WEDNESDAY, JUNE 5, 2019                                                                       11:49 A.M.



                                 ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO:  THE HOUSE WILL

                    COME TO ORDER.

                                 IN THE ABSENCE OF CLERGY, LET US PAUSE FOR A MOMENT OF

                    SILENCE.

                                 (WHEREUPON, A MOMENT OF SILENCE WAS OBSERVED.)

                                 VISITORS ARE INVITED TO JOIN THE MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE

                    OF ALLEGIANCE.

                                 (WHEREUPON, ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO LED VISITORS

                    AND MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO:  A QUORUM BEING

                    PRESENT, THE CLERK WILL READ THE JOURNAL OF TUESDAY, JUNE 4TH.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE TO

                                          1



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    DISPENSE WITH THE FURTHER READING OF THE JOURNAL OF TUESDAY, JUNE THE

                    4TH AND THAT THE SAME STAND APPROVED.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER PICHARDO:  WITHOUT

                    OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  I'D LIKE TO OFFER FOR OUR COLLEAGUES, STAFF AND GUESTS THAT ARE

                    IN THE CHAMBERS [SIC] A QUOTE THIS MORNING FORM CARLOS SANTANA.

                    MANY OF YOU MAY REMEMBER HIM AND HIS MUSICAL STYLE.  BUT HIS QUOTE

                    TODAY IS, "THE MOST VALUABLE POSSESSION YOU CAN OWN IS AN OPEN HEART.

                    THE MOST POWERFUL WEAPON YOU CAN BE IS AN INSTRUMENT OF PEACE."

                    AGAIN, MR. SPEAKER, THAT'S CARLOS SANTANA.

                                 ON MEMBERS' DESKS THERE IS A MAIN CALENDAR.  WE'RE

                    GOING TO CONTINUE ON THAT MAIN CALENDAR AS WELL AS A DEBATE LIST.  AFTER

                    ANY INTRODUCTIONS AND HOUSEKEEPING, WE WILL TAKE UP RESOLUTIONS WHICH

                    ARE ON PAGE 3.  AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH NEW BILLS THAT

                    ARE ON THE MAIN CALENDAR, BEGINNING WITH CALENDAR NO. 539 WHICH IS

                    ON PAGE 37.  WE'LL ALSO BE TAKING UP BILLS ON DEBATE AS WELL.  THERE ARE

                    ALSO GOING TO BE COMMITTEES.  WE ARE ALREADY ENGAGED IN BANKING.  WE

                    ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CALL ALCOHOLISM, ENERGY, TRANSPORTATION, CODES,

                    AND WAYS AND MEANS.  THE RULES COMMITTEE WILL MEET TODAY AS WELL,

                    AND THE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO PRODUCE AN A-CALENDAR WHICH WE'RE

                    GOING TO TAKE UP TODAY, MR. SPEAKER.  AT SOME POINT THE MINORITY IS

                    GOING TO BE IN NEED OF A CONFERENCE.  WE'LL LOOK TO MR. GOODELL TO LET

                    US KNOW WHEN THAT HAPPENS.  AND FOR OUR MAJORITY MEMBERS, THERE

                                          2



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WILL BE A NEED FOR A DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE AT THE CONCLUSION OF

                    TODAY'S SESSION.  AS ALWAYS, MR. SPEAKER, I WILL CONSULT WITH THE OTHER

                    FOLKS TO SEE WHEN THEY NEED TO HAVE THEIR CONFERENCE.

                                 THAT'S THE GENERAL OUTLINE, MR. SPEAKER.  IF THERE ARE

                    INTRODUCTIONS AND HOUSEKEEPING, NOW WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE TIME.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. WALSH FOR THE

                    PURPOSES OF AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MS. WALSH:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WE ARE SO

                    PLEASED TO BE JOINED TODAY BY THE CHARLTON HEIGHTS ODYSSEY OF THE

                    MIND TEAM.  MEMBERS STELLA KIBLER, EMME FISCHER, ARDEN HEINER,

                    LUCY CAPO, CAROLINE WELSH, GABI TATRO; THEIR COACHES KODI KIBLER

                    AND SARA WELSH; THEIR PRINCIPAL, DAN [SIC] SINNENBERG -- TIM

                    SINNENBERG, I'M SO SORRY -- AND SEVERAL OF THEIR PARENTS, INCLUDING

                    PAULA FISCHER, JARED HEINER, MELISSA CAPO, MICHAEL COLLIGAN AND DAN

                    TATRO.  ON MARCH 23RD, THE CHARLTON HEIGHTS ODYSSEY OF THE MIND ALL-

                    GIRL TEAM, WHICH IS MADE UP OF THE SIX FOURTH-GRADERS FROM THE BURNT

                    HILLS-BALLSTON LAKE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE HERE TODAY, WON THE

                    STATE CHAMPIONSHIP AND ADVANCED TO THE WORLD FINALS.  AT THE END OF

                    MAY, THE GIRLS WON THIRD PLACE AT THE WORLD FINALS, WHICH WAS HELD IN

                    MICHIGAN.  THEY PLACED FIRST IN THE PERFORMANCE PORTION OF THE

                    COMPETITION.  THEY COMPETED AGAINST 72 OTHER TEAMS FROM ALL OVER THE

                    UNITED STATES, AS WELL AS CHINA, POLAND, JAPAN, KOREA, CANADA,

                    SWITZERLAND AND MEXICO.  DURING THE COMPETITION, THE GIRLS WERE

                    REQUIRED TO REPLICATE LEONARDO DA VINCI WORKS.  THE MONA LISA WAS

                    QUILTED BY ONE OF THE GIRLS, USING HUNDREDS OF ONE-INCH FABRIC SQUARES

                                          3



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    AND THE PAINTING "LADY WITH ERMINE" WAS MADE COMPLETELY OUT OF

                    BEANS AND BARLEY.  THEIR PERFORMANCE BROUGHT GREAT RECOGNITION TO

                    THEIR CREATIVITY AND TALENTS, AND ULTIMATELY EARNED THEM A TOP

                    PLACEMENT.

                                 FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW, ODYSSEY OF THE

                    MIND AS IN AN INTERNATIONAL CREATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING COMPETITION.

                    STUDENTS LEARN CRITICAL THINKING AND PROBLEM-SOLVING SKILLS, AS WELL AS

                    THE VALUE OF TEAMWORK BY WORKING TOGETHER THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL YEAR

                    TO SOLVE A LONG-TERM PROBLEM.  THOUSANDS OF TEAMS THROUGHOUT THE

                    UNITED STATES AND 25 COUNTRIES PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM.

                                 I AM SO PROUD, I WANT TO CONGRATULATE THESE EXTREMELY

                    INTELLIGENT AND DRIVEN YOUNG LADIES ON THEIR STATE CHAMPIONSHIP AND

                    THIRD PLACE WORLD FINISH.  I HOPE YOU ARE AS PROUD OF YOURSELVES AS WE

                    ARE OF YOU.  WE ARE SO LUCKY TO HAVE YOU REPRESENTING THE BURNT

                    HILLS-BALLSTON LAKE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT.  AND AS NINE- AND

                    TEN-YEAR-OLDS, I CANNOT WAIT TO SEE WHAT YOU WILL DO NEXT.

                                 SO, ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND, MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU

                    COULD PLEASE EXTEND THE CORDIALITIES OF THE HOUSE AND A WARM WELCOME

                    TO THESE YOUNG LADIES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  CERTAINLY.  ON BEHALF

                    OF MS. WALSH, THE SPEAKER AND ALL THE MEMBERS, WE WELCOME YOU HERE

                    TO THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY.  WE EXTEND TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF

                    THE FLOOR.  ALSO, TO YOUR PRINCIPAL AND YOUR PARENTS WHO HAVE COME.

                    WE CELEBRATE WITH YOU THE VICTORIES THAT YOU'VE HAD AS CHAMPIONS IN

                    NEW YORK STATE AND THIRD PLACE IN THE WORLD.  NOT BAD WORK FOR

                                          4



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    TEN-YEAR-OLDS.  CONGRATULATIONS.  CONTINUE THAT GREAT WORK, AND WE

                    HOPE THIS WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WILL GUIDE YOU ONTO A HUGE, BRIGHT

                    FUTURE.  THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.  YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME HERE.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF WE CAN


                    NOW GO TO PAGE 3, RESOLUTIONS.  WE'RE GOING TO START AT ASSEMBLY NO.

                    493.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 493, MR.

                    CUSICK.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM JUNE 5TH, 2019, AS GLOBAL RUNNING

                    DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CUSICK ON THE

                    RESOLUTION.

                                 MR. CUSICK:  THANK YOU, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                    I RISE TO EXPLAIN THE RESOLUTION TODAY.  TODAY IS GLOBAL RUNNING DAY.

                    IT IS ALWAYS THE FIRST WEDNESDAY OF JUNE EVERY YEAR.  HERE IN THE

                    CAPITOL, WE INSTITUTED BACK IN 2013 A -- BACK THEN IT WAS NATIONAL

                    RUNNING DAY, NOW IT'S GLOBAL RUNNING DAY.  BUT BACK IN 2013 WE

                    INSTITUTED A FUN RUN HERE AT THE CAPITOL.  AND THIS RESOLUTION

                    COMMEMORATES GLOBAL RUNNING DAY AND IT ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO LIVE A

                    HEALTHY LIFESTYLE AND TO TAKE UP RUNNING IF YOU'RE NOT A RUNNER, OR TO

                    CONTINUE RUNNING AS A HEALTHY WAY OF KEEPING FIT.  TONIGHT, MR.

                                          5



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SPEAKER, TO COMMEMORATE GLOBAL RUNNING DAY WE ARE SPONSORING A

                    FUN RUN THAT STARTS AT THE EMPIRE PLAZA.  ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO

                    ARE INTERESTED, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO JOIN US FOR A NICE RUN

                    STARTING AT 6:30 TONIGHT.  IT WILL END -- IT'S A THREE-MILE RUN.  THERE ARE

                    HALF-MILE AND MILE INCREMENTS THAT YOU CAN RUN ALSO, IF YOU'D LIKE.  AND

                    THEN AFTERWARDS WE WOULD -- WE WILL GATHER AT A LOCAL ESTABLISHMENT

                    AFTER THE RUN.

                                 SO, MR. SPEAKER, AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES

                    FOR VOTING FOR THIS RESOLUTION AND -- FOR GLOBAL RUNNING DAY, AND HOPE

                    THAT MANY COLLEAGUES WILL JOIN US TONIGHT IN RUNNING.  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 494, MS.

                    SOLAGES.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM JUNE 8TH, 2019, AS BELMONT STAKES

                    DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, AND COMMENDING THE NEW YORK RACING

                    ASSOCIATION UPON THE OCCASION OF THE 151ST RUNNING OF THE BELMONT

                    STAKES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 495, MS.

                                          6



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    MALLIOTAKIS.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2019, AS

                    PUPPY MILL AWARENESS DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 496, MR.

                    MAGNARELLI.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM SEPTEMBER 23-29, 2019, AS DIAPER

                    NEED AWARENESS WEEK IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 497, MRS.

                    GUNTHER.

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO PROCLAIM WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2019, AS

                    WOMEN'S HEALTH AND FITNESS DAY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 498, MS.

                    MALLIOTAKIS.

                                          7



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR

                    ANDREW M. CUOMO TO DECLARE SEPTEMBER 2019, AS CHRONIC PAIN

                    AWARENESS MONTH.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

                    THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTION IS

                    ADOPTED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  WE'RE GOING TO GO TO

                    CONSENT NOW, MR. SPEAKER, ON PAGE 37 [SIC], GOING TO CALENDAR NO.

                    539 BY MR. STERN.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  PAGE 36, CALENDAR

                    NO. 539, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07097, CALENDAR NO.

                    539, STERN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE INSURANCE LAW, IN RELATION TO

                    STANDARDS FOR PROMPT INVESTIGATION AND SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS ARISING

                    FROM STATES OF EMERGENCY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07103, CALENDAR NO.

                    540, CRUZ, D'URSO, COLTON, BLAKE, RIVERA, ORTIZ, DESTEFANO, TAYLOR,

                    JAFFEE, DICKENS, BARRON, DINOWITZ, M.G. MILLER, SAYEGH, GOTTFRIED.

                    AN ACT IN RELATION TO THE EXAMINATION OF AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL'S

                    RE-ENTRY PLANNING; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS

                    UPON EXPIRATION THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MS.

                    CRUZ, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

                                          8



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07128, CALENDAR NO.

                    541, PAULIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, IN RELATION

                    TO TREATMENT PROGRAMS AND TREATMENT COURT DURING INTERIM PROBATION

                    SUPERVISION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 60TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 FIRST VOTE OF THE DAY, MEMBERS.  PLEASE, IF YOU ARE IN

                    YOUR SEAT, VOTE NOW.  IF YOU ARE IN THE SOUND OF OUR VOICE, PLEASE COME

                    INTO THE CHAMBER AND VOTE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, BEFORE WE

                    CONTINUE ON OUR CONSENT, IF WE COULD GO BACK TO CALENDAR NO. 540 BY

                    MS. CRUZ.

                                          9



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07103, CALENDAR NO.

                    540, CRUZ, D'URSO, COLTON, BLAKE, RIVERA, ORTIZ, DESTEFANO, TAYLOR,

                    JAFFEE, DICKENS, BARRON, DINOWITZ, M.G. MILLER, SAYEGH, GOTTFRIED.

                    AN ACT IN RELATION TO THE EXAMINATION OF AN INCARCERATED INDIVIDUAL'S

                    RE-ENTRY PLANNING; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF SUCH PROVISIONS

                    UPON EXPIRATION THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION

                    -- OH.

                                 ON A MOTION BY MS. CRUZ, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE

                    HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS ADVANCED.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. CRUZ TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. CRUZ:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  OUR CRIMINAL

                    JUSTICE SYSTEM OFTEN DOESN'T PROVIDE ENOUGH OPPORTUNITIES TO ENSURE

                    THAT FOLKS EXITING THAT SYSTEM ARE NOW GOING BE REENTERING IN TWO,

                    THREE, FOUR MONTHS.  AND SO THIS PARTICULAR BILL ENSURES THAT SOCIAL

                    SERVICES ARE BEING PROVIDED TO THESE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY SO

                    THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO BE PROACTIVE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND

                    THAT WE ARE GIVING THEM A FULL CHANCE.  AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OFTEN

                    HAPPENS AND THAT WE HEAR IS THAT THEY'RE PROHIBITED FROM, SAY, LIVING IN

                                         10



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PUBLIC HOUSING.  BUT THAT'S THE ONLY HOUSING THEY KNOW.  THEY MIGHT BE

                    GOING BACK TO THEIR PRIOR HOME, TO THEIR PARENTS' HOME.  SO IF WE ARE

                    NOT ANALYZING THE LIMITATIONS OF THEIR EXIT PLAN, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE

                    THAT THESE FOLKS DON'T CONTINUE TO COMMIT CRIMES AND CONTINUE TO ENTER

                    THE SYSTEM.  IT IS OUR DUTY AS LEGISLATORS TO PROVIDE THEM WITH THOSE

                    TOOLS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE ALL THE CHANCES AVAILABLE TO THEM.

                                 SO I AM PROUD TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, AND I THANK

                    YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. CRUZ IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 ENERGY COMMITTEE, PLEASE GO TO THE SPEAKER'S

                    CONFERENCE ROOM IMMEDIATELY.  ENERGY COMMITTEE, SPEAKER'S

                    CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07131, CALENDAR NO.

                    542, PEOPLES-STOKES.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE

                    CONTROL LAW, IN RELATION TO A LICENSE TO SELL LIQUOR AT RETAIL FOR

                    CONSUMPTION ON CERTAIN PREMISES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                         11



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07190, CALENDAR NO.

                    543, ZEBROWSKI, COLTON, WRIGHT, DAVILA, COOK.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE

                    TAX LAW AND ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE NEW YORK, IN RELATION TO REAL

                    PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX RETURNS OF LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07228, CALENDAR NO.

                    544, BARCLAY.  AN ACT RELATING TO LEGALIZING, VALIDATING AND RATIFYING

                    AND CONFIRMING A TRANSPORTATION CONTRACT OF THE FULTON CITY SCHOOL

                    DISTRICT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07282, CALENDAR NO.

                    545, ZEBROWSKI.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC SERVICE LAW, IN RELATION

                    TO AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION TO REQUIRE WATER-WORKS

                    CORPORATIONS TO PROVIDE CERTAIN RESIDENTS WITH NON-BILLING-RELATED

                                         12



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    INFORMATION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07310-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 546, JAFFEE.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO LIMITING THE SHIFT BETWEEN CLASSES OF TAXABLE PROPERTY IN THE

                    TOWN OF ORANGETOWN, COUNTY OF ROCKLAND.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL THE COMMITTEE ON ALCOHOLISM TO THE

                    SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  COMMITTEE ON

                    ALCOHOLISM, SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM, PLEASE.  THANK YOU.

                                 THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07326, CALENDAR NO.

                    547, MCDONALD.  AN ACT IN RELATION TO PERMITTING MOUNT MORIAH

                    BAPTIST CHURCH TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A REAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MR.

                                         13



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    MCDONALD, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS

                    ADVANCED.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07327, CALENDAR NO.

                    548, MCDONALD.  AN ACT -- AN ACT IN RELATION TO PERMITTING THE

                    NORTHEASTERN ASSOCIATION OF THE BLIND AT ALBANY, INC. TO FILE AN

                    APPLICATION FOR A REAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MR.

                    MCDONALD, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS

                    ADVANCED.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                         14



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  IF YOU COULD PLEASE CALL ON MR. CROUCH FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CROUCH FOR THE

                    PURPOSES OF AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 MR. CROUCH:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  THERE WILL

                    BE AN IMMEDIATE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE IN THE PARLOR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  IMMEDIATE

                    REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE IN THE PARLOR.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF WE

                    COULD STAND AT EASE FOR 20 MINUTES OR SO WHILE THE REPUBLICANS ARE IN

                    THEIR CONFERENCE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE ASSEMBLY WILL

                    STAND AT EASE.

                                 (WHEREUPON, THE HOUSE STOOD AT EASE.)



                    *****



                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE HOUSE WILL COME

                    TO ORDER.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  IF YOU -- MR. SPEAKER,

                    WOULD YOU PLEASE ASK THE CODES COMMITTEE TO MEET MEMBER LENTOL IN

                    THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM IMMEDIATELY?

                                         15



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  CODES COMMITTEE,

                    SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE.  MR. LENTOL IS ON HIS WAY.  SEE IF YOU CAN'T BEAT

                    HIM THERE.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, I NOW

                    WOULD LIKE TO INTERRUPT OUR BRIEFLY-OPENED RECONVENED SESSION TO

                    INTRODUCE SOME GUESTS ON BEHALF OF MEMBER QUART.  THESE ARE STUDENTS

                    FROM ROOSEVELT SCHOLARS FROM HUNTER COLLEGE.  THEY'RE HERE JOINING

                    MR. QUART AND TAKING AN OPPORTUNITY TO TOUR IN AND AROUND ALBANY.

                    THESE ARE STUDENTS WITH PASSION FOR CIVIL ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLIC

                    AFFAIRS.  ROOSEVELT ASPIRES TO BE A FORCE OF CONSTRUCTIVE CHANGE.  THEY

                    SEEK TO IMPACT THROUGH THEIR DIRECT SERVICE SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND

                    LEADERSHIP THAT FOSTERS STRONG COMMUNITIES AND SENSIBLE POLICIES.

                                 MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE WELCOME THESE FINE

                    24 FRESHMAN STUDENTS AND WELCOME THEM TO OUR CHAMBERS [SIC] TODAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  CERTAINLY.  ON BEHALF

                    OF ASSEMBLYMAN QUART, THE SPEAKER AND ALL THE MEMBERS, WE WELCOME

                    YOU HERE TO THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY, EXTEND TO YOU THE

                    PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR, CONGRATULATE YOU ON THE EXCELLENCE OF YOUR

                    ACADEMIC WORK, AND HOPE THAT THIS PARTICULAR TRIP WILL GIVE YOU INSIGHTS

                    INTO STATE GOVERNMENT THAT WILL BE HELPFUL TO YOU IN YOUR FUTURE.

                    THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR COMING.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MR. GOODELL FOR AN INTRODUCTION.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

                                         16



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SPEAKER.  ON BEHALF OF LEADER BRIAN KOLB, ASSEMBLYMAN WILL BARCLAY

                    AND ASSEMBLYMAN COLIN SCHMITT, IT'S MY PLEASURE TO INTRODUCE A -- A

                    FORMER MEMBER OF THE ASSEMBLY WHO WENT ON TO BECOME THE

                    SUPERINTENDENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.  MANY OF YOU

                    KNOW OF HIS GREAT WORK BOTH AS AN ASSEMBLYMAN AND A

                    SUPERINTENDENT, AND THAT'S HOWARD MILLS.  AND HE IS HERE WITH HIS

                    WIFE, ERIN.  ALSO ACCOMPANYING MR. MILLS AND HIS WIFE ARE A NUMBER

                    OF GUESTS WHO ARE UP HERE EXPRESSING CONCERNS AND PROVIDING HELPFUL

                    INFORMATION ON ISSUES INVOLVING KIDS AND VAPING.  HE HAS BEEN VERY

                    ACTIVE IN THIS FIELD AND, OF COURSE, AS YOU KNOW, HAS A LONG AND

                    DISTINGUISHED CAREER, ALONG WITH THE GUESTS THAT HE BRINGS WITH HIM, IN

                    HELPING US MAKE THOUGHTFUL AND INTELLIGENT DECISIONS ON THE FLOOR OF

                    THE LEGISLATURE.

                                 IF YOU WOULD WELCOME MR. MILLS, HIS WIFE AND ALL OF

                    HIS GUESTS, I WOULD CERTAINLY APPRECIATE IT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  CERTAINLY.  ON BEHALF

                    OF MR. KOLB AND MR. SCHMITT AND MR. BARCLAY, THE SPEAKER AND ALL THE

                    MEMBERS, WE WELCOME YOU BACK, HOWARD, TO THE NEW YORK STATE

                    ASSEMBLY AND YOUR FAMILY, YOU ARE FAMILY AND, THEREFORE -- AND A

                    FORMER MEMBER -- ALWAYS PROVIDED THE -- THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR.

                    HAPPY TO SEE YOU, HOPE THAT YOU HAVE ENJOYED YOUR DIVERSE CAREER

                    SINCE YOU LEFT US.  AND TO THOSE GUESTS THAT YOU HAVE COME HERE WHO

                    HAVE PUBLIC INTERESTS IN PROTECTING THE REST OF THE YOUTH OF THIS

                    COMMUNITY, THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO.  PLEASE

                    KNOW THAT YOU ARE ALSO ALWAYS WELCOME HERE.  THANK YOU.

                                         17



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, WE HAVE

                    SOME OTHER FINE SCHOLARS IN OUR CHAMBERS [SIC].  THEY HAPPEN TO BE

                    FOURTH- GRADERS FROM MARCY ELEMENTARY IN OUR COLLEAGUE MS.

                    BUTTENSCHON'S DISTRICT.  IF YOU WOULD WELCOME THESE YOUNG SCHOLARS TO

                    OUR CHAMBERS [SIC].

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  CERTAINLY.  ON BEHALF

                    OF MS. BUTTENSCHON, THE SPEAKER AND ALL THE MEMBERS, WE WELCOME

                    THESE EXTRAORDINARY FOURTH-GRADERS HERE TO THE NEW YORK STATE

                    ASSEMBLY, EXTEND TO YOU THE PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR, HOPE THAT YOU HAVE

                    ENJOYED YOUR TRIP HERE TO ALBANY.  KNOW THAT YOU ARE IN THE PEOPLE'S

                    HOUSE AND YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME HERE.  WE HOPE TO SEE YOU FOR

                    MANY YEARS UNTIL MAYBE ONE OF YOU TAKES ONE OF THESE SEATS.  THANK

                    YOU SO VERY MUCH.  HOPE THAT YOU'LL BE BACK.  THANK YOU.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF WE

                    COULD NOW CONTINUE OUR WORK ON CONSENT ON PAGE 38, WE'RE GOING TO

                    GO TO CALENDAR NO. 549.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  PAGE 38, CALENDAR

                    NO. 549, THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07372, CALENDAR NO.

                    549, PAULIN, OTIS.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC SERVICE LAW, IN RELATION

                    TO TRANSFERS OF CABLE SYSTEMS.

                                         18



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07373, CALENDAR NO.

                    550, GLICK, STIRPE, FAHY.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE EDUCATION LAW IN

                    RELATION TO REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEW YORK STATE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,

                    ENGINEERING AND MATHEMATICS INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07459, CALENDAR NO.

                    551, STECK, RAIA, RAYNOR, MOSLEY.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE GENERAL

                    BUSINESS LAW, IN RELATION TO MERCANTILE ESTABLISHMENTS AND THE DEFENSE

                    OF LAWFUL DETENTION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MR.

                    STECK, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS

                    ADVANCED.

                                 THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07462, CALENDAR NO.

                    552, EPSTEIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO MAKING THE PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE VARIOUS ON-PREMISES

                    LIQUOR LICENSES CONSISTENT WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC INTEREST FACTORS THAT

                                         19



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY WHEN EVALUATING THE

                    MERITS OF A LICENSE APPLICATION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07499, CALENDAR NO.

                    553, B. MILLER.  AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE SCHENEVUS CENTRAL DISTRICT --

                    SCHOOL DISTRICT TO APPLY FOR [SIC] THE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION TO

                    RECEIVE AN IMPORTANT -- AN APPORTIONMENT TO BE USED FOR SERVICES AND

                    EXPENSES OF SUCH SCHOOL DISTRICT AND TO SUPPORT ITS EDUCATIONAL

                    PROGRAMS AND ANY LIABILITY IN CARRYING OUT THE FUNCTIONS AND

                    RESPONSIBILITIES OF SUCH DISTRICT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MR.

                    BRIAN MILLER, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS

                    ADVANCED.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07504, CALENDAR NO.

                    554, EICHENSTEIN, BRONSON, REYES, TAYLOR, D. ROSENTHAL, WRIGHT,

                    ABBATE, JOYNER, WALLACE, DENDEKKER, CRUZ, BRAUNSTEIN, DICKENS,

                    BARNWELL.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE ELDER LAW, IN RELATION TO REPORTING

                                         20



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    UNMET NEED FOR PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR THE AGING.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 AND SIR, IT IS YOUR FIRST.  YOU ARE AT THE ZENITH.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07523, CALENDAR NO.

                    555, DINOWITZ.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE SURROGATES'S COURT PROCEDURE

                    ACT, IN RELATION TO THE COMPUTATION AND ALLOCATION OF THE COMMISSIONS

                    OF TRUSTEES OF CHARITABLE TRUSTS; AND REPEALING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SUCH

                    LAW RELATING THERETO.[

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07528, CALENDAR NO.

                    556, GANTT, DINOWITZ, WRIGHT, WEPRIN.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE FAMILY

                    COURT ACT, IN RELATION TO USE OF RESTRAINTS OF CHILDREN APPEARING BEFORE

                    THE FAMILY COURT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07529-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 557, WALLACE, DINOWITZ.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE FAMILY COURT ACT

                                         21



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    AND THE DOMESTIC RELATIONS LAW, IN RELATION TO ORDERS FOR TEMPORARY

                    SPOUSAL SUPPORT IN CONJUNCTION WITH TEMPORARY AND FINAL ORDERS OF

                    PROTECTION IN FAMILY COURT AND CALCULATION OF THE SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE

                    "CAP."

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07557, CALENDAR NO.

                    558, D'URSO, ENGLEBRIGHT, SAYEGH, SEAWRIGHT.  AN ACT TO AMEND

                    CHAPTER 58 OF THE LAWS OF 2013 AMENDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL

                    CONSERVATION LAW AND THE STATE FINANCE LAW RELATING TO THE "CLEANER,

                    GREENER NY ACT OF 2013", IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07598, CALENDAR NO.

                    559, SEAWRIGHT, DINOWITZ.  AN ACT TO AMEND CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND

                    RULES, IN RELATION TO THE FAILURE TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF A DEFAULT JUDGMENT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A07600, CALENDAR NO.

                    560, ABINANTI, DINOWITZ.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND

                    RULES, IN RELATION TO THE PERMITTED SUBMISSIONS IN A DEFAULT JUDGMENT.

                                         22



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF WE CAN

                    NOW GO TO OUR DEBATE LIST, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP MR. DINOWITZ'S

                    CALENDAR NO. 158, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO RIGHT TO MS. HUNTER ON

                    CALENDAR NO. 391.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A04745-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 158, DINOWITZ.  AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 455 OF THE LAWS OF 1997

                    AMENDING THE NEW YORK CITY CIVIL COURT ACT AND THE CIVIL PRACTICE

                    LAW AND RULES RELATING TO AUTHORIZING NEW YORK CITY MARSHALS TO

                    EXERCISE THE SAME FUNCTIONS, POWERS AND DUTIES AS SHERIFFS WITH RESPECT

                    TO THE EXECUTION OF MONEY JUDGMENTS, IN RELATION TO EXTENDING THE

                    EFFECTIVENESS OF SUCH CHAPTER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                         23



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF YOU

                    COULD PLEASE CALL THE RULES COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE

                    ROOM FOR A MEETING IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  RULES COMMITTEE,

                    SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM IMMEDIATELY, PLEASE.

                                 THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A02455-A, CALENDAR

                    NO. 391, HUNTER, COOK, HEVESI, GOTTFRIED, HYNDMAN, BLAKE, ROMEO,

                    BRONSON, BARRON, REYES.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO CONCILIATION AND NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC ASSISTANCE

                    EMPLOYMENT; AND TO REPEAL CERTAIN PROVISION OF SUCH LAW RELATING

                    THERETO.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MS.

                    HUNTER, THE SENATE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.  THE SENATE BILL IS

                    ADVANCED.

                                 AN EXPLANATION IS REQUESTED, MS. HUNTER.

                                 MS. HUNTER:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  THIS BILL

                    WOULD EXPAND THE CONCILIATION PROCESS TO THE REST OF THE STATE REQUIRING

                    LOCAL SOCIAL SERVICES DISTRICTS TO CONFIRM THAT THE RECIPIENT IS NOT

                    EXEMPT FROM THE MANDATORY WORK REQUIREMENT, AND THAT THE RECIPIENT

                                         24



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HAS APPROPRIATE CHILDCARE, TRANSPORTATION AND DISABILITY

                    ACCOMMODATIONS PRIOR TO IMPOSING A SANCTION ON A RECIPIENT FOR FAILURE

                    TO COMPLY WITH WORK RULES.  THE LANGUAGE WOULD END DURATIONAL

                    SANCTIONS ONCE THE RECIPIENT IS WILLING TO COMPLY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WOULD

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WILL YOU YIELD, MS.

                    HUNTER?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, MS. HUNTER.  SO,

                    BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THIS BILL CHANGES, CAN WE TALK A LITTLE BIT

                    ABOUT WHAT THE CURRENT LAW IS?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  THE CURRENT LAW IS WHEN SOMEONE IS

                    SANCTIONED, THERE'S A CONCILIATION PROCESS:  THEY SEND A NOTICE TO THE

                    RECIPIENT REGARDING THE FAILURE TO COMPLY.  THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT

                    STEPS AFTER THAT.  IF THEY REFUSE TO COMPLY, THERE'S ONE THING; IF THEY DO

                    COMPLY, IT'S ANOTHER.  THEY HAVE TEN DAYS IN ORDER TO GET BACK TO THE

                    CURRENT SOCIAL SERVICES.  THEY HAVE A SEVEN-DAY NOTIFICATION AND TEN

                    DAYS FOR THE RECIPIENT TO RESPOND, AND THEN AFTER ALL OF THIS PROCESS,

                    THERE IS ANOTHER 30 DAYS.  SO, IN TOTAL, THEY HAVE 50 DAYS FROM THE

                    BEGINNING OF A -- A CONCILIATION PROCESS THROUGH TO THE END, IF, IN FACT, A

                    SANCTION HAS OCCURRED.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND THAT'S UNDER CURRENT LAW.

                                         25



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MS. HUNTER:  CORRECT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND SO, IF A [SIC] ABLE-BODIED

                    WELFARE RECIPIENT IS ASSIGNED TO A TRAINING PROGRAM, FOR EXAMPLE, AND

                    LET'S SAY THE TRAINING PROGRAM STARTS, FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT, ON A

                    MONDAY, AND THEY DON'T SHOW UP ON MONDAY.  UNDER CURRENT LAW, THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES SENDS THEM A NOTICE, A TEN-DAY NOTICE

                    SAYING, WHY DIDN'T YOU SHOW UP FOR THIS TRAINING?  IT STARTED ON

                    MONDAY.  RIGHT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  CORRECT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND IF THEY GET A RESPONSE BACK,

                    MAYBE THEY CAN GET THEM INTO THE NEXT TRAINING PROGRAM.  OF COURSE,

                    THE TRAINING PROGRAM IS NOW MOVING ON.  SO, AFTER THAT FIRST TEN-DAY

                    NOTICE, IF THEY DON'T HEAR ANYTHING THEN THEY SEND A SECOND TEN-DAY

                    NOTICE UNDER CURRENT LAW.  RIGHT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  CORRECT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND THE SECOND TEN-DAYS NOTICE

                    SAID, YOU DIDN'T SHOW UP AT THE TRAINING SESSION, YOU HAVEN'T

                    RESPONDED AT ALL TO OUR FIRST NOTICE, SO, IF WE DON'T HEAR FROM YOU IN THE

                    NEXT TEN DAYS, WE'RE GOING TO SANCTION YOU.  WE'RE GOING TO CUT BACK ON

                    YOUR BENEFITS.  CORRECT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  WELL, AFTER -- AFTER THE CONCILIATION IS

                    EXTENDED, THEY MAKE A DETERMINATION WITHIN 14 DAYS.  AND THEN THE

                    RECIPIENT HAS 30 DAYS AFTER THAT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND SO, AFTER YOU HAVE THE FIRST

                    TEN-DAY NOTICE, YOU HAVE A SECOND TEN-DAY NOTICE OF AN INTENT TO CUT

                                         26



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BENEFITS UNDER CURRENT LAW.  IF THE RECIPIENT DISAGREES, THE RECIPIENT CAN

                    REQUEST A FAIR HEARING.  I KNOW MOST OF OUR UPSTATE COUNTIES ARE

                    RUNNING THREE OR FOUR MONTHS BEFORE THEY EVEN SCHEDULE A FAIR HEARING.

                    SO, IF YOU DON'T SHOW UP FOR A JOB TRAINING OR WORK EXPERIENCE OR A

                    TRAINING PROGRAM, UNDER THE CURRENT LAW, YOU CAN LIKELY COLLECT BENEFITS

                    FOR ANYWHERE FROM THREE TO FIVE MONTHS BEFORE THERE'S A FINAL

                    DETERMINATION AND SANCTIONS ACTUALLY WOULD KICK IN, RIGHT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  YES.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND THEN, OF COURSE, ONCE THE

                    SANCTIONS KICK IN, YOU CAN IMMEDIATELY SAY, NEVER MIND, I'D LIKE TO GO

                    TO THAT TRAINING, AND THEY'LL LIFT THE SANCTIONS?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  ONLY IF IT'S YOUR FIRST SANCTION AND

                    YOU'RE -- IF YOU'RE ON TANF, NOT SAFETYNET.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OKAY.  SO, THE CURRENT PROCESS IS...

                    I MEAN, REMARKABLY SLOW AND CUMBERSOME, IT SEEMS, IF WE'RE SERIOUS.

                    BECAUSE IF -- IF YOU'RE IN THE REAL WORLD, AND WHEN I SAY THE REAL WORLD,

                    I MEAN THE WORKING WORLD, AND YOU DIDN'T SHOW UP ON MONDAY, MOST

                    EMPLOYERS WILL HAVE IT RESOLVED BY TUESDAY, RIGHT?  I MEAN, MOST

                    EMPLOYERS WILL PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL YOU AND SAY, YOU DIDN'T

                    SHOW UP FOR WORK TODAY, ON MONDAY.  WHERE ARE YOU?  WHAT'S GOING

                    ON?  ARE YOU OKAY?  ARE YOU SICK?  WHAT'S GOING ON?  BUT THAT'S NOT

                    THE WAY THE STATE OF NEW YORK WORKS.  THE STATE OF NEW YORK SENDS

                    YOU A LETTER TWO WEEKS LATER AND SAYS, HOW COME YOU DIDN'T SHOW UP TO

                    WORK ON MONDAY?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  ACTUALLY --

                                         27



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SHOULDN'T WE BE TRYING TO STRUCTURE

                    THE --

                                 MS. HUNTER:  -- THIS PROCESS -- THIS CHANGE,

                    ACTUALLY, MR. GOODELL, WOULD ACTUALLY CHANGE THAT PROCESS.  BECAUSE

                    AFTER THE -- THE PERSON DOES NOT SHOW UP TO THE WORK TRAINING, TO THE --

                    TO THE POSITION, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON THE SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO

                    FIND OUT IF IT IS A DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION ISSUE, CHILDCARE,

                    TRANSPORTATION ISSUE, SO THEY CAN WORK TO -- TO RECTIFY THE ISSUE SO THE

                    PEOPLE COULD GET BACK INTO THE PROGRAM AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  WELL, I -- I -- I DISAGREE WITH YOUR

                    ASSESSMENT OF WHAT THIS BILL DOES.  BUT LET'S GET BACK TO THAT IN A

                    MINUTE.  SO, I'M JUST SAYING, IN THE -- IN THE WORKING WORLD, WHERE WE

                    HOPE EVENTUALLY EVERYONE ENDS UP SO THAT THEY CAN MAXIMIZE THEIR

                    POTENTIAL AND BECOME SELF-SUFFICIENT -- IN THE WORKING WORLD WE

                    RESOLVE A FAILURE TO SHOW UP WITHIN A DAY OR TWO, BECAUSE THE EMPLOYER

                    PICKS UP THE PHONE -- AND BY THE WAY, HERE ON THE FLOOR OF THE

                    ASSEMBLY, IF YOU DON'T SHOW UP AT A COMMITTEE MEETING, WE TYPICALLY

                    TEXT YOU WITHIN A FEW MINUTES.  WE DON'T SEND YOU THE -- A LETTER AND --

                    AND GIVE YOU SEVEN TO TEN DAYS TO SAY WHY YOU DIDN'T SHOW UP.  WHY

                    AREN'T WE FOLLOWING THAT PROCEDURE THAT APPLIES EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE

                    PRIVATE SECTOR, AND EVEN IN GOVERNMENT, WHEN IT COMES UP TO AN

                    INDIVIDUAL WHO'S ON THIS WELFARE WORK PROGRAM WHO DOESN'T SHOW UP

                    FOR WORK OR TRAINING?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  WELL, I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU, MR.

                    GOODELL, THAT EVERY COMPANY ACTUALLY HAS THEIR OWN POLICY ON

                                         28



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ABSENTEEISM.  THE -- WE'RE TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS BILL.  AND

                    WHAT THIS BILL WOULD DO WOULD ACTUALLY HELP PEOPLE TO GET BACK TO

                    WORK, BY TRYING TO IDENTIFY WHAT THE ISSUE IS IN ORDER TO GET THEM BACK

                    TO -- TO THE JOB TRAINING, THE WORK THAT THEY... NEED TO BE IN IN ORDER TO

                    THE -- BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND WE'LL COME TO THAT IN JUST A

                    SECOND.  AND, INDEED, IF -- IF I THOUGHT THAT WERE THE CASE, I'D BE A

                    COSPONSOR.  BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, I'M NOT, SO WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT IN A

                    MINUTE.  SO, UNDER THE CURRENT LAW, OR EVEN UNDER THIS LAW, IF

                    SOMEONE'S ASSIGNED TO A JOB TRAINING PROGRAM THAT HELPS THEM GET THE

                    SKILLS SO THEY CAN MAKE MONEY AND BE SELF-SUFFICIENT, THAT TRAINING

                    PROGRAM DOESN'T WAIT FOR THE TEN-DAY NOTICE, OR THE FOLLOW-UP TEN-DAY

                    NOTICE, OR THE THREE OR FOUR MONTH DELAY IN HEARING, RIGHT?  THAT

                    TRAINING PROGRAM -- THAT TRAIN HAS LEFT THE STATION.  RIGHT?  ON MONDAY.

                                 MS. HUNTER:  THEY CAN CONTINUE TO PARTICIPAT --

                    PARTICIPATE IN THAT TRAINING PROGRAM IF THEY LIKE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OH, SO, THEY CAN JUST JOIN IN AFTER

                    MISSING THE FIRST --

                                 MS. HUNTER:  THEY JUST WOULDN'T RECEIVE --

                                 MR. GOODELL: -- THREE OR FOUR MONTHS?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  -- THEIR BENEFITS.  BUT THEY CAN START

                    BACK INTO THE TRAINING PROGRAM.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OKAY.  SO, NOW THAT WE UNDERSTAND

                    HOW INCREDIBLY SLOW AND CUMBERSOME THE CURRENT PROCESS IS, AND HOW

                    IT HAS NO CONNECTION WITH THE REAL WORLD, LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT THESE

                                         29



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CHANGES ARE, BECAUSE, AFTER ALL, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE AND --

                                 MS. HUNTER:  CORRECT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  -- I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING MY

                    COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS.  SO, IN THE CURRENT LAW, THEY SEND A -- A

                    TEN-DAY NOTICE AND THEY SAY, WHY DIDN'T YOU SHOW UP FOR WORK ON

                    MONDAY?  AND UNDER THIS LAW, BEFORE THEY EVEN SEND THAT NOTICE, WE

                    ASK NOW THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES TO DO SOME SORT OF

                    INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE WELFARE RECIPIENT HAD

                    CHILDCARE AVAILABLE, OR TRANSPORTATION AVAILABLE, RIGHT?  OR IF THERE WAS

                    SOME OTHER EXCUSE, EVEN BEFORE WE START THE PROCESS.  IS THAT CORRECT?

                    THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  CORRECT.  AND BECAUSE THOSE ARE --

                    THOSE THREE ISSUES ARE THE MAIN REASONS WHY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN UNABLE

                    TO GET TO THEIR WORK OR JOB TRAINING PROGRAM.  THAT'S WHY WE WANT

                    SOCIAL SERVICES TO DO THIS AT THE BEGINNING, SO THAT WE CAN KEEP PEOPLE

                    IN THE PROGRAM AND KEEP PEOPLE WORKING --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  NOW, OF COURSE --

                                 MS. HUNTER:  TO SHORTEN THE PROCESS.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  OF COURSE, IN THE --IN THE WORKING

                    WORLD, BOTH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC, IT'S NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY TO CALL UP THE

                    EMPLOYEE AND SAY, UMM, WHAT CHILDCARE ARRANGEMENTS DO YOU HAVE

                    FOR MONDAY'S WORK?  YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE HERE ON

                    MONDAY.  WE EXPECT THE EMPLOYEE TO BE PRIMARILY RESPONSIBILE FOR

                    ARRANGING THEIR OWN CHILDCARE AND THEIR OWN TRANSPORTATION, RIGHT?  IN

                    THE -- IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, IT'S THE EMPLOYEE'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE

                                         30



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THOSE ARRANGEMENTS, NOT THE EMPLOYER, RIGHT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  WELL, THEY ARE STILL RESPONSIBLE TO

                    TAKE CARE OF CHILDCARE ARRANGEMENTS AND TRANSPORTATION.  AND JUST LIKE,

                    AS YOU REFERRED TO THE WORKING WORLD, WHICH THESE PEOPLE ARE IN THE

                    WORKING WORLD, THEY ARE WORKING, THAT -- YOU KNOW, AS A MATTER OF FACT,

                    THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE TRANSPORTATION AND

                    CHILDCARE.  AND JUST AS, YOU -- YOU KNOW, STATE, IN THE WORKING WORLD, IF

                    SOMEONE IN AN OUTSIDE EMPLOYER, THEY HAVE A CHILDCARE ISSUE OR THEY

                    HAVE TRANSPORTATION ISSUE, THEY COULD CALL THEIR EMPLOYER AND SAY, I

                    CAN'T BE [SIC] COME BECAUSE OF... THIS VALID REASON, USUALLY, WITHOUT

                    PENALTY OF BEING FIRED OR SANCTIONED BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T GET TO WORK.

                    AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE RECEIVING THIS KIND OF

                    ASSISTANCE ARE AFFORDED THE SAME TYPE OF SERVICE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH YOUR

                    ANALYSIS, AND -- AND I APPRECIATE THAT.  AND I'VE BEEN BOTH AN EMPLOYEE

                    AND AN EMPLOYER.  AND THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES AS AN EMPLOYER WHERE

                    I'VE RECEIVED A CALL FROM ONE OF MY EMPLOYEES SAYING, I'M GOING TO BE

                    LATE BECAUSE MY CAR BROKE DOWN, OR, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T GET THE

                    CHILDCARE, OR MY BABYSITTER IS SICK.  OR WHATEVER, RIGHT?  DOES THIS BILL

                    REQUIRE THE WELFARE RECIPIENT TO MAKE A PHONE CALL TO SOCIAL SERVICES

                    AND ADVISE THEM, LIKE WE EXPECT FROM EVERY OTHER EMPLOYEE IN THE

                    STATE OF NEW YORK?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  THIS IS A COMPUTERIZED SANCTION, SO

                    THERE'S NO WAY TO STOP THAT FROM -- FROM HAPPENING, FOR THE PERSON TO

                    BE ABLE TO -- TO MAKE THAT PHONE CALL.

                                         31



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. GOODELL:  BUT THIS BILL DOESN'T REQUIRE THE

                    WELFARE RECIPIENT TO NOTIFY SOCIAL SERVICES THAT THEY HAVE A

                    TRANSPORTATION PROBLEM OR CHILDCARE PROBLEM.  IS THAT CORRECT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  IN CURRENT REGULATIONS, THEY ARE

                    TECHNICALLY SUPPOSED TO BE CALLING IN NOTIFICATION SAYING THEY'RE NOT

                    ABLE TO MAKE IT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  BUT THIS BILL DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT.

                    CORRECT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  IT'S ALREADY IN CURRENT REGULATION,

                    WE'RE NOT CHANGING THAT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  BUT THIS BILL DOES CHANGE THE

                    PROCESS.  BECAUSE UNDER CURRENT LAW, IT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE

                    WELFARE RECIPIENT TO COME UP WITH THE EXPLANATION.  THIS REVERSES THE

                    BURDEN OF PROOF FROM THE WELFARE RECIPIENT TO THE SOCIAL SERVICES

                    DEPARTMENT.  SO, THIS IS GOING IN THE EXACT OPPOSITE DIRECTION IN THE

                    WAY WE TREAT NORMAL EMPLOYEES, ISN'T IT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  I DISAGREE.  YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  I MEAN, IF WE WANTED TO TRACK WHAT

                    WE DO WITH NORMAL EMPLOYEES, THIS BILL WOULD SAY, IF THE WELFARE

                    RECIPIENT LACKS TRANSPORTATION OR DAYCARE OR ACCOMMODATIONS, THE

                    RECIPIENT SHOULD CONTACT THE SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT AS QUICKLY AS

                    POSSIBLE SO THEY CAN HELP ADDRESS THAT SITUATION.  BUT THIS, INSTEAD,

                    GOES THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.  THIS, INSTEAD SAYS, AND I QUOTE, THE -- "IF

                    THE PARTICIPANT HAS FAILED OR REFUSED TO COMPLY AND THE DISTRICT HAS

                    DETERMINED THAT THEY DON'T HAVE CHILDCARE OR TRANSPORTATION OR OTHER

                                         32



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ACCOMMODATIONS..." AND ONLY AFTER THE DISTRICT HAS DETERMINED THAT CAN

                    THE DISTRICT THEN EVEN SEND OUT THE TEN-DAY NOTICE UNDER THIS NEW LAW,

                    RIGHT?

                                 MS. HUNTER:  THEY COULD HAVE DETERMINED THAT

                    BASED ON THE INDIVIDUAL ALREADY SELF-REPORTING THAT THEY DIDN'T OR DID

                    HAVE THOSE SERVICES AVAILABLE.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  I SEE.

