WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 19, 2022 2:58 P.M.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: 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 AUBRY LED VISITORS AND

MEMBERS IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.)

A QUORUM BEING PRESENT, THE CLERK WILL READ THE

JOURNAL OF TUESDAY, JANUARY 18TH.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MAY I MOVE TO DISPENSE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WITH THE FURTHER READING OF THE JOURNAL OF JANUARY -- TUESDAY, JANUARY

THE 18TH AND ASK THAT THE SAME WOULD STAND APPROVED.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO

ORDERED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER. COLLEAGUES, BEFORE WE GO OVER OUR SCHEDULE FOR TODAY, I

WANT TO SHARE A QUOTE AGAIN FROM THE REVEREND DR. MARTIN LUTHER

KING. AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN CELEBRATING HIS BIRTH AS WE SHOULD

ALWAYS, BUT THIS ONE TODAY I THINK IS PRETTY APPROPRIATE GIVEN THE

CONDITION THAT OUR SOCIETY IS IN, IN TERMS OF CIVILITY. SO THIS ONE SAYS

TODAY, MR. SPEAKER, "HATE IS JUST AS INJURIOUS AS TO THE HATER AS IT IS TO

THE ONE WHO IS HATED. LIKE AN UNCHECKED CANCER, HATE CORRODES THE

PERSONALITY AND EATS AWAY AT ITS VITAL UNITY. HATE IS TOO GREAT A BURDEN

TO BEAR." HOPEFULLY THESE WORDS CAN BEGIN THE PROCESS OF ELIMINATING

THAT AT MINIMUM IN AND AROUND OUR CHAMBERS AND IN AND AROUND OUR

CAPITOL.

MR. SPEAKER AND COLLEAGUES, YOU HAVE ON YOUR DESK A

MAIN CALENDAR AS WELL AS AN A-CALENDAR. IF YOU WOULD NOW PLEASE

ADVANCE THE A-CALENDAR, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON MRS.

PEOPLES-STOKES' MOTION, WE'RE ADVANCING THE A-CALENDAR.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU, SIR. AFTER

ANY HOUSEKEEPING, WE WILL TAKE UP RESOLUTIONS ON PAGE 3. OUR

PRINCIPAL WORK FOR TODAY, HOWEVER, WILL BE TO TAKE UP TWO DEBATES, ONE

FROM CALENDAR NO. 209, THAT'S BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER CRUZ. THIS WILL BE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

FOLLOWED BY RULES REPORT NO. 6 BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER DINOWITZ. AND

THEN WE WILL CONCLUDE OUR WORK OF TODAY BY WORKING OFF THE

A-CALENDAR ON CONSENT, MR. SPEAKER. SO THAT IS A GENERAL OUTLINE OF

WHERE WE'RE GOING. IF YOU DO HAVE ANY HOUSEKEEPING, NOW WOULD BE

THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: CERTAINLY. THANK

YOU, MA'AM.

ON A MOTION BY MR. GOTTFRIED, PAGE 5, CALENDAR NO.

8, BILL NO. 196, AMENDMENTS ARE RECEIVED AND ADOPTED.

PAGE 3, RESOLUTIONS, MAIN CALENDAR. THE CLERK WILL

READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 476, MS.

LUPARDO. LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR KATHY

HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JANUARY 2022 AS RADON AWARENESS MONTH IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

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

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 477, MR.

MCDONALD. LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR KATHY

HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM MAY 1-8, 2022 AS TARDIVE DYSKINESIA AWARENESS

WEEK IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL

THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE; OPPOSED -- THE RESOLUTION IS

ADOPTED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION NO. 478, MR.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

DESTEFANO. LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING GOVERNOR KATHY

HOCHUL TO PROCLAIM JANUARY 2022 AS THYROID DISEASE AWARENESS

MONTH IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DESTEFANO ON THE

RESOLUTION.

MR. DESTEFANO: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, FOR

ALLOWING ME TO INTRODUCE THIS RESOLUTION. IN NEW YORK STATE,

APPROXIMATELY 1,000 MEN AND 3,100 WOMEN ARE AFFECTED BY THYROID

DISEASE EACH AND EVERY YEAR, MANY OF THEM NOT EVEN KNOWING THEY

HAVE IT. THE MORTALITY RATE FROM THYROID CANCERS IS UNACCEPTABLE.

NATIONWIDE, AN ESTIMATED 20 MILLION AMERICANS HAVE THE DISEASE

WHICH CAN DEVELOP IN ANYONE, BUT TENDS TO OCCUR THREE TIMES MORE IN

WOMEN THAN MEN. THYROID CASES HAVE BEEN ON THE RISE BETWEEN 1975

AND 2013. CANCER DIAGNOSIS HAVE BEEN MORE THAN TRIPLED EACH YEAR

WHILE ADVANCED CASES OF DEATHS HAVE ALSO INCREASED. IN ADDITION,

THYROID DISORDERS, INCLUDING GRAVES' DISEASE, HASHIMOTO'S, GOITER,

MODULES AND BOTH HYPO- AND HYPERTHYROIDISM, ALL OF WHICH CAN BE

SUCCESSFULLY TREATED WITH EARLY DIAGNOSIS.

BECAUSE 60 PERCENT OF PEOPLE WITH THYROID DISEASE

DON'T EVEN KNOW THEY HAVE IT, PUBLIC AWARENESS IS CRITICAL TO

MINIMIZING ITS DEVASTATING EFFECTS. THIS IS WHY I'M SPONSORING A

RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE JANUARY AS THYROID DISEASE AWARENESS MONTH

IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK. LET'S ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO REDUCE THE RISK OF

THYROID PROBLEMS THROUGH AWARENESS, REGULAR CHECKUPS, AND PREVENTIVE

MEASURES SUCH AS EXERCISE, STOP FROM SMOKING, AND IF WE CAN SAVE ONE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

NEW YORKER FROM THESE DISTURBING EFFECTS OF THYROID DISEASE, OUR

EFFORTS WILL BE WELL WORTH IT. I ASK THAT MY COLLEAGUES JOIN ME IN THE

AWARENESS EFFORT. THE LIFE YOU SAVE CAN BE SOME OF THEIR FRIENDS,

NEIGHBORS, AND COLLEAGUES. THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

ON THE RESOLUTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING

AYE; OPPOSED, NO. THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED.

PAGE 40, CALENDAR NO. 209, THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A06319-A, CALENDAR

NO. 209, CRUZ, GRIFFIN, BURDICK, TAYLOR, BARNWELL, ZEBROWSKI,

DINOWITZ, VANEL, SIMON, BURGOS, L. ROSENTHAL, GONZÁLEZ-ROJAS,

PERRY, JACOBSON, OTIS, PRETLOW, STIRPE, FERNANDEZ, CLARK, GLICK,

BICHOTTE HERMELYN, LAVINE. AN ACT TO AMEND THE PENAL LAW, THE

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, THE CORRECTION LAW, THE SOCIAL SERVICES

LAW, THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW, THE FAMILY COURT ACT, THE CIVIL

RIGHTS LAW, THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES, THE AGRICULTURE AND

MARKETS LAW, THE JUDICIARY LAW AND THE DOMESTIC RELATIONS LAW, IN

RELATION TO SEX OFFENSES; AND TO REPEAL CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE PENAL

LAW RELATING THERETO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. CRUZ, AN

EXPLANATION IS REQUESTED.

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

WOULD AMEND THE PENAL LAW TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT OF PENETRATION

FROM THE DEFINITION OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RAPE

STATUTES. IT WOULD REDEFINE RAPE TO INCLUDE VAGINAL SEXUAL CONTACT, ORAL

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

SEXUAL CONTACT, AND ANAL SEXUAL CONTACT WHICH ARE CURRENTLY PROSECUTED

AS CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS. IT WOULD REPEAL SECTIONS OF THE PENAL LAW

RELATING TO CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS AND INCORPORATE THE CONDUCT OF THOSE

OFFENSES INTO THE ELEMENTS OF THE RESPECTIVE RAPE STATUTES. THE

PENALTIES WOULD REMAIN THE SAME AS THE REPEALED STATUTES AND

ADDITIONALLY, IT WOULD MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES THROUGHOUT VARIOUS

AREAS OF THE LAW.

UNDER THE CURRENT LAW, SURVIVORS WHO ALREADY STRUGGLE

TO COME TO TERMS WITH WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THEM ARE BEING TOLD THAT

FORCIBLE AND HORRIBLE CRIMINAL ACTS COMMITTED AGAINST THEM ARE

SOMEHOW NOT CATEGORIZED AS RAPE. THE REALITY IS THAT OUR STATE'S LAW IS

ENSHRINED IN OUTDATED GENDERED NOTIONS OF RAPE, CREATING DIFFERENT

CATEGORIES OF SEXUAL ASSAULT FOR WHAT IS CLEARLY RAPE. THE LEGISLATION

WAS INSPIRED BY LYDIA CUOMO, A BRAVE SURVIVOR WHO WAS BRUTALLY

RAPED ON THE MORNING OF AUGUST 19TH, 2011. AT THIS TIME, MS. CUOMO

WAS 25 YEARS OLD AND ON HER WAY TO HER FIRST DAY TEACHING AT A SCHOOL.

THAT MORNING SHE WAS APPROACHED BY AN OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICER,

MICHAEL PENA, WHO PROCEEDED TO BRANDISH HIS WEAPON AND BRUTALLY

RAPE HER. HE WAS LATER CHARGED WITH RAPE, CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT AND

PREDATORY SEXUAL CONDUCT. DESPITE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE OF FORCIBLE

NON-CONSENSUAL SEXUAL CONDUCT AGAINST MS. CUOMO, PENA WAS NOT

CONVICTED OF RAPE, BUT INSTEAD OF THE LESSER CHARGES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL

ASSAULT AND PREDATORY SEXUAL ASSAULT. THE NEW YORK COUNTY SUPREME

COURT DECLARED A MISTRIAL ON THE REMAINING TWO COUNTS OF RAPE AND

LATER -- AND RELATED CHARGES BECAUSE THE JURY COULD NOT AGREE ON

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WHETHER PENA HAD -- SORRY, I CAN'T SEE -- HAD VAGINALLY PENETRATED MS.

CUOMO. THE CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT CHARGES FOR WHICH HE WAS ACTUALLY

CONVICTED INCLUDED VIOLATING HER ORALLY AND ANALLY AND DID NOT REQUIRE

PROOF OF PENETRATION -- I DECIDED THE ONE DAY NOT TO WEAR MY CONTACTS

OR GLASSES WOULD BE TODAY.

WE ARE MOVING TO CONSOLIDATE THESE CRIMES UNDER ONE

STATUTE, THEREBY REDEFINING RAPE IN OUR STATE IN ORDER TO BRING OUR LAWS

UP TO NATIONAL STANDARDS, BECAUSE ACTUALLY THE FBI AND SEVERAL OTHER

STATES ALREADY DO THIS, PROPERLY VALIDATING SURVIVORS AND THEIR

EXPERIENCES IN STOPPING -- AND TO STOP TREATING VICTIMS OF HEINOUS

SEXUAL ASSAULT THAT IS CLEARLY RAPE, DIFFERENTLY SIMPLY BECAUSE YOUR

ATTACK DID NOT INVOKE PENETRATION OR A VAGINA.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. CRUZ, WILL YOU

YIELD?

MS. CRUZ: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. CRUZ YIELDS.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO MS. CRUZ, I

JUST WANTED TO ASK YOU VERY SIMPLY, HAS THIS BILL SUBSTANTIVELY

CHANGED SINCE IT WAS INTRODUCED IN 2012?

MS. CRUZ: YES. THERE ARE SOME MINOR CHANGES,

MAINLY TO CONFORM THE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS THAT THE SENATE PASSED

LAST SESSION. WE COULD HAVE NOT DONE IN RELATION TO OTHER CHAPTERS. IT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

HAS NOTHING TO DO REALLY WITH THIS BILL, IT'S HOW SOME OF THE LAWS THAT

WERE PASSED LAST YEAR IN THE SENATE THAT RELATE TO THIS BILL NOW NEED TO

BE CONFORMED, LIKE CHAPTER, SECTIONS, NOTHING MAJOR.

MS. WALSH: SO THEY'RE MINOR AMENDMENTS, THE

SUBSTANCE OF THE BILL --

MS. CRUZ: YES, THE SUBSTANCE OF THE BILL IS THE

SAME --

MS. WALSH: -- REALLY IS THE SAME AS 2012.

MS. CRUZ: -- IT'S JUST SECTIONS AND A FEW WORDS HERE

AND THERE TO CONFORM TO OTHER LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED IN THE SENATE

AND HERE.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. -- MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MS.

WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU. SO BEFORE I GET STARTED,

SOME OF YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THIS DEBATE LAST YEAR AND THAT I DID KIND

OF GIVE A DISCLAIMER FIRST, SOMETIMES IN THE EVENING THEY -- THEY PLAY

BACK OUR PROCEEDINGS, OR FOR THE PEOPLE THAT MIGHT BE ON THE LIVE

STREAM, SOME OF THE -- THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT

DURING THE DEBATE OF THIS BILL MIGHT NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR ALL LISTENERS,

SO I JUST -- JUST AS A GENERAL DISCLAIMER, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT

SOME THINGS THAT MAYBE MIGHT NOT BE SUITABLE FOR ALL EARS.

SO THAT BEING SAID, THIS BILL WOULD DO SEVERAL THINGS,

SOME THAT THERE IS WIDE SUPPORT FOR AND SOME THAT CAUSE CONCERN FOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MANY. THIS BILL CHANGES TEN DIFFERENT STATUTES: PENAL LAW, CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE LAW, SOCIAL SERVICES LAW, VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW,

FAMILY COURT ACT, CIVIL RIGHTS LAW, CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES,

AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS LAW, JUDICIARY LAW, AND THE DOMESTIC

RELATIONS LAW. SO THIS ONE BILL DOES HAVE A FAR REACHING IMPACT OVER A

NUMBER OF DIFFERENT STATUTES. THE FIRST THING THAT THE BILL DOES, AS THE

SPONSOR INDICATED DURING HER EXPLANATION CORRECTLY IS THAT IT REMOVES

THE PENETRATION REQUIREMENT FROM THE DEFINITION OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE,

ALLOWING CONTACT BETWEEN THE BODY PARTS TO SUFFICE. SO UNDER OUR

EXISTING LAW, SEXUAL INTERCOURSE OCCURS AND THIS IS A QUOTE, "UPON ANY

PENETRATION HOWEVER SLIGHT." AS SUCH, THE NEW DEFINITION PRESENTED BY

THIS BILL WOULD MAKE IT EASIER TO PROSECUTE A DEFENDANT FOR RAPE. IT'S

GENERALLY AGREED BY THE DAS ASSOCIATION AS WELL AS THE DOWNSTATE

COALITION FOR CRIME VICTIMS THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD THING.

THE SECOND THING THAT THE BILL DOES IS TO ADD FORCIBLE

AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ABUSE, WHICH COULD BE INSERTING AN OBJECT INTO A

VAGINA, URETHRA, PENIS, RECTUM OR ANUS OF ANOTHER PERSON TO THE LIST OF

CRIMES FOR WHICH A PERSON MAY USE DEADLY FORCE IN SELF DEFENSE. AND

IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE ANYONE REALLY ARGUING AGAINST THAT

CHANGE IN THE LAW. IT'S THE THIRD THING THAT THIS BILL DOES THAT IS WHERE I

BELIEVE THE PROBLEMS DO LIE AND WHERE I'D LIKE TO SPEND THE REMAINDER

OF MY TIME.

UNDER THE PENAL LAW CURRENTLY, THERE ARE THREE

DEGREES OF RAPE AND THREE DEGREES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT. SO JUST

IMAGINE LIKE TWO BASKETS, RIGHT. THEY ARE E, D, AND B FELONIES

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

RESPECTIVELY. ALL THREE DEGREES OF RAPE REQUIRE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE. IN

THE OTHER BASKET, THE THREE DEGREES OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT INCLUDE ORAL

SEXUAL CONDUCT, OR ANAL SEXUAL CONDUCT. SO WHAT THIS BILL DOES IT

WOULD DELETE ANY AND ALL REFERENCE TO THE TERM CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT AND

THEN IT WOULD TAKE AND LIFT THE LANGUAGE FROM THEM AND INSERT IT OR

IMPOSE IT INTO THE -- VERBATIM INTO THE RAPE STATUTE AS SUBDIVISIONS OF

THE RAPE STATUTE.

SO WHAT WE WOULD HAVE THEN IS A RAPE STATUTE WITH

SUBDIVISIONS INCLUDING ORAL SEXUAL CONDUCT AND ANAL SEXUAL CONDUCT.

THIS WOULD BE A MERGING OF RAPE CRIMES AND CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT

CRIMES INTO A VIOLATION OF THE SAME PROVISION OF THE RAPE STATUTE. AS

THE SPONSOR INDICATED, THERE ARE NO CHANGES WHATSOEVER IN THE PENALTY

FOR THESE CRIMES ONCE THEY'RE MERGED INTO THE RAPE STATUTE. ALSO, THE

BILL WOULD NOT CHANGE THE ELEMENTS THAT NEEDED TO BE PROVEN OR THE

BURDEN OF PROOF AND AS SUCH, THE MERGER WOULD MAKE THE CRIMES

NEITHER EASIER NOR MORE DIFFICULT TO PROSECUTE.

HOWEVER, HERE'S THE CONCERN THAT'S BEEN EXPRESSED BY

THE DAS ASSOCIATION: BY MERGING IN THIS WAY IT MAY -- MAY PRECLUDE

CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES FOR CRIMES INVOLVING MULTIPLE ACTS OF RAPE AND

CRIMINAL SEX ACTS BECAUSE MULTIPLE ACTS COULD BE INTERPRETED BY THE

COURTS AS PART OF ONE CONTINUOUS ACT OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND THEREBY

REQUIRE CONCURRENT SENTENCING INSTEAD OF CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES, AS IS

NOW PERMITTED.

SO A QUICK EXAMPLE OF THAT WOULD BE TWO CHARGES

EACH WITH A SEVEN-YEAR SENTENCE; A CONCURRENT SENTENCE WOULD BE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

SEVEN YEARS, A CONSECUTIVE SENTENCE WOULD BE 14 YEARS, SEVEN PLUS

SEVEN. SO I'M QUOTING FROM THE MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO THIS

BILL, THE DAS ASSOCIATION SAID, QUOTE, "IN LIGHT OF THE 2011 NEW YORK

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION IN PEOPLE V. ALONZO, A REORGANIZATION OF SEX

CRIME LAWS COULD PRECLUDE CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES FOR CRIMES INVOLVING

MULTIPLE ACTS OF RAPE AND CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS." FOR EXAMPLE, ORAL AND

ANAL SEXUAL CONDUCT. "IT WOULD BE" -- THIS IS A QUOTE -- "DISASTROUS IF

AN AMENDED LAW WHICH IS CLEARLY INTENDED TO GIVE ADDITIONAL

PROTECTION AND COMFORT TO VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT WERE INTERPRETED IN

A WAY THAT WOULD REDUCE THE PENALTIES OFFENDERS COULD RECEIVE. CRIME

VICTIMS AND PUBLIC SAFETY WOULD BE SERIOUSLY HARMED," END QUOTE.

AND THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY, QUOTE, "THE POTENTIAL

PROBLEM IS THAT UNDER EXISTING LAW, AN ASSAILANT WHO RAPES A WOMAN

AND ALSO ANALLY VIOLATES HER CAN RECEIVE -- CAN RECEIVE CONSECUTIVE

SENTENCES IF A JUDGE FINDS THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE WARRANT IT. BUT IF

FOLDED INTO THE RAPE LAWS, THIS TYPE OF CRIME WITH MULTIPLE ACTS AGAINST

A VICTIM COULD BE VIEWED BY APPELLATE COURTS AS A SINGLE, CONTINUOUS

ACT OF SEXUAL ASSAULT. UNDER THE REASONING OF ALONZO, THE COURTS COULD

FIND THAT THE OFFENDER COULD ONLY BE CHARGED AND CONVICTED OF A SINGLE

COUNT. IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN, THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION WOULD

SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE PENALTY FOR OFFENDERS BY ONE-HALF OR MORE.

THAT WOULD BE A VERY UNFORTUNATE OUTCOME, WE CAN AGREE, BECAUSE

CLEARLY THIS BILL WAS DEVELOPED AND INTRODUCED IN 2012 AS A RECOGNITION

OF THE SUFFERING AND AS A SHOWING OF RESPECT TO SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL

CRIME. IT IS ALSO INTENDED TO CLARIFY FOR THE SURVIVOR THAT BEING ORALLY OR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ANALLY VIOLATED IS RAPE. IT WOULD BE IRONIC, INDEED, THAT AN UNINTENDED

CONSEQUENCE OF THIS BILL WOULD BE TO POTENTIALLY REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF

TIME THAT THE WORST RAPIST MUST SPEND BEHIND BARS FOR HAVING

COMMITTED SUCH HEINOUS ACTS."

SO THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THIS BILL, BUT THERE IS A

SOLUTION TO IT, AS WELL. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT IT IS A LAUDABLE GOAL TO

HAVE A VICTIM OF A CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT CLASSIFIED AS A VICTIM OF RAPE IN

ORDER TO MORE CLEARLY CONVEY THE SERIOUSNESS AND BRUTALITY OF THAT

CRIME. A WAY TO DO THIS WITHOUT RUNNING INTO THE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

WITH MERGING WOULD BE TO RENAME CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT CRIMES AS ORAL

RAPE AND AS ANAL RAPE. THEY WOULD STAY WHERE THEY CURRENTLY ARE IN THE

PENAL LAW SECTIONS 130.45 AND 130.50. THIS SUGGESTION WAS RAISED

ALMOST TEN YEARS AGO; YET, THE BILL HAS NEVER BEEN AMENDED TO DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT IS. AT ONE TIME IN THE PAST IT APPEARS THAT THERE

WAS LEGISLATION INTRODUCED IN THE SENATE WHICH WOULD HAVE DONE THAT,

BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT BECAME OF THAT BILL AND WE HAVE THIS ONE

INSTEAD.

