no way that you could have gone
through all of the language in these bills
unless you were up, as I was, all night. I
know Senator Paterson was too, because we were
89
talking.
Was that last night, Dave, about
3:00 in the morning?
But, Senator, most of your
recommendations are incorporated in the
language -- most of them, not all of them. So
I would recommend that we move forward with
passage.
And you're right, presently it's a
one-house -- these are one-house bills. I'm
hopeful that the Assembly will see fit to join
us in whatever modifications they think are
warranted and valid, and then we'll either
conference or we'll accept. But we'll
certainly discuss.
And, Senator, you're absolutely
right in that this is not a partisan issue.
This is nonpolitical. All of the people of
this state deserve an on-time budget. We do
it collectively and together. And there's no
question the suggestions that you make could
make good bills better bills.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Senator. Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
90
Bonacic.
SENATOR BONACIC: Thank you, Mr.
President.
I'd like to thank our leader in
stepping up. The first message that we are
delivering, the Senate, in 2003 is budget
reform. And why is that the first message?
Because this is probably the worst budget
fiscal crisis we are facing in the last 40
years: Post-9/11, poor economy, Wall Street
performing lousy.
We are in a fiscal bind, and
there's no room for political shenanigans. We
talk of bipartisanship, we talk of unity, we
talk of facing stiff challenges and getting it
done. Okay?
Now, 18 years we have not had an
on-time budget. Why is that? We've had a
Democratic Governor, we've had a Democratic
Assembly, we've had a Republican Senate. Now
we have a Republican Governor, a Republican
Senate, and a Democratic Assembly. That axis
of three, of power, they use the budget as a
weapon of extortion.
What do I mean by that? If the
91
Assembly wants to raise taxes, if they want to
increase spending, do they want a budget come
April 1? No way. They don't care if we're
all stained. They don't care if the media
beats us up. And you know the media beats
each and every one up for not having a timely
budget.
There's no statutory mechanism to
make it work. There is none. And that
minority house power -- in this case, the
Democratic Assembly leadership -- they don't
want to give up their weapon. That's the
reason we can't get on-time budgets.
Accountability, public be damned,
we'll take the media hits. And when you ask
individual legislators, well, it requires an
April 1st budget, what do they say? It's
better to have a better budget than a late
budget. Remember? What does "better" mean?
Better means more spending, maybe more taxes
for their particular -- whether it's the
metropolitan area or what.
This has been going on now since
I've been here, for 13 years. And really,
when the people asked us to be their voice,
92
they asked us to run our fiscal affairs like
they do. When they have a household, come the
first of the month they got to pay the
mortgage. They got to pay their taxes when
they come due.
They say: Why can't you function
in government like we have to function our
household? Because we cannot get the other
house to pass legislation that would be a
statutory trigger in the event that we cannot
legislate and agree amongst ourselves.
So that's what our leader has done.
He has said we're beyond that now, we want to
be accountable.
And where is the good faith? We
have a Democratic Comptroller. We say let the
Democratic Comptroller determine revenue
forecasts. This is what the Senate Republican
leadership is saying. The people voted the
Comptroller, who deals with the numbers all
the time, deals with fiscal consultants, deals
with analysts and economists.
No, they don't want to give up the
weapon of extortion in passing a budget.
And the other problem where we're
93
dysfunctional, when things are slower in the
beginning of the year, we could be working on
legislation. But there's distrust, there's
distrust among the leadership. So all the
legislation backs up, and it's leveraged to
the budget. It's like a big dam.
So when this budget gets passed,
whether it's at the end of June, tied into
rent control, or we go into the summer months,
we'll stay here two weeks after the budget is
done and do 1500 bills and stay on this floor
10 to 15 hours and pass bills, of which many
of us are numb after a while.
That's the way this culture is that
I have seen for 13 years. And I can remember
being on the Assembly floor as a minority
member 27½ hours after the dam broke of the
budget tie-in -- and I say "dam," D-A-M.
That's how we work.
And what's going to change that?
Because it's a matter of respect and
compromise and trust with leaders. And I say
as long as we don't have that trust and we
don't have that respect, we are never going to
have legislation for an on-time budget.
94
And I will say in conclusion that
the Senate, in my humble opinion, can do
nothing, can do no more or take no stronger
action constitutionally to pass budget reform
legislation. And the Assembly can take no
weaker action constitutionally than to do
nothing, which they have done for ten years.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: For his
maiden speech, Senator Robach.
SENATOR ROBACH: Yes, Mr.
President, on this legislation.
I feel compelled, because of the
importance of this, to really say that it's
right for us to champion these efforts.
Coming from the other house, there's no
question that the ideas of open and timely
budget process is critically imperative to
everyone in New York State, whether you're
upstate or you're downstate. It is not only
good public policy, it is dramatically needed
and something we need to do.
And lastly, I say, one thing we all
have a commonality on, we like to view
ourselves as populists in being responsive to
95
our districts. This is something that people
everywhere in this state will applaud if we
can really make substantial changes.
There is no question we are in
challenging times. But from challenges come
opportunities. And this is the time that we
need to move forward not only with S1, but S2,
the ideas of joint conference committees. The
idea of using the Comptroller's revenue
estimate certainly cannot be pointed by anyone
as something politically partisan. It's just
good public policy. It's common sense.
And I don't have to tell everyone
in this chamber. You know it's coming. I
tried to champion this issue for ten years.
But now we have a group called New Yorkers for
an On-Time Budget. They're not just people in
upstate New York, they're in upstate, they're
in downstate, they're school districts,
they're school employees, they're
not-for-profit agencies, they're good
government groups that want us to act.
And I'll leave you with this. Not
only should we support this legislation all
across the board, but we should all work to
96
make sure that these measures get through the
entire Legislature. And it will be a
memorable day of a tough, challenging time
where something good was done. I encourage a
yes vote on not only S1 but S2.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hoffmann.
SENATOR HOFFMANN: Thank you, Mr.
President.
This is a very exciting day, and
it's exciting for several reasons. I think
probably one of the most personally satisfying
things that I can experience today is the fact
that we have a conciliatory tone and we have
true leadership coming from this chamber,
leadership not just for this chamber but
leadership for the entire state.
What better way for us to face the
fiscal challenge of 2003 than to begin by
cleaning up our own act. What better way than
by establishing for the Assembly a standard
that both houses of the Legislature should
follow.
And the unanimity with which we are
97
hearing debate on the other side of the aisle
is indeed heartening. This is another sign of
the new leadership of Senator Paterson. The
warm support coming from Senator Krueger is to
be noted.
This is a time for all members of
this chamber to use whatever power they have.
And indeed, our power is great and varied in
many ways. Not only are we elected to vote in
this chamber, we are elected to lead in our
own districts. And what better way for our
counterparts on the other side of the aisle to
lead in their own districts than by carrying
the message to their fellow members of the
Legislature who serve in the other house about
how important it is that we enact these budget
reforms today.