                                 MS. HUNTER:  AND AGAIN, AS YOU WERE STATING, THE

                    -- THE RECIPIENT IS ALREADY RESPONSIBLE, AND CONTINUES TO BE RESPONSIBLE,

                    TO MAKE THAT PHONE CALL.  AND THIS COMPUTERIZED GENERATION ESSENTIALLY

                    HAPPENS AND, HOPEFULLY, PROMPTS BEFORE, SO THAT THE SOCIAL SERVICE

                    AGENCY MAKES THAT CALL BEFORE THE NOTIFICATION GOES OUT TO THE RECIPIENT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MS. HUNTER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH

                    FOR YOUR COMMENTS.  I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

                                 ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  I THINK EVERYONE IN -- IN THIS ROOM

                    SHARES THE SAME OBJECTIVE:  THAT WE WANT TO HELP WELFARE RECIPIENTS

                    BECOME SUCCESSFUL, BECOME GAINFULLY EMPLOYED, LEAVE THE TAX ROLLS,

                    ENJOY ALL THE BENEFITS OF LIVING IN ONE OF THE WEALTHIEST STATES AND THE

                    COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD.  THAT, I THINK, WE ALL SHARE.  AND THEN I THINK

                    MOST OF US RECOGNIZE THAT ONE OF THE BEST WAYS FOR AN INDIVIDUAL --

                    WHETHER IT'S OUR OWN KIDS, SOMETIMES AS TEENAGERS OR FRIENDS OR

                    NEIGHBORS WHO AREN'T WORKING -- ONE OF THE BEST WAYS FOR SOMEONE

                    WHO'S UNEMPLOYED TO GET INTO THE EMPLOYMENT FIELD IS TO GET WORK

                                         33



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING.  AND RECOGNIZING THAT, OUR CURRENT LAW

                    REQUIRES THAT ABLE-BODIED WELFARE RECIPIENTS PARTICIPATE IN WORK

                    EXPERIENCE AND JOB TRAINING SO THAT WE CAN HELP THEM GET ON THEIR FEET

                    AGAIN AND MOVE FORWARD WITH LIFE.  BUT WHAT WE DON'T DO WITH OUR

                    WORK AND JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS IS IN ANY WAY EXPECT ANY PERSONAL

                    RESPONSIBILITY OR ACCOUNTABILITY, NOR DO WE REALLY EXPECT THEM TO

                    BEHAVE IN A WAY THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE -- ANY OTHER EMPLOYER

                    IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK WOULD EXPECT.  AND WHAT IS THAT BASIC

                    CONSISTENCY?  THE BASIC CONSISTENCY IS THAT THEY SHOW UP ON MONDAY,

                    IF THEY'RE ASSIGNED TO START ON MONDAY FOR A JOB TRAINING PROGRAM OR

                    WORK EXPERIENCE, THAT THEY SHOW UP.  AND IF THEY DON'T SHOW UP

                    BECAUSE THEY CAN'T, THAT THEY PROMPTLY CONTACT US AND SAY, I CAN'T

                    BECAUSE I HAVE A TRANSPORTATION ISSUE, OR A DAYCARE ISSUE OR SOME

                    OTHER ACCOMMODATION, SO THAT WE, AS THE STATE, CAN HELP THEM ADDRESS

                    THOSE ISSUES AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE ON WITH JOB TRAINING

                    AND THEIR WORK EXPERIENCE AND MAXIMIZE THEIR POTENTIAL.

                                 OUR CURRENT SYSTEM IS SO EXTRAORDINARILY CUMBERSOME.

                    IT IS NO -- NO SURPRISE AT ALL THAT IT IS VIRTUALLY WORTHLESS IN TERMS OF

                    HELPING PEOPLE GET INTO THE JOB TRAINING PROGRAM.  BECAUSE IF THEY MISS

                    ON MONDAY, WE SEND THEM A LETTER GIVING THEM TEN DAYS TO EXPLAIN WHY

                    THEY WEREN'T THERE ON MONDAY.  AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENED IN

                    THE MEANTIME?  THAT EMPLOYER HAS MOVED ON.  THAT JOB TRAINING

                    PROGRAM HAS MOVED ON.  THOSE OPPORTUNITIES ARE NO LONGER THERE.  AND

                    THIS BILL TAKES AN ALREADY INEFFECTIVE, INEFFICIENT AND CUMBERSOME

                    SYSTEM AND MAKES IT EVEN WORSE.  BECAUSE THIS PROGRAM NOW CHANGES

                                         34



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THE BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING IF SOMEONE DOESN'T HAVE CHILDCARE OR

                    TRANSPORTATION NOT ON THE INDIVIDUAL WHO KNOWS THEIR EXACT

                    CIRCUMSTANCES AND THEIR PERSONAL SITUATION, IT CHANGES IT FROM HAVING

                    THE INDIVIDUAL EXPLAIN, TO HAVING THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,

                    OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES AND CITY EMPLOYEES, HAVING TO SOMEHOW VERIFY

                    OR FIGURE OUT THAT THE INDIVIDUALS [SIC] DOESN'T HAVE CHILDCARE; THAT

                    THERE'S NOBODY IN THE INDIVIDUAL'S FAMILY THAT CAN HELP THEM; THAT

                    THERE'S NO INFORMAL OR FORMAL DAYCARE AVAILABLE.  AND ONLY AFTER OUR

                    BELEAGUERED LOCAL OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES DO THAT CALCULATION CAN THEY

                    EVEN RESPOND --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  SIR, IS THERE ANYONE BEHIND ME?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THERE IS A LIST, MR.

                    GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  FOR THESE REASONS, I HAVE CONCERNS

                    AND I LOOK FORWARD TO COMMENTS FROM MY COLLEAGUES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  WE -- WE THANK YOU,

                    MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. HEVESI.

                                 MR. HEVESI:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  I RISE TO

                    CONGRATULATE THE SPONSOR.  THIS IS A GREAT BILL.  AND FROM THE

                    EXPLANATION FROM MY COLLEAGUE, I DON'T UNDERSTAND IF WE'RE READING THE

                    SAME BILL.  HERE'S THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE:  RIGHT NOW, IF YOU'RE ON

                    PUBLIC ASSISTANCE AND YOU MISS APPOINTMENTS, FOR WHATEVER REASON, NO

                    TRANSPORTATION AND NO CHILDCARE, YOU GET BOOTED OFF; A DURATIONAL

                                         35



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SANCTION THAT WE KICK YOU OFF OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT

                    OF TIME, WHICH HURTS YOU AND YOUR FAMILY.  BUT GUESS WHO ELSE THAT

                    HURTS?  IT'S HURTS THE COUNTIES.  BECAUSE IT COSTS YOU MORE MONEY.

                    EVERY TIME YOU BOOT SOMEBODY OFF OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FOR A CERTAIN

                    PERIOD OF TIME, THE EXPONENTIALLY MORE LIKELY THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE

                    GOING TO WIND UP IN A HOMELESS SHELTER, COSTING YOUR COUNTIES MORE

                    MONEY.  THIS IS HELPFUL TO YOU.  SO, WHEN WE HAVE A NEW REQUIREMENT

                    TO HAVE THE DSS MINIMALLY CHECK IN TO SAY, HEY, BEFORE WE HURT YOU

                    AND OURSELVES, AND COST OUR TAXPAYERS MORE MONEY, WHY DON'T WE SEE

                    IF THERE WAS A REASON WHY WE -- YOU MISSED YOUR APPOINTMENT?  YOU

                    COULDN'T GET TO THE DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENT, MAYBE THERE WAS NO

                    TRANSPORTATION.  THIS IS A BARE MINIMUM OF DUE DILIGENCE THAT IS

                    REQUIRED TO HELP THE FAMILIES TO GET THE SERVICES THAT THEY NEEDED, AND

                    TO HELP YOUR TAXPAYERS NOT BE ON THE HOOK FOR MORE EXPENSIVE SERVICES.

                                 I WILL ALSO TELL YOU, THIS IS CURRENTLY THE LAW IN NEW

                    YORK CITY.  IT'S BEEN WORKING WONDERFULLY FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS.

                    ORIGINALLY, THE INTENT WAS TO DO THE WHOLE STATE TOGETHER.  POLITICALLY,

                    WE COULDN'T GET IT DONE.  NEW YORK CITY PASSED WITH MY CHAIR --

                    FORMER CHAIRMAN KEITH WRIGHT PASSED THIS.  IT'S THE LAW IN NEW YORK

                    CITY.  TODAY, MS. HUNTER IS GOING TO MAKE IT PART OF THE LAW IN NEW

                    YORK STATE, WHICH IS FANTASTIC.

                                 ONE LAST THING I WANT TO OPINE ON.  AND IT WILL BE

                    INTERESTING TO SEE HOW OUR GOVERNOR REACTS.  BECAUSE WHEN THE ORIGINAL

                    BILL PASSED FOR NEW YORK CITY TO DO THIS EXACT SAME THING, THE

                    GOVERNOR WAS EFFUSIVE, THIS IS GREAT, NO MORE DURATIONAL SANCTIONS,

                                         36



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    NO MORE HURTING PEOPLE.  WELL, I WANT TO SEE HIM PUT HIS MONEY IN --

                    WHERE HIS MOUTH IS AND MAKE SURE THAT HE SIGNS THIS WHEN THIS COMES

                    BEFORE HIS DESK.  THIS IS A GREAT BILL.

                                 THANK YOU, MS. HUNTER, FOR ALL YOUR WORK ON IT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    HEVESI.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  APOLOGIES, MR. SPEAKER,

                    FOR INTERRUPTING THE PROCEEDINGS OF -- OF THE DEBATE TO CALL THE WAYS

                    AND MEANS COMMITTEE TO THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM

                    IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  WAYS AND MEANS TO

                    THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM IMMEDIATELY.

                                 AND NOW, MR. BARRON.

                                 MR. BARRON:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  IT -- IT

                    NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME, THE CONDESCENDING, DISRESPECTFUL MANNER IN

                    WHICH THEY TALK ABOUT PEOPLE RECEIVING SOCIAL SERVICES.  HOW DARE YOU

                    SAY THAT IN THE REAL WORK WORLD, LIKE THEIRS IS FAKE.  THAT'S INSULTING AND

                    RACIST AND I BELIEVE THAT THEY SAY THESE THINGS --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER, POINT OF ORDER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  NO, I'M NOT INTERRUPTED --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. GOODELL, WHY DO

                    YOU RISE?

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE VERY CLEAR

                    RULES --

                                         37



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. BARRON:  NO, HE CAN'T TALK.  YOU'VE GOT TO ASK

                    HIM --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  -- IN OUR ASSEMBLY THAT --

                                 MR. BARRON:  I DON'T ACCEPT HIS INTERRUPTION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. -- MR. GOODELL,

                    WHY DO YOU RISE?

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  HE IS ALLOWED TO RISE.

                                 MR. BARRON:  BUT HE CAN'T --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU --

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- START TALKING WITHOUT ME ACCEPTING

                    HIS INTERRUPTION.

                                 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:  HE'S MAKING A POINT OF

                    ORDER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  ALL RIGHT.  MR. -- MR.

                    GOODELL, IS IT A POINT OF ORDER?

                                 MR. GOODELL:  YES, IT IS, SIR.

                                 MR. BARRON:  OH, COME ON, NOW.  YOU GAVE HIM

                    THE IDEA?

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. BLAKE, AS -- MR. SPEAKER, AS

                    YOU KNOW, UNDER RULE V, SECTION 6 (B) --

                                 MR. BARRON:  THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  FIRST OF ALL, A MEMBER WHO IS

                    CALLED TO ORDER IS REQUIRED TO IMMEDIATELY STOP UNTIL WE HAVE THIS

                    DISCUSSION.

                                 MR. BARRON:  I DIDN'T CALL HIM A RACIST.  WHAT HE

                                         38



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SAID WAS A [SIC] RACIST.  WELL, I'M STANDING UP, TOO --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- TO INTERRUPT THAT.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AGAIN, A POINT OF ORDER.  IT'S THE

                    POLICY OF THIS --

                                 MR. BARRON:  HE CAN'T DO THAT.

                                 MR. GOODELL: -- LEGISLATURE TO PROHIBIT ARGUMENTS

                    AD HOMINEM THAT QUESTION IN ANY WAY THE CHARACTER, MOTIVE, ATTRIBUTE

                    OF ANY CANDID -- OF ANY OF OUR MEMBERS, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY.  AND SO,

                    WHILE I CERTAINLY WELCOME ALL DISCUSSION, HOWEVER ROBUST, ON THE VALUE

                    OF THIS BILL OR THE WEAKNESSES OF THIS BILL, OUR DISCUSSION, AS YOU KNOW,

                    UNDER OUR RULES, FOCUSES ON THE MERITS OF THE BILL, AND DOES NOT AND

                    SHOULD NOT INVOLVE THE CHARACTERIZATION OF ANY MEMBER OR THEIR

                    COMMENTS.  I WOULD ASK THAT YOU GENTLY REMIND THE MEMBER OF OUR RULE

                    AND ASK THAT HE CONFINE HIS COMMENTS TO WHAT HE LIKES ABOUT THE BILL,

                    OR DOESN'T LIKE ABOUT THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    GOODELL.  WE -- WE UNDERSTAND AND WE HEAR.  MEMBERS ARE REMINDED

                    TO CONFINE THEIR COMMENTS TO THE MERITS OF THE BILL.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, I -- WITH

                    ALL DUE RESPECT TO MY COLLEAGUE, I -- I DO THINK THAT MR. BARRON WAS

                    SPEAKING ON THE MERITS OF THE BILL --

                                 MR. BARRON:  EXACTLY.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO

                                         39



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CREATE THIS KIND OF LEGISLATION TO COMBAT THE ATTEMPTS OF OTHERS THAT ARE

                    INSTITUTING RACIST POLICY.  SO, IT WASN'T DIRECTED AT A PERSON OR A

                    MEMBER, IT IS ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THE BILL AND ITS VALUE IN REMOVING

                    SOME OF THE DIALOGUE THAT COMES OUT OF POLICY THAT IS ADMINISTERED IN A

                    WAY THAT IS NOT FAIR TO ALL PEOPLE OF ALL RACES.

                                 AND SO, I WOULD ALSO REMIND MY COLLEAGUE, MR.

                    BARRON, THAT UM... IN ORDER FOR US TO REALLY HAVE GOOD COMMUNICATIONS

                    IN OUR CHAMBERS [SIC], OPPORTUNITIES TO REMIND PEOPLE OF THINGS THAT

                    PERHAPS THEY DON'T WANT TO BE REMINDED OF DOESN'T BODE FOR GOOD

                    CONVERSATION.  AND SO, I -- I THINK IF WE CAN, YOU KNOW, REALLY JUST KEEP

                    OUR -- EVEN-KEELED.  THIS IS GOOD LEGISLATION THAT MS. HUNTER HAS PUT

                    FORWARD.  IF IT CLEARLY CAN WORK IN NEW YORK CITY, IT CAN WORK IN NEW

                    YORK STATE.  AND SO, I HOPE AT THE END OF THIS CONVERSATION, WE ALL ARE

                    VOTING YES FOR THIS REALLY GOOD PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WILL PROMOTE

                    NOT JUST GOOD SPIRIT, BUT OFFER GOOD POLICIES FOR THE CITIZENS THAT WE ALL

                    REPRESENT ACROSS THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  AB -- ABSOLUTELY,

                    MEMBER PEOPLES-STOKES.  AND -- AND THE POINT IS DEFINITELY NOTED.

                                 MR. KOLB, WHY DO YOU RISE?

                                 MR. KOLB:  WHY DO I RISE IS BECAUSE I'M TIRED --

                    SICK AND TIRED --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  CAN EVERYONE PLEASE

                    TAKE THEIR SEATS.

                                 MR. KOLB:  -- OF THE TYPE OF LANGUAGE THAT IS USED

                    ON THIS BILL AND ANY OTHER BILL ACCUSING ANY MEMBER OF BEING RACIST --

                                         40



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. -- MR. KOLB --

                                 MR. KOLB:  -- OR USE OF --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. KOLB --

                                 MR. KOLB:  NO, I'M GOING TO FINISH --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. KOLB --

                                 MR. KOLB:  -- MY COMMENT.  HE GOT --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. KOLB, WE -- WE --

                    MR. KOLB, I -- I WOULD EXPECT AS WE ALL AS COLLEAGUES THAT WE CAN SPEAK

                    IN A COURTEOUS MANNER.  SO, AGAIN I ASK, WHY DO YOU RISE?

                                 MR. KOLB:  I'M RISING TO DISAGREE WITH THE

                    CHARACTERIZATION MADE BY THE OTHER MEMBER ON THIS PARTICULAR BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  UNDERSTOOD.  MR.

                    KOLB, THE -- THE MEMBER NEVER SPOKE OF THE OTHER MEMBER, AND SO,

                    THEREFORE, YOUR POINT IS ACKNOWLEDGED AND I THINK WE CAN GO BACK TO

                    MR. BARRON.  BUT WE DO HEAR YOUR POINT, MR. KOLB.

                                 MR. KOLB:  WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM.

                                 MR. BARRON:  ARE YOU THREATENING?

                                 MR. KOLB:  WE HAVE HAD THIS DISCUSSION AND WE'RE

                    GOING TO HAVE --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. -- MR. KOLB, THE

                    -- THE POINT HAS BEEN MADE AND MR. BARRON IS STILL THE ONE --

                                 MR. KOLB:  I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY MEMBER OF

                    THIS HOUSE MISCHARACTERIZING AND MOTIVATIONS OF OUR MEMBERS ON THE

                    DEBATE OF A LEGISLATIVE BILL.  IT'S UNCALLED FOR, UNNECESSARY AND --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. -- MR. KOLB --

                                         41



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 MR. BARRON:  IF HE'S NOT GOING TO RESPECT THE

                    PROCESS --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. BARRON --

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- NEITHER AM I.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. BARRON --

                                 MR. BARRON:  I WILL CONTINUE MY REMARKS, I WILL

                    CONTINUE MY REMARKS.  WHEN PEOPLE SPEAK OF US ON SOCIAL SERVICES,

                    SOME OF THE IDEAS ARE RACIST.  I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE INDIVIDUAL IS, SOME

                    OF THE IDEAS COME FROM A RACIST --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. -- MR. GOODELL --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AGAIN --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  -- WHY DO YOU --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  -- MR. SPEAKER, A POINT OF ORDER.

                    THERE HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY NO DISCUSSION UP TO THIS POINT OF ANYTHING

                    INVOLVING RACISM --

                                 MR. BARRON:  YES, IT HAS --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AND MY--

                                 MR. BARRON:  YES, IT HAS --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER, LET ME COMPLETE MY--

                                 MR. BARRON:  YES, IT HAS -- YOU JUST KEEP

                    INTERRUPTING --

                                 MR. GOODELL: -- POINT OF ORDER.  IN MY DISTRICT --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. -- MR. GOODELL.  I

                    WOULD JUST ASK, AS I THINK OTHERS WOULD AS WELL, WE SHOULD LET MR.

                                         42



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BARRON COMPLETE --

                                 MR. BARRON:  LET ME FINISH.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  -- HIS COMMENTS.  HE

                    HAS NOT DIRECTED HIS COMMENTS TO ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  WHY DON'T YOU LET ME FINISH.  I

                    WASN'T EVEN TALKING --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER, POINT OF ORDER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  LET ME FINISH --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THE POINT -- MR.

                    GOODELL, RESPECTFULLY, THE POINT OF ORDER WAS RAISED INITIALLY.  WE

                    SHOULD LET MR. BARRON COMPLETE HIS COMMENTS --

                                 MR. BARRON:  LET ME FINISH MY STATEMENT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  -- AND THEN WE CAN GO

                    FROM THERE.

                                 MR. BARRON:  WHEN I HEAR COMMENTS --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- WHEN I HEAR COMMENTS COMING

                    FROM ANYBODY ON THIS FLOOR --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. GOODELL --

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- WHETHER THEY --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  -- YOUR POINT HAS BEEN

                    HEARD.  WE SHOULD LET MR. BARRON COMPLETE HIS COMMENTS.

                                 MR. BARRON:  WHEN I HEAR COMMENTS COMING --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  PLEASE, MR. BARRON,

                                         43



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    GO AHEAD.

                                 MR. BARRON:  WHEN I HEAR COMMENTS COMING

                    FROM THIS FLOOR --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  POINT OF ORDER -- I ASK THAT --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- I THINK --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. GOODELL --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. GOODELL.  MR.

                    GOODELL.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  -- MR. BARRON DOESN'T

                    HAVE TO YIELD.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. BARRON:  EXACTLY.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  PLEASE.

                                 MR. BARRON:  SO WHEN I HEAR COMMENTS COMING

                    FROM THIS FLOOR --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  WE WON'T GET THROUGH

                    THIS IF YOU DON'T STOP INTERRUPTING --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  WHEN I -- WHEN I HEAR COMMENTS

                    COMING --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. --

                                 MR. BARRON:  I HAVE THE FLOOR --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. GOODELL --

                                         44



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- I HAVE THE FLOOR.  I HAVE THE TIME.

                    AND I'M GOING TO KEEP TALKING.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  -- MR. BARRON HAS THE

                    FLOOR.  HE HAS CHOSEN NOT TO YIELD.

                                 MR. BARRON:  I HAVE THE FLOOR --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  WE HEAR YOU ON YOUR

                    POINT.

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- I DON'T YIELD TO MR. GOODELL.  I

                    HAVE THE FLOOR.

                                 MR. KOLB:  MR. SPEAKER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  I HAVE THE FLOOR.  I HAVE THE FLOOR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. BARRON, PLEASE

                    CONTINUE.

                                 MR. BARRON:  THANK YOU.  WHEN I HEAR IDEAS THAT I

                    BELIEVE ARE CODED RACIST --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. RA, WHY DO YOU

                    RISE?

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER, I APPEAL TO THE --

                                 MR. RA:  MR. SPEAKER, A POINT OF ORDER --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. RA.

                                 MR. RA:  -- APPEAL TO THE CHAIR THAT THE MEMBER WAS

                    NOT OUT OF ORDER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  HE -- THE MEMBER IS

                    NOT OUT OF ORDER BECAUSE HE NEVER SPOKE DIRECTLY OF AN INDIVIDUAL

                    MEMBER --

                                         45



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. RA:  AND --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  -- AND THEREFORE, WE

                    SHOULD LET MR. BARRON COMPLETE HIS COMMENTS.

                                 MR. RA:  AND WE HAVE A PROCESS UNDER THE RULES TO

                    APPEAL THE --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER.  MR.

                    SPEAKER, CAN WE --

                                 MR. RA: -- RULING OF THE CHAIR.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  CAN I CALL EVERYBODY'S

                    ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT OUR RULES ASK US TO ASK THE SPEAKER --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  -- MR. SPEAKER FOR A

                    DETERMINATION.  HE HAS MADE THAT DETERMINATION.  IT'S BEEN MADE.  IT'S

                    BEEN DECIDED.  CAN WE PLEASE MOVE ON?  MR. BARRON STILL HAS THE FLOOR,

                    I WANT TO SAY, FOR ANOTHER 12 MINUTES --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THAT IS CORRECT.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  AND I DO HOPE, MR.

                    BARRON, THAT IF YOU COULD POSSIBLY NOT CAUSE MR. GOODELL OR MR. RA OR

                    MR. KOLB TO WANT TO STAND UP --

                                 MR. BARRON:  MY MISSION IN LIFE, THERE'S NOTHING I

                    COULD SAY --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  -- ON ANY OF THESE TOPICS

                    AGAIN, COULD YOU PLEASE REMOVE THAT WORD --

                                 MR. BARRON:  THERE'S NOTHING I COULD SAY TO NOT

                    UPSET THEM.  AND SO, I NO LONGER TRY --

                                         46



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. BARRON, WHY

                    DON'T YOU PLEASE CONTINUE YOUR COMMENTS AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE

                    --

                                 MR. BARRON:  AND IT'S NOT ABOUT HIM --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  I KNOW IT WASN'T ABOUT

                    HIM.

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- IT'S ABOUT ME NOT ALLOWING CODED

                    RACIST IDEAS TO PROCEED WITHOUT ADDRESSING THEM.  AND WHEN YOU SPEAK

                    OF US IN SOME WORK WORLD THAT IS NOT THE REAL WORLD, THEN YOU'RE TALKING

                    SOMETHING VERY NEGATIVE ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO BE ON SOCIAL

                    SERVICES.  THIS BILL STOPS THEM FROM PUNISHING THEM FOR MISSING A TIME

                    AT WORK.  WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE IN THE WORKPLACE

                    AND NOT HAVE TO BE ON WELFARE AT ALL.  BUT WE LIVE UNDER A RACIST --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MS. -- MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. BARRON:  -- WE LIVE UNDER --

                                 MR. GOODELL:  MR. SPEAKER --

                                 MR. BARRON:  YOU CAN'T LET HIM KEEP INTERRUPTING.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  -- IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE I,

                    SECTION 1 (C) (2) OF THE RULES OF THE ASSEMBLY, I HEREBY APPEAL YOUR

                    RULING -- YOUR RULING, AND REQUEST THE FLOOR TO SPEAK ON THE APPEAL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MS. GOODELL -- MR.

                    GOODELL DOES HAVE THAT RIGHT.

                                 MR. BARRON:  YOU CAN'T DENY THAT REQUEST AND LET

                    ME FINISH?  I MEAN, THIS GUY, HE CAN'T KEEP INTERRUPTING ME AND THEN

                    SAY THIS IS THE RULES --

                                         47



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MR. BARRON --

                                 MR. BARRON:  IF HE AIN'T GOING TO PLAY BY THE RULES,

                    I'M NOT.  YOU CAN'T HAVE HIM INTERRUPTING EVERY TIME TALKING ABOUT

                    SOMETHING HE'S READ OUT OF SOME RULES.  THIS IS INTERRUPTING ME.  I

                    WOULD HAVE BEEN FINISHED BY NOW.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  MS. -- MR. BARRON,

                    THE POINT HAS BEEN HEARD.  THE POINT THAT WAS RAISED WAS CAN HE APPEAL

                    ON THE RULE, AND THAT HE CAN.  THE SAME WAY WHEN WE STOPPED HIM

                    INITIALLY, WHEN HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE HIS INITIAL COMMENT WE SAID THAT

                    THEY WERE INCORRECT BECAUSE YOU DID NOT SPEAK DIRECTLY TO HIM, SO WE'RE

                    JUST ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE POINT IS APPROPRIATE TO BE MADE AND YOU

                    STILL HAVE YOUR TIME.  WE'RE JUST ACKNOWLEDGING THE POINT AS BEING

                    MADE.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  AS YOU KNOW, PURSUANT TO RULE I, SECTION 1 (C) (2) OF THE

                    RULES OF THE ASSEMBLY, ANY RULING BY THE CHAIR CAN BE APPEALED.

                    EVERY MEMBER HAS UP TO 15 MINUTES TO DISCUSS THEIR VIEWS FOR OR

                    AGAINST THE RULING OF THE CHAIR.  AND I APPRECIATE THAT WE ARE NOW

                    GOING BACK ON THE RULES AND THAT I HAVE 15 MINUTES TO EXPLAIN WHY I'M

                    APPEALING THE RULING OF THE CHAIR.

                                 UP UNTIL THIS POINT IN THE DEBATE WE WERE TALKING

                    ABOUT A CONCILIATION PROCESS INVOLVING THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL

                    SERVICES, AND WHETHER THAT PROCESS SHOULD BE MADE MORE DIFFICULT ON

                    OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES AND CITY EMPLOYEES, WHETHER IT SHOULD BE MADE

                                         48



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SLOWER, OR WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD LOOK AT TRYING TO IMPROVE THE

                    PROCESS AND HELP PEOPLE MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR LIVES AND GETTING INTO

                    PRIVATE-SECTOR EMPLOYMENT.  AND THAT PROCESS INVOLVES HELPING PEOPLE

                    ATTEND WORK EXPERIENCES ON TIME, TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR KEEPING

                    THEIR EMPLOYER ADVISED, TO ATTEND TRAINING ON TIME, AND TAKE PERSONAL

                    RESPONSIBILITY TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE TO MOVE THEIR LIFE

                    FORWARD.  NONE OF THAT DISCUSSION, MR. SPEAKER AND MY COLLEAGUES,

                    NONE OF THAT DISCUSSION WAS RACIST.  IN MY COUNTY, IT'S TWO PERCENT

                    BLACK, SEVEN PERCENT HISPANIC AND THE REST IS WHITE.  AND IN SOME OF

                    MY NEIGHBORING COUNTIES, IT'S ALMOST 98 PERCENT WHITE.  IT HAS NOTHING

                    TO DO WITH WHETHER YOU'RE WHITE, BLACK, BROWN, WHETHER YOU'RE

                    HISPANIC, WHETHER YOU'RE ENGLISH, WHETHER YOU'RE RUSSIAN.  IT DOESN'T

                    HAVE ANYTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH THAT.  IT HAS NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY

                    NOTHING TO DO WITH RACISM.  SO, WHEN A MEMBER OF THIS ASSEMBLY

                    STANDS UP AND TALKS ABOUT THE MERITS OF A BILL, A BILL THAT AFFECTS, IN MY

                    COUNTY, ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY WHITE, ANGLO-SAXON AMERICANS, TO STAND

                    UP AND ACCUSE THAT MEMBER'S COMMENTS OF BEING RACIST AND TRY TO HIDE

                    BEHIND THE FACT THAT YOU DIDN'T NAME THAT MEMBER BECAUSE, AS THOUGH

                    WE DIDN'T KNOW HE'S THE ONLY MEMBER THAT SPOKE ON IT, LIKE THAT'S SOME

                    SORT OF SMOKESCREEN THAT WE CAN HIDE BEHIND, LEADS ALL OF US IN THIS

                    CHAMBER DOWN A RAT HOLE.  INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON THE MERITS OF A BILL

                    AND TALKING ABOUT WHETHER IT'S GOOD OR BAD OR WHETHER IT HELPS OUR

                    RESIDENTS OR NOT, WHETHER -- INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON WHETHER IT MOVES

                    THE STATE OF NEW YORK FORWARD, WE SLIDE DOWN THAT ROLE OF CALLING

                    NAMES AND COMMENTS, DEROGATORY TERMS, AND RACISM IS ONE OF THEM.

                                         49



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    AND NO ONE'S COMMENTS ON THIS FLOOR SHOULD BE ACCUSED OF BEING RACIST

                    OR SEXIST OR ANY OTHER DEROGATORY TERM WHEN THE FOCUS OF THAT

                    DISCUSSION IS ON THE MERITS OF THE BILL.  AND WE ALL SHOULD FEEL FREE TO

                    STAND UP AND -- AND SPEAK OUR CONVICTIONS ABOUT A BILL.  WHETHER IT'S

                    GOOD OR BAD, WHETHER IT HELPS OUR SOCIETY MOVE FORWARD OR NOT, WITHOUT

                    HAVING OUR COMMENTS CHARACTERIZED INCORRECTLY AS BEING RACIST OR ANY

                    OTHER MISCHARACTERIZATION.

                                 NOW, WE WORKED -- WE HAVE WORKED EXTRAORDINARILY

                    HARD ON THE MINORITY SIDE - AND I HOPE ALL OF YOU APPRECIATE IT - WE

                    HAVE WORKED EXTRAORDINARILY HARD TO AVOID CALLING PEOPLE NAMES, TO

                    AVOID ATTACKING PEOPLE.  OH, SURE, IT WOULD BE EASY FOR US TO STAND UP

                    AND SAY, THAT IS A DUMB COMMENT.  OR, IS THAT MEMBER STUPID, OR

                    WHAT?  AND BY THE WAY, I'VE BEEN HERE ON THE FLOOR OF THE ASSEMBLY

                    WHEN WE WENT DOWN THAT ROAD.  MOST OF YOU HAVE SEEN THAT BEFORE.

                    WE'VE HAD DEBATES WHERE THE DEBATE WAS ATTACKED, NOT THE MERITS OF

                    THE BILL, BUT THE DEBATER, HIS COMPETENCE, HIS INTELLIGENCE, HIS

                    UNDERSTANDING.  AND BELIEVE ME, AS THE ASSISTANT FLOOR -- AS A FLOOR

                    LEADER, ASSISTANT PRO TEM, THERE ARE PLENTY OF TIMES ON ALL OF YOUR

                    BILLS WHERE OUR MEMBERS MAY HAVE RESEARCHED IT BETTER THAN YOU HAVE,

                    AND WE CAN WORK COOPERATIVELY AND PROFESSIONALLY, FOCUSED ON WHAT'S

                    GOING ON, OR WE CAN MAKE IT REALLY NASTY AND REAL PERSONAL, AND WE

                    HAVE WORKED REALLY HARD NOT TO GO THAT ROUTE.

                                 SO, WHEN I APPEAL THIS DECISION, THE QUESTION BEFORE

                    THE HOUSE FOR ALL OF YOU, RECOGNIZING THAT ALL OF US ARE GOING TO BE

                    ASKING ALL OF YOU A WHOLE BUNCH OF QUESTIONS OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS,

                                         50



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WHAT TONE DO YOU WANT ON THE FLOOR OF THIS ASSEMBLY?  DO YOU WANT IT

                    RESPECTFUL?  DO YOU WANT IT PROFESSIONAL?  DO YOU WANT TO FOCUS ON THE

                    BILL AND THE MERITS OF THE BILL?  OR DO YOU WANT TO GO A DIFFERENT ROUTE?

                    WHERE WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH US YOU'RE RACIST, OR

                    A FLAMING LIBERAL, OR A RADICAL CONSERVATIVE, OR ANY OTHER DEROGATORY

                    NAME YOU CAN THINK OF.  WE ALL HAVE THAT LIST BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE BEEN

                    CALLED THOSE NAMES ONE TIME OR ANOTHER BY OUR OPPONENTS OR PEOPLE

                    THAT ARE NOT WELL-CONSTRAINED OR PROFESSIONAL.

                                 SO, THE CHOICE MY FRIEND, TODAY, IS IT -- IS IT ACCEPTABLE

                    ON THE FLOOR OF THIS ASSEMBLY FOR A DISCUSSION THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO

                    WITH RACE, TO BE ACCUSED OF RACISM?  I'M PERSONALLY OFFENDED, AND EACH

                    OF YOU SHOULD BE AS WELL.  AND, THEREFORE, I BELIEVE, THE MEMBER'S

                    COMMENTS THAT SUGGESTS THAT ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT IMPROVING THE WAY

                    WE DEAL WITH PEOPLE TO HELP THEM LEAVE POVERTY IS IN ANY WAY

                    MOTIVATED BY RACISM, LET ME TELL YOU THIS:  MY COMMENTS ABOUT HOW WE

                    CAN IMPROVE HELPING PEOPLE GET OUT OF POVERTY IS BECAUSE I WANT TO

                    HELP PEOPLE GET OUT OF POVERTY.  I WANT THEM TO MAXIMIZE THEIR

                    BENEFITS.  I WANT THEM TO MOVE FORWARD IN LIFE.  THAT'S MY FOCUS.  IT'S

                    NOT RACISM.  IT'S NOT SEXISM.  IT'S NONE OF THOSE OTHER ISMS.  I'M FOCUSED

                    SOLELY ON WHAT WE CAN DO, THE BEST WAY WE CAN WORK TOGETHER AS

                    REPUBLICANS, AS DEMOCRATS, AS LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES, TO HELP THE

                    PEOPLE IN POVERTY IMPROVE THEIR LIVES.  THAT'S MY FOCUS.  I HOPE THAT'S

                    YOUR FOCUS.  AND I HOPE NOBODY IN THIS ROOM THINKS THAT DOING THE BEST

                    WE CAN DO TO HELP PEOPLE WHO ARE IN POVERTY IMPROVE THEIR LIVES IS

                    RACISM.

                                         51



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 THANK YOU, MR. GOODELL.  ON THE...

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 (ACTING SPEAKER GAVELING)

                                 THE POINT'S BEEN HEARD.

                                 ON THE APPEAL, MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  LET ME MOTIVATE YOU TO

                    HEAR WHAT MR. GOODELL HAD TO SAY, REMIND YOU OF WHAT MR. BARRON HAD

                    TO SAY, THAT WAS IN NO WAY POINTING FINGERS AT ANYBODY, BUT, THE

                    SCENARIO THAT WE LIVE IN TODAY'S SOCIETY IN AMERICA, WHERE THE VAST

                    MAJORITY OF PEOPLE -- BE THEY IN THESE CHAMBERS [SIC], OR BE THEY

                    OUTSIDE IN ANY OF OUR COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING THE ONE I LIVE IN -- HAVE

                    THIS TERRIBLE PERCEPTION THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE SOCIAL

                    SERVICES BENEFITS IN THIS STATE LOOK LIKE ME.  WELL, THEY DON'T.  THAT'S

                    THE FIRST THING WE NEED TO REMOVE FROM OUR THOUGHT PROCESS.  THE

                    SECOND THING IS, IS MR. BARRON CLEARLY -- I MEAN, I HEARD HIM.  I DID NOT

                    HEAR HIM DIRECT A NEGATIVE COMMENT AT ANYBODY.  AND I -- I THINK IF --

                    ONCE YOU HEAR WHAT MR. GOODELL HAD TO SAY, HEAR WHAT MR. BARRON HAD

                    TO SAY, AND MAKE YOUR RULING ON THIS -- ON THIS APPEAL THAT HE'S OFFERED,

                    THAT WE SHOULD MOVE ON.  BECAUSE THE BILL BEFORE US IS A LOT MORE

                    IMPORTANT THAN THE DIALOGUE WE'RE HAVING HERE NOW.  NOW, THERE'S NO

                    QUESTION THAT ONE THING THAT WE LACK IN AMERICA IS A REAL WILLINGNESS TO

                    TALK ABOUT RACE.

                                         52



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 WE REALLY DON'T -- DON'T EVEN WANT TO HEAR IT.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 THAT'S THE PROBLEM.  BUT THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO DO THAT,

                    MR. SPEAKER.  RIGHT NOW BEFORE US THERE'S A VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION THAT MEET -- NEEDS TO BE MOVED FORWARD.  I WOULD IMPLORE

                    MR. BARRON, MR. GOODELL, MR. KOLB AND EVERYBODY IN THIS CHAMBERS

                    [SIC] RIGHT NOW, TO LET US MOVE FORWARD.  I WILL BE HAPPY TO LEAD THAT

                    DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE ON RACE.  THERE IS NOT A POLICY AREA

                    THAT WE WORK ON IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK THAT DOESN'T HAVE SOME

                    RACIAL IMPLICATIONS.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 DON'T ACT LIKE IT DOESN'T.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 BUT THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO WORK ON THAT, MR. SPEAKER.

                    THE TIME RIGHT NOW FOR US IS TO REJECT MR. GOODELL'S APPEAL, MOVE

                    FORWARD WITH THIS LEGISLATION AND THE MANY OTHER PIECES OF FINE WORK

                    THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US TODAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU, MEMBER

                    PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MR. RA ON THE APPEAL.

                                 MR. RA:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  YOU KNOW, I FIRST

                    CAME UP HERE ABOUT NINE YEARS AGO NOW, AND LIKE ALL OF YOU, I CAME UP

                    HERE TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT.  I THINK WE ALL CAME HERE FOR

                    THE RIGHT REASONS, TO REPRESENT OUR COMMUNITIES.  AND WHETHER WE

                                         53



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    COME FROM LONG ISLAND OR NEW YORK CITY OR THE NORTH COUNTRY OR THE

                    CAPITAL REGION OR ALL THE WAY IN WESTERN NEW YORK, WHAT WE DO ON

                    THE FLOOR EACH AND EVERY DAY, WHAT WE DO IN OUR COMMITTEE MEETINGS,

                    WHAT WE DO IN ALL OUR CAPACITIES AS -- AS ELECTED MEMBERS OF THIS BODY,

                    IS DONE WITH THE BEST INTERESTS OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS IN MIND.  AND WE

                    MAY DISAGREE ON ISSUES.  AND I'VE SEEN DAYS IN HERE WHERE WE'VE HAD

                    VERY SPIRITED DEBATES ON REALLY CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES, BUT EVERYBODY

                    WALKED OUT OF THE CHAMBER, NO GRUDGES BEING HELD, EVERYBODY HAVING

                    HAD THEIR VOICE HEARD.  AND WE GET IT ON OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE.  WE --

                    WE KNOW HOW THE VOTE'S GOING TO GO AT THE END OF THE DAY.  BUT, WE

                    HAVE JUST AS MUCH OF A RIGHT TO REPRESENT OUR CONSTITUENTS AS ANYBODY

                    ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE.  WE HAVE JUST AS MUCH A RIGHT TO RAISE OUR

                    POINTS.  AND WE HAVE JUST AS MUCH A RIGHT TO RAISE THEM IN A WAY THAT

                    NOBODY SHOULD QUESTION WHAT OUR MOTIVATION IS IN DOING SO; OTHER THAN

                    TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED US AND SENT US HERE TO SIT IN THIS

                    HOUSE AND VOTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT'S BEST FOR THEM AND WHAT'S

                    BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITIES.  AND WE'RE SEEING FAR TOO MUCH OF THIS THIS

                    YEAR AND -- AND LATELY.  I KNOW WE LIVE IN POLARIZING TIMES.  BUT, TO

                    CAUSE DEBATES ON -- ON ISSUES -- YOU KNOW, MY -- MY COLLEAGUE, I THINK,

                    HAS THE SAME END GOAL.  HE WANTS TO HELP INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE IN

                    POVERTY.  HE HAS A DIFFERENT IDEA OF HOW WE CAN BEST GET THERE.  THAT

                    DOESN'T MEAN HE DISLIKES PEOPLE THAT ARE IN POVERTY.  IT DOESN'T MEAN

                    THAT HE'S MISCHARACTERIZING ANYBODY, OR -- OR -- OR THAT HE'S MAKING ANY

                    RACIST ALLEGATIONS.  IT MEANS HE'S DECIDED THAT FROM A PUBLIC POLICY

                    STANDPOINT -- AN ISSUE THAT I KNOW HE HAS STUDIED EXTENSIVELY BECAUSE

                                         54



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    I'VE HAD A MILLION CONVERSATIONS WITH HIM ABOUT THESE ISSUES -- HE HAS A

                    DIFFERENT WAY THAT HE WANTS TO -- WANTS TO GET TO THE END RESULT.

                                 SO, I -- I THINK WE HAVE JUST OVER TWO WEEKS LEFT.

                    WE'RE SCHEDULED TO FINISH TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY.  WE'RE GOING TO HAVE

                    A LOT OF DEBATES BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES THAT ARE

                    GOING TO COME UP.  AND IF THIS IS WHAT WE WANT OUR HOUSE TO DEVOLVE

                    INTO, IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY LONG TWO WEEKS.  SO, I THINK THAT IF WE -- AS

                    WE PUT THIS QUESTION BEFORE THE HOUSE AS TO WHETHER THE MEMBER WAS

                    OUT OF ORDER, AND -- AND PERHAPS, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, WE COULD READ BACK

                    WHAT THE COMMENTS WERE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN BE AWARE OF WHAT THE

                    COMMENTS WERE, AND -- AND VOTE ACCORDINGLY.  BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED

                    TO KEEP IN MIND THAT WE COME HERE TO REPRESENT OUR CONSTITUENTS.  AND

                    IF WE FEEL OUR CONSTITUENTS AREN'T GOING TO BENEFIT FROM A PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION BEFORE THIS HOUSE, OR ARE GOING TO BE HURT FROM A PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION BEFORE THIS HOUSE, WE HAVE A RIGHT TO RAISE THOSE POINTS.

                    AND IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DON'T LIKE YOUR CONSTITUENTS, OR -- OR

                    PEOPLE IN YOUR DISTRICT THAT -- THAT YOU REPRESENT, BUT -- BUT WE -- WE

                    HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT THAN YOU.  SO, I THINK THE CIVILITY IN THIS

                    HOUSE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BE PROUD OF WHEN WE'RE DOING IT RIGHT,

                    WHEN WE'RE HAVING THOSE SPIRITED POLICY DEBATES, THAT WE'RE TALKING

                    ABOUT THE ISSUES.  WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHY THIS BILL IS GOOD, WHY THIS

                    BILL IS BAD.  WHY -- WHY...  YOU KNOW, ONE GROUP OR ANOTHER GROUP IS

                    GOING TO BENEFIT OR -- OR NOT BENEFIT FROM IT.  BUT IF IT BECOMES LOOKING

                    AT AND -- AND ATTACKING OTHER MEMBERS' MOTIVATIONS, WE'RE GOING TO

                    HAVE A REALLY TOUGH TIME HAVING CIVIL DEBATES IN THIS HOUSE.

                                         55



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER BLAKE:  THANK YOU, MR. RA.

                                 MS. MELISSA MILLER ON THE APPEAL.

                                 MS. M. MILLER:  I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS THE

                    SECOND TIME THIS SESSION THAT I HAVE BEEN DRIVEN TO TEARS WHILE SITTING

                    IN THIS CHAMBER OVER THIS TONE.  AND THIS IS NOT WHAT I WAS ELECTED TO

                    DO.  I WAS ELECTED TO REPRESENT MY CONSTITUENTS TO MY BEST POSSIBLE

                    ABILITY, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ALL HERE TO DO.  AND WE ALL HAVE THE SAME

                    RIGHT TO DO IT.  WE HAVE TO RESPECT EACH OTHER.  WE ARE -- WE ARE ALL OUR

                    STATE'S REPRESENTATIVES.  IF WE CAN'T SET THE TONE AND RESPECTFULLY SET THIS

                    TONE -- PEOPLE WATCH US.  THESE SESSIONS ARE VIEWED BY PEOPLE.  AND

                    THIS IS THE TONE, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE SHOWING PEOPLE?  SHAME ON US.  WE

                    CAN DIFFER, WE CAN HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AND STILL BE RESPECTFUL

                    TO EACH OTHER.  AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO PAY MORE ATTENTION

                    TO.  IT'S OKAY TO DISAGREE.  WE'RE GOING TO DISAGREE.  BUT WE NEED TO

                    FIGURE OUT HOW TO DISAGREE AND STILL RESPECT EACH OTHER, BECAUSE THAT'S

                    WHAT DEMOCRACY IS.  AND I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT IN

                    MIND.  WE ALL HAVE A RIGHT TO REPRESENT OUR CONSTITUENTS THE WAY WE

                    FEEL WE NEED TO.  BUT WE NEED TO RESPECT EACH OTHER.  THANK YOU.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THERE IS AN APPEAL TO

                    THE RULING OF THE CHAIR, AND THE QUESTION BEFORE THE HOUSE IS SHALL THE

                    DECISION OF THE CHAIR STAND AS THE JUDGMENT OF THE HOUSE.  THOSE

                    VOTING YES VOTE TO SUSTAIN THE RULING OF THE CHAIR.  THOSE VOTING NO

                    VOTE TO OVERRIDE THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR.

                                         56



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 THE CLERK WILL ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE RULING OF THE CHAIR IS SUSTAINED.  READ THE LAST --

                    THE BILL IS BEFORE THE HOUSE.

                                 READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT APRIL 1ST.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MS. HUNTER TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. HUNTER:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN

                    MY VOTE.  I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ALL MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN SUPPORT OF

                    THIS BILL.  THERE'S BEEN PROVEN STATISTICS TO SHOW THAT THE COST OF

                    TURNOVER IS ONE OF THE HIGHEST OPERATIONAL COSTS FOR EMPLOYERS IN THE

                    COUNTRY.  PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT OF WORK AND WHO ARE LET GO FROM WORK

                    ARE USUALLY -- IT'S THE MOST COSTLY TO TURN THOSE FOLKS AROUND.  WE WANT

                    TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO KEEP PEOPLE IN THE WORKFORCE SO THAT

                    THEY CAN CONTINUE TO CONTRIBUTE.  THIS BILL WILL BE ABLE TO DO THAT.  WE

                    WILL BE ABLE TO SHORTEN THE PROCESS IN ORDER TO ALLEVIATE SANCTIONS.  AND

                    AGAIN, I ASK ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.

                                 THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. BARRON TO

                    EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

                                         57



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. BARRON:  FIRST LET ME SAY, MR. CHAIR, I STAND

                    BY EVERY WORD I UTTERED.  I STAND BY THAT.  WE NEED TO HAVE THAT

                    CONVERSATION ON RACE BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S BUTTON GETS PUSHED THE

                    MINUTE YOU MENTION IT.  WE NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ON THAT

                    BECAUSE WHEN IT REARS ITS UGLY HEAD, I'M GOING TO RAISE IT.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 I THINK THAT THE BILL IS VERY SIMPLE, FAIR.  WHY SHOULD

                    PEOPLE HAVE TO HAVE THEIR FUNDS REDUCED BECAUSE THEY MISS AN

                    APPOINTMENT?  THAT'S A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE.  AND WHEN SOME PEOPLE

                    CAN'T UNDERSTAND THAT, THEN I SEARCH FOR OTHER REASONS WHY YOU DON'T

                    UNDERSTAND SOMETHING SO SIMPLE, SOMETHING SO SIMPLE.  DO YOU THINK

                    PEOPLE WANT TO BE ON WELFARE?  TRADE PLACES, YOU THINK WE HAVING IT SO

                    GOOD.  PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BE ON WELFARE.  SO IF, IN FACT, THEY MISS AN

                    APPOINTMENT, WHY WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO REENGAGE AND FIND OUT?  AND

                    THEN IF YOU REALLY WANT TO GET US OFF WELFARE, WHEN WE PUT FORTH THESE

                    OTHER BILLS THAT GET US OFF WELFARE, SUPPORT THEM.  SUPPORT THEM AND WE

                    WILL BE OFF WELFARE.  WE LIVE IN A VERY RACIST, CAPITALISTIC SOCIETY.  I'M

                    GOING TO RAISE IT EVERY CHANCE I GET AND EVERY TIME IT REARS ITS UGLY

                    HEAD.

                                 THIS IS A GOOD BILL.  I COMMEND THE SPONSOR OF THIS

                    BILL.  AND WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS KIND OF

                    INTERROGATION ON A BILL THAT IS SO SIMPLE AND A BILL THAT HELPS THOSE WHO

                    ARE MOST VULNERABLE AND THE MOST NEED TO BE HELPED.  WHEN YOU CAN'T

                    HELP THEM LIKE THAT AND WHEN YOU COME UP WITH ALL OF THIS OTHER STUFF, I

                    GET SUSPICIOUS AND I RAISE MY CONCERNS.  AND I WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT

                                         58



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    AS LONG AS I'M IN THIS ASSEMBLY.