NOW LAST YEAR WHEN WE DEBATED THIS BILL, THE SPONSOR

HAD INDICATED THAT THE MERGER OF THESE SECTIONS WAS NOT GOING TO BE A

REAL PROBLEM IF THE DAS WOULD JUST DO THEIR JOB IN THE WAY THAT THEY

CHARGE THESE CRIMES. AND WHILE WE'VE SEEN LATELY THAT DAS ARE

REFUSING OR DECLINING TO PROSECUTE CRIMES, THE VAST MAJORITY I THINK ARE

VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN DOING THEIR JOBS AND IN SEEKING JUSTICE FOR

VICTIMS. THAT IS PRECISELY WHY THE DAS ASSOCIATION IS CONCERNED

ABOUT THIS BILL AS IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN. THEY LIKE THE IDEA THAT THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

PENETRATION REQUIREMENT IS REMOVED, BUT THIS PROBLEM WITH MERGING ALL

THESE SEX CRIMES INTO THE RAPE STATUTE IS THAT THE DEFENDANT MIGHT GET

CONVICTED BUT END UP DOING LESS TIME. IN MY BOOK, THAT'S LESS JUSTICE

FOR VICTIMS, SURVIVORS, AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THAT'S WHAT THE SPONSOR

OF THIS BILL WOULD WANT. AND I WOULD SAY THAT WHY WOULD WE WANT TO

TAKE THAT RISK? IT -- IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE THE CASE ON A CASE BY CASE

BASIS, BUT IT IS -- IT IS A RISK THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE EXPERTS IN --

IN THIS AREA OF LAW.

I WOULD ALSO MENTION FOR THE BENEFIT OF BY COLLEAGUES

THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL FROM SEVERAL DIFFERENT

ORGANIZATIONS. OFTEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BILLS WHERE WE KNOW THAT

THE TRIAL LAWYERS MIGHT LIKE IT, BUT THE INSURANCE COMPANIES WON'T, OR

THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS MIGHT LIKE IT, BUT ANOTHER GROUP WOULDN'T. HERE

THEY'RE UNIFIED AND I THINK THAT THAT SAYS SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT. THE

DAS ASSOCIATION, THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY, THE NEW YORK STATE

ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS, AND THE DOWNSTATE

COALITION OF CRIME VICTIMS ARE ALL OPPOSED TO THIS BILL. THE NEW

YORK STATE ASSOCIATION OF DEFENSE LAWYERS IN THEIR MEMORANDUM OF

OPPOSITION SUGGESTS THAT THIS BILL WAS INTRODUCED I -- AND I THINK THAT

THIS IS A CORRECT STATEMENT, WAS INTRODUCED IN DIRECT RESPONSE TO THE

PENA CASE THAT THE SPONSOR TALKED ABOUT AS SHE EXPLAINED THE BILL,

WHICH WAS A HORRIFIC CASE IN 2012, DESCRIBED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF

SUPPORT ACCOMPANYING THE BILL AS WELL, IN WHICH THE DEFENDANT WAS

SENTENCED CONSECUTIVELY TO 75 YEARS IN PRISON. THE DEFENSE LAWYERS

ADVISED, QUOTE, "UNLESS THE LEGISLATURE IS PREPARED TO STUDY AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

OVERHAUL THE ENTIRE SEX CRIMES ARTICLE 130 OF THE PENAL LAW, THIS

RESPONSE TO A SINGLE VERDICT IS ILL-ADVISED. THE ASSOCIATION

RESPECTIVELY SUBMITS THAT INTRODUCING NEW CRIMINAL JUSTICE LEGISLATION

TO CHANGE LONG-STANDING CRIMINAL STATUTES BECAUSE SOME JURORS IN ONE

CASE WEREN'T CONVINCED BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT WOULD EXPOSE OUR

CRIMINAL LAW TO CHANGE EVERY TIME A JURY IN THE EYES OF OUTSIDERS WHO

WERE NOT PRESENT IN THE COURTROOM GOT IT WRONG. THE MEMBERS SHOULD

THINK LONG AND HARD BEFORE RUSHING IN EMOTIONALLY TO CREATE A CHANGE

OF THIS MAGNITUDE," CLOSED QUOTE.

THOSE OF US WHO ARE NOT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OR CRIME

VICTIM ADVOCATES OR DEFENSE ATTORNEYS SHOULD NOT SECOND GUESS THESE

EXPERTS. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THIS BILL CREATES A RISK THAT THE WORST

RAPIST WILL NOT BE SENTENCED TO ALL THE TIME BEHIND BARS THAT THEY

DESERVE. AS THERE IS ANOTHER WAY TO VALIDATE THE EXPERIENCE AND

SUFFERING OF SURVIVORS, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE BILL IN THIS FORM BUT I WOULD

WELCOME AN AMENDED VERSION OF THIS BILL WHICH, NUMBER ONE,

ELIMINATES THE PENETRATION REQUIREMENT; NUMBER TWO, ALLOWS FOR THE

USE OF DEADLY FORCE IN SELF-DEFENSE FOR FORCIBLE AGGRAVATED SEXUAL

ABUSE; AND THREE, RENAMES CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACT CRIMES AS RAPE. THIS

WILL BE THIS BODY'S TENTH TIME VOTING ON THIS BILL. EACH YEAR, THERE ARE

MORE NO VOTES. I WILL BE CASTING MY VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE AND I WOULD

ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

(PAUSE)

MS. CRUZ.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MS. CRUZ: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. IF THERE ARE NO

OTHER QUESTIONS FROM OUR COLLEAGUES, I'M GOING TO GO ON THE BILL NOW.

I'D LIKE TO THANK LYDIA CUOMO FOR HER COURAGE IN

SEEKING JUSTICE. I ALSO WANT TO THANK OUR FORMER COLLEAGUE, ARAVELLA

SIMOTAS, WHO FOR ALMOST A DECADE FOUGHT TO BRING JUSTICE TO SURVIVORS.

I WANT TO THANK THE SPEAKER FOR PRIORITIZING THE RIGHTS OF SURVIVORS ONCE

AGAIN BY HELPING PASS THIS BILL IN OUR FIRST MONTH BACK IN SESSION.

MY COLLEAGUE IS CORRECT; THIS IS THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY

OF THE FIRST TIME THE ASSEMBLY PASSED THE RAPE IS RAPE BILL. EVERY YEAR,

IT HAS COME TO THE FLOOR AND EVERY YEAR WE HAVE DONE RIGHT BY

SURVIVORS, AND EVERY YEAR IT DIES IN THE SENATE. I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT

THIS IS THE LAST TIME I'M UP HERE DEBATING AND HAVING TO EXPLAIN WHY

CERTAIN VICTIMS OF HEINOUS SEXUAL ASSAULT CAN CALL THEMSELVES RAPE

VICTIMS AND OTHERS CAN'T. I LOOK FORWARD TO OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE

SENATE ALSO DOING RIGHT BY SURVIVORS.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR, ANY IMPLICATION

BY ANYONE IN OPPOSITION THAT WOULD PUSH FORWARD -- THAT WE WOULD

PUSH FORWARD LEGISLATION THAT WOULD HARM SURVIVORS OR IN ANY WAY

JEOPARDIZE THEIR ABILITY TO GET JUSTICE IS DISGUSTING. EARLIER I MENTIONED

A HORRIFIC ATTACK ENDURED BY LYDIA CUOMO. BUT I THINK TO REALLY

UNDERSTAND WHY THIS LAW IS IMPORTANT, WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE

SPECIFICS OF HER CASE AND MANY OTHERS LIKE HER. THAT MORNING AS MS.

CUOMO WAS WAITING FOR HER RIDE TO GO TO HER FIRST DAY AS A TEACHER, A

POLICE OFFICER BY THE NAME OF MR. PENA WHO WAS DRUNK AND WHO --

WHO HAD BEEN DRUNK THE NIGHT BEFORE AND WHO WAS OFF DUTY AND OUT OF

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

UNIFORM, STOPPED HER AND ASKED HER FOR DIRECTIONS TO THE SUBWAY AND

SUGGEST THAT SHE ACCOMPANY HIM. WHEN SHE REFUSED, HE BRANDISHED HIS

POLICE-ISSUED 9 MILLIMETER GLOCK AND FORCED HER DOWN AN ALLEY

WHERE HE HELD A GUN TO HER HEAD AND VIOLATED HER IN EVERY WAY

IMAGINABLE. HE THREATENED TO SHOOT HER IN THE FACE IF SHE SCREAMED OR

OPENED HER EYES. ULTIMATELY, A RESIDENT OF THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS

CALLED THE POLICE AFTER BECOMING CONCERNED BY MS. CUOMO'S TONE OF

VOICE AND THE FACT THAT SHE WAS COVERING HER EYES AND HER MOUTH WITH

HER OWN HANDS. WHILE THE JURY SEEMED TO BELIEVE THAT PENA'S PENIS

HAD MADE ORAL AND ANAL CONTACT WITH MS. CUOMO, THEY COULDN'T AGREE

ON WHETHER HE HAD VAGINALLY PENETRATED HER. THEY CONVICTED MR. PENA

OF PREDATORY SEXUAL ASSAULT WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE PENETRATION, BUT

WERE DEADLOCKED ON THE RAPE CHARGES WHICH DO REQUIRE IT.

RIGHT NOW, CASES LIKE CUOMO'S WHERE COMMON SENSE

WOULD DICTATE THAT THE FACTS DEMONSTRATE THAT A RAPE OCCURRED WOULD

PRECLUDE RAPE CHARGES AND CONVICTIONS SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE WAS NO

PENETRATION BETWEEN GENITALS. NEW YORK HAS TO CATCH UP TO NATIONAL

STANDARDS. THE FBI HAS ALREADY EXPANDED THE DEFINITION OF RAPE TO

INCLUDE MULTIPLE KINDS OF PENETRATION, INCLUDING FORCED ORAL AND ANAL

SEX. MORE SPECIFICALLY, THEIR DEFINITION NOW SAYS: PENETRATION, NO

MATTER HOW SLIGHT OF THE VAGINA OR ANUS WITH ANY BODY PART OR OBJECT,

OR ORAL PENETRATION BY SEX OR ORGAN OF ANOTHER PERSON WITHOUT THE

CONSENT OF THE VICTIM. ADDITIONALLY, EIGHT OTHER STATES HAVE ALREADY

RECOGNIZED RAPE AS ORAL, ANAL, AND VAGINAL CONTACT.

WE HAVE TO DO BETTER BY VICTIMS. THE PENA CASE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

SHOWED US THE FLAW IN THE STATUTE AND IT IS OUR DUTY TO FIX IT. THE

REALITY IS THAT RIGHT NOW HOW PERSONS ARE SEXUALLY VIOLATED IS NOT

ADEQUATELY ACKNOWLEDGED BY OR PROSECUTED. THIS IS LEGISLATION THAT

WILL ESTABLISH POLICY THAT THAT THE LAW SUPPORTS RAPE SURVIVORS. IT IS MY

HOPE THAT THIS POLICY WILL TURN -- WILL IN TURN INFLUENCE PUBLIC ATTITUDES

TOWARDS SURVIVORS.

I URGE US TO UNDERSTAND THAT RAPE IS NOT JUST A LEGAL

TERM. RAPE IS ABOUT FORCEFUL ASSERTION OF POWER AND CONTROL. WHILE

THERE'S A COMMON COLLOQUIAL UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT RAPE ENTAILS, WE

MUST ADVANCE OUR LAW TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE RECOGNIZING THAT THIS

VIOLATION CAN HAPPEN TO ANYONE, REGARDLESS OF GENDER, AND THAT IT DOES

NOT, IN FACT, REQUIRE FORCED VAGINAL INTERCOURSE. THERE SHOULD BE

OBVIOUSLY NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE WAY THAT THE LAW TREATS A MALE

SURVIVOR OR A FEMALE SURVIVOR; FORCED VAGINAL CONTACT VERSUS FORCED

ANAL CONTACT VERSUS FORCED ORAL CONTACT. OUR PROPOSED CHANGE WILL

ACTUALLY MAKE THE JOB OF EFFECTIVE PROSECUTORS MUCH EASIER, CREATING

EASILY COMMUNICATIVE STANDARDS THAT JURIES CAN UNDERSTAND BECAUSE

REGARDLESS OF YOUR GENDER DESIGNATION AT BIRTH, A FORCED SEXUAL ACT IS, IN

FACT, RAPE.

AND OUR COLLEAGUES' FEARS ARE UNFOUNDED. ROUTINELY

WHERE THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THE LAW ALLOWS PROSECUTORS TO DO

WE TURN TO LEGISLATIVE INTENT. AND I WANT TO READ AN ACTUAL EXCERPT

FROM THE -- FROM THE CASE QUOTED BY OUR COLLEAGUE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY

THE CASE CONTINUALLY MENTIONED EVERY YEAR, ALONZO, BECAUSE OF THE

MEMO THAT I'LL TALK ABOUT IN A MINUTE, THERE IS NO INFALLIBLE FORMULA FOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

DECIDING HOW MANY CRIMES ARE COMMITTED IN A PARTICULAR SEQUENCE OF

EVENTS. IN EACH CASE, THE ULTIMATE QUESTION IS WHICH RESULT IS MORE

CONSISTENT WITH THE LEGISLATURE'S INTENT. AND OUR INTENT HERE IS TO

ENSURE THAT -- THAT DAS PLEAD CASES WITH SPECIFICITY SUFFICIENT TO BE

ABLE TO GET A CONVICTION AND SUFFICIENT TO BE ABLE TO GET CONSECUTIVE

SENTENCING.

LASTLY, BUT IMPORTANTLY, THIS CHANGE WOULD PROVIDE

VICTIMS WITH THE RESPECT THAT THEY DESERVE. AND I WANT TO -- BEFORE I

GET INTO THAT, I WANT TO ADDRESS THE MEMO THAT WE HAD BEEN REFERRING TO

SINCE 2013. THIS IS THE MEMO BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION,

WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY CY VANCE, THE FORMER DA WHOSE OFFICE HAS

CONTINUOUSLY BEEN UNDER INVESTIGATION AND ACTUALLY, HE HIMSELF

REQUESTED AN INTERNAL REPORT ABOUT THEIR MISHANDLING OF SEXUAL ASSAULT

CASES. IS THIS REALLY WHO WE WANT TO RELY ON WHEN WE'RE ARGUING THAT

WE ARE FOR VICTIMS, THAT WE ARE HERE TO ENSURE THAT VICTIMS GET JUSTICE?

SOMEONE WHOSE OFFICE IN 2019 DROPPED 44 PERCENT OF THE CASES THAT

CAME BEFORE HIM. ALMOST HALF OF THE CASES OF SEXUAL ASSAULT WERE

DROPPED. THIS IS NOT THE MEMO WE SHOULD BE RELYING ON AND, FRANKLY,

ESPECIALLY AFTER PENA, BECAUSE THAT CASE, THAT CASE CLEARLY SHOWED US

THAT WHERE PLEADINGS ARE SPECIFIC, WHERE YOU CAN ACTUALLY -- WHERE

PLEADINGS ARE SPECIFIC, YOU'RE ABLE TO GET THE CONVICTION AND YOU'RE ABLE

TO GET CONSECUTIVE SENTENCING.

IN THAT CASE, THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF PENA'S SEMEN IN

THE VICTIM'S UNDERWEAR, REDNESS IN HER GENITALS, EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY

OF THE VICTIM'S OWN CONTACT WITH PAIN AND THE ATTACK, AND THE JURY WAS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

NOT ABLE TO CONVICT ON RAPE -- AND I WANT TO ADDRESS THE 75 YEARS

ACTUALLY. THE REASON HE GOT 75 YEARS WAS BECAUSE AFTER THE JURY WAS

DEADLOCKED, HE WENT BACK AND MADE A PLEA -- HE WENT BACK AND TOOK A

DEAL, A DEAL THAT GAVE HIM 75 YEARS IN PRISON, A DEAL HE TRIED TO LATER GO

TO COURT AND OVERTURN AND HAS BEEN UNABLE TO TO DATE.

REDEFINING RAPE TO INCLUDE VAGINAL, ORAL, AND SEXUAL

CONDUCT, THE LATER WHICH WAS CURRENTLY PROSECUTED AS CRIMINAL SEXUAL

ACTS AND IN -- EVEN IN THE PENA CASE WERE CHARGED SEPARATELY, HE GOT

SEPARATE SENTENCES FOR THE ONES THAT WERE NOT -- THAT HE DIDN'T PLEAD TO.

AND A COMMENT THAT WAS MADE BY -- BY OUR COLLEAGUE IN THAT THIS BILL

WAS BORNE OUT OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE JURY IN THE PENA CASE. I

THINK THE PENA CASE SHOWED US THE HOLES IN THE LAW. BUT THIS BILL WAS

BORNE OUT OF THE THOUSANDS OF VICTIM IN THE LGBTIQ COMMUNITY,

WOMEN, MEN WHO HAVE GONE TO THE POLICE, WHO HAVE GONE TO THE DAS

OFFICE AFTER BEING ASSAULTED AND WHO HAVE HAD THEIR CASES EITHER

DROPPED, IGNORED OR NOT DESIGNATED AS RAPE SIMPLY BECAUSE OF WHO

THEY ARE OR BECAUSE THERE WAS NO PENETRATION, OR BECAUSE OF THE

GENITALS THAT WERE INVOLVED. AND TO BE ABLE TO FACE THESE PEOPLE AND

TELL THEM, THE HEINOUS SEXUAL ASSAULT THAT HAPPENED TO YOU IS NOT RAPE,

IT'S NOT THE KIND OF LEGISLATURE THAT WE SHOULD BE.

AND SO I'M GOING TO URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE YES

AND VOTE YES BECAUSE OUR LEGISLATIVE INTENT, AND I'M GOING TO REPEAT IT

ONCE MORE BECAUSE I AM HOPEFUL THAT ONE DAY THIS LAW WILL PASS, AND IF

A COURT EVER HAS A QUESTION, IF A DA EVER HAS A QUESTION THEY CAN COME

BACK AND LOOK AT OUR RECORD THAT WILL SHOW THAT OUR LEGISLATIVE INTENT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WAS TO MAKE VICTIMS WHOLE, TO ALLOW A DA TO PLEAD WITH SPECIFICITY

WHERE ANAL RAPE OCCURRED, WHERE ORAL RAPE OCCURRED, WHERE A VAGINAL

RAPE OCCURRED. AND IF THEY HAPPEN TO BE DURING ONE INCIDENT THEN THEY

CAN CHARGE FOR THOSE THREE CRIMES, AND THEY CAN GET CONVICTIONS FOR

THOSE THREE CRIMES, AND THEY COULD GET SENTENCING FOR THOSE THREE

CRIMES, AND THEY CAN FINALLY GIVE VICTIMS THE JUSTICE THAT THEY DESERVE.

EARLIER TODAY I HAD TO CONTEMPLATE WHETHER I CALLED

MS. CUOMO OR NOT. AND I COULD NOT FACE THE IDEA OF HAVING TO EXPLAIN

TO HER WHY AFTER TEN YEARS OUR LEGISLATURE STILL CAN'T FACE THE FACT THAT

WHAT HAPPENED TO HER IS RAPE, AND THAT I HAD TO STAND UP HERE AND ARGUE

WHY THE ASSAULT THAT SHE ENDURED WAS NOT RAPE AND WHY THERE ARE

LEGISLATORS WHO BELIEVE THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO HER IS NOT RAPE. AND

WHY THERE ARE LAWYERS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE DAS ASSOCIATION IS,

WHO BELIEVE THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO HER IS NOT RAPE. AND I WILL POINT

OUT THAT SINCE 2013, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY MEMORANDUM IN

OPPOSITION; IN FACT, WE'VE ACTUALLY RECEIVED MEMORANDUMS IN SUPPORT

FROM MANY OTHER COMMUNITY GROUPS, INCLUDING GMHC, INCLUDING

WIN, AND WE'VE HAD SURVIVORS COME TO US AND TELL US HOW DIFFICULT IT IS

TO FACE THE REALITY THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM NOT ONLY WILL NOT BE

CLASSIFIED AS RAPE BUT WILL PROBABLY NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF A COURTHOUSE.

AND SO WHEN LAST YEAR I TALKED ABOUT DISTRICT

ATTORNEYS WANTING TO DO THEIR JOB, I MEANT IT. IF YOU ARE A DISTRICT

ATTORNEY WHO IS DOING THIS JOB FOR THE IDEA OF PROTECTING VICTIMS,

SURVIVORS, AND GETTING THEM JUSTICE, WE ARE GIVING YOU THE TOOLS. WE

ARE TELLING YOU WHEN YOU FACE A SURVIVOR AND THESE THREE ACTS OCCUR,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ANAL, ORAL, AND VAGINAL RAPE, YOU ARE TO CHARGE WITH SPECIFICITY. YOU

ARE TO PLEAD THE FACTS AND YOU ARE TO GET THAT VICTIM JUSTICE. DO NOT

HIDE BEHIND HOW DIFFICULT IT COULD BE BECAUSE IF YOU ARE AN EFFECTIVE

LAWYER, YOU CAN DO THIS; YOU'VE DONE MANY OTHER THINGS.