We have tried. Since 1985, under
Senator Bruno's leadership -- and I remember
well, Senator, when you introduced measures
like that, because I can remember the
conversations you and I had then across the
aisle, back when I was sitting I believe where
Senator Stavisky sits right now. I remember
breaking ranks on many, many occasions because
98
it was the right thing to do. I liked what I
heard, I knew what we needed a change, I
understood what my constituents wanted.
And now there is an opportunity for
people on both sides of the aisle in both
houses to say our constituents in this state
individually and collectively want meaningful
budget reform, and they want it now. We can't
afford to wait. This is a crisis of
confidence for New York State.
And lest any of us forget that, I
would be happy to pull out a few newspaper
clippings that show Standard & Poor's and
Moody's downgrading the bond ratings of this
state and listing as the reason for those
downgradings the lack of an on-time budget.
If we are going stimulate the
economy of this state, we must do it by
keeping the jobs that we have, by encouraging
people who are investing in New York State to
invest more. We must tell them that we
understand sound business practices; we must
demonstrate sound business practices
ourselves.
And to the school districts around
99
the state who have already begun their annual
trip into the Capitol, let us allow these
people to educate and not force them to become
professional lobbyists. I was embarrassed
yesterday to begin my legislative session with
my very first constituent meeting with several
superintendents. They've reorganized; they
have a little bit more structure. One of them
is now elected to a position that in effect
means he's the chief spokesperson for the pain
they all fear. And his job will bring him
here to the Capitol as often as necessary with
the latest updates on teachers they are forced
to lay off, classroom expansion that is
already put on hold, overcrowding that they
can't address.
If this is happening in upstate
New York, in Madison, Oneida, Onondaga, and
Cayuga County, surely it happens in New York
City too. And I would hope that the Speaker
realizes that we cannot be fair to these
school districts if they can't put their
budgets together because they don't know what
the state budget is.
Yes, rent control is important to
100
New York City. And I don't think anybody here
would be cavalier and say that we don't want
to address it. We will address it. We have
before. But this is not the time to raise
that.
There are issues that are important
to upstate New York, to an entire industry
that is often misunderstood and sometimes
maligned by the other house. But I won't
bring up an issue like the Dairy Compact and
expect action on it prior to passage of a
budget, because the budget is our first
priority and budget reform must happen now.
And I would ask the members of the
Fourth Estate, the esteemed members of the
press who work so hard to cover our activities
here, to please be fair and please convey
accurately and consistently the actions of
these two houses of the Legislature. Nobody
likes to see stereotypical tarring with the
same brush of any class of people, whether it
is by gender or by economics or by ethnic
background or racial background.
When someone says "all you people,"
we're all offended as Americans. That is
101
wrong. That's not the way we talk in an
intelligent, educated society. We treat
people with dignity, and we acknowledge their
differences.
Well, my friends, there is a
difference here between these two houses of
the Legislature. The Senate is prepared to do
a budget. We have attempted before, we have
tried to meet openly, we have invited the
other house to meet. And this year we are
passing as our first two pieces of legislation
budget reform.
Now it is up to the Assembly to do
the same. Let the people of this state
understand the distinction and apply the
pressure where it is most appropriate and
where it is most needed.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. President. I will be brief.
In the spirit of overwhelming
bipartisanship here, I want to address some of
the comments made by Senator Bonacic regarding
102
the fact that this bill will take a weapon
away from whichever of the leaders is the
outsider in terms of party, if you have a --
in this case we have a Republican Governor, a
Republican Senate, and a Democratic Assembly.
My concern is that this bill would
in fact give a massive weapon to the governor,
whatever party that governor belongs to,
taking power away from us as a Legislature and
transferring it to the governor. And I would
urge you, in the spirit of bipartisanship -- I
mean, maybe things will work out statewide in
four years, but maybe they won't and we'll
have a Democratic governor. This would be a
massive transfer of power.
It also -- and this is a very
critical point, and I think this can be
addressed, Senator Bruno, I would urge, in a
modification of this bill, if perhaps it
doesn't become law this year, for next year.
Something that is very, very
troubling about this is if we make a multiyear
commitment, as we did in the Education Law, to
prekindergarten programs, to expand them,
expand the funding over a multiyear period,
103
this bill would prevent programs from
receiving funding that we promised them in
another area of law, because it would lock us
in at the previous year's level.
So in my district we have
prekindergarten programs who we promised in
the Education Law would receive twice as much
money in Year Two as in Year One. This bill
would create chaos because they will act, as
they should, on our word in the Legislature
that we're going to expand the funding, and
this bill would eliminate our ability to do
that.
This is a flaw I believe that can
be corrected. I hope that in -- I just have
this feeling that maybe this won't become law
this year. And I would hope that perhaps in
next year's version we can address this.
And I do think it is good for us to
start the year with this critical issue, and
to try and move things along. We need the
Governor and the Assembly to participate. And
I think that it is not going to move forward
on the basis that we can't provide additional
funding which we've already promised. I would
104
urge that correction.
And I would also urge that we're
not going to make this process better by
strengthening the hand of the Governor at the
expense of the Legislature.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Larkin.
SENATOR LARKIN: Thank you very
much, Mr. President.
As I start my 25th year, I look
back to my first few years here -- in the
Assembly, in those days -- and we used to do
three budgets. We did the regular budget we
did, finished it in April. Before we went
home in June, we did a supplemental. And in
December we'd always come back and we'd always
blame the MTA.
And I remember Senator Bruno saying
back then to colleagues of mine in the
Assembly: Let's start blaming ourselves.
And we blamed the MTA, and in
December we'd come back and we did a deficit
budget. And that's the way it was until 1983,
when we said we'll only have one budget.
105
And that sounds excellent. But,
you know, we've been passing the word around
here about we ought to change this and we
ought to change that. You know what you're
really saying on this side of the aisle, in
the other house, is "We don't really want to
change."
I have members of the Assembly
Democrats from my district area who say a late
budget is better than an on-time budget.
Well, go tell somebody who's owed money that
you're not going to pay him because, you know,
it's not just good policy.
But, you know, here's two pieces of
paper. And I might suggest that those of you
who think this is a bad idea, you ought to go
and read them. There is Section 107 of the
Town Law, and it tells the contents of what a
preliminary budget is. Having been a town
supervisor, and elected in 1975, when the town
board did not adopt a budget.
And if you then look over at
Section 109 of the Town Law, it says that with
the exception of Westchester County, every
town -- there are 935 towns -- must have this
106
budget adopted by the 20th of November or it's
the final passage of the budget that was
preliminary.
Somebody will say: Well, what does
preliminary mean? There's the Comptroller's
rule of what a preliminary budget for a town
must include.