                                 I VOTE AYE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. ARROYO TO

                    EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MRS. ARROYO:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  I

                    COMMEND THE -- THE PERSON THAT PUT THIS BILL IN THE FLOOR.  AND THE

                    SPEAKER FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVING US THE OPPORTUNITY TO HELP THOSE

                    IN NEED.  I HAVE TO TELL YOU SOMETHING PERSONAL FROM MY LIFE.  I WAS IN

                    WELFARE FOR NINE MONTHS WITH MY SEVEN KIDS WHEN I HAD TO QUIT MY JOB

                    BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE NOBODY TO TAKE CARE OF THEM WHEN I WAS

                    WORKING.  I NEVER -- AND I NEVER DREAMED TO BE ON WELFARE BECAUSE I

                    HAD CHILDREN.  I TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE MYSELF AND TO PREPARE

                    MYSELF IN THIS SOCIETY THAT HAVE BEEN DESCRIBED HERE.  THANK YOU VERY

                    MUCH.  AND I WENT THROUGH OBTAINING AN EDUCATION IN ORDER TO MAKE

                    ENOUGH MONEY TO SUPPORT MY CHILDREN AND TO MAKE THEM PROUD OF

                    WHAT WE ARE IN THIS SOCIETY AS A PUERTO RICAN AND A U.S. CITIZEN.

                    PROBABLY BEFORE THAT MANY OTHER PEOPLE HERE IN THIS ROOM.  I'M PROUD

                    OF THE WORK THAT WAS DONE FOR ME WITH THE SOCIAL WORKERS THAT GAVE ME

                    THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO SCHOOL AND PREPARE MYSELF.  AND TODAY I AM

                    HERE, AND MY CHILDREN ARE PROFESSIONALS.  AND WE ARE MAKING

                    PROFESSIONALS OF MY GRANDCHILDREN BECAUSE THAT IS THE STIGMA THAT MANY

                    PEOPLE HAVE.  BUT WE ARE HERE TO MAKE OURSELVES BETTER AND TO BE PART

                    OF A SOCIETY THAT, IN PART, DOESN'T LIKE US.  I DON'T WANT NOBODY TO LIKE

                    ME BECAUSE LOVE -- GOD LOVE ME AND I LOVE GOD.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. ARROYO, HOW DO

                                         59



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    YOU VOTE?

                                 MRS. ARROYO:  I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, MY DEAR.

                    MRS. ARROYO IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, COULD YOU

                    CALL ON MR. CROUCH FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CROUCH FOR THE

                    PURPOSES OF AN ANNOUNCEMENT.

                                 MR. CROUCH:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  THERE WILL

                    BE AN IMMEDIATE MEMBERS-ONLY REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE IN THE PARLOR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  IMMEDIATE

                    MEMBERS-ONLY REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE IN THE PARLOR.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, CAN YOU

                    CALL ON MR. OTIS FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. OTIS.

                                 MR. OTIS:  THERE WILL BE AN IMMEDIATE CONFERENCE

                    OF THE DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE IN THE SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  IMMEDIATE

                    DEMOCRATIC CONFERENCE, SPEAKER'S CONFERENCE ROOM.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                         60



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF WE

                    COULD GO INTO RECESS FOR A FEW MOMENTS, PLEASE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE HOUSE WILL STAND

                    IN RECESS.

                                 (WHEREUPON, THE HOUSE STOOD IN RECESS.)



                    *******



                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE HOUSE WILL COME

                    BACK TO ORDER.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE

                    GOING TO CONTINUE ON OUR DEBATE LIST WITH CALENDAR NO. 414 BY MRS.

                    GALEF.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL READ,

                    PAGE 28, CALENDAR NO. 414.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A05147, CALENDAR NO.

                    414, GALEF, THIELE, MOSLEY, GOTTFRIED, DE LA ROSA, JEAN-PIERRE,

                    L. ROSENTHAL, GLICK.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN

                    RELATION TO THE MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF SEASONAL AND DECORATIVE

                    LIGHTING PRODUCTS CONTAINING LEAD.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  AN EXPLANATION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AN EXPLANATION IS

                    REQUESTED, MRS. GALEF.

                                         61



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MRS. GALEF:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.  WHAT THIS BILL

                    DOES IS JUST REQUIRE THAT ALL DECORATIVE HOLIDAY LIGHTS AND LIGHTING -- AND

                    IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE DEVELOPING MORE WITH ALL OF OUR HOLIDAYS.  IN FACT,

                    HALLOWEEN, I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY MORE LIGHTS THAN -- THAN CHRISTMAS

                    AT THIS POINT.  BUT THE LIGHTING PRODUCTS THAT ARE MANUFACTURED OR

                    DISTRIBUTED INTO NEW YORK THAT WOULD CARRY A WARNING LABEL THAT JUST

                    SAYS, WARNING:  HANDLING THE COATED ELECTRICAL WIRE OF THIS PRODUCT

                    MAY EXPOSE YOU TO LEAD.  WASH YOUR HANDS THOROUGHLY AFTER USE.  AND

                    THE PURPOSE OF THE BILL IS TO PROTECT CONSUMERS, AND PARTICULARLY

                    CHILDREN, FROM EXPOSURE TO LEAD THROUGH THE CONTACT WITH THE LEAD-

                    COATED WIRES OF DECORATIVE LIGHTING.  CALIFORNIA HAS DONE A SIMILAR KIND

                    OF -- OF LEGISLATION, AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PASSED, I THINK IT WAS

                    MAYBE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, LEGISLATION PROTECTING OURSELVES AGAINST

                    LEAD IN JEWELRY, AND WE'VE ALSO DONE THAT WITH TABLEWARE.  WE'VE DONE

                    IT WITH TOYS AND FURNITURE, AND CERTAINLY WITH PAINT.  I THINK WE ALL ARE

                    SO MUCH AWARE THAT PARTICULARLY YOUNG CHILDREN CAN BE SO IMPACTED BY

                    LEAD IN THEIR BLOODSTREAM.  AND THESE WIRES, WHEN CHILDREN TOUCH IT, THE

                    DUST FROM THE WIRE CAN IMPACT THEM, AND IF YOU DON'T WASH YOUR HANDS

                    IT CAN GO RIGHT INTO YOUR MOUTH.  AND THIS IS JUST -- JUST TO PUT A

                    WARNING ON --ON OUR DECORATIVE WIRING.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. MIKULIN.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  THANK YOU.  WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 MRS. GALEF:  CERTAINLY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WILL YOU YIELD?

                                 MRS. GALEF:  YES.

                                         62



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MRS. GALEF -- MRS.

                    GALEF YIELDS, SIR.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  JUST A FEW QUICK QUESTIONS.  NOW, IS

                    THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ARE IN HOLIDAY

                    DECORATIONS, OR DOES IT POSE A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY?

                                 MRS. GALEF:  WELL, IT'S IN -- WHAT -- WHAT HAPPENS

                    IS THE POLYVINYL CHLORIDE -- LEAD IS USED AS A STABILIZER AND A FIRE

                    RETARDANT IN THE POLYVINYL CHLORIDE, WHICH IS COATED ON THE WIRES AND

                    THE BULBS AND THE SOCKETS AND THE HOLIDAY LIGHTS.  THERE HAVE BEEN

                    STUDIES -- IT MAKES IT VERY FLEXIBLE.  YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALL PUT LIGHTS ON

                    SOMETHING, IT MAKES IT VERY FLEXIBLE.  BUT WHEN IT'S EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT

                    AND LIGHT, THAT'S WHEN YOU START TO GET THE DECAY.  THERE HAVE BEEN

                    STUDIES.  THERE WAS ONE RECENTLY -- WELL, IT WASN'T AS RECENT AS I'D LIKE --

                    BUT 2008 WITH THE CORNELL UNIVERSITY WHERE THEY DID LEAD SWIPE TESTS

                    ON SOME NEWLY-PURCHASED AND OLDER CHRISTMAS LIGHTS.  AND THEY FOUND

                    THAT ACTUALLY THE AMOUNTS OF LEAD ON THE SURFACE WAS IN EXCESS OF THE

                    US EPA CLEARANCE LEVEL FOR LEAD ON WINDOWSILLS.  SO IT WAS REALLY

                    WORSE THAN ON WINDOWSILLS.  AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER REPORT DONE IN

                    2010 BY THE ECOLOGY CENTER, A US ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, THAT TESTED 68

                    SETS OF CHRISTMAS LIGHTS AND FOUND THAT MORE THAN HALF OF THEM

                    CONTAINED MORE THAN THE 210 FEDERAL REGULATIONS ALLOWED FOR CHILDREN'S

                    PRODUCTS, AND SOME OF THEM EVEN CONTAINED 30 TIMES THESE LIMITS.  I

                    THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY HADN'T FOCUSED ON.  YOU KNOW, OVER

                    THE TIME, I'VE HAD CHILDREN, I'VE DECORATED TREES.  I HAVEN'T DECORATED FOR

                    HALLOWEEN.  BUT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE THINK ABOUT THAT.  BUT

                                         63



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WHEN WE HAVE LEAD IN ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT WE PUT ON TREES AND

                    PEOPLE HANDLE AND CHILDREN HANDLE -- I -- I REMEMBER THE WONDERFUL

                    TIMES I'VE HAD MY GRANDCHILDREN OVER TO DECORATE THE TREE, AND WHAT A

                    BAD THING I PROBABLY DID BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THE WASHING OF

                    THE HANDS, ET CETERA.  I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THIS UNTIL I STARTED TO GET INTO

                    THE LEGISLATION, AND THEN I WAS AWARE OF IT.  AND ALL WE'RE DOING IS

                    SAYING PUT A WARNING, YOU KNOW, ON YOUR -- ON YOUR PACKAGING AND ON

                    YOUR -- ON YOUR STRING OF LIGHTS THAT YOU NEED TO WASH YOUR HANDS AFTER

                    YOU DEAL WITH THIS.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  OKAY.  NOW, WOULDN'T THE FEDERAL

                    HAZARDOUS AND SUBSTANCES ACT OF FEDERAL LAW, 15 U.S.C. SECTION

                    1261, WOULDN'T THAT HANDLE THAT WITH LABELS ON CERTAIN LEAD PRODUCTS

                    AND HAZARDOUS PRODUCTS?

                                 MRS. GALEF:  I'M NOT SURE I QUITE HEARD THAT, BUT WE

                    HAVE THE ABILITY HERE THROUGH OUR CONSUMER AFFAIRS COMMITTEE AND

                    THROUGH THE ASSEMBLY AND THE SENATE TO ADOPT LEGISLATION TO REQUIRE

                    THIS LABELING.  WE DO THIS ON --ON MANY DIFFERENT KINDS OF ITEMS.  AND

                    AS I SAID, CALIFORNIA HAS DONE IT AS A STATE.  SO, OBVIOUSLY, WE COULD GO

                    FORWARD TO THAT.  I THINK THEY DID IT BACK IN -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT YEAR IT

                    WAS, BUT IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO.  IT -- IT WAS CALIFORNIA'S PROPOSITION

                    65, WHENEVER THAT WAS.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  YEAH, BUT WOULDN'T -- WOULDN'T THE

                    FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, IF THERE, YOU KNOW, WAS A RISK OF LEAD REQUIRE AS A

                    PRECAUTION THE LABEL ON THE -- THE DECORATION?  SO, YOU KNOW, IF THE

                    FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S NOT DOING THIS, WHY ARE WE?

                                         64



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MRS. GALEF:  WE DO A LOT OF THINGS THAT THE FEDERAL

                    GOVERNMENT DOESN'T DO.  BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY PROBABLY WANT TO PROTECT

                    -- I DON'T KNOW, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WANTS TO PROTECT US, BUT I

                    GUESS WE WANT TO PROTECT OURSELVES EVEN MORE.  WHEN WE KNOW THERE'S

                    A PROBLEM, THAT WE WANT TO GO FORWARD AND -- AND DEAL WITH THAT.  I'M

                    TRYING -- YOU KNOW, WE -- WE HAD PROBABLY DONE -- WHEN WE PASSED -- I

                    DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ALL VOTED FOR THAT -- BUT THE LEGISLATION ON JEWELRY

                    -- I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO HAD THE BILL OVER THERE.  YOU KNOW, WE -- WE

                    ARE DOING SOMETHING THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WASN'T DOING.  YOU

                    KNOW, WE -- WE DO THAT ALL THE TIME.  WE HAVE REGULATIONS, YOU KNOW,

                    WITHIN OUR HOUSING AND -- AND IN EDUCATION.  I MEAN, WE -- WE -- THAT'S

                    OUR ROLE.  THAT'S OUR ROLE TO RESPOND TO PROBLEMS AND TO PROTECT THE

                    PEOPLE OF OUR STATE.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  HOW ABOUT THE SALE OF HOMEMADE

                    HOLIDAY CRAFTS?

                                 MRS. GALEF:  WELL, HOMEMADE HOLIDAY CRAFTS

                    WOULDN'T COME UNDER THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE HOMEMADE.  IT'S -- IT'S WITH

                    CERTIFICATIONS -- IT REALLY SAYS IN THE BILL THAT"... A PERSON, FIRM,

                    CORPORATION OR ASSOCIATION THAT" -- THAT -- WELL, THAT IS ACTUALLY FOR THE

                    CIVIL PENALTY.  RIGHT.  OKAY.  AND THE LIGHTING PRODUCTS, THE RULE IS THE

                    FACTORY ASSEMBLED WITH A PUSH-IN -- IT -- IT TALKS ABOUT THE -- THE FACTORY

                    BEING -- ASSEMBLING THIS AND SO ON, AND THE -- AND -- DID I MISS

                    ANYTHING IN THIS ONE?  IT'S -- IT'S ALL MAN -- IT'S ALL MANUFACTURED.  IT'S NOT

                    MANUFACTURED AT HOME.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  OKAY.  SO IF A PERSON MAKES THEIR

                                         65



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    OWN HOMEMADE HOLIDAY DECORATIONS AND SELLS THEM --

                                 MRS. GALEF:  IT DOESN'T -- DOESN'T MATTER.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  -- THEY --

                                 MRS. GALEF:  WELL, WE WOULD HOPE THAT --

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  -- THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ANY CIVIL

                    VIOLATION WITH THIS LAW?

                                 MRS. GALEF:  NO.  NO.  I WOULD HOPE THAT THEY

                    WOULD NOW KNOW THAT THEY -- THEY SHOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, HAVE THIS KIND

                    OF WIRING AS -- AS THEY'RE DEALING WITH THEIR -- THEIR HOME PRODUCTS.

                    BUT, NO.

                                 MR. MIKULIN:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT ON THE 90TH

                    DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, IF WE CAN

                    ADVANCE THE A-CALENDAR, PLEASE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON A MOTION BY MRS.

                    PEOPLES-STOKES, THE A-CALENDAR IS ADVANCED.

                                         66



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  THANK YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  WE WILL BEGIN ON PAGE 3 ON THE A-CALENDAR WITH RULES

                    REPORT NO. 65 BY MR. CAHILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL READ.


                                 THE CLERK:  ASSEMBLY NO. A00264-B, RULES

                    REPORT NO. 65, CAHILL, COLTON, ARROYO, JEAN-PIERRE, TAYLOR,

                    MCDONOUGH, JACOBSON, STECK.  AN ACT TO AMEND THE FINANCIAL SERVICES

                    LAW, IN RELATION TO ESTABLISHING PROTECTIONS FROM EXCESS HOSPITAL

                    CHARGES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AN EXPLANATION IS

                    REQUESTED, MR. CAHILL.

                                 SHH.  LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE ON DEBATE.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  THIS BILL

                    WOULD SUBJECT HOSPITAL CHARGES FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES THAT FOLLOW TO

                    THE -- TO THE INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS ESTABLISHED TO

                    PROTEST -- PROTECT AGAINST EXCESSIVE EMERGENCY CHARGES.  IT IS A PROCESS

                    THAT EXISTS FOR MOST OTHER MEDICAL COSTS, AND WE'RE NOW EXPANDING IT TO

                    INCLUDE EMERGENCY CHARGES AND THE CHARGES THAT FOLLOW.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. RA.

                                 MR. RA:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WILL YOU YIELD, MR.

                    CAHILL?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES, OF COURSE.

                                         67



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. RA:  THANK YOU.  FIRST OFF, I KNOW WE HAVE

                    VOTED ON A VERY SIMILAR BILL IN THE PAST.  CAN YOU JUST GO THROUGH WHAT

                    IS CHANGED FROM THE BILL WE PASSED LAST YEAR?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  WE HAD VOTED ON A VERY SIMILAR BILL,

                    MR. SPEAKER, MR. RA.  THE -- THE BILL THAT WE VOTED ON IN THE PAST WAS

                    FAIRLY IDENTICAL IN TERMS OF THE SUBSTANCE, WITH ONE EXCEPTION:  WE'VE

                    MADE IT MORE NARROW TO TAKE OUT THE SAFETY NET HOSPITALS, THE HOSPITALS

                    THAT PROVIDE CARE TO PEOPLE USING THE MEDICAID PLAN TO THE TUNE OF 60

                    PERCENT OF THEIR REVENUE OR MORE.  AND WE VOTED ON IT FOUR TIMES SO

                    FAR, UNANIMOUSLY.

                                 MR. RA:  SO THE -- THAT -- THAT PIECE, IN TERMS OF THE

                    60 PERCENT, WHERE -- WHERE'S THAT NUMBER COMING FROM?  IS THAT -- IS

                    THAT REFLECTED ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE LAW?  WHY -- WHY 60 PERCENT

                    MEDICAID AS -- AS THE EXEMPTION?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  IT'S -- IT'S OUR BELIEF THAT AT THAT

                    PARTICULAR THRESHOLD, THAT'S A POINT AT WHICH THE HOSPITAL NEEDS TO RELY

                    UPON THE COMMERCIAL INSURERS TO MAKE SURE THEY CAN STAY AFLOAT.  IT IS

                    NOT A SPECIFIC NUMBER.  AND CERTAINLY, SOME WOULD ARGUE WE SHOULD'VE

                    GONE TO 51 PERCENT, OTHERS WOULD ARGUE WE SHOULD'VE GONE TO 75

                    PERCENT.  I THINK 60 IS A GOOD HAPPY MEDIUM.

                                 MR. RA:  OKAY.  NOW, JUST IN TERMS OF THE, YOU

                    KNOW, THE SUBSTANCE OF -- OF WHAT THIS BILL DOES.  CURRENTLY, THE PATIENT

                    IS, YOU KNOW, IS PROTECTED BY -- BY OUR CURRENT LAW.  THIS DEALS WITH,

                    BASICALLY, BETWEEN THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND THE HOSPITAL, CORRECT?

                                         68



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. CAHILL:  WELL, DIRECTLY, THAT IS THE CASE.

                    BECAUSE WE'VE DONE A -- A NUMBER OF THINGS TO PROTECT -- PROTECT

                    CONSUMERS FROM SURPRISE BILLING.  WE'VE PUT PROTECTIONS IN PLACE THAT

                    WOULD PROHIBIT THE CHARGES BEING INCURRED BY THE CONSUMER IN EXCESS

                    OF ANYTHING THEY WOULD'VE PAID UNDER THEIR PLAN, EVEN IF THEY'RE USING

                    AN OUT-OF-NETWORK PROVIDER.  BUT LET'S NOT FOR A MOMENT THINK THAT THIS

                    CURRENT SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES PROTECTS CONSUMERS.  THERE ARE A NUMBER

                    OF REASONS WHY THE CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCE DOES NOT.  AND PRIMARILY IS

                    WHAT COULD BE THE DRAMATIC IMPACT ON THE COST OF HEALTHCARE, WHICH

                    THEN REFLECTS ITSELF AS THE COST OF HEALTH INSURANCE, WHICH IS OFTENTIMES

                    PAID IN AN INCREASING PERCENTAGE BY THE CONSUMER.

                                 MR. RA:  SO NOW, WHEN A PATIENT GOES INTO AN

                    EMERGENCY FACILITY AT A -- AT A HOSPITAL AND IT'S OUT-OF-NETWORK, WHAT --

                    WHAT CURRENTLY HAPPENS WHEN THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, PUT INTO THE

                    EMERGENCY ROOM AND, YOU KNOW, GIVE OVER AN INSURANCE CARD FOR -- FOR

                    A -- AN INSURANCE COMPANY THAT IS NOT PART OF THE NETWORK OF THAT

                    HOSPITAL?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  LET ME TELL YOU WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS.

                    AND BY "USUALLY" I MEAN ALMOST ALL OF THE TIME.  WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT

                    A PERSON GOES INTO A HOSPITAL THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN TO BE A NETWORK

                    WITHIN -- AND THEY PRESENT THEIR INSURANCE CARD, AND THAT HOSPITAL SENDS

                    A BILL TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY THAT REFLECTS WHAT ARE THEIR USUAL AND

                    CUSTOMARY CHARGES, AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY PAYS IT.  THAT'S WHAT

                    USUALLY HAPPENS.  WHAT COULD HAPPEN AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THAT

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES HAVE RECEIVED BILLS FROM HOSPITAL PROVIDERS AFTER

                                         69



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THE CONTRACT HAS EXPIRED, WHEN THE CONTRACT IS IN NEGOTIATION, OR WHEN

                    NO CONTRACT EXISTS, WHERE THE CHARGES ARE NO LONGER WHAT THEY USED TO

                    BE.  THEY'RE NOT WHAT THEY WERE WHEN THEY HAD A CONTRACT.  THEY'RE NOT

                    WHAT THEY WERE CHARGING OTHER PEOPLE.  BUT THEY HAVE BEEN INFLATED TO

                    THE POINT OF BEING SO HIGH THAT THEY CAN'T EVEN BE PAID.  AND WHAT

                    HAPPENS THEN?  THEN THE HOSPITALS USE THOSE INFLATED BILLS TO FORCE A

                    DIFFERENT KIND OF NEGOTIATION FOR THE NEW CONTRACT AS OPPOSED TO HAVING

                    A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.  WHAT THIS BILL WILL DO IS MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE

                    HAVE THOSE KIND OF DISPUTES BETWEEN THESE PARTIES, THAT -- AND ONLY IN

                    THOSE INSTANCES WHERE WE HAVE THOSE KIND OF DISPUTES -- THAT THERE'S A

                    PLACE WHERE THOSE DISPUTES CAN BE RESOLVED BY A NEUTRAL THIRD-PARTY.

                                 MR. RA:  OKAY.  NOW, THE -- THE NEUTRAL THIRD-PARTY

                    THAT -- THAT WILL BE THE ARBITER OF THIS INDEPENDENT DISPUTE PROCESS, WHO

                    SELECTS THAT INDIVIDUAL?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THE NEUTRAL THIRD-PARTY IS AN

                    INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION REPRESENTATIVE THAT IS APPOINTED BY THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.

                                 MR. RA:  OKAY.  AND UNDER THIS BILL -- SO YOU SAY

                    CURRENTLY, YOU KNOW, THEY -- THEY GO -- THEY SEND A BILL AND THEY'LL -- THE

                    HEALTH PLAN WILL, YOU KNOW, GIVE THE HOSPITAL OR PAY THE HOSPITAL

                    WHATEVER IS THEIR USUAL AND CUSTOMARY AMOUNT.  BUT UNDER THIS BILL,

                    THEN, THE HEALTH PLAN IS GOING TO BASICALLY DETERMINE WHAT THEY'RE GOING

                    TO PAY, CORRECT?  AND THEN IF THERE'S A DISPUTE IN THAT AMOUNT IT GOES TO

                    THIS PROCESS?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THE HEALTH PLAN WILL DETERMINE WHAT

                                         70



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THEY ARE GOING TO PAY IN THE SAME MANNER THAT THE HOSPITAL WILL

                    DETERMINE WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO CHARGE.  IF THEY CANNOT COME TO AN

                    AGREEMENT ON THEIR OWN, THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT IT TO AN INDEPENDENT

                    DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS.  IF IT GETS SUBMITTED TO AN INDEPENDENT

                    DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS, THAT INDIVIDUAL WHO IS CHARGED WITH

                    DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATE CHARGE LOOKS AT BOTH SIDES, AND THEN USES

                    SOMETHING THAT -- THAT WE CALL "BASEBALL ARBITRATION" - THAT'S THE ACTUAL

                    TERM OF ART FOR IT -  WHERE ONE OF THOSE SIDES IS CHOSEN.  SO, IF THE

                    INSURANCE PLAN HAS DECIDED TO LOWBALL THE HOSPITAL BY -- BY A RATE THAT IS

                    NOT WHAT THEY WERE PAYING THEIR NETWORK PROVIDERS, BY A RATE THAT IS NOT

                    WHAT THEY WOULD PAY FOR A HOSPITAL THAT HAS THE LEVEL OF ACUITY OF

                    PATIENTS THAT THEY WOULD PAY FOR THE COMPLEXITY OF THE CASE, AND THE

                    HOSPITAL SUBMITS A REASONABLE CHARGE, THE REASONABLE CHARGE WILL BE

                    AWARDED BY THE -- BY THE INDEPENDENT BODY.  IF THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE, IF

                    THE INSURANCE COMPANY SUBMITS A CHARGE, SUBMITS AN OFFER TO PAY THAT

                    IS VERY REASONABLE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THEY'VE PAID BEFORE AND THE

                    HOSPITAL HAS ALL OF A SUDDEN STARTED CHARGING 150 PERCENT OR 200

                    PERCENT OF WHAT THEY USED TO CHARGE, WELL, THEN GUESS WHAT'S GOING TO

                    HAPPEN?  THE HOSPITAL IS NOT GOING TO WIN AND THE AWARD IS GOING TO GO

                    TO WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY SAID IT WOULD PAY.  THIS FORM OF AWARD,

                    WHICH I WAS A LITTLE SKEPTICAL ABOUT AT FIRST, HAS PROVEN TO PUSH BOTH

                    SIDES TO THE APPROPRIATE CENTER.  THEY BOTH END UP OFFERING WHEN THEY

                    GO INTO AN IDR PROCESS THE REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE AMOUNT BECAUSE

                    THEY WANT TO WIN THAT RESOLUTION.

                                 MR. RA:  SURE.  AND AS A BASEBALL FAN, I -- I'M

                                         71



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    FAMILIAR WITH -- WITH THAT.  THAT'S HOW --

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I -- I HAD TO QUIT -- I STOPPED WATCHING

                    BASEBALL WHEN JOE NAMATH RETIRED, SO...

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MR. RA:  UNFORTUNATELY, AS A LONG-SUFFERING METS

                    FAN, I CAN'T WALK AWAY THAT EASILY.  SOMETIMES I WISH I COULD.  BUT ONE

                    OF THE CONCERNS THAT'S BEEN RAISED BY, YOU KNOW, OPPONENTS OF THIS

                    PIECE OF LEGISLATION IS THAT THIS WILL THROW KIND OF OUT OF BALANCE THE --

                    THE BARGAINING POSITIONS OF THOSE TWO PARTIES, THE HOSPITALS VERSUS THE

                    -- THE INSURANCE PLANS.  RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL HAVE A

                    NEGOTIATION, PERHAPS, TO BE INCLUDED IN A CERTAIN PLAN, AND THEN YOU

                    HAVE, YOU KNOW, THIS PROCESS WHICH WILL TAKE PLACE IF SOMEBODY'S

                    OUT-OF-NETWORK.  THE -- THE CONCERN THAT'S BEEN EXPRESSED IS THAT IF

                    SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS -- IS PUT IN PLACE, THERE WILL BE LESS OF AN

                    INCENTIVE FOR THE HEALTH PLANS TO BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, PUT MORE

                    HOSPITALS INTO THEIR NETWORK, AND ALSO THAT THE BARGAINING POWER OF

                    THOSE HOSPITALS WILL BE REDUCED BECAUSE THE HEALTH -- THE HEALTH

                    INSURANCE POLICIES WILL KNOW THAT THEY HAVE THIS PROCESS TO FALL BACK

                    ON.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  WELL, MR. SPEAKER, MR. RA, THAT --

                    THAT ANTICIPATES THAT WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY INTENDS TO DO IS TO

                    LOWBALL THE PAYMENTS.  WHY ELSE WOULD THEY DO IT IF THEY COULDN'T SAVE

                    MONEY?  THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO KICK HOSPITALS OUT OF THE NETWORK SO

                    THAT THEY CAN'T HAVE OTHER THINGS LIKE QUALITY ASSURANCE, LIKE -- LIKE

                    AFFILIATIONS WITH OTHER PARTS OF THEIR NETWORK UNLESS THEY WERE GOING TO

                                         72



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    DO IT TO SAVE MONEY.  IF THEY LOW BALL, WHEN THEY GET TO THE IDR

                    PROCESS THEY'RE GOING TO LOSE.  SO THERE IS REALLY NO INCENTIVE FOR THAT TO

                    HAPPEN.  WHAT THIS REALLY DOES IS IT PREVENTS THE DISRUPTION OF THE

                    NORMAL DELIVERY OF HEALTHCARE IN A COMMUNITY, QUITE FRANKLY, WHEN A

                    CONTRACT IS COMING TO AN END.  INSTEAD OF THAT CONTRACT COMING TO AN END

                    ABRUPTLY, INSTEAD OF THAT CONTRACT COMING TO AN END AFTER A MODEST

                    COOLING-OFF PERIOD, WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT THE -- THE CONSUMER CAN

                    CONTINUE TO USE THAT FACILITY.  THAT FACILITY CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE

                    QUALITY HEALTHCARE.  THE INSURANCE PLAN CAN CONTINUE TO OFFER TO PAY THE

                    PLAN, AND AN INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY WILL DETERMINE WHAT'S RIGHT UNTIL

                    THE TWO PARTIES CAN GET BACK INTO THAT KUMBAYA THAT THEY HAD BEFORE

                    AND ENTER THEIR CONTRACT.

                                 MR. RA:  OKAY.  AND THAT -- NOW ONE OF, YOU KNOW,

                    THE -- THE OTHER THINGS THAT HAS BEEN RAISED IS, YOU KNOW -- AS WE KNOW

                    WHEN WE DO MANY OF THESE LAWS, THERE ARE -- THERE ARE -- BECAUSE OF

                    MAYBE THE COMPLEXITY OF -- OF, YOU KNOW, HEALTH INSURANCE AND THE

                    WAY CERTAIN ENTITIES ARE -- ARE INSURED THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE MANY

                    MUNICIPALITIES, SCHOOL DISTRICTS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, THAT ARE

                    SELF-INSURED.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES.

                                 MR. RA:  WOULD -- WOULD THIS DO ANYTHING TO PROTECT

                    PEOPLE THAT ARE COVERED BY THAT TYPE OF PLAN?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  OH, ABSOLUTELY.  THAT'S WHERE IT HAS

                    SOME OF THE GREATEST IMPACTS ALL TOGETHER.  AND THANK YOU FOR ASKING

                    THE QUESTION.  WHEN YOU HAVE A SELF-INSURED PLAN, FOR ALL INTENTS AND

                                         73



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PURPOSES, THE SPONSOR OF THE PLAN IS USUALLY THE EMPLOYER - OR PERHAPS

                    EVEN THE EMPLOYEE, AS ISN'T OFTEN THE CASE - AND THOSE FOLKS ARE

                    RESPONSIBILE FOR THE FIRST NICKLE AND THE LAST DIME OF WHATEVER IS PAID.

                    AND IF THE CHARGES GO UP, THE COST OF THAT PLAN GOES UP FOR THAT

                    MUNICIPALITY.  AND IF THE COST OF THAT PLAN GOES UP FOR THAT

                    MUNICIPALITY, THE NEXT THING THAT RISES IS YOUR REAL PROPERTY TAX CAP.

                    AND THEY COME AND THEY ASK TO PIERCE IT BECAUSE THEIR INSURANCE COSTS

                    WENT OUT -- WENT THROUGH THE ROOF.  OR, A BENEVOLENT PLAN HAS AN

                    INSURANCE PLAN AND THEY HAVE TO PAY THOSE CHARGES.  THEY'RE NOT AT THE

                    TABLE.  WHO'S AT THE TABLE IS THE INSURANCE COMPANY THAT'S ADMINISTERING

                    THE PLAN FOR THEM.  SO, WHERE THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS THE ONE THAT

                    HAS THE CONTRACT WITH THE HOSPITAL, THE SELF-INSURED PLAN OFTENTIMES USES

                    THAT INSURANCE COMPANY TO ADMINISTER THEIR PLAN.  SO IT HAS A DIRECT,

                    EVEN PERHAPS A GREATER DOLLAR IMPACT ON THOSE PLANS EACH AND EVERY

                    DAY.

                                 MR. RA:  OKAY.  AND JUST TO GO BACK TO -- TO ONE

                    OTHER THING THAT I BELIEVE IS NEW TO THE BILL THIS YEAR, IS THIS -- YOU

                    KNOW, THAT IT'S NOT JUST THE INITIAL EMERGENCY, YOU KNOW, TREATMENT, BUT

                    IT'S ANY INPATIENT SERVICES THAT HAPPEN AS A RESULT AND IN THE AFTERMATH

                    OF THAT EMERGENCY VISIT?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES.  WHAT -- WHAT THE BILL -- WHAT

                    THE BILL WAS CORRECTED TO DO WAS TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM THAT EXISTED.

                    THE PROBLEM THAT EXISTED WAS CERTAINLY THAT IF YOU WALK INTO AN

                    EMERGENCY ROOM OR GET WHEELED INTO AN EMERGENCY ROOM - WHICH IS

                    MAYBE MORE LIKELY IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES - THAT CHARGE IS ONE PART OF

                                         74



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THE EQUATION.  BUT THE AFTERCARE THAT FOLLOWS FROM THAT EMERGENCY AND

                    THE ADMISSION THAT FOLLOWS FROM THAT EMERGENCY IS OFTEN TO THE HOSPITAL

                    OR THE HOSPITAL SYSTEM THAT HAS ADMITTED YOU -- THAT -- THAT HAS SEEN YOU

                    FOR THE EMERGENCY.  SO THE ISSUE ABOUT THE BILLING OFTENTIMES IS -- IS

                    MORE CONCERNED WITH WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT,

                    BUT ASSOCIATED WITH THAT EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT.  SO, YES, THAT WAS A

                    CORRECTION THAT WAS MADE, AND -- AND I APOLOGIZE, COLLEAGUES, FOR NOT

                    HAVING DONE SO SOONER.

                                 MR. RA:  OKAY.  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

                                 MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 MR. RA:  SO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW MANY OF US WHO

                    HAVE BEEN HERE IN THE PAST HAVE VOTED ON THIS BILL, AND -- AND PERHAPS,

                    YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CHANGES; SOME OF THEM MAY BE GOOD,

                    SOME OF THEM MAY BE, YOU KNOW, TROUBLING FOR DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONS.

                    BUT -- BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE AWARE AS WE -- WE VOTE ON THIS

                    -- YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD MANY HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS, MANY OF OUR

                    HOSPITALS IN OUR STATE THAT HAVE HAD THEIR -- THEIR DIFFICULTIES.  YOU

                    KNOW, WE HAVE THIS NUMBER OF 60 PERCENT MEDICAID THAT IS -- THAT IS

                    EXEMPT FROM IT.  BUT REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOUR, YOU KNOW, RATE IS IN ANY

                    GIVEN, YOU KNOW, COUNTY OR ANY PLACE WHERE -- WHERE A CERTAIN HOSPITAL

                    IS LOCATED, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE PATIENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, NEED SERVICES.

                    THEY MAY BE, YOU KNOW, MEDICALLY FRAIL, THEY NEED EXTENSIVE SERVICES.

                    AND -- AND CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, THAT'S AN EXPENSIVE THING FOR THE

                    HOSPITALS TO TAKE CARE OF.  WHEN WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE, YOU KNOW

                                         75



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    -- AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN ANY NUMBER, AS THE SPONSOR INDICATED.

                    MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS MAYBE A HAPPY MEDIUM.  MAYBE IT COULD BE

                    HIGHER, IT COULD BE LOWER ON WHAT -- WHAT WE USE AS THE CUTOFF.  BUT --

                    BUT THERE IS THE POTENTIAL THAT CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS THAT SERVICE REALLY

                    VULNERABLE POPULATIONS COULD -- COULD BE HURT BY THIS TYPE OF PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION BECAUSE OF THE -- THE CHANGE IN -- IN THE, YOU KNOW,

                    BARGAINING POWER THAT THE HOSPITALS ARE GOING TO HAVE WITH THESE PLANS

                    AND THE REDUCTION OF THE INCENTIVE FOR THOSE PLANS TO INCLUDE HOSPITALS

                    IN THEIR -- IN THEIR NETWORKS.

                                 SO, I'M GOING TO BE VOTING IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS

                    PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  I DO THINK THERE ARE MEASURES THAT WE CAN TAKE TO

                    HELP CONTINUE TO, YOU KNOW, PROTECT PEOPLE FROM OUT-OF-NETWORK

                    CHARGES.  CERTAINLY, WE HAVE A GREAT PRO-CONSUMER STATUTE TO PROTECT

                    THE INDIVIDUAL CONSUMER, AND -- AND -- AND THIS IS REALLY ABOUT THE

                    RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THOSE -- THOSE HEALTH INSURERS AND THE HOSPITALS.

                    AND I THINK THERE ARE OTHER THINGS WE CAN DO WITHOUT DOING SOMETHING

                    THAT COULD PUT THAT RELATIONSHIP OUT OF BALANCE.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  AND I

                    -- I'M -- ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  I -- I'M SORRY TO BE RISING TODAY

                    FOR A FEW REASONS:  FIRST, BECAUSE I HAVE A NUMBER OF GOOD FRIENDS IN

                    SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION, BOTH INSIDE THIS HOUSE AND OUTSIDE.  AND

                                         76



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    I'M ALSO SORRY BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER WAY TO GET TO THIS

                    POINT THAT WOULD NOT HAVE HAD AS DIRECT AN IMPACT ON THE REGION OF THE

                    STATE THAT I REPRESENT.  BUT NONETHELESS, BECAUSE WE ARE WHERE WE ARE,

                    MR. SPEAKER.  I PLANNED TO SPEAK FOR 30 MINUTES TODAY IN TWO 15-

                    MINUTE CHUNKS, AS ARE PERMITTED UNDER OUR RULES.  SO LET ME TAKE A

                    MOMENT, IF I CAN, MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN FROM MY PERSPECTIVE WHAT

                    THIS BILL DOES, AND THEN PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF THE LOCAL IMPACT ON MY

                    DISTRICT AND MY COUNTY AND THE LOWER HUDSON REGION.

                                 THIS BILL IS NOT ABOUT PATIENTS AND CUSTOMERS OF

                    HOSPITALS.  THIS DOESN'T DO WHAT THE PRIOR LEGISLATION DID ON SURPRISE

                    BILLING WHERE FOLKS WHO WERE GETTING BILLS FROM -- FROM MEDICAL

                    PROVIDERS WERE BEING FORCED TO DEAL WITH THOSE BILLS AND WE HAD TO PASS

                    A SURPRISE BILLING LEGISLATION IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT AN ISSUE THAT WOULD

                    BE WORKED OUT BETWEEN THE MEDICAL PROVIDER AND THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANY.  THIS BILL ISN'T ABOUT THAT.  THIS BILL IS ONLY ABOUT THE

                    RELATIONSHIP OF INSURANCE COMPANIES TO HOSPITALS.  AND ALTHOUGH THAT'S

                    A - A PERFECTLY FINE TOPIC, IT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN PROTECTING THE PEOPLE

                    OF NEW YORK IN THE SAME WAY THE PRIOR LEGISLATION DID.  AND IN

                    PARTICULAR, I FIND IT INAPPROPRIATE FOR US TO GET IN THE MIDDLE OF THE

                    RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INSURANCE COMPANIES AND HOSPITALS WHEN SOME OF

                    THOSE HOSPITALS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES RIGHT NOW ARE IN THE MIDDLE

                    OF NEGOTIATIONS.  WE ALL, IN GOVERNMENT, DEAL WITH NEGOTIATIONS

                    BETWEEN VARIOUS PARTIES.  USUALLY IT IS OUR APPROACH NOT TO GET INVOLVED

                    IN THE MIDDLE AND INTERRUPT THOSE NEGOTIATIONS.  ONE OF THOSE

                    NEGOTIATIONS IS OCCURRING RIGHT NOW BETWEEN WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                                         77



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CENTER AND BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD, WHICH HAPPENS TO PROVIDE OUR

                    INSURANCE HERE IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE.  SO I KNOW NOT JUST BEING A

                    WESTCHESTER RESIDENT, BUT BECAUSE I'M DIRECTLY AFFECTED ALSO HAVE

                    KNOWLEDGE OF THAT.  BUT THIS IS A BROADER ISSUE THAN JUST ABOUT

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER.  THIS IS ABOUT WHETHER INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES WILL HAVE ANY INCENTIVE TO HAVE HOSPITALS BE IN-NETWORK.

                    RIGHT NOW UNDER EXISTING NEW YORK STATE LAW, EMERGENCY SERVICES

                    THEMSELVES ARE PROVIDED TO CUSTOMERS AT THE IN-NETWORK REDUCED RATE.

                    IF YOU WERE BROUGHT BY AN AMBULANCE TO A HOSPITAL THAT HAPPENS NOT TO

                    BE IN YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY'S NETWORK, YOU, AS A CUSTOMER, DON'T

                    DEAL WITH THAT, AND THE -- EFFECTIVELY, THE IN-NETWORK RATE APPLIES.  THIS

                    BILL DEALS WITH THE SECOND CATEGORY OF TYPES OF CHARGES THAT A HOSPITAL

                    HAVE [SIC], WHICH IS AFTER YOU'VE RECEIVED EMERGENCY CARE AND ARE

                    ADMITTED TO THE HOSPITAL, WHAT THOSE CHARGES ARE.  AND THEN THERE'S A

                    THIRD CATEGORY THAT CHARGE -- THAT HOSPITALS CHARGE FOR, WHICH IS FOR

                    ELECTIVE SURGERIES.  ELECTIVE SURGERIES ARE THE ONES THAT PREDOMINANTLY

                    PROVIDE THE VAST MAJORITY OF REVENUE TO HOSPITALS.  THAT'S THE NATURE OF

                    -- OF THEM.  AND ONLY IF THOSE ELECTIVE SURGERIES ARE SUFFICIENTLY

                    PERFORMED CAN THE HOSPITAL FUND THE EMERGENCY CARE AND THE ANCILLARY

                    CARE TO EMERGENCIES.  THAT, FRANKLY, IS NOT NEARLY AS LUCRATIVE.  THIS BILL

                    DEALS -- AS I SAID, WITH THE SECOND CATEGORY, THOSE ADMISSIONS

                    POST-EMERGENCY CARE.  RIGHT NOW, NEW YORK STATE LAW, FOR BETTER OR

                    WORSE, SAYS, CUSTOMERS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT.  THE

                    INSURANCE COMPANY WILL SIMPLY HAVE TO ACCEPT THE OUT-OF-NETWORK

                    CHARGE OF THE HOSPITAL IF THE HOSPITAL IS OUT-OF-NETWORK.  AND OF COURSE

                                         78



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    YOU MIGHT SAY, WELL, THAT'S NOT FAIR.  WHY SHOULD THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANY HAVE TO PAY THAT?  OBVIOUSLY, THE INSURANCE COMPANIES DON'T

                    FEEL THAT'S FAIR.  BUT, THAT SYSTEM IS WHAT SETS UP THE INCENTIVE FOR

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES TO BRING THE HOSPITAL IN-NETWORK AND TO NEGOTIATE

                    A RATE THAT IS FAR LESS THAN THE LIST PRICE THAT A HOSPITAL CHARGES.  THAT

                    CATEGORY IS, IN FACT, THE REASON WHY HOSPITALS ARE BROUGHT IN-NETWORK.

                    IT'S NOT THE THIRD CATEGORY, THE ELECTIVE SURGERIES, THAT ARE THE REASON TO

                    BRING IN -- THE HOSPITAL IN-NETWORK.  AN INSURANCE COMPANY REALLY ONLY

                    NEEDS ONE HOSPITAL IN EVERY REGION TO BE IN-NETWORK FOR THOSE ELECTIVE

                    SURGERIES.  THEY CAN SAY TO THEIR COVERED CONSUMERS, SORRY, THAT

                    ELECTIVE SURGERY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO AT THIS HOSPITAL

                    BECAUSE IT'S OUT-OF-NETWORK.  YOU CAN -- YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE ONE

                    THAT'S IN-NETWORK.  BUT WITH REGARDS TO THE ANCILLARY TO EMERGENCY CARE

                    SERVICES, BECAUSE, OF COURSE, PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THE NECESSARY CONTROL

                    OVER WHAT HOSPITAL THEY'RE BROUGHT TO FOR AN EMERGENCY, IT'S IMPORTANT

                    FROM A MARKETING AND OTHER PERSPECTIVE FOR THE HOSPITAL TO HAVE THAT

                    IN-NETWORK.  AND IT IS ONLY THE FACT THAT AN OUT-OF-NETWORK HOSPITAL

                    COULD CHARGE THOSE HIGHER -- HIGHER RATES THAT FORCES THE DIALOGUE

                    BETWEEN INSURANCE COMPANIES AND HOSPITALS.  WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS IT --

                    INSTEAD OF HAVING THE HOSPITAL BE ABLE TO CHARGE ITS HIGHER RATE, IT SAYS

                    WE'RE GOING TO GO TO AN -- THE ARBITRATOR RATE.  AND OF COURSE, THE

                    ARBITRATOR RATE IS LOWER.  AND VIS-À-VIS THE INSURANCE COMPANY, THAT'S,

                    OF COURSE, GREAT.  VIS-À-VIS THE EMPLOYERS AND SOME FRIENDS IN LABOR

                    WHO NEGOTIATE WITH THE INSURANCE COMPANY FOR THEIR PRICES, THERE'S A

                    HOPE THAT THERE WILL BE PASSED-ON LOWER PRICES.  BUT FROM -- REMEMBER,

                                         79



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    FROM THE PATIENT PERSPECTIVE, THEY'RE NOT COVER -- THEY'RE NOT PAYING THIS

                    CHARGE ANYWAY; AT LEAST FOR THE BASIS OF RECEIVING IT.  IF THE HOSPITAL IS

                    NOT ENGAGED WITH THE INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE NEGOTIATIONS TO MAKE IT

                    IN-NETWORK AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY DOES NOT HAVE THE INCENTIVE TO

                    HAVE THAT NEGOTIATION, THEY WILL SIMPLY BE ABLE TO LEAVE A WHOLE HOST OF

                    HOSPITALS OUT-OF-NETWORK, MEANING DIVERTING THOSE ELECTIVE SURGERIES TO

                    OTHER HOSPITALS.  MEANING THAT HOSPITALS THAT RELY ON THOSE ELECTIVE

                    SURGERIES TO FUND THEIR OTHER OPERATIONS WILL SIMPLY NOT BE ABLE TO

                    MAINTAIN ANY SEMBLANCE OF PROFITABILITY.  AND THAT IS CRUCIALLY

                    IMPORTANT FOR THOSE OF US WHO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE HOSPITALS ACROSS

                    THE STATE THAT PROVIDE ESSENTIAL CARE, INCLUDING ESSENTIAL EMERGENCY

                    CARE, AND IF THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO HAVE AN ECONOMIC MODEL THAT WORKS,

                    THOSE COMMUNITY SERVICES ARE GOING TO BE LOST.  IN WESTCHESTER

                    COUNTY, IF INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE ABLE TO PUT WESTCHESTER COUNTY

                    MEDICAL CENTER OUT-OF-NETWORK AND PEOPLE DIVERT THEIR ELECTIVE

                    SURGERIES TO OTHER HOSPITALS AROUND WESTCHESTER, WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                    CENTER, A HERETOFORE HISTORICALLY STRUGGLING HOSPITAL NETWORK THAT FOR

                    YEARS REQUIRED BAILOUTS AND PUBLIC FUNDS BECAUSE OF A FORMER PUBLIC

                    HOSPITAL, NOW A PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION, BUT HAS FINALLY, AFTER SO

                    MANY YEARS, GOT INTO FINANCIAL STABILITY, WILL ONCE AGAIN REVERT TO BEING

                    RELIANT ON TAXPAYER DOLLARS.  AND FUNDAMENTALLY, WE CANNOT, ONCE

                    AGAIN, ESTABLISH THAT WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER - THE TRAUMA CENTER

                    FOR THE ENTIRE LOWER HUDSON VALLEY, THE BURN CENTER FOR EVERYWHERE

                    IN NEW YORK STATE FROM WESTCHESTER ON NORTH TO CANADA - FOR THE

                    CRUCIAL SERVICES THAT IT PROVIDES AS THE SOCIAL SAFETY NET HOSPITAL IN THE

                                         80



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    AREA THAT SO MANY OTHER HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS, INCLUDING HOSPITALS, RELY

                    ON TO PROVIDE THE BASE-LEVEL OF SUPPORT FOR EVERYTHING FROM TRAUMA

                    EMERGENCY SERVICES TO INPATIENT PSYCHIATRIC FACILITIES.  IF WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER'S FINANCIAL STABILITY IS THREATENED, IT THREATENS THE ENTIRE

                    HEALTHCARE SYSTEM OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY AND THE LOWER HUDSON

                    REGION.  AND, ULTIMATELY, IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE FOR ME, AS A

                    REPRESENTATIVE FROM WESTCHESTER, TO ALLOW LEGISLATION TO MOVE FORWARD

                    THAT HAVE THAT IMPACT.  AND YOU MIGHT ASK, WELL, SINCE THIS LEGISLATION

                    IN A DIFFERENT FORM IT COULD COME UP PREVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, WHY DID I

                    AND SO MANY OTHER COLLEAGUES VOTE FOR IT, IT'S BECAUSE THE LEGISLATION

                    WAS DIFFERENT AT THE TIME.  IT APPLIED ACROSS THE ENTIRE STATE.  IT DID NOT

                    HAVE AN EXEMPTION FOR HOSPITALS THAT PROVIDE OVER 60 PERCENT OF

                    INPATIENT EMERGENCY SERVICES FROM -- INPATIENT SERVICES FOR MEDICAID

                    AND MEDICARE SERVICES.  THIS LINE WAS ALL HOSPITALS WERE IN IT TOGETHER.