AND SO I URGE YOU ALL TO VOTE YES, AND I URGE OUR

COLLEAGUES IN THE SENATE TO DO THE SAME BECAUSE WE CANNOT DO THIS FOR

ANOTHER TEN YEARS. WE DID IT WITH THE CHILD VICTIMS ACT, DID WE NOT

LEARN NOTHING? DID WE NOT LEARN FROM OUR OWN HISTORY OF TURNING OUR

BACKS ON SURVIVORS? THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LAWLER.

MR. LAWLER: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD?

MS. CRUZ: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. CRUZ, WILL YOU

YIELD?

MR. LAWLER: THANK YOU. I JUST -- I -- I JUST WANT

TO GET SOME CLARITY FOR THE RECORD ON LEGISLATIVE INTENT. YOU BROUGHT UP

THE FORMER MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND HIS OFFICE'S BUNGLING OF

NUMEROUS CASES, DROPPING CHARGES WHEN THEY SHOULD HAVE PROSECUTED.

OBVIOUSLY, PROSECUTORS ACROSS THE STATE AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY USE

DISCRETION ALL THE TIME. IS THE INTENT OF THIS BILL IN PART TO LIMIT THAT

DISCRETION, TO REDEFINE THE LAW SO THAT REGARDLESS OF PENETRATION WITH

RESPECT TO ANAL, VAGINAL OR ORAL, THAT IT WILL BE EASIER TO BRING CHARGES OF

RAPE FORWARD AND THAT PROSECUTORS WOULD HAVE LESS DISCRETION TO DROP

THOSE CHARGES?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MS. CRUZ: I WOULD ARGUE THAT DROPPING -- AND I

ACTUALLY MISQUOTED EARLIER, I SAID 44 PERCENT, IT WAS 49 PERCENT. I

WOULD ARGUE --

MR. LAWLER: I'M SORRY --

MS. CRUZ: I SAID I MISQUOTED EARLIER. IT WASN'T 44

PERCENT, IT WAS ACTUALLY 49 PERCENT OF THE CASES THAT WERE DROPPED. I

WOULD ARGUE THAT 49 PERCENT DROP RATE ISN'T REALLY ABOUT DISCRETION, IT'S

ABOUT UNWILLINGNESS TO DO THEIR JOB. BUT LET'S IMAGINE A SCENARIO

WHERE THERE IS A DAS OFFICE THAT IS MORE THAN WILLING TO DO THIS BUT

FINDS THEMSELVES IN A POSITION WHERE THEY MIGHT NOT KNOW IF THE

CURRENT LAW ALLOWS THEM TO DO THAT OR NOT, OUR LAW IS GOING TO BE OR IS

INTENDED TO BE SPECIFIC ENOUGH TO ENSURE THAT WHERE THOSE ACTS

OCCURRED, AS DESCRIBED IN THE STATUTE, THE DA CAN PLEAD THE CASE, CAN

CHARGE THE PERPETRATOR, CAN GET A CONVICTION AND CAN GET CONSECUTIVE

SENTENCING. DOES THAT --

MR. LAWLER: YEAH, SO --

MS. CRUZ: OKAY.

MR. LAWLER: -- YOU KNOW, AND -- AND I APPRECIATE

THAT CLARITY. AND -- AND I THINK THE WAY I WOULD READ YOUR INTENT HERE

AND BASED ON WHAT YOUR -- YOUR COMMENTS ARE IS THAT THE BOTTOM LINE

IS, PROSECUTORS SHOULD NOT BE SUBSTITUTING THEIR JUDGMENT ON WHAT THE

LAW IS AND THAT WE'RE GIVING THEM MORE SPECIFICITY TO ENSURE THAT THE

CHARGES THAT SHOULD BE BROUGHT ARE BEING BROUGHT WHEN IT COMES TO

RAPE.

MS. CRUZ: YES. AND -- AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE CAN DEFINITELY AGREE ON. IT'S OUR JOB TO DRAFT THE

LAW, TO DO IT WITH ENOUGH CLARITY -- IN FACT, ACCORDING TO ALONZO, A LOT

OF -- AND I KNOW YOUR SIDE USUALLY RELIES ON IT, TO -- TO ARGUE AGAINST IT,

A LOT OF THEIR DISAGREEMENT OR A LOT OF THEIR DISLIKE OF -- OF THE FACTS WAS

BECAUSE THE LAW IN THAT SPECIFIC CASE WAS NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH AND DID

NOT ALLOW FOR -- FOR THE CONVICTION IN THE WAY THAT -- DID NOT ALLOW FOR

THE CONVICTION TO BE SPECIFIC ENOUGH. IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, THE

VICTIM HAD BEEN FONDLED -- TWO OF THE VICTIMS, BUT IT WASN'T CLEAR

WHERE ONE ACT BEGAN, WHERE ANOTHER ENDED AND THE -- AND THE -- THE

STATUTE WASN'T CLEAR ENOUGH, ACCORDING TO THE COURT.

AND SO I THINK WHEN WE CAN, AND WHERE WE SHOULD AS

A LEGISLATURE MAKE SOMETHING SPECIFIC ENOUGH SO THERE IS NO QUESTION

FOR A DEFENSE ATTORNEY, BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DO THEIR JOB IN DEFENDING

THEIR CLIENT, FOR A DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DO THEIR JOB

IN PLEADING THE CASE AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE ALSO IN COMPLIANCE

WITH CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO DO SO AND

I BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL DOES EXACTLY THAT.

MR. LAWLER: OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR.

LAWLER.

MR. LAWLER: THANK YOU. SO I VERY MUCH AGREE

WITH MY COLLEAGUE'S SENTIMENT THAT PROSECUTORS SHOULD BE PROSECUTING

OFFENSES AND -- AND BARRING EVIDENCE THAT WOULD SUGGEST OTHERWISE,

THEY SHOULD BRING CHARGES AGAINST INDIVIDUALS WHO COMMIT CRIMES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THE PROBLEM WE HAVE HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK RIGHT NOW IS IN

CERTAIN JURISDICTIONS WE HAVE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS WHO DON'T CARE WHAT WE

SAY IN THIS BODY, WHO DON'T CARE WHAT THE LAW IS AND DECIDE THAT THEY

WILL NOT ENFORCE CERTAIN OFFENSES NO MATTER WHAT THE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS.

THAT IS A PROBLEM. AND SO I AGREE WITH TRYING TO CLARIFY THE LAWS.

TRYING TO STRENGTHEN THE LAWS SO THAT IT IS VERY CLEAR TO DISTRICT

ATTORNEYS ALL ACROSS THE STATE. WHETHER IT WAS THE FORMER MANHATTAN

DISTRICT ATTORNEY CY VANCE OR THE CURRENT MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY

MR. BRAGG, YOU HAVE A JOB TO DO. YOU ARE THERE TO ENFORCE THE LAW. IF

YOU DON'T LIKE THE LAW, RUN FOR THE LEGISLATURE. OTHERWISE, ENFORCE IT.

AND SO I DO APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE'S LEGISLATION. I SUPPORTED IT LAST

YEAR. I WILL BE VOTING FOR IT AGAIN. I THINK MY COLLEAGUE TO MY RIGHT

RAISED SEVERAL IMPORTANT CONCERNS WHICH HOPEFULLY CAN CONTINUE TO BE

LOOKED AT AND FINE-TUNED, BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT THE OBJECTIVE SHOULD

BE TO GET SEXUAL PREDATORS OFF THE STREETS. RAPE IS RAPE. AND WHETHER

YOU'RE THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK OR AN INDIVIDUAL ON THE

STREETS, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO FORCIBLY TOUCH SOMEONE. PERIOD.

AND YOU SHOULD BE PROSECUTED FOR DOING SO. AND SADLY, DISTRICT

ATTORNEYS, WHETHER THEY BE FROM ALBANY COUNTY OR ELSEWHERE, DON'T

SEEM TO HAVE THE COURAGE TO STAND UP AND ENFORCE THE LAW. IT NEEDS TO

BE DONE.

SO I SUPPORT THIS BILL AND I THANK THE SPONSOR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT JANUARY 1,

2023.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 6319-A. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY

MEMBER WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO

CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY

PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. GLICK TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. GLICK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WANT TO RISE

TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR HER DEBATE AND HER EXPLANATION, AND TO

STAND HERE YET AGAIN TO SEEK JUSTICE FOR SURVIVORS OF RAPE. IT IS

INFURIATING. I MEAN, I'M OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER WHEN DAS SAID THAT

YOU NEEDED AN EYEWITNESS TO BRING CHARGES TO RAPE. IT WAS A LONG TIME

AGO, BUT THERE STILL IS A QUEASINESS ON THE PART OF DISTRICT ATTORNEYS

AROUND SEXUAL OFFENSES.

SO I COMMEND THE SPONSOR, WITHDRAW MY REQUEST AND

HAPPILY VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. GLICK IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GOODELL.

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

EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I HAVE VOTED IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL IN THE PAST AND I

VOTED AGAINST THIS BILL LAST YEAR AND I WILL CONTINUE TO VOTE AGAINST IT FOR

THE REASONS MENTIONED BY MY COLLEAGUE MS. WALSH. WE HAVE BEEN

TOLD BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION THAT THIS BILL COULD RESULT IN

AN EXTRAORDINARILY UNFORTUNATE SITUATION WHERE WOMEN WHO HAD BEEN

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THE VICTIM OF SOME OF THE MOST HORRIFIC CRIMINAL ACTS COULD SEE THE

DEFENDANT'S POTENTIAL SENTENCE CUT IN HALF. AND SO IN AN EFFORT TO

RENAME SOME OF THESE ACTS AS RAPE, THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE MAY

BE TO CUT THE PENALTY IN HALF, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE THAT I THINK

THIS BODY WANTS TO ACCOMPLISH IF IT TRULY WANTS TO BACK WOMEN. AND

WHAT'S FRUSTRATING IS THAT THERE'S A VERY SIMPLE SOLUTION INVOLVING AN

AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING STATUTE THAT WOULD NOT CREATE THIS POSSIBILITY

THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY REDUCING THE SENTENCE FOR THE MOST HORRENDOUS ACTS

THAT CAN BE PERFORMED AGAINST A WOMAN. YET THAT AMENDMENT IS NOT

BEING CONSIDERED.

NOW, I'VE BEEN PRACTICING LAW FOR OVER 40 YEARS, AND

ONE THING I'VE LEARNED IS THAT DIFFERENT AREAS OF LAW HAVE DIFFERENT

EXPERTISE. SO EVEN THOUGH I'VE BEEN PRACTICING FOR FOUR DECADES, I

REACH OUT TO LAWYERS WHO SPECIALIZE IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE LAW TO GET

THEIR INSIGHTS. AND IN THIS CASE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION HAS

BEEN ABSOLUTELY CLEAR IN THEIR OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL BECAUSE IT CAN

REDUCE THE SENTENCE OF DEFENDANTS WHO HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF HORRIFIC

CRIMES.

AND BECAUSE I AM STANDING UP IN FAVOR OF THE

MAXIMUM SENTENCE POSSIBLE FOR THOSE DEFENDANTS WHO COMMIT THESE

CRIMES, I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS AND I RECOMMEND MY COLLEAGUES VOTE

AGAINST IT AS WELL. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MS. CRUZ TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MS. CRUZ: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'M VERY

HAPPY TO SEE SO MANY MORE COLLEAGUES VOTING YES. WE HAD A FEW VOTE

IN THE NEGATIVE LAST YEAR. I THINK THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING OR A BETTER

UNDERSTANDING THAT RAPE, NO MATTER WHO IT HAPPENS TO, NO MATTER WHICH

PART OF YOUR GENITALS IT INVOLVES, SHOULD BE DEEMED RAPE. BECAUSE IT IS

TRAUMATIC, BECAUSE IT IS A CRIME, AND BECAUSE YOU AS A SURVIVOR DESERVE

THE RESPECT, DESERVE THE JUSTICE AND, FRANKLY, THE RECOGNITION THAT YOU

ARE A VICTIM OF A CRIME. AND NO ONE, ESPECIALLY THE LEGISLATURE, SHOULD

BE TELLING YOU THAT YOU AREN'T. BECAUSE WE WERE ELECTED TO PROTECT

PEOPLE. TO PUSH FORWARD OUR COUNTRY. TO PUSH FORWARD OUR STATE. TO

PUSH FORWARD THE BELIEFS OF OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE THERE ARE TIMES

WHEN YOU'RE ELECTED TO LEAD AND THERE ARE TIMES WHEN YOU LEAD THE

COMMUNITY. AND THIS IS THE DIRECTION WE NEED TO LEAD OUR COMMUNITY.

TO UNDERSTAND THAT GENDER NORMS FOR WHAT RAPE SHOULD LOOK LIKE ARE

OUTDATED. THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE TELLING A TRANS WOMAN OR A TRANS MAN

THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM IS NOT RAPE. OR A MAN WHO WAS RAPED THAT

WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM WAS NOT RAPE.

AND SO I'M HOPING THAT THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE LAST TIME

THAT I HAVE TO DO THIS ON THE FLOOR. THAT OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE SENATE

STAND WITH US. AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR ENSURING THAT WE CAN

GET THE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO HAVE BEEN DENIED JUSTICE A

SEMBLANCE OF WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE. THANK YOU, AND I'M VOTING IN

THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. CRUZ IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MS. WALSH TO EXPLAIN HER VOTE.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. VERY

BRIEFLY, A COUPLE OF POINTS. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE MEMORANDUM

FROM THE DA'S ASSOCIATION WAS DATED FROM 2013. AND SOME OF YOU,

PROBABLY ALL OF YOU, KNOW THAT WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN A BILL IS COMING

BACK FOR ANOTHER YEAR, STAFF WILL REACH OUT TO THE ORGANIZATIONS AND SAY,

ARE YOU STILL OPPOSED TO THIS BILL OR ARE YOU NOW IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL?

JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF MY COLLEAGUES, IN 2020 THE DA'S ASSOCIATION

WAS CONTACTED AND THEY ARE STILL OPPOSED TO THIS BILL. AND THE ONE

QUESTION I ASKED OF THE SPONSOR WAS HAS THIS BILL SUBSTANTIVELY

CHANGED? SO THE -- THE FACT THAT WE DO LIKE, DON'T LIKE, DON'T TRUST,

WHATEVER THE -- THE CURRENT -- THE CURRENT DA THAT'S THERE, I DON'T KNOW.

IT -- IT -- IT'S A PROBLEM WITH THIS BILL. AND I THINK THE OTHER POINT I'D

LIKE TO MAKE VERY QUICKLY IS THAT THERE'S A FIX. AND WHAT I FIND

FRUSTRATING IS THAT FOR TEN YEARS WE COULD HAVE THE -- THE ESSENCE OF THIS

BILL, WHICH IS RAPE IS RAPE, RIGHT? WE COULD HAVE THE RAPE

DETERMINATION OF ORAL RAPE, OF ANAL RAPE. WE COULD DO IT IN SUCH A WAY,

BUT MAKE IT SO THAT THERE'S NO RISK OF THIS PROBLEM WITH SENTENCING.

AND IT'S -- AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THAT AMENDMENT HAS NOT BEEN

MADE. THAT IS THE REASON, PERHAPS -- I DON'T KNOW WHY THE SENATE

MAYBE HASN'T PASSED IT, BUT THAT COULD BE THE REASON WHY IT'S TAKING TEN

YEARS. SO WHY NOT JUST FIX IT? WE DON'T DISAGREE THAT IT SHOULD BE

TERMED AS RAPE. WE UNDERSTAND THAT MEN AND WOMEN CAN BE RAPED.

WE VALUE THE EXPERIENCES AND SUFFERING OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE

BEEN RAPED. WE ALL AGREE ABOUT THAT. THE PROBLEM IS, WHY MAKE THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WORST RAPISTS GET LESS TIME? FIX THAT IN THE BILL AND I THINK YOU WILL GET

A UNANIMOUS VOTE. BUT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW WITH THE BILL AS IT IS, I

VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES TO EXPLAIN HER BILL -- HER VOTE.

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

FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I REALLY ACTUALLY JUST WANTED TO

RISE TO COMMEND THE TENACITY OF THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION TO NOT

JUST, YOU KNOW, ON A REGULAR BASIS DEBATE THE BILL IN A VERY GOOD

FASHION, EXPLAINING THE DETAILS. BUT TO ALSO, YOU KNOW, TALK ABOUT THE

STRENGTH THAT IT TAKES TO OPPOSE ONE OF THE AGENCIES THAT WE ALL HAVE THE

MOST RESPECT FOR IN OUR SOCIETY, AND THAT'S THE DA'S ASSOCIATION.

PEOPLE RESPECT THE DA. PEOPLE RESPECT THE WORK THAT THEY DO. IT'S A

PART OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND IT'S A REAL IMPORTANT PART OF LAW

ENFORCEMENT. SO TO DISAGREE WITH THEM BOTH IN PRIVATE AND IN PUBLIC IS

NOT THAT EASY OF A THING TO DO, PARTICULARLY FOR AN ATTORNEY OF HER CALIBER

WHO HAS A LONG CAREER LEFT. I -- I THINK THIS WORK IS COMMENDABLE. I

REALLY TRULY WISH THAT THIS WERE 20 YEARS AGO WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE TO

WORRY ABOUT RAPE AT SUCH HIGH NUMBERS. WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT RAPE

AS IF IT WAS JUST SOMETHING VAGINALLY, NOT ANALLY AND ORALLY. WE DIDN'T

EVEN HAVE TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS. BUT SOMETHING IS HAPPENING IN

OUR SOCIETY JUST PUSHING US TOWARDS HAPPY TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS

SO THAT THEY CAN BE STOPPED DEAD IN ITS TRACKS AND CONSIDERED EXACTLY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WHAT IT IS. IF SOMEBODY SAYS NO, I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE THE FORMER

PRESIDENT IT STILL MEANS NO. AND IF YOU DO IT ANYWAY, THAT'S RAPE.

SO I COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR HER WORK ON THIS AND

I'M PLEASED TO VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR IT AGAIN.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES

IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

MR. GOODELL.

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

RECORD THE FOLLOWING COLLEAGUES IN THE NEGATIVE ON THIS BILL: MARJORIE

BYRNES, MR. DIPIETRO, MR. FITZPATRICK, MR. FRIEND, MR. GALLAHAN, MR.

HAWLEY, MR. MCDONOUGH AND MR. TAGUE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

MR. GOODELL: ALSO SIR, PLEASE ADD TO THAT LIST MR.

BRABENEC IN THE NEGATIVE AND MR. SMITH.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: YOU'RE QUITE

WELCOME.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

GOING TO THE A-CALENDAR, PAGE 3, RULES REPORT NO. 6,

THE CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08432-A, RULES

REPORT NO. 6, DINOWITZ, KELLES, SILLITTI, LAVINE, ABINANTI, PAULIN,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

SIMON, SEAWRIGHT, STECK, FERNANDEZ, BURGOS, ENGLEBRIGHT, GALEF,

GOTTFRIED, CRUZ. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ELECTION LAW, IN RELATION TO

ABSENTEE VOTING IN VILLAGE ELECTIONS; TO AMEND CHAPTER 139 OF THE

LAWS OF 2020 AMENDING THE ELECTION LAW RELATING TO ABSENTEE VOTING,

IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF

CERTAIN PROVISIONS UPON EXPIRATION THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

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

ADVANCED.

MR. NORRIS.

MR. NORRIS: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, PLEASE?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. DINOWITZ: YES, I WILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE SPONSOR YIELDS.

MR. NORRIS: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN DINOWITZ.

SINCE THE LAST TIME WE DEBATED THIS BILL A LOT OF CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE

CHANGED. I REMEMBER DOING IT ACTUALLY AT MY KITCHEN TABLE. YOU MAY

HAVE BEEN DOING THE SAME THING BECAUSE THERE WERE VERY FEW MEMBERS

IN THIS CHAMBER WHEN WE PASSED THE FIRST BILL. MY QUESTION IS, IT'S NOT

A VERY LONG BILL. THE LANGUAGE IS VERY, VERY OPEN-ENDED.

MR. DINOWITZ: I'M SORRY, COULD YOU TALK A LITTLE

MORE LOUDLY, PLEASE?

MR. NORRIS: YES, I'D BE HAPPY TO, CHAIR DINOWITZ.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. DINOWITZ: THANK YOU.

MR. NORRIS: THE -- THE BILL LANGUAGE IS NOT VERY

LONG. SO MY QUESTION TO YOU ARE THREE PARTS: ONE, IT SAYS UNABLE TO

APPEAR. HOW WOULD YOU DEFINE THAT UNDER THIS PROPOSED LEGISLATION?

MR. DINOWITZ: THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO

BECAUSE OF THE VIRUS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT GOING TO A CROWDED PUBLIC

PLACE, AND AS A RESULT THEY WOULD BE UNABLE TO APPEAR.

MR. NORRIS: WOULD THAT APPLY FOR, LIKE, A

LOCKDOWN, A SHELTER IN PLACE OR ANYBODY WHO JUST DOESN'T WANT TO

APPEAR PHYSICALLY AT THE POLLING SITE?

MR. DINOWITZ: WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE - WHEN I

SAY "WE," I MEAN ME AND YOU AND EVERYBODY ELSE HERE - WHO ARE

CONCERNED ABOUT GOING TO A VOTING -- I MEAN, A POLLING PLACE VERY OFTEN

HAS A CROWD, HAS LINES AND ALL THAT. AND INEVITABLY, THERE ARE SOME

PEOPLE WHO -- WHO MAY NOT VOTE EVEN THOUGH THEY WOULD LIKE TO,

BECAUSE THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT CATCHING COVID. ESPECIALLY NOW

THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH A PERIOD WHEN THERE -- THERE'S A VARIANT THAT IS

SO EXTRAORDINARILY TRANSMISSIBLE. NOW, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT CONDITIONS

ARE GOING TO BE LIKE IN JUNE OR NOVEMBER. WE JUST DON'T KNOW.

