Regular Session - April 14, 2004
1679
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
THE STENOGRAPHIC RECORD
ALBANY, NEW YORK
April 14, 2004
3:14 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION
LT. GOVERNOR MARY O. DONOHUE, President
STEVEN M. BOGGESS, Secretary
1680
P R O C E E D I N G S
THE PRESIDENT: The Senate will
please come to order.
I ask everyone present to please
rise and repeat with me the Pledge of
Allegiance.
(Whereupon, the assemblage recited
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.)
THE PRESIDENT: In the absence of
clergy, may we bow our heads in a moment of
silence, please.
(Whereupon, the assemblage
respected a moment of silence.)
THE PRESIDENT: Reading of the
Journal.
THE SECRETARY: In Senate,
Tuesday, April 13, the Senate met pursuant to
adjournment. The Journal of Monday, April 12,
was read and approved. On motion, Senate
adjourned.
THE PRESIDENT: Without
objection, the Journal stands approved as
read.
Presentation of petitions.
Messages from the Assembly.
1681
Messages from the Governor.
Reports of standing committees.
Reports of select committees.
Communications and reports from
state officers.
Motions and resolutions.
Senator Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Thank you,
Madam President.
On behalf of Senator Hoffmann, I
move to amend Senate Bill Number 3270A by
striking out the amendments made on
January 21, 2004, and restoring it to its
previous print number, 3270 --
THE PRESIDENT: So ordered.
Senator Fuschillo.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: -- on
Corporations, Authorities and Commissions,
Assembly Print Number 675A, and substitute it
for the identical bill.
THE PRESIDENT: Substitution
ordered.
SENATOR FUSCHILLO: Madam
President, amendments are offered to the
following Third Reading Calendar bills:
1682
On behalf of Senator Velella, page
number 10, Calendar Number 157, Senate Print
Number 5973A;
On behalf of Senator Larkin, page
number 15, Calendar Number 288, Senate Print
Number 1966;
On behalf of Senator Wright, page
number 20, Calendar Number 387, Senate Print
Number 4890B;
On behalf of Senator Meier, page
number 30, Calendar Number 527, Senate Print
Number 5736A;
On behalf of Senator Meier, page
number 30, Calendar Number 529, Senate Print
Number 5738A;
On behalf of Senator Flanagan, page
number 33, Calendar Number 581, Senate Print
Number 6158;
On behalf of Senator Morahan, page
number 36, Calendar Number 622, Senate Print
Number 1034;
On behalf of Senator McGee, page
number 37, Calendar Number 627, Senate Print
Number 3315;
On behalf of Senator Skelos, page
1683
number 39, Calendar Number 653, Senate Print
Number 6384;
On behalf of Senator LaValle, page
number 32, Calendar Number 570, Senate Print
Number 825.
I now move that these bills retain
their place on the order of Third Reading
Calendar.
THE PRESIDENT: The amendments
are received, and the bills will retain their
place on the Third Reading Calendar.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
there's a privileged resolution, 4369, by
Senator Marcellino. Can we have it read in
its entirety and move for its immediate
adoption.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator
Marcellino, Legislative Resolution Number
4369, commemorating the 34th anniversary of
Earth Day on April 22, 2004.
"WHEREAS, It is the sense of this
Legislative Body to recognize and pay tribute
1684
to those organizations dedicating their
purposeful work to increasing public awareness
of, and appreciation for, the natural
resources of New York, recognizing the role
all citizens have in protecting the
environment and the quality of life in this
Empire State; and
"WHEREAS, On April 22, 1970,
approximately 25 million Americans
participated in the first Earth Day
demonstration to express their concerns over
the environment and the fate of the planet;
and
"WHEREAS, In the 34 years that have
passed since the original Earth Day, the
planet has been subjected to the continuing
burdens of world population growth, increasing
commercial and residential development, ocean
pollution, increasing stores of toxic and
nuclear waste, and other similar assaults
which have exacerbated the growing dangers of
global climate change, ozone depletion, toxic
poisoning, deforestation, and mass species
extinctions; and
"WHEREAS, Following the first Earth
1685
Day and the demonstrations of concern of over
20 million Americans, a collective national
action has resulted in the passage of sweeping
new laws to protect the invaluable resources
of air, land, and water; and
"WHEREAS, April 22, 2004, marks the
34th anniversary of Earth Day, a day set aside
to celebrate the beauty and bounty of our
environment and to revitalize the efforts
required to protect and maintain respect for
the environment and its resources; and
"WHEREAS, Earth Day 2004 activities
and events will educate all citizens on the
importance of acting in an environmentally
sensitive fashion by recycling, conserving
energy and water, using efficient
transportation, and adopting more ecologically
sound lifestyles; and
"WHEREAS, Earth Day 2004 activities
and events will educate all citizens on the
importance of supporting the passage of
legislation that will help protect the
environment and will highlight the importance
of a heightened awareness of environmental
concerns amongst our state's leaders; and
1686
"WHEREAS, The goal of Earth Day
2004 is not to plan only one day of events and
activities but to continue worldwide efforts
to protect all aspects of the environment;
now, therefore, be it
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative
Body pause in its deliberations to commemorate
the 34th anniversary of Earth Day on April 22,
2004, and it be further
"RESOLVED, That this Legislative
Body congratulate all the concerned citizens
of New York State who have embraced the
responsible work of protecting and preserving
the environment for future generations."
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Marcellino.
SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you,
Madam President. It is a pleasure to rise and
speak on behalf of this resolution.
This is one of the most important
things we do here. As a body, we represent
the people of this great state, and this great
state has a beautiful environment. And we are
living on one planet, and they're not making
any more, to my knowledge. And we have an
1687
obligation to preserve and protect this planet
and its environment so that future generations
will have the highest quality of life possible
for them.
What we do now and what we do today
will not only affect us immediately but will
affect many, many generations down the line.
And it is our obligation and our duty, as I
said, to preserve and protect our environment
and our planet.
To that end, education, education
is the key. We must reach out to the younger
generations to bring them on board to protect
the environment, which is what this resolution
talks about. Reaching out to our youth, to
our schools, to bring them in, to preserve
habitats, to protect species, to protect the
air and water quality that we have here.
It is of paramount importance that
we don't let this thing end with one day,
because it is not just one day that is Earth
Day. Every day of the year should be Earth
Day, in everybody's mind and in every
community.
So I urge a one hundred percent
1688
vote for this. I know we're going to get it.
And I urge that we go forth as emissaries for
this environment and that we preach the gospel
of the environment to our children and to
everyone we can, to make sure that they do
everything they can in their communities to
preserve and protect our quality of life here
in New York State and in this great country
and on this great planet.
Madam President, I'd like to open
up this resolution to all members. Anyone not
wishing to be on board, let them notify the
chair.
THE PRESIDENT: Any member who
does not wish to be a sponsor of this
resolution please notify the desk.
All in favor of the resolution
please signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
THE PRESIDENT: Opposed, nay.
(No response.)
THE PRESIDENT: The resolution is
adopted.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
1689
there's a privileged resolution, 4378, at the
desk by Senator Duane. Could we have the
title read and move for its immediate
adoption.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read.