So we're going to tell 935 towns
that you must do this by November the 20th or
you will be satellited with the budget that
you prepared in compliance with the
comptroller. And you the supervisor gave it
to the town clerk and the town board reviewed
it in September, and in November you didn't
adopt it.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm telling
you, I experienced it. All the people in my
town were told we're getting a
28-cent-per-thousand tax. Great PR for
campaigning. But when the tax bills went out
in December, they were an 82-cents-a-thousand
increase, and the budget had not been adopted.
And I was satellited.
So if we can put this into Town Law
and say you must do it, 935 towns, then why
107
can't we at the state say, as Senator Bruno
clearly lined out for us, what we should and
shouldn't do?
Now, if you want to go back to some
of you who were here a few years ago, about
1998 or 1999, when we had a meeting in the Red
Room -- the Governor, Senator Bruno, a bunch
of my colleagues came here. The Speaker --
and it was in the paper, the Speaker was
invited, and the Comptroller invited, because
there were some ideas that we have enunciated
here already today. And they were both asked.
Here is an opportunity for you to
stand with us and say the bill that we
proposed you've looked at and here's what I
like and here's what I don't like. And here
we are five, six years later, and they still
don't like it, but they haven't submitted
anything.
Now, I don't know about you in
New York City, but I have 30 towns, and I go
to them and the first thing out of their
mouth: When are you going to get an on-time
budget? Two Chambers of Commerce this
morning: priorities, get an on-time budget.
108
We've forced the towns to do it,
we've forced the villages to do it, we've
forced the counties to do it, and we force our
school districts. Are we showing any
leadership when we start to say, well, if you
add a little sugar and maybe some berries and
then some cream and you stir it up, it will
smell better, it will taste better?
Ladies and gentlemen, unless you
want to do this and do it right, you're not
going to do anything. You're going to be here
for as long as you'll be here and you'll be
saying the same thing.
And you know what? And I'm not
trying to be smart. I served 23 years in the
Army with combat units. You know what it's
called? Lack of courage, lack of leadership.
We have the leadership here. We
have the will to do it. Will you be with the
people you were sent here to represent, or
will you take a stand of saying "I just don't
want to do it"?
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco.
109
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: The
Legislature makes laws. And all those laws
have to comply with the Constitution of the
State of New York. It seems to me if we have
the responsibility of making laws, we ought to
have the responsibility of following the laws
and doing what the laws say we're supposed to
do.
I'm sure every one of us, no matter
what political party we belong to, is totally
embarrassed by the process. It's embarrassing
to go home to the district and hear people
treat us as if we are not good, we'll put it
that way, people that can't do their job.
And every newspaper around the
state has editorialized one time or another
about the Legislature. We're all lumped up.
Everybody is bad because we can't do our job.
Now, what's really important here
is the Senate has a set of bills. They may
not be the greatest. Some Minority members
may have better ideas. The fact is, in good
faith, year after year after year, we go
through this. And there's always a criticism
of the bill.
110
Senator Schneiderman mentioned it
will give the Governor too much power. It
will only give the Governor too much power if
we don't pass the budget on time. If you
don't have a club over somebody's head in the
Legislature, there's no reason not to continue
on over and over with the same process.
So I have just a couple of
suggestions. If we don't want to go through
the embarrassment, if we don't want to go
through the inconvenience year after year of
not knowing when it's going to be over, then
we all have a responsibility to try to get it
done.
Last year Senator Bruno had the
open meetings, invited Mr. Silver, Speaker
Silver to come over, start the process. It
didn't work. All papers around the state
editorialized: Mr. Silver, come to the
meetings, let's start doing this process.
Well, all of us have a
responsibility, and that includes everyone
here, to go to the people that they feel
comfortable with, that this is the year, let's
get some realistic measure that we can both
111
agree on. We no longer want to be
embarrassed, we no longer want to be
inconvenienced over it year after year after
year. And that includes the media as well.
As Senator Hoffmann mentioned --
and I think it's a very, very important
point -- the first editorial in our papers in
Syracuse was the Legislature, the ineffective
Legislature. Well, if you're going to keep
painting everyone with that same brush, there
is no pressure whatsoever for the Assembly to
do anything. Because the average person
doesn't understand the workings of the
Legislature.
And it's incumbent, I think, on the
media to explain year after year that we've
presented these bills, no alternatives
presented in the Assembly, let alone
negotiations. And it's about time that we
made certain that there were alternatives and
so we could work out this problem once and for
all.
And it is incumbent on all of us to
play our part. And hopefully, hopefully this
year we'll take this issue seriously and be
112
respected for not only making the laws but
following the laws as well.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Thank you, Mr.
President. I'd like to speak to the bill.
I'm not going to lecture anyone in
this chamber. I think we all stand together
for reform. We all have some individual ideas
how that may come about. But I think what's
important to note is that in this chamber we
are allowed to address the issue. In this
chamber, both Majority and Minority are
allowed to speak on it and to vote on it.
And I don't know that this is the
final version we'll ever see. Last year we
passed a series of these bills, two of which I
sponsored but were not taken up in the
Assembly. It seems to me that we'll pass
these bills today and they will go to the
Assembly.
And I believe these bills really
say to the Assembly we're ready to do business
on budget reform, send us your proposals, let
us see what your ideas are. Maybe we can
113
conference. Maybe we can come to an
agreement. Maybe we can amend. Maybe we can
get reform. Maybe we can take everyone's
opinion into account.
So I'm speaking to the bill, not to
my colleagues in any sense of a lecture. I
urge everyone in this hall, in this chamber to
vote for this bill.
As to the gubernatorial powers that
we may be giving or some people feel that
we're giving to the Governor, let me remind
you, as Senator Larkin stated, I served at the
county level for many years. In a county --
in most counties, all counties in this state,
a budget is prepared, where there's an
executive, by his staff, and submitted to the
legislature. If the county legislature does
not act and vote on that budget by a certain
date, I think it's usually about December 6th
or thereabouts, then the original submission
of the executive becomes law.
I don't know of any case in the
State of New York where that really occurred.
I've seen legislatures work till 5 o'clock in
the morning -- and I was on one of those -- to
114
make the deadline, to come to accord, to make
an agreement. Not everyone was happy, not
everyone was angry, but we had done our job.
And I think the specter of giving
the control back to the Governor would incent
us to do what has to be done.
In those counties that don't have a
county executive, it's even more concerning
because it's put together by a budget officer
who's elected by no one. And if the
legislature can't adopt his budget by a
certain date, then the nonelected bureaucratic
budget is put into place. Not to be amended
later, but put in place.
So I'm delighted that we have these
bills. And I think the other message is
they're the first two items of business that
we're dealing with this year. And even in the
best of times, when we had all sorts of
money -- really there was never enough, but we
had a whole lot more than we have today. But
even in those years -- good years, lean
years -- the budget process always was broken
or derailed for other purposes.