HOPEFULLY, THINGS WILL BE BETTER. I MEAN, I LIKE WHEN PEOPLE GO OUT TO

VOTE IN PERSON. I MEET THEM ON THE STREET, I -- I -- YOU KNOW, ELECTION

YEAR AND THE WHOLE BIT. YOU CAN'T DO THAT WHEN PEOPLE VOTE ABSENTEE

BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT HERE. THE POINT HERE IS WE WANT TO DO

EVERYTHING WE CAN TO, IN A LEGITIMATE WAY, GIVE PEOPLE THE MEANS TO

CAST THEIR VOTE. THAT'S THE ESSENCE OF DEMOCRACY, PEOPLE VOTING. AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

NO ONE SHOULD LOSE THEIR VOTE BECAUSE THEY'RE AFRAID OF CATCHING THE

VIRUS. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL ADDRESSES. SO I -- AND WE DID THIS LAST

YEAR, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF IT. PARTICULARLY OLDER

PEOPLE, BECAUSE THOSE WERE THE PEOPLE WHO WERE PROBABLY MORE LIKELY

TO BE AFRAID OF GOING OUT. AND IT WAS -- IT WAS A HUGE SUCCESS, I THINK.

AND SINCE THE NUMBERS ARE STILL SO HIGH, IT MAKES SENSE TO CONTINUE IT

THROUGH THIS YEAR.

MR. NORRIS: NOW, IN TERMS OF THE ILLNESS, DOES THE

VOTER THEMSELVES HAVE TO HAVE THE ILLNESS?

MR. DINOWITZ: I'M SORRY. SAY IT AGAIN, PLEASE.

MR. NORRIS: DO -- IN TERMS OF THE WORD "ILLNESS,"

DOES THE VOTER THEMSELVES HAVE TO HAVE THE ILLNESS?

MR. DINOWITZ: NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE BILL SAYS.

THE BILL SAYS, PROVIDED THAT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS PARAGRAPH

"ILLNESS" SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO INSTANCES WHERE A VOTER IS

UNABLE TO APPEAR PERSONALLY AT A POLLING PLACE OF THE ELECTION DISTRICT

IN WHICH THEY'RE A QUALIFIED VOTER BECAUSE THERE'S A RISK OF CONTACTING

OR SPREADING A DISEASE THAT MAY CAUSE ILLNESS TO THE VOTER OR TO OTHER

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. SO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT PROTECTING THE VOTER, IT'S

ABOUT ALSO PROTECTING EVERYBODY ELSE. THAT'S WHY WE WEAR A MASK.

WE WEAR A MASK NOT ONLY TO PROTECT US, BUT TO PROTECT YOU, TO PROTECT

THESE PEOPLE.

MR. NORRIS: I -- I HAPPENED TO LOOK UP IN THE

WEBSTER DICTIONARY THE WORD "ILLNESS" AS DEFINED AS A SICKNESS OR AN

UNHEALTHY CONDITION OF BODY OR MIND FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL. SO I JUST

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WANT TO MAKE SURE, IF I HAVE -- THIS DOESN'T JUST APPLY FOR COVID,

RIGHT? THIS WOULD APPLY FOR THE FLU, A COLD, ANY OTHER DISEASE?

MR. DINOWITZ: YEAH, IT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY SAY

COVID. IT'S SLIGHTLY MORE GENERAL THAN THAT.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY, SO -- SO IF I HAVE A FEAR OF

GETTING A COLD FROM SOMEBODY ELSE, THEN UNDER YOUR BILL SOMEONE

COULD GET AN ABSENTEE BALLOT BECAUSE THEY'RE AFRAID OF GETTING A COLD?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT

I DON'T PERSONALLY DEFINE A COLD AS AN ILLNESS. IT'S LIKE -- I MEAN, IT'S A

SNIFFLE. I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS LIKE COVID. IT COULD BE --

MAYBE IT COULD BE CHICKEN POX, I DON'T KNOW. BUT THE POINT IS IS THAT

WE -- WE WANTED TO MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE GENERAL SO AS TO TAKE INTO

ACCOUNT THE CONTINGENCY OF -- OF -- WHEREBY THERE MIGHT BE SOME --

SOMETHING ELSE THAT GOES ON THIS YEAR ALONG THE LINES OF COVID.

MR. NORRIS: SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, THOUGH.

SO, IF SOMEONE IS FEARFUL OF GETTING A DISEASE -- IT BE A COLD, IT COULD BE

THE FLU, COULD BE COVID, COULD BE ANYTHING -- THEN THROUGH THE END OF

THE YEAR THEY COULD APPLY FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT AND RECEIVE ONE

BECAUSE THEY MIGHT BE AFRAID TO GET A COLD FROM SOMEBODY ELSE.

MR. DINOWITZ: I -- I WOULDN'T PUT IT THAT WAY. I

MEAN WE KNOW VERY WELL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COVID HERE. BUT

WE WANTED TO USE LANGUAGE THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE GENERAL THAN THAT.

WE -- WE ARE -- WE ARE STILL IN THE MIDST OF THIS PANDEMIC. I MEAN,

THANKFULLY THE NUMBERS IN NEW YORK CITY ARE GOING DOWN NOW, BUT

I'M NOT SURE WE CAN SAY THE SAME ABOUT THE REST OF THE STATE,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

UNFORTUNATELY. HOPEFULLY THAT WILL HAPPEN AS WELL. WE DON'T KNOW

THAT THERE WON'T BE ANOTHER VARIANT DOWN THE ROAD. HOPEFULLY THAT

WON'T HAPPEN, BUT WE HAVE TO BE PREPARED FOR IT. I THINK WE WOULD ALL

AGREE IN THIS ROOM THAT WE WANT TO SEE EVERY POSSIBLE PERSON WHO IS

ELIGIBLE TO VOTE TO VOTE. WE DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO NOT VOTE BECAUSE

THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT CATCHING COVID. AND -- AND THAT HOLDS TRUE IN

ALL OF OUR DISTRICTS, WHETHER A DEMOCRATIC DISTRICT OR REPUBLICAN

DISTRICT. YOU HAVE, I'M SURE, PLENTY OF CONSTITUENTS WHO VOTED BY

ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER THE SPECIAL RULES THAT WE PASSED IN 2021 AND WHO

WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT AGAIN IN 2022. AND I

THINK THERE WILL BE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE VERY UPSET IF

THEY CAN'T DO THAT.

MR. NORRIS: DID YOU THINK ABOUT DOING IT ON A

PIECEMEAL BASIS? MAYBE THROUGH THE VILLAGE ELECTIONS AND NOT THROUGH

THE END OF THE YEAR OR -- WE'RE GOING TO BE HERE UNTIL JUNE, BEGINNING OF

JUNE. DID YOU THINK ABOUT DOING THAT RIGHT TO THE END OF THE YEAR?

MR. DINOWITZ: I'M SORRY, DOING IT FOR THE --

MR. NORRIS: FOR THE VILLAGE ELECTIONS. JUST DO IT

NOW FOR THE VILLAGE ELECTIONS AND THEN SEE WHERE WE ARE COME EARLY IN

THE -- YOU KNOW, EARLY AS WE GET FURTHER THROUGH MAY, JUNE. WE'RE

GOING TO BE HERE LIKELY INTO THE BEGINNING OF JUNE. WHY -- WHY ARE WE

DOING THIS TO THE END OF THE YEAR?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, THAT WOULDN'T BE VERY

EFFICIENT TO HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN, WOULD IT? EITHER WE'RE HERE --

MR. NORRIS: THINGS -- THINGS ARE CHANGING ON A

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

REGULAR BASIS. I MEAN, THE LAST TIME WE DEBATED THIS BILL WAS THE

SUMMER OF 2020. NOT LAST YEAR. AND SINCE THEN WE'VE HAD A VACCINE,

PEOPLE ARE VACCINATED. PEOPLE ARE NOW IN STADIUMS -- I WANT TO GET THIS

ON THE RECORD BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE BUFFALO BILLS HAD OVER 60,000

PEOPLE IN THE STADIUM JUST THIS PAST WEEK. AND I'M VERY HAPPY ABOUT

IT, BY THE WAY.

MR. DINOWITZ: THAT'S GOOD.

MR. NORRIS: WE -- WE WON THE GAME, WE'RE GOING

TO WIN THE NEXT GAME AND MANY MORE.

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, THAT'S THE ONLY GOOD PART.

BUT 60,000 PEOPLE GETTING TOGETHER IS NOT TOO BRIGHT, IN MY OPINION.

MR. NORRIS: BUT PEOPLE ARE DOING IT. THEY'RE OUT

AND ABOUT, THEY'RE GOING TO THE MOVIES, THEY'RE GOING TO RESTAURANTS.

THEY'RE -- THEY'RE MOVING ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS.

MR. DINOWITZ: THEY ARE --

MR. NORRIS: CERTAINLY, THAT COULD CHANGE.

MR. DINOWITZ: EXACTLY. AND THE COVID RATES

ARE HUGE IN -- IN MANY PARTS OF NEW YORK. COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. SO I WANT TO ASK YOU ANOTHER

QUESTION. SO, THIS -- THIS WOULD APPLY TO EVERYBODY, RIGHT? SO IT

WOULD APPLY POTENTIALLY TO WAITRESSES AND WAITERS WHO ARE WAITING ON

PEOPLE ALL DAY LONG WHO ARE SEATED WITHOUT THEIR MASK. WOULD THAT BE

CORRECT? WOULD THEY BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE AN ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER

YOUR PROPOSED BILL?

MR. DINOWITZ: IF THEY'RE REGISTERED TO VOTE, YES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. THEY -- THEY WOULD BE.

CASHIERS --

MR. DINOWITZ: IF WE THOUGHT THERE WAS A NEED WE

COULD REPEAL THIS, BUT IT MAKES MORE -- IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO PASS THIS

AND THEN IF FOR SOME BIZARRE REASON WE WOULD WANT TO REPEAL IT, WE

COULD DO THAT. BUT TO PASS IT FOR A LIMITED PERIOD OF TIME AND THEN HAVE

TO DO IT AGAIN BEFORE THE END OF SESSION, TO ME, MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL

BEING THAT WE LIKE TO BE EFFICIENT HERE.

MR. NORRIS: I SEE. NOW, IN TERMS OF, LIKE, A

CANDIDATE IF THEY WANTED TO CHALLENGE THE -- THE VERIFICATION OF THE

ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATION, WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO DO THAT? WHAT

PROOF WOULD BE REQUIRED OF THE VOTER WHO APPLIES FOR AN ABSENTEE

BALLOT UNDER THIS CIRCUMSTANCE?

MR. DINOWITZ: IT'LL BE NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER

APPLICATION FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN APPLYING FOR

ABSENTEE BALLOTS BEFORE I WAS BORN, I'M SURE. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT --

I MEAN, THIS PAST YEAR I HAPPENED TO -- I FILLED OUT AN APPLICATION FOR AN

ABSENTEE BALLOT. I ULTIMATELY DIDN'T USE IT. I -- I WENT ONLINE,

(INAUDIBLE) WHATEVER. THEY SENT ME THE ABSENTEE BALLOT. I DIDN'T HAVE

TO SHOW ANY PROOF. THEY -- THEY LOOKED ME UP, I WAS REGISTERED TO

VOTE AND I GOT MY ABSENTEE BALLOT IN THE MAIL.

MR. NORRIS: (INAUDIBLE) GOOD CHALLENGES, LIKE IF

THEY SAY, I'M GOING TO BE IN COLLEGE, I'M GOING TO BE OUT OF THE COUNTY.

THEY COULD SAY, WHERE'S YOUR PLANE TICKET? A -- A CANDIDATE

THEORETICALLY COULD DO THAT. THEY COULD CHALLENGE THE ABSENTEE BALLOT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

APPLICATION. SO WHAT I'M ASKING FOR, WOULD -- JUST TO BE CLEAR, THERE

WOULD BE NO PROOF REQUIRED, YOU JUST CHECK THE BOX AND THEN THE BOARD

OF ELECTIONS WILL SEND YOU A BALLOT.

MR. DINOWITZ: AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND THE LAW,

THERE WOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE -- DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE DO AND

WHAT WE WOULD DO IF THIS PASSES. THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY ADDITIONAL

PROOF. I MEAN, I -- I DID NOT HAVE TO SUBMIT ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER TO

GET MY ABSENTEE BALLOT. PERIOD.

MR. NORRIS: MY POINT WAS THAT SOMEONE COULD

CHALLENGE THE BALLOT. NOW THAT'S WHY -- OR THE ABSENTEE BALLOT

APPLICATION. AND WHAT -- I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT PROOF IS THERE.

MR. DINOWITZ: WHY WOULD SOMEBODY WANT TO

CHALLENGE AN ABSENTEE BALLOT? WHY WOULD SOMEBODY WANT TO DEPRIVE

SOMEBODY OF THE ABILITY TO VOTE? THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE CONSISTENT

WITH A DEMOCRACY. YOU WANT PEOPLE TO VOTE. YOU WANT PEOPLE TO BE

ABLE TO VOTE, AND THIS WOULD HELP THAT HAPPEN.

MR. NORRIS: OKAY. NOW I WANT TO ASK YOU

ANOTHER QUESTION. LAST YEAR THERE WAS A REFERENDUM ON THE BALLOT FOR

NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING.

MR. DINOWITZ: CORRECT.

MR. NORRIS: IT BASICALLY ALLOWED EVERYBODY WHO

WANTED TO GET AN ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATION THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET A

BALLOT.

MR. DINOWITZ: THAT'S RIGHT.

MR. NORRIS: THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

FROM THE ELECTION RESULTS THAT I SAW, BY OVER 300,000 PEOPLE SAID, NO,

WE DO NOT WANT NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID. THEY VOTED THAT WAY.

MR. DINOWITZ: THEY DID, AFTER A VERY EXPENSIVE

CAMPAIGN. BUT YES, THEY DID --

MR. NORRIS: OH, THEY DID?

MR. DINOWITZ: -- (INAUDIBLE), AND AS A RESULT THAT

BALLOT PROPOSAL WAS DEFEATED.

MR. NORRIS: ALL RIGHT. NOW MY NEXT QUESTION,

WOULD THAT HAVE INCLUDED VOTERS WHO APPLIED FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT

UNDER THE TEMPORARY VOTERS PROVISION UNDER YOUR BILL BEFORE?

MR. DINOWITZ: THERE'S ACTUALLY --

MR. NORRIS: (INAUDIBLE) VOTERS -- DID IT ACTUALLY --

MR. DINOWITZ: LET ME -- LET ME -- I JUST HAPPEN TO

HAVE THIS WITH ME.

MR. NORRIS: GREAT.

MR. DINOWITZ: THIS IS WHAT THE BALLOT -- WHAT IT

SAID ON THE BALLOT, OKAY? IT SAID, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD

DELETE FROM THE CURRENT PROVISION ON ABSENTEE BALLOTS THE REQUIREMENT

THAT AN ABSENTEE BALLOT VOTER -- AN ABSENTEE VOTER MUST BE UNABLE TO

APPEAR AT THE POLLS BY REASON OF ABSENCE OF THE COUNTRY OR ILLNESS OR

PHYSICAL DISABILITY SHALL THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BE APPROVED. THIS

HAS NOTHING TO DO -- WELL, IT HAS A LITTLE BIT TO DO, BUT THIS IS NOT THE

SAME AS WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. THIS SIMPLY SAYS YOU CAN GET AN

ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER ANY AND ALL CIRCUMSTANCES WITHOUT HAVING A

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

REASON. THIS LEGISLATION IS MUCH NARROWER THAN THAT. IF IT WAS EXACTLY

THE SAME, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WOULD BE NECESSARILY APPROPRIATE

BECAUSE, AS YOU SAID, THE VOTERS VOTED. BUT THE VOTERS VOTED ON THIS.

THEY DIDN'T VOTE ON THAT. WHAT WE DO HERE IS A MUCH MORE NARROW SET

OF CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IT ONLY ALLOWS THE ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN -- IN

SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE REFERENDUM WAS. THE

REFERENDUM WAS FOR NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTS. THAT'S NOT THIS.

MR. NORRIS: SO IN TERMS OF THE -- THE -- YOUR --

YOUR LEGISLATION THAT'S GOING FORWARD RIGHT NOW, COULD ANYBODY IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK RECEIVE AN ABSENTEE BALLOT BY CHECKING THE

TEMPORARY ILLNESS BOX WITH NO PROOF? THEY JUST SAY, I'M AFRAID OF

GETTING THE COLD -- A COLD AND CHECK THE BOX.

MR. DINOWITZ: YEAH, JUST LIKE THEY DO NOW.

MR. NORRIS: SO THAT'S LIKE NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE.

MR. DINOWITZ: THAT'S NOT NO EXCUSE. THAT --

THERE IS AN EXCUSE, THEY'RE AFRAID OF CATCHING COVID. THAT'S THE

EXCUSE. THAT'S NOT NO EXCUSE, THAT'S EXCUSE.

MR. NORRIS: YEAH. OKAY.

I'LL LIKE TO GO ON THE BILL, MR. -- MR. DINOWITZ, THANK

YOU VERY MUCH FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTION. I APPRECIATE IT.

MR. DINOWITZ: SURE.

MR. NORRIS: MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. NORRIS: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ON THE BILL.

SINCE WE VOTED ON THIS BILL IN THE SUMMER OF 2020, A LOT OF THINGS HAVE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

CHANGED. CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED. WE ARE GETTING BACK TO WORK.

WE'RE GETTING BACK MOVING AROUND. WE'RE GOING TO THE BILLS GAMES.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVIE THEATERS. WE'RE OUT AT RESTAURANTS. THINGS ARE

GETTING BACK TO NORMAL. AND THE VOTERS MADE IT VERY CLEAR, VERY CLEAR

WITH NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING WITH THE PROVISION LAST YEAR WHERE

THEY VOTED IT DOWN BY OVER 300,000 VOTES. VOTED IT DOWN. AND THIS IS

VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO THAT. AND ALL THIS IS IS AN EXTENSION OF TRYING TO

MOVE THAT GOAL LINE TO HAVING NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING THROUGH THE

END OF THIS YEAR. AND I JUST HAVE TO IMPLORE MY COLLEAGUES TO SAY

LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. THEY SPOKE LOUD AND

CLEAR. WE DO NOT WANT NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING IN THE STATE OF NEW

YORK. BY OVER 300,000 PEOPLE. THEY SPOKE UP. THEY SAID NO. AND

THIS IS VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO THAT.

AND THE OTHER THING I JUST WANT TO MENTION IS THERE ARE

SOME CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS WITH THIS PARTICULAR BILL IN TERMS OF THE

ACTUAL -- WHO IS ENTITLED TO AN ABSENTEE BALLOT. THAT RESTS WITH THE

CONSTITUTION. HOW THEY ARE GIVEN OUT RESTS WITH THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

AND I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD HERE BECAUSE THAT IS VERY,

VERY IMPORTANT AS THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY IS EXAMINED DOWN THE ROAD IN

THIS PARTICULAR BILL.

SO WITH THAT, I THINK CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED

DRAMATICALLY. THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK HAVE SPOKEN ON

THIS ISSUE JUST THIS LAST YEAR, AND VERY CLEARLY. AND I THANK YOU FOR THE

OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. RA.

MR. RA: THANK YOU MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. DINOWITZ: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ YIELDS.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. DINOWITZ. SO, I HAVE SOME

QUESTIONS AS WELL, YOU KNOW, REALLY A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT AREAS OF THIS.

SO I WANT TO START WITH JUST THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE OF THIS WITHIN THE

BOARD OF ELECTIONS BECAUSE AS I'M SURE YOU KNOW, WHEN SOMEBODY

MAKES AN APPLICATION FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT IT GOES TO THE BOARD AND

THE BOARD APPROVES IT, YOU KNOW, SENDS THE PERSON A BALLOT. AND AS WE

KNOW, EVERYTHING WITHIN THE BOARDS IN OUR STATE IS DONE IN A BIPARTISAN

FASHION, AND TRADITIONALLY -- WE NOW HAVE A PORTAL, OBVIOUSLY -- BUT

PEOPLE WOULD USE -- WOULD USE THIS FORM. AND MY -- MY QUESTION

REALLY IS WHEN A COMMISSIONER AT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS GETS AN

APPLICATION FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT FEAR OF

ILLNESS. SO HOW CAN A COMMISSIONER EVALUATE WHETHER THIS PERSON IS

ELIGIBLE FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT WHEN THERE'S NOTHING IN THE FORM TO TALK

ABOUT THIS EXCUSE FOR GETTING A BALLOT.

MR. DINOWITZ: THE -- THE FORM, WHICH I HAPPEN TO

HAVE HERE, THE FORM INDICATES THAT YOU CAN CHECK OFF A TEMPORARY

ILLNESS OR PHYSICAL DISABILITY, A PERMANENT ILLNESS, YOU KNOW, OR

PHYSICAL DISABILITY AND A FEW OTHER OPTIONS. YOU COULD BE OUT OF TOWN,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

YOU'RE -- YOU'RE ABSENT FROM THE COUNTY OR THE CITY ON ELECTION DAY. SO

THEY GET THE FORM AND ONE OF THOSE BOXES IS CHECKED OFF.

MR. RA: SO WHAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE BOX TO

CHECK OFF IF YOU'RE USING THE EXCUSE? NONE -- NONE OF THOSE BOXES --

I'M LOOKING AT THE SAME FORM YOU ARE RIGHT NOW -- NONE OF THOSE BOXES

SAY ANYTHING ABOUT A FEAR OR RISK OF CONTRACTING AN ILLNESS. SO HOW IS A

VOTER TO KNOW WHAT THE APPROPRIATE BOX TO CHECK IS, AND HOW IS

SOMEBODY AT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS EVALUATING THAT APPLICATION TO

KNOW WHETHER THE PERSON HAS A VALID EXCUSE TO GET ONE?