                    NOW WE ARE DRAWING A LINE, AND INSTEAD OF RELYING ON THE SOCIAL SAFETY

                    NET HOSPITAL LINE - WHICH WE OFTEN RELY ON, THAT WOULD HAVE INCLUDED

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER -- WE ARE DRAWING A LINE THAT,

                    CONVENIENTLY FOR SOME AND INCONVENIENTLY FOR OTHERS, EXCLUDES

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER.  THAT IS JUST SIMPLY NOT RIGHT.  IT'S ONE

                    THING FOR US TO SET POLICY ON THE OVERALL HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY, BUT TO HAVE

                    THERE BE WINNERS AND LOSERS AND HAVE THE LOWER HUDSON VALLEY BE A

                    DEFINITIVE LOSER IS NOT SOMETHING THAT MY CONSTITUENTS SENT ME HERE TO

                    STAND FOR.

                                 SO INSTEAD, I STAND AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION.  I

                    OBVIOUSLY URGE COLLEAGUES TO LOOK CAREFULLY AT WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THE

                                         81



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HOSPITALS IN THEIR OWN DISTRICTS, TO UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN IF THEIR HOSPITAL

                    ISN'T THE FIRST TO SUFFER FINANCIALLY FROM THE LEGISLATION.  IF THEY'RE NOT IN

                    THE EXEMPT CATEGORY, THEY ARE AT RISK.  AND EVEN IF THEY ARE IN THE

                    EXEMPT CATEGORY, IF EVER THEIR -- THEIR PATIENT MIX DROPS BELOW THE 60

                    PERCENT THRESHOLD, THEN THAT HOSPITAL, TOO, WILL BE AT RISK.  AND WE HAVE

                    VERY IMPORTANT THINGS TO DEBATE AND DISCUSS AND TO UNDERSTAND WITH --

                    WITH REGARDS TO OUR HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY AND CERTAINLY THE WAY INSURANCE

                    IS PROVIDED IN NEW YORK STATE, I, FRANKLY, FIND A NUMBER OF THE

                    ARGUMENTS OF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES AND THEIR CUSTOMERS ARE MAKING

                    ABOUT HOW -- OR IF WE JUST ARE ABLE TO KNOCK A BUNCH OF PLACES

                    OUT-OF-NETWORK THAT LOWERS THE COSTS, IT WILL BE A MORE EFFICIENT SYSTEM.

                    WELL, FRANKLY, THOSE VERY SAME INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL -- WILL BE

                    FIGHTING TOOTH AND NAIL IF EVER THIS HOUSE CONSIDERS A SINGLE-PAYER

                    SYSTEM THAT WOULD, IN FACT, BE MUCH MORE EFFICIENT, AT LEAST WITH

                    REGARDS TO THE ABILITY TO -- TO DETERMINE PAYMENTS TO HOSPITALS AND OTHER

                    MEDICAL PROVIDERS.

                                 I -- I UNDER -- UNDERSTANDABLY -- I UNDERSTAND THE

                    MOTIVATIONS OF, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS WHO WILL BE THE WINNERS UNDER THIS

                    LEGISLATION, BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT WE CAN PIT ONE MEDICAL INSTITUTION

                    VERSUS OTHERS.  NOT JUST ONE.  I THINK OF A HUNDRED HOSPITALS ACROSS THE

                    STATE THAT WOULD BE COVERED BY THIS, AND THAT FUNDAMENTALLY MANY OF

                    THEM, SHORTLY AFTER THIS BILL BECAME LAW -- IF IT BECOMES LAW, AND I HOPE

                    IT DOESN'T -- MANY OF THEM WOULD FIND THEMSELVES OUT-OF-NETWORK.  AND

                    THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD GO BACK TO OUR CONSTITUENTS AND SAY, THE REASON

                    YOU COULDN'T GET ACCESS TO IN-NETWORK COVERAGE AT YOUR AREA HOSPITAL IS

                                         82



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BECAUSE OF SOMETHING WE DID ESSENTIALLY IS NOT THE MESSAGE WE SHOULD

                    BE SENDING TO OUR CONSTITUENTS.

                                 SO I WOULD CONCLUDE, MR. SPEAKER, BUT I CANNOT.

                    UNTIL THAT BUZZER GOES OFF, I WILL BE STANDING HERE AND I WILL BE

                    CONVEYING HOW UNFORTUNATE IT IS THAT DESPITE THE EFFORTS OF MANY OF US,

                    AND PARTICULARLY THE WESTCHESTER DELEGATION, TO SIMPLY SAY IN THE

                    MIDDLE OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER, PLEASE,

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER IS A SAFETY NET HOSPITAL.  IT IS -- UNDERMINE

                    -- UNDERLIES THE ENTIRE HEALTHCARE STRUCTURE OF AT LEAST WESTCHESTER

                    COUNTY AND BEYOND.  PLEASE EXCLUDE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER.  NO

                    OPTION TO DO THAT.  INSTEAD, WHAT DO WE HAVE?  A BILL THAT BEFORE TODAY

                    WAS JUST SIMPLY IN THE CODES COMMITTEE.  TODAY, PUT ON -- WELL, LAST --

                    YESTERDAY PUT ON THE CODES COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR TODAY.  THE CODES

                    COMMITTEE VOTED.  IT DIDN'T EVEN GO THROUGH WAYS AND MEANS, EVEN

                    THOUGH IT HAS A FISCAL IMPACT.  IT WENT STRAIGHT TO RULES -- STRAIGHT FROM

                    RULES TO THE FLOOR FOR A VOTE.  THIS BILL IS BEING RUSHED.  IT IS BEING

                    RUSHED BECAUSE IF ENOUGH NEW YORKERS FIND OUT WHAT IMPACT IT WILL

                    HAVE ON THEIR AREA HOSPITALS, IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT THE SUPPOSED

                    BENEFITS OF THIS LEGISLATION WILL BE SHOWN TO HAVE -- BE MATCHED WITH

                    VERY SIGNIFICANT COSTS.

                                 AND THAT IS THE BUZZER, MR. SPEAKER.  I WILL BE BACK

                    FOR A SECOND ROUND.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AS PROMISED, YOU'VE

                    ELAPSED THE FIRST TIME.

                                 MR. MONTESANO.

                                         83



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. MONTESANO:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WILL

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD, PLEASE?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CAHILL, WILL YOU

                    YIELD?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CAHILL YIELDS.

                                 MR. MONTESANO:  MR. CAHILL, JUST A FOLLOW-UP

                    QUESTION.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  SURE.

                                 MR. MONTESANO:  WITH REGARD TO THE, I THINK THE

                    IDRS THEY CALL THEM, THE INDEPENDENT RESOLUTION PEOPLE, THE LIST -- THE

                    INVOLVEMENT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DO THEY PUT

                    OUT A LIST AND THEN THE PARTIES, THE HOSPITALS AND THE INSURER CHOOSE

                    FROM THAT LIST, OR DOES DFS ACTUALLY APPOINT ONE OF THE COMPANIES?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I AM BEING ADVISED BY COUNSEL THAT

                    THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION REPRESENTATIVE

                    IS APPOINTED IS THAT IT IS APPOINTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL

                    SERVICES.  A SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL IS APPOINTED FROM A LIST THAT THEY HAVE.

                                 MR. MONTESANO:  OKAY.  AND THE COST FOR THAT

                    INDIVIDUAL, IS THAT SHARED BY BOTH PARTIES?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THAT'S ANOTHER INTERESTING PART,

                    BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE USING THIS PROCESS ACROSS THE BOARD.  WE'RE

                    USING THIS FOR A LOT OF HEALTHCARE IN NEW YORK STATE.  AND THE WAY IT

                    WORKS, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO HAVE DISPUTES, IS

                    THAT THE LOSER OF THE RESOLUTION - BECAUSE REMEMBER, THERE'S A WINNER

                                         84



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    AND A LOSER, WE'RE NOT GOING SPLITTING THE BABY - THE LOSER HAS TO PAY THE

                    COST UNLESS THERE IS SOME SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT TO THE CONTRARY.

                                 MR. MONTESANO:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.  THANK

                    YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 MR. SAYEGH.

                                 MR. SAYEGH:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ON THE -- ON THE BILL BEFORE US.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 MR. SAYEGH:  I STAND BEFORE YOU TO -- TO REALLY

                    FOCUS ON HOW IMPORTANT THIS BILL IS AND THE IMPACT IT WOULD HAVE ON

                    HOSPITALS ACROSS THE STATE, AND MORE IMPORTANT, AS MY COLLEAGUE MR.

                    BUCHWALD EXPLAINED ELOQUENTLY, ON ESPECIALLY A HOSPITAL THAT IS IN MY

                    DISTRICT.  MY DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF YONKERS, A HIGH URBAN AREA, IS PART

                    OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY, PART OF THE LOWER HUDSON VALLEY REGION.  AND

                    WESTCHESTER COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER IS A KNOWN TRAUMA CENTER WHERE

                    ALL THE LOCAL HOSPITALS, WHETHER IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY, IN ROCKLAND

                    AND SULLIVAN AND DUTCHESS AND PUTNAM COUNTIES, WHENEVER THERE'S

                    TRAUMA CASES DEALING POTENTIALLY WITH SERIOUS MATTERS - ANEURYSMS AND

                    HEART CONDITIONS AND AUTO ACCIDENTS AND OTHER TRAUMA-RELATED TYPE OF

                    INCIDENTS - ARE OFTEN REFERRED TO WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER.  AND

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER HAS HAD A HISTORY OF FINANCIAL WOES IN THE

                    PAST, AND HAVE MADE SERIOUS ATTEMPTS TO TRY TO SETTLE DOWN THEIR FISCAL

                    WOES AND REALLY DEVELOP SOME SENSE OF STABILITY, WHICH IS NECESSARY FOR

                    THE ENTIRE REGION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.  I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED OF

                                         85



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HOW THIS BILL WAS EXPEDITED IN SUCH A FASHION TO AVOID THE PARTIES THAT

                    ARE INVOLVED - NAMELY, THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND THE HOSPITAL - TO TRY

                    TO NEGOTIATE THIS MATTER.  I THINK WHEN THE DELEGATION MEMBERS,

                    ESPECIALLY FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY, MET WITH THE PARTIES NOT TOO LONG

                    AGO, THE UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THEY WERE ENCOURAGED TO SIT ON THE

                    TABLE AND TRY TO COME UP WITH WHAT WAS REASONABLE FOR BOTH SIDES.

                    WE'RE NOT IN A PHILOSOPHY OR IN A SITUATION WHERE THERE MUST BE LOSERS

                    AND WINNERS.  WHEN YOU DEAL WITH HEALTHCARE, IT'S CRUCIAL TO MAKE SURE

                    THAT WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE INSTITUTIONS WITH THE RIGHT TO NEGOTIATE

                    AND THE RIGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE COMPENSATED FOR SERVICES

                    PROVIDED.  MY CONCERN IS BY RUSHING A VOTE ON THIS BILL, WE HAVE CLOSED

                    THE DOOR TO NEGOTIATIONS.  WE HAVE PUT WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER

                    AND MANY HOSPITALS ACROSS THE STATE POTENTIALLY IN -- IN A BANKRUPTCY

                    SITUATION, WHICH IS A LOSE-LOSE FOR MANY PATIENTS IN OUR AREAS AND

                    THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

                                 SO, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES, THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT TIME TO

                    PASS A BILL LIKE THIS.  LET'S GIVE NEGOTIATIONS AN OPPORTUNITY.  LET'S TELL

                    THE PARTIES, SIT ON THE TABLE AND RESOLVE THIS, SO THAT AT THE END OF THE

                    DAY, THE INSURANCE COMPANY, PATIENTS ARE PROTECTED AND THE HOSPITAL IS

                    PROTECTED.  AND WHATEVER ISSUES THAT RELATE TO LABOR, THEY WILL BE

                    ADDRESSED, ALSO.  SO, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO REALLY, AT THIS TIME MORE

                    THAN EVER, TO VOTE THIS DOWN.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 MRS. GALEF.

                                 MRS. GALEF:  YES.  I'VE REALLY NEVER DONE THIS

                                         86



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BEFORE, LIKE THIS.  SO I'M GOING TO SAY I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS ABOUT THIS.

                    WHAT DID I LEARN AT THE CODES COMMITTEE MEETING TODAY?  WELL, FIRST I

                    LEARNED THAT IT WAS ON THE AGENDA, THIS BILL WAS ON THE AGENDA.  AND

                    WITHIN, I THINK, 20 MINUTES IT WENT TO THE RULES COMMITTEE, AND THEN IT

                    DIDN'T GO TO WAYS AND MEANS EVEN THOSE THERE'S THIS HUGE ECONOMIC

                    IMPACT ON THIS.  AND THEN IT'S HERE ON THE FLOOR FOR US TO DEBATE WHEN

                    WE'RE SUPPOSED HAVE A WOMEN'S DINNER ANYWAY.  OKAY.  SO THAT'S WHAT

                    I LEARNED TODAY.  I ALSO LEARNED TODAY THAT THIS IS THE ONLY STATE THAT

                    WOULD HAVE A POLICY LIKE THIS.  THERE'S NEVER BEEN AN EXPERIENCE LIKE

                    THIS ANYWHERE ELSE.  MAYBE THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE DOING THIS SO

                    THAT THEY CAN USE NEW YORK STATE AS AN EXAMPLE.  I DON'T KNOW.  I HOPE

                    NOT.  WHAT ELSE?  IN THE CODES COMMITTEE SOMEBODY ASKED THE

                    QUESTION - I HAVE TO SAY THAT MY COLLEAGUE SITTING IN FRONT OF ME WHO

                    ASKED QUESTIONS LATER WAS ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIC - BUT ASKING SOME

                    QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT IS AN EXTENS -- EXCESSIVE CHARGE.  WELL, I DIDN'T

                    HEAR A CLARIFICATION.  WHAT IS AN EXCESSIVE CHARGE?  WHO'S GOING TO

                    DETERMINE THE EXCESSIVE CHARGE?  ANOTHER THING, WHAT HOSPITALS ARE

                    GOING TO BE IMPACTED?  IN THE CODES COMMITTEE, I DID NOT HEAR AN

                    ANSWER TO THAT.  I HAVE A LIST THAT I'VE SEEN, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR AN ANSWER

                    FROM THE CODES COMMITTEE.  COMPARABLES.  WHAT KIND OF COMPARABLES

                    ARE WE GOING TO USE FOR A BURN CENTER OR A TRAUMA CENTER, ET CETERA?  I

                    DIDN'T REALLY FEEL THAT I GOT AN ANSWER TO THAT.  THE BURN CENTER IS THE

                    ONLY ONE IN THE AREA, I THINK, FROM DOWN HERE.  WE KEPT THE BURN

                    CENTER GOING AT THE MEDICAL CENTER BECAUSE IT'S SO EXPENSIVE AND

                    NOBODY ELSE WANTED TO DEAL WITH IT, SO WE HAD IT THERE.  I DON'T KNOW

                                         87



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ABOUT THE COMPARABLES.  AND REMEMBER, WE'RE DEALING IN A COUNTY THAT

                    IS A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE UPSTATE COUNTIES.  I WISH IT

                    WASN'T, BUT IT IS.  WHY -- WE ASKED THE QUESTION OF WHY 60 PERCENT, AND

                    THE STAFF, I BELIEVE, HAD NO ANSWER TO 60 PERCENT.  I KNOW THE SPONSOR

                    OF THE BILL HAS SAID SOMETHING ABOUT WELL, IT COULD'VE BEEN 51 PERCENT,

                    IT COULD'VE BEEN WHATEVER.  WELL, THERE'S NO DATA TO SAY IT SHOULD BE 60

                    PERCENT, SO WHY DID WE CHOOSE 60 PERCENT?  THEY TALKED ABOUT A SAFETY

                    NET HOSPITAL, AND I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT DEFINITION IS AND THAT

                    PROBABLY GOT INTO THE 60 PERCENT.  I DON'T KNOW.  THEN THERE WAS A

                    QUESTION ABOUT WHY IS MONTEFIORE EXCUSED FROM THIS.  WHY, I DON'T

                    REALLY KNOW.  I GUESS THEY'RE AT 63 PERCENT SO THAT THEY ARE.  BUT WHAT IS

                    THE REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HOSPITALS?  THEN I HEARD THAT ALBANY

                    HAS 59 PERCENT.  SO THE HOSPITAL HERE IN ALBANY, IF WE GET TAKEN THERE

                    WITH AN EMERGENCY, WILL BE COVERED.  BUT WE WON'T BE COVERED IF WE

                    STAY AT THE ALBANY HOSPITAL BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING -- IT'LL BE

                    OUT-OF-NETWORK.  DID THEY -- THEY LOOK -- DID THE CODES COMMITTEE

                    LOOK AT THE IMPACT ON HOSPITALS?  WE DIDN'T GET AN ANSWER THAT THEY

                    LOOKED AT ANY IMPACT ON THE HOSPITAL BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS WHAT

                    IMPACT IS ON HOSPITALS.  HAVE THERE BEEN ANY HEARINGS ON THIS SO THAT

                    PEOPLE CAN COME IN?  I DON'T THINK SO.  IT WAS SO CLEAR FROM THE CODES

                    COMMITTEE TODAY THAT THERE'S BEEN NO RESEARCH OR DATA ON THIS ISSUE.

                                 LET ME JUST TALK ABOUT THE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                    CENTER.  I WAS A WESTCHESTER COUNTY LEGISLATOR STARTING IN 1980.

                    BEFORE THAT, MY HUSBAND WAS A COUNTY LEGISLATOR IN 1975.  AND THAT

                    HOSPITAL WAS A POOR PERSON'S HOSPITAL.  IT WASN'T EVEN A MEDICAL CENTER.

                                         88



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    IT WAS THE WESTCHESTER HOSPITAL.  IT WAS FOR ONLY POOR PEOPLE.  AND

                    THEY MADE THE DECISION IN ABOUT 7 -- 1978 THAT THIS HOSPITAL WAS GOING

                    TO TAKE CARE OF ALL PATIENTS IN THE REGION AND BE A HOSPITAL THAT HAD

                    REALLY, REALLY TOP-NOTCH CARE.  IT WAS GOING TO BE A TERTIARY CARE FACILITY.

                    AND AT THAT TIME, ALL THE OTHER HOSPITALS AROUND THE AREA WERE ALL UPSET

                    BECAUSE THEY'D HAD A POOR PERSON'S HOSPITAL AND THEY SENT ALL THEIR POOR

                    PEOPLE TO THE HOSPITAL.  AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, NOW THERE'S GOING TO BE A

                    HOSPITAL THAT IS FOR EVERYBODY AND THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE PATIENTS AWAY

                    FROM ALL OF THE OTHER HOSPITALS.  THEY WERE SO UPSET.  I REMEMBER ALL OF

                    THOSE HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATORS IN MY HOUSE.  I WAS A DEVOTED WIFE.  I

                    GAVE THEM TEA AND COFFEE AND COOKIES, AND MY HUSBAND NEGOTIATED

                    WITH THEM.  NOW WE'VE TURNED THE TABLES, RIGHT?  ANYWAY, IT JUST -- I

                    MEAN, IT WAS INCREDIBLE.  THEY WERE SO UPSET WITH THE COMPETITION.  SO

                    WHAT WE SAID WAS WHEN I GOT ON THE COUNTY BOARD, WE'RE GOING TO BE

                    SURE IT'S TERTIARY.  WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THOSE BURN PATIENTS, WE'RE GOING

                    TO TAKE THE ORGAN DONATIONS.  WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE HEART TRANSPLANTS.

                    AND THEY WERE ONE OF THE HOSPITALS THAT STARTED THE FIRST HEART

                    TRANSPLANT.  AMY AND I SAW THIS WEEKEND TWINS THAT HAD BEEN SEPARATED

                    AT THE HOSPITAL.  YOU DON'T DO THAT IN EVERY HOSPITAL.  THAT IS EXPENSIVE.

                    AND IF YOU -- NEONATAL FACILITY, WHERE THOSE LITTLE BABIES THAT LIVE WHEN

                    THEY'RE LIKE TWO POUNDS, THEY GO TO THE MEDICAL CENTER.  THAT'S

                    EXPENSIVE.  AND YOU'RE GOING TO SAY IN THIS BILL THAT THEY CAN COME IN

                    FOR THE EMERGENCY, I GUESS FOR THE DELIVERY, I DON'T KNOW, AND THEN

                    WHEN THE BABY IS GOING TO STAY THERE THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE

                    COVERED, THEY'RE GOING TO BE -- THEY'RE GOING TO BE OUT-OF-NETWORK?

                                         89



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    YOU KNOW THE COST OF ALL THAT AND THE HOSPITAL'S COST FOR THOSE?  AND

                    WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH THAT ISSUE?  IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.  I

                    TEND TO THINK THAT IF THIS BILL WENT THROUGH, THAT THE WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER WOULD THINK ABOUT THE BURN CENTER AND MAYBE ALL THE

                    FIREFIGHTERS WHO END UP AT OUR MEDICAL CENTER AND OTHER PEOPLE THAT

                    ARE IN CAR ACCIDENTS THAT END UP AT THE MEDICAL CENTER, THAT WE'RE NOT

                    GOING TO HAVE A BURN CENTER THERE BECAUSE ALBANY DROPPED IT.  DO --

                    ARE OTHER PEOPLE GOING TO DROP IT?  WE CAN DROP IT.  IT'S REALLY, REALLY,

                    REALLY EXPENSIVE, AND PEOPLE ARE THERE FOR A LONG TIME.  AND THIS IS ALL

                    ABOUT THE INSURANCE COMPANY.  THE INSURANCE COMPANY JUST WANTS TO

                    MAKE MORE MONEY ON ALL THIS STUFF.  I ALSO THINK BECAUSE IT'S A PUBLIC

                    BENEFIT HOSPITAL NOW, IT'S GOING THROUGH - AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THE

                    MEDICAL CENTER, BUT IF THIS -- ANY HOSPITAL IN YOUR DISTRICT CAN BE PART OF

                    ALL THIS.  BECAUSE YOU COULD BE 60 PERCENT TODAY AND 59 PERCENT NEXT

                    YEAR, AND YOU COULD BE OUT OF THE SYSTEM.  YOU CAN HAVE THE SAME

                    PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.  THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, BECAUSE WE

                    PUT TOGETHER PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION -- WHICH WE VOTED ON HERE IN

                    THE 1990'S SOMETIME TO MAKE IT A PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION, AND SO

                    DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME WESTCHESTER COUNTY TAXPAYERS WERE PUTTING

                    A LOT OF MONEY INTO THE DISTRICT.  AND EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A REGIONAL

                    HOSPITAL, THE OTHER REGIONS WERE NOT PUTTING MONEY IN, AND WE WERE

                    REALLY FUNDING THAT HOSPITAL.  AND NOW AT THIS POINT, WE MADE SURE THAT

                    OUR EMPLOYEES - REMEMBER, THEY ALL STARTED OUT AS COUNTY EMPLOYEES -

                    WE MADE SURE THAT THEY WERE ALL IN THE UNIONS.  THE NURSES, ALL THE

                    WORKERS THERE ARE IN THE UNIONS.  THEY'RE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.  PUBLIC

                                         90



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    EMPLOYEES COST MORE THAN THE PRIVATE EMPLOYEES AT YOUR PRIVATE

                    HOSPITALS.  SO, YES.  IT'S GOING TO COST MORE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE

                    MEDICAL CENTER CONTINUE, AND IT'S MORE FOR REIMBURSEMENT.  I TEND TO

                    THINK IF WE PASS THIS BILL, OUR COUNTY IS GOING TO HAVE TO PUT MORE

                    MONEY INTO IT.  BUT I TEND TO THINK THAT WE ARE GOING TO, AT THE MEDICAL

                    CENTER, GRAB PATIENTS THAT ARE NOT TERTIARY CARE PATIENTS BECAUSE WE'RE

                    GOING TO HAVE TO START TO BE ABLE TO PUT MORE PEOPLE IN THERE BECAUSE

                    MANY OF THE -- BECAUSE THE WAY THE SYSTEM WORKS, YOU GO TO THE

                    EMERGENCY ROOM AND THEN AFTERWARDS - AND YOU GET COVERED - AND THEN

                    AFTERWARDS, WITH YOUR AFTERCARE, YOU ARE GOING TO END UP WITH YOUR

                    AFTERCARE MAYBE AT ANOTHER HOSPITAL.  IT'S -- FIRST OF ALL, IT'S NOT REALLY

                    GOOD TO MOVE PEOPLE AROUND WHEN THEY'RE SICK, BUT WE MAY BE HAVING

                    TO DO THAT.  AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE PEOPLE OUT OF BEDS, WHAT YOU'RE

                    GOING TO DO IS YOU'RE GOING TO PUT MORE PEOPLE IN THE BEDS THAT MAYBE

                    AREN'T TERTIARY.  THEN WE HAVE A RIPPLE EFFECT ON ALL OF OUR OTHER

                    HOSPITALS, AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM.

                                 YOU KNOW, DID THIS ALL START, THIS BILL -- WHICH DID

                    CHANGE, IT'S NOT THE SAME BILL THAT WE HAVE VOTED ON IN THE PAST.  IT IS A

                    DIFFERENT BILL.  DID THIS ALL START BECAUSE THE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                    CENTER CAME IN TO RESCUE SOME HOSPITALS IN THE HUDSON REGION A LITTLE

                    BIT NORTH?  THEY RESCUED THOSE HOSPITALS BECAUSE THOSE HOSPITALS WERE

                    FAILING, AND THEY CAME IN.  ARE WE UPSET BECAUSE WESTCHESTER CAME IN

                    TO HELP PULL TOGETHER SOME OF THOSE REGIONAL HOSPITALS?  MAYBE THAT'S

                    THE ESSENCE OF WHY THIS BILL IS BEFORE US.  I DO NOT KNOW.  BUT I WOULD

                    SUGGEST THAT THE RUSH ON THIS BILL, THIS IS NOT LIKE ANYTHING WE'VE EVER

                                         91



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    DONE BEFORE.  RUSH, RUSH, RUSH.  EXCEPT MAYBE ON THE LAST NIGHT OF

                    SESSION.  I MEAN, I CAN'T IMAGINE WHY WE ARE DOING THIS AT 5:  OF 6:00

                                 LET ME TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS.  THIS BILL, IN

                    MY MIND, IS TRYING TO TAKE AWAY NEGOTIATIONS FOR WHAT IS -- WHAT ARE

                    GOING ON RIGHT NOW.  I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOUR HOSPITALS THAT YOU'RE

                    NEGOTIATING -- WELL, WE'RE ALWAYS -- THEY'RE ALWAYS NEGOTIATING WITH

                    HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS.  BUT THE MEDICAL CENTER IS NEGOTIATING WITH THE

                    EMPIRE PLAN -- FOR THE EMPIRE PLAN, AND THEY'VE BEEN IN NEGOTIATIONS.

                    AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS LAST FRIDAY IN NEGOTIATIONS, THE MEDICAL

                    CENTER ACCEPTED THE RATES THAT EMPIRE HAD OFFERED FOR THE -- FOR THE

                    HOSPITALS OTHER THAN THE MEDICAL CENTER.  SO ALL THE OTHER HOSPITALS

                    THEY'RE A PART OF THE MEDICAL CENTER, THEY ACCEPTED THE RATES, AND THAT

                    EMPIRE WALKED AWAY FROM THAT.  THEY ALSO ASKED -- THE MEDICAL CENTER

                    ASKED FOR TWO WEEKS TO CONTINUE TO NEGOTIATE, AND EMPIRE SAID NO.

                    AND EMPIRE SAID, LET'S GET BACK UP TO THE ASSEMBLY AND LET'S GET THEM

                    TO VOTE ON THIS.  THAT'S WHAT GOING ON.  I'VE JUST NEVER SEEN IT SO BLATANT

                    IN MY -- IN MY TIME HERE OF WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.  AND THE FACT THAT

                    THERE'S NO DATA, NO FACTS.  WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HOSPITALS ARE IMPACTED.

                    YOU -- YOU OUGHT TO QUESTION THAT.  IS YOUR HOSPITAL ON THE LIST?  DO

                    YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH YOUR HOSPITAL?  AND WHAT HAPPENS IF

                    YOUR HOSPITAL CHANGES FROM 6 -- 60 PERCENT TO 50 PERCENT?  ARE YOU

                    GOING TO BE IN THIS BOAT, TOO?  AND ARE YOUR SERVICES GOING TO START TO

                    FAIL?  I -- I'M -- I'M -- I TOLD YOU, I STARTED OUT WITH THIS MEDICAL CENTER

                    IN 1975, PUSHING EVERY WAY, WHETHER IT'S LEGISLATION UP HERE OR AT THE

                    COUNTY.  I DON'T WANT IT TO FAIL.  I DON'T WANT IT TO FALL APART.  IT IS

                                         92



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PROVIDING FANTASTIC SERVICE TO PEOPLE.  AND, YES, THEY'RE DOING TERTIARY

                    CARE.  IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN OUR REGULAR PRIMARY CARE.  BUT WE'RE

                    GOING TO START PUTTING ALL THOSE PRIMARY CARE PEOPLE IN TO TRY TO GET THE

                    REVENUES AND TO FILL THE BEDS.  THAT'S WHAT WILL HAPPEN.  AND WE'RE

                    GOING TO TOPPLE THIS WHOLE SYSTEM DOWN.  I THINK IT'S JUST A BAD IDEA.  IF

                    YOU WANT TO EXEMPT THE MEDICAL CENTER, I WOULD LOVE TO DO THAT.  BUT I

                    DON'T REALLY THINK IT'S FAIR, BECAUSE YOUR HOSPITAL CAN BE IN IT NEXT YEAR.

                    AND IF WE EXEMPT ONE, WE SHOULD -- WE SHOULD JUST GET RID OF THIS

                    WHOLE POLICY.  I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE 60 PERCENT CAME FROM.  YOU

                    COULD PUT IT DOWN AT 2 PERCENT.  NOBODY KNOW, BECAUSE NOBODY CARES.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. WALCZYK.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WOULD

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WILL YOU YIELD, SIR?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  I APPRECIATE THAT.  WHO EXACTLY

                    DETERMINES WHAT AN EXCESSIVE CHARGE IS?  IS THERE A SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL

                    THAT WOULD DO THAT?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.  THERE

                    ARE SOME STANDARDS WRITTEN INTO THE LEGISLATION.  THERE ARE ALSO SOME

                    STANDARDS WRITTEN INTO THE LEGISLATION TO WHICH IT REFERS, SEPARATE AND

                    APART FROM WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE BILL IN FRONT OF YOU.  BUT THE EXCESS

                    CHARGES ARE BASED UPON A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CRITERIA, INCLUDING WHAT

                                         93



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WAS BEING CHARGED BEFORE THE CONTRACT ENDED, WHAT IS BEING CHARGED TO

                    OTHER PEOPLE.  THE ACUITY OF THE PATIENT BEFORE THAT -- THAT IS BEING

                    TREATED AND THAT IS BEING -- THAT THE CHARGES ARE BASED UPON.  AND A

                    NUMBER OF OTHER VERY SPECIFIC FACTORS.  THE IDEA IS THAT -- THAT WE ARE

                    SENDING THIS TO A NEUTRAL THIRD-PARTY TO MAKE A DETERMINATION.  THAT

                    NEUTRAL THIRD-PARTY IS THE PARTY THAT WILL ULTIMATELY DETERMINE WHETHER IT

                    IS AN EXCESSIVE CHARGE.  BOTH SIDES WILL MAKE ARGUMENTS THAT IT IS OR IS

                    NOT, BUT THE THIRD-PARTY WILL MAKE THAT DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE

                    EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM AND THE STANDARDS THAT ARE PUT IN -- THAT ARE -- THAT

                    ARE -- THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  MAYBE IT WAS IN YOUR ANSWER AND I

                    MISSED IT, BUT HOW EXACTLY DO WE FIND THAT NEUTRAL THIRD-PARTY?  WHO

                    APPOINTS THEM?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I -- I ANSWERED THAT BEFORE TO ANOTHER

                    INDIVIDUAL WHO ASKED.  IT IS APPOINTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL

                    SERVICES.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  OKAY.  WHO DETERMINES WHAT AN

                    EXORBITANT FEE WOULD BE?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  AGAIN, IT'S THE -- IT'S THE CRITERIA THAT

                    ARE INDICATED IN THE -- IN THE BILL AND IN THE LAW, IN THE EXISTING LAW

                    TODAY THAT WE USE WHERE -- BY THE WAY, THE HISTORY OF THIS BILL IN NEW

                    YORK STATE IS WHERE WE CAN -- WHERE WE CAN GET A REFERENCE POINT IS

                    WHERE PHYSICIANS HAVE BEEN SUBJECT TO THE BILL, AND THE RESULTS HAVE

                    VIRTUALLY BEEN EVENLY DIVIDED BY THE INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION

                    REPRESENTATIVE BETWEEN THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND THE PROVIDER.  SO,

                                         94



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THE DETERMINATION IS MADE BASED UPON THE CRITERIA IN THE STATUTE, AND

                    BASED UPON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  WELL, I'M GLAD THAT THE SPONSOR

                    BROUGHT UP THE HISTORY OF THIS BILL BECAUSE IT CERTAINLY PREDATES ME, AND

                    I UNDERSTAND THAT IT HAS SOME HISTORY HERE.  BUT THERE HAVE BEEN

                    CHANGES TO THE BILL.  WHERE EXACTLY DID THIS ORIGINATE FROM?  WHERE DID

                    THE IDEA OF THIS BILL COME FROM?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.  THE --

                    THE BILL ORIGINATED FROM A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PLACES.  BUT PRIMARILY, IT

                    -- IT ORIGINATED BECAUSE WE, AS A LEGISLATIVE BODY, WERE CONCERNED WITH

                    THE RUNAWAY COST OF HEALTHCARE AND THE INCREASING BURDEN THAT IS BEING

                    PLACED -- THAT'S BEING PLACED ON INDIVIDUALS FOR SURPRISE BILLING.  THERE

                    WAS A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT STUDIES THAT TOOK PLACE.  BUT ULTIMATELY, WE

                    PASSED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PREVENT SURPRISE BILLING, AND WE

                    EMPANELED A COMMISSION, A WORK GROUP, IF YOU WILL.  AND THAT WORK

                    GROUP MET, AND IN 19 -- AND IN 2017 OFFERED A SERIES OF

                    RECOMMENDATIONS, ONE OF WHICH WAS TO DO EXACTLY THIS BILL.  SO, THE

                    ORIGIN WAS TO PROTECT CONSUMERS, NUMBER ONE; TO REIN IN HEALTHCARE

                    COSTS, NUMBER TWO; AND TO ALLOW A -- A WORK GROUP TO STUDY THE ISSUE

                    MORE IN DEPTH AND COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.  AND TO THE

                    POINT THAT SOME COLLEAGUES HAVE MADE ABOUT THIS BEING RUSHED, IT IS

                    ANYTHING BUT RUSHED.  THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME THE CONCEPTS THAT UNDERLIE

                    THIS BILL HAVE BEEN BEFORE THIS BODY.  THE FOURTH TIME.  THE BILL WAS

                    INTRODUCED ON JANUARY 9TH.  IT WASN'T INTRODUCED TODAY.  IT WAS

                    INTRODUCED ON JANUARY 9TH.  IT WASN'T CONSIDERED BY THE CODES

                                         95



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    COMMITTEE FOR THE FIRST TIME THIS AFTERNOON.  IT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE

                    CODES COMMITTEE AND WENT ON AN AGENDA FOR THE CODES COMMITTEE

                    LAST WEEK.  THE CODES COMMITTEE POSTPONED CONSIDERATION OUT OF

                    CONSIDER -- TO -- TO ALLOW PARTIES TO CONTINUE TO DISCUSS, AND THE CODES

                    COMMITTEE CONSIDERED IT TODAY.  IT IS NOT ALL UNUSUAL, MADAM SPEAKER,

                    MY COLLEAGUES, FOR A -- A COMMITTEE TO PASS A BILL, FOR IT TO GO TO RULES

                    AND THEN TO WIND UP ON THE FLOOR WITH JUST A -- IN -- IN DUE COURSE.

                    THERE'S NOTHING RUSHED ABOUT THIS.  THIS IS PART OF A LONGSTANDING

                    PROCESS THAT WE HAVE UNDERTAKEN AS LEADERS IN THIS COUNTRY TO REIN IN

                    THE COST OF HEALTHCARE.  I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT, IF MY COLLEAGUE WOULD

                    ALLOW ME, THAT WE ARE NOT ALONE.  THAT WE ARE BEING COPIED BY OTHER

                    STATES -- THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, THE STATE OF

                    COLORADO, THE STATE OF TEXAS EITHER HAVE OR ARE CONSIDERING DOING THESE

                    THINGS EITHER BY STATUTE OR BY REGULATION.  THE COST -- THE RUNAWAY COST

                    OF HEALTHCARE IS OF GREAT CONCERN TO THE PEOPLE OF NEW YORK STATE, BUT

                    GUESS WHAT?  IT'S OF GREAT CONCERN TO PEOPLE ACROSS THIS COUNTRY.  AND

                    THIS IS ONE OF THE MANY TOOLS WE'RE TRYING TO BRING TO THE FLOOR TO ARREST

                    SOME OF THOSE COSTS UNDER CONTROL.  BUT ALSO TO MAKE SURE WE DO IT IN A

                    FAIR AND IMPARTIAL WAY.  WE DIDN'T JUST STOP PAYING HOSPITALS.  WE

                    DIDN'T JUST SAY, OH, INSURANCE COMPANIES, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO

                    CHARGE, YOU CAN CHARGE.  WE SAID LET'S ALLOW A THIRD-PARTY TO

                    DETERMINE, BASED UPON THE CRITERIA IN THE STATUTE.  BASED UPON THE

                    EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM WHETHER A CHARGE IS EXORBITANT, WHETHER IT IS AN

                    EXCESSIVE -- OR WHETHER AN INSURANCE COMPANY IS TRYING TO TAKE

                    ADVANTAGE OF THAT PROVIDER BY LOWBALLING THE PAYMENTS.

                                         96



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  I APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR'S ANSWER

                    TO MY QUESTION OF WHERE DID THIS IDEA COME FROM, AND I -- I THINK THE

                    ANSWER WAS IT WAS GENERALLY FROM THIS LEGISLATIVE BODY.  YOU ALSO WENT

                    INTO A -- A GOOD AMOUNT OF HISTORY THAT HAS BROUGHT A COUPLE MORE

                    QUESTIONS TO ME TO THE FOREFRONT.  IN 2017, I WAS JUST A WATERTOWN CITY

                    COUNCILMAN SERVED BY THE GREAT SAMARITAN MEDICAL CENTER AT THE TIME.

                    WHILE YOU WERE WORKING ON THIS WITH A WORK GROUP, WOULD YOU

                    ENLIGHTEN ME AS TO WHO WAS ON THAT WORK GROUP AND HOW THAT FORMED?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  WELL, I WASN'T ON THE WORK GROUP.  I

                    BELIEVE THE WORK -- WORK GROUP WAS APPOINTED CONSISTENT WITH WHAT

                    THE ORIGINAL SURPRISE BILLING LAWS PROVIDED, AND I DON'T HAVE THAT

                    INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME.  BUT IT DID INCLUDE A VARIETY OF

                    REPRESENTATIVES AND STAKEHOLDERS FROM -- FROM DIFFERENT WALKS OF LIFE.

                    AND I -- IF YOU WANT TO WAIT ONE MINUTE I'LL ASK THE EXPERTS HERE AND I'LL

                    GIVE YOU THE PRECISE ANSWER.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  I'D APPRECIATE IT.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 MR. CAHILL:  WE'LL -- WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU WITH

                    THAT INFORMATION.  BUT REST ASSURED, I WASN'T ON THERE.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  YEAH.  AND OBVIOUSLY, IT COMING

                    BEFORE MY TIME, I'M ALWAYS CURIOUS ABOUT WHERE THE IDEAS FOR THESE

                    BILLS COME FROM, WHAT THE MOTIVATION IS BEHIND THEM AND WHEN THEY --

                    WHEN THEY SHOW UP.  YOU ALSO BROUGHT UP A -- A DEFENSE ON PROCESS.  I

                    WASN'T -- WASN'T PREPARED TO BRING UP PROCESS, BUT SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT

                    UP -- AND I HAVE NOTICED THAT SINCE THIS BILL WAS BROUGHT TO THE FOREFRONT

                                         97



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    -- YOU KNOW, AND BEING A FRESHMAN IN THE LEGISLATURE, THERE'S A LOT OF

                    BILLS THAT ARE NEW TO ME.  SO I'M OF -- OFF -- OFTEN FOUND MYSELF

                    SCRAMBLING TO GET INPUT FROM THOSE INDIVIDUALS IN MY DISTRICT WHO

                    WOULD BE IMPACTED.  AND I'VE BEEN SCRAMBLING, YOU KNOW, IN THE LAST

                    COUPLE OF HOURS TO GET INPUT FROM MY HOSPITAL CEOS.  BUT MAYBE THIS

                    WORK GROUP IN 2017 OR YOU, THROUGH THIS LONG PROCESS THAT YOU'VE

                    DESCRIBED, HAVE HEARD FROM MASSENA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND YOU COULD

                    ENLIGHTEN ME AS TO WHAT THEIR POSITION ON THIS BILL WOULD BE.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM MASSENA

                    MEMORIAL HOSPITAL.  I WOULD POINT OUT THAT -- THAT THE -- THAT THE BILL

                    HAS BEEN INTRODUCED NOW FOR OVER FIVE MONTHS.  OR MAYBE IT IS EXACTLY

                    FIVE MONTHS OR GETTING THERE VERY SOON.  THIS IS THE THIRD YEAR THAT

                    WE'VE CONSIDERED THIS BILL.  HOSPITALS ARE CERTAINLY AWARE OF IT.  REST

                    ASSURED, THEY ARE AWARE OF IT.  WE'VE HEARD FROM THE HOSPITAL

                    ASSOCIATIONS THAT REPRESENT THE HOSPITALS IN NEW YORK STATE ON THIS BILL

                    EXTENSIVELY.  THEY HAVE LOBBIED AND -- AND VISITED INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS.

                    SO THERE'S NO SURPRISE TO THEM THAT THIS LEGISLATION IS MOVING FORWARD.

                    AND, QUITE FRANKLY, THE -- THE ARGUMENTS THAT WE'VE HEARD TODAY ARE NOT

                    NEW ARGUMENTS.  SOME OF THEM ARE NOT BASED ON FACT, BUT THEY ARE NOT

                    NEW ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN HEARD AND CONSIDERED NOW BY MULTIPLE

                    COMMITTEES IN THIS LEGISLATURE MULTIPLE TIMES, AND BY THIS ENTIRE BODY

                    MULTIPLE TIMES.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  WELL -- WELL, I'M DISAPPOINTED TO

                    HEAR THAT YOU HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE GREAT MASSENA MEMORIAL

                    HOSPITAL.  I WAS WONDERING IF -- IF YOU HAD HEARD FROM CLAXTON

                                         98



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HEPBURN HOSPITAL IN OGDENSBURG AS TO WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE, OR IF

                    THE WORKING GROUP IN 2017, IN ALL OF THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN THE LONG

                    PROCESS OF THIS LEGISLATION, HAS HEARD FROM THAT HOSPITAL AT ALL, FROM

                    CLAXTON HEPBURN.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  WELL -- EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING.

                    BUT THE -- GENERALLY SPEAKING, THOSE HOSPITALS, I THINK, WOULD BE HEARD

                    FROM THROUGH THE ASSOCIATIONS OF WHICH THEY ARE A MEMBER.  AND WE

                    HAVE HEARD FROM THE ASSOCIATIONS OF WHICH THEY ARE A MEMBER, AND THEY

                    ARE OPPOSED TO THIS BILL.  THEY HAVE REGISTERED IN AGAINST THIS BILL.  NOT

                    IN -- IN A PARTICULAR STRIDENT WAY, IN MY VIEW.  THEY RAISED SOME ISSUES

                    WITH IT.  THEY SAID THAT IT WOULD TAKE AWAY AN ADVANTAGE THAT THEY

                    WOULD HAVE.  THEY SAID THAT IT WOULD MAKE A PLAYING FIELD THAT WASN'T

                    AS LEVEL THE WAY THEY WANTED IT TO GO.  BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS,

                    THEY HAVE REGIS -- I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOUR SPECIFIC HOSPITALS, BUT WE

                    HAVE HEARD FROM HOSPITAL ASSOCIATIONS WHO HAVE INDICATED THEIR

                    OPPOSITION.  HOWEVER, I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT WE HEARD FROM A LOT

                    OF PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT THIS.  I COULD -- I COULD GO DOWN THE LONG, LONG

                    LIST OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE INDICATED THEY SUPPORT IT.  MOST RECENTLY,

                    DISTRICT COUNCIL 37, THE CONSUMERS UNION, SEIU, BJ32 -- 32BJ.

                    HERE'S AN INTERESTING PAIRING THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN IN A WHILE:  THE

                    BUSINESS COUNCIL AND THE TRIAL LAWYERS.  HOW OFTEN DO YOU SEE THEM

                    ON THE SAME MEMOS?  UNITED FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, THE NATIONAL

                    FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES AND THE NEW YORK STATE UNITED

                    TEACHERS, THE CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, AN ORGANIZATION

                    KNOWN AS HEALTHCARE FOR ALL OF NEW YORK [SIC], THE MUNICIPAL LABOR

                                         99



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    COMMITTEE, AND SEVERAL OTHER ORGANIZATIONS HAVE INDICATED THEIR

                    SUPPORT.  THERE'S NO QUESTION.  EVERY TIME WE TAKE UP A PIECE OF

                    LEGISLATION THERE ARE BODIES IN SUPPORT AND THERE ARE BODIES IN

                    OPPOSITION.  IN THIS INSTANCE, IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT THEM ON THE SCALE,

                    FORGETTING THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE, THE WEIGHT OF THE WITNESSES,

                    CERTAINLY INDICATES THAT THERE'S MUCH BROADER SUPPORT THAN THERE IS

                    OPPOSITION FOR THIS BILL.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  I -- I APPRECIATE THAT AND

                    UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE, ON ANY ISSUE, YOU KNOW, TWO VOICES AND --

                    AND OFTEN OPPOSING VOICES THAT WE'LL HEAR IN THIS CHAMBER.  AND IF THE

                    SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO YIELD, I WONDER IF YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE --

                    THE GREAT SAMARITAN MEDICAL CENTER IN WATERTOWN, NEW YORK, WHETHER

                    THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE AMENDMENTS OF THIS BILL AND

                    WHETHER THEY WOULD SUPPORT OR OPPOSE IT.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I -- I WOULD POINT OUT, MR. SPEAKER

                    AND MY COLLEAGUES, THAT -- THAT THESE HOSPITALS THAT YOU'VE MENTIONED,

                    THAT HAVE BEEN MENTIONED HERE TODAY, ARE -- ARE REPRESENTED BY AN

                    INCREDIBLY EFFECTIVE ORGANIZATION.  ONE THAT IS HEARD FROM ON -- ON A

                    NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ISSUES AND HAVE BEEN HEARD FROM ON THIS.  IT IS MY

                    ASSUMPTION THAT THAT ASSOCIATION DID WHAT THEY DO WELL, AND THAT IS TO

                    COMMUNICATE BOTH WAYS; BACK TO THE HOSPITAL AND THEN BACK TO US,

                    WHAT THE -- WHAT THE CONSENSUS WAS OF THEIR MEMBERSHIP.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  SO YOU -- YOU HAVE HAVEN'T HEARD

                    SPECIFICALLY FROM SAMARITAN MEDICAL CENTER ON THE -- ON THE

                    AMENDMENTS OF THIS BILL, THEN?

                                         100



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I HAVE NOT, BUT GUESS WHAT?  YOU'VE

                    GIVEN US ENOUGH TIME FOR ME TO TELL YOU WHO'S ON THE WORK GROUP.  SO,

                    THE WORK GROUP CONSISTED OF PHYSICIANS, CONSUMER GROUPS, BUSINESSES

                    AND OTHER PROVIDERS.  HOSPITALS WERE NOT ON THE WORK GROUP, PER SE, BUT

                    THEY DID WEIGH IN.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  OKAY.  SO THIS -- THIS 2017 WORK

                    GROUP DIDN'T HAVE ANY HOSPITAL REPRESENTATION ON IT?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THE WORK GROUP, TO THE BEST OF MY

                    KNOWLEDGE - AND AGAIN, I'M DOING THIS SORT OF SEAT-OF-THE-PANTS HERE -

                    DID NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL REPRESENTATION FROM THE HOSPITALS, BUT THE

                    HOSPITALS WERE HEARD FROM AT THE WORK GROUP, AS WERE A NUMBER OF

                    OTHER PARTIES.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  AND I'M -- I'M UNDERSTANDING --

                    TELL ME IF I'M WRONG -- YOU WEREN'T ON THE WORK GROUP EITHER?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  NO.  I WAS CERTAINLY NOT ON THE WORK

                    GROUP.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  WELL, THAT'S A -- THAT'S A BOLD

                    MOVE, CARRYING A PIECE OF LEGISLATION LIKE THIS.  I -- I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T

                    WANT TO CARRY A BILL FORWARD IF I HADN'T BEEN -- YOU KNOW, HAVE A GOOD

                    KNOWLEDGE OF WHERE IT CAME FROM OR BEEN A PART OF THE CONVERSATIONS

                    WITH THE IMPACT THAT IT -- IT WOULD HAVE.  BUT MAYBE IF YOU'VE -- IF

                    YOU'VE HAD ENOUGH TIME TO RESEARCH WITH SOME OF THE STAFF ON THE SIDE,

                    THEY COULD ENLIGHTEN BOTH YOU AND I AS TO WHETHER RIVER HOSPITAL IN

                    ALEXANDRIA BAY, NEW YORK WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS LEGISLATION.