THE SECRETARY: By Senator Duane,
Legislative Resolution Number 4378, honoring
Las Madres de Plaza de Mayo of Argentina upon
the occasion of their historic visit to
New York.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Duane.
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Madam
President. It's an honor to be a part of this
historic day. And I welcome Argentina's
Mothers and Grandmothers of the Disappeared
here to the state capital today.
I don't think that we can hear
often enough or that they could ever get tired
of hearing that we are so sorry for what
happened to their families -- the daughters,
the sons, the relatives who were taken away
from their families. None of them deserve to
have to go through that terrible pain.
I think that we have to take this
1690
kind of tragedy as an example so that we can
stop repeating this kind of tragedy anywhere
in the world. And the work that they did,
putting their lives on the line by confronting
the military and other authorities in
Argentina, I think gives many of us courage to
move forward when other families are in danger
of being destroyed. Certainly the mothers and
grandmothers are shining lights and examples
of how important it is important it is to
fight for human rights and civil rights.
And I have to say that because of
their visit here to the Capitol today, I'm
reminded that we need to take courage from
them for work that needs to be done here in
New York State, because here also in New York
State we have a large group of women who are
also mothers of the disappeared. And the
mothers of the disappeared have sons and
daughters who are serving lengthy and unfair
mandatory prison sentences for low-level drug
offenses. And that's because of the so-called
Rockefeller Drug Laws.
And I feel that as a representative
of the people here in the Senate that I owe an
1691
apology to New York State's mothers of the
disappeared, because they are part of families
that are suffering terribly because of a
misguided drug policy that we have here in
New York.
And New York's laws are terribly
out of whack with every other state in the
nation. And our mandatory laws are much
harsher than the laws that DAs in other parts
country feel that they need. And there is no
evidence that these drug laws in any way are
helpful towards stopping the scourge of drug
addiction in our state.
And unfortunately, these mothers
have lost members of their families because we
only look at drug addiction in our state as a
criminal justice issue and not as a health
issue as well. And until and unless we change
that, we are going to continue to have mothers
whose children have disappeared into our state
prison system.
And I say that our laws are way out
of whack, and that can be proven because our
conference did a survey of drug laws across
the nation. And indeed, our laws are much
1692
harsher than any other laws in the nation.
And there is no reason why we need such harsh
laws. No other DAs across the nation require
that.
You know, it's a shame that the
vast majority -- 80 percent -- of those
incarcerated for these drug offenses are
people of color. There is something terribly
wrong with that. I urge my colleagues to look
at our conference's proposal for reforming the
laws and bringing us into the same realm of
law enforcement and drug policy that other
states in the nation have adopted.
And not only do we need to look at
what the prison sentences are now, but we also
need to look at what happens when those who
are incarcerated because of drug offenses
reenter their neighborhoods and their cities.
And I urge all of my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle to come to the forums
that we'll be holding on our proposal. And in
fact the first one will be next Wednesday,
April 21st, here in Albany.
Only by reforming our laws here in
New York State will we be able to really
1693
address and once and for all make it so that
we don't have to have mothers of the
disappeared here in our state.
And so again, thank you to those
brave mothers and grandmothers from Argentina
who came to the Capitol today. And I hope
that your visit will help to give each and
every one of us the courage to stop what is
happening in our state and will help to make
families be more quickly reunited in our
state.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: All in favor of
the resolution please signify by saying aye.
Senator Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, thank
you, Madam President. Just on the resolution.
THE PRESIDENT: On the
resolution. You may proceed.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I would just
like to thank my colleague for introducing
this resolution. And certainly it's very
important that we begin to change the dialogue
and the environment for young people.
So many women, mothers in my
1694
district have lost their children for many
different reasons. And in a very real sense,
those young people have disappeared. And in
addition to the ones who have been killed or
have disappeared because of their problems
with drugs and they are incarcerated in prison
across the state, we now have this huge
problem where young people are dropping out of
school very strangely. They're disappearing
out of school, off the rolls of their schools
in middle school and high school -- 8th
graders, 9th graders, 10th graders. So we
have this major problem where our young people
are essentially disappearing.
And I think of those women who
waged that battle to force the government to
listen to them and to give them information.
I look at them as a model. And I'm hopeful
that the women in New York State, especially
women in my district and across the city of
New York, will begin to organize in the same
way that those women did so that we can
recover our own children.
So I thank you very much. Thank
you, Senator Duane, for this resolution, and I
1695
am happy to support it.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
I regret getting up on this issue. And I --
there is no -- I realize that this is an
attempt to get some publicity on the issue of
drug laws.
There's about 300 or 400 people in
jail under Rockefeller Drug Laws. I mean, we
just let out about a hundred and -- we've been
checking them out. None of the people that
are involved here to my knowledge have
anything to do with the Rockefeller Drug Laws.
They're talking about a sad situation in
another country, and they're right. They are
heroes.
But I think we have to stop and
look at this state. California has 175,000
people in prison. We have less than 65,000
now. The numbers of people who are in now for
drugs, strictly drugs, is probably a few
thousand. Maybe about 8,000 or 9,000.
Virtually all of them are sellers, very few
purchasers. We have been sending them out so
fast through shock incarceration.
1696
The national group that is involved
in this -- and I have been fed up with
listening to this stuff -- is trying to drive
nationwide -- and your study, I don't know
exactly what you're talking about about the
tough laws we have. Look at California.
Check it with California. They're putting in
hundreds of thousands of people into jail.
There is no proof to what you're saying, I
want to tell you right now.
And I've stood and listened to this
nonsense for several years, and I'm a little
tired of it. Sure we have tough laws. That's
why our crime rate is down dramatically, and
that's why the number of drug sales is down,
and that's why we've made huge progress.
What's left of the Rockefeller drug
Laws is a piece of A-I and a piece of A -- the
B felonies are not Rockefeller Drug Laws.
What the Assembly would like us to do, fine,
is a jailbreak. Let everybody out who does a
B felony, sales or purchases. Maybe you can
agree with that. And, you know, that's fine.
We have offered all sorts of
programs. While we've been debating here,
1697
thousands of people are going out under shock
incarceration, are being treated. The people
who are arguing against mandatory drug laws
are not arguing in this state. They're
arguing about other states. And they're
trying to use us as an example. That bothers
me, because we've done better than any state
in the union at dealing with this issue.
The facts are there. The crime
rate is down, the prison population is down,
drug rates are down. It's all down. What can
I say? I mean, I feel sorry for these poor
people. If they have missing children, that's
sad. A handful of them -- there were two or
three here that are in under what they think
are the Rockefeller Drug Laws. It's just drug
laws. Maybe they deserve to be there, I don't
know. But we're checking them all out since
last year, by the way. We've gone through 300
or 400, they've gone through in the system,
and let a hundred and some out because they
were ability to be out.
And let me just finish one thing
and then I'll be quiet. One of the women said
she'd like to know about kingpins in jail.