MR. DINOWITZ: BECAUSE THE BOARDS OF ELECTIONS, I

BELIEVE, INFORM THE VOTERS, THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN MY

DISTRICT AND I ASSUME IN EVERYBODY ELSE'S DISTRICT VOTED BY ABSENTEE

BALLOT BASED UPON THE FEAR OF COVID AND THEY WERE INSTRUCTED TO

CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS TEMPORARY ILLNESS OR DISABILITY, AND THEY DID. I

MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE STATEWIDE VOTED THAT WAY, BUT IT

WAS A HUGE NUMBER. AND FOR THE LIFE OF ME I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE

WOULD NOT WANT TO HELP MORE PEOPLE VOTE. LEGITIMATE VOTERS VOTING.

THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO.

MR. RA: THAT'S -- THAT'S GREAT. BUT WHAT YOU'RE

MAKING RIGHT NOW IS REALLY AN EMOTIONAL ARGUMENT, NOT A -- NOT A LEGAL

ARGUMENT. LEGALLY, THE QUESTION IS IS THIS AN APPROPRIATE EXERCISE BY

THE LEGISLATURE, OR DOES THE FACT - AND IT'S A FACT - THAT OUR STATE

CONSTITUTION REQUIRES NOT JUST AN EXCUSE FOR VOTING ABSENTEE, BUT A VERY

SPECIFIC -- YOU KNOW, ONE OF THESE VERY SPECIFIC CATEGORIES FOR VOTING

ABSENTEE. SO, I MEAN, IT'S GREAT TO LOOK AT ALL THE -- I MEAN -- AND WE'RE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

DEALING WITH THIS IN SO MANY DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE LAW RIGHT NOW.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE THINK IS REASONABLE AND GREAT

FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE'RE --

WE DO HAVE A SYSTEM OF A CONSTITUTION AND OF LAWS. AND IF THIS IS NOT A

VALID USE OF OUR LEGISLATIVE POWER BECAUSE OUR STATE CONSTITUTION SAYS

YOU CAN VOTE ABSENTEE IF YOU'RE ABSENT FROM THE COUNTY OR IF YOU'RE ILL,

THEN ANY REASON WE HAVE FOR DOING IT JUST ISN'T ENOUGH. WE NEED TO

ACTUALLY HAVE THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO DO THIS.

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, I -- I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU

THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO DO IT. BUT BEYOND THAT,

WE'VE HAD THIS NOW FOR TWO YEARS. IN 2020 GOVERNOR CUOMO ISSUED AN

EXECUTIVE ORDER WHICH ALLOWED THIS, AND IN 2021 WE PASSED

LEGISLATION THAT I SPONSORED TO DO THIS. THIS LEGISLATION IS -- IS BASICALLY

THE SAME THING, EXCEPT WE ALSO INCLUDE VILLAGE ELECTIONS WHERE THE --

THAT ARE ADMINISTERED BY THE VILLAGE PEOPLE. AND SO WE'D BE ALLOWING

MORE PEOPLE ACTUALLY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS PROVISION. BUT I DON'T

SEE THAT THIS IS INCONSISTENT AT ALL WITH THE STATE CONSTITUTION, AND IT

CERTAINLY HASN'T BEEN -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BEEN CHALLENGED, BUT IT

HASN'T BEEN SUCCESSFULLY CHALLENGED.

MR. RA: WELL, I MEAN, IT WAS CHALLENGED BUT THE

FINAL DECISION ON IT THAT CAME OUT OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION WAS, I

BELIEVE, WAS TOO CLOSE ON FOR -- WELL, WE'LL GET -- WE WON'T GET INTO THAT

(INAUDIBLE). IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO HAPPEN AGAIN.

BUT, ANYWAY, SO ONE OF MY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE

ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE OF THIS, WE'RE DOING THIS TODAY, AND AS SOME OF MY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

COLLEAGUES MAY NOTE, THERE WAS A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR THE STATE

ASSEMBLY HELD YESTERDAY IN NEW YORK CITY. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN

A -- WE'VE BEEN IN A TENUOUS SITUATION, REALLY, THROUGH THE HOLIDAY

SEASON. THANKFULLY, THINGS ARE STARTING TO COME DOWN. BUT THAT

ELECTION WAS CONDUCTED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF THIS. I DON'T KNOW IF

PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO VOTE ABSENTEE OR NOT. BUT AT THE HEIGHT OF

OMICRON, THAT ELECTION WAS CONDUCTED YESTERDAY WITHOUT THIS. AND --

MR. DINOWITZ: CHECK OUT THE TURNOUT IN THAT

ELECTION. IT WAS SO MINISCULE. NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS BECAUSE

PEOPLE COULDN'T DO THIS BECAUSE THIS HASN'T BEEN PASSED YET, BUT THE

TURNOUT WAS REALLY, REALLY LOW.

MR. RA: WELL --

MR. DINOWITZ: WE DO HAVE ELECTIONS COMING UP,

SEVERAL OF THEM IN THE NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS. HOPEFULLY IT -- IT COULD BE

AFTER WE PASS THIS.

MR. RA: SO THIS WILL BE APPLICABLE IF -- YOU KNOW, I

KNOW WE HAVE SOME COLLEAGUES THAT MAY BE MOVING ON TO OTHER

THINGS. THIS WILL BE APPLICABLE FOR ANY OF THOSE SPECIAL ELECTIONS.

MR. DINOWITZ: IF --

MR. RA: (INAUDIBLE)

MR. DINOWITZ: IT DEPENDS ON THE TIMING. IF WE

PASS IT, IF IT'S SIGNED. IF THE TIME PERIOD TO APPLY FOR THE ABSENTEE BALLOT

IS STILL HAPPENING, YOU KNOW, IT WILL DEPEND ON THE TIME FRAME.

MR. RA: SO -- SO, BUT JUST GETTING BACK FOR A SECOND.

SO, WITHIN THE STATUTE THAT THIS IS AMENDING, THERE IS SPECIFICALLY -- IT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

DOES ACTUALLY SAY WHAT THE APPLICATION FOR THE ABSENTEE BALLOT SHOULD

SAY. SO I'M JUST WONDERING, WHY NOT AS PART OF THIS ADD SOMETHING IN

THAT SECTION WHERE IT SAYS UNABLE TO APPEAR AT A POLLING PLACE BECAUSE

OF ILLNESS OR -- OR DISABILITY SO THAT THE FORM COULD BE CLEAR TO THE VOTER

THAT THEY'RE UTILIZING THIS EXCUSE?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE --

THAT THERE WOULD BE ENOUGH TIME TO CHANGE THE FORM AND -- AND GET IT

THROUGHOUT THE STATE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. AT LEAST NOT FOR THE UPCOMING

ELECTIONS AND MAYBE NOT EVEN FOR THE VILLAGE ELECTIONS AND MAYBE NOT

EVEN FOR THE JUNE 28TH ELECTION. AND THAT'S WHY THE WORDING IN THE

LEGISLATION IS WHAT IT IS. AND IT'S REALLY VERY SIMPLE AND

STRAIGHTFORWARD.

MR. RA: WE COULDN'T GET THE (INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

ONLINE FOR PEOPLE TO PRINT AND SUBMIT AN APPLICATION? WE COULD DO

THAT BY THE END OF THE DAY TODAY.

MR. DINOWITZ: WE COULD DO A LOT OF THINGS BY THE

END OF THE DAY. BUT THE QUESTION IS WHAT ARE THE VARIOUS BOARDS OF

ELECTIONS -- AND WHAT ARE THERE, 58 OF THEM I GUESS -- WOULD THEY BE

ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, DO THAT. AND THE ANSWER IS I DON'T KNOW.

MR. RA: OKAY. PUTTING -- PUTTING THAT ASIDE AND JUST

IN TERMS OF HOW YOU'VE CHOSEN TO GO ABOUT THIS. I KNOW THAT THIS WAS

DONE A COUPLE YEARS AGO, BUT WHAT ABOUT -- SINCE THIS IS KIND OF A

SPECIFIC SITUATION, AS YOU I'M SURE KNOW, UNDER TITLE 3 OF THE ELECTION

LAW WE HAVE A COUPLE OF SPECIAL BALLOTS. LIKE, WE HAVE ONE FOR

EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARDS OF ELECTIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONDERS, VICTIMS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. WHY NOT TAKE THAT APPROACH AND HAVE BASICALLY

A, YOU KNOW, A TEMPORARY TYPE OF BALLOT FOR SOMEBODY WHO HAS FEAR OF

-- OF CONTRACTING AN -- AN ILLNESS LIKE COVID?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, THAT SOUNDS LIKE CREATING

ADDITIONAL BUREAUCRACY TO ME. I MEAN, WHAT -- WHAT WE WANT TO DO

HERE IS PRETTY STRAIGHT FORWARD AND IT ACCOMPLISHES THE GOAL OF ALLOWING

PEOPLE TO VOTE IN A WAY THAT THEY FEEL SAFE.

MR. RA: I -- I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD CREATE

ADDITIONAL BUREAUCRACY. I DO THINK THAT IT WOULD MAKE THINGS MUCH

CLEARER ON BOTH THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE WITHIN THE BOARDS OF ELECTIONS

AND WITH THE VOTER SIDE AS TO THEIR ELIGIBILITY TO VOTE.

MR. DINOWITZ: AND THERE MIGHT BE A COST

ATTACHED TO IT WHICH SOME MIGHT SAY WOULD BE AN UNFUNDED MANDATE

ON THE LOCAL BOARDS, AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE WANT TO

DO AT THIS TIME EITHER.

MR. RA: OKAY. SO -- SO LASTLY, AND JUST GETTING BACK

TO THE CONSTITUTIONALITY SIDE OF THIS. AND I --

MR. DINOWITZ: ISN'T THAT MR. GOODELL'S --

MR. RA: I'M SORRY?

MR. DINOWITZ: I SAID ISN'T THAT MR. GOODELL'S JOB,

THE CONSTITUTION?

MR. RA: I'M SURE HE WILL GET INTO IT PLENTY. BUT

HAVING SAT NEXT TO HIM FOR TWO YEARS DOWN HERE AND I HAD AN OFFICE

NEXT TO HIM FOR I THINK EIGHT YEARS SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, SOME OF IT HAS

RUBBED OFF. SO AS -- AS I'M SURE YOU -- YOU KNOW, RIGHT, WE HAD THIS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

REFERENDUM LAST YEAR AND IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE NEW YORK STATE,

YOU KNOW, NOT AN EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOT STATE, BUT ESSENTIALLY A NO

EXCUSE ABSENTEE --

MR. DINOWITZ: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. RA: -- BALLOT STATE. AND ARTICLE 19 OF THE STATE

CONSTITUTION SETS FORTH THAT PROCEDURE THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION, IT GETS PASSED

BY A SUCCESSIVE LEGISLATURE, GOES OUT TO THE PUBLIC. AS WE SAID, THIS

ONE WAS -- WAS DEFEATED. SO WOULD YOU SAY THEN THIS -- I ASSUME YOU

DON'T BELIEVE THIS BILL AMENDS THE STATE CONSTITUTION, CORRECT?

MR. DINOWITZ: CORRECT.

MR. RA: WOULD YOU -- DO YOU BELIEVE IT CLARIFIES THE

STATE CONSTITUTION WITH REGARD TO ALLOWING THIS EXCUSE? I MEAN, HOW

WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THIS APPROACH TO ALLOWING SOMEBODY TO VOTE

ABSENTEE DUE TO NOT HAVING AN ILLNESS, BUT A FEAR OF CONTRACTING AN

ILLNESS?

MR. DINOWITZ: I THINK THIS LEGISLATION IS -- IS NO

DIFFERENT THAN ANY ONE OF HUNDREDS OF OTHER LAWS THAT WE PASSED THAT

DOES NOT CLARIFY THE CONSTITUTION. I DON'T THINK THIS CLARIFIES THE

CONSTITUTION. THE CONSTITUTION IS THE CONSTITUTION. THIS -- THIS IS NOT

RELEVANT TO THAT EXCEPT OF THE FACT THAT IT'S A SIMILAR IDEA. BUT THE

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT FAILED WAS FOR NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE

BALLOTS. THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS IS.

MR. RA: OKAY. SO CAN YOU THINK OF ANY SITUATION

WHERE A NEW YORK STATE RESIDENT, A REGISTERED VOTER, THIS YEAR WOULDN'T

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

BE ABLE TO REQUEST AN ABSENTEE BALLOT BY JUST SAYING THEY HAVE A FEAR OF

CONTRACTING AN ILLNESS?

MR. DINOWITZ: YES. IF THEY'RE NOT -- IF THEY'RE NOT

FEARFUL OF CONTRACTING THE ILLNESS THEN THEY SHOULDN'T REQUEST IT. NOT

EVERYBODY'S A LIAR. IF SOMEBODY'S NOT FEARFUL, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO

REQUEST IT. WHAT DO YOU THINK, PEOPLE JUST WANT TO, YOU KNOW, STAY AT

HOME BECAUSE THEY'RE LAZY? I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK MOST PEOPLE WHO

VOTE LIKE TO VOTE IN PERSON. I KNOW I DO.

MR. RA: BUT HOW -- HOW WOULD ANYBODY KNOW

WHETHER SOMEBODY IS ACTUALLY FEARFUL OF GETTING AN ILLNESS? I MEAN,

YOU'RE GETTING (INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK) --

MR. DINOWITZ: THEY CHECKED OFF THE APPROPRIATE

BOX.

MR. RA: THERE'S -- BUT THERE WILL BE NO BOX THAT

SAYS, I'M FEARFUL OF GETTING THE ILLNESS. THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, I HAVE AN

ILLNESS.

MR. DINOWITZ: THE INSTRUCTION OF THE BOARD OF

ELECTIONS -- I -- I BELIEVE THAT WAS ON THEIR WEBSITE -- VERY CLEARLY SAID

THAT IF YOU ARE FEARFUL OF COVID, OF CATCHING IT OR SPREADING IT OR

WHATEVER, THAT YOU SHOULD CHECK THAT PARTICULAR BOX. SO WHEN

SOMEBODY WOULD GO AND LOOK TO APPLY FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, THE

INSTRUCTIONS WERE THERE. THAT'S HOW THEY KNOW. AND IN TERMS OF HOW

DO WE KNOW WHETHER THE PERSON WAS ACTUALLY FEARFUL OF THAT, WELL, I -- I

DON'T THINK WE CAN READ PEOPLE'S MINDS, BUT I DO THINK THAT THE VAST --

MOST PEOPLE ARE -- ARE HONEST AND MOST PEOPLE -- IT'S NOT LIKE THIS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ALLOWS PEOPLE WHO AREN'T ELIGIBLE TO VOTE TO VOTE. IT'S NOT LIKE

NON-VOTERS ARE GOING TO BE VOTING. THESE ARE VOTERS WE'RE TALKING

ABOUT, AND WE WANT TO MAKE IT SUCH THAT THEY CAN VOTE WITHOUT

WORRYING ABOUT COVID, WHICH IS UNFORTUNATELY AFTER ALMOST TWO YEARS

STILL HERE. AND PEOPLE -- AND BY THE WAY, NOT EVERYBODY IS GOING TO

MOVIES AND GOING TO, YOU KNOW, BILLS GAME AND THINGS LIKE -- I HAVEN'T

GONE TO A MOVIE IN OVER TWO YEARS. I'D LIKE TO GO TO THE MOVIES. IT

CAN'T -- THAT DOESN'T MEAN I CAN'T POSSIBLY CATCH IT, BUT I'D LIKE TO KEEP

THE ODDS MORE IN MY FAVOR. SO I DON'T GO TO THE MOVIES. I DON'T GO TO

ALL THESE CROWDED PLACES. AND I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE LIVING LIKE

THAT. AND THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T, WELL, THEN THEY HAVE A GREATER CHANCE

OF CATCHING SOMETHING.

MR. RA: THANK YOU, MR. DINOWITZ.

MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR. RA.

MR. RA: SO, I -- I JUST WANT TO REITERATE, YOU KNOW,

THREE REAL POINTS HERE. NUMBER ONE, I THINK THAT THIS IS VAGUE. IT RELIES

ON SOMEBODY'S, BASICALLY, STATE OF MIND FOR IT TO BE VALID. THEY'RE

GOING TO CHECK A BOX. WE'RE ACTUALLY TELLING A RESIDENT TO CHECK A BOX

AND THEN SIGN A FORM UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT SAYS THEY'RE ILL, BUT

WE'RE SAYING, DON'T WORRY, WE SAID THAT ILL MEANS YOU FEAR GETTING ILL.

SO IT'S VAGUE BOTH, I THINK, ON THE VOTER SIDE TO KNOW WHETHER YOU

QUALIFY. IT'S VAGUE ON THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS SIDE. BUT BACK TO, YOU

KNOW, THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF IT. I CAN'T SEE ANY CIRCUMSTANCE UNDER

WHICH ANY REGISTERED VOTER IN NEW YORK STATE WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE FOR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

AN ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER THIS. NOW, THERE MAY BE PLENTY OF PEOPLE IN

THIS CHAMBER WHO THINK ANYBODY WHO WANTS AN ABSENTEE BALLOT SHOULD

BE ABLE TO GET ONE, AND THAT'S GREAT. AND IT'S GREAT TO SAY THAT WE NEED

TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE AND ALL OF THAT. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR STATE

CONSTITUTION PROVIDES FOR. AND THE VOTERS THIS YEAR WERE ASKED THE

QUESTION WHETHER THEY WANTED THAT TO BE THE CASE AND THEY SAID NO.

NOW MY COLLEAGUE TALKED ABOUT ALL THE MONEY THAT WAS SPENT. WELL,

YOU KNOW, YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE PRIOR GOVERNOR WHO SIGNED THE

PRIOR BILL. HE SPENT A HECK OF A LOT OF MONEY TO GET ELECTED MULTIPLE

TIMES. ALL OF US SPEND MONEY TO GET ELECTED. THAT'S HOW ELECTIONS

WORK. SO THE IDEA THAT JUST BECAUSE THERE WAS A CAMPAIGN OUT TO

EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR BILL AND CERTAINLY INFLUENCED

THEIR VOTES DOESN'T MAKE WHAT THE VOTER DECIDED ANY LESS LEGITIMATE.

THE VOTERS SPOKE LAST FALL. THEY DON'T WANT NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING.

AND THE CORRECT WAY TO ALLOW INCREASED ABSENTEE VOTING IN OUR STATE IS

TO AMEND THE PROVISIONS OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION, WHICH WAS

ATTEMPTED AND FAILED.

SO I WOULD URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE IN THE

NEGATIVE. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, MR. RA.

MR. LAWLER.

MR. LAWLER: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. IT'S BEEN A

LONG TIME. WILL THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. DINOWITZ: YES.

MR. LAWLER: THANKS. I'LL BE RELATIVELY BRIEF

BECAUSE I KNOW MOST OF THESE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ASKED AND

ANSWERED. YOU MADE REFERENCE TO THE BILLS GAMES SEVERAL TIMES. I -- I

JUST -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU RIGHT. YOU WERE AGAINST THE

60,000 PEOPLE ATTENDING THE GAME?

MR. DINOWITZ: NO, I JUST WOULDN'T WANT TO BE ONE

OF THE 60,000. I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT THE BILLS WON. BUT I PERSONALLY,

MY CHOICE, I WOULD NOT -- IF I WAS AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO THE

GAME WITH 60,000 OF MY BEST FRIENDS, I WOULD NOT WANT TO GO. THAT'S

JUST ME.

MR. LAWLER: OKAY. I THINK YOU SAID IT WAS A BAD

DECISION, IF I RECALL. I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT THE GOVERNOR ATTENDED A

BILLS GAME ON SEPTEMBER 12TH.

MR. DINOWITZ: AND THAT'S HER PRIVILEGE.

MR. LAWLER: RIGHT. SO IT'S NOT -- IT CAN'T BE THAT

BAD OF AN IDEA.

WHY IS -- WHY IS THIS BILL NECESSARY, IN YOUR -- IN YOUR

MIND?

MR. DINOWITZ: I THINK IT'S NECESSARY BECAUSE WE

HAVE SEEN -- I'VE SEEN THAT THERE ARE MANY, MANY PEOPLE WHO DON'T FEEL

COMFORTABLE GOING OUT IN CROWDS STILL. IT'S UNFORTUNATE. IT'S

UNFORTUNATE. I MEAN, I VOTED IN PERSON BUT I WAS VERY CAREFUL AND I

THINK MOST PEOPLE TRY TO BE CAREFUL. NOT EVERYBODY, ESPECIALLY THE

PEOPLE WHO DON'T WEAR THEIR MASKS. BUT I THINK WE, AS A BODY,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

REGARDLESS OF OUR POLITICAL AFFILIATION, SHOULD WANT TO MAKE CONDITIONS

SUCH THAT EVERYBODY WHO'S ELIGIBLE TO VOTE CAN VOTE IF THEY WANT TO

VOTE. NO ONE'S FORCED TO VOTE, BUT IF YOU'RE ELIGIBLE WE DON'T WANT

ANYBODY FEELING THAT, OH, WELL IT'S ONLY A PRIMARY OR, IT'S NOT A

PRESIDENTIAL SO I'M NOT GOING TO BOTHER THIS TIME BECAUSE I DON'T WANT

TO TAKE THE CHANCE. I MEAN, IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING SEEING THAT THERE'S ONLY

ONE TIME IN FOUR YEARS WHERE THERE'S HUGE LINES AT THE POLLS, AND THAT'S

NOVEMBER OF -- OF PRESIDENTIAL. SO, WE WANT PEOPLE TO VOTE. WE WANT

MORE PEOPLE TO VOTE. AND CERTAINLY (INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK) NOT TO VOTE

BECAUSE THEY'RE -- BECAUSE THEY'RE NERVOUS ABOUT THIS. YOU KNOW,

SOME PEOPLE ARE PERFECTLY COMFORTABLE GOING INTO CROWDS RIGHT NOW.