                    WHETHER THEY'VE SEEN THE RECENT AMENDMENTS TO IT AND WHAT THE IMPACT

                                         101



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WOULD BE ON RIVER HOSPITAL IN ALEXANDRIA BAY, RIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD

                    OF AMERICA.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  SURE.  MR. SPEAKER, I CANNOT ADDRESS

                    HOW ONE INDIVIDUAL HOSPITAL WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS BILL AT ANY

                    POINT IN TIME.  WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE BILL, HOWEVER, IS TO TAKE THOSE

                    HOSPITALS THAT ARE MOST IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE, MOST RELIANT UPON

                    GOVERNMENT DOLLARS - THAT IS OUR HOSPITALS THAT ARE SERVING 60 PERCENT OR

                    MORE MEDICAID - AND WE HAVE EXCLUDED THEM.  SO IF ONE OF THOSE

                    HOSPITALS FITS INTO THAT CHARACTERIZATION, THEY WOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM

                    THIS PROCESS.  AND LET ME ALSO POINT OUT, IF THAT HOSPITAL DOES NOT OFFER A

                    CHARGE THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE CHARGES THAT THEY OFFERED BEFORE, THEY

                    ALSO WOULD NOT BECOME PART OF THIS PROCESS.  IF THAT HOSPITAL CONTINUED

                    - WHETHER THEY WERE IN A NETWORK OR NOT - BUT TO CHARGE WHAT WERE THE

                    USUAL AND CUSTOMARY CHARGES, THEY WOULD NOT BE IN THIS PROCESS.  THOSE

                    CHARGES WOULD HAVE TO BE PAID.  THAT'S WHAT THE BILL SAYS.  IN TERMS OF

                    SPONSORING SOMETHING FOR WHICH I WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE WORK

                    GROUP, I THINK WE ALMOST ALWAYS DO THAT HERE.  RARE IS THE TIME THAT WE

                    GET THE BENEFIT OF SERVING ON THE GROUPS THAT WE APPOINT TO DO SOME OF

                    THE DETAILED WORK.  AND I WOULD POINT OUT TO MY COLLEAGUE, MR.

                    SPEAKER, THAT THIS LEGISLATION, ALTHOUGH CARRIED IN THIS HOUSE BY ME

                    HERE TODAY, HAS BEEN CARRIED BY MY COLLEAGUE, SENATOR SEWARD, IN THE

                    SENATE IN THE TIMES IN THE PAST, IS CURRENTLY BEING SPONSORED BY SENATOR

                    BRESLIN IN THAT HOUSE.  AND IN NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, WE HAVE HAD

                    STRONG BIPARTISAN NEW YORK STATE SUPPORT FOR LEGISLATION AND MODEL

                    LEGISLATION EXACTLY LIKE THIS.

                                         102



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  YOUR TIME IS EXPIRED.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  IS THERE ANY ONE ELSE?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  OH, BOY.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MS. PAULIN.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  THANK YOU.  I THINK THIS -- YOU KNOW,

                    IT'S END OF SESSION.  LOTS OF THINGS HAPPEN END OF SESSION, AS WE'VE

                    LEARNED TODAY.  AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE SEEN BEFORE, HAVING

                    BEEN HERE FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE, THAT SOME OF YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE, IS

                    WHEN A GROUP OF MAJORITY MEMBERS GET UP UNITED AND BELIEVE THAT

                    SOMETHING IS HURTING THEIR COMMUNITY, YOU -- I THINK -- I THINK I'VE

                    SEEN IT ONLY, ACTUALLY WHEN I THINK ABOUT IT, ONCE.  AND THAT DEBATE WAS

                    JUST LIKE THIS ONE, EXCEPT IT WAS THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT.  YOU KNOW,

                    THOSE OF US WHO REMEMBER THAT.  AND IT WAS SPEEDED THROUGH JUST LIKE

                    THIS ONE, AND SOME OF US LISTENED AND DECIDED THAT IT WAS MORE

                    IMPORTANT THAN THE INTEREST GROUPS THAT WERE DISCUSSED, THAT ARE

                    SUPPORTING IT, TO SUPPORT THEIR COLLEAGUE BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT IT

                    COULD HAPPEN TO THEM.  AND LET ME TELL YOU, MY COLLEAGUES, IT IS

                    HAPPENING TO US IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY.  LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THE

                    MEDICAL CENTER.  THE MEDICAL CENTER IS OUR ONLY TERTIARY CARE FACILITY.

                    THE MEDICAL CENTER IS A PUBLIC HOSPITAL THAT TAKES OUR POOREST OF THE

                    POOR.  OUR MEDICAL CENTER IS THE PLACE THAT WHEN I WAS UP HERE AND MY

                    DAUGHTER WAS HIT BY A CAR AND THE LOCAL HOSPITAL COULDN'T ACCOMMODATE

                    HER INJURIES, THAT TOOK HER AND MADE HER WHOLE.  THAT IS THE MEDICAL

                    CENTER.  IT IS PERSONAL.  WE BELIEVE IN THIS BODY THAT HEALTHCARE IS OUR

                                         103



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    RIGHT.  LOOK AT THE BILLS WE PASS.  AND LOOK AT THE BILLS WE'RE PUTTING IN

                    JEOPARDY.  IF OUR HEALTHCARE FACILITIES DO NOT GET THE RATES THAT THEY NEED

                    TO SUCCEED -- AND I CAN TELL YOU, OUR MEDICAL CENTER IS NOT GOING TO

                    SUCCEED IF THE RATES AREN'T UP TO WHAT THEY NEED TO BE AND THIS BILL GOES

                    THROUGH.  SO OUR MEDICAL CENTER, WE WON'T HAVE A TERTIARY CARE FACILITY.

                    AT LEAST WE WILL NOT HAVE ONE THAT HAS A BURN CENTER AND HAS A

                    CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL.  WE WILL NOT HAVE A MEDICAL CENTER THAT COULD HAVE

                    ACCOMMODATED MY DAUGHTER.  WE WILL NOT HAVE A MEDICAL CENTER THAT

                    WHEN WE PASS SAFE STAFFING, THAT THEY CAN DO.  WHY?  BECAUSE THEY WILL

                    NOT HAVE THE RATES TO PAY THE WORKERS.

                                 SO, WE ARE GOING TO PASS LOTS OF BILLS.  WE'RE GOING TO

                    PASS BILLS TO GIVE MORE RESOURCES TO WORKERS.  WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT?

                    IF THEY DON'T EXIST, THEY WILL NOT GET PAID.  SO WHEN WE WANT OUR NURSES

                    TO GET PAID MORE, WHEN WE WANT MORE NURSES, OUR MEDICAL CENTER IS

                    GOING TO GO UNDER.  AND THEN THINK ABOUT IT.  THINK ABOUT IT FROM YOUR

                    PERSPECTIVE.  THINK ABOUT IT FROM YOUR HOSPITAL.  IF YOU HAVE A PUBLIC

                    HOSPITAL, THIS -- THIS BILL IS GOING TO DESTROY THAT, TOO.  BUT YOU KNOW

                    WHAT?  THERE ISN'T MANY PUBLIC HOSPITALS ON THAT LIST.  THERE'S ONLY TWO,

                    AND ONE OF THEM IS OURS.  AND I AM TELLING YOU THAT THE WESTCHESTER

                    DELEGATION NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS CHAMBER, BECAUSE IF IT HAPPENS

                    TO YOU, YOU'D WANT OURS.  IT'S SO UPSETTING FOR US THAT THIS IS GOING TO

                    COMPLETELY DESTROY OUR HEALTHCARE.  IT IS OUR HOSPITAL OF LAST RESORT.  IT'S

                    THE PLACE WE GO WHEN WE ARE HURT.  I KNOW I'M SUPPOSED TO TALK 15

                    MINUTES, THIS IS HARD.

                                 YOU KNOW, LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THE INTEREST GROUP.

                                         104



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    YOU KNOW, WE HEARD ABOUT THE LONG LIST OF INTEREST GROUPS THAT -- THAT

                    ARE --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. BUCHWALD, WHY

                    DO YOU RISE?

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  WOULD -- WOULD THE GENTLELADY

                    YIELD FOR A QUESTION?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  YES, THANK YOU.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. PAULIN YIELDS,

                    MR. BUCHWALD.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  MY

                    APPRECIATION TO THE LADY.  COULD SHE GO IN -- COULD YOU ENLIGHTEN US AS

                    TO THE HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER AND WHY IT IS THAT

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER MIGHT HAVE HIGHER COSTS THAN OTHER AREA

                    HOSPITALS?  AND FOR WHICH, THEREFORE, AN INDEPENDENT ARBITER

                    COMPARING COSTS ACROSS THE NEARBY HOSPITALS MIGHT PRODUCE A RESULT

                    THAT IS, IN FACT, BELOW WHAT WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER NEEDS TO BE A

                    VIABLE INSTITUTION.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  THANK YOU.  YES.  AND, IN FACT, THAT

                    REMINDS ME THAT -- WELL, LET'S -- LET'S TALK ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THE

                    HISTORY, RIGHT?  SO, THE HISTORY IS THAT A LONG TIME AGO - AS MY COLLEAGUE

                    TO THE SIDE OF ME MENTIONED, A LONG TIME AGO WE WERE -- THE HOSPITAL

                    WAS A CHARITY HOSPITAL, AND IT -- IT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL AND FALLING UNDER.

                    AND IT WAS VISIONARY THAT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS AT THE COUNTY AND STATE

                    LEVEL 30 YEARS AGO DECIDED THAT WE WANTED TO HAVE A MODEL HOSPITAL.

                                         105



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    AND THAT MODEL HOSPITAL DOESN'T JUST SERVE WESTCHESTER COUNTY, BY THE

                    WAY.  IT'S THE ENTIRE HUDSON VALLEY.  AND IT'S THE ONLY TERTIARY HOSPITAL

                    UP UNTIL THE ALBANY MEDICAL CENTER RIGHT HERE.  SO THAT WHOLE

                    CATCHMENT AREA IS SERVED BY THE MEDICAL CENTER.  THEY DECIDED THEY

                    WANTED TO HAVE A GREAT HOSPITAL.  AND SO WITH COUNTY SUPPORT, WE GOT

                    THERE.  AND IT WAS AT GREAT COUNTY EXPENSE.  A LOT OF TAXPAYER MONEY

                    WENT INTO MAKING THAT A FINE HOSPITAL.  AND NOW -- AND NOW WE ARE

                    FINALLY -- WE HAD -- WE LEARNED -- WE -- YOU KNOW, WE ARE FINALLY

                    SOLVENT WITHOUT TAXPAYER EXPENSE.  AND WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK ON

                    TAXPAYER EXPENSE.  BUT MAYBE NOT, BECAUSE OUR TAXPAYERS CANNOT

                    AFFORD IT.  CERTAINLY NOT WITH THE 2 PERCENT CAP, TO BE ABLE TO -- TO GIVE

                    THEM THE RESOURCES THAT THEY HAD BEEN GIVING THEM, WHICH WAS $30-

                    AND $40- AND $50- AND $60 MILLION A YEAR.  WE ARE DOWN TO ZERO.  WE

                    ARE DOWN TO A SELF-SUSTAINING HOSPITAL.  AND LET ME TELL YOU, THE INTEREST

                    GROUPS.  THE INTEREST GROUP THAT WE RECEIVED A MEMO FROM WAS 1199.

                    WHY?  BECAUSE THEY ARE THE WORKERS AT THE HOSPITAL, TO YOUR POINT.  TO

                    YOUR POINT, WHEN WE FORMED THE MEDICAL CENTER AND WE WENT FORWARD

                    AND WE MADE THEM A PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION, WE MADE SURE THAT THE

                    WORKERS GOT THE -- THE -- THE -- THAT THEY WERE UNIONIZED.  SOMETHING

                    THAT OUR HOUSE CHERISHES.  WE MADE SURE THAT THEY RECEIVED MINIMAL

                    PAY SO THAT BECAUSE OF THAT -- THOSE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS THAT WE, AT

                    THE STATE, PUT ON THE MEDICAL CENTER, BECAUSE WE DECIDED -- WE KNEW

                    THAT WE WANTED TO PROTECT THOSE WORKERS, IT -- IT COSTS MORE.  AND WHEN

                    IT COSTS MORE, THEY NEED HIGHER RATES.  AND IF THEY DON'T GET THE HIGHER

                    RATES, 1199, THESE WORKERS, THE NURSES, THEY'RE GOING UNDER.  THEY'RE

                                         106



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    LOSING THEIR JOBS.  THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO PROTECT.  IT IS -- IT

                    IS JUST A -- A VERY UPSETTING SITUATION FOR US IN THIS DELEGATION.  YOU'RE

                    GOING TO HEAR EACH OF US TALK ABOUT IT.  AND I APOLOGIZE, BECAUSE I

                    KNOW THAT WE WANT TO BE SOMEWHERE ELSE TONIGHT.  BUT THIS IS SO

                    IMPORTANT TO US.  YOU CANNOT BELIEVE HOW IMPORTANT THIS PARTICULAR

                    INSTITUTION IS TO THIS COMMUNITY AND TO THIS DELEGATION.  SO, YOU KNOW

                    WHAT?  I CAN'T USE MY 15 MINUTES UNLESS, DAVID, YOU HAVE ANOTHER

                    QUESTION.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  WELL, ACTUALLY -- IF I -- IF I COULD,

                    COULD I ASK, MR. SPEAKER, IS IT THE RIGHT OF ANY MEMBER RIGHT NOW TO

                    MOVE TO ADJOURN UNTIL 10:00 A.M. TOMORROW?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  LEARNED COUNSEL IS

                    GOING TO ADVISE ME ON THIS ONE.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES, AS WE --

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU

                    FOR REMINDING OUR COLLEAGUE WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT.  WE'RE IN THE

                    MIDDLE OF DEBATE.  IF HE WANTS TO CONTINUE IT, HE COULD DO THAT.  BUT HE'S

                    NOT GOING TO BE IN A POSITION TO DETERMINE WHAT WE HAVE ON THE FLOOR.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  MR. SPEAKER, IF I COULD, I DID NOT

                    MAKE THE MOTION, I SIMPLY INQUIRED --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  I DID --

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  -- WHETHER IT WAS THE RIGHT OF

                    ANY MEMBER --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  I DID UNDERSTAND YOUR

                    QUESTION.

                                         107



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  OKAY.  I'M JUST CLARIFYING.

                    THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE MOTION WOULD BE

                    IN ORDER.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  BUT TO

                    ASK MY COLLEAGUE --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  YOU CANNOT,

                    HOWEVER, BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE FLOOR.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  I -- I UNDERSTAND THAT.  THANK

                    YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  I -- I WOULD JUST -- TO CONTINUE MY LINE OF

                    QUESTIONING WITH MY SECOND QUESTION.  IS IT, IN FACT, THE CASE THAT

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER IS BY NO MEANS UNIQUE IN BEING IMPACTED

                    BY THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  WE ARE NOT UNIQUE IN BEING IMPACTED

                    BY THIS LEGISLATION.  HOWEVER, BECAUSE WE'RE A PUBLIC HOSPITAL, WE ARE

                    IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION THAN THE PRIVATE HOSPITALS.  BUT WE ARE NOT

                    UNIQUE.  AND I WILL JUST POINT OUT THAT IF ANYBODY IS WORRIED ABOUT THE

                    FINANCIAL STRAIGHTS OF THEIR HOSPITAL AND THEY ARE ONE OF THE HUNDRED THAT

                    ARE INCLUDED, THEN THEY ARE IN JEOPARDY, TOO.  AND SINCE WHEN DO WE

                    PUT THE INSURANCE COMPANY'S ABILITY TO MAKE MONEY -- BECAUSE WE HAVE

                    NO GUARANTEE.  LET ME JUST MAKE THAT POINT.  WE HAVE NO GUARANTEE.

                    THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS BILL THAT SAYS ANY SAVINGS IS GOING TO GO --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. PAULIN, FOR ONE

                    MINUTE.  JUST ONE MINUTE.

                                 (BANGING GAVEL)

                                         108



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE HAVE SOME COMPLAINT FROM

                    MEMBERS WHO ARE TRYING TO LISTEN TO THE DEBATE THAT THE CONVERSATIONS

                    THAT ARE GOING ON OUR DROWNING OUT THEIR ABILITY TO LISTEN.  SO, I SUGGEST

                    IF YOU'RE A MEMBER AND YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY TO ANOTHER MEMBER,

                    ASK THEM TO LEAVE THE CHAMBER WITH YOU AS OPPOSED TO HAVING THE

                    CONVERSATION WHERE YOU STAND.  AND I ALSO SUGGEST THAT MEMBERS TAKE

                    THEIR SEATS AND DON'T WAIT ME OUT.

                                 I'M SORRY, MS. PAULIN.  PLEASE PROCEED.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  SO, IN THE LEGISLATION, YOU KNOW,

                    WE'VE BEEN PROMISED A REDUCTION OF INSURANCE COSTS.  THERE'S NOTHING

                    IN THE LEGISLATION TO GUARANTEE THAT.  THERE'S NOTHING IN THE LEGISLATION

                    THAT SAYS WHERE THAT MONEY GOES.  SO IT'S POSSIBLE, BECAUSE THESE ARE A

                    LOT OF PRIVATE INSURANCE -- THIS ISN'T ALSO LIMITED TO JUST ONE INSURANCE

                    COMPANY, IT'S ALL THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.  SO ALL OF THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES ARE NOW GOING TO GET A BENEFIT.  THEY'RE ALL GOING TO GET

                    MONEY, EXTRA MONEY OFF THE BACKS OF OUR INSTITUTIONS THAT PAY OUR

                    NURSES AND PAY OUR DOCTORS.  AND SO WHEN OUR DOCTORS FLEE AND OUR

                    NURSES FLEE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE MONEY, THE INSURANCE COMPANIES

                    WILL HAVE IT.  OKAY, SO YOU SAY WHERE IS THE INSURANCE MONEY GOING TO

                    GO?  WELL, IT DOESN'T SAY IT IN THE BILL.  IT DOESN'T SAY IT'S GOING TO GO

                    BACK INTO HEALTHCARE.  IT DOESN'T SAY IT'S GOING TO GO BACK INTO THE

                    CONSUMER'S POCKET IN ANY WAY.  THERE'S NO GUARANTEE IT DOES THAT.  SO --

                    SO HERE YOU HAVE A PROMISE OR AN EXPECTATION THAT SOMEHOW IT'S GOING

                    TO LOWER HEALTHCARE COSTS.  WELL, I CAN TELL YOU, IT'S NOT GOING TO LOWER

                    HEALTHCARE COSTS.  IT'S GOING TO DESTROY HEALTHCARE.  AND IT'S STARTING FIRST

                                         109



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    IN OUR COUNTY.  SO -- SO -- BUT IF YOU HAVE A HOSPITAL ON THAT LIST, I

                    WOULD WORRY.  AND I WOULD LOOK BEFORE I TOOK THIS VOTE, BECAUSE LET

                    ME TELL YOU, WHEN YOUR HOSPITAL GOES DOWN IN A FEW YEARS BECAUSE OF

                    THE NEGOTIATIONS, IT'S GOING TO BE BECAUSE OF THIS AND IT'S GOING TO COME

                    BACK TO, DID YOU VOTE FOR THAT BILL?  BECAUSE THIS HOSPITAL IS NOW IN

                    JEOPARDY.  DID YOU VOTE FOR THAT BILL?  BECAUSE NOW WE CAN'T PAY OUR

                    NURSES.  DID YOU VOTE FOR THAT BILL?  BECAUSE WE'RE CLOSING OUR

                    CHILDREN'S CENTER.  DID YOU VOTE FOR THAT BILL?  BECAUSE WE CAN'T HAVE

                    A BURN CENTER.  DID YOU VOTE FOR THAT BILL?  BECAUSE NOW WE CAN'T DO --

                    WE CAN'T ADDRESS HEART FAILURE.  DID YOU VOTE FOR THAT BILL?  BECAUSE

                    YOU KNOW WHAT?  WE DON'T HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY, THE NEW TECHNOLOGY

                    ANYMORE.  YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN TO, BECAUSE

                    THIS BILL TAKES MONEY OUT OF HEALTHCARE.  IT DOES NOT PUT MONEY INTO

                    HEALTHCARE.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  IF THE LADY WOULD CONTINUE TO

                    YIELD.  IS THERE ANYTHING IN THIS BILL THAT DIRECTS THE ARBITER SETTING PRICES

                    TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT SERVICES THE HOSPITAL PROVIDES OTHER THAN THE

                    ONE THAT'S PARTICULARLY AT ISSUE IN THE -- IN THE PRICING DISPUTE?  IN OTHER

                    WORDS, IF A HOSPITAL PROVIDES SIGNIFICANT BUT BELOW 60 PERCENT

                    MEDICAID AND UNINSURED COVERAGE, THE -- OR SERVICES -- IF THE HOSPITAL

                    ALSO PROVIDES THESE UNIQUE BUT HIGH-COST, LOW-PROFIT ENDEAVORS, IS THERE

                    ANYTHING WHICH THE ARBITER IS SUPPOSED TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT UNDER

                    THIS BILL?

                                 MS. PAULIN:  NO.  AND SO, IN FACT, WE -- IT DOESN'T

                    SAY, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT PROCESS IS GOING TO BE LIKE.  IT

                                         110



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    DOESN'T -- IT'S NOT DEFINED.  IT'S BRAND-NEW.  WE DON'T REALLY KNOW IF THE

                    PEOPLE CHOSEN AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTING IT ARE

                    GOING TO HAVE ANY EMPATHY TOWARD THE FACT THAT THE MEDICAL CENTER HAS

                    THESE EXTRA SERVICES OR THAT ANY HOSPITAL HAS EXTRA SERVICES.  WE REALLY

                    DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS GOING TO BE.  SO, YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT

                    FEEL CONFIDENT THAT GOING FORWARD, THAT OUR INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE

                    PROVIDING THESE EXTRA SERVICES ARE GOING TO BE PROTECTED IN -- IN ANY

                    WAY.  AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD JUST WONDER -- YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE

                    BILL HAS CHANGED SO DRAMATICALLY, YOU KNOW, FROM LAST YEAR WHEN IT WAS

                    JUST EMERGENCY SERVICES AND NOT OTHER SERVICES, AND WHEN THERE WEREN'T

                    AN ARBITRARY CAP OF 60 PERCENT MEDICAID SET.  YOU KNOW, SINCE THOSE

                    WERE SUCH DRAMATIC CHANGES, WERE THOSE CHANGES THAT THE WORK GROUP

                    IN 2017, WHICH MIGHT HAVE RECOMMENDED THE LEGISLATION FROM 2018 --

                    DID THAT WORK GROUP SUGGEST THAT?  YOU KNOW, OR WERE THESE ADDED --

                    YOU KNOW, I WOULD ARGUE LIKELY ADDED IN ORDER TO ELIMINATE SOME

                    HOSPITALS FROM THAT LIST.  THAT MIGHT BE A POLITICAL PROBLEM FOR PASSING

                    THIS BILL.  SO, YOU KNOW -- SO WE ARE NOW -- WE NOW HAVE 100 HOSPITALS

                    IN JEOPARDY.  LUCKILY, WE HAVE A NUMBER THAT ARE NOT.  BUT ONE YEAR

                    MAYBE YOUR HOSPITAL IS GOING TO GET INCLUDED, AND THEN MAYBE NOT THE

                    NEXT YEAR.  SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO BE IN JEOPARDY FOR

                    -- FOR THESE KINDS OF DRACONIAN METHODS TO PUT THE ONUS OR TO GET IN THE

                    MIDDLE OF THE NEGOTIATIONS, WHICH WE HAVE NEVER, NEVER DONE.  WE

                    HAVE NEVER DECIDED THAT WE ARE GOING TO PASS A BILL IN THE MIDDLE OF

                    NEGOTIATIONS -- MOUNT SINAI, NYU, THE MEDICAL CENTER.  THEY'RE ALL --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. --

                                         111



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MS. PAULIN:  -- IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR NEGOTIATION --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. PAULIN --

                                 MS. PAULIN:  -- AND WE'RE DOING A BILL TO JEOPARDIZE

                    THAT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  YOU HAVE

                    SUCCESSFULLY DONE YOUR 15 MINUTES.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  YOU'RE WELCOME.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MR. ABINANTI.

                                 MR. ABINANTI:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  TO MY

                    COLLEAGUES FIRST --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  SIR, I PRESUME THIS IS

                    ON THE BILL?

                                 MR. ABINANTI:  YES, ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. ABINANTI:  YOU'RE HEARING FROM THE

                    WESTCHESTER DELEGATION, BUT THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT WESTCHESTER.  THE

                    BILL GOT OUR ATTENTION BECAUSE OF THE DIRECT IMPACT ON WESTCHESTER'S

                    MEDICAL CENTER.  AND BECAUSE THE ADVOCATE FOR EMPIRE, EMPIRE

                    INSURANCE COMPANY, ADMITTED TO US IN A CONVERSATION THAT HIS

                    INSURANCE COMPANY WAS TARGETING THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY MEDICAL

                    CENTER.  BUT AS YOU KNOW, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME READING LEGISLATION AND

                    ANALYZING LEGISLATION, MUCH TO THE CHAGRIN OF MANY PEOPLE IN THIS -- IN

                    THIS LEGISLATURE.  BUT I WANT TO ASSURE YOU, THIS IS NOT A GOOD BILL.  THIS

                                         112



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER.  THIS IS A BAD BILL.

                    THIS BILL WOULD BE BETTER NAMED "THE INSURANCE COMPANY PROFIT

                    ENHANCEMENT ACT."  THE INSURANCE COMPANY PROFIT ENHANCEMENT ACT.

                    THE PREMISE OF THIS BILL IS THAT THE BEST WAY TO REDUCE THE HIGH

                    INSURANCE RATES IS TO TURN OVER HEALTHCARE TO THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.

                    THIS BILL IS GOING TO ALLOW INSURANCE COMPANIES TO SET PRICES.  SOME OF

                    US MIGHT THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE PRICE CONTROLS.  I'VE HEARD

                    NOBODY EVER SUGGEST THAT WE LET THE INSURANCE COMPANIES SET THE PRICE

                    CONTROLS.  THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES.  IT'S A VERY SIMPLE BILL.  IT INSURE --

                    INSERTS HOSPITALS NEXT TO PHYSICIANS IN A BILL THAT WE PASSED A WHILE AGO.

                    AND SOME PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO SAY WE CAN TREAT HOSPITALS THE WAY WE

                    TREAT PHYSICIANS.  I RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT ANYBODY THAT KNOWS

                    ANYTHING ABOUT HEALTHCARE KNOWS THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

                    PHYSICIANS AND HOSPITALS; THE WAY THEY'RE FINANCED, THE WAY THEY

                    FUNCTION, THEIR OBLIGATIONS.  PUBLIC HOSPITALS HAVE TO TAKE ANYBODY THAT

                    WALKS IN THE DOOR.  PHYSICIANS DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT.  THAT PUTS THEM IN

                    A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION, ESPECIALLY IF THEY TAKE A LOT OF MEDICAID

                    PATIENTS OR THEY'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE AVAILABLE TO MEDICAID

                    PATIENTS.

                                 BUT I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THIS BILL DOES

                    AND DOESN'T DO, SO THAT THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT TO VOTE NO WILL

                    UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT JUST SEVEN OF US ASKING YOU TO VOTE NO.  THAT

                    THIS IS A BAD BILL.  IT'S BAD POLICY, AND IT'S BADLY DRAFTED.  WHAT IT DOES IS

                    IT ALLOWS INSURANCE COMPANIES TO REJECT OUT-OF-NETWORK HOSPITAL BILLS

                    FOR INPATIENT SERVICES WHICH FOLLOW AN EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT.  AND IT

                                         113



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    REQUIRE -- IT ALLOWS THE INSURANCE COMPANY TO REQUIRE THAT THE BILL BE

                    SUBMITTED TO AN INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION ENTITY.  NOW, YOU

                    MIGHT BE IN FAVOR OF THE BASEBALL MODEL, BUT THINK ABOUT HOW THAT

                    APPLIES TO A HOSPITAL.  THIS WAS, I BELIEVE, MOTIVATED BY EMPIRE.  BUT

                    HOW MANY HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE THERE IN THE -- IN THE STATE?

                    SO IF ONE HOSPITAL FINDS THAT EVERY ONE OF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES

                    DECIDES NOT TO LET THEM INTO NETWORK BECAUSE THEY MAY BE AN EXPENSIVE

                    HOSPITAL OR BECAUSE THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE DICTATES OF THEIR NATIONAL

                    PARENT THAT HAS ANNOUNCED PUBLICLY THAT THEY ARE NOW GOING TO TRIM

                    DOWN THEIR NETWORKS.  SO THEY MAY DECIDE THIS HOSPITAL'S TOO

                    EXPENSIVE, WE'RE GOING TO USE THE LESS EXPENSIVE HOSPITAL.  AND UNDER

                    THIS BILL WE CAN CHALLENGE EVERY BILL THAT WE DON'T LIKE FOR SOMEBODY

                    WHO IS ADMITTED AFTER AN EMERGENCY.  THE BILL THAT WE HAVE PASSED YEAR

                    AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR APPLIED ONLY TO EMERGENCY SERVICES.  NOT TO THE

                    SERVICES AFTER THE EMERGENCY.  NOT TO THE ADMISSION AFTER THE

                    EMERGENCY.  THAT'S A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE.  AND FOR AN EMERGENCY-TYPE

                    HOSPITAL, THAT'S A VERY EXPENSIVE DIFF -- DIFFERENCE.  SO, THIS IS NOT THE

                    SAME BILL THAT WE PASSED YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR, SO DON'T BE MISLED.

                    THE HOSPITALS WANT YOU TO THINK THAT IT IS.  BUT THIS IS A GIMMICK FOR THE

                    -- FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANIES TO DECIDE NOT TO PUT HOSPITALS IN A

                    NETWORK AND THEN GET THE NETWORK RATE.  BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO

                    THE IDR, THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW, AND THEY'RE GOING TO SAY CUSTOMARY

                    FOR THIS HOS -- FOR THIS IS WHAT WAS OUR RATE IN-NETWORK, OR WHAT THE GUY

                    DOWN THE STREET CHARGES.  AND THAT MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE.  SO THIS IS A

                    BILL THAT'S DESIGNED TO HELP THE INSURANCE COMPANIES, EITHER BECAUSE

                                         114



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THEY DON'T WANT TO PUT A HOSPITAL IN-NETWORK AND THEY WANT THE NETWORK

                    RATE, OR IN THEIR NEGOTIATIONS.  THEY CAN THREATEN THE HOSPITAL, YOU'D

                    BETTER GIVE US A BETTER DEAL OR WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH A DEAL.  AND

                    YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANYTHING BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE

                    THIS -- THIS BILL, THIS LEGISLATION, TO HARASS YOU.  SO THIS IS NOT A PATIENT

                    PROTECTION BILL.  THIS IS AN INSURANCE COMPANY PROTECTION BILL.  IT'S AN

                    ENHANCEMENT OF THEIR -- OF THEIR INSURANCES AND THEIR PROFITS.

                                 BY THE WAY, IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE, AS I SAID BEFORE,

                    THAT THIS IS A PRICE FIXING -- THIS ALLOWS THE INSURANCE COMPANIES, IN

                    EFFECT, TO FIX PRICES.  AND LET ME ASK YOU, HOW MANY PEOPLE IN YOUR

                    DISTRICT THINK THAT INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE KNOWN AS CONSUMER-

                    FRIENDLY?  AREN'T WE CONSTANTLY COMPLAINING THAT INSURANCE COMPANIES

                    ARE REJECTING CLAIMS OF OUR -- OF OUR CONSTITUENTS?  EVERY TIME YOU TURN

                    AROUND, YOU'RE GETTING ONE OF THOSE COMPLICATED THINGS IN THE MAIL

                    SAYING, WE'RE NOT PAYING THIS, WE'RE NOT PAYING THAT.  WE'RE NOT PAYING

                    THIS, WE'RE NOT PAYING THAT.  THEY DON'T TELL YOU WHY.  YOU HAVE TO TRY

                    TO FIGURE IT OUT BY MATCHING UP BILLS.  BUT THAT'S WHAT INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES DO.  DO WE THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE ANY DIFFERENT WITH THE

                    HOSPITALS IF WE TURN THEM LOSE?  DO WE THINK THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE

                    GENTLER WITH A HOSPITAL THAT -- THAT NOW HAS SOMEBODY RUSHED IN IN AN

                    AMBULANCE, EMERGENCY SURGERY, AND THEN HAS TO STAY IN THAT HOSPITAL FOR

                    TEN DAYS?  DO YOU THINK THEY'RE GOING TO PAY THAT BILL WILLINGLY IF THEY

                    HAVE A WAY AROUND IT?

                                 YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A REFERENCE, BY THE WAY, TO THE

                    SPONSOR OF THIS BILL TO A WORK GROUP.  I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT WORK

                                         115



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    GROUP, BUT THIS IS A NEW BILL.  I DIDN'T HEAR ANY ASSURANCE THAT THE WORK

                    GROUP ACTUALLY CONSIDERED THIS BILL, OR WAS THE WORK GROUP TALKING

                    ABOUT LAST YEAR'S BILL, WHICH WE PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.  AND BY THE WAY,

                    YES, THE SENATE HAS HAD THIS BILL AND WE'VE PASSED IT FOUR TIMES.  BUT

                    CURIOUSLY, THE SENATE NEVER PASSED THE BILL.  NOW, THOSE OF US WHO'VE

                    BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE UNDERSTAND THAT THE, LET'S SAY, THE SENATE WAS A

                    LITTLE BIT FRIENDLIER TO INSURANCE COMPANIES THAN WE'VE BEEN IN THE PAST,

                    AND YET IT NEVER PASSED THE SENATE.  BECAUSE THE SPONSORS IN THE SENATE

                    REALIZED THAT IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A BATTLE BETWEEN THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES AND THE HOSPITALS, THEY WERE GOING TO GO WITH THE HOSPITALS.

                    AND I RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST, SO SHOULD WE.  THIS IS GIVING LEVERAGE TO

                    THE INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT THEY DON'T DESERVE, OVER EVERY HOSPITAL IN

                    EVERY ONE OF OUR DISTRICTS.  YOU MAY NOT BE HEARING FROM THEM NOW

                    BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT REALIZE WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.  AND MOST OF

                    THEM HAVE CONTRACTS WITH INSURANCE COMPANIES, SO THEY'RE IN THE

                    NETWORK.  BUT IF THEY CAN TAKE ON A BIG MEDICAL CENTER LIKE WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER AND GET THE SUPPORT OF THE NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY

                    IN THAT EFFORT, WHAT CHANCE DOES MASSENA HOSPITAL HAVE, OR WHAT

                    CHANCE DOES ANY OF THE OTHER HOSPITALS IN THE STATE HAVE; THE SMALL,

                    LOCAL HOSPITALS, WHEN THE INSURANCE COMPANY COMES IN AND SAYS, SCREW

                    YOU.  WE'RE NOT CUTTING A DEAL WITH YOU UNLESS YOU GIVE US EXACTLY WHAT

                    WE WANT.

                                 YOU KNOW, I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THIS IS BEING

                    PROMOTED AS SOME KIND OF A CONSUMER BENEFIT.  IF IT'S SUCH A GREAT

                    CONSUMER BENEFIT, WHY ARE WE NOT APPLYING IT TO ALL OF THE HOSPITALS?

                                         116



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WHY SHOULD THIS BILL NOT APPLY TO EVERY HOSPITAL?  WHY ARE WE SAYING

                    ONLY -- ONLY 100 OF THE HOSPITALS AND NOT A 140?  WHY HAVE WE CARVED

                    OUT 40 HOSPITALS?  WELL, THE SPONSOR EARLIER, I BELIEVE, SAID SOMETHING

                    ABOUT WELL, SOMEBODY MADE A DETERMINATION THAT THOSE HOSPITALS

                    NEEDED THE INSURANCE COMPANY MONEY SO THAT THEY COULD SURVIVE AND

                    PAY FOR MEDICAID, MEDICAID PATIENTS.  WELL, WHO DID THE ANALYSIS OF

                    EACH INDIVIDUAL HOSPITAL TO DETERMINE THAT THAT 60 PERCENT NUMBER WAS

                    THE MAGIC NUMBER?  AND LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME FAIRNESS HERE.  ARE WE

                    BEING FAIR TO ALBANY MEDICAL CENTER WHEN THEY LAST YEAR WERE 59

                    PERCENT MEDICAID AND THEY DIDN'T MAKE THE 60 PERCENT CUTOFF?  NOW

                    THEY HANDLED 11,000 MEDICAID CASES.  11,000.  AND YET, WE HAVE

                    HOSPITALS ON THIS LIST WHO ARE EXEMPTED BECAUSE THEY'RE OVER THE 60

                    PERCENT, HANDLED FAR FEWER MEDICAID CASES.  NOW I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT

                    WESTCHESTER COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER, I'M TALKING ABOUT ALBANY COUNTY

                    [SIC] MEDICAL CENTER.  AND I'VE GOT A LIST HERE IF YOU WANT TO SEE WHERE

                    YOUR HOSPITAL RANKS.  MANY, MANY HOSPITALS THAT ARE NOT EXCLUDED HAVE

                    HANDLED MORE MEDICAID PATIENTS THAN THE HOSPITALS WHO ARE EXCLUDED.

                    SO WHERE'S THE FAIRNESS IN THIS?  AND WHO SAYS THAT IN A PARTICULAR

                    REGION, THE MONEY THAT THE HOSPITAL IS GETTING FROM THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES AND THE OTHER SOURCES IS SUFFICIENT OR ISN'T SUFFICIENT TO PAY

                    FOR MEDICAID?  LET ME TAKE THE HOSPITAL I KNOW, WHICH IS THE

                    WESTCHESTER COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER.  THEY'VE HANDLED SOME 10,000

                    CASES LAST YEAR OF MEDICAID PATIENTS.  BUT EVERY ONE OF THEM WAS A HIGH

                    ACUITY.  WESTCHESTER COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER HAS THE HIGHEST ACUITY RATE

                    IN THE COUNTRY.  SO THEY ARE AN EXPENSIVE HOSPITAL IN AN EXPENSIVE

                                         117



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    COUNTY.  AND THE MEDICAID PATIENTS WHO GO THERE DON'T GO THERE

                    BECAUSE THEY HAVE A COLD.  THEY GO THERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE A SERIOUS

                    PROBLEM.  IF YOU HAVE A REGULAR PREGNANCY, YOU GO TO WHITE PLAINS

                    HOSPITAL, NOT THE MEDICAL CENTER.  BUT IF YOU WALK INTO THE WHITE

                    PLAINS HOSPITAL AND WHITE PLAINS LOOKS AT YOU AND SAYS, YOU KNOW

                    WHAT?  THIS IS GOING TO BE A TROUBLED PREGNANCY.  YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE

                    A REAL PROBLEM, THEY PUT THEM IN AN AMBULANCE AND SEND THEM TO THE

                    MEDICAL CENTER.  AND SO, THE MEDICAL CENTER MAY NOT HAVE MORE THAN

                    60 PERCENT OF ITS ADMISSIONS AS MEDICAID, BUT IT CERTAINLY HAS A LARGE

                    NUMBER OF PEOPLE ON MEDICAID WHO DESERVE TO GET QUALITY TREATMENT.

                    VERY HIGH-LEVEL TREATMENT.  AND THAT'S WHAT THIS MEDICAL CENTER DOES.

                    AND I BET YOU, YOU CAN LOOK AROUND AT EVERY ONE OF YOUR DISTRICTS AND

                    YOU WILL HAVE THE EXACT SAME CIRCUMSTANCE.  YOU WILL HAVE SOME

                    MEDICAL CENTER THAT'S THE BEST ONE AROUND, AND THAT'S WHERE SOMEBODY

                    WHOSE GOT A HIGH LEVEL OF PROBLEMS NEEDS TO GO.  AND WE DON'T NEED

                    THEM REJECTED OR PUSHED WAY BECAUSE THAT HOSPITAL CAN'T AFFORD IT

                    BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GETTING ENOUGH FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO COVER THE

                    MEDICAID PATIENTS.

                                 THERE ARE A LOT OF IMPLICATIONS TO THIS BILL WHICH WE

                    HAVEN'T DISCUSSED.  BUT LOOK AT THIS LIST AND TELL ME ABOUT THE FAIRNESS OF

                    THIS.  TO SAY THAT A HOSPITAL THAT MEETS THIS ARBITRARY 60 PERCENT AND HAS

                    61 PERCENT OR 63 PERCENT SHOULD BE LET OUT OF THIS, BUT A HOSPITAL THAT

                    MAKES 59 PERCENT DOES NOT.  AS REFERENCED BEFORE, THE ALBANY MEDICAL

                    CENTER JUST CLOSED DOWN ITS BURN CENTER.  NOW I HAVE A -- A PERSONAL

                    EXPERIENCE WITH THE MEDICAL CENTER BECAUSE I WAS THE WESTCHESTER

                                         118



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    COUNTY LEGISLATOR THAT PASSED THE LEGISLATION THAT SPUN IT OFF FROM

                    BEING A COUNTY HOSPITAL.  BUT WE HAD CERTAIN GOALS IN MIND WHEN WE

                    SPUN IT OFF.  SOME PEOPLE SAID, YOU KNOW IT SHOULD BE A PRIVATE

                    HOSPITAL.  OTHERS SAID, NO, IT SHOULD BE A NOT-FOR-PROFIT.  WE

                    DEMOCRATS ON THE BOARD OF LEGISLATORS SAID, NO, IT'S GOING TO BE A

                    PUBLIC HOSPITAL.  HOW DO WE FREE IT FROM THE -- FROM THE CONFINES OF THE

                    POLITICS OF GOVERNMENT AND AT THE SAME TIME KEEP IT PUBLIC?  AND WE

                    MADE IT A PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION.  AND WE INSISTED THAT IT STAY

                    UNDER CIVIL SERVICE.  SO THE MEDICAL CENTER IN WHITE PLAIN -- IN

                    WESTCHESTER COUNTY, THE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER, IS A CIVIL

                    SERVICE HOSPITAL.  THEY CAN'T CHANGE A JOB TITLE WITHOUT GOING TO CIVIL

                    SERVICE.  THEY HAVE PUBLIC PENSIONS WHICH THEY HAVE TO FUND EVERY

                    YEAR.  AND THEY HAVE CSEA AND THEY HAVE THE NYSNA.  I FIND IT VERY

                    INTERESTING TO SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE STATEWIDE UNIONS AND THE

                    LOCAL UNIONS.  YOU TAKE A LOOK AT WHERE THE STATEWIDE UNIONS ARE, BUT

                    THE CSEA LOCAL PEOPLE WHO WE'VE WORKED WITH TO PRESERVE THEIR JOBS

                    OVER AND OVER AGAIN, ARE BEGGING US TO TURN THIS BILL DOWN.  BECAUSE

                    THEY UNDERSTAND THE PRESSURE ON THE MEDICAL CENTER WILL MEAN THAT THE

                    MEDICAL CENTER COULD NO LONGER SUPPORT PUBLIC SALARIES.  THAT'S WHAT

                    WE'RE DOING HERE.

                                 YOU KNOW, I FIND IT INTERESTING AS I LOOK AT THIS BILL,

                    THERE ARE LOTS OF OTHER QUESTIONS WHICH I'LL COME BACK TO ON MY SECOND

                    ROUND.  BUT THERE ARE SERIOUS QUESTIONS WITH THIS BILL ABOUT WHAT'S IN

                    THE BILL AND WHAT ISN'T IN THIS BILL.  THERE'S NO DEFINITION OF EXCESS COST.

                    THERE'S NO DEFINITION OF INDEPENDENT DISPUTE ENTITY AND HOW IT'S

                                         119



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SUPPOSED TO WORK.  IT WAS SET UP FOR THE DOCTORS.  WELL, SOMEBODY

                    BELIEVES THAT THAT'S GOING TO WORK FOR HOSPITALS.  AND -- AND -- AND

                    THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BILL THAT REQUIRES THAT ANY SAVINGS AT ALL, ANY

                    SAVINGS, IF THERE ARE ANY, ACTUALLY GO TO THE CONSUMERS.  THIS IS THE

                    SAME THING WE HEAR FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES ALL OF THE TIME.  PUT US

                    IN CHARGE AND WE'LL SAVE MONEY.  WHILE THEY'RE TRYING TO SAVE MONEY

                    ON THE BACKS OF EVERY HOSPITAL IN THIS STATE.  THEY'VE JUST STARTED WITH

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER AND NYU AND PRESBYTERIAN AND

                    NORTHWELL.  THEY'RE THE ONES THAT THEY'RE STARTING WITH -- -

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. --

                                 MR. ABINANTI:  -- AND THEY'RE AIMING FOR EVERY

                    OTHER ONE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. ABINANTI, YOU

                    ARE --

                                 MR. ABINANTI:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  -- READY FOR YOUR

                    SECOND WHEN WE GET AROUND TO YOU.

                                 MR. BYRNE.

                                 MR. BYRNE:  YES, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 MR. BYRNE:  THANKS.  I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT I HAVE

                    GREAT RESPECT FOR THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL AND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO

                    ACCOMPLISH.  BUT I'M COMPELLED TO JOIN MY MANY COLLEAGUES FROM

                    WESTCHESTER COUNTY ACROSS THE AISLE AND OPPOSE THIS PROPOSAL.  AS

                                         120



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SOMEONE FROM PUTNAM COUNTY BUT THAT REPRESENTS A SLICE OF NORTHERN

                    WESTCHESTER, I CAN TELL YOU THE REGIONAL EFFECTS AND SERVICE THAT THE

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER PROVIDES IS GREAT.  IT GOES WELL BEYOND

                    WESTCHESTER AND INTO PUTNAM COUNTY AND THE HUDSON VALLEY.  IT IS ONE

                    OF THE MAIN TRAUMA CENTERS THAT PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT USE, SHOULD THEY

                    HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT TRAGEDY OF HAVING A HORRIFIC AUTOMOBILE

                    ACCIDENT OR SOME OTHER SEVERE TRAUMA.  CURRENTLY, HOSPITALS HAVE AN

                    INCENTIVE TO BE INCLUDED IN AN INSURANCE NETWORK SO THAT INSURERS

                    ENROLLEE -- ENROLLEES CAN ACCESS HOSPITAL SERVICES, INCLUDING ELECTIVE

                    SERVICES.  THIS PROPOSAL WOULD ELIMINATE OR GREATLY REDUCE THAT

                    INCENTIVE.

                                 I ALSO FIND IT PROBLEMATIC THAT MANY HOSPITALS ARE

                    EXCLUDED FROM THIS PROPOSAL.  AND I AGREE WITH MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES'

                    REMARKS REGARDING THE TRANSPARENCY, AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THIS BILL

                    WAS INTRODUCED EARLIER IN THE YEAR, IT MOST CERTAINLY WAS RUSHED THROUGH

                    TODAY, THROUGH TWO COMMITTEES AND ON TO THE FLOOR.  WE HAVE A -- A

                    POLICY WITH OTHER PROPOSALS WHEN THEY'RE CONTROVERSIAL.  SOMETIMES WE

                    DO HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS.  AND I THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THAT IF IT

                    DOES NOT BECOME LAW, PERHAPS WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON A PROPOSAL

                    LIKE THIS TO INCLUDE ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS SO THE HOSPITALS WILL HAVE THEIR

                    REPRESENTATIVES TO -- TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS TO ALL

                    OF OUR COLLEAGUES.

                                 AGAIN, I OPPOSE THIS PROPOSAL.  I WILL BE VOTING NO.

                    THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER ORTIZ:  MR. OTIS TO EXPLAIN HIS

                                         121



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    VOTE.

                                 MR. OTIS:  I'M GOING TO BE OPPOSING THIS BILL, AND I

                    THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH HEALTHCARE AND INSURANCE AND

                    HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS, WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO DO THINGS CAREFULLY.

                    AND I THINK IT'S APPARENT FROM THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'VE HEARD SO FAR

                    THIS EVENING THAT THIS BILL NEEDS MORE WORK.  WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                    CENTER, AS HAS BEEN STATED EARLIER, IS, IN A SENSE, OUR PUBLIC HOSPITAL IN

                    WESTCHESTER.  IT PROVIDES A LOT OF EXPENSIVE SERVICES, PROVIDES SERVICES

                    TO THE NEEDY, AND HAS HAD SOME TOUGH YEARS UNTIL TODAY WHERE THEY'RE --

                    HAVE GOTTEN TO A PLACE OF SOME FINANCIAL STABILITY.  WHAT WE'RE

                    CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE RISK THAT THIS PUTS TO FUTURE FINANCIAL STABILITY.