Yes, it's important to do this,
115
especially this year because of what we face.
But I think it's important for every year from
here on out. So I'm delighted and proud that
my leader has put forth these two as our first
priority to tell the Assembly we mean to do
business.
Send us your thoughts, Mr. Speaker,
send us your thoughts so that we can review
those and perhaps before this session ends,
before we get to the budget process, we can
have some budget reform, meaningful budget
reform in place.
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I'll explain
my vote. I defer to explain my vote.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Thank
you, Senator Montgomery.
Senator Flanagan.
SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you, Mr.
President. I just want to make a couple of
brief comments.
After serving 16 years in the
Assembly, many people might suspect that the
116
greatest frustration you have is being in the
minority. In reality, the greatest
frustration that I experienced in being in the
Assembly was a lack of timeliness and a lack
of getting our work done in a timely fashion
and frankly serving the people's interests in
this state in a way that they should readily
expect and be accustomed to. But
unfortunately that's not the case.
And I would point out one very
stark and simple difference, but it's
profound, between the Senate and the Assembly.
It's not the legislation. The thing that I
noticed today is that the leader of the
Senate, Senator Bruno, actually engages in
debate. That's something you don't see in the
Assembly. The leader is here and can enter
into a colloquy with anyone in this house and
exchange ideas and have suggestions and
comments. And, frankly, I find that to be a
very welcome change.
And it also underscores the fact
that the Senate is actively doing business
already. I am very happy that this is the
number-one priority. I'm very happy that
117
budget reform is something that's being
discussed in a meaningful way.
And it also points out that if you
look over to the Assembly, that the committees
are not formed yet. I mean, I sat through
years of fiscal hearings as the ranking
Republican on the Ways and Means Committee,
and right now, while we all suspect and we all
probably assume that Chairman Farrell will be
the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee,
those assignments haven't been made. So they
can't engage in this type of debate at this
stage of the game, because they don't know
what their assignments are going to be.
And I can tell you that I was
largely responsible for offering our
suggestions and our comments for the Assembly
Republicans for the last number of years, and
offered suggestions on the floor -- in fact,
even offered bills on the floor which were
routinely voted down. And the most amazing
thing is, of course, not that they were voted
down but that there was never an alternative
offered.
There was never any reform
118
proposal, whether it was a constitutional
amendment or a statutory change or a call for
conference committees, there was never
anything offered by the Assembly Majority.
And they didn't even seem to be embarrassed or
shy about the fact that that wasn't taking
place.
And one thing that I think in
relation to the comments made about the power
of the Governor, there was also some
discussion and debate on a general level about
the power of the Comptroller. There were some
who were very concerned, saying that if the
Legislature didn't come up with a revenue
forecast, then all of a sudden the New York
State Comptroller would have unbridled power,
that the Comptroller would be the one to set
the actual revenue figures for the State of
New York.
Well, as Senator DeFrancisco said,
the Governor would have no power if we do our
job, and the Comptroller will have no power if
the Legislature acts in unison and in
cooperation and does its job.
I think this is a wonderful thing.
119
I would consider this to be a very productive
session if we were able to pass reform like
this. And I hope that we can pass our budget
on time. This is a great start.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we call the roll on this resolution. We
have two members, Senators Stavisky and Duane,
who have planes to catch.
You have a plane to catch, Senator
Oppenheimer?
All of us are anxious to get on our
way. But if you've got reasons for leaving,
you can vote now, including Senator
Oppenheimer, and then we'll return to the
discussion on this resolution.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: On the
resolution, the Secretary will call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All
right, the roll call is withdrawn then.
SENATOR BRUNO: Thank you, Mr.
120
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Thank
you, Senator Bruno.
Senator Diaz.
SENATOR DIAZ: Mr. President,
will the sponsor yield for a question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno, do you yield for a question from
Senator Diaz?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DIAZ: Thank you.
I am representing a very poor
neighborhood. And I see every year that there
are many groups in my community that receive
money from the state budget. When the state
budget doesn't come in time, there are
families that have to go through three and
four months without paying their bills,
without paying their rent, without having the
money to supply their needs.
Question. If we don't agree on a
budget and the Governor instituted to continue
121
with the old budget, would the families on the
programs in my community, would they continue
receiving the money without stopping?
SENATOR BRUNO: The answer, Mr.
President, is yes. Because those communities
that are receiving dollars are receiving them
from the authority of the budget that we've
all passed. So that would continue until a
new budget gets put in place. So yes.
SENATOR DIAZ: Mr. President,
would the sponsor yield for another question?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno, do you yield?
SENATOR BRUNO: Yes, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
sponsor yields.
SENATOR DIAZ: Senator
Schneiderman said that this is a dangerous
thing because if you promise something to a
community group for a kindergarten or
education, if the Governor established to
continue with the old budget, that those
groups will lose their money.
Would they lose their money, or
122
they would get the money when the budget is
approved?
SENATOR BRUNO: The Governor
could, in his prerogative, withhold funds.
But our experience has been that if it's of a
necessity with the people who are
disadvantaged, that those dollars usually are
prioritized in use of the flow. The only way
that that would change is if we then do a new
budget and the numbers are different.
So there's as much protection --
and that's really the intent, that the normal
flow take place for all of these agencies that
are out there -- for school districts, for
hospitals, for nursing homes -- uninterrupted.
SENATOR DIAZ: Thank you, Mr.
President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Mr. President.
First I'd like to thank the
Majority Leader for his leadership and for his
fortitude on this issue. This legislation has
been put forth for 17 out of past 18 years.
123
One could get a bit cynical, as we
heard from one of my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle, that we're putting this
forward just to get a little bit of press and
a little bit of publicity at the opening day.
I don't take it that way. I think
we have a priority here. And I think the most
important priority that this house has is to
fix, once and for all, a dysfunctional system,
a system that does not allow us to get an
on-time budget the way we are supposed to
according to the constitution.
Senator DeFrancisco was correct.
We write the laws, we ought to abide by the
laws. The law says we have to have an on-time
budget, we should have one. We need a system
of carrot and stick to get the system in.
This may not be the best proposal
in the world. However, it is the best one on
the table. And if the other house has a
better one, put it out there. For 17 out of
the past 18 years, there hasn't even been a
murmur from the other house. Nothing has come
forward. No alternative, no issues.
I noted that three Senators who
124
already voted voted no. Voted no on what?
They're not in favor of reforming a system
that doesn't work? They want to keep the
statute quo? I don't think so. I don't think
anybody seriously here does.
This system has to change. Senator
Bruno has put forth a challenge to the other
house. He's put forth a challenge to the
leadership of the other house: Come to the
table and talk. We're already there. We have
been there. We want to go there.