OTHERS AREN'T SO COMFORTABLE. AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS SUCH A BIG LIFT

FOR US TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO VOTE BY ABSENTEE BALLOT. IT'S NOT NO

EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOT. IT GIVES PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE. AND I

THINK -- AS I SAID, REGARDLESS OF AFFILIATION WE COLLECTIVELY SHOULD WANT

TO HAVE AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE PARTICIPATE IN OUR DEMOCRATIC

PROCESS.

MR. LAWLER: RIGHT. WELL, THE PROBLEM HERE IS

THAT WE'VE DEFINED WHAT THE EXCUSES ARE TO REQUEST AN ABSENTEE BALLOT

PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION AND UNDER THE LAWS OF NEW

YORK. WE'VE DEFINED THOSE EXCUSES. AND TO MY COLLEAGUE'S POINT

BEFORE, THEY HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED IN THE PAST TO ENSURE THAT SOMEBODY

WHO IS APPLYING IS LEGALLY DOING SO. NOW, THE REASON THAT WE'RE DOING

THIS BILL IS BECAUSE THE NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING PROVISION FAILED IN

NOVEMBER. HAD IT PASSED, WOULD WE HAVE TO DO THIS BILL TODAY?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. DINOWITZ: WE WOULD NOT. HAD THE BILL WE

PASSED LAST YEAR COVERED A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO

DO IT NOW, EITHER. BUT WE'RE IN A SITUATION THAT --

MR. LAWLER: WELL, ONE -- ONE WOULD ASSUME THAT

WE ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE OF THE STATE OF EMERGENCY. SO WE SHOULD BE

DOING IT ON A TEMPORARY BASIS, NOT A LONG BASIS.

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, BUT THERE SHOULD BE A

TEMPORARY BASIS.

MR. LAWLER: IT SHOULD BE BASED ON -- IT SHOULD BE

BASED ON THE SITUATION ON THE GROUND.

MR. DINOWITZ: THIS BILL IS JUST FOR THIS YEAR. IT'S

NOT BEYOND THIS YEAR. I THOUGHT IT SHOULD ACTUALLY BE FOR TWO YEARS.

BUT IN EITHER CASE IT'S -- IT'S TEMPORARY. IF WE -- IF -- IF -- LET'S HOPE NOT,

BUT IF THINGS ARE BAD NEXT YEAR THEN WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AT THE

TIME. HOPEFULLY THAT WON'T BE THE CASE.

MR. LAWLER: SO --

MR. DINOWITZ: BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS

YEAR THAT NO ONE FEELS THAT THEY SHOULD STAY HOME BECAUSE THEY DON'T

FEEL COMFORTABLE GOING TO THE POLLS. I KNOW PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITHIN A

BLOCK OF THEIR POLLING PLACE WHO STILL VOTED BY ABSENTEE BALLOT. THEY

WEREN'T LAZY. THEY WEREN'T PULLING, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING. THEY JUST

DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE GOING INTO THE CROWDED POLLING PLACE, AND THEY

STILL WERE ABLE TO HAVE THEIR VOTE (INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK) --

MR. LAWLER: I PERSONALLY -- I PERSONALLY VOTED FOR

THE BILL LAST YEAR TO ALLOW PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE BY ABSENTEE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

BALLOT WITHOUT AN EXCUSE. I VOTED FOR THAT. THE VOTERS --

MR. DINOWITZ: GOOD VOTE. GOOD VOTE.

MR. LAWLER: -- REJECTED IT. THE VOTERS REJECTED IT.

THEY SAID NO. NOW, YOU CAN DECRY THE MONEY THAT WAS SPENT BY THE

CONSERVATIVE PARTY AND OTHERS --

MR. DINOWITZ: YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S NOT REALLY

RELEVANT. I WAS JUST POINTING OUT A FACT. BUT THAT'S REALLY LOW

(INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK).

MR. LAWLER: WELL THAT'S -- NO, IT'S RELEVANT INSOFAR

AS IT'S OUR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. AND PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT --

MR. DINOWITZ: AND PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO

ABSENTEE BALLOTS.

MR. LAWLER: -- TO EXPRESS THEIR OPPOSITION.

PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO EXPRESS THEIR SUPPORT. UNFORTUNATELY, THE

DEMOCRATIC PARTY COULDN'T GET ITS ACT TOGETHER AND PUT A SUPPORT

CAMPAIGN TOGETHER. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU. BUT THE VOTERS --

MR. DINOWITZ: BUT THIS IS NOT

(INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK) --

MR. LAWLER: THE VOTER -- THE VOTERS SPOKE AND

THEY SAID, NO, WE WANT A PROCESS. WE WANT YOU TO HAVE TO APPLY FOR

AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, AS YOU HAVE FOR THE ENTIRETY OF OUR ELECTIONS, AND TO

FOLLOW THE LAW. THAT IS NOT ASKING TOO MUCH ON BEHALF OF THE VOTERS. I

THINK WHAT IS REMARKABLE IS THAT SHORTLY AFTER THE VOTERS REJECTED THIS

ATTEMPT, THE GOVERNOR SAID, I WANT NEW YORK STATE TO BE A LEADER, AND

WE HAVE NOT BEEN A LEADER IN THE PAST. WE HAVE MADE IT TOO HARD TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

VOTE. I BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO VOTE BY MAIL. AND

THAT'S SHORTLY AFTER THE VOTERS REJECTED IT. SO WHAT THIS BILL SAYS TO ME IS

THAT THIS BODY IS TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT THE WILL OF THE VOTERS. THAT'S

WHAT IT IS DOING. AND IT USING A CRISIS TO DO IT. WE HAVE --

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, I'LL HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE THE VOTERS DID NOT REJECT THIS. THE VOTERS

REJECTED THE CONCEPT OF NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING. THIS IS NOT THE

SAME THING.

MR. LAWLER: RIGHT, BUT --

MR. DINOWITZ: (INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK). PEOPLE

HAVE TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE.

MR. LAWLER: HERE'S THE PROBLEM--

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: GENTLEMEN, PLEASE

ALLOW EACH OTHER THE ROOM TO SPEAK. NOT A CROSS-CUT, PLEASE.

MR. LAWLER: THANK YOU, SIR. EVERY -- EVERY VOTER

IS ELIGIBLE TO USE THIS -- THIS EXCUSE. NOW, YOU CAN SAY NOBODY'S LYING

-- AND I'M NOT ACCUSING ANYBODY OF LYING ABOUT BEING FEARFUL OF

CATCHING COVID, BUT THE REALITY IS THAT EVERY NEW YORK VOTER WILL BE

ELIGIBLE, UNDER THIS BILL, TO USE THE TEMPORARY ILLNESS OR DISABILITY BOX

TO RECEIVE AN ABSENTEE BALLOT. EVERYONE. BECAUSE AS YOU POINT OUT

THERE IS NO WAY TO VERIFY IT. YOU CANNOT -- YOU CAN'T GET IN SOMEBODY'S

MIND TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE FEARFUL AND NEITHER CAN I. SO

NOBODY WILL BE ABLE TO VERIFY THAT, WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY IS -- IS

ELIGIBLE UNDER THAT BOX. I CAN VERIFY IF SOMEBODY'S OUT-OF-STATE, IF

SOMEBODY'S OUT-OF-COUNTY, BUT I CAN'T VERIFY THAT. SO EVERYONE IS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ELIGIBLE. SO THAT IS IN AND OF ITSELF GIVING EVERYBODY A BUILT-IN EXCUSE

AND, THEREFORE, MAKING IT NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING. WE CAN GO

ROUND AND ROUND AND HAVE SEMANTICS AND FIGURE OUT A WAY TO SAY, NO,

IT'S NOT. IT IS. AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM HERE. WE ARE TWO-PLUS YEARS INTO

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LAWLER, WOULD

YOU GET TO THE QUESTION? YOU ASKED HIM TO YIELD SO YOU COULD

QUESTION. YOU'RE NOT --

MR. LAWLER: SURE. I'LL --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK

TO THE BILL --

MR. LAWLER: I'LL GO ON THE BILL. I'LL GO ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THAT'S GOOD.

MR. LAWLER: THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: HE DOESN'T NEED TO

STAND WHILE YOU DO THIS.

MR. LAWLER: SOUNDS GOOD. THE REALITY HERE IS

THAT NEW YORK STATE IS REJECTING THE WILL OF THE VOTERS. NEW YORK

STATE AND ITS GOVERNMENT IS SAYING, WE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU HAVE TO

SAY. WE DON'T CARE THAT YOU REJECTED OUR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

WE DON'T CARE THAT NEW YORKERS SAID YOU NEED AN EXCUSE. SO WE'RE

GOING TO USE THIS CRISIS -- AS THE OLD ADAGE GOES, NEVER LET A GOOD CRISIS

GO TO WASTE, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS. IT'S AN ATTEMPT TO THWART

THE VOTERS AND IT'S WRONG. IT'S WRONG.

AND SO I REALLY ENCOURAGE ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES TO PUT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

YOUR PARTY LABEL ASIDE FOR A MINUTE AND RECOGNIZE WHAT THE VOTERS SAID

WHEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS PERMANENT. THEY SAID NO.

SO I ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO VOTE AGAINST THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. GOODELL.

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

THE SPONSOR YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD.

MR. DINOWITZ: YES. IT'S -- IT'S BEEN SO LONG. I

REALLY MISSED YOU.

MR. GOODELL: LIKEWISE, MR. DINOWITZ. AND

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YIELDING.

MR. DINOWITZ: YOU'RE WELCOME.

MR. GOODELL: I HAVE BEEN LISTENING INTENTLY, AND I

-- I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. UNDER

THIS BILL, CAN A PERSON WHO IS PERFECTLY HEALTHY REQUEST AN ABSENTEE

BALLOT?

MR. DINOWITZ: IF THEY ARE FEARFUL OF CATCHING AN

ILLNESS SUCH AS COVID, YES. IT DOESN'T SAY YOU HAVE TO BE ILL. IT SAYS

YOU HAVE TO BE FEARFUL --

(PAUSE)

ILLNESS SHALL INCLUDE -- I'M NOT GOING TO READ THE

WHOLE THING AGAIN -- WHERE A VOTER IS NOT ABLE TO APPEAR PERSONALLY

BECAUSE THERE'S A RISK OF CONTRACTING OR SPREADING A DISEASE THAT MAY

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

CAUSE ILLNESS. AND OF COURSE THE ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATION, WHEN

THEY REQUEST IT THEY SAY, I'M REQUESTING IN GOOD FAITH.

MR. GOODELL: SO --

MR. DINOWITZ: IF THEY SAY THEY'RE DOING IT IN GOOD

FAITH WILL BE DOING IT IN GOOD FAITH, I WOULD IMAGINE THEY WOULD BE.

MR. GOODELL: YOU'VE MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES,

INCLUDING JUST NOW, THAT AN INDIVIDUAL WOULD BE ELIGIBLE IF THEY WERE

FEARFUL OF GETTING SICK, RIGHT?

MR. DINOWITZ: YES.

MR. GOODELL: BUT THE ACTUAL BILL LANGUAGE SAYS

"UNABLE TO APPEAR." THE WORD "FEARFUL" IS NOT IN THE BILL LANGUAGE, IT'S

"UNABLE" --

MR. DINOWITZ: THAT WORD IS NOT THERE. UNABLE TO

APPEAR BECAUSE THERE'S A RISK OF CONTRACTING. YES.

MR. GOODELL: SO, IS THIS LANGUAGE THEN LIMITED TO

THOSE WHO ARE PHYSICALLY UNABLE TO APPEAR? FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE WAS

A LOCKDOWN OR A SHELTER IN PLACE ORDER OR THEY WERE QUARANTINED OR

THERE WAS A SUSPENSION OF THE SUBWAY OR MASS TRANSIT? I MEAN, THOSE

ALL OCCURRED. (INAUDIBLE) --

MR. DINOWITZ: THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE GROUNDS

FOR GETTING AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, SURE.

MR. GOODELL: FOR SURE. BUT THIS BILL GOES BEYOND

THAT. SO THOSE WHO ARE ABLE TO APPEAR BUT ARE FEARFUL WOULD STILL BE

ELIGIBLE. IS THAT, UNDER YOUR INTERPRETATION, THE WAY THIS BILL LANGUAGE

IS TO BE READ?

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU

DEFINE "ABLE." IF SOMEBODY IS PHYSICALLY CAPABLE OF WALKING TO THE

POLLING PLACE -- I LIVE A BLOCK FROM MY POLLING PLACE. I COULD JUST WALK

THERE. BUT IF I WAS CONCERNED THAT BY DOING IT I WOULD RUN THE RISK OF

CONTRACTING AN ILLNESS LIKE COVID, THEN THAT WOULD MAKE ME ELIGIBLE

TO APPLY FOR THE ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL.

MR. GOODELL: ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY

DOCUMENTATION OF ANY INFECTIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED AS A RESULT OF

IN-PERSON VOTING?

MR. DINOWITZ: AM I AWARE OF ANY INFECTIONS THAT

-- I DON'T -- LOTS OF PEOPLE GOT THE INFECTIONS. I DON'T KNOW WHERE

PEOPLE GET IT. THEY MAY NOT THEMSELVES KNOW WHERE THEY GOT IT.

MR. GOODELL: BUT YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY STUDIES

OR DOCUMENTATION OF ANY INFECTIONS --

MR. DINOWITZ: I DON'T THINK THERE HAVE BEEN ANY

STUDIES DONE THAT I'M AWARE OF.

MR. GOODELL: WELL, LAST YEAR THE GOVERNOR

PUBLISHED A LIST. IT WAS QUITE A DETAILED LIST, OVER 30 ITEMS ON THAT LIST

OF WHERE PEOPLE WERE EXPOSED OR CONTACTED COVID BASED ON THEIR

CONTACT TRACING. AND I LOOKED AT THE ENTIRE LIST AND NOWHERE, BY THE

WAY, DID IT SAY VOTING IN PERSON. AM I CORRECT TO ASSUME, THEN, THAT

VOTING IN PERSON WOULDN'T EVEN SHOW UP ON THIS LIST?

(INAUDIBLE/CROSS-TALK)

MR. DINOWITZ: I HAVEN'T -- I HAVEN'T SEEN THE LIST

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. GOODELL: -- PERCENT.

MR. DINOWITZ: I HAVEN'T SEEN THE LIST, BUT I'M SURE

MOST OF THE THINGS ON THE LIST -- AND I HAVEN'T SEE THE LIST SO I'M JUST

ASSUMING NOW -- ARE THINGS THAT -- THAT HAPPEN, LIKE, ON EVERY DAY

BASIS; GOING TO THE GROCERY STORE, GOING TO SCHOOL, GOING TO WORK.

VOTING TAKES PLACE JUST A FEW TIMES A YEAR, SO THERE MAY NOT BE ANY

REASON FOR SUCH A THING TO BE ON THE LIST IN THE FIRST PLACE.

MR. GOODELL: NOW, THIS BILL IS TRIGGERED ONLY IF

YOU ARE UNABLE TO APPEAR BECAUSE OF A RISK OF CONTACTING OR SPREADING

COVID. IS THAT RISK A RISK THAT HAS TO BE QUANTIFIABLE? SUCH AS THE

CERTAIN INFECTION RATE IN THE COMMUNITY OR AN EXECUTIVE ORDER OR A

DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY? IS THERE ANY QUANTIFICATION OF WHAT THAT

RISK MUST BE?

MR. DINOWITZ: I DON'T BELIEVE I SEE THAT IN THE

BILL, SO I'M GOING TO SAY NO.

MR. GOODELL: AND CERTAINLY, THIS IS -- WHEN WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT RISK, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE AT HIGH RISK AND SOME

PEOPLE THAT ARE AT VERY LOW RISK, BASED ON MEDICAL EXPERIENCE WE'VE

SEEN SO FAR. THIS LANGUAGE IS NOT LIMITED TO PEOPLE WHO ARE RECOGNIZED

AT HIGH RISK LIKE SENIOR CITIZENS OR THOSE WHO HAVE COMORBIDITIES, IS IT?

MR. DINOWITZ: IT DOES NOT DELINEATE -- IT DOES NOT

SEPARATE PEOPLE LIKE THAT. HOWEVER, I THINK IF WE CHECKED THE RECORDS

WE WILL FIND THAT THE -- THE PEOPLE WHO'VE ACTUALLY TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF

THE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL LAST YEAR WEREN'T SUCH PEOPLE. IT WAS

DISPROPORTIONATELY SENIOR CITIZENS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. GOODELL: I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT

WE'RE DOING IS ASKING THE VOTERS TO CHECK A BOX IN A FORM THAT'S BY

STATUTE THAT WOULD REALLY STRETCH THE NORMAL READING OF ENGLISH AND DO

SO UNDER PERJURY, CERTIFYING THAT THEY ARE TEMPORARILY ILL WHEN THEY

COULD BE PERFECTLY HEALTHY. IS THERE ANY VERIFICATION OF ANY KIND TO

BACK THIS UP? FOR EXAMPLE, AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO

ARE NOT VACCINATED BECAUSE OF A MEDICAL EXCEPTION, RIGHT?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, BECAUSE THEY CHOOSE NOT TO

GET VACCINATED FOR SOME BIZARRE REASON. IT'S NOT JUST MEDICAL

EXCEPTIONS.

MR. GOODELL: RIGHT. IT COULD BE A RELIGIOUS

EXEMPTION OR A MEDICAL --

MR. DINOWITZ: OR IT COULD BE PEOPLE WHO JUST

DON'T WANT TO GET VACCINATED, REGARDLESS OF RELIGIOUS -- RELIGION --

RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OR MEDICAL SITUATIONS.

MR. GOODELL: BUT THIS EXCEPTION IS NOT LIMITED TO

THOSE WHO ARE UNVACCINATED FOR WHATEVER REASON, LEGITIMATE OR NOT. IT'S

NOT LIMITED TO THOSE WHO ARE -- HAVE COMORBIDITIES OR HAVE A DOCTOR'S

EXCUSE, CORRECT? THERE'S NO -- THERE'S NO OBJECTIVE LIMITATION ON THIS

LANGUAGE, CORRECT?

MR. DINOWITZ: NO. I MEAN, THE BILL IS VERY

STRAIGHTFORWARD. AND I WILL TELL YOU JUST SO YOU KNOW - AND I DON'T

KNOW IF IT'S TRUE IN OTHER BOROUGHS - BUT IN THE BRONX THERE HAS BEEN A

VERY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO WORK AT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

WHO'VE CONTRACTED COVID OVER TIME, INCLUDING -- INCLUDING THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

PRESENT. AND SO IT'S NOT ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE. THERE ARE PEOPLE

WHO WORK THE POLLS WHO COULD ALSO BE -- HOPEFULLY NOT, BUT WHO COULD

BE ENDANGERING OTHER PEOPLE. IT'S NOT SURPRISING THAT THERE ARE A CERTAIN

NUMBER OF PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY OLDER PEOPLE OR PARTICULARLY PEOPLE WHO

MAY BE IMMUNOCOMPROMISED, BUT WHO AREN'T NECESSARILY, LIKE, SICK

THAT -- THAT WOULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO VOTE

BY ABSENTEE BALLOT DURING THIS HEALTH CRISIS.

MR. GOODELL: CERTAINLY. AND TO BE HONEST WITH

YOU, IF THE BILL WERE NARROWLY DRAFTED TO DEAL WITH THOSE WHO HAVE

COMORBIDITIES OR CANNOT TAKE THE VACCINE BECAUSE OF A MEDICAL

EXEMPTION OR RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION, OR -- AND IT'S TIED IN TO AN INFECTION

RATE OR SOME OTHER OBJECTIVE CRITERIA, WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT

BILL. BUT NONE OF THAT IS IN THIS BILL --

MR. DINOWITZ: (INAUDIBLE) I DON'T -- I'M SURE

YOU'D WANT TO SEE SOME DOCUMENTATION. AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, AS BEING

IMMUNOCOMPROMISED OR SOME OTHER COMORBIDITY.

MR. GOODELL: CERTAINLY.

MR. DINOWITZ: I'M NOT SURE HOW SIMPLE THAT

WOULD BE TO DO. THIS IS VERY SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD. AND IT'S CLEAR TO

ME BASED ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LAST YEAR THAT THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED

BY ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER THIS PROVISION WERE EXACTLY THE PEOPLE WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT HERE.

MR. GOODELL: NOW, BELIEVE IT OR NOT I'VE ACTUALLY

BEEN INVOLVED IN ELECTION LITIGATION AND WE ACTUALLY DID CHALLENGE AN

ABSENTEE BALLOT. AND ONE OF THE CASES I WAS INVOLVED IN IT WENT ALL THE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WAY UP TO THE COURT OF APPEALS AND I WAS PLEASED THAT AT LEAST IN THAT

CASE THEY AGREED WITH ME. THEY DON'T ALWAYS, BUT THAT TIME THEY DID.