1698
They're in there. I can assure you, there are
some big people who are in jail. And they're
first-time offenders. One guy was found with
24 pounds of cocaine. He claimed it was put
on him, it was -- the police set him up for
it. He was one of the biggest dealers to the
Syracuse area; in fact, the top distributor in
the Syracuse area. There are some of the top
dealers from New York City that are in prison.
By the way, some of the mules that got into
trouble got into trouble because they were
dealing directly with these people.
So I only can tell you -- you can
have hearings. And I realize this is good
political stuff, because most people don't
understand all these laws. But to say that
Rockefeller Drug Laws need to be reformed is
nonsense. We've already done it. You can
talk about drug laws, but not Rockefeller Drug
Laws. They've long since virtually
disappeared.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Schneiderman.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Thank you,
Madam President.
1699
I truly appreciate Senator Volker's
sincerity on this issue, and his frustration,
but I think what we're dealing with here is a
definitional problem that's preventing us from
confronting the actual issue.
Yes, it may be the case that what
people refer to as the Rockefeller Drug Laws
are not in fact the Rockefeller Drug Laws.
But according to numbers that were obtained
from DCJS and DOCS by the Correctional
Association, there are over 17,000 drug
offenders -- nonviolent drug offenders whose
only crime was drug possession -- in our
prisons.
We're incarcerating at an estimated
annual cost of $544 million, $544 million per
year to keep nonviolent drug offenders.
Right, those are not there under the
Rockefeller Drug Laws. We use the term
"Rockefeller Drug Laws" generally. But the
fact of the matter is there are many
nonviolent drug offenders who could be in
treatment who are in prison in the state of
New York.
And look, I have -- you know, I
1700
don't think anyone here is talking about a
jailbreak. I actually went through a
jailbreak. My car was stolen by people in a
jailbreak and destroyed. So, you know, I
don't like jailbreaks any more than anyone
else around here. We're not talking about a
jailbreak. We're not talking about letting
kingpins out. We're not talking about letting
out people who deal drugs to kids or use kids
in drug deals.
What we're talking about really
primarily are not even the A-Is. We're
talking about the lesser offenders. If you
look at Senator Paterson's proposal, it's a
proposal to reform the sentencing laws for all
nonviolent offenders.
Let's have the hearings. Let's
have an open mind. Let's not get caught up in
the semantics of what a Rockefeller Drug Law
and what is not a Rockefeller Drug Law. If
there are people who are nonviolent offenders
who are not a danger to anyone who are in
prison who could be in treatment, let's deal
with the issue.
And I respectfully suggest that the
1701
crime rate drop here because of the
Rockefeller Drug Laws, the assertion that
that's what's taken place is -- doesn't make
much sense, since the crime rate has also
dropped in states all around the country
during the same period. And as shown by the
survey which we did, the fact is that most of
those states don't have drug laws that are as
severe as our drug laws, whether Rockefeller
or otherwise.
But I think the most important
point that we're trying to make today is that
the Mothers of the Disappeared from Argentina,
Las Madres de la Plaza de Mayo, are really
something that are a symbol of something that
goes beyond the specific issue, and that
should inspire us on the issue of reform of
drug laws or reform of any laws that are
unjust that are still on the books. Which is
our obligation, I believe, as public servants.
These women, their children
disappeared. They're called the Mothers of
the Disappeared because the junta in Argentina
would fly people out over the ocean and throw
them out of airplanes. And no one knew what
1702
happened to them. And instead of retreating
into grief, these women organized. And when
you see them, they have the buttons with the
pictures of their children on them. They met
every Thursday in the Plaza de Mayo and
demonstrated and marched. And more people
joined them and more people joined them, and
eventually the junta was brought down.
And they still are fighting for
justice. They're still fighting to identify
what happened to some of their lost relatives.
And they're still fighting to see that there
is punishment for those who inflicted this
unspeakable torture and really destroyed not
just thousands of lives but tens of thousands
of families in Argentina during this horrible
period.
They're here to speak out for
justice. And yesterday I had the honor of
being present at a meeting that they had with
the dean of our delegation of district
attorneys, Robert Morgenthau. And I do think
Mr. Morgenthau understands the drug laws. And
after the meeting with the mothers, which was
an extraordinarily moving meeting, District
1703
Attorney Morgenthau said, "It's time for us
district attorneys to take a look at the laws
again. It is time to review them. There are
people in prison who don't need to be in
prison." And if the senior district attorney
of the state believes that's true, I think
it's fair to say that we have a reason to hold
public hearings.
And the hearings that Senator Duane
and Senator Montgomery spoke of and that
they're chairing, starting next week, are
intended to honestly get the facts out. And
maybe we can clear up some of this confusion.
But whether they are Rockefeller
Drug Laws or not Rockefeller Drug Laws, if we
can improve our sentencing laws to do more
justice, to have people who need treatment get
treatment, to keep the people who need to be
in prison in prison and to get everyone else
out, let's do it.
And the Mothers of the Disappeared
are simply here to remind us that we have an
obligation to do justice and we should not, in
the New York State Senate, have to be
embarrassed into doing justice, as the
1704
government of Argentina was, by a group of
women who are there standing outside the doors
because they can't get in to force action when
the leaders and the powers that be refused to
take it.
So I'm honored to be here
supporting Senator Duane's resolution. These
are true heroes in the fight for social
justice. And I think it's appropriate that we
pause today to honor them. And next week
let's get to the hearing and renew our
discussion, argument, debate over what to do
about the sentencing laws in this state.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Meier.
SENATOR MEIER: Thank you, Madam
President.
I'm also going to be honored to
vote for Senator Duane's resolution, but I
think we're engaging in a bit of a stretch
here to compare Argentina under the junta of
General Pinochet to -- or not General
Pinochet, that was Chile -- but under the
Argentinian junta to present-day New York.
The mothers of the missing in
1705
Argentina would have been quite glad, I think,
to have lived in a society where you can only
be arrested for a law that is on the books and
that is publicly known, where you can only
have a criminal proceeding brought against you
upon an accusatory instrument or an indictment
filed in a court of law, where you have the
right to confront your accuser, where you have
the right to counsel, where you have the right
to be presumed innocent until proven guilty,
where you have protection against ex post
facto laws, where you have a public trial,
where you have the right to petition your
democratically elected government without fear
of going arrested.
I think that's what the Mothers of
the Missing would have preferred. And their
children wouldn't have been missing in a
society like the State of New York that had
those protections present.
I'm going to vote for this
resolution. But you dishonor the memory of
people who have sacrificed when you pull this
kind of a stretch.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Duane.
1706
SENATOR DUANE: Thank you, Madam
President.
And I believe that my colleagues on
the other side of the aisle know the esteem
that I hold them in. However, they're wrong.
And New York State has harsher
sentencing guidelines than anyplace else in
the nation. Our crime rates are not in any
way lower than other jurisdictions across the
nation that don't have the draconian laws that
we have in New York State.
And we will have, I hope, more time
to debate this issue in this house. But our
proposal is, I think, an excellent combination
of Republican and Democratic ideas. It's
determinate sentencing combined with greater
opportunities for probation, but real
probation.