I want to address the Superfund. I
want to address comprehensive brownfields
legislation. I want to address the
Rockefeller Drug Laws and, yes, even rent
control and other issues of concern. And the
Dairy Compact. I want to address a whole host
of other issues. None of them can go forward
seriously until we have comprehensive budget
reform. Every one of these issues requires
money. You can't allocate that money unless
we have the process reformed.
I'm not worried about giving up
some power to the governor because, as was
said before, he only gets it if we don't
125
function. I'm not worried about giving up
power to the comptroller, whichever party the
comptroller is in. He's an elected
official -- or she, as the case may be. An
elected official. They'll exercise their
duty. And it only happens if we don't
function here.
And there is no excuse for not
functioning here. We have an obligation, as
my colleague Senator Flanagan said, an
obligation to our constituents to get the job
done. We're sent here to do a budget and
other meaningful legislation. Everything else
gets held up until we get this budget process
done. How can we go home when in a few
weeks -- or days, who knows -- we could have
troops at war in a foreign country. Men and
women serving this country could be fighting
and dying on foreign soil and we're arguing
over who is going to set a budget proposal.
There are, I would suggest to you,
ladies and gentlemen, much bigger issues on
the table of this nation and this state. And
our constituents have a right to expect that
we address the budget. That's the least we
126
can do. Our school districts need it, the
cities need it, the villages need it, the
rural areas need it, the suburbs need it,
everybody needs an on-time budget.
Senator Bruno has offered an
alternative. He's offered a process. I
should think we would all support the process,
get it on the table. If the other house has
an alternative, put it on the table. We can
meet in conference and for once and for all
address the system and get on with our
business in a timely way.
Ladies and gentlemen, I urge, I
urge that we support this legislation so that
this house and this Legislature can move
forward to do the people's business.
Thank you, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you,
Mr. President. I just want to speak briefly
on this legislation.
As I'm reading this, to some of my
colleagues who have talked about us needing to
have an earlier date, I just remember that the
127
Governor did give us a budget, I believe, one
year in December. And I don't think that we
had an earlier budget, despite the fact that
we received that budget early, because there
was not an agreement between the three people
who generally end up doing the budget.
So I'm not so sure that we are
addressing that. But nonetheless I certainly
agree with an attempt to try to address the
issue of an on-time budget.
I do, however -- I'm very concerned
and I do oppose a particular aspect of the
bill that I think is -- goes against what we
represent in our roles as elected officials.
And that is the establishment in the
constitution of this default budget process,
to me, goes in the opposite of what we say
that we want to do, in terms of opening up the
process, making sure that we as legislators
are a part of the budget discussions, a
meaningful -- play a meaningful role, and are
able in fact to represent fully the people
that we're elected to represent.
In the legislation I want to point
out to my colleagues -- I'm sure we've all
128
read as much as we could. But my
understanding based on this bill states
unequivocally that in the event that a default
budget becomes law, and in a fiscal year where
there are less monies and the Legislature does
not come to an agreement, the Governor
acquires certain specific powers.
One of those is to make any
transfer of any appropriation or portion
thereof for any object or purpose based on the
Governor's determination. The Governor may
reduce by a uniform percentage all
appropriations from the general fund except
those that are necessary for contractual
agreements.
And when Senator Diaz asks whether
or not his constituents are going to receive
monies in the budget, since there will be no
contractual agreements, nothing that we in the
Legislature would have voted to fund the year
prior would have to be -- would have to be
funded. Because unless there was a
contractual agreement, the Governor doesn't
have to do that.
The Governor may modify the
129
operation of any law governing the
apportionment and the allocation of
appropriations. So if we pass legislation
establishing a program, that Governor for that
year that we have not reached an agreement
does not have to honor the program or the
project and in fact can remove the funding for
it.
So it seems to me that we are
building into our constitution a right for the
Governor to override, to supersede what the
Legislature -- and indeed, in agreement with
the Governor, in a prior year -- can just
change.
The other point that I want to make
is that this proposal, by virtue of the fact
that we put in the constitution now a
four-to-one majority membership on the
conference committees, we on this side of the
aisle, for now, since we have -- we are in the
minority, and we get to put one in, that means
Senator Marcellino has more power, more
authority in relationship to the budget
process than I do, by four times at least,
just simply in representation on that
130
conference committee. Not to mention all of
the other built-in constitutional inequities
in our state already.
So I am obviously opposed to this
legislation. I think it makes no sense for us
to give up whatever small role that we play
already in the budget process. Because, in
fact, our job is the budget. This is what we
do, the budget. Everything else flows from
it.
So I am adamantly opposed to this
legislation. It builds in inequity. And
forever and ever we in the Legislature will be
subject to any Governor. And no matter what
party that Governor belongs to, I think that
is wrong. It is ridiculous for us to move out
as our first action to give up more of our
power.
So I'll be voting no on this
legislation.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Saland.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you, Mr.
President.
I listened carefully to much of the
131
debate, and I just felt compelled to rise,
particularly with regard to some of the
dialogue that has occurred with regard to our
abdicating our responsibilities and in effect
giving the Governor a blank check should we
have to resort to a default budget under this
constitutional resolution.
The bottom line is, is that if you
read the language on the third page of the
bill, it does not give the Governor unfettered
discretion, as would seem to be where Senator
Montgomery was pointing. In fact, that first
subparagraph A only refers to contractual
obligations and does not refer to merely
authorizing the Governor, as he or she may see
fit, to effectively undo what had been in a
prior year's budget.
And then as you read further among
those three subsections, what you see is that
there is an apportionment system that
basically says if you're going to reduce,
those reductions really have to be equal.
Those reductions can't be, in effect,
arbitrary and willy-nilly across the board.
This constitutional resolution is
132
not something easily arrived at. But in a
system which has failed 18 consecutive years,
one which is now faced with the most enormous
fiscal crisis, certainly if not within recent
memory, then within our history, there is
action that is required to be taken.
And as has been mentioned several
times by my colleagues, in effect what we are
saying is by first saying that the
Comptroller, in the event that we do not have
a budget consensus by the 1st of March, shall
become the final and sole arbiter of what
shall be those revenues, effectively becomes
the person who sets the table for us.
Why does he or she set that table?
Because we have failed. We have failed.
Failed, failed, failed. There is a law on the
books, as everyone in this chamber knows, and
it's the classic case of being the toothless
tiger. Nothing happens if the revenue
consensus isn't in line by March as is
required by law.
So this provides teeth. We don't
like teeth, we'd rather have the other system
that lets us go on indefinitely with no
133
responsibilities, lets us go on indefinitely
with no ramification? I would think not.
We've become the, in effect, determinants of
our own future by merely coming to agreement.
If we don't, a pox on our house and a pox on
their house. We blew it.
Then we come up with the May 1
date. Now, this will have given us more than
five months, if you want to go back into the
preceding year when the process starts. If by
the 1st of May people with a modicum of good
faith can't arrive at a budget agreement, then
we'll have to admit again we've failed. It's
nobody's fault but our own. We've become the
controllers of our own destiny.