AND SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, ELECTIONS CAN BE DECIDED BY JUST A FEW

ABSENTEE BALLOTS, PARTICULARLY LOCAL ELECTIONS. WOULD IT BE OPEN TO A

CANDIDATE CHALLENGING AN ABSENTEE BALLOT TO POINT OUT THAT THE PERSON

WHO CLAIMED THEY WERE FEARFUL OF COVID WAS A WAITER OR A WAITRESS

THAT FULL-TIME SERVED PEOPLE WITHOUT MASKS, OR CASHIERS WHO SEE

HUNDREDS OF CUSTOMERS EVERY DAY WALKING IN FRONT OF THEM OR SPORTS

FANS WHO HAVE SEASON TICKETS TO THE BILLS? OR MAYBE ICU NURSES WHO

WORK DAY IN AND DAY OUT WITH COVID-INFECTED PEOPLE? OR A ROUTINE

SUBWAY RIDER OR MASS TRANSIT RIDER? ALL PEOPLE WHO HAVE GONE ABOUT

THEIR DAILY LIVES WITHOUT PREPARING -- WITHOUT ANY MANIFESTATION OR

OBJECTIVE CRITERIA OF FEAR. COULD -- COULD A CANDIDATE CHALLENGE AND

SAY, HEY, YOU'RE NOT UNABLE TO APPEAR BECAUSE OF A RISK, IT'S EVIDENCED

BY ALL OF THESE CHARACTERISTICS THAT YOU EXHIBIT. YOU'RE FULLY

VACCINATED, YOU'RE BOOSTED. YOU RIDE THE SUBWAY, YOU ATTEND SPORTING

EVENTS. YOU HAVE NO HESITATION ABOUT GOING OUT TO A RESTAURANT. CAN A

CANDIDATE SAY, HOW DO YOU QUALIFY FOR NOT APPEARING FOR VOTING WHEN

YOU DO ALL OF THESE OTHER ACTIVITIES? IS THAT AN OPPORTUNITY THAT EXISTS

UNDER THIS LEGISLATION TO CHALLENGE THE VALIDITY OF AN ABSENTEE BALLOT?

MR. DINOWITZ: CLEARLY, WE LIVE IN A VERY LITIGIOUS

SOCIETY, WHICH YOU ARE NO DOUBT A VERY SIGNIFICANT PART OF IF YOU THINK

THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE ALL THIS LITIGATION ON -- ON THIS. ANYBODY CAN

BRING A CHALLENGE IN COURT ON ANYTHING. WHY SOMEBODY WOULD DO THAT

AND GO THROUGH A LOT OF TROUBLE TO PROVE THAT SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW,

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WENT TO A RESTAURANT, I DON'T KNOW. BUT MY EXPERIENCE, AT LEAST IN -- IN

MY AREA, IS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO GOT THE ABSENTEE BALLOTS WERE SIMPLY

PEOPLE WHO FELL RIGHT INTO THE CATEGORY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE,

PEOPLE WHO WERE REALLY NERVOUS ABOUT GOING OUT TO VOTE. AND -- AND I

THINK THE PROOF IS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED ABSENTEE, AT LEAST IN MY

DISTRICT, EXCUSED OLD. THOSE WERE THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED TO -- TO A VERY

SIGNIFICANT DEGREE, MUCH MORE SO THAN USUAL. THE NUMBERS WERE UP

AND THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO WERE OLDER WAS UP ALSO. SO THAT

SUGGESTS TO ME THAT IT WASN'T SIMPLY PEOPLE WHO JUST DIDN'T WANT TO,

YOU KNOW, WALK AROUND THE CORNER TO VOTE, BUT ACTUALLY PEOPLE WHO

HAD THIS CONCERN, WHICH I'M SURE WE WOULD ALL SHARE FOR OUR

CONSTITUENTS.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

DINOWITZ. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND THANK YOU FOR THE

COURTESIES.

ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, MR.

GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THIS LEGISLATION IS INTERESTING IN THE

SENSE THAT IT TAKES WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE VERY CLEAR AND

UNDERSTANDABLE LANGUAGE IN THE CONSTITUTION AND MAKES IT RATHER VAGUE

AND PRECISE AND REALLY DIFFERENT THAN AN ORDINARY PLAIN ENGLISH READING

OF THE CONSTITUTION. SO WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS IS YOU CAN VOTE BY

ABSENTEE BALLOT IF YOU, QUOTE,"... ARE UNABLE TO APPEAR PERSONALLY AT THE

POLLING PLACE." UNABLE TO APPEAR. AND SO THE FIRST THING THIS BILL SAYS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

IS EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE PERFECTLY CAPABLE PHYSICALLY OF APPEARING,

YOU'RE UNABLE TO APPEAR IF YOU DON'T WANT TO VOTE. WELL, THAT'S A

STRANGE READING OF "UNABLE," ISN'T IT? I MEAN, I WOULD UNDERSTAND IF IT

SAID -- IF IT SAID YOU CAN GET AN ABSENTEE BALLOT IF YOU'RE UNABLE TO

APPEAR BECAUSE THE SUBWAY IS SHUT DOWN OR MASS TRANSIT IS SHUT DOWN.

OR YOU'RE UNABLE TO APPEAR BECAUSE THERE'S A LOCKDOWN IN PLACE OR

THERE'S AN ORDER TO SHOW -- SHELTER IN PLACE. I WOULD UNDERSTAND IF THIS

BILL SAID YOU'RE UNABLE TO APPEAR IF YOU'RE ORDERED INTO QUARANTINE. ALL

OF THOSE DEAL WITH THE PLAIN ENGLISH IN THE CONSTITUTION WHICH SAYS

"UNABLE TO APPEAR." AND WHAT THIS BILL SAYS IS EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE

PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF APPEARING AND MAY APPEAR ALL OVER THE COMMUNITY

ON A REGULAR BASIS, IF YOU ARE FEARFUL OF GOING THEN WE'LL CONSIDER IT AS

THOUGH YOU'RE UNABLE TO APPEAR. SO THEN WE LOOK AT WHAT IS IT THAT

TRIGGERS BEING UNABLE TO APPEAR OTHER THAN JUST A SUBJECTIVE FEARFULNESS

THAT IS NOT DOCUMENTED IN ANY PARTICULAR WAY. WHEN WE'RE NOT LIMITING

THIS BILL -- IT'S NOT LIMITED TO THOSE WHO HAVE A LEGITIMATE FEAR BECAUSE

OF COMORBIDITIES OR BECAUSE THEY CANNOT GET THE VACCINE BECAUSE OF A

MEDICAL SITUATION OR BECAUSE THEY'RE OTHERWISE AT HIGH RISK. NO. THIS

BILL WOULD APPLY TO THOSE WHO ARE PERFECTLY HEALTHY, ABSOLUTELY

PERFECTLY HEALTHY, WHO ARE AVID BUFFALO BILLS FANS, WHO LOVE EATING OUT

AT RESTAURANTS, WHO WORK AS A CASHIER OR AS A WAITRESS OR IN ANY OTHER

ACTIVITY THAT INVOLVES A LOT OF CONTACT. IT DOESN'T MATTER. YOU CAN BE

PERFECTLY HEALTHY, ROUTINELY ENGAGING WITHOUT HESITATION, AND YOU COULD

APPLY FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT UNDER THIS LANGUAGE WHICH CERTAINLY

STRAINS THE CONSTITUTIONAL LANGUAGE WHICH SAYS YOU'RE UNABLE TO APPEAR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

BECAUSE OF ILLNESS. NOW, WE'RE TOLD THAT THIS LANGUAGE WOULD ALLOW

YOU TO APPLY FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE PERFECTLY

HEALTHY, IF YOU THOUGHT THERE WAS A RISK OF CONTACTING OR SPREADING A

DISEASE AND, AS THE SPONSOR NOTED, THAT IS NOT LIMITED TO COVID. IT

COULD INCLUDE THE COMMON COLD OR LESS COMMON THINGS LIKE CHICKEN

POX (INAUDIBLE). (INAUDIBLE), FLU. BUT AGAIN, THE CONSTITUTION SAYS

BECAUSE OF ILLNESS. NOW, I SUPPOSE IN THEORY WE COULD LIMIT THIS TO

THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN DIAGNOSED AS HAVING THE COVID FEAR SYNDROME.

APPARENTLY THAT'S NOW BECOMING A RECOGNIZED DIAGNOSIS.

MR. SPEAKER, IF THERE'S NO OTHER PEOPLE I WOULD LIKE TO

CONTINUE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WE DO HAVE OTHER

SPEAKERS.

MR. GOODELL: IN THAT CASE, THANK YOU FOR THE

COURTESIES. I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS TWISTED LANGUAGE, BUT I'D DEFER TO

THE COMMENTS OF OTHERS THAT ARE COMING AFTER ME. THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. EPSTEIN.

MR. EPSTEIN: WOULD THE -- WOULD THE SPONSOR

YIELD?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. DINOWITZ: YES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ YIELDS.

MR. EPSTEIN: MR. DINOWITZ, ARE PEOPLE STILL DYING

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

IN THIS COUNTRY FROM COVID?

MR. DINOWITZ: I BELIEVE THE DEATH TOLL IN THIS

COUNTRY IS PAST 855,000. AND, IN FACT, IT'S THE SINGLE-BIGGEST DEATH

EVENT THAT'S EVER TAKEN PLACE IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF OUR GREAT REPUBLIC.

GREATER THAN WORLD WAR II. GREATER THAN THE CIVIL WAR. GREATER THAN

THE PANDEMIC OF 1918. THE ANSWER IS YES, PEOPLE ARE STILL DYING.

MR. EPSTEIN: ALMOST 2,000 PEOPLE ARE PROBABLY

DYING AS OF TODAY OR YESTERDAY FROM THIS PANDEMIC. RIGHT?

MR. DINOWITZ: YES. ALMOST 2,000 PEOPLE ARE

DYING. SADLY, MOST OF THEM ARE NOT VACCINATED. BUT IT'S A HUGE

NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE DYING AND IT'S HORRIBLE.

MR. EPSTEIN: AND -- AND IS THERE -- IF SOMEONE

WANTS TO VOTE AND ISN'T WEARING A MASK, CAN THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

STOP SOMEONE FROM VOTING WHO ISN'T WEARING A MASK?

MR. DINOWITZ: I BELIEVE EVERYBODY WHO GOES INTO

THE POLLING PLACE MUST BE WEARING A MASK. I'M NOT -- I'M NOT AWARE IF

THEY STOPPED ANYBODY, BUT THEN AGAIN I'M NOT AWARE THAT THERE'S

ANYBODY WHO ACTUALLY WHO HAD THE AUDACITY TO GO IN THERE NOT WEARING

A MASK AND INSISTED UPON VOTING.

MR. EPSTEIN: SO -- SO BECAUSE WE HAD IT IN MY

POLLING PLACE WHERE PEOPLE WEREN'T WEARING MASKS BUT THEY COULDN'T --

BECAUSE THEY WERE COMING INTO VOTE THERE WAS NO PROHIBITION FROM

LETTING THEM VOTE, EVEN IF THEY WERE MASKLESS.

MR. DINOWITZ: I --I DON'T -- I'M NOT SURE YOU CAN

STOP A VOTER FROM VOTING. (INAUDIBLE) SPECIFIC CASE.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. EPSTEIN: AND SO -- SO YOU COULD HAVE A

WELL-FOUNDED FEAR THAT IF A MASKLESS PERSON WAS IN THE POLLING PLACE

THAT THEY COULD POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, IMPACT SOMEONE ELSE FROM NOT

GOING INTO THAT POLLING SITE.

MR. DINOWITZ: OH, NOT ONLY THAT, BUT MANY OF OUR

POLLING SITES ARE IN PUBLIC PLACES LIKE SCHOOLS, AND SCHOOLS ARE

GENERALLY OPEN ON ELECTION DAY -- WELL, THEY'RE CERTAINLY OPEN ON

PRIMARIES -- AND THERE COULD BE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE SCHOOL BESIDES

VOTERS. SO IF ANYONE -- THERE ARE MANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR THERE TO BE

UNMASKED PEOPLE - HOPEFULLY NOT - BUT THERE COULD BE -- THAT CERTAINLY

COULD HAPPEN.

MR. EPSTEIN: WELL, THANK YOU.

ON THE BILL, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. EPSTEIN: I JUST REALLY WANT TO APPLAUD THE

SPONSOR FOR TAKING A COMMONSENSE PUBLIC HEALTH DECISION IN RELATION TO

OUR POLLING. I MEAN, WE'VE SEEN THIS PANDEMIC GETTING WORSE OVER THE

LAST MONTH. WE SEE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE DYING EVERY SINGLE DAY, AND IF

SOMEONE HAS A WELL-FOUNDED FEAR IN THEIR OWN MIND THAT THEY'RE GOING

TO GET SICK -- AND LITERALLY, I SPOKE TO A 93-YEAR-OLD CONSTITUENT THE

OTHER DAY WHO'S GOT THE -- GOT THE SHOT, GOT THE SECOND SHOT, GOT THE

BOOSTER (INAUDIBLE) SHE WAS GOING TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A FOURTH SHOT, BUT

STILL DOESN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE GOING OUT BECAUSE OF HER HEALTH. WE

SHOULD NOT LIMIT HER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE. SO THIS BILL WILL ALLOW

HER AND PEOPLE WHO ARE SIMILARLY SITUATED TO BE ABLE TO FEEL

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

COMFORTABLE VOTING ASKING FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT. EVEN THOUGH THEY

MAY BE ABLE TO GO OUT AND DO OTHER THINGS, THEIR FEAR OF VOTING BECAUSE

OF HEALTH CONSEQUENCES, WE SHOULD PROTECT THOSE NEW YORKERS. WE

SHOULD PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS. WE SHOULD ENSURE THAT EVERYONE HAS THE

RIGHT TO VOTE AND HAS ACCESS TO -- TO VOTING WHETHER THEY FEEL

COMFORTABLE BECAUSE OF HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OR NOT, TO GO INTO THE

POLLS.

THIS IS A GOOD BILL. I WANT TO APPLAUD THE SPONSOR AND

I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS. THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. WALCZYK.

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

THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR SOME QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. DINOWITZ: GLADLY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ YIELDS,

SIR.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU. THROUGH YOU, MR.

SPEAKER, HOW MANY ABSENTEE BALLOTS, ROUGHLY, WERE REQUESTED IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK IN 2020 WHEN WE STARTED THE -- THE NEW PHASE OF

HOW WE VOTE HERE IN NEW YORK STATE?

MR. DINOWITZ: I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK. I DON'T

KNOW OFFHAND. A LOT. IT WAS A VERY HIGH NUMBER.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. WALCZYK: THROUGH YOU, MR. SPEAKER, I

COULD PROVIDE THE SPONSOR AN ANSWER. IT'S 2.5 MILLION ABSENTEE BALLOTS

WERE REQUESTED IN 2020.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. WALCZYK, COULD

YOU LEAN INTO THE MIC A LITTLE BIT SO THAT WE CAN HEAR YOU?

MR. WALCZYK: WOULD I JUST BE ABLE TO TAKE MY

MASK OFF, MR. SPEAKER? WOULD THAT WORK?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WELL --

MR. WALCZYK: WELL, THE PERSON IN FRONT OF YOU --

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: (INAUDIBLE)

MR. WALCZYK: IS THAT BETTER? NO PROBLEM, MR.

SPEAKER. HOW MANY ABSENTEE BALLOTS WERE REQUESTED IN 2020 IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK? THROUGH YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

MR. DINOWITZ: I -- I BELIEVE THE NUMBER -- I'M

GUESSING IS THE NUMBER IS -- IS A HUGE NUMBER. I DON'T KNOW THE

NUMBER, THOUGH, BUT IT WAS -- IT WAS PROBABLY THE MOST EVER.

MR. WALCZYK: IT IS. ACTUALLY, AT 2.5 MILLION.

AND THROUGH YOU, MR. SPEAKER, IF THE SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO YIELD,

DID YOU NOTICE THAT SOME AREAS HAD A HIGHER RATE OF REQUESTS FOR

ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN 2020 THAN OTHER AREAS OF NEW YORK STATE?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST, THE

ONLY DISTRICT I WOULD HAVE LOOKED AT WAS THE 81ST ASSEMBLY DISTRICT.

SO I -- I DON'T KNOW. I WOULDN'T KNOW ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

MR. WALCZYK: AND THROUGH YOU, MR. SPEAKER,

THAT -- THAT ASSEMBLY DISTRICT IS LOCATED IN NEW YORK CITY. DO YOU

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

HAPPEN TO KNOW WHAT THE RATE OF REQUESTS FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN NEW

YORK CITY WAS IN 2020?

MR. DINOWITZ: NO. BUT I KNOW THAT A VERY HIGH

PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO MADE THE REQUEST DID NOT VOTE BY ABSENTEE

BALLOT. MANY VOTED IN PERSON, SOME DIDN'T VOTE AT ALL. BUT IT WAS HIGH.

IT WAS VERY HIGH.

MR. WALCZYK: MR. SPEAKER, IT WAS 19 PERCENT.

AND THE ANSWER TO MY EARLIER QUESTION, THE CITY HAS MADE UP THE BULK

-- THE CITY IS A MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA AND HAS MADE UP THE BULK OF

THE REQUESTS FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN 2020. DO YOU HAVE -- WOULD YOU

HAVE ANY GUESSES AS TO WHICH COUNTIES OR AREAS OF THE STATE WOULD HAVE

THE LOWEST RATE OF REQUESTS FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN NEW YORK?

MR. DINOWITZ: I WOULD GUESS - AND THIS IS JUST A

TOTAL GUESS - THAT PEOPLE WHO MAY LIVE IN RURAL OR LESS

DENSELY-POPULATED AREAS WOULD HAVE BEEN LESS LIKELY TO MAKE THOSE

REQUESTS. MAYBE THEY HAD FEWER FEARS OF -- OF THE COVID BUT BECAUSE

THERE AREN'T AS MANY PEOPLE AROUND BUT I DON'T KNOW. THAT WOULD BE

MY GUESS, THAT MORE DENSELY-POPULATED AREAS WOULD BE WHERE YOU'D

HAVE THE GREATEST NUMBER OF REQUESTS, AND THAT WOULD MAKE TOTAL SENSE.

MR. WALCZYK: YOUR -- YOUR GUESS LOGICALLY

FOLLOWS AND FOLLOWS THE NUMBERS THAT I'VE GOT IN FRONT OF ME. WHY

WOULD WE WANT TO GIVE AN ADVANTAGE TO A POPULATION THAT LIVES IN ONE

AREA BY ABSENTEE BALLOT OVER THE PROCLIVITY OF VOTERS IN THE STATE OF

NEW YORK THAT LIVE IN A DIFFERENT AREA TO VOTE?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, EVERYBODY -- IF THIS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

LEGISLATION BECOMES LAW, EVERYBODY THROUGHOUT THE STATE REGARDLESS OF

DISTRICT, REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION, WOULD HAVE AN EQUAL

OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUCH A REQUEST IF THEY WERE FEARFUL OF COVID.

THE FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE EXERCISE THEIR FREEDOM OF CHOICE TO NOT

MAKE A REQUEST IS PERFECTLY FINE. PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS. BUT

MANY PEOPLE WOULD DO IT. THE FACT THAT AS THE -- BASED ON THE NUMBERS

OR THE DATA THAT YOU JUST REFERRED TO THAT IT WAS MORE HEAVILY

CONCENTRATED WHERE PEOPLE MADE THE REQUESTS IN -- IN THE CITY, TO ME,

THAT HAS NO BEARING ON ANYTHING. EVERYBODY HAS THE OPPORTUNITY AND

THE RIGHT TO DO THAT.

MR. WALCZYK: AND THROUGH YOU, MR. SPEAKER, IF

THE SPONSOR WOULD CONTINUE TO YIELD, I'M WONDERING IF THE SPONSOR

KNOWS WHICH PARTY AFFILIATION HAS MORE OF A PROCLIVITY TO VOTE VIA

ABSENTEE BALLOT THAN ANY OTHER PARTY?

MR. DINOWITZ: I DON'T KNOW. I THINK MANY PEOPLE

HAVE SAID IN THE PAST THAT ACTUALLY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAD A GREATER

PROCLIVITY. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE. IN MY AREA MOST PEOPLE ARE

DEMOCRATS, AND -- AND OF COURSE IF THEY'RE REQUESTING ABSENTEE BALLOTS

FOR A PRIMARY, THEY'RE ALL DEMOCRATS. BUT I WOULD THINK ANYBODY

WOULD HAVE A PROCLIVITY TO VOTE BY ABSENTEE IF THEY THOUGHT THAT WAS IN

THEIR BEST INTEREST, IF THAT WOULD PROTECT THEIR HEALTH. AND CERTAINLY,

THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT. BUT I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT -- I

DON'T THINK IT REALLY MATTERS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER WHETHER SOME PEOPLE

ARE MORE LIKELY TO VOTE BY ABSENTEE BALLOT. THE QUESTION IS, ARE WE

GOING TO GIVE EVERYBODY THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAFELY VOTE AND FEEL

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

COMFORTABLE ABOUT IT.

MR. WALCZYK: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ON THE BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. WALCZYK: SO 2.5 MILLION BALLOTS WERE

REQUESTED STATEWIDE IN 2020. THAT WAS THE LAST TIME THE MEMBERS OF

THIS BODY WERE ON THE BALLOT. 1.5- -- OR 1.1 MILLION OF THOSE, A RATE OF

19 PERCENT, WERE IN NEW YORK CITY ALONE. THE TOP FIVE COUNTIES OUT OF

NEW YORK STATE THAT REQUESTED AN ABSENTEE BALLOT -- AND THIS IS THE TOP

FIVE RATES FOR VOTERS WERE -- AND I'D LIKE THE -- THE MEMBERS OF THIS

BODY WHO ARE ABOUT TO VOTE ON THIS BILL TO THINK ABOUT THE -- THE AREAS

I'M ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT. MONROE COUNTY, 26 PERCENT RATE OF ABSENTEE

BALLOT REQUESTS. TOMPKINS COUNTY, 23 PERCENT ABSENTEE BALLOT

REQUESTS. ONONDAGA COUNTY, 20.7. COLUMBIA COUNTY, 20 PERCENT.