So please come and listen to what
DAs and others from across the nation have to
say about their laws. Please look at our
survey. And I think that you will see that
our argument is very compelling that the time
is here for New York State to get into the
mainstream of criminal justice as it applies
1707
to nonviolent offenders.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other
Senator wish to be heard?
All those in favor of the
resolution please signify by saying aye.
(Response of "Aye.")
THE PRESIDENT: Opposed, nay.
(No response.)
THE PRESIDENT: The resolution is
adopted.
Senator Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: Yes, Madam
President. Are there any substitutions at the
desk?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, there are,
Senator.
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: On page 17,
Senator Spano moves to discharge, from the
Committee on Investigations and Government
Operations, Assembly Bill Number 8752A and
substitute it for the identical Senate Bill
Number 5136A, Third Reading Calendar 317.
On page 33, Senator Skelos moves to
1708
discharge, from the Committee on Local
Government, Assembly Bill Number 9801A and
substitute it for the identical Senate Bill
Number 6179A, Third Reading Calendar 582.
And on page 33, Senator Morahan
moves to discharge, from the Committee on
Elections, Assembly Bill Number 9925 and
substitute it for the identical Senate Bill
Number 6492, Third Reading Calendar 588.
THE PRESIDENT: Substitutions
ordered.
Senator Morahan.
SENATOR MORAHAN: May we please
have the noncontroversial reading of the
calendar.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read the noncontroversial calendar.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
218, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 608B, an
act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to the
issuance of junior licenses.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is laid
aside.
1709
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
289, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 2326B, an
act to amend the Environmental Conservation
Law, in relation to allowing.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is laid
aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
515, by Senator Marchi, Senate Print 6160A, an
act to amend Chapter 84 of the Laws of 2003
relating to directing the Commissioner of the
Department of Environmental Conservation.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
516, by Senator Little, Senate Print 6124, an
act to amend the Social Services Law, in
1710
relation to tribal authority.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
535, by Senator Larkin, Senate Print 1222B, an
act to amend the Education Law, in relation to
requiring institutions of higher education.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is laid
aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
552, by Senator Padavan, Senate Print 5117A,
an act to amend the Vehicle and Traffic Law,
in relation to suspension for failure.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
1711
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58. Nays,
1. Senator Duane recorded in the negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
582, substituted earlier today by Member of
the Assembly DiNapoli, Assembly Print Number
9801A, an act to amend the Real Property Tax
Law, in relation to allowing.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is laid
aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
585, by Senator Wright, Senate Print 6386B, an
act in relation to creating.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
1712
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
589, by Senator Saland, Senate Print 1916A, an
act to amend the Domestic Relations Law and
the Family Court Act --
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is laid
aside.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
598, by Senator Velella, Senate Print 6477, an
act to amend the Administrative Code of the
City of New York, in relation to adjusting the
statutory periods.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
1713
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
599, by Senator Velella, Senate Print 6535, an
act to amend the Retirement and Social
Security Law, in relation to adjusting the
statutory periods.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
626, by Senator Kuhl, Senate Print 1468, an
act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to the
imposition of driver's license suspensions.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect on the first of
November.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
1714
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58. Nays,
1. Senator Duane recorded in the negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
636, by Senator Golden, Senate Print 6559, an
act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to
concurrent and consecutive terms of
imprisonment.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58. Nays,
1. Senator Connor recorded in the negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
637, by Senator McGee, Senate Print 6560, an
act to amend the Penal Law, in relation to
vehicular assault and vehicular manslaughter.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
1715
THE SECRETARY: Section 7. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
638, by Senator Robach, Senate Print 6561, an
act to amend the Criminal Procedure Law and
the Vehicle and Traffic Law, in relation to
aggravated unlicensed operation.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 5. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
639, by Senator Nozzolio, Senate Print 6644,
an act to amend the Penal Law, the Vehicle and
Traffic Law, and the Insurance Law, in
1716
relation to criminally aggressive driving.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
act shall take effect on the first of
November.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
654, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 6528 --
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN: Lay it
aside.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is laid
aside.
Senator Skelos, that completes the
noncontroversial reading of the calendar.
SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you, Madam
President. If we could go to the
controversial reading of the calendar.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
1717
218, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 608B, an
act to amend the Penal Law --
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER:
Explanation, please.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Volker,
an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
this is a bill which really resulted from the
bill that was passed in this house a number of
years ago concerning gun control.
By the way, with all the fears of
the -- and I realize I'm probably arguing
against the people that I support, but with
all the talk about gun control, there have
been almost no arrests under the gun control
statute we passed unless there was a federal
arrest coupled with it.
In other words, the bill that we
passed totally mirrored the federal law, the
so-called Brady Law, and it's very hard to
find any arrests solely under the state law
that weren't linked to federal laws. Which
was a great fear of the sportsmen, and it does
not appear that anything of that kind
happened. And the theory that it was going to
1718
spread to many other areas has never happened,
and I think that should be said.
One of the problems that happened
when we did the law, however -- because
previous to that statute, there was actually
no bottom rung for a person to purchase a
license. And therefore, licenses could be
given to very young people, in effect for
purposes of training. But once we made the
statute 21, that you couldn't have a gun
license until you're 21, that cut off any
possibility of training or skill competition
and so forth for younger people, which denies
New Yorkers the opportunity to be part of
Olympic teams and various hunting sports
throughout the country.
What this bill does, it sets up the
junior licensing proposal that has been
advocated, by the way, by not just gun
advocates but youth advocates across the
state. And it says that between the ages of
14 to 20, you can obtain a junior license but
you have to pass the regular requirements --
by the way, this does not allow you to have a
pistol. I think there's some
1719
misunderstanding. You can't -- with a junior
license, you can't actually own a gun.
What it says, however, is that you
have the ability, along with a parent and with
the permission of a parent, to engage in
safety training, target practice, shooting
competition, or lawful hunting. And, you
know, you can -- in other words, just as it
was years before when that used to happen, you
can now do it, but it's specifically under a
junior license.
When this bill passed last year,
Senator Paterson and I had a colloquy about
this, and he mentioned the city of New York.
And I said to him, "All right, Senator
Paterson, in keeping with what you have
suggested to me, do you think we'd have a
better chance of passing this in the Assembly
if we eliminated the city of New York?" And
he said he thought so.
So this year, as you'll notice,
there's a section on page 3, line 47, that
says: "A junior license issued pursuant to
this section shall not be valid within the
City of New York."
1720
So that is basically the bill.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
Oh, Senator Krueger. Excuse me.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. If the sponsor would yield,
please.
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Volker
does yield. You may proceed, Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Through you, Madam President.
Senator Volker, you mentioned it's
not that they can own pistols or other kinds
of guns. Are you saying that if you have a
junior license, you don't have a gun in your
possession, as a 14-to-20-year-old --
SENATOR VOLKER: That's right.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: -- to take
to and from your gun competitions, your
trainings, your hunting?
Can you explain what that means
when you say you have a license but you don't
have a gun?
SENATOR VOLKER: Well, I'm
1721
talking about pistols. Because with rifles
and shotguns, you have the right to -- you can
handle a rifle or a shotgun whether you're
licensed or not. You can't go into the field
with it, because that's illegal, but you can
carry a rifle or a shotgun, for instance, to a
competition even without a junior license.