And we do not abdicate our
responsibility in a carte blanche fashion, as
has been implied in several of the comments
that I've heard today. Yes, we do abdicate
some of our responsibility. Keep in mind that
preceding budget would have been one that we
would have actively participated in the
negotiating of.
And it becomes in effect a
fail-safe, no more than a fail-safe. And it
134
basically says the dysfunction will not be any
longer. The bottom line is if we can't do it
ourselves, we have to set up the guidelines
that's going to make it work. And this is a
very well constructed means by which to do it.
I too join with my colleagues in
complimenting Senator Bruno for once again
attempting to put this on the table. The fact
of the matter is that Senator Bruno has, since
the day he became the Majority Leader,
effectively made this a more efficient place.
He's tried to make this a place that operates
in a more effective fashion. This is another
manifestation of his desire to make this
government system work more effectively.
And the bottom line is really
simple. It leaves it up to us, and it's only
if we fail that any other players get
involved.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: On the
resolution, the Secretary will call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Nozzolio, to explain his vote.
SENATOR NOZZOLIO: Thank you, Mr.
135
President. I rise to explain my vote.
This is a tremendous legislative
measure. It's the most important that we will
enact this year. It provides certainty to all
who depend on the state budget. It provides
order. And it provides a way to end the
deadlock.
Mr. President, I speak not just to
my colleagues here, to my colleagues as
Senators, but also to my colleagues as
Assemblymen. Those Assemblymen who are --
have any seriousness about reforming this
budget process, they need to enact Senator
Bruno's legislation.
In the next few weeks we will be
meeting, particularly in the regions between
Syracuse and Rochester, with a number of
groups, a number of groups who are concerned
about the budget, who are dependent upon the
state budget. And we will hear their pleas to
have an on-time budget to provide the
certainty necessary so they can do their
budgetary process, so they can provide -- they
know it's going to be a tough year. They know
the budget will face challenges. We need to
136
at least provide them with certainty that they
will have the information they need on time.
We will hear at those meetings from
the Assembly particularly, how they believe
they want to reform the process. We will hear
back home how they will support reform of the
budget process. But what will happen is
they'll come back to Albany and turn their
backs on reform.
That's something that is a tragedy,
something that I believe Senator Bruno and all
of us in this chamber who support this
legislation want to stop. We're providing
that with this vote. And, Mr. President, I
ask permission to vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Nozzolio will be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Fuschillo, to explain his
vote.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: You know,
I've listened to this discussion. It's
certainly spirited and informing. And I keep
hearing about we're giving up power, we're
giving up authority.
And I think about Joe Bruno, one of
137
the most powerful political and governmental
leaders in the State of New York, not saying
to these chambers: "I'm not afraid to give up
any authority or power that I may have in this
Legislature. I'm frustrated." And I often
wonder what's in his mind to get to this point
to start off the year with this type of
reform. But if it takes this, then so be it.
But what is it going to take to
bring the other party to the table? Hopefully
this. Because this man isn't saying "I'm not
afraid to give up my authority. What I want
to do is allow us to do our job."
Well, let's do this for all the
right reasons. And let's not forget those who
fall through the cracks. And as somebody who
ran a nonprofit agency before he got elected
to the Senate, we had to stop taking in
clients who needed to be treated for alcohol
or substance abuse, we had to shut down the
child abuse center and work within our means
and go to the banks and start looking for
loans at great interest rates.
Let's do it for the school systems,
so they know how to budget for the upcoming
138
years and they don't have to cut back on
buying schoolbooks. Let's do it for the
people who will get affected the most.
You know, we blame everybody. And
we're doing it here. And I'm hearing the
arguments on both sides of the table. And the
Assembly will not come, because they say a
late budget is a good budget if we get all
that we agree.
Look what happened last year. We
got our Majority Leader and the conference
committees, the mother ship, going to an
auditorium in the LOB saying: Shelly, where
are you? Shelly, can you hear me? Shelly,
come down, do your job.
It's absurd, it's ridiculous that
it has to get to that point. Let's pass the
budget, as John DeFrancisco said, because we
have a law in the State of New York that says
you have to do it by April 1st. And then
nobody will get hurt by it.
I vote aye.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Fuschillo will be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Little, to explain her
139
vote.
SENATOR LITTLE: Thank you, Mr.
President.
This is the first vote that I will
take as a member of the New York State Senate.
And I believe that it's a very appropriate
first vote for me to take for the people that
sent me here.
Late budgets have a negative effect
throughout this state. They negatively affect
the over 100 towns and villages that I
represent, as all of you represent towns,
villages, and cities. They have a negative
effect on the 53 school districts that I
represent.
This is something that we tried to
do when I was a member of the Assembly for
seven years, to get a bill like this on the
floor, and we were never able to do so.
So it is with a great deal of
enthusiasm that I vote in the affirmative on
an aggressive way of attacking one of New York
State's major problems, the late budget.
Thank you.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
140
Little will be recorded in the affirmative.
Senator Montgomery, you will be
recognized in order.
Senator Lachman, to explain his
vote.
SENATOR LACHMAN: Yes, thank you,
Mr. President. I've been recorded no on S1.
I will be recorded yes on S2. They're two
different bills.
First I'd like to commend the
Majority Leader for bringing this bill back
from last year. It is a one-house bill and
last year I thought was a first step towards a
more comprehensive budget reform bill.
Everyone in this chamber, everyone
in this chamber believes in an on-time budget.
Everyone in this chamber believes in
meaningful budget reform, whether we're
Democrats or Republicans or upstaters and
downstaters. That is not the question. The
question is how do we best achieve that
objective, and what is in the bill.
Now, last year's bill was a first
step. And I thought that when this bill came
before this chamber, even without the approval
141
of the other chamber, you'd have a second step
and a third step in terms of improvement.
Now, I would suggest that we have a
bill similar to this, but that it should not
only be a compromise involving the minor
issues but really major issues. I believe in
an independent budget office. I don't believe
in a congressional budget office where
legislators participate.
I've never served in the City
Council, but at least their independent budget
office is independent of the mayor, is
independent of the comptroller, and
independent of the City Council members.
That, to me, means total independence from the
political process in the budgetary process.
I also strongly believe, strongly
believe in a totally transparent budget where
we know exactly where everything is and where
everything goes, and that this transparent
budget should also include discretionary items
where we don't know what is happening with
them or an evaluation of them.
So if we're producing a bill that
is supposed to be comprehensive, and all of us
142
want it to be comprehensive and all of us want
it to be on time, let's take that second step
which we have not taken. I vote no on S1.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Lachman will be recorded in the negative.
Senator Liz Krueger, to explain her
vote.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Mr. President.