                    AROUND THE STATE WE HAVE LOST MANY HOSPITALS.  AND THE HOSPITAL AND

                    HEALTHCARE BUSINESS IS A TOUGHER BUSINESS THAN IT USED TO BE, AND SO

                    SOME OF THOSE REDUCTIONS WERE INEVITABLE.  BUT YOU HAVE TO ASK

                    YOURSELF THE QUESTION, THROUGHOUT THE STATE DO WE HAVE MEDICAL

                    FACILITIES, DO WE HAVE HOSPITALS IN THE PLACES THAT WE NEED THEM?  DO

                    WE HAVE TERTIARY CARE FACILITIES WITH EXPERT SURGEONS, EXPERT PEOPLE

                    WHO DEAL WITH EMERGENCIES IN PROXIMITY TO WHERE PEOPLE CAN GET TO

                    THEM IN TIME TO SAVE A LIFE.

                                 SO, I'M OPPOSING THIS BILL.  MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE

                    THAT WE SPEND SOME MORE TIME NOT ON THE FLOOR - YOU CAN HAVE SOME

                    APPLAUSE FOR THAT - NOT ON THE FLOOR, BUT BACK IN -- IN MEETING ROOMS

                    AND FIGURE OUT A BETTER WAY TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES AND TO COME UP WITH

                    SOMETHING THAT PROVIDES COST CONTAINMENT FOR OUT-OF-NETWORK COSTS,

                    BUT ALSO IN A WAY THAT IS RATIONAL AND IS NOT HARMFUL TO SOME OF OUR

                                         122



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS.

                                 I'LL BE VOTING NO.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER ORTIZ:  MR. WALCZYK FOR THE

                    SECOND.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  IF THE

                    SPONSOR WOULD YIELD.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER ORTIZ:  WILL THE SPONSOR

                    YIELD?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER ORTIZ:  YES, MR. WALCZYK.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  I APPRECIATE THE TIME AND

                    ACCOMMODATION AND PATIENCE AS WE TRY TO GET ADDITIONAL INPUT, AND I

                    GET A GOOD FEEL FOR THE STATEWIDE IMPACT OF THIS BILL AND, CERTAINLY,

                    OBVIOUSLY, MY DISTRICT AT THE FOREFRONT.  I -- I WONDERED IF, YOU KNOW,

                    EITHER IN 2015 WHEN THIS BILL FIRST CAME UP AND 2017 WHEN THE WORKING

                    GROUP THAT IGNORED HOSPITALS - AT LEAST THEY WEREN'T A PART OF THE

                    WORKING GROUP - IF WE HAD HEARD FROM HOSPITALS IN 2017 THAT WOULD

                    INCLUDE CANTON-POTSDAM HOSPITAL.  ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE POSITION

                    THAT CANTON-POTSDAM WOULD HAVE ON THIS BILL, ON THE AMENDMENTS OF

                    THE BILL THAT WERE DONE RECENTLY?  HAVE THEY BEEN A PART OF THE

                    CONVERSATION, OR YOU, MR. SPONSOR, ARE -- ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE

                    IMPACT THAT THIS WOULD HAVE ON THEM?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, AS I HAVE INDICATED

                    BEFORE WHEN MY COLLEAGUE HAS ASKED ABOUT A SPECIFIC HOSPITAL, I WILL

                    REPEAT THAT SAME ANSWER.  THE HOSPITAL TO WHICH HE REFERS MOST LIKELY

                                         123



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BELONGS TO ONE OF THE HOSPITAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE REGISTERED IN IN

                    OPPOSITION OF THIS BILL.  THAT -- IT IS CERTAINLY TRUE AND UNDISPUTED THAT

                    THE TWO MAJOR HOSPITAL ASSOCIATIONS OF NEW YORK STATE WHICH

                    COMMUNICATE REGULARLY WITH THE HOSPITALS ALL ACROSS NEW YORK STATE

                    HAVE REGISTERED IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL.  IT IS ALSO TRUE THAT PUBLIC

                    EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE CSEA, THE MUNICIPAL UNIONS

                    REPRESENTING OVER 1.1 MILLION MEMBERS, 97 DIFFERENT MUNICIPAL UNIONS,

                    THE TRIAL LAWYERS AND A NUMBER OF OTHER ENTITIES WHO ARE NOT INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES AND NOT HOSPITALS HAVE ALSO INDICATED THAT THEY STRONGLY

                    SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION AND HAVE URGED US REPEATEDLY - NOT JUST THIS

                    YEAR, NOT JUST TODAY, BUT OVER THE COURSE OF THE PAST FIVE MONTHS, OVER

                    THE COURSE OF THE PAST THREE YEARS - TO PASS THIS BILL THAT OUR COLLEAGUES,

                    MANY OF WHOM ARE STANDING HERE TODAY AND ARGUING AGAINST THIS BILL,

                    HAVE VOTED FOR FOUR TIMES.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  I -- I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSE,

                    AND WHILE I'M NOT PRIVY TO EXACTLY WHO REPRESENTS THESE HOSPITALS, I

                    WONDERED IF -- IF YOU WERE FAMILIAR WITH THE HOSPITALS IN -- IN KINGSTON,

                    WHICH INCLUDE THE -- THE MARY'S AVENUE CAMPUS, THE BROADWAY

                    CAMPUS, AND ALSO IN MARGARETVILLE, FOR THE HEALTHALLIANCE OF THE

                    HUDSON VALLEY.  HAVE -- HAVE THEY BEEN A PART OF THE CONVERSATION?

                    WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT BE ON THOSE FACILITIES?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  WELL, I WILL -- AND MR. SPEAKER, I WILL

                    ANSWER THAT DIRECTLY.  THE HOSPITALS THAT ARE IN MY COMMUNITY - THAT IS,

                    THE KINGSTON -- FORMER KINGSTON HOSPITAL, OR NOW THE BROADWAY

                    CAMPUS; AND THE FORMER BENEDICTINE HOSPITAL, NOW THE MARY'S AVENUE

                                         124



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CAMPUS OF WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER - HAVE NOT SPECIFICALLY TALKED

                    TO ME ABOUT THIS BILL.  HOWEVER, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT I'VE HAD

                    EXTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH REPRESENTATIVES AND EMPLOYEES OF

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION AND I'VE HEARD THEIR

                    CONCERNS.  AND I'VE INCORPORATED SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS INTO THE

                    LEGISLATION OR AT LEAST CONSIDERED IT AS WE MOVED FORWARD.  SUFFICE IT TO

                    SAY, WE DON'T AGREE.  WE DON'T AGREE THAT -- THAT THERE'S ANYTHING -- MY

                    VIEW IS THAT THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH TELLING PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE TO

                    COME UP WITH A MEANS OF FINDING AGREEMENT.  THERE'S NOTHING WRONG

                    WITH HAVING A THIRD-PARTY DETERMINE WHETHER A -- WHETHER A FEE BEING

                    CHARGED IS EXORBITANT OR WHETHER AN INSURANCE COMPANY IS TRYING TO

                    TAKE UNFAIR ADVANTAGE OF A HOSPITAL, BE THEY A RURAL HOSPITAL OR AN

                    UPSTATE HOSPITAL OR A SUBURBAN HOSPITAL OR EVEN AN URBAN HOSPITAL.

                    THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS BILL DOES.  WHAT THIS BILL DOES NOT DO, AS HAS

                    BEEN PORTRAYED MANY TIMES, IS LINE OUT SPECIFIC HOSPITALS THAT ARE

                    COVERED AND NOT COVERED.  WHAT DOES IT DO?  IT SETS CRITERIA FOR WHAT

                    CIRCUMSTANCES ARE COVERED.  AND IF YOU ARE NOT OUT OF CONTRACT OR NOT

                    CONCLUDING YOUR CONTRACT, IT DOESN'T COVER YOU.  IF YOU PROVIDE

                    HEALTHCARE TO 60 PERCENT OR MORE OF YOUR PATIENTS WHO ARE DISCHARGED

                    THROUGH MEDICAID, IT DOES NOT COVER YOU.  IF YOU ARE CHARGING RATES THAT

                    ARE APPROPRIATE, NOT BASED UPON WHAT OTHER HOSPITALS CHARGE, BUT WHAT

                    YOUR HOSPITAL CHARGES FOR OTHER PATIENTS OR FOR THAT PATIENT WHEN THEY

                    ARE COVERED BY A HEALTH PLAN, OR WHEN THEY ARE NOT COVERED BY A HEALTH

                    PLAN.  THEN YOU MIGHT BE COVERED.  IF NONE OF THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES

                    EXIST, THEN THIS BILL MIGHT HAVE SOME IMPACT ON YOU.  BUT I WOULD

                                         125



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SUGGEST TO YOU THAT WILL NOT NECESSARILY BE A NEGATIVE IMPACT.  IT COULD

                    HAVE A VERY POSITIVE IMPACT, BECAUSE IF THE RATES THAT YOUR HOSPITAL

                    WANTS TO CHARGE ARE REASONABLE, NOT IN THE VIEW OF THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANY, BUT IN THE VIEW OF AN INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION

                    REPRESENTATIVE APPOINTED BY A DULY-APPOINTED STATE AGENCY, THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, THEN YOUR HOSPITAL WILL GET THOSE

                    CHARGES.  THAT'S WHAT THIS PROCESS DOES.  IT ACTUALLY GIVES A TOOL.  AND,

                    QUITE FRANKLY, WHILE THIS YEAR, AT THIS EXACT MOMENT, CLEARLY THIS

                    MOMENT, THE -- THERE ARE HOSPITALS THAT OPPOSE THIS, I WOULD SUBMIT TO

                    YOU THAT IN A FEW YEARS OR IN DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES, THOSE VERY SAME

                    HOSPITALS MAY COME HERE AND LOBBY FOR THIS KIND OF LEGISLATION.  WHEN

                    THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES TELLS THE INSURANCE COMPANIES TO

                    NARROW THEIR NETWORK AND THE TABLE HAS TURNED.  WHEN THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES DECIDE THAT THERE'S MORE COMPETITION THAN -- THAN WARRANTS

                    THE RATES THAT THEY'RE PAYING, AND THE HOSPITAL WANTS TO CONTINUE IN THE

                    PROCESS, THEN THEY CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE INDEPENDENT DISPUTE

                    RESOLUTION PROCESS.  HERE'S THE THING:  IT HAS BEEN PORTRAYED TODAY BY

                    PEOPLE WHO HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION FOR THREE YEARS THAT

                    SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER THIS IS INSURANCE COMPANY LEGISLATION.  I SUBMIT TO

                    YOU, AND MANY OF YOU HAVE HAD VISITS FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT

                    INSURANCE COMPANY REPRESENTATIVES WHO SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION

                    BECAUSE IT BRINGS ABOUT A PROCESS OF FAIRNESS THAT CAN RESULT IN NOT JUST

                    APPROPRIATE LEVELS OF CARE, CONTINUATION OF CARE THAT WON'T BE

                    INTERRUPTED BECAUSE CONTRACTS END, BUT ALSO WILL MAKE SURE THAT THE

                    CHARGES THAT ARE BEING OFFERED AND THE CHARGES THAT ARE BEING PAID ARE

                                         126



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    REASONABLE ACCORDING TO A NEUTRAL THIRD-PARTY, AND CRITERIA THAT IS CLEARLY

                    LINED OUT IN THE LAST PAGE OF THE BILL, WHICH, YOU KNOW, I KNOW MY

                    COLLEAGUES HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.  NONE OF THE WESTCHESTER

                    COLLEAGUES HAVE ADVANCED THOSE QUESTIONS TO ME IN THIS DEBATE.  NONE

                    OF THE WESTCHESTER COLLEAGUES HAVE CHOSEN TO LOOK AT THE LEGISLATION TO

                    SEE IF THE ANSWERS EXIST THERE.  INDEED, THEY DO.  INSTEAD, THERE'S BEEN A

                    -- A CHOICE, AND I -- I SPECIFICALLY DO NOT REFER TO MY COLLEAGUE WHO IS

                    STANDING HERE TODAY BEFORE ME AT THIS MOMENT -- BUT SPECIFICALLY AS

                    STATED BY SOME OF THOSE COLLEAGUES SIMPLY TO FILIBUSTER BECAUSE THEY

                    DISAGREE.  AND -- AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MY COLLEAGUE WHO ASKED

                    ME TO YIELD, I DON'T APPLY THAT TO YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE SPECIFICALLY

                    ASKED ME SUBSTANTIATIVE QUESTIONS, AND I WOULD URGE MY COLLEAGUES

                    FROM THE OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE TO DO THE SAME.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  WELL, THANK YOU BOTH FOR THE

                    ANSWER AND THE SENTIMENT.  I APPRECIATE IT.  AND THROUGH YOU, MR.

                    SPEAKER, IF THE SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO YIELD?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER ORTIZ:  YES, HE WILL.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  THANK YOU.  WITH A PARADIGM SHIFT

                    IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMMUNITY HOSPITALS AND INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES, ARE YOU CONCERNED AT ALL THAT INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL BE

                    SETTING THEIR OWN RATES AS A RESULT OF THIS LEGISLATION?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  TO THE CONTRARY.  I BELIEVE THIS

                    LEGISLATION PROTECTS COMMUNITY HOSPITALS FROM HAVING INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES SET THEIR RATES, BECAUSE WE'VE INTERJECTED INTO THE WHOLE

                                         127



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PROCESS AN INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY WHO WILL NOW MAKE A

                    DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER THOSE RATES ARE REASONABLE OR NOT.  IF A

                    HOSPITAL BELIEVES THAT THEY -- AND -- AND -- AND LET'S ALSO NOT FORGET THIS

                    LITTLE -- LITTLE DETAIL THAT HASN'T BEEN MENTIONED HERE TODAY:  HEALTH

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES, BY REGULATION, BY SUPERVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT

                    OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, AND IN SOME INSTANCES THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

                    AS WELL, ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE WHAT IS CALLED "AN ADEQUATE NETWORK."

                    THAT IS, THEY CAN'T GO AROUND WILLY-NILLY DISMISSING CONTRACTS AND GOING

                    BACK TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SAYING, OH, IT'S OKAY.  WE'RE

                    GOING TO DO EVERYTHING OUT-OF-NETWORK.  NO.  THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES PLACES ON THESE INSURANCE COMPANIES

                    IS THAT THEY DEVELOP A NETWORK.  THEY NEED A NETWORK.  AND EVEN IF

                    THEY DIDN'T WANT ONE, THE LAW REQUIRES THEM TO HAVE ONE.  WHAT THIS BILL

                    WILL DO IS MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THE CONTRACT ENDS OR WHEN A NEW ONE IS

                    BEING NEGOTIATED, THERE'S NOT A GAP FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WE REPRESENT, AS

                    THERE WAS IN MY COMMUNITY FOR YOU WANT TO KNOW HOW LONG?

                    EIGHTEEN MONTHS.  LONGER, 18 MONTHS.  THAT'S HOW LONG PEOPLE THAT I

                    REPRESENT WERE NOT ABLE TO GO TO THEIR COMMUNITY HOSPITAL BECAUSE OF A

                    - DON'T SAY THAT WORD - A CONTEST BETWEEN AN INSURANCE COMPANY AND A

                    -- AND A HOSPITAL CONGLOMERATE.  YOU KNOW WHO WAS LEFT OUT IN THE

                    COLD?  THE PEOPLE I REPRESENT.  YOU KNOW WHO ENDED UP PAYING THE

                    BILL?  THE COUNTY AND -- AND THE MUNICIPALITIES WHO SELF-INSURE AND

                    WHO NOW HAVE TO PAY SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER RATES.  AND BY THE WAY, WE

                    TALK ABOUT THIS COMING TO YOUR TOWN.  IT WILL COME TO YOUR TOWN.

                    BECAUSE WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF MASSIVE HOSPITAL CONSOLIDATION.  AND

                                         128



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THAT'S THE PARADIGM SHIFT, NOT THE RELATIONSHIP OF TWO HOSPITALS BECAUSE

                    WE'VE INTERJECTED AN INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS.  IT'S THE

                    FACT THAT HOSPITALS ARE BEING GOBBLED UP LIKE - FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE

                    MY AGE AND OLDER - LIKE PAC-MAN ON A VIDEO GAME.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  THANK YOU, MR. SPONSOR.  THE --

                    THE AMENDMENTS TO THIS BILL WERE -- WERE ISSUED RELATIVELY RECENTLY.

                    CAN YOU -- CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THERE WAS A HURRY-UP ON THE

                    AMENDMENTS TO THIS BILL?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, THROUGH YOU, I -- I DON'T

                    BELIEVE THERE WAS A HURRY-UP.  WE MODIFY LEGISLATION ALL THE TIME.  AND

                    IN THIS INSTANCE, ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION WAS GIVEN TO THOSE HOSPITALS

                    THAT ARE PRIMARILY MEDICAID HOSPITALS - THAT IS, GREATER THAN HALF, 60

                    PERCENT MEDICAID HOSPITALS - AND WE FELT THERE ARE ENOUGH SUFFICIENT

                    CONTROLS ON THOSE HOSPITALS ALREADY THAT IT WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY TO --

                    TO INCLUDE THEM IN THIS LEGISLATION.  WE ALSO FELT AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC

                    POLICY THAT WE WISHED TO EXCLUDE THEM.  BUT IT WASN'T A HURRY-UP, IT

                    WAS JUST AS WE WENT ALONG.  AND BY THE WAY, ONCE IT BECOMES LAW, AS

                    THE INDEPENDENT DISPUTE PROCESS ALREADY IS LAW, SOMEBODY IN THIS ROOM

                    MAY DECIDE TO PUT IN A BILL TO MODIFY THAT, AND THAT WOULD BE FINE, TOO.

                    AND IF WE CAN GET ON THE FLOOR AND HAVE A DEBATE AND MAYBE EVEN HAVE

                    ANOTHER - FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY EXPERIENCE HERE - A FILIBUSTER DEBATE,

                    MAYBE WE'LL FIND OUT THAT SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO CHANGE THE LAW THAT I

                    AM OFFERING HERE TODAY.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  UNDERSTOOD.  WOULD THERE BE --

                    WOULD THERE BE, YOU KNOW, ANY LEVEL OF AMENDMENTS TO THIS BILL THAT

                                         129



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WOULD CAUSE YOU TO GO BACK TO A -- A WORKING GROUP LIKE YOU HAD IN

                    2017?  WHAT WOULD TRIGGER THE NEED FOR GREATER PUBLIC INPUT?  AND I

                    KNOW THAT -- I KNOW THAT YOU'VE CONTINUALLY WORKED ON THIS TO PROGRESS

                    IT THROUGH THE PROCESS.  IT'S ALREADY BEEN AN A-PRINT AND NOW A B-PRINT

                    IN THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION.  WHAT SORT OF TRIGGERS FOR YOU, AS A

                    POLICYMAKER, GIVE ENOUGH PAUSE TO HOLD YOUR BILL ON THE ASSEMBLY

                    FLOOR AND SAY, HEY, WAIT A MINUTE.  WE PROBABLY NEED TO HEAR FROM THE

                    PUBLIC AND THE HOSPITALS, THE COMMUNITY HOSPITALS THAT THESE MEMBERS

                    REPRESENT IN THIS CHAMBER?  THIS IS TIME TO -- TO TAKE A PAUSE AND --

                    AND HEAR FROM THOSE WHO WOULD BE IMPACTED.  WHAT WOULD DO THAT FOR

                    YOU?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT

                    HAPPENED HERE.  WHEN THE INDE -- INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION

                    PROCESS WAS INTRODUCED INTO LAW, THERE DID NOT APPEAR TO BE A NEED TO

                    INCLUDE CHARGES FOR EMERGENCIES AND THOSE CHARGES THAT FOLLOWED

                    EMERGENCIES.  BECAUSE IT APPEARED THAT THERE WAS A STASIS, THAT THERE

                    WAS A BALANCE THAT WAS TAKING PLACE.  WHAT OCCURRED OVER THE PAST

                    SEVERAL YEARS IS -- IS IT BECAME CLEAR THAT THERE WAS NOT A BALANCE.  SO,

                    IF WE FOUND IN THE FUTURE THAT THERE WAS AN IMBALANCE, WHETHER IT WAS

                    THAT IT DID NOT CONTAIN THOSE COSTS AS WE ANTICIPATED IT WOULD; IT DID NOT

                    ALLOW FOR CONTINUITY OF CARE, AS IS THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF THIS

                    LEGISLATION; OR THAT HOSPITALS WERE BEING TREATED UNFAIRLY IN THE PROCESS,

                    I ABSOLUTELY WOULD BE BACK HERE.  YOU MENTIONED THE TWO HOSPITALS IN

                    MY COMMUNITY, AND THE ONE HOSPITAL, MARGARETVILLE, ON THE PERIPHERAL

                    OF MY COMMUNITY.  I HAVE STOOD ON THIS FLOOR A NUMBER OF TIMES AND

                                         130



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    DEFENDED THOSE HOSPITALS.  I HAVE ADVOCATED FOR THOSE HOSPITALS IN THE

                    BUDGET AND SECURED PRETTY NEAR $200 MILLION TO KEEP THEM AFLOAT

                    THROUGH THEIR TOUGH TIMES.  AND I CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR MONEY,

                    INCLUDING $100 MILLION-PLUS THAT I ADVOCATED FOR FOR WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER, THE VERY HOSPITAL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE TODAY, SO

                    THAT THEY COULD CONTINUE TO PROVIDE QUALITY CARE THROUGHOUT THE HUDSON

                    VALLEY, INCLUDING IN THEIR HOME COUNTY.  SO, YES.  THERE'S A LOT OF

                    THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN THAT WOULD CAUSE ME AND OTHERS IN THIS ROOM

                    TO REVISIT THIS, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE ARE HERE, TO BE ABLE TO HAVE

                    THAT SORT OF DYNAMIC APPROACH TO THE CHANGING NATURE OF THE ISSUES

                    BEFORE US, INCLUDING HEALTHCARE.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  THANK YOU.  AND THROUGH YOU,

                    MR. SPEAKER, IF THE SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO YIELD?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  ABSOLUTELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE SPONSOR

                    CONTINUES TO YIELD.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  AND JUST REMIND ME, BECAUSE I'M

                    NOT SURE THAT I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY EARLIER.  BUT YOU SAID YOU HADN'T

                    SPECIFICALLY HEARD FROM THE HOSPITALS IN YOUR DISTRICT TO INCLUDE THE --

                    THE MARY'S AVENUE, THE BROADWAY AND THEN THE HOSPITAL THAT'S ON THE

                    PERIPHERY OF YOUR DISTRICT, MARGARETVILLE, ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION

                    SPECIFICALLY?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS A MEETING

                    HELD - FORGIVE MY MEMORY - I THINK IT WAS EARLIER THIS YEAR, BUT IT MIGHT

                    HAVE BEEN LAST YEAR - WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                                         131



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CENTER.  AND UNDER THE AFFILIATION AGREEMENT THAT EXISTS BETWEEN THESE

                    HOSPITALS RIGHT NOW, IT IS THE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER THAT SERVES AS

                    THE MANAGEMENT OF MY LOCAL HOSPITALS.  AND -- AND I WILL BE HONEST

                    WITH YOU; IT WAS A VERY CORDIAL AND OPEN MEETING WHERE BOTH SIDES

                    DISCUSSED THEIR POINT OF VIEW.  AND I HAVE BEEN IN REGULAR

                    COMMUNICATION AND HAVE HAD MY DOOR OPEN TO PEOPLE WHO REPRESENT

                    MY COMMUNITY HOSPITALS.  I COUNT AS THE PEOPLE I SEE IN THE GROCERY

                    STORE, SOMETIMES WHEN I LEAVE THIS BUILDING AT NIGHT, MEMBERS OF THE

                    BOARDS OF THOSE HOSPITALS, AND -- AND THEY ARE AWARE OF THE LEGISLATION.

                    THEY HAVEN'T REGISTERED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER WITH ME SPECIFICALLY ON

                    THIS.  BUT YES, I'VE HEARD FROM THEM THROUGH THEIR REPRESENTATIVES AT

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  SIR, YOUR TIME HAS

                    EXPIRED.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE

                    LISTENING TO YOU.

                                 MS. REYES.

                                 MS. REYES:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL.

                                 MS. REYES:  I'VE BEEN SITTING HERE LISTENING VERY

                    INTENTLY TO MY COLLEAGUES ON THIS DEBATE, AND EVERYBODY'S BEEN TALKING

                    ABOUT HOSPITALS.  BUT NOT A SINGLE PERSON HAS MENTIONED A PATIENT AND

                    THE ASTRONOMICAL COSTS THAT PATIENTS IN OUR DISTRICTS THAT EACH AND EVERY

                                         132



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ONE OF US REPRESENTS ARE STRADDLED WITH WHEN IT COMES TO HOSPITAL BILLS.

                    BECAUSE IN AN EMERGENT SITUATION, NOBODY HAS THE OPTION TO DECIDE

                    WHETHER THEIR DOCTOR OR THEIR MEDICAL PROVIDER IS IN- OR OUT-OF-NETWORK.

                    SO I THINK THAT WE'RE MISSING THE BROADER PICTURE HERE, AND IT'S THAT THIS

                    BILL REALLY ADDRESSES THE -- THE -- THE COSTS THAT SO MANY FAMILIES HAVE TO

                    DEAL WITH.  AND LET'S BE FRANK.  THIS WILL BANKRUPT MANY, MANY FAMILIES

                    AND MANY PATIENTS.  AND THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE EXPERIENCED THAT, THAT

                    HAVE EXPERIENCED INSTANCES WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO INTO THE EMERGENCY

                    ROOM, YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.  SO, I'M NO LAWYER, BUT I AM A NURSE.

                    AND I READ THROUGH THE LANGUAGE OF THIS BILL, AND I HAVE NOT SEEN A

                    SINGLE MENTION OF ANY HOSPITAL.  SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE PEOPLE ARE

                    GETTING THIS FROM.  BUT I HAVE -- I DID UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A 60

                    PERCENT CARVE-OUT FOR THOSE THAT TAKE CARE OF PREDOMINANTLY THE

                    INDIGENT CARE POOL, WHICH IS OUR MEDICAID PATIENTS, THOSE THAT ARE

                    MEDICARE AND MEDICAID RECIPIENTS, THOSE THAT ARE UNDERINSURED, WHICH

                    MEANS THAT A LOT OF -- A LOT OF THE HOSPITALS THAT SERVE OVERWHELMINGLY A

                    POOR POPULATION WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.  BUT IT

                    ALSO TALKS ABOUT CREATING A DISPUTE RESOLUTION.  SO, IF YOU ARE A PATIENT

                    THAT HAS INSURANCE AND YOU FIND YOURSELF IN AN EMERGENT SITUATION IN AN

                    EMERGENCY ROOM, AND YOU ARE OUT-OF-NETWORK WITH THE MEDICAL

                    PROVIDER, THEN YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENTER A DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHERE

                    THEN THOSE CHARGES WILL BE ABLE TO BE NEGOTIATED WITH THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES AT AN IN-NETWORK RATE.  AND IF WE LOOK AT THE SALARIES OF

                    MANY OF THESE CEOS, THEY GO UP TO THE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF

                    DOLLARS.  SO I DON'T FORESEE THERE BEING A HUGE FISCAL IMPACT ON MANY OF

                                         133



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THESE HOSPITALS.  IF THE -- THE PAYMENT, THE REIMBURSEMENT THAT THEY WILL

                    RECEIVE UNDER A DISPUTE RESOLUTION WOULD BE AN IN-NETWORK RATE --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. BUCHWALD, WHY

                    DO YOU RISE?

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  WOULD THE LADY YIELD FOR A

                    QUESTION?

                                 MS. REYES:  NO.  NO.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE LADY SAID SHE

                    WILL NOT YIELD.

                                 MS. REYES:  SO I DON'T FORESEE THAT THESE MEDICAL

                    INSTITUTIONS WOULD LOSE AN ASTRONOMICAL AMOUNT OF MONEY IF WHAT THE

                    DISPUTE RESOLUTION -- OR WHAT THIS LANGUAGE ON THIS BILL TALKS ABOUT IS

                    THEM RECEIVING AN IN-NETWORK RATE THAT THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY BARGAINED

                    FOR OR NEGOTIATED IN THE FIRST PLACE.  IT JUST MEANS THAT THOSE INDIVIDUALS

                    THAT FIND THEMSELVES IN AN EMERGENT SITUATION WHERE THEY CANNOT PAY OR

                    THEY DON'T HAVE THE OPTION TO CHOOSE AN IN-NETWORK PROVIDER, THEY WILL

                    NOT FIND THEMSELVES WITH THIS ASTRONOMICAL BILL.

                                 BUT I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER.  AND I -- I DO UNDERSTAND THAT MANY YEARS AGO THEY

                    FOUND THEMSELVES IN A BANKRUPT SITUATION, AND THE HOSPITAL THAT WENT

                    FORWARD -- THAT SET FORWARD A PLAN TO BAIL THEM OUT OF THAT WAS

                    MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER, WHICH IS THE LARGEST EMPLOYER IN THE

                    BRONX, BUT ALSO TAKES CARE OF ONE OF THE LARGEST INDIGENT CARE POOLS IN

                    THE BRONX AS WELL.  AND WE HAVE A POPULATION -- BRONX COUNTY IS THE

                    -- RANKS 52ND IN HEALTHCARE OUTCOMES IN ALL OF NEW YORK STATE, AND WE

                                         134



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    FOUND ONE OF OUR MEDICAL CENTERS TRYING TO BAIL OUT ALSO WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER.

                                 SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS FROM THE LENS OF THE

                    PATIENTS AND OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE REPRESENT, BECAUSE THE

                    HOSPITALS DID NOT VOTE ME IN HERE AND THEY DID NOT SEND ME HERE TO

                    SPEAK JUST FOR THEM.  BUT THE PEOPLE OF MY DISTRICT, THOSE PEOPLE THAT

                    ARE SUFFERING EVERY DAY THAT HAVE LOST THEIR HOMES BECAUSE THEY HAVE

                    BEEN STRADDLED WITH ASTRONOMICAL MEDICAL DEBT, THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE

                    THAT VOTED FOR ME.

                                 I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PIECE OF LEGISLATION, AND I URGE

                    MY COLLEAGUES TO RETHINK THIS.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. PRETLOW.

                                 MR. PRETLOW:  GOOD -- GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE

                    -- OR GOOD EVENING.  WOULD MR. BUCHWALD RISE FOR A QUESTION?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. BUCHWALD, WILL

                    YOU YIELD?

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  I WOULD, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. BUCHWALD

                    YIELDS.

                                 MR. PRETLOW:  DAVID, WE'VE BEEN TALKING A LOT

                    ABOUT WESTCHESTER HOSPITAL.  HOW -- HOW DOES THIS DIRECTLY AFFECT THE

                    HOSPITAL?

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER

                    RIGHT NOW IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEGOTIATION WITH A MAJOR INSURANCE

                                         135



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    COMPANY, BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD, WHICH I THINK IS UNDER THE ANTHEM

                    SET OF COMPANIES.  AND RIGHT NOW, THIS BILL WOULD IMPACT THAT

                    NEGOTIATION BECAUSE IF THIS BILL BECAME LAW IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY MEAN

                    THAT ANTHEM WOULD NOT HAVE ANY PARTICULAR REASON TO HAVE WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER IN-NETWORK EXCEPT WITH REGARDS TO ELECTIVE SURGERIES.

                    BUT INSURANCE COMPANIES DO NOT PARTICULARLY NEED HOSPITALS TO BE IN-

                    NETWORK FOR ELECTIVE SURGERIES, BECAUSE THEY CAN INSTEAD TELL THEIR

                    CUSTOMERS, GO TO ANOTHER HOSPITAL FOR THOSE ELECTIVE SURGERIES.  AND,

                    OF COURSE, THERE ARE OTHER HOSPITALS IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY WHO WOULD

                    BE HAPPY TO HAVE THAT LUCRATIVE BUSINESS.  BUT FOR WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                    CENTER, IT NEEDS THE REVENUES FROM THOSE ELECTIVE SURGERIES TO PROVIDE

                    THE SOCIAL SAFETY NET SERVICES THAT IT PROVIDES TO WESTCHESTER'S COUNTY,

                    BUT ALSO TO PROVIDE THE TRAUMA CENTER, BURN UNIT AND SO FORTH THAT IT

                    PROVIDES TO THE ENTIRE REGION.

                                 MR. PRETLOW:  AND IF THIS BILL WOULD PASS AS IS

                    WRITTEN, WOULD THERE WILL BE A DIRECT NEGATIVE IMPACT TO PATIENTS?

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  IF WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER

                    STOPPED BEING TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES, IT WOULD BE A DRAMATIC

                    NEGATIVE IMPACT TO THOSE POTENTIAL PATIENTS.  AND I SHOULD -- IF I COULD,

                    MR. PRETLOW, JUST RESPOND THAT OTHERWISE, THIS BILL, IF IT GOES INTO EFFECT,

                    DOES NOT AFFECT THE BILLS PATIENTS GET AT HOME WITH CONNECTION -- IN

                    CONNECTION WITH EMERGENCY SERVICES.  IT IS ALREADY SEPARATELY THE LAW

                    THAT WITH REGARDS TO EMERGENCY SERVICES, SOMEONE WHO HAS INSURANCE

                    WHO GOES TO A, QUOTE, UNQUOTE, "OUT-OF-NETWORK HOSPITAL" WILL BE

                    CHARGED THE IN-NETWORK RATE.  SO IT IS -- AND WITH REGARDS TO THOSE

                                         136



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    SERVICES THAT COME AFTER ADMITTANCE TO THE HOSPITAL, POST-EMERGENCY

                    SERVICES, IS ALREADY THE LAW IN NEW YORK STATE THAT THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANY HAS TO PAY THE HOSPITAL'S STATED CHARGE.  SO NONE OF THIS,

                    UNLIKE WHAT WE DID WITH SURPRISE BILLING FOR THE -- THE MEDICAL

                    PROVIDERS AND PHYSICIANS, IS ABOUT THE BILLS THAT GO TO PATIENTS AND

                    FAMILIES AND THAT DO, INDEED, CREATE BANKRUPTCIES -- OR AT LEAST DID,

                    ESPECIALLY HERE IN NEW YORK, BEFORE WE PASSED THAT SURPRISE BILLING

                    LEGISLATION.  SO I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES THINGS FOR THE GENTLEMAN.

                                 MR. PRETLOW:  YES -- YES, IT DOES.  AND, MR.

                    SPEAKER, I -- I KNOW THE SPONSOR OF THIS BILL HAD -- HAD ALL GOOD

                    INTENTIONS, BUT I THINK THAT THIS BILL NEGATIVELY AFFECTS THE COUNTY OF

                    WESTCHESTER, THE PEOPLE OF WESTCHESTER, WHICH YOU'VE HEARD FROM YOUR

                    WESTCHESTER REPRESENTATIVES.  AND I HAVE -- I WANT TO OFFER AN

                    AMENDMENT TO THIS BILL, CHANGING THE -- THE PERCENTAGE FROM 60 PERCENT

                    TO 40 PERCENT OF THOSE THAT ARE ELIMINATED FROM THIS BILL.  I HAVE THE --

                    THE AMENDMENT IN MY HAND, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAND IT TO YOU NOW.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  PLEASE HAVE IT UP AND

                    WE'LL LOOK AT IT.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 MR. PRETLOW, WE HAVE EXAMINED YOUR WHAT APPEARS TO

                    BE A HOSTILE AMENDMENT.  AND IT IS OUT OF ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

                    CUSTOM AND PRACTICE OF THE HOUSE THAT HOSTILE AMENDMENTS BE DISPOSED

                    OF BEFORE CONSIDERATION OF THE BILL-IN-CHIEF AND NOT IN THE PROPER FORM.

                                 MR. PRETLOW:  BUT I APPEAL THE RULING OF THE

                    CHAIR.

                                         137



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. PRETLOW APPEALS

                    THE RULING OF THE CHAIR.  THE QUESTION BEFORE THE HOUSE IS SHALL THE

                    DECISION OF THE CHAIR STAND AS THE JUDGMENT OF THE HOUSE.  THOSE

                    VOTING YES VOTE TO SUSTAIN THE RULING OF THE CHAIR, THOSE VOTING NO VOTE

                    TO OVERRIDE THE DECISION OF THE CHAIR.

                                 THE CLERK WILL RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, CLEARLY,

                    SOME OF OUR COLLEAGUES --

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE RULING OF THE CHAIR IS SUSTAINED.

                                 MR. -- MRS. GALEF.

                                 MRS. GALEF:  YES.  THERE WERE A COUPLE OF

                    QUESTIONS THAT -- THAT HAVE COME UP, ONE OF WHICH -- IT WAS MENTIONED

                    THAT SENATOR SEWARD, WHO HAD THE BILL BEFORE HAD DEALT WITH IT, BUT I

                    BELIEVE THAT THE SENATE NEVER APPROVED IT.  SO, YOU KNOW, IT WAS KIND

                    OF LIKE A NON-ISSUE.  THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHO'S --

                    WHAT HOSPITALS ARE ON THIS LIST THAT ARE 60 PERCENT OR LESS WITH MEDICAID

                    PATIENTS.  AND SINCE THE SPONSOR HADN'T REALLY GIVEN US MUCH

                    INFORMATION, I HAVE A LIST ABOUT SIX PAGES, AND I'D LIKE TO START TO READ

                    THEM SO THAT YOU KNOW WHETHER YOUR HOSPITAL MIGHT BE INCLUDED.  THE

                    ALBANY MEDICAL CENTER IS AT 59, SO OBVIOUSLY, THAT IS LESS THAN 60

                                         138



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PERCENT.  I -- I WANT TO DO A CLARIFICATION, TOO, ON WHAT ONE OF MY

                    COLLEAGUES SAID.  IF YOU'RE GOING TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM, YOU'RE NOT

                    OUT-OF-NETWORK.  BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS INPATIENT AND

                    BEING OUT-OF-NETWORK.  SO, ALBANY MEDICAL CENTER IS 59 PERCENT.  WE

                    GO TO ALBANY MEDICAL CENTER, WE'RE OUT-OF-NETWORK.  ALBANY

                    MEMORIAL HOSPITAL IS 29 PERCENT.  ST. PETER'S HOSPITAL IS 30 PERCENT.

                    CUBA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL IS 35.  JONES MEMORIAL HOSPITAL IS 33.

                    LOURDES HOSPITAL - I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I PRONOUNCED IT RIGHT - 37.

                    OLEAN GENERAL HOSPITAL, 43 PERCENT.  TLC HEALTH LAKESHORE HOSPITAL,

                    53 PERCENT.  AUBURN MEDICAL HOSPITAL, 43 PERCENT.  BROOKS MEMORIAL

                    HOSPITAL, 50 PERCENT.  UPMC CHAUTAUQUA AT WCA, 53 PERCENT.  ARNOT

                    OGDEN MEDICAL CENTER, 43 PERCENT.  ST. JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL IS 67, BUT

                    YOU NEVER KNOW WHETHER THE NEXT YEAR IT MIGHT BE DOWN BELOW, AND

                    THAT'S IN ELMIRA.  UHS CHENANGO MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 51 PERCENT.

                    CHAMPLAIN VALLEY PHYSICIANS HOSPITAL, 20 PERCENT.  COLUMBIA

                    MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 47 PERCENT.  CORTLAND REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, 48

                    PERCENT.  MARGARETVILLE HOSPITAL, 19 PERCENT.  UHS DELAWARE VALLEY

                    HOSPITAL, 58 PERCENT.  O'CONNOR HOSPITAL, 15 PERCENT.  NOW THESE ARE

                    ALL HOSPITALS THAT WOULD BE OUT-OF-NETWORK.  VASSAR BROTHERS MEDICAL

                    CENTER, 31 PERCENT.  NORTHERN DUTCHESS HOSPITAL, 27 PERCENT.  ERIE

                    COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER IS AT 63, BUT THAT'S PRETTY CLOSE TO 60.  MERCY

                    HOSPITAL OF BUFFALO, 33 PERCENT.  ROSWELL PARK CENTER INSTITUTE, 22

                    PERCENT.  SISTERS OF CHARITY HOSPITAL, 40 PERCENT.  KALEIDA --

                    MISPRONOUNCED IT, PROBABLY -- HEALTH (INAUDIBLE), 28 PERCENT.

                    KENMORE MERCY HOSPITAL, 27 PERCENT.  BERTRAND CHAFFEE HOSPITAL, 17

                                         139



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PERCENT.  BERLIN HOSPITAL IS 30 PERCENT.  ELIZABETHTOWN COMMUNITY

                    HOSPITAL, 22 PERCENT.  MOSES LUDINGTON HOSPITAL, 7 PERCENT.

                    ADIRONDACK MEDICAL CENTER, 33 PERCENT.  NATHAN LITTAUER HOSPITAL, 58

                    PERCENT.  UNITED MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER IS AT 64 PERCENT, SO CLOSE TO

                    THE 60.  I'M NOT DOING THE OTHER HOSPITALS THAT ARE ABOVE.  LITTLE FALLS

                    HOSPITAL, 34 PERCENT.  SAMARITAN MEDICAL CENTER, 23 PERCENT.  RIVER

                    HOSPITAL, 21 PERCENT.  CARTHAGE AREA HOSPITAL, 40 PERCENT.  LEWIS

                    COUNTY GENERAL HOSPITAL, 41 PERCENT.  NOYES MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 40

                    PERCENT.  ONEIDA HEALTHCARE CENTER, 42 PERCENT.  COMMUNITY

                    MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 19 PERCENT.  HIGHLAND HOSPITAL OF ROCHESTER, 41

                    PERCENT.  ROCHESTER GENERAL HOSPITAL, 39 PERCENT.  STRONG MEMORIAL

                    HOSPITAL, 39 PERCENT.  UNITED HOSPITAL OF ROCHESTER, 36 PERCENT.  ST.

                    MARY'S HEALTHCARE IN AMSTERDAM, 50 PERCENT.  GLEN COVE HOSPITAL, 27

                    PERCENT.  NYU WINTHROP HOSPITAL, 25 PERCENT.  MERCY MEDICAL CENTER,

                    42 PERCENT.  THAT'S PAGE ONE.  I'VE GOT SIX PAGES.  YOU WANT ME TO GO

                    THROUGH IT.  SOUTH NASSAU COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, 34 PERCENT.  NORTH

                    SHORE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, 24 PERCENT.  PLAINVILLE HOSPITAL, 25 PERCENT.

                    ST. JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL BETHPAGE -- I'M SORRY, THEY'RE 10 PERCENT.  ST.

                    FRANCIS HOSPITAL OF ROSLYN, 11 PERCENT.  EASTERN NIAGARA HOSPITAL, 47

                    PERCENT.  NIAGARA FALLS MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, 57 PERCENT.  MOUNT

                    SAINT MARY'S HOSPITAL, 37 PERCENT.  ROME MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 65, SO

                    THAT'S PRETTY CLOSE.  AND ST. ELIZABETH MEDICAL CENTER, 64, PRETTY CLOSE.

                    FAXTON ST. LUKE'S HEALTHCARE, 47 PERCENT.  ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL IN

                    SYRACUSE, 30 PERCENT.  UPSTATE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL IN SYRACUSE, 47

                    PERCENT.  CROUSE HOSPITAL, 31 PERCENT.  GENEVA GENERAL HOSPITAL, 30

                                         140



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PERCENT.  CLIFTON HILLS [SIC] -- SPRINGS HOSPITAL AND CLINIC, 46 PERCENT.

                    F.F. THOMPSON HOSPITAL, 30 PERCENT.  ST. LUKE'S CORNELL HOSPITAL, 43

                    PERCENT.  ORANGE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, 36 PERCENT.  ST. ANTHONY'S

                    COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, 32 PERCENT.  MEDINA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 40

                    PERCENT.  OSWEGO HOSPITAL, 52 PERCENT.  AURELIA OSBORN FOX MEMORIAL

                    HOSPITAL, 28 PERCENT.  BASSETT MEDICAL CENTER, 25 PERCENT.  PUTNAM

                    HOSPITAL, 25 PERCENT.  SAMARITAN HOSPITAL IN TROY, 44 PERCENT.  HELEN

                    HAYES HOSPITAL - GREAT HOSPITAL, 19 PERCENT.  NYACK HOSPITAL, 53

                    PERCENT.  THAT'S ONLY PAGE TWO.  THEY'RE FOUR MORE TO GO.  DID YOU SEE

                    HERE A HOSPITAL THAT, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE INCLUDED IN ALL THIS?  MASSENA

                    MEMORIAL HOSPITAL IS 46 PERCENT.  GOUVERNEUR HOSPITAL IS 37.

                    CANTON-POTSDAM HOSPITAL, 32 PERCENT.  CLINTON-FINE HOSPITAL, 32

                    PERCENT.  SARATOGA HOSPITAL, 41 PERCENT.  FOUR WINDS OF SARATOGA, 39

                    PERCENT.  ELLIS HOSPITAL, 38 PERCENT.  SUNNYVIEW REHAB HOSPITAL, 17

                    PERCENT.  COBLESKILL REGIONAL HOSPITAL, 17 PERCENT -- PERCENT.  SCHUYLER

                    HOSPITAL, 11 PERCENT.  CORNELL HOSPITAL, 29 PERCENT.  ST. JAMES MERCY

                    HOSPITAL, 40 PERCENT.  IRA DAVENPORT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 58 PERCENT.

                    BRUNSWICK HOSPITAL CENTER, 43 PERCENT.  BROOKHAVEN MEMORIAL

                    HOSPITAL, 49 PERCENT.  STONY BROOK SOUTHAMPTON HOSPITAL, 30 PERCENT.

                    EASTERN LONG ISLAND HOSPITAL, WELL, IT'S 61, SO IT'S CLOSE.  JOHN T.

                    MATTHEW -- MATHER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 22 PERCENT.  ST. CHARLES

                    HOSPITAL, 43 PERCENT.  STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER, 37

                    PERCENT.  HUNTINGTON HOSPITAL, 29 PERCENT.  SOUTHSIDE HOSPITAL, 44

                    PERCENT.  GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL IN WEST -- WEST ISLIP, 40 PERCENT.

                    PECONIC BAY MEMORIAL CENTER -- MEDICAL CENTER, 22 PERCENT.  ST.

                                         141



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CATHERINE OF SIENA HOSPITAL, 28 PERCENT.  SOUTH OAKS HOSPITAL, 57

                    PERCENT.  CATSKILL REGION [SIC] MEDICAL CENTER AT HARRIS, 55 PERCENT.

                    CATSKILL REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER HERMANN, 29 PERCENT.  CAYUGA

                    MEDICAL CENTER AT ITH -- ITHACA, 36 PERCENT.  HEALTH ALLIANCE HOSPITAL

                    MARY -- MARY'S AVENUE, 61, THAT'S CLOSE.  HEALTH ALLIANCE HOSPITAL

                    BROADWAY, 41 PERCENT.  ELLENVILLE HOSPITAL, 30 PERCENT.  GLEN HALLS

                    HOSPITAL -- GLENS FALLS HOSPITAL, 37 PERCENT.  NEWARK-WAYNE

                    COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, 49 PERCENT.  NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL

                    VALLEY, 27 PERCENT.  WHITE PLAINS HOSPITAL, 21 PERCENT.  BURKE

                    REHABILITATION HOSPITAL, 14 PERCENT.  MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER IN

                    MOUNT VERNON, 63, IT'S CLOSE TO 60.  MOUNT VERNON MONTEFIORE

                    MEDICAL CENTER IN NEW ROCHELLE IS 48 PERCENT.  NORTHERN WESTCHESTER

                    HOSPITAL, 18 PERCENT.  NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN LAWRENCE, 29 PERCENT.

                    PHELPS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL,          39 PERCENT.  WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                    CENTER IS 47.  FOUR WINDS, 55.  WYOMING COUNTY COMMUNITY

                    HOSPITAL, 50 PERCENT.  SOLDIERS AND SAILERS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, 42

                    PERCENT.  CALVARY HOSPITAL, 29 PERCENT.  NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN

                    BROOKLYN METHODIST, 53 PERCENT.  MOUNT SINAI BROOKLYN, 41 PERCENT.