It's pistols that are the key.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Fine. Say
with pistols and revolvers, mm-hmm.
SENATOR VOLKER: But you can't
carry a pistol. Someone else has to carry
that pistol to wherever you're going, because
you don't have the right to possess a pistol.
You can only possess it on the range or
wherever it is or with the person who is
showing you how to use it.
Now, 90 percent of this, by the
way, will not necessarily be -- it will be
rifle competition. But there is some special
pistol competition, especially Olympic
competition, that can really utilize these
junior licenses.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
1722
President, through you, if the sponsor will
continue to yield.
SENATOR VOLKER: Sure. Sure.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Volker
does yield. You may proceed, Senator.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Senator Volker, I am confused. Can
you show me where in the bill it says if you
have a junior license you can't have
possession of the gun or be taking it to or
from your training or your competition?
Because I see a section on having
the notarized signature of a parent in order
to go and get permission to have the license,
but I don't see anything here that would
then --
SENATOR VOLKER: Right. It's not
in there. Because the law says right now that
no one without a regular license, that no one
that doesn't possess a license and has that
pistol on his license or her license can
possess a pistol.
So it's illegal right now. What
this bill does is say it's only legal under
certain circumstances. And there's nothing
1723
that says that you can carry a pistol to and
from competition or anything else. Therefore,
it's illegal, because it's illegal under the
present law. We haven't changed that.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. On the bill.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed
on the bill.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
I appreciate Senator Volker's
explanation and clarification of the bill.
I'm not a hundred percent sure that I agree
that having a license that says you can use it
at Point A but you can't bring it from Point B
to Point A would in a practical sense actually
apply, if you think of common sense of 14-,
15-, 16-, 17-, 18-, 19-, 20-year-olds going
off and participating in gun sports, so to
speak.
But I will state and I continue to
state, despite my disagreement with many of my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle, that we
live in a society that not only is dangerous
and unfortunately has too many violent
incidents, but the statistics make it very
1724
clear that children having access to guns
increases the chances that they will do harm
to others, that they will do harm to
themselves, both intentional and
unintentional.
And I think there's a very good
reason that the State of New York passed a law
to say that people below the age of 21
shouldn't have access to pistols and revolvers
and that the data nationally and in this state
since should be reaffirming to us why we
should not change this law, we should frankly
not make it easier for young people to get
access to guns.
And if in fact a price to be paid
is less access of young people to be able to
compete in pistol-and-revolver-related sports,
I have to say that for society's sake and for
younger people's sake, I think that is a cost
worthy of being paid on behalf of our society.
Just to provide some statistics to
argue my point, every eight hours a child or a
teenager was killed in a firearm-related
accident or suicide in the year 2001. On
average, during each of the last ten years
1725
nearly 1300 children committed suicide with a
firearm each year. More than 145 each year
were children under the age of 15 who
committed suicide with guns. The overall
firearm-related death rate among United States
children aged less than 15 years old is nearly
twelve times higher than among children in 25
other industrialized countries.
Unfortunately, in our homes
throughout the country, even in states that
don't allow children to have pistol and
revolver licenses, because of the failure to
appropriately lock up and store guns and
ammunition, the rate of harm done in the home
is staggering. Of gun-owning households with
children, only 25 percent lock and store their
bullets in a separate place from their guns.
Among homes with children and firearms,
40 percent have at least one unlocked firearm
at any given time in their home. Only
39 percent of homes with children and firearms
are keeping their firearms locked, unloaded,
and separate from their ammunition.
Two-thirds of the 41 students
involved in the 37 school-related shootings
1726
that took place in this country from 1974 to
the year 2000 got their guns that they brought
to school from their home or from a relative.
The statistics are staggering.
During the 1992 to 2001 school years,
shootings were the lead cause of violent
deaths in our schools, responsible for
77 percent of all in-school violent deaths.
And the facts are not just national
or statistics for over a 10-year period. I
did a look at newspaper story about gun
violence and children in New York State just
over the last six months:
March 29, 2004, Bronx, New York,
11-year-old-boy accidentally shot by
19-year-old brother.
March 26, Spring Valley, New York,
boy, 16, shot with a BB gun on a school bus.
March 23rd, Buffalo, 11-year-old
girl accidentally shot by a child neighbor.
March 11th, Niagara, New York, boy,
17, shoots self showing off gun outside
school.
March 10th, in Ossian, New York,
14-year-old boy accidentally killed when
1727
shooting with friends.
March 14th, 17-year-old in the
Bronx accidentally shot in head and killed by
other teenager.
We know about the East Greenbush
incident from February 10th; we discussed it
here on the floor.
February 3rd, Cornwall, New York,
girl, 13, brings loaded BB gun to school.
January 23rd, in Machias, New York,
17-year-old girl accidentally shot by her
teenage boyfriend.
I could read on for pages just the
stories in New York of children being shot or
killed or shooting others with guns in our
state. Queens, 5-year-old accidentally killed
himself with a gun.
We should not be making it easier
for children to have access to pistols and
revolvers in the State of New York. We should
be making it harder for them to have access to
guns. It is in their best interests and it is
in our best interests.
I will vote against this bill,
Senator Volker. I don't think it's adequate
1728
just to protect the children of New York City
because they are exempt from this law. And I
hope my other colleagues will share in my view
that our assignment as legislators is to keep
our children safe from gun violence, including
by their own hand.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Madam President,
I want to thank the Senator for helping to
pass my bill.
I agree with you one hundred
percent. By the way, those numbers are
national numbers. You gave me some incidents
involving in schools. And one of the reasons
that violent crime rates for guns is the
highest is there's very little violent crime,
comparatively, in schools, and a lot of it is
with guns. And one of the ways we hope to
avoid that is with some training for young
people.
By the way, if you'll read on the
second page -- and I won't go into it. It's
persons between the ages of 14, while
undergoing firearm training -- it specifically
1729
says they cannot possess a weapon without
someone right there with them. In other
words, the firearms training or whatever. And
because they can't list a gun on their
license, because junior licenses don't allow
the listing of a weapon, therefore they cannot
possess except when they're being trained or
whatever.
The second thing is, though, the
argument that somehow this is going to create
more problems, I think the truth is it will
help the situation. Although most of these
deaths that you're talking about are with
illegal firearms. They're involving people
that have drugs and criminal activity and so
forth. Some, regrettably, are police officers
who sometimes forget to lock their guns away.
And that's true. Nothing we can do, by the
way. We can pass all the laws we want and
it's going to be difficult to deal with that.
The problem is that we are talking
about crime, and I am talking about sportsmen.
There's nothing that we are doing here that
has anything to do, except on the positive
side, with the handling of weapons. What
1730
we're trying to do is make sure that young
people respect those weapons, know how to use
them.
We certainly realize that there
aren't a ton of hunters in New York City. But
upstate in particular, this makes immense
sense. And it just seems to me that we
shouldn't allow criminals and people who make
mistakes to keep us from doing those things
that are important to our society.