As I debated before, I think I
highlighted that there were many things in
this bill that I thought made sense. And I
certainly understand and hear the frustration
of so many of my colleagues on both sides of
the aisle, about years and years -- 23 years,
more than 23 years -- of Assembly experience
and frustration as well as Senate frustration
with the fact that we don't get our budgets
done on time.
And there is no doubt that our
failure to do so causes harm and pain
throughout the State of New York at the very
local levels of our towns and communities.
But I also would argue -- and my
reason for voting no today is this -- we can
143
do better, and we need to. This is the year
to move forward with budget reform. But it's
not just a question of do we get a budget done
on time, it's a question of do we have a
better budget process and come out with better
budgets. And I think that the proposal before
us today, S1, only starts to move us down part
of the road.
And I heard a great deal of
frustration that the Assembly has failed to do
this and the Assembly has failed to do that.
I don't represent the Assembly; I represent my
community here in the Senate. And I would
argue that this house can do better.
And perhaps one of the reasons that
we have not been able to sit down with our
colleagues in the Assembly to move this
forward year after year is because we need to
come up with a model that is better than S1
and is more inclusive.
I share the concerns of my
colleagues that we shouldn't fall into a
default budget scenario where we do lose the
power of the Legislature to speak for our
communities in the context of the budget.
144
I do argue that while I am pleased
to see the Comptroller playing an important
role, and I think that would go a long way to
addressing revenue issues, that we still have
obligations in the context of the budget to
ensure that that budget is itemized and
detailed and that that information is provided
to the public in such a timely way that we can
have public discussion and debate.
That we need to, if we're going to
expose ourselves to changing the Constitution
of the State of New York to change our budget
process, that we need to ensure that we have
real budget conferences mandated in the
context of that, so that we are in some way
forced to do our job rather than finding
ourselves in the position of failing to pass a
budget on time or moving to I believe the
mistake of default budgets and the power of
the Governor.
We need to ensure that not only are
our budgets timely, but that we don't fall
into continuing extender bills and in fact --
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Krueger, speaking --
145
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: -- the
proposal -- thank you -- for the default
timeliness --
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: -- of
timely, the chair notes that the rules provide
for two minutes.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: -- the
default --
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Could I
ask you -- and you've exceeded that.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
I'm sorry I couldn't continue on.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Could I
ask you to announce your vote.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: My vote was
no, Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Thank
you. Senator Liz Krueger will be recorded in
the negative.
Senator Hassell-Thompson, to
explain her vote.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Thank
you, Mr. President.
The only comment that I want to
make as I vote no on this resolution is that
146
there seems to be this assumption, because we
argue and debate the fine points of the bill,
that we are not in favor here on the
Democratic side for a timely budget.
There is no one who has more
programmatic concerns for the people in my
district than I. Even -- even to my new
Senator, who believes he has the poorest
district, I have the highest statistics,
negative statistics in the numbers of programs
for people where HIV and AIDS, the numbers of
young, teenage pregnant women. I can go the
gamut and tell you the numbers of the programs
that are going to be dependent upon this
budget.
But even having said that, and
certainly one who has attempted to articulate
in this chamber the concerns that I have for
the people that I represent, a timely budget
is critical, for all the reasons that we've
stated. But please do not believe because we
argue for a better process in this budget that
we are not as concerned as you that the budget
be on time.
I want a budget that's fair. I
147
want a budget that's much more equitable. I
do not believe that the bill in front of us
offers us that opportunity. And so therefore,
Mr. President, I will be voting no.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Hassell-Thompson will be recorded in the
negative.
Senator Montgomery, to explain her
vote.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, Mr.
President. I would just -- this budget
proposal that Senator Bruno has made for us
seems to have a tablespoon full of sugar,
which I accept happily, but it also has a
cupful of poison.
And I want to point out that in
Senator Bruno's own memo which explains his
bill, it says that the Governor would be
allowed to modify the operation of laws that
drive increased spending for a new fiscal year
in order to reduce spending to the prior
year's level.
So essentially the Governor has the
authority that we now write into the
constitution, based on this proposal, to take
148
money from this year's budget to fill gaps in
last year's budget.
In his memo it also says the
Governor would be allowed to transfer unneeded
appropriation authority to meet contractual
obligations for which appropriation authority
is insufficient. So the Governor can transfer
money from one place to another based on his
determination -- or perhaps someday her
determination -- as to where it is most
needed.
Finally, in Senator Bruno's memo,
it says the Governor would be allowed to
uniformly reduce all appropriations not
necessary to meet contractual obligations or
statutory requirements.
The Governor we have given an
entirely new set of powers and authority based
on a whole new budget process, which we call,
in this legislation, the default budget. I
think that this is unconscionable for us to be
allowing ourselves to discuss the possibility
of giving up our authority to participate
meaningfully in the budget process, and I'm
voting no.
149
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Montgomery will be recorded in the negative.
The Secretary will announce the
results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 1 are Senators
Andrews, Breslin, Brown, Dilán, Duane,
González, Hassell-Thompson, L. Krueger,
Lachman, Montgomery, Onorato, Oppenheimer,
Parker, Paterson, Sabini, Schneiderman,
A. Smith, M. Smith, Stachowski, and Stavisky.
Ayes, 41. Nays, 20.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
resolution is adopted.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
2, by Senator Bruno, Senate Print Number 2, an
act to amend the State Finance Law, in
relation to changing the state fiscal year to
May 1st through April 30th.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Read the
last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 11. This
act shall take effect upon the effective date
150
of the amendments.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Call the
roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 61.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Bruno, that concludes the
controversial calendar.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
can we return to motions and resolutions. I
believe that there is a privileged resolution
at the desk. I would ask that the title be
read and move for its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Motion
and resolutions.
The Secretary will read the title
of the privileged resolution.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator Bruno,
Senate Resolution Number 65, amending
Section 1 of Rule VII of the Senate Rules, in
relation to the composition of standing
committees.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the resolution. All those in
151
favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Those
opposed, nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
resolution is adopted.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Bruno.
SENATOR BRUNO: Can we ask for an
immediate meeting of the Rules Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER:
Immediate meeting of the Rules Committee in
the Majority Conference Room.
SENATOR BRUNO: Mr. President,
while the Rules Committee is meeting, I
believe there is a privileged resolution at
the desk by Senator DeFrancisco. I would ask
that it be read in its entirety and move for
its immediate adoption.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read the privileged resolution.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
152
DeFrancisco, Legislative Resolution Number 50,
congratulating the Onondaga Central High
School "Tigers" Football Team and Coach Bill
Spicer upon the occasion of capturing the
Class C Championship.