                    THESE ARE ALL HOSPITALS THAT WILL BE AFFECTED.  MOUNT SINAI BETH ISRAEL,

                    56 PERCENT.  HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY,      5 PERCENT.  LENOX HILL

                    HOSPITAL, 30 PERCENT.  MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER, 16

                    PERCENT.  MOUNT -- MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL, 48 PERCENT.  MOUNT SINAI

                    NEW YORK EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY,                55 PERCENT.  MOUNT SINAI

                    ST. LUKE'S AND WEST [SIC], 54 PERCENT.  NEW YORK GRACIE SQUARE

                    HOSPITAL, 58 PERCENT.  NEW YORK UNIVERSITY LANGONE TISCH HOSPITAL,

                                         142



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    41 PERCENT.  NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL, 44 PERCENT.  LONG ISLAND

                    JEWISH MEDICAL CENTER, 48 PERCENT.  AND THE LAST ONE THAT I HAVE ON

                    THIS PAPER, YOU'LL BE GLAD, RICHMOND UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER, 52

                    PERCENT.  THAT'S A LOT OF HOSPITALS THAT ARE GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THIS

                    LEGISLATION IF IT GETS PASSED TONIGHT.  AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THERE HAVE

                    BEEN HEARINGS ON THIS BILL.  I THINK HOSPITALS NEED TO EXPRESS THEIR

                    CONCERN ABOUT IT.  WE DID HAVE AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS OFFERED THAT

                    WOULD BRING IT DOWN TO 40 PERCENT INSTEAD OF 60 PERCENT.  NOW ALL

                    THESE HOSPITALS WOULDN'T BE HELPED BY THAT, BUT A GOOD NUMBER OF

                    HOSPITALS WOULD BE HELPED BY THAT.  I THINK WE'RE MAKING A -- A TERRIBLE

                    DECISION TONIGHT IF WE GO FORWARD WITH THIS LEGISLATION.  AND MAYBE WE

                    CAN JUST HAVE IT WITHDRAWN AND START THE PROCESS ALL OVER AGAIN AND

                    INVOLVE EVERYBODY THAT'S IN THE HOSPITAL COMMUNITY AND THE MEDICAL

                    COMMUNITY.  THIS ALL AFFECTS PATIENTS, WHAT WE'RE DOING TONIGHT.  IF WE

                    DON'T HAVE GOOD SERVICES IN OUR HOSPITALS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT BEING

                    REIMBURSED, IT IS GOING TO HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR PATIENTS.  SO

                    THIS IS REALLY A PATIENT-RELATED PIECE OF LEGISLATION BEFORE US.  IF

                    ANYBODY WANTS TO COME AND SEE -- SEE THIS LIST, THEY ARE WELCOME TO DO

                    IT.  I'M SURPRISED THAT THE CODES COMMITTEE OR THE EXPRESSION AT -- AT

                    THE MEETING DID NOT HAVE THIS KIND OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE

                    TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPACT WAS FOR THEIR COMMUNITY.  THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. SAYEGH.

                                 MR. SAYEGH:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  ON A -- AS

                    A FOLLOW-UP, AND HAVING BEEN SOMEONE THAT'S BEEN INVOLVED, I OFTEN

                    SAY EDUCATION, BUT HEALTHCARE ALSO, I'VE HAD FIVE BROTHERS THAT ARE

                                         143



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    MEDICAL DOCTORS, AND I'VE HAD AN EXTENSIVE INVOLVEMENT SERVING ON

                    HOSPITAL BOARDS.  AND I GOT TO TELL YOU, WHAT IS HAPPENING THIS EVENING

                    WITH THIS BILL TOOK PLACE A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO THAT DIMINISHED PRIMARY

                    MEDICAL PRACTICES.  WE HAVE WITNESSED A WHOLE OVERHAUL IN THE WAY WE

                    CONDUCT MEDI -- MEDICINE IN OUR STATE, BECAUSE INSURANCE COMPANIES

                    AND LARGE BUSINESSES HAVE TAKEN OVER AND DICTATED WHAT AND HOW

                    MEDICAL DOCTORS PROVIDE MEDICAL SERVICES.  TODAY OUR MEDICAL

                    GRADUATES NO LONGER LOOK TO OPEN PRIVATE PRACTICES.  THE ONLY WAY YOU

                    CAN SURVIVE AS A MEDICAL DOCTOR IS YOU HAVE TO JOIN A GROUP, BECAUSE

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES AND BUSINESS EXECUTIVES THAT HAVE MADE THE MOST

                    OUT OF HEALTHCARE DOLLARS ARE THE BIG WINNERS IN THIS.  AND TONIGHT, THIS

                    TYPE OF RESOLUTION THAT EMPOWERS INSURANCE COMPANIES AGAIN TO NOW

                    TARGET HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS LIKE HOSPITALS, IS REALLY LEADING US IN THE

                    SAME DIRECTION.  MANY OF US THAT CALLED OUR DOCTORS MANY YEARS AGO

                    SPOKE TO THEIR PRIVATE STAFF AND WERE ABLE TO SET APPOINTMENTS.  NOW

                    YOU'LL HEAR FROM A RECEPTIONIST IN CAROLINA OR ELSEWHERE AND OTHER PARTS

                    OF THE COUNTRY THAT TRY TO TELL YOU, WELL, YOU CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO THE

                    DOCTOR BECAUSE THERE'S NO LONGER PRIMARY CARE PRACTICE.  AND AS

                    SOMEONE -- I SPOKE EARLIER ABOUT WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER BEING A

                    TRAUMA CENTER.  AND I GOT TO TELL YOU, FOR MANY INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD

                    BE IMPACTED, IT'S A SERIOUS PROBLEM.  FROM A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, ONE

                    OF MY BROTHERS A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, A MEDICAL DOCTOR THAT HAD AN

                    ANEURYSM AND WAS BROUGHT TO THE LOCAL HOSPITAL AND BASICALLY WAS TOLD,

                    WE CAN'T SAVE HIM, AND THE ONLY WAY WAS TO SEND HIM TO WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER.  NOW, THE AMBULANCE WENT ABOUT 70 MILES PER HOUR TO

                                         144



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    TAKE HIM FROM ST. JOHN'S RIVERSIDE IN YONKERS TO WESTCHESTER MEDICAL

                    CENTER.  THEY WERE ABLE TO SAVE HIM AND WERE ABLE TO SHARE WITH HIM

                    FOR TWO YEARS - HE ENDED UP PASSING AWAY - BUT THOSE TWO YEARS WERE OF

                    GREAT VALUE FOR OUR FAMILY.  AND THIS IS A SITUATION THAT WILL IMPACT

                    MANY FAMILIES, AND THIS IS NOT JUST THE WESTCHESTER DELEGATION.  THE

                    ENTIRE LOWER HUDSON VALLEY WOULD BE IMPACTED BY POTENTIALLY

                    SHUTTING DOWN ONE OF THE MOST PRODUCTIVE AND MOST TECHNICAL AND

                    EXPERIENCED TRAUMA CENTERS IN THE ENTIRE STATE.  SO I ASK MY COLLEAGUES

                    TO KEEP IN MIND THAT FOR ESPECIALLY MANY OF US, LIKE MYSELF, THAT -- THAT

                    WERE ELECTED RECENTLY AND ARE FRESHMEN MEMBERS OF THIS ASSEMBLY, I

                    DON'T WANT TO HEAR WHAT HAPPENED TWO YEARS AGO AND LAST YEAR.  I WANT

                    TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT A BILL, LOOK AT A RESOLUTION AND BE ABLE TO

                    UNDERSTAND IT TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THE FACTS BEFORE ME.  NOT

                    WHAT WAS BEFORE LAST YEAR OR TEN YEARS AGO.  SO I ASK US TO LOOK AT THIS

                    RESOLUTION AND TO RECOGNIZE THIS IS, IN MY OPINION, THE LAST MINUTE

                    BECAUSE I PERSONALLY BECAME AWARE OF IT THREE DAYS AGO.  THAT'S ALL.

                    AND -- AND A DAY OR TWO AGO, WE THOUGHT THERE WAS NEGOTIATIONS GOING

                    ON.  NOW WHY ARE THOSE NEGOTIATIONS BEING CUT BACK?  WHY IS IT THAT

                    WE CAN'T PUT THIS ON THE TABLE AND HAVE THE PARTIES NEGOTIATE AND PUT IT

                    BACK SO THAT WE CAN BEGIN TO BECOME FAMILIAR WITH IT AND MAKE SURE

                    THAT WHATEVER OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE, SIMILAR TO THE ONE PRESENTED BY

                    MY COLLEAGUE, ASSEMBLYMAN PRETLOW, THAT SEEMS TO BE PRETTY

                    REASONABLE.  BUT LET'S PUT ASIDE -- PARTY POLITICS ASIDE, AND LET'S MAKE

                    SURE WE LOOK AT THIS AND MAKE THE BEST DECISION IN THE BEST INTERESTS, AS

                    WAS STATED EARLY -- EARLY -- EARLIER, OF PATIENTS.  BECAUSE WHEN WE TALK

                                         145



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ABOUT HOSPITALS, WE'RE PRIMARILY TALKING ABOUT PATIENTS.

                                 THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. SCHMITT.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  WOULD

                    THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  WILL YOU YIELD, MR.

                    CAHILL?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.  I

                    APPRECIATE YOU TAKING A FEW MINUTES TO ANSWER A FEW MORE QUESTIONS.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  SURE.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  COMING FROM ORANGE AND ROCKLAND

                    COUNTIES, WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER IN PARTICULAR SERVICES MANY OF

                    MY CONSTITUENTS, THOSE WHO WORK, RESIDE OR VISIT MY AREA.  IF THIS

                    LEGISLATION WERE TO PASS AND BE ENACTED, HOW DO YOU SEE IT AFFECTING

                    HEALTHCARE OVER THE NEXT 5, 10, 15 YEARS?  I KNOW THAT WHEN IT COMES TO

                    -- TO HEALTHCARE, HEALTHCARE DELIVERY, THERE -- THAT'S KIND OF THE MODEL

                    THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THE LONGER-TERM VIEW.  WHAT IS YOUR OPINION?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  ANYBODY

                    THAT PROFESSES TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO HEALTHCARE IN THE NEXT

                    15 YEARS OR TEN YEARS OR FIVE YEARS OR EVEN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS IS

                    REALLY MAKING IT UP, BECAUSE HEALTHCARE IS DYNAMIC.  IT'S CHANGING

                    CONSTANTLY IN -- IN UNPREDICTABLE WAYS.  WE HAD THE AFFORDABLE CARE

                                         146



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ACT, AND THEN WE HAD ATTEMPTS TO DESTROY THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT THAT

                    WEREN'T SUCCESSFUL.  AND THEN WE HAD ATTEMPTS THAT WAS DEATH BY A

                    THOUSAND CUTS AND IT SERIOUSLY HINDERED THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.  WE

                    HAD A LEGISLATURE THAT CONSIDERED FOR MANY YEARS A SINGLE-PAYER BILL,

                    BUT IT LOOKED LIKE IT WOULD NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY.  WE'RE NOW

                    CONDUCTING SERIOUS HEARINGS ON A SINGLE-PAYER BILL.  WE HAD HOSPITALS

                    THAT WERE BORN AND BRED IN OUR COMMUNITIES, AS YOU HEARD SOME OF OUR

                    COLLEAGUES DESCRIBE WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER HERE TODAY, AND WE'VE

                    SEEN THOSE HOSPITALS GOBBLED UP BY CONGLOMERATES.  WE'VE HAD

                    HOSPITALS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE CLOSED.  WE HAVE SEEN HEALTH

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES HAD THEIR RATES DROP BY 40 PERCENT JUST A FEW

                    YEARS AGO, AND THEN WE'VE SEEN THEM CLIMB RIGHT BACK UP AGAIN.  WE'VE

                    SEEN HEALTHCARE COSTS TAKE DRAMATIC TWISTS AND TURNS.  WE'VE SEEN

                    CHANGES IN HEALTHCARE.  SOMETHING I THINK NONE OF US ANTICIPATED THAT

                    IN OUR LIFETIMES WE WOULD SEE THE LIFE EXPECTANCY OF HUMAN BEINGS IN

                    THIS COUNTRY TO STOP RISING.  WE'VE SEEN THAT.  WE'VE SEEN AN OPIOID

                    EPIDEMIC.  WE'VE SEEN LYME DISEASE.  THERE IS NO PREDICTING WHAT THE

                    FUTURE HOLDS.  BUT, WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THIS BILL ON THE FUTURE OF

                    HEALTHCARE IN THE HUDSON VALLEY, IN THE -- IN THE WESTERN PART OF NEW

                    YORK, ON LONG ISLAND, IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK, IN THE ADIRONDACKS

                    AND ALL OVER THE STATE?  IT I A STABILIZING FORCE.  THIS IS A STABILIZING

                    FORCE.  THIS WILL PREVENT THE DISLOCATION THAT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE

                    OCCURRED WHEN A CONTRACT IS CONCLUDED.  THIS WILL ALLOW A NEUTRAL

                    THIRD-PARTY APPOINTED BY US, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, TO DETERMINE

                    WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE CHARGE TO -- TO CHARGE WHEN THE TWO PARTIES

                                         147



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CANNOT DECIDE IT THEMSELVES.  LET ME REITERATE THAT MOST OF THE TIME, OUR

                    PROVIDERS AND OUR INSURERS AGREE.  MOST OF THE TIME.  EVEN WHEN THEY

                    ARE NOT IN CONTRACT, THEY AGREE.  THIS IS FOR THOSE OUTLIER CIRCUMSTANCES

                    THAT HAVE BEEN, UP TO THIS MOMENT, UNSOLVABLE.  THIS WILL SOLVE IT.  IT

                    DOESN'T SOLVE IT BY GIVING ONE SIDE A GUN TO POINT AT THE HEAD OF THE

                    OTHER SIDE.  INSTEAD, WHAT IT GIVES THE TWO SIDES IS A THIRD NEUTRAL PLACE

                    TO GO, TO HAVE THE MERITS OF THEIR POSITION WEIGHED BY AN INDEPENDENT

                    THIRD-PARTY.

                                 SO, WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF HEALTHCARE BECAUSE OF THIS

                    BILL?  THIS VASTLY IMPROVES HEALTHCARE.  NOTHING ABOUT THIS BILL

                    DIMINISHES HEALTHCARE.  FOR ALL OF THE RHETORIC WE HEARD TODAY ABOUT

                    HOW IT WILL DESTROY HOSPITALS, IT WILL ABSOLUTELY NOT DESTROY HOSPITALS.

                    AND REST ASSURED, FOR MY COLLEAGUES WHO WOULD ASSERT THAT I WOULD

                    INTRODUCE A BILL THAT WOULD DESTROY HOSPITALS IS A LITTLE BIT PERSONALLY

                    OFFENSIVE.  THIS BILL IS INTENDED TO BRING STABILITY.  THIS BILL IS INTENDED

                    TO BRING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR UNRESOLVABLE ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED.  IT WILL

                    BE A POSITIVE.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION, MR.

                    CHAIRMAN.  YOU MENTIONED THE CHANGES OR, YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENT

                    OPINIONS ON THE AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT, OBVIOUSLY, THE

                    SINGLE-PAYER DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING IN THE STATE AND WE'RE

                    SEEING ACROSS THE NATION.  IN YOUR OPINION WILL -- I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF

                    THE SINGLE-PAYER MODEL, BUT SHOULD THAT BE ADVANCED OR SHOULD THERE BE

                    OTHER CHANGES AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, WOULD THAT MAKE THIS LEGISLATION

                    NULL AND VOID AT THAT POINT?  WILL THERE STILL BE A NEED FOR IT AT THAT POINT

                                         148



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    IF -- IF THAT'S THE ROAD THAT WE GO DOWN?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, MY COLLEAGUE, AT THIS

                    MOMENT I WOULD LOVE -- I WON'T DO IT, BUT I WOULD LOVE TO YIELD TO MY,

                    COLLEAGUE, MR. GOTTFRIED, SO HE CAN GIVE HIS CONSISTENT ANSWER TO THAT

                    QUESTION OF YES, YES, YES.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  HE -- HE LOOKS READY, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  I -- I THINK I'VE BEEN ASKED TO SAY

                    SOMETHING.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 IN -- IN -- FOR MANY YEARS NOW IN ALMOST EVERY

                    MEETING --

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. SMITH [SIC] HAS

                    THE FLOOR, SO IF HE WANTS YOU TO -- HE WOULD HAVE TO YIELD.  MR. CAHILL

                    DID NOT HAVE THE FLOOR, HE WAS ANSWERING A QUESTION.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  IT'LL BE QUICK.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  MR. SPEAKER, I WILL GLADLY YIELD TO

                    THE CHAIR --

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  OH, COOL.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. SMITH [SIC]

                    YIELDS TO MR. GOTTFRIED.

                                 MR. GOTTFRIED:  I WASN'T PLANNING ON GETTING

                    INVOLVED IN THIS DISCUSSION, BUT IN ALMOST EVERY MEETING ABOUT HEALTH

                    POLICY THAT I'M IN, THERE COMES A POINT WHERE I SAY, THIS IS THE POINT IN

                                         149



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THE MEETING WHERE I SAY IF THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT WAS LAW, WE

                    WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE TALKING ABOUT THIS.  THANK YOU.

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AND I'M SURE THAT

                    PROVIDED SOME ILLUMINATION TO THE DISCUSSION.

                                 NOW MR. SMITH [SIC].

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  MR.

                    CHAIRMAN, I GO BACK TO THE -- THE 2014 BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS WHEN I WAS

                    A YOUNG STAFFER OVER ON THE SENATE SIDE, AND WE SAW THE INITIAL REAL

                    BREAKTHROUGH WHEN IT COMES TO, YOU KNOW, THE OUT-OF-NETWORK

                    PROTECTIONS THAT WE SAW.  AND AT THAT POINT WE SAW DOCTORS, PATIENTS

                    REALLY WORKING TOGETHER AND I FEEL LIKE THERE'S KIND OF -- THERE ARE

                    SIMILARITIES HERE AND DIFFERENCES TO WHAT WE WENT THROUGH DURING THAT

                    2014 BUDGET NEGOTIATION UNTIL THE FINAL PRODUCT.  DO YOU -- DO YOU

                    THINK THAT IT IS IN LINE WITH WHAT WE SAW OUT OF THAT 2014 BUDGET

                    NEGOTIATION?  THIS IS AN OUTGROWTH OF IT OR THIS -- THIS IS REALLY A

                    MODIFICATION GOING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  NO, I THINK -- AND -- AND, MR.

                    SPEAKER, IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION BY MY COLLEAGUE, YES, IT IS

                    CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE FINDINGS WERE IN 2014.  AND -- AND LET'S LOOK

                    DOWN THE ROAD A LITTLE BIT.  TODAY THE INSURANCE COMMITTEE TOOK UP A

                    BILL BY OUR COLLEAGUE, MR. MAGNARELLI, CONCERNING AMBULANCE SERVICES.

                    WE HAVE TO RESOLVE THAT ONE AS WELL.  OUR GOAL HERE IS TO GET HEALTHCARE

                    COSTS UNDER CONTROL TO MAKE SURE THEM PREDICTABLE FOR CONSUMERS, AND

                    TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR HEALTHCARE DELIVERY SYSTEM REMAINS INTACT IN THE

                                         150



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    PROCESS.  I BELIEVE THIS IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH THOSE GOALS AS STATED

                    BACK IN '14, '16 AND '17 WHEN THE -- WHEN THE WORKING GROUP CAME OUT

                    WITH THEIR FINDINGS.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  NOW, THERE SEEMS TO BE A -- A

                    CHANGE IN THE POSITION OF THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY IN THAT -- SINCE THAT

                    TIME, MR. CHAIRMAN.  IS THAT JUST BASED ON THE EXPERIENCES THEY'VE SEEN

                    ON THE OTHER PARTS SINCE 2014, OR DO YOU FEEL THAT'S RELATED TO SOMETHING

                    ELSE OR...

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE

                    INSURANCE INDUSTRY, AND -- AND IN SPITE OF THE PROTESTS OF SOME OF OUR

                    COLLEAGUES, I DON'T SPEAK FOR THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY.  AND IF YOU ASK

                    THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY, I CAN ASSURE YOU THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT I DON'T

                    SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF.  BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE -- THAT THE

                    DETERMINATION TO MOVE FORWARD WAS MOTIVATED BY A REFLECTION NOT JUST

                    FROM THE WORKING GROUP WHICH INCLUDED A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ENTITIES,

                    INCLUDING HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING CONSUMER GROUPS, INCLUDING

                    BUSINESS GROUPS, THAT SAID THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO DO ALL WE CAN TO

                    RATIONALIZE OUR HEALTHCARE COSTS SO THAT WE DON'T COME TO THE POINT

                    WHERE WE HAVE TO RATION OUR HEALTHCARE.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  ABSOLUTELY.  NOW, MR. CHAIRMAN,

                    YOU HAD IN A PREVIOUS RESPONSE ALLUDED TO CLOSED HOSPITALS WHICH WE

                    HAVE SEEN, OBVIOUSLY, IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE STATE.  I'M SURE YOU'RE

                    AWARE IN MY DISTRICT IN PARTICULAR, WE SAW THE CLOSURE OF THE EMERGENCY

                    ROOM AT ST. LUKE'S CORNWALL HOSPITAL COMBINING WITH ST. LUKE'S

                    CAMPUS IN THE CITY OF NEWBURGH.  AND OBVIOUSLY, SOME OTHER CHANGES

                                         151



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    IN -- IN THE SERVICES THAT ARE BEING PROVIDED IN ORANGE COUNTY AND IN

                    THE IMMEDIATE AREA OF MY DISTRICT.  DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THIS LEGISLATION

                    WOULD HAVE IMPACTED THAT CLOSURE, OR WOULD IT POTENTIALLY AID IN

                    PREVENTING FUTURE CLOSURES OR HAVE ANY IMPACT IN THAT IN ANY WAY?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, IN RESPONSE TO THE

                    QUESTION I -- I -- I WOULD SAY I COULDN'T PREDICT OR EVEN REFLECT UPON

                    WHAT IT WOULD HAVE DONE IN THE ST. LUKE'S SITUATION.  ST. LUKE'S

                    CORNWALL WAS -- WAS THE CLOSURE OF THAT EMERGENCY ROOM AND THAT --

                    THAT SERVICE WAS A PRODUCT OF A LOT OF DIFFERENT FACTORS, AND -- AND SOME

                    OF THEM LONGSTANDING AND HAVING NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH THE

                    MATTER BEFORE US.  WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THIS WOULD LEND STABILITY

                    WHERE RIGHT NOW THERE'S SOME LEVEL OF UNPREDICTABILITY.  YOU KNOW,

                    ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN LOST IN THIS DISCUSSION WHERE WE TALK ABOUT

                    THE CHARGES THAT THE HOSPITALS MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT INCUR IS WHERE DO THE

                    PATIENTS GO?  PATIENTS TEND TO STILL GO WHERE THEIR NETWORK IS.  AND IN

                    THE CASE OF MY HOSPITAL, 40 OR 50 PERCENT OF THE PATIENTS STOPPED GOING

                    TO OUR COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND THEY HAVE NOT RETURNED AS OF THIS TIME.

                    THEY HAVE NOT RETURNED TO OUR COMMUNITY HOSPITAL BECAUSE THERE WAS

                    THIS BREACH BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES THAT -- THAT LEAKED OUT INTO THE

                    COMMUNITY AND CAUSED HEALTHCARE TO BE INTERRUPTED.  ANYTHING THAT CAN

                    BRING ORDER WHERE THERE IS CHAOS, IN MY VIEW, PARTICULARLY IN

                    HEALTHCARE, IS -- IS HELPFUL.  CAN WE STEM ALL OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WILL

                    EXIST NOW AND FOR THE FUTURE IN HEALTHCARE?  WE SHOULD STRIVE TO.  BUT

                    DO I THINK THIS BILL WILL DO IT?  OF COURSE NOT.  WILL IT CONTRIBUTE TO IT?

                    OF COURSE IT WILL.

                                         152



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.  I JUST

                    WANT TO -- TO READ A STATEMENT THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE GREATER NEW

                    YORK HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION JUST TO GET YOUR OPINIONS ON IT, IF YOU

                    BELIEVE IT'S ACCURATE TO WHAT THE BILL REFLECTS.  THEY STATED, "THERE IS NO

                    EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT HOSPITAL CHARGES FOR OUR EMERGENCY SERVICES

                    ARE EXCESSIVE.  THIS AMENDMENT PROVIDES NO ADDITIONAL CONSUMER

                    PROTECTIONS, AS CONSUMERS ARE ALREADY HELD HARMLESS FOR ANY ADDITIONAL

                    COSTS IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.  THIS BILL WOULD HARM RATHER THAN HELP

                    CONSUMERS BY MAKING IT EASIER FOR INSURERS TO EXCLUDE HOSPITALS FROM

                    THEIR NETWORK, LIMITING CONSUMER ACCESS TO HOSPITALS OF THEIR CHOICE."

                    SO, DO YOU FIND THAT STATEMENT TO BE INACCURATE, ACCURATE, IN PART, IN

                    WHOLE, AND MAYBE WHAT WOULD BE A BETTER DIRECTION TO INTERPRET THE

                    LEGISLATION THAN THAT?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, INSOFAR AS THE STATEMENT

                    IS CONCERNED, I WILL ADDRESS THE FACTUAL PORTIONS OF IT AND LEAVE THE

                    OPINION PORTION OF THE GREATER NEW YORK HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION TO

                    THEM.  I CAN'T SUBSTITUTE MY OPINION FOR THEIRS, AND I RESPECT THEIR

                    OPINION.  BUT AS FOR THE FACTUAL PORTION OF -- OF THEIR STATEMENT THAT

                    THERE IS LITTLE EVIDENCE THAT -- THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF CHARGES ARE -- ARE

                    NOT INAPPROPRIATE, I AGREE.  THE VAST MAJORITY OF CHARGES ARE NOT

                    INAPPROPRIATE.  MOST OF THE TIME, HOSPITALS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES

                    AGREE.  THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE TIME, HOSPITALS AND INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES AGREE.  THE VAST MAJORITY OF TIME, HOSPITALS ARE -- ARE

                    ASSERTING CHARGES THAT ARE LEGITIMATE, THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THEY

                    HAVE BEEN CHARGING BEFORE.  THAT IS THE USUAL CIRCUMSTANCE, AND THAT IS

                                         153



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    NOT WHAT THIS BILL IS ADDRESSING.  THE BILL IS ADDRESSING FOR THOSE

                    INSTANCES WHERE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.  AND IT DOESN'T HAPPEN SOMETIMES,

                    AND WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE INTERVENE TO PROVIDE

                    AN ORDERLY PROCESS FOR DEALING WITH THOSE ANOMALIES, THOSE UNUSUAL

                    SITUATIONS.  YES, BY AND LARGE, I THINK THE PEOPLE WHO RUN OUR HOSPITALS

                    - AND I DON'T CONSIDER THEM TO BE THE ADMINISTRATORS, I CONSIDER THEM TO

                    BE THE BOARDS - THE PEOPLE WHO RUN OUR HOSPITALS ARE VERY RESPONSIBLE

                    AND RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMUNITIES.  OCCASIONALLY, STRATEGIC DECISIONS

                    ARE MADE THAT DON'T REFLECT THAT RESPONSIBILITY, AND WHEN THAT OCCURS,

                    THAN THIS BILL WOULD TAKE HOLD.  OCCASIONALLY, THOSE DECISIONS ARE

                    APPROPRIATE, EVEN IF THEY SEEM TO BE AN OUTLIER.  THIS WOULD PROVIDE A

                    MEANS BY WHICH THOSE OUTLIER DECISIONS COULD BE VALIDATED AND CARRIED

                    FORTH WITH A PAYMENT BY AN INSURANCE COMPANY.  SO, ORDER OUT OF

                    CHAOS.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.  I -- I

                    KNOW PREVIOUS COLLEAGUES HAD MENTIONED VARIOUS DIFFERENT HOSPITALS,

                    HOSPITAL SYSTEMS.  DO YOU HAVE ANY -- AND THEIR -- THEIR PERCENTAGES

                    READ OFF.  BON SECOURS, ORANGE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, ST. LUKE'S

                    THAT SERVICE ORANGE AND ROCKLAND COUNTIES, DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC

                    KNOWLEDGE OR ANY SPECIFIC REQUESTS THAT HAVE COME TO YOUR OFFICE FROM

                    ANY OF THESE ENTITIES?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, NO.  I -- I AM NOT EVEN

                    AWARE OF THE SOURCE OF THE LIST THAT WAS CITED BY A COLLEAGUE HERE TODAY.

                    I'M SURE IT IS WELL-SOURCED AND I'M SURE IT CAME PROBABLY -- I'M NOT

                    SURE, BUT I BELIEVE IT PROBABLY CAME FROM PEOPLE AFFILIATED WITH THE

                                         154



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HOSPITAL INDUSTRY WHO HAVE INDICATED THEIR OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL SO

                    THAT THEY COULD BOLSTER THEIR CASE AS TO WHY THEY ARE AGAINST IT.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER, MR.

                    CHAIRMAN.  ALSO MENTIONED, SOME UNCERTAINTY IN WASHINGTON AT THE --

                    AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL AND HOW THAT COULD IMPACT OUR -- OUR HEALTH

                    SITUATION HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.  AND I KNOW THAT ALSO THE

                    ROCHESTER REGIONAL HEALTHCARE ADVOCATES HAD SAID THEY FEEL THE -- THE

                    THREATS AND UNCERTAINTY FROM WASHINGTON ON THE ONGOING HEALTHCARE

                    DEBATE, THIS WILL EXASPERATE THEIR CONCERNS.  DO -- DO YOU ALSO FEEL THAT

                    IS AN ADEQUATE OR INADEQUATE CONCERN, AND -- AND IS THERE ANY -- IS THERE

                    ANY OTHER AVENUE OTHER THAN THIS THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO ALLEVIATE IT

                    WITHOUT PLACING AN EXTRA CONCERN ON THOSE ENTITIES?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, THERE ARE MANY THINGS

                    WE COULD DO OTHER THAN THIS, AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE COULD DO IS WE

                    COULD MANDATE FEES.  WE COULD SAY, THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL BE PAYING,

                    AND, THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL PAY, INSURANCE COMPANIES.  WE COULD DO

                    THAT.  I THINK IT WOULD BE A BIG MISTAKE TO DO THAT.  WE'RE NOT IN THAT

                    BUSINESS.  BUT WE COULD DO IT, AND WE COULD DO IT IN A WAY THAT MAYBE

                    WOULD BE POLITICALLY POPULAR FOR A LITTLE BIT OF TIME BECAUSE WE WOULD

                    TELL OUR HOSPITALS HERE, HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT, IT'S A BLANK CHECK, AND

                    TELL OUR INSURANCE COMPANIES, PAY IT.  BUT THAT WOULD BE A SHORT-TERM

                    SOLUTION BECAUSE WITHIN VERY SHORT ORDER, OUR INSURANCE COMPANIES

                    WOULD BE BANKRUPT.  IF WE DID THE OPPOSITE, OUR HOSPITALS WOULD BE

                    BANKRUPT.

                                 MR. SCHMITT:  THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.  I

                                         155



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    APPRECIATE IT.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 MR. RA.

                                 MR. RA:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ON THE BILL.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  ON THE BILL, SIR.

                                 MR. RA:  THANK YOU.  SO, YOU KNOW, I -- I THANK MY

                    COLLEAGUES FOR THEIR COMMENTS ON THE -- ON THIS BILL AND, YOU KNOW,

                    PARTICULARLY, WE'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF OUR COLLEAGUES FROM

                    WESTCHESTER.  BUT I -- I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO FORGET THAT THERE ARE

                    OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE THAT ARE GOING TO BE GREATLY IMPACTED, AND I

                    HEARD -- WE HEARD FROM MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES, FOR EXAMPLE, LONG

                    ISLAND.  WE HAVE SOME HOSPITALS ON LONG ISLAND WHERE, YOU KNOW,

                    THEY'VE DROPPED OUT-OF-NETWORK ON CERTAIN PLANS AND IT'S CAUSED, YOU,

                    KNOW, LOCAL PATIENTS AND CONSUMERS A GREAT HARDSHIP TO HAVE A LOCAL

                    HOSPITAL THAT THEY COULD GO TO.  SO WE ARE -- YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN

                    ALLUDED TO THAT MANY PLANS ARE, YOU KNOW, IN THE PROCESS OF

                    NEGOTIATIONS WITH, YOU KNOW, WITH -- WITH DIFFERENT HOSPITALS, AND --

                    AND I THINK MANY ARE LOOKING AT THIS AND PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT WE'RE

                    DOING.  AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY FROM A BUSINESS STANDPOINT, WHY

                    WOULD YOU NOT WAIT TO SEE IF SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS GOING TO BE DONE

                    THAT MAY CHANGE THE PLAYING FIELD AND THE BALANCE OF THAT NEGOTIATION

                    AND WHO'S GOING TO HAVE THE LEVERAGE.  YOU KNOW, I -- I CERTAINLY

                    WOULD SEE WHY AN INSURANCE COMPANY WOULD WAIT TO SEE THIS

                    LEGISLATION ENACTED.

                                         156



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 A FEW YEARS AGO, YOU KNOW, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY

                    WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT -- ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THERE HAD BEEN ALL

                    THIS TALK ABOUT THESE SURPRISE OUT-OF-NETWORK BILLS -- CHARGES AND, YOU

                    KNOW, I -- I WENT TO SOME OF THE ROUNDTABLES THAT WERE HELD AND, YOU

                    KNOW, THERE WAS A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH PUT FORTH TO HELP PROTECT

                    THE CONSUMER AND -- AND HELP ENSURE THAT -- THAT BILLS GET PAID IN A

                    TIMELY MANNER AND THAT -- THAT WE, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY STARTED WITH

                    THAT PREMISE.  THE CONSUMER NEEDED TO BE PROTECTED.  AND THEN WE PUT

                    TOGETHER PROCESSES IN CERTAIN AREAS TO HELP ENSURE THAT CLAIMS WERE PAID

                    AND THE SYSTEM COULD MOVE FORWARD.

                                 YOU FAST FORWARD TO NOW, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS OF

                    HOW YOU WANT TO LOOK AT IT, YOU KNOW, THIS -- THIS BILL WAS PUT ON AN --

                    AN AGENDA IN ONE COMMITTEE, MOVED TO ANOTHER, STRAIGHT OUT TO THE

                    FLOOR.  WE -- WE DON'T SEE A TON OF THAT HERE OTHER THAN MAYBE, YOU

                    KNOW, THE BUDGET OR -- OR SOME BIG UGLY THAT MAYBE WE'LL SEE IN -- IN A

                    FEW WEEKS HERE.  SO, I DO FEEL IT'S BENG RUSHED.  I DO FEEL IT'S, YOU

                    KNOW, DEPRIVING US OF AN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO -- TO HEAR FROM

                    DIFFERENT HOSPITALS THAT WE REPRESENT.  JUST DURING THE COURSE OF THIS

                    DEBATE, MY UNDERSTANDING -- YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD FROM MULTIPLE

                    PEOPLE WHO SUDDENLY GOT MEMOS OR GOT SOME COMMENTS FROM THEIR

                    LOCAL HOSPITALS WHO DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THIS WAS MOVING FORWARD AT THIS

                    PACE, AND THEY WANTED TO WEIGH IN.  AND THEY'RE DOING IT IN THE MIDDLE

                    OF A DEBATE.  YOU KNOW, IT WAS ALLUDED TO EARLIER THAT WE HAD THESE

                    HEARINGS AND WE ARE HAVING HEARINGS ONGOING ABOUT AN ISSUE LIKE

                    SINGLE-PAYER, AND I PARTICIPATED IN A HEARING A FEW WEEKS AGO.  AND,

                                         157



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    YEAH, THAT'S HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE.  YOU KNOW, THAT'S LEGISLATING AND

                    HAVING HEARINGS ON -- ON IMPORTANT ISSUES AND -- AND HAVING THAT INPUT

                    REFLECTED IN WHAT A BILL ULTIMATELY LOOKS LIKE IS HOW THE LEGISLATIVE

                    PROCESS SHOULD BE DONE.  AND -- AND, YOU KNOW, I FEEL THAT THERE'S

                    MANY THINGS THAT ARE LEFT UNANSWERED.  YOU KNOW, IS THAT 60 PERCENT

                    NUMBER THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER FOR THE MEDICAID POPULATIONS?  I - I'VE

                    LOOKED THROUGH THE LIST THAT MY COLLEAGUE HAD AND, YOU KNOW, THAT

                    AMENDMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER.  THERE'S A HOSPITAL

                    RIGHT IN MY OWN BACKYARD THAT -- THAT I'VE UTILIZED ON LONG ISLAND THAT

                    -- THAT WOULD HAVE BENEFITTED FROM -- FROM MAKING THAT TYPE OF CHANGE.

                    GREATLY, I'M SURE.  YOU KNOW, IT -- IT'S ALWAYS DANGEROUS WHEN THE --

                    WHEN THE LEGISLATURE, YOU KNOW, MOVES FORWARD SOMETHING THAT IS

                    GOING TO HAVE FAR GREATER IMPACTS THAN WHAT'S ON THE PAPER THAT IT'S

                    PRINTED.  AND IT'S CERTAINLY GOING TO IMPACT THOSE NEGOTIATIONS THAT ARE

                    ONGOING, AND -- AND I WANTED TO JUST, YOU KNOW, STATE FOR THE RECORD

                    HERE TODAY THAT IT'S GOING TO IMPACT LONG ISLAND AS WELL.  I KNOW THERE'S

                    A VERY CLEAR IMPACT ON WESTCHESTER, AND I THANK MY -- MY COLLEAGUES

                    FOR THEIR, YOU KNOW, FOR THEIR COMMENTS TODAY.  BUT THERE -- THERE'S

                    GOING TO BE AN IMPACT ON -- THROUGHOUT THE STATE.  AND JUST ONE THOUGHT

                    TO LEAVE YOU WITH.  WE WOULDN'T BE LOOKING AT A NUMBER OR A THRESHOLD

                    NUMBER FOR EXEMPTIONS IF WE WEREN'T OPERATING UNDER THE PREMISE THAT

                    THE HOSPITALS ARE GOING TO BE GIVEN LESS.  THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY REASON

                    WE WOULD HAVE THAT THRESHOLD.  SO WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, REMEMBER

                    THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH NOT JUST THE AMOUNT OF MONEY, BUT ALSO

                    CASH FLOW.  HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HEARD ABOUT DIFFERENT CASH FLOW

                                         158



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ISSUES THAT INSTITUTIONS UNDERTAKE?  AND THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL, ALSO,

                    WITH THIS NEW PROCESS, TO DELAY THOSE CLAIMS BEING PAID WHICH -- WHICH

                    COULD HAVE, IN SOME CASES, CATASTROPHIC RESULTS.

                                 SO, I -- I THANK MY COLLEAGUES, YOU KNOW, ON BOTH

                    SIDES OF THIS ISSUE AND BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE FOR THEIR DEBATE TODAY.

                    BUT, AGAIN, I THINK THAT -- I THINK WE'RE MOVING FORWARD ON THIS WITH --

                    WITHOUT HAVING HAD TRULY THE, YOU KNOW, TYPE OF HEARINGS THAT WE

                    SHOULD HAVE ON AN ISSUE OF THIS MAGNITUDE.

                                 THANK YOU.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD FOR HIS SECOND.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  AND,

                    MR. SPEAKER, LET ME FIRST, IF I COULD, ASK -- ASK YOU, AM I CORRECT THAT

                    UNDER YOUR PRIOR RULING, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME NOW THAT I HAVE THE FLOOR,

                    THAT I COULD MOVE TO ADJOURN IF I WANTED TO?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  YOU COULD MOVE IT.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME,

                    CORRECT?  BEFORE NOW, ALL THE TIMES I'VE SPOKEN, I'VE ONLY BEEN YIELDING

                    SINCE I ASKED THAT LAST QUESTION, CORRECT?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  FOR YOU, PERSONALLY,

                    TO MAKE THAT MOTION, YES.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  THANK YOU.  AND I - -I WANT TO

                    SAY TO COLLEAGUES - AND I KNOW WE ARE NOW HITTING PAST 8:00 - THERE'S A

                    PART OF ME THAT IS TREMENDOUSLY SORRY, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT WHAT WE

                    SHOULD BE DOING RIGHT NOW.  MEMBERS SHOULD BE AT THE WOMEN'S

                                         159



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    CAUCUS DINNER, SHOULD BE OTHERWISE ENJOYING WHATEVER THEIR NORMAL

                    PLANS WERE FOR THIS EVENING.  BUT I -- I HAVE TO CONVEY, I'VE BEEN ASKED

                    BY LEADERSHIP NOT TO MOVE TO ADJOURN.  IF OTHERS THINK THAT'S THE WRONG

                    DECISION, FEEL A CERTAIN POINT -- A DECISION FOR EACH PERSON TO CONVEY

                    THEIR THOUGHTS.  I HAVE RESPECT FOR WHAT THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE PRIOR

                    SAID IN TERMS OF THE IDEA THIS BILL MAY BE SUBJECTED TO HEARINGS AND SO

                    FORTH.  I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, THOUGH:  MY REQUEST IS SIMPLY LET'S DO IT

                    ANOTHER DAY.  WE'VE GOT ANOTHER TWO, TWO-AND-A-HALF WEEKS OF SESSION.

                    THERE IS NO PARTICULAR REASON THIS BILL HAS TO BE VOTED ON TODAY.  I'VE

                    HAD NUMEROUS COLLEAGUES COME UP TO ME, ASKING WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON

                    THEIR HOSPITALS.  AND I UNDERSTAND THAT NOT EVERY HOSPITAL EITHER HAS ITS

                    OWN GOVERNMENT RELATIONS TEAM OR IS AS PROACTIVE.  THERE IS A --

                    STATEWIDE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION.  MY PERSONAL VIEW HAS ALWAYS BEEN I

                    CARE FAR LESS WHAT A STATEWIDE ASSOCIATION SAYS THAN WHAT MY OWN

                    HOSPITALS SAY.  SOME OF THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE PARTICULARLY ON THE FRONT

                    LINES OF THIS - MAYBE BECAUSE THEY'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF NEGOTIATIONS -

                    HAVE BEEN VERY PROACTIVE.  BUT MEMBERS DESERVE THE RIGHT TO LEARN

                    WHAT THE IMPACT IS ON THEM.  AND I WANT TO CONVEY THANKS TO MY

                    NEIGHBORING COLLEAGUE, MRS. GALEF, FOR READING THAT LIST BECAUSE EVEN I

                    LEARNED OF ANOTHER HOSPITAL IN MY DISTRICT THAT IS SUBJECT, POTENTIALLY, TO

                    THIS; FOUR WINDS HOSPITAL, WHICH IS BOTH BASED IN KATONAH, CROSS

                    RIVER, IN MY DISTRICT BUT ALSO HAS A BRANCH IN SARATOGA SPRINGS, WHICH I

                    DON'T CONSIDER TYPICALLY A HOSPITAL BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT THE TYPICAL SORT

                    OF HOSPITAL.  THEY PROVIDE, FOR THE MOST PART, INPATIENT PSYCHIATRIC

                    SERVICES, A CRUCIAL COMPONENT OF THINGS.  AND MAYBE IT'S THE CASE THAT

                                         160



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TRADITIONAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, FOR THE MOST

                    PART THIS MIGHT NOT AFFECT THEM.  I'D LOVE TO LEARN THAT.  THERE ARE

                    ENOUGH HOSPITALS IN MY DISTRICT AND NEARBY THAT HAVE CONVEYED DIRECT

                    CONCERNS.  THAT'S SUFFICIENT FOR ME.  BUT TO HAVE THAT LIST READ DID SHED

                    LIGHT AND EVEN I WOULD HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.  AND -- AND, MR. SPEAKER,

                    I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.  HAVING BEEN ESSENTIALLY REQUESTED TO MAKE

                    SOME QUESTIONS OF THE SPONSOR OF THE BILL, I WONDER WHETHER THE

                    SPONSOR WOULD YIELD FOR A QUESTION.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CAHILL, WILL YOU

                    YIELD, SIR?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CAHILL YIELDS.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN CAHILL.

                    AND THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  THE BILL REFERS TO BILLS FOR INPATIENT

                    SERVICES WHICH FOLLOW AN EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT.  IS THERE ANY

                    DEFINITION OF WHAT "FOLLOWING AN EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT" IS?  IN OTHER

                    WORDS, IS THERE ANYTHING ACTUALLY IN THE BILL THAT SAYS "IMMEDIATELY

                    FOLLOW" OR THE IN -- OR THE ADMITTANCE THAT IMMEDIATELY SUCCEEDS AN

                    EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT AS OPPOSED TO AN EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT THAT

                    OCCURRED MONTHS OR YEARS AGO?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  IS THAT THE END OF THE QUESTION, MR.

                    BUCHWALD?

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  YES.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  NO, I THINK THE PLAIN READING OF THE

                    LANGUAGE INDICATES THAT IF AN ADMISSION IS FROM AN EMERGENCY ROOM

                                         161



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    VISIT AND THERE IS AFTERCARE FROM THERE WITHIN THAT FACILITY OR ASSOCIATED

                    WITH THAT FACILITY, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT'S REFERENCED HERE.  I THINK IT IS --

                    IT IS -- HOW CAN I PUT THIS?  PROBABLY NOT A FAIR AND REASONABLE

                    INTERPRETATION TO THINK THAT IF YOU EVER WENT TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM

                    THAT THIS BILL INTENDS OR THAT ANYONE WOULD INTERPRET IT TO MEAN ANY

                    OTHER TIME THAT HOSPITAL PROVIDES YOU CARE, THAT IT WOULD BE COVERED.

                    SO, THAT WHICH IS DONE AT THE EMERGENCY ROOM AND THAT WHICH FOLLOWS

                    AS A COURSE OF CARE FROM THAT EMERGENCY ROOM.  I -- I WILL POINT OUT THAT

                    THERE COULD BE SOME CONCURRENT CONDITIONS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH IT

                    THAT MAY RAISE SOME QUESTION THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE

                    DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, PERHAPS IF THERE WAS AN INDEPENDENT

                    DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS.  THAT'S WHERE IT COULD BE HASHED OUT.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  MR. SPEAKER, IF -- IF -- IF THE

                    SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO -- TO YIELD TO QUESTIONS.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  YES.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  HE'LL -- CONTINUES TO

                    YIELD.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  HAVING SAID THAT'S THE PLAIN

                    LANGUAGE AND PLAIN MEANING OF THE BILL, COULD -- COULD THE GENTLEMAN

                    BE SO KIND AS TO POINT TO WHAT LINE OR LINES OF THE BILL ACTUALLY CONTAIN

                    THAT PLAIN MEANING THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I -- THE LAST PART OF YOUR STATEMENT

                    DROPPED, SO I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT THE --

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  WHICH -- WHICH ONE OF THE --

                    MAYBE, MR. SPEAKER, COULD WE HAVE SOME ORDER?

                                         162



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  CERTAINLY, SIR.

                                 (BANGING GAVEL)

                                 PLEASE, WE ARE STILL ON DEBATE AND IT WILL HELP US GET TO

                    THE END OF DEBATE IF YOU'RE QUIET.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  MY --

                    MY -- MY QUESTION, JUST TO REITERATE, WAS IF -- IF THERE IS A PLAIN MEANING

                    OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE BILL THAT'S NOT SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION, COULD THE

                    SPONSOR POINT TO THE LINE OR LINES OF THE BILL THAT CONTAIN THAT PLAIN

                    MEANING ABOUT WHAT FOLLOW AN EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT MEANS?  I

                    UNDERSTAND WHAT THE GENTLEMAN'S INTENT IS, BUT HE SAID IT WAS A PLAIN

                    MEANING, AND SO I'D LIKE TO ASK WHERE IN THE BILL THAT PLAIN MEANING IS

                    CONTAINED.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  SURE.  LINE 7 AND 8 ON PAGE 1 OF THE

                    BILL, THE PLAIN LANGUAGE REFERENCE IS MADE.  I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT

                    THERE ARE OTHER STANDARDS THAT COULD BE APPLIED IN THE CASE OF A DISPUTE

                    THAT WAS BEING RESOLVED, AND THOSE STANDARDS COULD INCLUDE, SAY, A

                    FEDERAL DEFINITION, AND A FEDERAL DEFINITION MIGHT BE, I THINK, UNDER

                    MEDICARE.  WHEN A PATIENT IS STABILIZED.  THAT'S WHAT CONSIDERED THE

                    AFTERCARE.  A -- A PLAIN READING OF THE STATUTE HERE AND A PLAIN READING

                    OF ANY TIME THAT THIS MIGHT COME UP WOULD BE THAT IF A PATIENT IS

                    ADMITTED THROUGH THE EMERGENCY ROOM, THAT COURSE OF CARE CONTINUES

                    UNTIL THEY ARE DISCHARGED FROM THE HOSPITAL OR COMPLETE THE SERVICES

                    AFFILIATED WITH THAT EMERGENCY ROOM ADMISSION.  THE IDEA THAT IT COULD

                    GO ON FOREVER IS -- IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK ANY REASONABLE DISPUTE

                    RESOLVER WOULD SEE THROUGH IN A HEARTBEAT.  AND PRESUMABLY, MY

                                         163



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    COLLEAGUE AND MR. SPEAKER, IF PARTIES ARE SUBMITTING TO AN INDEPENDENT

                    DISPUTE RESOLUTION, THEY MAY FIND THEMSELVES - AS HAS BEEN THE

                    EXPERIENCE OTHER PLACES WHERE THIS FORM OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION HAS BEEN

                    USED - TO GET CLOSER AND CLOSER TO ONE ANOTHER WITH EACH DISPUTE

                    REDUCES THE NEED FOR THAT INTERVENTION IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE THE PARTIES

                    HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS REASONABLE, WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE,

                    AND WHAT THEY WILL PREVAIL UPON WHEN THEY GO TO -- TO THE INDEPENDENT

                    DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS.  SO, YOU KNOW, IT -- IT MAY BE A

                    CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, BUT I THINK IT'S FAIR AND REASONABLE FROM THE

                    LANGUAGE IN THE BILL THAT A RESPONSIBLE DECISION CAN BE MADE BY AN

                    INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY, NOT AN INSURANCE COMPANY.

                                 MR. BUCHWALD:  I -- MR. SPEAKER, I RETAIN MY

                    TIME, BUT I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR -- FOR ANSWERING SOME QUESTIONS.