And I think this is one of those
things that's important to our society,
particularly people in upstate New York and on
Long Island, to a certain extent. Because the
people who have been deprived mostly are on
Long Island, because of the pistol clubs that
they have developed there which used young
people to do national competition and so
forth.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Hoffmann.
SENATOR HOFFMANN: Thank you,
Madam President.
I appreciate Senator Volker's
thoughtful explanation of this bill and
indicating what it does and what it doesn't
1731
do.
And while it's very easy to use
national statistics and to espouse a
philosophy that is based upon a desire to
outlaw all guns, let's be realistic about what
we're trying to do here in this state. First
of all, we have guns quite legally in this
state for many purposes. And guns are readily
available to most law-abiding citizens who
want them.
This is about training young people
in the proper use of firearms. And as Senator
Volker pointed out, firearms are used in an
Olympic activity. They are sanctioned
nationally and internationally for
competition. This is another form of
wholesome activity for young people in many
parts of the state and the country.
Despite all of the efforts from
people in other parts of the state with a
different agenda, in the upstate region that I
proudly represent, people respect firearms and
they want their children to learn how to use
them and respect them at a reasonable age.
Fourteen is a very appropriate age.
1732
I'm happy to tell you that I went
through the firearms safety course with my own
son when he was that age. I thought it was
great that he was interested in getting a
junior hunting license. And I was very proud
to go along with him, and since I was driving
him, I stayed and took the course myself.
Learned a lot of things that perhaps I might
not have remembered as readily from the time
when I took it as a teenager myself. It was
one of those rare bonding activities that
parents remember and children remember all of
their lives.
And there are many, many families
with daughters and sons at the age of 14 who
are looking at various recreational
opportunities, and the shooting sports are on
that list. And we should not discourage them
from entering those activities. We should be
encouraging them to utilize firearms for
recreation as well as for safety, quite
obviously, and to utilize them fairly,
responsibly, and with a maximum amount of
education and under supervision.
This is a very well thought out
1733
piece of legislation. I'm delighted that we
have it in front of us today. And I hope that
everybody can be practical about the
interesting split that we have
philosophically. This isn't about having guns
or not having guns. This is about guns being
treated with safety.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. On the bill, and just to
clarify some statements.
Senator Volker, none of the
statistics I gave were about criminal
activity. They were all gun violence, either
suicides or accidents with guns, not about
criminals having guns.
You're right, those are not legal
guns, because by definition, 14-year-olds,
15-year-olds shouldn't be having guns under
New York State law. So clearly we are right
that we have laws that say children shouldn't
have access to guns, and yet they do get
access to guns.
The point with this bill and where
1734
I disagree with my colleague Senator Hoffmann
so strongly is this is not about the ethic of
hunting or guns in general. This is a bill
that lets 14-year-olds have handguns. New
York State should not be supporting,
endorsing, or encouraging teenagers to have
handguns. They are a danger to our society,
they are a danger to young people that far
outweigh the value of training in a sport
involving a revolver or another type of
handgun.
And that is the argument that I am
making here today. This is not the criminals
versus the noncriminals. This is about
children with guns. We should be discouraging
and doing everything we can to make sure that
children don't get access to guns, don't find
themselves in situations where they get harmed
or do harm to others or that they have the
ability to commit suicide with such items.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other
member wish to be heard?
Then the debate is closed.
Read the last section.
1735
THE SECRETARY: Section 4. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 58. Nays,
1. Senator L. Krueger recorded in the
negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
289, by Senator Volker, Senate Print 2326B, an
act to amend the Environmental Conservation
Law, in relation to allowing.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Volker,
an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR VOLKER: I understand
there's going to be an amendment, so I'll just
very quickly explain what this bill is.
The bill doesn't change the hunting
season. The times and dates for hunting deer
and bear remain the same, except that in the
counties of Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua,
Chenango, Herkimer, Montgomery, Oneida,
1736
Oswego, Otsego, Schoharie, and Tioga, as well
as certain towns in Broome County -- except
for the towns of Vestal, Binghamton, Union,
Kirkwood, and Conklin -- in those counties,
you will be able to hunt bear and deer with
rifles.
It has nothing to do with any of
the major urban areas. These are all rural
areas. This bill essentially came from the
New York State Conservation Council. The law
already allows rifle hunting in certain
counties in the Catskills and in the North
County, the Adirondacks. It has absolutely
nothing to do with New York City or, in fact,
Long Island, because Long Island is not
included anyplace here where you can have
rifles.
And basically that's the bill,
sponsored by Assemblywoman Francine DelMonte
in the Assembly.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
President, I believe I have an amendment at
the desk. I'd like to waive reading.
THE PRESIDENT: The reading is
1737
waived.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
On my amendment, Madam President.
I think the theme was clear from
the earlier debate. I am of the position that
guns should be kept away from children and
that in fact there are other, far safer and
more rewarding sports for young children than
playing with guns, whether it be for
competitions, as was the debate in the
previous bill, or for hunting, as is the issue
in the current bill.
My amendment to Senator Volker's
bill would raise the age for junior hunting
licenses from currently 12 to 14 to 14 to 16
to be permitted to hunt in New York if
accompanied by a parent, guardian, or
relative. And I would have that parent,
guardian, or relative be over the age of 23
instead of the current age of 21.
It would raise the junior archery
license for hunting from current 14 to 16 to
16 to 18 years of age, and require that
archers under 20 who are hunting be
accompanied by a parent, guardian, or
1738
relative.
It would raise from 16 to 18 the
minimum age to receive a wildlife hunting
license and require all wildlife hunters under
the age of 20 be accompanied by a parent,
guardian, or relative while hunting.
Again, I think my message is
consistent. Children and guns do not add up
to a safe environment. It increases the risk
of doing harm to themselves and to others,
whether it is on a firing range, which was the
issue in the previous bill, or in the woods
hunting.
We should be concerned about
children's welfare in the context of their
having access to guns and other dangerous
items. And I think, rather than lowering the
age limit for these activities for children,
we should actually be increasing the age
limit, which is what I do in this amendment.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Those Senators in
agreement with the amendment please signify by
raising your hands.
THE SECRETARY: Those Senators
1739
recorded in agreement are Senators Duane, L.
Krueger, Parker, Paterson, Schneiderman, and
Stavisky.
THE PRESIDENT: The amendment is
lost.
Senator Volker.
SENATOR VOLKER: Read the last
section, please. I think I already explained
the bill.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
Senator Connor.
SENATOR CONNOR: Yes, will the
sponsor yield for a question?
SENATOR VOLKER: Certainly.
SENATOR CONNOR: Senator Volker,
my concern is germane to your counties.
It's always been my understanding,
since I first took up hunting at the age of 13
or 14 in the state of New Jersey -- and the
first question I asked is, In the state of New
Jersey, why can't we use rifles, how come we
only use shotguns? And the answer was it's
not mountainous enough.
SENATOR VOLKER: It's not what?
1740
SENATOR CONNOR: Since then --
mountainous.
I've certainly learned recently,
going through my sons going through hunter
safety and their getting their licenses, we
learned things like a rifle -- I have a .22.