"WHEREAS, It is the sense of this
Legislative Body to commend and pay tribute to
those who, by achieving outstanding success in
athletic competition, have inspired others and
brought pride to their community; and
"WHEREAS, It is acknowledged that
excellence and success in competitive sports
can be achieved only through hard work and the
demand of rigorous practice, teamwork and team
spirit, fostered by dedicated coaching; and
"WHEREAS, It is further
acknowledged that athletic competition
enhances the ethical and physical development
of the young people of this State, preparing
them for the future by instilling in them the
value of integrity, encouraging a standard of
healthy living, imparting a desire for
success, and developing a sense of
sportsmanship; and
"WHEREAS, Through its exceptional
153
teamwork and talents, Onondaga Central's
football team, known as the 'Tigers,' located
in Nedrow, New York, won the State Class C
title on November 29, 2002, at the Carrier
Dome in Syracuse, New York; and
"WHEREAS, Having moved from last
year's Class D competition to Class C, the
capture of the State crown was the second for
the Onondaga Central High School football
team, and concluded an outstanding record, the
only State champion to finish the season
unbeaten; and
"WHEREAS, In all that they have
accomplished, the athletic talent and superb
spirit displayed by this team is due in great
part to the efforts of Coaches Bill Spicer,
Paul Taylor, Jeff Pierce, Victor Zampetti and
Rick Bailey, Volunteer Coaches Dave Pierce and
Steve Louis, and the loyal and active support
of Onondaga Central's student body and
community; and
"WHEREAS, One such valuable part of
the talented team, with his extraordinary
speed, strength, and agility, is junior
tailback Mike Hart, who scored the 58th, 59th
154
and 60th touchdowns of the season and finished
with 29 carries for 199 yards; and
"WHEREAS, This extraordinary team
consists of the following gifted young men:
Hodges Sneed, Andrew Abbott, Ryan Hotaling,
Justin Graham, Richard Bova, Adam Legg, Don
Cummings, Matt Popov, Carl Runge, John Manley,
Chad Amidon, Ryan Clifford, Dakota McCann,
Mike Hart, Kyle Martin, Robbie Cormier, Dan
Germain, Zach Carrington, Zach MacCollister,
Brian Beacham, Todd Amidon, Marty Brunner,
Jacob Cummings, Cory Dill, Richard Beak, Todd
Gardner, James Sanford, Matthew Majewski,
Thomas Brownell, Caleb Golombiewski, Dan
Willis, Scott Campbell, Pat Neuman, Kurt
Wasilewski, Aaron Johnson, Steven Tiss, Felipe
Diaz, Brad Glaister, Adam Goodman, and Jesse
Schneider.
"They have proven themselves to be
an outstanding combination of athletic prowess
and discipline, reflecting favorably upon
their school, their parents, their friends and
their community; now, therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative
Body pause in its deliberations to
155
congratulate the Onondaga Central High School
Football Team and Coach Spicer on their
successful season, overall team record, and
capture of the State Class C title; and be it
further
"RESOLVED, That copies of this
Resolution, suitably engrossed, be transmitted
to the members of the Onondaga Central High
School Football Team and to Coach Spicer."
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
DeFrancisco.
SENATOR DeFRANCISCO: I'm proud
to rise on this great occasion. This is
becoming an annual tradition for this team to
win the state championship.
I first am sorry that you had such
a difficult time -- I understand there was a
fatality on the Thruway and you've been on the
road five hours, is that -- that's not good.
And I bet you're all hungry at this point.
And we've got lunch for you after we get done,
so this will be brief.
Many of the Senators are in
meetings now. We expected you a lot sooner.
But they I know express the same appreciation
156
and congratulations that I express today for
the wonderful achievement you've done. It's
amazing to have a team undefeated; but to win
two state championships in a row is just
outstanding.
The D division didn't want you
anymore, so they moved you up to C. And you
took everyone on in the C division and won the
championship. I think you probably should
just go straight to A at this point and don't
pass go and don't pass the B division, because
it's just a waste of time.
I read the resolution, I've looked
at it carefully, and I know all the
achievements of Mike Hart. And I actually saw
the run that it's being called in the city of
Syracuse. A friend of mine actually e-mailed
it to me. And what was phenomenal about the
run was not only the athleticism of Mike Hart,
but there were some blockers out there too.
And the people that were blocking were just as
important as the wonderful run and the great
success that you've had.
So it's a team effort. You should
be congratulated. And I'm sure that each one
157
of you do as well with your grades as you do
on the football team, because that's just as
important.
So congratulations again, continued
success, and lunch is on.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
question is on the resolution. All those in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Those
opposed, nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
resolution is adopted.
Gentlemen, we congratulate you and
your coaches on your accomplishments, we
welcome you to the Senate today, and we wish
you well with all your future activities and
endeavors.
(Applause.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, may we please return to the reports
of standing committees. I believe there's a
158
report of the Rules Committee at the desk.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Reports
of standing committees.
The Secretary will read the report
of the Rules Committee.
THE SECRETARY: Senator Bruno,
from the Committee on Rules, reports the
following bill direct to third reading:
Senate Print 528, by Senator
Johnson, an act to amend the State Finance
Law.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, I move to accept the report of the
committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All
those in favor of accepting the report of the
Rules Committee signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Those
opposed, nay.
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
report of the Rules Committee is accepted.
159
Senator Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, may we please take up Calendar
Number 26, Senate Print 528, which was just
reported from the Rules Committee.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
26, by Senator Johnson, Senate Print 528, an
act to amend the State Finance Law, in
relation to variable rate debt instruments.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Is there a
message of necessity at the desk?
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There is
a message at the desk.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Move to
accept the message of necessity.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: All
those in favor of accepting the message of
necessity signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Those
opposed, nay.
160
(No response.)
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
message is accepted. The bill is before the
house.
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.)
SENATOR ONORATO: Explanation,
please.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Johnson, Senator Onorato has requested an
explanation.
SENATOR JOHNSON: Senator, the
purpose of this bill is to save approximately
$51 million of the taxpayers' money --
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: Senator
Onorato, why do you rise?
SENATOR ONORATO: Mr. President,
will the -- to expedite matters, will Senator
Johnson yield to a question?
SENATOR JOHNSON: Oh, sure.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The
161
Senator yields.
SENATOR ONORATO: Senator
Johnson, is this bill agreed to by both
houses?
SENATOR JOHNSON: Yes, it is,
Senator.
SENATOR ONORATO: Thank you.
SENATOR JOHNSON: It's a tough
question. Glad I had the answer.
SENATOR ONORATO: Explanation
satisfactory.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER:
Explanation satisfactory.
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, 61.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: The bill
is passed.
Senator Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Is there any
housekeeping at the desk?
162
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: There's
no housekeeping, Senator.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Mr.
President, there being no further business to
come before the Senate, I move we stand
adjourned until Tuesday, January 21st, at
3:00 p.m., intervening days being legislative
days.
ACTING PRESIDENT MEIER: On
motion, the Senate stands adjourned until
Tuesday, January 21st, at 3:00 p.m.
Intervening days will be legislative days.
(Whereupon, at 2:25 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)