                    THE ONLY LINES PURPORTED TO CONTAIN THAT PLAIN MEANING WERE SECTIONS --

                    LINES 7 AND 8 OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE BILL, WHICH SAY,"... A BILL FOR

                    INPATIENT SERVICES WHICH FOLLOW AN EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT", WHICH, TO

                    ME, IS NOT A CLEAR STATEMENT OF WHAT FOLLOWS.  IF -- IF YOU WANT A CLEAR

                    STATEMENT YOU CAN SAY, "IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW" OR "DIRECTLY FOLLOW

                    WITHOUT AN INTERVENING DISCHARGE" OR ANYTHING TO THAT REGARD.  THE FACT

                    THAT THOSE -- THAT LANGUAGE IS NOT THERE, PERHAPS NOT THERE BECAUSE THE

                    BILL MOVED THROUGH THE TWO COMMITTEES AND ONTO THE FLOOR WITH A

                    DEBATE IMMEDIATELY TODAY, THE PROCESS THAT COMMITTEES WOULD IDEALLY

                    GO THROUGH.  TO ME, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT THAT THE SPONSOR'S TRYING TO

                    PUT FORWARD WITH REGARDS TO THAT PHRASE.  BUT I WOULD NOT SAY IT'S THE

                    PLAIN MEANING OF --OF THE LANGUAGE.  AND, YOU KNOW, I -- YOU KNOW, I

                                         164



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THINK UNTENABLE FOR HOSPITALS TO HAVE ANY UNCERTAINTY WITH REGARDS TO

                    THAT PROVISION.

                                 AND SO, MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD -- I WOULD SAY ONCE

                    AGAIN, I -- I WOULD -- WOULD RECALL A CONVERSATION I HAD HERE IN MY FIRST

                    YEAR IN THE STATE ASSEMBLY WITH A COLLEAGUE WHO HAD LEGISLATION THAT

                    HAD A VERY SIGNIFICANT DIRECT HARM IN THAT CASE TO A PORTION OF MY

                    DISTRICT.  NOT BECAUSE THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION, BUT BECAUSE

                    THAT WAS THE EFFECT OF THE LEGISLATION.  THAT COLLEAGUE TOTALLY UNDERSTOOD

                    THAT IF IT WAS THEIR DISTRICT THAT WAS BEING ADVERSELY IMPACTED, IT WOULD

                    BE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO STAND UP FOR THEIR DISTRICT.  AND SO I WOULD

                    ASK COLLEAGUES, AS INCONVENIENT AS A DEBATE AT 8:10 IN THE EVENING ON A

                    WEDNESDAY IS, TO UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE OF US WHO WERE SENT HERE

                    REPRESENTING PARTICULAR DISTRICTS, THAT WE FEEL ARE CONSIDERED GENUINE

                    BASIS ARE GOING TO BE PARTICULARLY HARMED HAVE A DUTY TO SPEAK UP.

                    AND I KNOW THAT IS NOT INHERENTLY AS COLLEGIAL AS IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE

                    ABLE TO BE.  BUT WERE THE SHOE ON THE OTHER FOOT, I WOULD NOT EXPECT

                    OTHER COLLEAGUES TO NOT DEFEND THE NEEDS OF THEIR DISTRICTS.

                                 AND SO I -- I STAND BY MY ORIGINAL PLEDGE, MR.

                    SPEAKER.  I AM COMPELLED TO MAKE SURE THAT AS MANY COLLEAGUES AS

                    POSSIBLE UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF -- OF THIS -- THIS BILL FOR THEIR

                    DISTRICTS, AND ON THE PRINCIPLE THAT WE OPERATE, PARTICULARLY ON OUR SIDE

                    OF THE AISLE, OF LOOKING OUT FOR ISSUES THAT AFFECT IN THIS CASE NOT JUST

                    ONE MEMBER'S DISTRICT, BUT A WHOLE HOST OF MEMBERS' DISTRICTS TO TRY TO

                    TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THEIR CONCERNS, NOT BECAUSE IT ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE

                    DONE TONIGHT, BUT BECAUSE ONLY WITH TIME WILL THERE BE A POSSIBILITY OF

                                         165



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    TRYING TO ADDRESS THIS.  AND I -- AND I WOULD SAY, IT HAS BEEN CERTAINLY

                    MY APPROACH AND A NUMBER OF COLLEAGUES' APPROACHES TO SIMPLY ASK FOR

                    SOME EXPANSION OF THE EXCLUSION, AND I'VE NOT HEARD ANY PARTICULAR

                    WILLINGNESS TO ENTERTAIN THAT TONIGHT OR BEFORE TONIGHT.  THERE'S BEEN

                    OPPORTUNITY; I'M NOT JUST REFERRING TO THE FORMAL AMENDMENT.  THERE --

                    THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT A LOT OF THE DEBATE TONIGHT COULD HAVE

                    BEEN AVOIDED IF THOSE TO WHOM THE WESTCHESTER DELEGATION AND OTHERS

                    CONVEYED CONCERNS WERE IN SOME FORM OR ANOTHER, THOSE CONCERNS WERE

                    HEARD AND ACCOMMODATED IN THE TEXT OF THE BILL.  BUT THE TEXT OF THE BILL

                    HAS NOT BEEN AMENDED IN THE LAST FEW DAYS.  THE LAST TIME IT WAS

                    AMENDED WAS MAY 17TH IN THIS HOUSE.  AND I -- I VERY MUCH HOPE THAT

                    THIS EFFORT IS NOT IN VAIN, BUT THE EFFORT, NONETHELESS, MUST BE MADE.

                    AND I WANT TO THANK THOSE COLLEAGUES WHO'VE EITHER PARTICIPATED IN THE

                    DEBATE OR WHO HAVE CON -- CONVEYED THAT THEY BEGRUDGINGLY UNDERSTAND

                    THAT THIS BILL DID NOT NEED TO BE UP FOR CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING.  THAT

                    THERE OTHER WAYS -- IT COULD STILL END UP BEING POSTPONED TO ANOTHER

                    DAY.  BUT FOR NOW, MR. SPEAKER, I JUST VERY MUCH WOULD INSIST THAT IF

                    ANYONE HAD -- HAS EVIDENCE THIS WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER, PLEASE ASK ME TO YIELD TO THEM NOW AND I WILL YIELD

                    AND YOU CAN MAKE THE POINT ABOUT WHY WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER,

                    WHICH IS AT THE BASELINE OF THE HEALTHCARE PROVISION IN WESTCHESTER

                    COUNTY AND LOWER HUDSON VALLEY, OF WHY WE SHOULD NOT BE NEARLY AS

                    CONCERNED AS WE ARE.  BUT I ASSUME WITHOUT POINTS BEING MADE TO THAT

                    EFFECT, THAT INDEED, WE ARE CORRECT ON THAT POINT.

                                 THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER.

                                         166



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 MS. PAULIN.

                                 MS. PAULIN:  SO, I -- I WANT TO JUST CLARIFY A COUPLE

                    OF THINGS THAT I HEARD ON THE FLOOR.  THIS DISPUTE RESOLUTION IS NOT FOR

                    PATIENTS.  IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PATIENTS.  THE -- THE CONCERN THAT THE

                    WESTCHESTER DELEGATION HAS IS ACTUALLY FOR THE PATIENTS.  AND IF WE GAVE

                    A FALSE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS FOR THE HOSPITAL, IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE

                    CONCERNED THAT THE HOSPITAL HAD THE SERVICES FOR THE PATIENTS.  SO, THE

                    REASON -- OR THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION ONLY COMES INTO PLAY FOR THE CONTRACT

                    NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND THE HOSPITAL.  AND, IN

                    FACT, THAT'S WHERE WE ARE WITH MANY OF THE HOSPITALS THAT ARE BEING

                    TARGETED BY THIS BILL.  AND I WANT TO READ THE OPPOSITION MEMOS THAT I

                    HAVE SO THAT MY COLLEAGUES CAN UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHY THESE -- THIS

                    PARTICULAR BILL WOULD BE A PROBLEM FOR THE PATIENTS.  THIS IS FROM THE

                    GREATER NEW YORK HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION.  "ASSEMBLY BILL 264/SENATE

                    BILL 31 -- 3171-A WOULD AMEND THE STATE FINANCIAL SERVICES LAW TO

                    EXTEND THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS IN PLACE FOR EXCESSIVE PHYSICIAN

                    EMERGENCY CHARGES TO HOSPITAL EMERGENCY CHARGES."  AGAIN, NOT FOR THE

                    PATIENT, FOR THE NEGOTIATION BETWEEN THE EMERGENCE -- BETWEEN THE

                    HOSPITAL AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY.  "GNYHA OPPOSES THIS

                    AMENDMENT BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT HOSPITAL CHARGES FOR

                    EMERGENCY SERVICES ARE EXCESSIVE, AND THE AMENDMENT PROVIDES NO

                    ADDITIONAL CONSUMER PROTECTIONS.  CONSUMERS ARE ALREADY HELD

                    HARMLESS FROM ANY ADDITIONAL COST IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.  IN FACT, THE

                    BILL WOULD HARM CONSUMERS BY MAKING IT EASIER FOR INSURERS TO EXCLUDE

                                         167



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HOSPITALS FROM THEIR NETWORK, LIMITING CONSUMER ACCESS TO THE HOSPITAL

                    OF THEIR CHOICE."  AND I'M GOING TO PAUSE HERE FOR A MINUTE BECAUSE

                    THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW WITH THE NEGOTIATION BETWEEN THE

                    MEDICAL CENTER AND EMPIRE.  WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THAT EMPIRE DECI --

                    THE MEDICAL CENTER IN THE NEGOTIATIONS SAID, WE WILL EXTEND THE

                    NETWORK PROVISIONS FOR TWO WEEKS WHILE WE CONTINUE THE NEGOTIATION.

                    INSTEAD, EMPIRE REJECTED THAT AND SAID, NO, NO, NO.  WE'D RATHER - IN

                    THEIR MINDS, I CAN IMAGINE - GET A HEADLINE ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE'RE

                    GOING TO GO OUT-OF-NETWORK BECAUSE IT SCARES PEOPLE, KNOWING THAT THIS

                    BILL MIGHT BE IN PLACE.  I'LL CONTINUE.  "WE STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THERE IS

                    NO DEMON -- DEMONSTRABLE NEED TO EXPAND THE LAW WHICH WOULD

                    INCREASE GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN HOSPITAL AND INSURER PAYMENT

                    PROCESSES AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR INSURERS TO LIMIT CONSUMER ACCESS TO

                    THEIR PROVIDERS.  NEW YORK STATE FINANCIAL SERVICES LAW ALREADY

                    PROVIDES A PROCESS FOR INSURERS, CONSUMERS AND PROVIDERS TO RESOLVE

                    DISPUTES OVER EXCESSIVE PHYSICIAN EMERGENCY CHARGES.  THIS LAW WAS

                    PART OF A COMPREHENSIVE BILL THAT SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCED CONSUMER

                    PROTECTIONS IN OUT-OF-NETWORK SITUATIONS, INCLUDING BY REQUIRING THAT

                    CONSUMERS BE HELD HARMLESS FROM ADDITIONAL COSTS IN OUT-OF-NETWORK

                    EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.  THIS BILL WAS ENACTED AFTER YEARS OF DISCUSSIONS

                    AMONG THE LEGISLATURE, THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES AND

                    STAKEHOLDERS ABOUT PROBLEMS SOME PATIENTS EXPERIENCED WHILE

                    RECEIVING OUT-OF-NETWORK CARE IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.  IT WAS

                    PROMPTED PARTLY BY AN UNWELCOME SURPRISE, A MARCH 2012 DFS REPORT

                    THAT DETAILED THE SIGNIFICANT BURDEN IMPOSED ON CONSUMERS BY

                                         168



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    EXCESSIVE EMERGENCY SERVICE CHARGES.  THE PROBLEMS WHICH WERE

                    IDENTIFIED IN THE REPORT AND IN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT PRECEDED THE LAW'S

                    ENACTMENT ALL PERTAINED TO PHYSICIAN CHARGES, NOT HOSPITAL CHARGES.

                    THE DFS REPORT GAVE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES FROM MORE THAN 2,000

                    COMPLAINTS THAT DFS RECEIVED ANNUALLY FROM CONSUMERS ABOUT PAYMENT

                    ISSUES, AND NOT A SINGLE EXAMPLE - NOT A SINGLE EXAMPLE - INVOLVED

                    HOSPITAL CHARGES.  DURING THE NEGOTIATIONS LEADING TO ENACTMENT OF THE

                    INDEPENDENT DISPUTE PROCESS, THERE WAS NEVER ANY DISCUSSION OF

                    APPLYING IT TO HOSPITAL CHARGES."  PERHAPS THAT THE WORK GROUP THAT

                    WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.  "IF THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM IN THIS AREA,

                    SURELY THE DFS REPORT WOULD HAVE IDENTIFIED IT OR WOULD HAVE -- HAVE

                    RAISED DURING THE YEARS OF NEGOTIATIONS LEADING UP TO THE LAW'S

                    ENACTMENT."

                                 OPPOSITION MEMO TWO, 1199.  "ON BEHALF OF THE 3,000

                    -- 300,000 NEW YORK STATE MEMBERS OF 1199 SEIU, WE WRITE TO

                    OPPOSE ASSEMBLY BILL 264/SENATE BILL 3171 WHICH WOULD AMEND THE

                    STATE FINANCIAL SERVICES LAW TO EXTEND THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS

                    WHICH IS IN PLACE FOR EXCESSIVE OUT-OF-NETWORK PHYSICIAN EMERGENCY

                    CHARGES TO ALL HOSPITAL EMERGENCY CHARGES.  UNLIKE THE ORIGINAL

                    LEGISLATION CREATING THE INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS, THIS

                    BILL DOES NOT - DOES NOT - ADDRESS CONSUMER COMPLAINTS.  ACCORDING TO

                    THE 2012 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES REPORT, AN UNWELCOME

                    SURPRISE, THOSE WERE DRIVEN BY SURPRISE PHYSICIAN, NOT HOSPITAL BILLS.

                    RATHER, IT ONLY SERVES TO PUT A THUMB ON THE SCALE IN FAVOR OF

                    MULTI-BILLION-DOLLAR INSURANCE COMPANIES BY LIMITING HOSPITALS' ABILITY

                                         169



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    TO NEGOTIATE.  THIS AMENDMENT PROVIDES NO ADDITIONAL CONSUMER

                    PROTECTIONS.  CONSUMERS ARE ALREADY HELD HARMLESS FOR ANY ADDITIONAL

                    COSTS IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS.  IT HARMS CONSUMERS BY MAKING IT EASIER

                    FOR INSURERS TO EXCLUDE HOSPITALS FROM THEIR NETWORKS, LIMITING

                    CONSUMER ACCESS TO HOSPITALS OF THEIR CHOICE.  IT ALSO HARMS SAFETY NET

                    HOSPITALS WHO ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING TO COVER COSTS BY REDUCING THEIR

                    ABILITY TO INCENTIVIZE INSURERS TO INCLUDE THEM IN THEIR NETWORKS.  FOR

                    THESE REASONS, WE REJECT THIS LEGISLATION."  AND I WOULD SAY IF WE REALLY

                    WANTED TO PROTECT SAFETY NET HOSPITALS, WE WOULD INCLUDE ALL SAFETY NET

                    HOSPITALS AND NOT ARBITRARILY SET IT AT 60 PERCENT, WHICH INCLUDES OUR

                    HOSPITAL WHICH IS BEING TARGETED IN THIS BECAUSE WE ARE IN NEGOTIATIONS.

                    IF YOU WANT TO INCLUDE ALL SAFETY NET, INCLUDE ALL SAFETY NET AND INCLUDE

                    US, BECAUSE WE ARE A SAFETY NET HOSPITAL.  WE SHOULD NOT BE ABSORBED

                    BY THIS BILL.

                                 AND I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO MY COLLEAGUES THAT WE ARE

                    HAVING THIS DEBATE RIGHT NOW.  WE HAD ASKED TO POSTPONE THE DEBATE,

                    KNOWING THAT THERE WAS A DINNER TONIGHT.  WE ASKED LEADERSHIP TO

                    POSTPONE THIS DEBATE.  WE WERE TOLD THAT, NO, WE WERE NOT GOING TO

                    POSTPONE THIS DEBATE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IT NOW.  SO WE ARE FORCED

                    INTO THIS POSITION.  AND I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO

                    BE AT A DIFFERENT PLACE RIGHT NOW, WHICH I WANT TO BE AT, TOO.

                                 SO, AGAIN, I AM SORRY.  BUT THIS BILL IS SO IMPORTANT TO

                    US, CRITICALLY, IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY, TO THE PATIENTS AND TO OUR

                    CONSTITUENTS AND TO US AS A DELEGATION.  THANK YOU.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                         170



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THANK YOU.

                                 MR. ABINANTI.

                                 MR. ABINANTI:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  I WANT

                    TO FOLLOW UP ON THE APOLOGY FROM -- FROM MY COLLEGE -- COLLEAGUE.  I

                    RECOGNIZE THAT THE HOUR IS LATE.  I EVEN SUGGESTED WHY DON'T WE HAVE A

                    CONFERENCE ON THIS BILL BEFORE WE -- WE TAKE THE BILL UP AND BEFORE WE

                    HAVE A -- A FULL DISCUSSION ON IT, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF DETAILS TO THIS

                    BILL.  THIS BILL COULD BE IMPROVED.  IT COULD BE -- IT COULD BE MADE FAIR

                    FOR ALL OF THE -- THE HOSPITALS IN THE STATE.  BUT INSTEAD, IT WAS

                    FAST-TRACKED.  I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY.  THIS BILL COULD BE -- THIS IS NOT

                    THE END OF SESSION.  WE COULD DO THIS BILL ANY TIME OVER THE NEXT TWO

                    WEEKS WITH SOME IMPROVEMENTS IF WE HAD A CHANCE TO BE CONSULTED,

                    AND TO HAVE ALL OF OUR COLLEAGUES CONSULTED TO SAY, HOW DOES THIS

                    IMPACT YOU AND WHAT CAN WE DO TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUE?

                                 YOU KNOW, I -- I THOUGHT IT STRANGE THAT -- THAT THERE

                    WAS SOME REFERENCE TO CONSUMER PROTECTION.  THIS BILL HAS NOTHING TO

                    DO WITH CONSUMERS.  THIS BILL PROTECTS INSURANCE COMPANIES.  IT GIVES

                    RIGHTS TO INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT THE CONSUMERS DON'T EVEN HAVE.

                    JUST LOOK AT THE FACE OF THE BILL.  IT SAYS INSURANCE COMPANIES CAN

                    CHALLENGE BILLS.  IT DOESN'T SAY CONSUMERS CAN CHALLENGE BILLS, IT SAYS

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES.  IT ALSO TALKS ONLY ABOUT POST-EMERGENCY SERVICES

                    IN THE HOSPITAL.  SO, IF SOMEBODY IS ADMITTED BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BE

                    ADMITTED AFTER AN EMERGENCY, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

                                 NOW, IT'S -- YOU KNOW, I FIND IT -- I -- I AGREE WITH THE

                    -- THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION THAT WE NEED TO GET HEALTHCARE COSTS

                                         171



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    UNDER CONTROL.  BUT I SUGGEST THAT YOU DON'T PUT THE FOX IN CHARGE OF THE

                    HENHOUSE.  AND YOU DON'T PUT AN INSURANCE COMPANY IN CHARGE OF

                    HOSPITAL CHARGES.  YOU DON'T PUT INSURANCE COMPANIES IN A POSITION

                    WHERE THEY CAN THWART THE SERVICES OF A HOSPITAL.  THE INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES DON'T EVEN HAVE TO PAY ANY PART OF THE INITIAL BILL.  THE BILL

                    -- THE LEGISLATION BEFORE US SAYS THAT AN INSURANCE COMPANY CAN PAY

                    WHAT THEY THINK IS REASONABLE.  SO IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY IN A

                    HIGH-ACUITY HOSPITAL, ANYONE IN THE STATE WHO IS THERE BECAUSE THEY

                    WERE IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION AND THEY'RE NOW BEING ADMITTED, THE

                    INSUR -- AND THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR TEN DAYS, THE INSURANCE COMPANY

                    COULD LOOK DOWN THE ROAD AT A SMALL HOSPITAL AND SAY THAT'S WHAT THEY

                    WOULD HAVE CHARGED, THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO PAY YOU, EVEN THOUGH IT'S

                    A THIRD OF WHAT YOU NORMALLY GET.  SO IT'S -- IT'S -- PUTS EVERYTHING IN THE

                    HANDS OF THE INSURANCE COMPANY.  AND THEN IT SUGGESTS THAT WELL, YOU

                    CAN -- YOU'LL HAVE AN INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY.  WELL, WHO IS THE

                    INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY?  IT'S THE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT.  IT'S THE

                    FINANCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT.  THEIR OBLIGATION IS TO MAKE SURE

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE SOLID.  WHY NOT PUT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT IN

                    CHARGE OF THE -- OF THE -- OF THE DISPUTE?  BECAUSE THE HEALTH

                    DEPARTMENT IS IN CHARGE OF MAKING SURE THAT HOSPITALS ARE SAFE.  WE'RE

                    PUTTING IN THE HANDS OF THE INSURANCE REGULATORS THE DETERMINATION AS TO

                    WHAT SHOULD BE THE CHARGES IN THE HEALTH FIELD.  WE HAVE 28 HOSPITALS

                    IN THIS STATE THAT ARE IN DANGER OF GOING DOWN THE DRAIN.  THE HEALTH

                    DEPARTMENT IS MONITORING THEM.  NOT THE FINANCIAL SERVICES

                    DEPARTMENT, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT.  SO WHERE IS THE CONNECTION

                                         172



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BETWEEN THE TWO?  WHERE IS THERE SOMEBODY WHO IS WORRIED ABOUT

                    HOSPITAL HEALTH AS OPPOSED TO INSURANCE COMPANY HEALTH?  THIS BILL

                    DOES NOTHING TO DEAL WITH THE SKYROCKETING INSURANCE PREMIUMS.  THERE

                    ARE 15 -- I'M SORRY, 28 FINANCIALLY-STRUGGLING HOSPITALS IN THIS STATE

                    WITH LESS THAN 15 DAYS CASH ON HAND, AND THEY'RE ON THE STATE WATCH

                    LIST.  WHAT HAPPENS IF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES HOLD UP THE PAYMENTS

                    FOR MORE THAN 15 DAYS, WHICH IS CERTAINLY GUARANTEED TO HAPPEN?

                    THOSE HOSPITALS GO DOWN THE DRAIN.  SO WE'RE PUTTING IN THE HANDS OF

                    THE INSURANCE COMPANIES THE ABILITY TO SINK OUR HOSPITALS AND FORCE THE

                    HOSPITALS TO PAY THEM ANYTHING THEY DEMAND -- OR ACCEPT WHATEVER THE

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL OFFER -- OTHERWISE, THEY COULD GO DOWN THE

                    DRAIN.  SO WE'RE SAYING THE -- THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE GOING TO

                    CONTROL THE HEALTH OF OUR HOSPITALS IN THIS STATE.

                                 YOU KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING.  WHILE THE HOSPITALS ARE IN

                    THIS SITUATION - AND THERE'S BEEN SOME REFERENCE TO THE WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER - THEY'RE A $220 BILLION OPERATION THAT IS $4 MILLION

                    CASH FLOW.  THEY'RE AT THAT MARGIN.  THEY'RE RUNNING THAT CLOSE.  SO --

                    AND THEY'RE NOT ONE OF THE 28.  THEY'RE NOT ONE OF THE 28.  ON THE OTHER

                    HAND, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT HOW THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE DOING.  A

                    2019 RAND CORPORATION STUDY FOUND THAT THE RATES PRIVATE INSURERS IN

                    NEW YORK STATE PAYER HOSPITALS ARE THE THIRD-LOWEST IN THE COUNTRY.  SO

                    THE INSURANCE COMPANIES IN THIS STATE ARE ALREADY GIPPING OUR HOSPITALS.

                    A 2019 STUDY BY THE RAND CORPORATION FOUND THAT THE RATES PRIVATE

                    INSURERS IN THE STATE-PAY HOSPITALS ARE THE THIRD-LOWEST IN THE COUNTRY.

                    AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THEM THE OPTION OF THE DETERMINING WHAT OUR

                                         173



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HOSPITALS SHOULD BE PAID?

                                 IT -- IT'S INTERESTING IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE

                    EXPERIENCE.  THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION COULD POINT TO NO STUDIES.

                    COULD POINT TO NO HISTORY ANYWHERE WHERE THIS HAS BEEN APPLIED TO

                    HOSPITALS.  THERE WAS SOME REFERENCE THAT OTHER STATES ARE LOOKING AT IT,

                    THEY MAY WANT TO FOLLOW OUR LEAD.  BUT THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT IT WILL

                    NOT HURT OUR HOSPITALS AND HEALTHCARE.  IN FACT, IT'S INTERESTING THAT

                    ANTHEM, WHICH IS THE PARENT OF EMPIRE, WHICH HAS BEEN THE -- THE

                    MAJOR SUPPORTER OF THIS BILL, HAS NATIONWIDE ANNOUNCED THAT IT'S GOING

                    TO TRIM BACK ITS NETWORKS.  IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO - IT'S

                    NOT HARD FOR US LAYPEOPLE TO FIGURE IT OUT - THEY'RE GOING TO FIND ALL THE

                    LESS EXPENSIVE HOSPITALS IN A REGION, FORM AGREEMENTS WITH THEM, FORCE

                    ALL OF THEIR CONSUMERS TO GO TO THOSE LESS EXPENSIVE HOSPITALS, AND THEN

                    WHEN A CONSUMER HAS TO GO TO A MORE EXPENSIVE HOSPITAL BECAUSE THEY

                    HAVE AN EMERGENCY, THEY'RE GOING TO RELY ON THIS BILL TO SAY, YES, YOU'RE

                    NOT GETTING THE BENEFIT OF THE NETWORKS.  WE'RE NOT SENDING OUR PEOPLE

                    TO YOU FOR THE ELECTIVE SURGERIES.  BUT WE'RE GOING TO DEMAND THAT YOU

                    PAY US THE NETWORK RATE FOR THOSE HOSPITALIZATIONS AFTER AN EMERGENCY

                    WHERE PEOPLE WERE BROUGHT TO YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE THE PLACE THEY HAVE

                    TO GO TO BE SAVED.  SO THE -- THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE TRYING TO

                    INCREASE THEIR PROFITS ON THE BACKS OF THE HOSPITALS.

                                 AND I SPOKE BEFORE ABOUT FAIRNESS.  IF WE'RE WORRIED

                    ABOUT THE HOSPITALS THAT DO A LOT OF -- OF MEDICAID, WHY DON'T WE TAKE A

                    LOOK AT THE NUMBERS?  THERE'S A LITTLE HOSPITAL HERE IN TROY THAT DOES

                    435 MEDICAID ADMISSIONS A YEAR, BUT THAT'S 60 PERCENT OF THEIR

                                         174



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    ADMISSIONS AND DISCHARGES.  THEY'RE PROTECTED FROM THIS BILL.  BUT

                    ALBANY MEDICAL CENTER, THAT DOES 11,000 DISCHARGES OF MEDICAID, IS

                    COVERED BY THIS BILL.  LET'S TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT ANOTHER ONE.  WE HAVE

                    -- HERE WE GO.  LONG ISLAND JEWISH MEDICAL CENTER, FROM MY

                    COLLEAGUES FROM LONG ISLAND.  LONG ISLAND JEWISH DOES 28,000

                    MEDICAID A YEAR.  28,000 -- OH, THAT'S IN QUEENS?  I'M SORRY.  OH, I

                    THOUGHT IT WAS NASSAU.  THESE TWO CAN ARGUE WHERE IT IS.  YOU CAN BOTH

                    CLAIM IT, BUT YOU SHOULD BOTH BE AWARE, THEY DO 28,000 MEDICAID

                    DISCHARGES A YEAR, BUT THAT'S ONLY 48 PERCENT OF THEIR DISCHARGES, AND SO

                    THEY'RE COVERED BY THE BILL.  THEY'RE NOT EXEMPTED.  SO WHERE IS THE

                    FAIRNESS?  WHERE'S THE -- WHERE'S THE ARGUMENT THAT THOSE WHO DO A LOT

                    OF MEDICAID DESERVE TO BE EXEMPTED FROM THE BILL?  AND HOW ABOUT

                    GOING TO NYU LANGONE?  18,500 MEDICAID DISCHARGES.  NEW YORK

                    PRESBYTERIAN, 36,000 MEDICAID DISCHARGES.  AND YET, NEITHER ONE OF

                    THEM QUALIFIES WITH THE 60 PERCENT.  SO WHERE'S THE INCENTIVE FOR THEM

                    TO TAKE -- TO CONTINUE TO TAKE MEDICAID?  WHY DON'T THEY JUST CUT BACK

                    ON THEIR SERVICES AND SAY, WE'RE NOT TAKING MEDICAID ANYMORE.  THIS

                    BILL IS GOING TO PENALIZE THEM ANYWAY.  WE SHOULD BE INCENTIVIZING

                    THEM, NOT DISINCENTIVIZING THEM.  AND I'VE ALREADY REFERRED TO THE LACK

                    OF -- OF STUDIES, THE LACK OF SUCCESS RATE ANYWHERE ELSE.  BUT THE REAL

                    QUESTION IS WHY DID WE COME TO THE 60 PERCENT OUT OF NOWHERE?  THERE

                    ARE SEVERAL PLACES IN NEW YORK STATE LAW THAT ALREADY DETERMINE WHAT

                    A SAFETY NET HOSPITAL IS.  THIS IS A BRAND-NEW STANDARD DEVISED BY THE

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.  AND I DON'T

                    UNDERSTAND WHY THIS BODY IS EVEN CONSIDERING A BILL THAT'S GOING TO

                                         175



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    BENEFIT INSURANCE COMPANIES TO THE DETRIMENT OF HEALTHCARE IN OUR

                    STATE.

                                 THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BILL THAT SAYS ANY SAVINGS HAVE

                    TO GO TO CONSUMERS.

                                 (PAUSE)

                                 I WILL REPEAT THAT THERE'S OPPOSITION, AND I WANT TO

                    MAKE A CORRECTION IN THE RECORD.  I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THE LOCAL CSEA IN

                    WESTCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER OPPOSES THIS BILL.  I STILL BELIEVE THAT THEY

                    OPPOSE THIS BILL.  BUT I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY THE STATEWIDE CSEA THAT THE

                    LOCAL DOESN'T OPPOSE THE BILL BECAUSE THE STATEWIDE IS SUPPORTING THE

                    BILL.  SO I CAN'T -- I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE STATEWIDE CSEA

                    THAT'S LISTENING TO THE DEBATE THINKS I SHOULD CORRECT THE RECORD, SO I

                    WILL TELL YOU WHAT I UNDERSTAND TO BE THE CASE.  BUT I DON'T THINK THAT

                    MATTERS.  I THINK WHAT MATTERS IS THE -- IS THE MERITS OF THE BILL.  AND I

                    HOPE THAT WE'VE EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT PRICE CONTROL BY INSURANCE

                    COMPANIES OVER HOSPITALS IS NOT THE WAY THAT WE SHOULD BE RUNNING OUR

                    HEALTHCARE SYSTEM IN THIS STATE.

                                 I KNOW I HAVEN'T USED MY FULL 15 MINUTES, BUT I'M NOT

                    GOING TO TAKE UP 15 MINUTES.  I THINK WE WANT TO GET OUT OF HERE.  I

                    THINK WE, FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY, HAVE TRIED TO POINT OUT TO YOU THAT

                    THIS IS A BAD BILL FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK.  WE'RE JUST FEELING THE

                    BRUNT OF IT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE EMPIRE WALKED OUT OF NEGOTIATIONS OVER

                    THE WEEKEND.  AS SOON AS IT BECAME CLEAR THAT THIS BILL WAS GOING TO

                    MOVE IN THE ASSEMBLY, THEY CUT OFF NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE WESTCHESTER

                    MEDICAL CENTER.  AND WE'RE NOW HEARING FROM NYU THAT THEY'RE

                                         176



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    HAVING SIMILAR ROUGH -- A SIMILAR ROUGH ROAD AS THIS BILL IS MOVING

                    FORWARD.  THIS BILL IS ABOUT GIVING THE INSURANCE COMPANIES MORE

                    LEVERAGE OVER HOSPITALS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE STATE.

                                 SO I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR LISTENING.  I DO HOPE THAT

                    YOU WILL -- YOU WILL CONSIDER VOTING WITH US AND -- AND -- AND SENDING A

                    MESSAGE THAT WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE COST OF HEALTHCARE IN THIS

                    STATE.  BUT GIVING THE INSURANCE COMPANIES THE RIGHT TO SET THE RATES IS

                    NOT THE WAY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. MCDONALD.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                    WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CAHILL, WILL YOU

                    YIELD?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  OVER MR. ABBATE'S OBJECTIONS, YES.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  OVER MANY PEOPLE'S OBJECTIONS,

                    I'M SURE.  SO, I -- I HAVE A QUESTION, AND THIS IS A QUESTION I PROBABLY

                    WOULD HAVE ASKED IN CONFERENCE IF WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THIS

                    QUESTION.  AND IT CAME UP BRIEFLY IN OUR INSURANCE COMMITTEE MEETING

                    THIS MORNING.  I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS.  AND, YOU KNOW, I

                    GET THE CONTEXT WHAT'S GOING ON.  HEALTH SYSTEMS AND HOSPITALS ARE

                    GROWING DEEPER INTO THE COMMUNITY.  THEY'RE GOBBLING UP MORE

                    PRACTICES.  IT'S MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANIES TO

                    NEGOTIATE, BECAUSE THERE'S LESS TO NEGOTIATE WITH.  BUT IN THIS SITUATION, I

                    JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR.  WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT SITUATIONS

                    WHERE A PERSON MIGHT BE FLOWN IN FROM THE ADIRONDACKS TO

                                         177



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    WESTCHESTER, BAD BURNS.  THEY'RE ADMITTED INTO THE ER, AND THEN THEY

                    ARE ADMITTED INTO THE HOSPITAL FOR FOLLOW-UP TREATMENT.  IS THAT -- IS THAT

                    A GOOD WAY OF DESCRIBING THE SITUATION?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  MR. SPEAKER, THE ANSWER TO THAT

                    QUESTION IS NO.  THAT IS NOT THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT THIS BILL COVERS.  THAT

                    IS A CIRCUMSTANCE THAT MAY BE COVERED BY THIS BILL, BUT THIS BILL COVERS

                    WHEN EMERGENCY CARE IS GIVEN AND THE AFTERCARE FROM AN EMERGENCY IS

                    -- IS PROVIDED BY A HOSPITAL AND A CONTRACT DOES NOT EXIST, AND THE TWO

                    PARTIES CANNOT AGREE TO AN AMOUNT THAT SHOULD BE PAID, AND THEN THIS

                    WOULD PROVIDE A MEANS BY WHICH AN INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY COULD

                    DETERMINE WHAT THE APPROPRIATE CHARGES ARE, BASED UPON THAT WHICH

                    WAS SUBMITTED BY THE HOSPITALS AND BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  AND -- AND WHO IS THAT

                    INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY?  WHO IS THAT INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  IT WOULD BE AN INDEPENDENT DISPUTE

                    RESOLUTION PERSON APPOINTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  BY DFS.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  CORRECT.  THE REGULATORY AGENCY THAT

                    OVERSEES AND REGULATES INSURANCE.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  AND IN THAT PROCESS, DO THEY USE

                    NATIONAL OR STATEWIDE BENCHMARKS TO HELP GET TO A -- AN APPROPRIATE

                    REIMBURSEMENT?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THEY MAY -- THEY MAY REFER TO

                    NATIONAL OR STATEWIDE BENCHMARKS, BUT THE GUIDELINES ARE LINED OUT

                    RIGHT IN THE EXISTING LAW TODAY OF WHAT THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW.  AND QUITE

                                         178



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    FRANKLY, IN SPITE OF SOME OF THE COMMENTS HERE TODAY, ONE OF THE MOST

                    IMPORTANT CRITERIA THAT GETS USED IS HOW MUCH THAT HOSPITAL CHARGES

                    PEOPLE.  THAT HOSPITAL, NOT OTHER HOSPITALS.  HOW MUCH DOES THAT

                    HOSPITAL CHARGE PEOPLE.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  AND DO THEY GET INTO WHAT WENT

                    INTO THAT SERVICE BEING PROVIDED?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THERE'S AN ACUITY FACTOR THAT IS

                    REQUIRED FOR THE INDEPENDENT BODY TO CONSIDER.  THERE ARE THE

                    COMPLEXITIES THAT -- THAT THE PATIENT BRINGS TO THE TABLE.  THERE IS THE --

                    THE NATURE OF THE FACILITY, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A BURN CENTER WOULD

                    SECURE ONE RATE.  AN EMERGENCY ROOM MAYBE IN MY TOWN WOULDN'T GET

                    THE SAME RATE.  SO, ALL OF THOSE FACTORS ARE REQUIRED OF THE INDEPENDENT

                    THIRD-PARTY TO JUDGE WHICH PARTY IS COMING IN WITH THE APPROPRIATE

                    CHARGE OR PAYMENT PROPOSAL.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  AND BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THE

                    LAW, IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO ME.  WHAT IS THE -- HOW LONG IS -- IS THERE --

                    IS THERE A DEFINED TIMELINE FOR THE PROCESS?

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THERE'S MUSIC IN MY BACK EAR, SO --

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  THAT'S OKAY.

                                 MR. CAHILL:  -- I'M HAVING A LITTLE BIT --

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  I HEAR IT -- I HEAR IT, TOO.  IS THERE

                    A DEFINED --

                                 MR. CAHILL:  THIRTY DAYS.  I THINK 30 DAYS.

                                 MR. MCDONALD:  THIRTY DAYS?  OKAY.  THANK YOU,

                    MR. SPEAKER.

                                         179



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  READ THE LAST SECTION.

                                 (APPLAUSE)

                                 THE CLERK:  THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE CLERK WILL

                    RECORD THE VOTE.

                                 (THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

                                 MR. CAHILL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.  AND THE MUSIC YOU

                    HEARD WAS "GOODNIGHT, IRENE."

                                 (LAUGHTER)

                                 MR. CAHILL:  I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT WAS.  THANK YOU,

                    MR. SPEAKER, AND COLLEAGUES.  I -- I APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU'VE

                    GIVEN THIS, AND I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHT THAT'S GONE INTO THE DEBATE

                    FROM EVERYBODY WHO STOOD UP TO SPEAK TONIGHT.  AND LET ME BE CLEAR

                    THAT IF I FELT THAT THIS WAS DETRIMENTAL TO MY HOSPITAL, TO HEALTHCARE IN

                    MY COMMUNITY, I WOULD ARGUE AND DEBATE WITH THE SAME FERVOR THAT

                    OUR COLLEAGUES DID HERE TONIGHT.  THAT IS NOT THE CASE.  THIS DOES NOT

                    PUT POWER IN THE HANDS OF INSURANCE COMPANIES.  THIS PUTS POWER IN

                    THE HANDS OF AN INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY TO RESOLVE DISPUTES THAT WOULD

                    OTHERWISE NOT BE ABLE TO BE RESOLVED AND COULD RESULT IN PROTRACTED

                    LITIGATION OR INTERRUPTION OF SERVICE, AS IT DID IN MY COMMUNITY.  AND

                    THERE ARE MANY ASPECTS OF THIS BILL THAT ARE NOT WHAT WERE REPRESENTED

                    HERE TONIGHT IN THIS DEBATE.  I CHOSE NOT TO ENGAGE, JUST AS MY

                    COLLEAGUES WHO MADE THOSE REPRESENTATIONS CHOSE INSTEAD OF ASKING ME

                    THOSE QUESTIONS SO I COULD ANSWER THEM WITH SOME AUTHORITY.  THEY --

                    I CHOSE NOT TO ASK THEM TO GIVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO -- TO RESPOND SO

                                         180



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THEY COULD USE THEIR FULL 30 MINUTES AND FILIBUSTER AS THEY DID.

                                 I THINK THE BILL STANDS ON ITS MERITS.  I THINK THE BILL IS

                    ONE THAT WILL ADVANCE HEALTHCARE, STABILIZE HEALTHCARE, CONTAIN SOME

                    COSTS, BUT ALSO PROVIDE A MEANS BY WHICH THOSE DISPUTES THAT COULD NOT

                    BE RESOLVED CAN NOW BE RESOLVED.

                                 AND I WOULD WITHDRAW MY REQUEST, MR. SPEAKER, AND

                    URGE A VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, AND I WILL CAST MY VOTE IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. CAHILL IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 MR. GOODELL.

                                 MR. GOODELL:  THANK YOU, SIR.  BY NOW I THINK IT

                    SHOULD BE CLEAR TO EVERYBODY HERE THIS IS NOT A BILL ABOUT PATIENTS

                    BECAUSE IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE AMOUNT THAT A PATIENT PAYS IN CO-PAYS AND

                    DEDUCTIBLES.  WE'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE AND WE'VE ALREADY

                    MADE IT CLEAR BY LAW THAT WHAT A PATIENT PAYS, WHETHER IT'S IN-NETWORK

                    OR OUT-OF-NETWORK, IS UNAFFECTED BY THIS LEGISLATION.  AS HAS BEEN

                    REPEATEDLY POINTED OUT, THIS IS ALL ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO HELP

                    INSURANCE COMPANIES AT THE EXPENSE OF THE LOCAL HOSPITALS.  THAT'S WHAT

                    IT'S ALL ABOUT.  WE'RE TOLD IT'S AN INDEPENDENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION, BUT WE

                    DON'T ASK THE ONE AGENCY IN OUR STATE GOVERNMENT THAT MONITORS THE

                    REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS, WHO HAS A FULL STAFF,

                    THAT HAS A MULTI-BILLION-DOLLAR BUDGET THAT MONITORS HEALTHCARE COSTS,

                    AND THAT'S THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.  SO THIS IS NOT ABOUT MAKING SURE

                    IT'S AN INDEPENDENT PARTY.  THIS IS AN INSURANCE BAILOUT BILL WITH THE

                                         181



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    INDEPENDENT REVIEW BEING DONE BY THE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT AND NOT

                    THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT THAT ACTUALLY HAS THE DATA AND THE EXPERTISE.

                                 SO MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT.  IF YOU HAVE A HOSPITAL

                    IN YOUR DISTRICT THAT'S FACING TOUGH FINANCIAL ISSUES, THIS BILL WILL HURT

                    YOUR LOCAL HOSPITALS.  NOW ON THE OTHER HAND, IF YOU HAVE AN INSURANCE

                    COMPANY IN YOUR DISTRICT THAT'S FACING FINANCIAL ISSUES AND YOU'RE

                    WORRIED ABOUT THEM GOING OUT OF BUSINESS, THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND

                    YOU VOTE FOR THIS.  IN MY DISTRICT, IT'S THE HOSPITALS THAT ARE STRUGGLING,

                    NOT THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.

                                 THANK YOU, SIR.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. GOODELL IN THE

                    NEGATIVE.

                                 MR. WALCZYK.

                                 MR. WALCZYK:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  I -- I

                    HAD ONE FINAL QUESTION FOR THE SPONSOR THAT I JUST RAN OUT OF TIME TO ASK

                    TODAY.  BUT I WOULD HAVE ASKED HIM HOW -- HOW -- IF HE HADN'T HEARD

                    FROM THE HOSPITALS IN HIS REGION, IF THEY HADN'T BEEN AN INTEGRAL PART OF

                    CRAFTING THIS LEGISLATION, HOW HE COULD VOTE FOR THIS BILL TODAY.  BECAUSE

                    ON -- ON PROCESS -- AND -- AND MANY MEMBERS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE

                    AISLE TODAY HAVE BROUGHT UP THE LACK OF INPUT, THE USHERING THROUGH, THE

                    RUSHING THIS LEGISLATION THROUGH.  BUT ON PROCESS, WITHOUT THE

                    OPPORTUNITY TO ASK MASSENA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, TO ASK CLAXTON

                    HEPBURN, TO ASK CANTON POTSDAM HOSPITAL OR RIVER HOSPITAL OR

                    SAMARITAN MEDICAL CENTER WHAT THIS WOULD DO TO THE CONSTITUENTS THAT I

                    REPRESENT, THERE'S NO WAY IN GOOD FAITH THAT I COULD VOTE FOR THIS BILL.

                                         182



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                                 SO, I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND I VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE.

                    THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MR. WALCZYK IN THE

                    NEGATIVE.

                                 MS. FAHY TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

                                 MS. FAHY:  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.  I RISE TO

                    EXPLAIN MY VOTE.  AND I'VE -- THE ONE GOOD THING ABOUT A LATE HOUR IS

                    YOU ACTUALLY GET A LITTLE BIT OF A CHANCE TO LISTEN TO THE DEBATE INSTEAD OF

                    BEING DISTRACTED WITH 15 OTHER THINGS.  AND THE DEBATE, QUITE FRANKLY,

                    HAS BEEN DISTURBING.  WHILE I THINK THIS BILL IS WELL-INTENDED IN TERMS OF

                    TRYING TO ASSIST AND -- IN INDIRECTLY PROTECT THE CONSUMERS OR -- OR TRYING

                    TO KEEP THE CONSUMERS IN MIND, I -- I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DID NOT SAY

                    THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY UPSETTING.  AND I DID NOT KNOW WHEN I

                    WAS VOTING TO REPORT THIS OUT OF CODES TONIGHT THAT THE BILL WOULD BE ON

                    THE FLOOR TONIGHT.  I -- I MADE A SPECIFIC POINT -- I MADE A SPECIFIC POINT

                    IN CODES TONIGHT -- THIS MORNING OR THIS AFTERNOON -- ASKING THAT WE GO

                    BACK AT THIS AND ADDRESS A NUMBER OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I THOUGHT WERE

                    VERY LEGITIMATE, VERY FAIR QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP.  AND EVEN IN

                    LISTENING TO THE DEBATE TONIGHT, THE QUESTIONS HAVE NOT COME UP -- OR

                    HAVE NOT BEEN ANSWERED TO THE EXTENT THAT I THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE.

                    AND I CAN ONLY COME AWAY FROM THIS THINKING THAT THIS IS BIG INSURANCE

                    AGAINST BIG HOSPITALS.  AND -- AND THAT REALLY -- AND I THINK THE PATIENTS

                    ARE SOMEHOW BEING A LITTLE LEFT -- LEFT ASIDE HERE.  AND I DO WORRY THAT

                    THIS IS INSURANCE COMPANIES BEING LEFT IN CHARGE OF HOSPITALS.  I DON'T

                    BELIEVE THIS IS A WAY TO BRING COSTS DOWN.  I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS

                                         183



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    THE WAY TO HELP HEALTHCARE.  IN THE END, THOUGH, HOWEVER, I HAVE TO GO

                    BACK TO WHAT I'M HEARING FROM ALBANY MED.  AND BY THE WAY, ALBANY

                    MED SERVES 80 -- TAKES IN 80,000 ER PATIENTS JUST IN 2018.  OVER

                    80,000.  HOWEVER, I'M TOLD, QUOTE, UNQUOTE, THEIR IMPACT FROM THIS BILL

                    COULD POSSIBLY BE MODERATE BECAUSE THE SIZE OF THE NETWORK IS SO LARGE.

                                 CONSEQUENTLY, BECAUSE I AM HEARING MORE FROM THE

                    ADVOCATES AND THE CONSUMER GROUPS, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS

                    LEGISLATION BUT VERY RELUCTANTLY.  THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  MS. FAHY IN THE

                    AFFIRMATIVE.

                                 ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?  ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

                                 (THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

                                 THE BILL IS PASSED.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER

                    HOUSEKEEPING OR RESOLUTIONS?

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  AT THE REQUEST OF MR.

                    GOTTFRIED, CALENDAR NO. 100, BILL A1125, THE BILL IS STARRED.

                                 ON A MOTION BY MS. ROSENTHAL, PAGE 5, CALENDAR NO.

                    19, BILL NO. 1024-A ON THE MAIN CALENDAR, AMENDMENTS ARE RECEIVED

                    AND ADOPTED.

                                 ON A MOTION BY MS. PAULIN, PAGE 22, CALENDAR NO.

                    316, BILL A225 ON THE MAIN CALENDAR, AMENDMENTS ARE RECEIVED AND

                    ADOPTED.

                                 WE HAVE NUMEROUS FINE RESOLUTIONS WHICH WE WILL

                                         184



                    NYS ASSEMBLY                                                           JUNE 5, 2019

                    TAKE UP WITH ONE VOTE.

                                 ON THE RESOLUTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

                    AYE; OPPOSED, NO.  THE RESOLUTIONS ARE ADOPTED.

                                 (WHEREUPON, ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NOS. 499-504

                    WERE UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED.)

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

                                 MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES:  MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE

                    THAT THE ASSEMBLY STAND ADJOURNED UNTIL 10:00 A.M. TUESDAY --

                    THURSDAY, JUNE THE 6TH, TOMORROW BEING A SESSION DAY.

                                 ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY:  THE ASSEMBLY WILL

                    STAND ADJOURNED.

                                 (WHEREUPON, AT 8:49 P.M., THE HOUSE STOOD ADJOURNED

                    UNTIL THURSDAY, JUNE 6TH AT 10:00 A.M., THAT BEING A SESSION DAY.)

























                                         185