And when you read this stuff, maximum carry, a
mile -- that's only a .22. You can't hunt
with a .22. Not large game, you have to use
something larger-bore than that.
So my concern about those counties
simply is, why were they excluded in the past?
And am I wrong, I've visited those counties --
I can't say I know them from one end to the
other, but I've actually, in most of them,
countered ballots in places like the county
seat in Tioga County and the county seat in
Chenango. That's Norwich. The other one
is -- begins with an O. I'll think of it in a
minute.
And my sense of those places were
that they're -- in the Southern Tier, they're
relatively flat lands with some rolling hills.
And my concern is really about the carry. And
is the reason in the past that we've allowed
1741
rifles in Catskills and Adirondacks that, you
know, the miss. If you miss in a mountainous
area, that bullet is going to impact in the
earth or whatever, a hillside, and not carry.
And I'm concerned about allowing
high-powered rifles to be used to hunt deer or
bear in open farmland, rolling fields where a
miss could carry for well -- if a .22 can
carry for a mile, probably a miss could carry
for a mile and a half with something stronger.
I've fired at targets a mile and a half away
and hit them with a sniper rifle.
And so I just have -- and as you
know, Senator, I am not one of those New York
City people, even though I represent part of
Manhattan, who's against all guns, hunting, et
cetera, et cetera. But I do have a safety
concern that I think is relevant to your bill.
SENATOR VOLKER: I appreciate
that.
It was never excluded. The real
story is -- in fact, for years New York really
never had restrictions on hunting for a long
time, until probably 40 years ago or whatever.
By the way, these listings here
1742
don't say that a city, for instance, could
stop hunting. Obviously, they could post
their own local hunting requirements, as we
do, for instance, in Erie County. Where I
live, we have like posted places. And
actually, I think my town doesn't allow
hunting except in the very rural part of the
town. So the local people can restrict it.
I would say to you that there are a
lot of rolling hills and it's not really all
flat. There's some decidedly mountainous or
hilly places. But I think the thing you
should realize is .22s actually -- which are
legal, and which you can use for squirrels and
things like that, you can hunt anyplace except
of course where hunting is restricted.
The so-called high-velocity rifle
is actually, I think -- I would be more
concerned, my own personal feeling, for .22s,
because generally these high-velocity bullets,
you'll hit something. I mean, you graze a
tree and they're down. Most people that get
hurt are hurt with shotguns, by the way, the
vast majority of people that are hurt during
hunting season.
1743
But I think the feeling is, of
sportsmen and of the people of these areas, is
that there really isn't the kind of danger
that there would seem to be. And that's why
certain counties where there was concern were
excluded.
Frankly, at one point this bill had
more counties than is here now. And there's a
couple of places where people objected, and we
took them out because of special problems.
Broome County, for instance, had some special
problems. And a certain person here discussed
this with us, and we took them out.
But I think the thing is the
feeling here is that the danger -- and
remember, this is only -- we're not changing
the seasons. They're hunting seasons. Could
something happen? Oh, that's for sure. Does
it normally happen? No. And the safety
record for rifles is actually a lot better
than it is for shotguns.
Could there be a carry? Could be.
But that's why people -- that's why everybody
has to go to hunter training. That's why
everybody has to have -- I've had hunter
1744
training. Anybody who's got -- you know, I've
had it three times, I think, in my younger
years.
So the assumption is that people
will act reasonably. Will everybody act
reasonably? Probably not. But I think the
feeling of people who are involved in this is
that they will do the best they can to make it
safe. But the other side of the coin is that
you will try your best to give people the
maximum ability to deal with issues.
And one of the issues is deer,
that -- I don't think people realize deer are
creating havoc in upstate New York. They're
killing people. And we have one road that is
right near me, we call it Deer Alley, where in
the fall it's not unusual to have two dozen
deer get killed in about two months. If
they're not hunted, they're going to wreak
havoc. They're coming through windows.
I mean, the problem with the PITA
people is they are inadvertently creating
horrors for these deer. And what we're trying
to do is to a certain extent deal with that.
Also keeping them out from destroying property
1745
and all the rest of the things.
So that's another reason that this
is being done, is to try to cut down the
enormous numbers of deer that are spreading
throughout all of upstate New York.
SENATOR CONNOR: On the bill,
Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Connor,
you may proceed on the bill.
SENATOR CONNOR: Thank you, Madam
President.
Yes, I think Senator Volker has
addressed my concerns. I don't know if he's
totally satisfied them, but the fact that his
bill is somewhat limited now makes me feel
safe in voting in favor of it.
I do want to note it doesn't change
seasons. And I know, Madam President, Senator
Volker is aware of this, that in May we have
spring turkey. And I noticed in my district
in Lower Manhattan in the paper the other day,
there's a bearded turkey running around
Battery Park. And my boys saw that story too,
and said: Dad, you know, spring turkey is
coming. I said, I don't think folks would
1746
appreciate it if we nailed that turkey in
Battery Park. So we'll keep our turkey
hunting much farther north than that.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 3. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 60. Nays,
1. Senator Duane recorded in the negative.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
535, by Senator Larkin, Senate Print 1222B, an
act to amend the Education Law, in relation to
requiring institutions.
SENATOR SCHNEIDERMAN:
Explanation.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Larkin,
an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR LARKIN: May I ask by
whom, Madam President?
THE PRESIDENT: By Senator
1747
Schneiderman, Senator.
SENATOR LARKIN: First of all,
this bill was passed last year 56 to 4. And
it now has a B print.
This bill is a basic, simple bill.
Under current laws, colleges and universities
are not obligated to release education grades
to parents of dependent children. Under this
bill, colleges would be obligated to release
college grades if such reports were requested
by the parent of a dependent college student.
Under the federal law, parents are
entitled to receive copies of their dependent
children's school grades as long as they can
prove such student is a dependent child. This
can be designated by releasing tax information
that demonstrates that the child was listed as
a dependent.
And a question that was asked last
year, Madam President and Senator, was does
this violate any federal laws. And according
to the federal Educational Rights and Privacy
Act, they have informed us in Washington that
our bill as it's now written does not violate
anything as long as the individual parents
1748
request it in writing and provide the
documentation that the student is their legal
dependent.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. On the bill.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed
on the bill.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
I appreciate Senator Larkin's
clarification, and the fact that it's not
against federal law and that it requires the
individual signature of the parents who are
requesting the information.
And last year I was opposed to the
bill on several grounds, as he pointed out one
of them. And the other one was my concern
that financial -- declaring someone as a
dependent on your tax forms may not be the
same as actually providing financial
assistance to them.
And also my concern that
legislating parental-child relationships above
1749
the age of 18 is perhaps not a territory we
ought to be going into in New York.
And so while I appreciate the work
he did on the bill and in learning the
information he did from the federal
government, I will continue to vote no on this
bill because I still have the concern that at
a certain point one has to trust in
adult/young adult relationships when it comes
to a college situation.
And that I fear not so much this
bill as a precedent where we would be
legislating step-by-step additional parental
roles, so to speak, through schools, asking
schools to report to parents this activity,
that activity, this activity, that activity
for college-age students. And I don't think
that's a road we want to go down in New York
State.
So I will vote no for this bill,
but I appreciate the Senator's comments.
Thank you, Madam President.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
1750
act shall take effect on the first of January.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary
will announce the results.
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 535 are
Senators Breslin, Duane, Parker and A. Smith.
Also Senator L. Krueger. Ayes, 56. Nays, 5.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
Senator Montgomery.
SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes, Madam
President. I would like unanimous consent to
be recorded in the negative on Calendars 552
and 626. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Hearing no
objection, you will be so recorded as voting
in the negative on both of those bills.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
582, substituted earlier today by Member of
the Assembly DiNapoli, Assembly Print Number
9801A, an act to amend the Real Property Tax
1751
Law.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER:
Explanation.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Skelos,
an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very
much, Madam President.
This bill allows Nassau County to
adjust and limit the maximum class growth in
the 2004 assessment roll to 2 percent of the
prior year's adjusted base proportion.
Current law allows up to 5 percent.
This bill is similar to last year's
bill, Chapter 43, that applied to Nassau
County and to numerous other chapters of laws
that have passed applying to New York City.
We've passed this legislation for New York
City residents, and now we are repassing it
once again for Nassau County residents.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. If the sponsor would yield.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Skelos,
do you yield?
You may proceed.
1752
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Is this at the request of the county, Senator?
Has Nassau County formally requested that we
do this?
SENATOR SKELOS: This is for
school districts.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
President, if the sponsor would continue to
yield.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator, do you
continue to yield?
SENATOR SKELOS: And there's
no -- we've received no letters of opposition,
phone calls of opposition, whispers of
opposition. And obviously our county
executive has a loud voice and loves to be
heard. So we have not heard from him.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. I accept the sponsor's
answers. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other
member wish to be heard?
Then the debate is closed.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 2. This
1753
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 61.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
589, by Senator Saland, Senate Print 1916A --
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:
Explanation.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Saland,
an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR SALAND: Thank you, Madam
President.
Madam President, this is a bill
which we've seen in this house on prior
occasions. The bill is a bill which in a
number of different sections of our law
changes reference to the term "visitation" to
the term "parenting time."
And the idea behind it is pretty
basic. What it says is that a parent is a
parent and when he or she spends time with his
or her child, that should constitute parenting
time and not have the connotation that might
1754
be applied by way of the term "visitation."
That term would perhaps be more appropriately
used when someone is incarcerated or someone
is in an institution.
There is nothing in this bill that
changes the substantive law of the State of
New York with regard to any existing case law
or statutory law vis-a-vis support. There is
one amendment that would distinguish it from
last year's. This year's version merely
changes, in one section of the bill or in
appropriate sections of the bill, reference to
what had previously been "hearing examiner" to
"support magistrate," which was necessitated
by a recent change in the law.
Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator
Hassell-Thompson.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON: Yes,
thank you, Madam President. Just on the bill.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed.
SENATOR HASSELL-THOMPSON:
Senator Saland, you and I have had a
discussion on this bill in the past. And I
had hoped that you and I would be able to talk
1755
some and massage the language of this bill,
and we haven't seemed to have been able to do
that.
So again, I will stand to say that
I feel I understand the intent, but I don't
feel that this bill does that. And therefore
I again will be voting no.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the last
section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 29. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Those recorded in
the negative on Calendar Number 589 are
Senators Balboni, Dilán, Duane,
Hassell-Thompson, Montgomery, and Parker.
Ayes, 55. Nays, 6.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
The Secretary will continue to
read.
THE SECRETARY: Calendar Number
654, by Senator Libous, Senate Print 6528, an
act to authorize the Village of Endicott in
1756
the County of Broome.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER:
Explanation.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Libous,
an explanation has been requested.
SENATOR LIBOUS: Thank you, Madam
President.
This bill allows the Village of
Endicott to bond for $2 million, and over a
10-year period, with various reports that
would have to be given to the Comptroller.
And they would hopefully be able to get out of
their financial situation.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Krueger.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. If the sponsor would please
yield.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Libous,
will you yield for a question?
SENATOR LIBOUS: Madam President,
I'd be happy to yield to Senator Krueger.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed,
Senator.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you.
Through you, Madam President.
1757
Is the state guaranteeing these
bonds? Is that why there would have to be
various reports submitted to the Comptroller
on a regular basis?
SENATOR LIBOUS: Actually, it
is -- the state is not.
And we've required those reports.
I thought it made sense. The village is
willing to pay those bonds back themselves,
through their own tax base, so that they're
not affecting all of the taxpayers of
New York. Which I think is an honorable thing
to do, because it's a situation they got
themselves into.
But no, these reports are required
based on requirements that we've put upon
them.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Madam
President, through you, if the sponsor would
continue to yield.
THE PRESIDENT: Senator Libous,
do you continue to yield?
SENATOR LIBOUS: Absolutely.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed,
Senator.
1758
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Since in
general we -- although we do it ourselves here
in Albany -- we financially frown on the idea
of bonding out operating expenses rather
than -- and having long-term debt with
sometimes high interest rates associated with
paying off some kind of annualized cost, do
you know why they found themselves in a
$2 million deficit where they can't simply
address it through adjustments in their budget
or their revenue?
SENATOR LIBOUS: Yeah, Madam
President, that's a good question.
There's a number of reasons. And
you can certainly -- we can point the fingers
at the former Republican administration. And
now there's a Democratic administration in,
the new mayor and the town board. But I don't
think it's that.
I think the big issue is that,
Madam President, at one time IBM Corporation
employed 18,000 people in Endicott, New York,
and encompassed a square footage area of over
1.5 million square feet. And unfortunately,
now they employ 1800 people and no longer own
1759
anything. And the tax value has continued to
disintegrate and disintegrate. And that's
really the bottom line.
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER: Thank you,
Madam President. Thank you, sponsor.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other
member wish to be heard on this bill?
Then the debate is closed.
There is a home-rule message at the
desk.
Read the last section.
THE SECRETARY: Section 8. This
act shall take effect immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Call the roll.
(The Secretary called the roll.)
THE SECRETARY: Ayes, 61.
THE PRESIDENT: The bill is
passed.
Senator Skelos, that completes the
controversial reading of the calendar.
SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you, Madam
President. Is there any housekeeping at the
desk?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, there is,
Senator.
1760
The Secretary will read.
THE SECRETARY: On page 15,
Senator Saland moves to discharge, from the
Committee on Environmental Conservation,
Assembly Bill Number 8315 and substitute it
for the identical Senate Bill Number 3430,
Third Reading Calendar 291.
THE PRESIDENT: Substitution
ordered.
Senator Skelos.
SENATOR SKELOS: Madam President,
there being no further business to come before
the Senate, I move we adjourn until Thursday,
April 15th, at 11:00 a.m.
THE PRESIDENT: On motion, the
Senate stands adjourned until Thursday,
April 15th, at 11:00 a.m.
(Whereupon, at 4:38 p.m., the
Senate adjourned.)