AND WESTCHESTER COUNTY, 19.5 PERCENT. YOU CAN THINK ABOUT THE PARTY

REGISTRATION OF THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS IN THOSE AREAS WHILE I MOVE ON TO

THE FIVE COUNTIES WITH THE LOWEST RATE OF ABSENTEE BALLOT REQUESTS.

WYOMING COUNTY HAD THE LOWEST RATE. SO IF YOU THINK THAT ABSENTEE

BALLOTS ARE GOING TO GET YOU OVER THE FINISH LINE AND YOU REPRESENT

WYOMING COUNTY, I'M SORRY TO SAY THAT ONLY 9.4 PERCENT OF REGISTERED

VOTERS IN WYOMING COUNTY AS COMPARED TO MONROE COUNTY NEXT DOOR

WITH A 26 PERCENT REQUEST RATE, ONLY 9.4 PERCENT OF REGISTERED VOTERS IN

WYOMING COUNTY REQUESTED AN ABSENTEE BALLOT IN 2020. AND THE REST

OF THE LIST IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO SURPRISE A LOT OF MEMBERS OF THIS

BODY BECAUSE I'M GOING TO NAME SOME MORE REPUBLICAN COUNTIES.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

HERKIMER COUNTY WITH 10.4 PERCENT. CATTARAUGUS WITH 10 PERCENT.

FULTON WITH 11 PERCENT AND LEWIS COUNTY WITH 11 PERCENT REQUEST RATE

FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS. THE REPUBLICAN AREAS DON'T REQUEST AS MANY

ABSENTEE BALLOTS. AND THAT'S -- THAT DOESN'T SURPRISE ANYBODY IN THIS

CHAMBER.

ON NOVEMBER 2ND THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF NEW

YORK WHILE WE WERE STILL VOTING WITH ABSENTEE BALLOTS THROUGHOUT THIS

PANDEMIC, THIS PAST FALL THE VOTERS WITH ABSENTEE BALLOTS STILL REJECTED

PROPOSITION 4 ON THE BALLOT. WE WERE TRYING THIS IS NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE

BALLOT THING. WE THREW IT ON THERE AND WE SAID, WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE

THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION. ALL WE NEED IS THE VALIDATION OF YOU,

THE VOTERS. AND THEY REJECTED IT. THEY SHOWED UP IN MILLIONS AND THEY

REJECTED THE IDEA THAT THIS LEGISLATURE SENT THEM AND I RESPECT THAT.

AND IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE I THINK ABOUT THE -- THE DEMOCRATS AND THE

REPUBLICANS AND THE INDEPENDENTS AND THE CONSERVATIVES AND THE NEW

YORKERS THAT SHOWED UP THIS PAST FALL TO TELL US WELL, NO. WE PROBABLY

KNOW WHAT I'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED TO THIS BODY, THAT DEMOCRATS VOTE

MORE BY ABSENTEE BALLOT THAN REPUBLICANS DO. IT'S NOT A SECRET. IN

2021 -- SO JUST BACK HOME, IN 2021 DEMOCRATS REQUESTED MORE

ABSENTEE BALLOTS THAN REPUBLICANS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, WHICH I -- I

REPRESENT. JEFFERSON COUNTY HAS AN ENROLLMENT ADVANTAGE OF 10,000

REPUBLICANS OVER DEMOCRATS. BUT DEMOCRATS REQUESTED MORE BY

NUMBER ABSENTEE BALLOTS THAN REPUBLICANS DID. SO EVEN IN THE RURAL

AREAS, PARTY WILL FAR OUTWEIGH THE PROCLIVITY OF A VOTER TO -- TO REQUEST

AN ABSENTEE BALLOT. THEY'LL TELL YOU THAT THIS ABSENTEE BALLOT VOTING

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

IDEA IS GREAT FOR DEMOCRACY, THAT WE'RE JUST EXPANDING VOTER ACCESS.

BUT REALLY, IT'S NOTHING MORE THAN A PARTISAN APPROACH TO MAKE SURE

THAT THE DECK IS STACKED ON ONE SIDE OF THE AISLE. IT'S MAKING THE

REPUBLIC MORE PARTISAN. IT'S NOT GOING TO INSTILL MORE FAITH IN OUR

DEMOCRACY. THE BEST CITIZEN IS THE ONE THAT SHOWS UP -- IN MY OPINION,

THE BEST CITIZEN IS THE ONE THAT SHOWS UP. SHOWS UP ON ELECTION DAY,

SHOWS UP TO TUNE IN TO DEBATES LIKE TODAY. SHOWED UP ON NOVEMBER

2ND AND REJECTED THIS IDEA THE LAST TIME THE LEGISLATURE BROUGHT IT TO

THEM. AND NOW WE'RE TRYING TO END AROUND THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF

NEW YORK TO GET TO THE SAME POLITICAL MEANS. AND I'LL TELL YOU WHAT.

THE STATE -- THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ARE FED UP WITH THIS

PARTISAN STUFF.

SO, MR. SPEAKER, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE NO ON

THIS BILL AND I THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A -- MR. SALKA.

MR. SALKA: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WILL THE

SPONSOR YIELD FOR A COUPLE OF BRIEF QUESTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD?

MR. DINOWITZ: I'LL YIELD FOR AS MANY QUESTIONS AS

YOU'VE GOT.

MR. SALKA: THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. DINOWITZ: FOR 15 MINUTES.

MR. SALKA: IT PROBABLY WON'T TAKE ANYWHERE NEAR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THAT. YOU WILL AGREE THAT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE THROUGH THIS

LEGISLATION IS MINIMIZE RISK.

MR. DINOWITZ: MINIMIZE RISK, YES.

MR. SALKA: MINIMIZE RISK.

MR. DINOWITZ: YES.

MR. SALKA: SO, SOMETIME BACK WE DECIDED TO

INCORPORATE EARLY VOTING, OKAY, IN -- IN NEW YORK STATE. NOW, DURING

THAT EARLY VOTING PROCESS AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AT THAT TIME RUNNING FOR

OFFICE I WAS VERY INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT KIND OF TURNOUT WAS OCCURRING

WITH THAT EARLY VOTING. AND I HAVE A RURAL DISTRICT, BUT THERE'S A COUPLE

CITIES THERE AND THERE'S A VERY GOOD FLOW OF PEOPLE. AND THE ELECTION

INSPECTORS INFORMED ME THAT IT WAS SPARSE AT BEST. SO IF WE'RE TALKING

ABOUT MINIMIZING RISK, WHY AREN'T WE PUSHING THE OPTION MORE FOR

PEOPLE THAT ARE AFRAID OF GOING ON A VERY BUSY ELECTION DAY OR A BUSIER

ELECTION DAY, THAT THEY CAN MINIMIZE THEIR RISK BY MAYBE EARLY

VOTING? THAT MEANS THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH GOING TO THE POLLS BY

THEMSELVES, THEY'RE GOING TO THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS. THEY'RE NOT GOING

TO A POLL. SO WHY -- WHY AREN'T WE AT LEAST ENCOURAGING THAT?

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, MANY PEOPLE DO TAKE

ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE EARLY. I DON'T KNOW THAT EARLY

VOTING HAS APPRECIABLY CHANGED TURNOUT SO MUCH AS IT MAY HAVE SPREAD

IT OUT MORE, BUT I'M HOPING IT INCREASES TURNOUT. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT

YOUR AREA -- ALTHOUGH I GUESS I KIND OF DO IN A SENSE. I KNOW IN MY

AREA WE HAVE IN MY ASSEMBLY DISTRICT A LIMITED NUMBER OF EARLY

VOTING SITES. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, ME, IF I DIDN'T DRIVE A CAR I WOULD HAVE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

TO TAKE A VERY LONG WALK TO VOTE. IT -- IT'S NOT THAT CONVENIENT FOR

PEOPLE UNLESS THEY HAVE A CAR. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T HAVE CARS IN

THE CITY IN PARTICULAR. A LOT OF THE OLDER PEOPLE DON'T HAVE CARS. A LOT

OF YOUNGER PEOPLE DON'T HAVE CARS. AND PEOPLE IN NEW YORK CITY AS

AN EXAMPLE IN GENERAL DON'T HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE. SO IT'S -- UNLESS

YOU'RE IN A CONCENTRATED AREA, IT'S HARD. I IMAGINE IN YOUR AREA -- WHERE

IS YOUR AREA?

MR. SALKA: IT'S UPSTATE NEW YORK.

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, THAT PART I KNEW, BUT --

MR. SALKA: MADISON COUNTY, OTSEGO COUNTY,

ONEIDA COUNTY AND DELAWARE.

MR. DINOWITZ: OKAY. I -- I IMAGINE THAT FOR MOST

PEOPLE THEY WOULD HAVE TO DRIVE TO THE EARLY VOTING SITE. THAT WORKS

FOR SOME PEOPLE. IT WORKS FOR PEOPLE WHO DRIVE. SO, YEAH, EARLY

VOTING I THINK IS A PLUS. BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY REALLY ADDRESS THIS

FOR THE MOST PART.

MR. SALKA: AND IF I MAY ASK YOU ANOTHER

QUESTION. DO YOU BELIEVE IN THE CDC GUIDELINES?

MR. DINOWITZ: DO I BELIEVE IN THE WHAT?

MR. SALKA: THE CDC GUIDELINES. THE GUIDELINES

THAT ARE RECOMMENDED BY THE CDC AND THE NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AS FAR AS MITIGATING OR PREVENTING THE SPREAD

INFECTION.

MR. DINOWITZ: I -- I CAN TELL YOU WHAT I BELIEVE. I

BELIEVE YOU GET VACCINATED AND YOU WEAR A MASK AND YOU WASH YOUR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

HANDS AND YOU DON'T SNEEZE ON PEOPLE AND YOU DON'T GO INDOORS

WITHOUT A MASK. IN FACT, MANY PEOPLE GO OUTDOORS WITH A MASK. THAT'S

WHAT I BELIEVE. THAT'S THE CURRENT CDC GUIDELINES. GOOD. I -- I DON'T

BELIEVE IT'S WISE FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE TO GET TOGETHER RIGHT NOW WHILE THE

-- WHILE THE POSITIVITY RATES ARE SO HIGH IN THIS STATE, ALTHOUGH THEY

SEEM TO BE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THEY'RE STILL NOT WHERE THEY

SHOULD BE. YOU KNOW, IT WAS ONLY ABOUT, I WANT TO SAY, ABOUT A

MONTH-AND-A-HALF AGO THAT THE POSITIVITY RATE IN THE BRONX WAS LIKE .75.

LESS THAN 1. AND THEN JUST A WEEK OR TWO AGO IT WAS APPROACHING 30

PERCENT. SO, YOU KNOW, IT SKYROCKETED. AND I THINK THE REST OF THE

STATE IS A LITTLE BIT BEHIND THE CITY SO YOUR RATES -- THERE'S A GOOD

CHANCE YOUR RATES ARE HIGHER THAN THE RATES IN MY AREA. I THINK PEOPLE

SHOULD BE WISE IN WHAT THEY DO. I MEAN, I CAN'T TELL PEOPLE WHAT TO DO.

WELL, WITHIN -- I DO TELL PEOPLE WHAT TO DO SOMETIMES BUT I -- I REALLY

CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE TO WEAR A MASK. BUT NOT EVERYBODY DOES WHAT THEY

SHOULD DO. AND SO IT -- IT'S NOT ALWAYS -- YOU KNOW, SOME PEOPLE

MIGHT NOT ALWAYS FIND IT SAFE OR FEEL SAFE. AS FAR AS -- YOU KNOW, AS FAR

AS THE CDC I GUESS AS A GENERAL RULE I WOULD -- I WOULD FOLLOW THEIR

GUIDELINES. BUT I KNOW WHAT I THINK IS RIGHT AND I'M -- YOU KNOW, I'M

NOT THE ONE WHO MAKES UP THE GUIDELINES BUT I THINK IT TAKES -- SOME

THINGS JUST TAKE COMMONSENSE. AND THE ABILITY TO WANT TO SURVIVE, YOU

KNOW, THERE'S A THING CALLED SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST. WELL, IF YOU DON'T

WEAR A MASK YOU MIGHT NOT FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY.

MR. SALKA: OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR.

DINOWITZ.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL BRIEFLY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. SALKA: TWO YEARS AGO WE USED FEAR, ALL RIGHT,

AS A MOTIVATOR TO MAKE SOME QUITE DRASTIC CHANGES TO OUR -- TO OUR

VOTING PROCESS, AND HERE WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO IT AGAIN OUT OF FEAR. I

GUESS MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS WHAT'S NEXT? IN THE NEXT ELECTION, WHAT'S

GOING TO BE THE FEAR FACTOR THAT'S GOING TO BE USED BY CHANGING THE WAY

WE VOTE, TO CHANGE WHAT IS CONTRARY TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF

NEW YORK. SO I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT WE'RE STARTING A TREND HERE

BECAUSE WE FOUND THAT FEAR WORKS. FEAR MAKES PEOPLE DO THINGS THAT

THEY WOULDN'T NECESSARILY DO, AND THAT'S JUST HUMAN NATURE. SO MY

CONCERN IS AS THIS TREND GOES, AS WE EACH ELECTION FIND SOME OTHER WAY

TO BE ABLE TO CIRCUMVENT, NUMBER ONE IN THIS CASE, THE VOTE OF THE

PEOPLE ON PROPOSITION 4, OR SOMETHING CONTRARY TO THE CONSTITUTION OF

NEW YORK STATE. NOW WE FOUND OUT IT'S PRETTY EASY TO DO. SO WHAT'S

GOING TO BE IN THE NEXT ELECTION? THAT'S MY CONCERN. I THINK WE NEED

TO BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL AND VERY, VERY VIGILANT THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT

IF, IN FACT, THERE ARE REASONS THAT ARE USED, THEY'RE BASED IN THE

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE BILL. NOT IN THE FEAR FACTOR, NOT IN SOMETHING

THAT WE MADE UP OR SOMEBODY WHO JUST DOESN'T WANT TO GO. WE'RE

CONCERNED THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO SEE AGAIN IN THE FUTURE,

AND FOR THAT MATTER, BECAUSE OF THAT I'M GOING TO BE VOTING NO ON THIS

BILL.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. MANKTELOW.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

WOULD THE SPONSOR YIELD FOR A QUESTION?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ, WILL

YOU YIELD?

(PAUSE)

HE ASKED YOU TO YIELD, MR. DINOWITZ.

MR. DINOWITZ: YES. I WAS BUSY GOSSIPING.

MR. MANKTELOW: I'M SORRY?

MR. DINOWITZ: NOTHING.

MR. MANKTELOW: GOOD.

MR. DINOWITZ: YES, I'D BE HAPPY TO YIELD.

MR. MANKTELOW: THANK YOU SO MUCH. IN YOUR

BILL AND I THINK IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION, IF YOU'RE SICK YOU CAN REQUEST

AN ABSENTEE BALLOT, CORRECT?

MR. DINOWITZ: YOU CAN.

MR. MANKTELOW: SO, I LIKE -- I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE

TRYING TO DO AND I LIKE THE -- THE -- THE END RESULT FROM THIS TO GET

PEOPLE OUT TO VOTE. MY QUESTION IS, WHY IS FEAR IN THIS BILL?

MR. DINOWITZ: WHY IS WHAT?

MR. MANKTELOW: WHY IS -- WHY IS FEAR -- WHY --

IF SOMEONE'S AFRAID TO GO OUT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO POSSIBLY GET

COVID OR -- OR ANY OTHER ILLNESS, WHY WAS THAT ADDED TO THIS?

MR. DINOWITZ: YOU KNOW, FOR A -- FOR A

SIGNIFICANT PERIOD OF TIME NEW YORK CITY AND PLACES LIKE THE BRONX

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

AND QUEENS WERE THE EPICENTER OF THE PANDEMIC WORLDWIDE, AND

COUNTLESS PEOPLE DIED. SO I GUESS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME WE WERE

CONDITIONED TO BE A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT COVID. A LOT OF STEPS WERE

TAKEN OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS OF -- GOVERNOR CUOMO ISSUED NUMEROUS

EXECUTIVE ORDERS ON A VARIETY OF TOPICS. A LOT OF THINGS CHANGED. WE

-- WE JUST DID A LOT OF THINGS TO ADDRESS THE SITUATION AS IT WAS AND AS IT

STILL IS IN -- IN JUST MANY DIFFERENT AREAS. AND WHILE I'M KIND OF FEELING

LIKE MAYBE WE'RE TURNING A CORNER -- WE'VE HAD THAT FEELING BEFORE, I'M

HOPING THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW -- WE DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S A FACT.

AND SO LEGISLATION LIKE THIS IS MEANT ONLY TO BE -- TO BE IN EFFECT DURING

THIS EMERGENCY. AND IT'S HARD TO ARGUE THAT WE'RE NOT STILL IN AN

EMERGENCY. EACH DAY FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS BETWEEN 150 AND

200 NEW YORKERS HAVE DIED. AND I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU, THEY'RE NOT

COMING MOSTLY FROM NEW YORK CITY AT THIS POINT. THEY'RE JUST NOT.

THE -- THE DISTRIBUTION HAS CHANGED BECAUSE -- BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE

VIRUS HAS MOVED, BECAUSE OF -- OF DECISIONS SOME PEOPLE MADE AS TO

WHETHER OR NOT TO GET VACCINATED. SO WE'RE STILL IN AN EMERGENCY AND

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE WILL COMFORTABLY VOTE -- EXERCISE

THEIR FRANCHISE. AND I KNOW IT WAS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY THAT SOME

AREAS MIGHT HAVE HAD A HIGHER RATE OF APPLICATIONS FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS

AND I SAY SO WHAT. SO WHAT. IT DOESN'T MATTER. WHAT MATTERS IS THAT

THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO WANT TO VOTE AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY

CAN DO IT SAFELY, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES. NOW, I'M HOPING THAT

NEXT YEAR WE WON'T EVEN THINK OF DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS AT ALL. THAT

IT WOULDN'T BE NECESSARY. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HOPING. I THINK WE'RE ALL

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

HOPING THE SAME THING.

MR. MANKTELOW: ABSOLUTELY. I TOTALLY AGREE

WITH YOU THERE. AND I ALSO BELIEVE THAT IF THIS IS PUT INTO EFFECT AND THIS

TIME NEXT YEAR THERE -- THERE STILL WOULD BE SOME COVID AROUND,

HOPEFULLY NOT AS MUCH. MY CONCERN HERE IS WE'RE ADDING SOMETHING

THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO USE FOR A VERY LONG TIME: FEAR.

MR. DINOWITZ: THEY COULD BE FEARFUL OF DYING?

855,000 AMERICANS HAVE DIED. THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE FEARFUL OF. THIS

IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS CREATED, THIS IS A REALITY THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE

HAVE DIED AND A LOT OF PEOPLE SEE THAT AND HAVE THE CONCERN THAT THAT

COULD HAPPEN TO THEM.

MR. MANKTELOW: DO YOU ALSO -- DO YOU FEEL THAT

WITH THIS BILL THAT YOU'RE GOING TO ALLEVIATE THAT FEAR FOR THE INDIVIDUALS

THAT TRULY WANT TO VOTE?

MR. DINOWITZ: I THINK IF WE CAN ENSURE THAT THOSE

PEOPLE WHO WANT TO VOTE BUT ARE NERVOUS ABOUT GOING TO THE POLLS CAN

STILL VOTE, THAT'S A GOOD THING. THAT'S A POSITIVE THING. THAT WILL BE ONE

LESS THING THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO GO TO A CROWDED PLACE FOR. YOU KNOW,

SOME PEOPLE -- I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY DO THEIR OWN

FOOD SHOPPING ANYMORE. A LOT OF PEOPLE -- I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE IT

IN YOUR NECK OF THE WOODS, BUT WHERE I AM WE HAVE PLACES LIKE

FRESHDIRECT AND SHOP & STOP, (INAUDIBLE), WHERE YOU CAN JUST PLACE

YOUR -- YOUR GROCERY ORDERS ONLINE AND GET A DELIVERY. A LOT OF PEOPLE

ARE DOING THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S A GREATER EXPENSE BECAUSE THEY DON'T

WANT TO TAKE THE CHANCE OF GOING INTO A CROWDED SUPERMARKET. AND

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS PEOPLE ARE DOING. HOW MANY PEOPLE --

I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HAVE APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN YOUR DISTRICT OR NOT, BUT

MY DISTRICT IS MOSTLY APARTMENT BUILDINGS, AND IF YOU GO INTO ANY

BUILDING LOBBY YOU'RE GOING TO STACKS OF CARTONS FROM AMAZON. PEOPLE

WHO ARE DOING THEIR SHOPPING ONLINE. AND THAT'S NOT BECAUSE PEOPLE

ARE LAZY - ALTHOUGH I THINK SOME PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET USED TO THE

IDEA - BUT BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO GO TO CROWDED STORES RIGHT NOW. I

PERSONALLY LIKE TO GO OUT AND -- AND DO SHOPPING, BUT NOT RIGHT NOW. I

DON'T -- I MEAN, I DON'T GO TO GROCERY STORES ANYMORE.

MR. MANKTELOW: AND YOU MADE A GREAT POINT.

YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ARE SHOPPING ONLINE AND USING AMAZON. WHAT --

WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF -- NEVER MIND, I WON'T GO THERE. SO, UP IN OUR

NECK OF THE WOODS, AS YOU MADE REFERENCE TO JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO,

PEOPLE TAKE PRIDE AS AMERICANS. THEY TAKE PRIDE AS NEW YORKERS.

AND THEY TAKE PRIDE OF DOING THEIR DUTY TO GO AND VOTE, AND THEY'RE

GOING TO FIND A WAY TO DO IT WHETHER THEY'RE FEARFUL -- FEARFUL OR NOT. I

REALLY WANT TO SUPPORT THIS BILL ONLY IF YOU CAN TAKE THE FEAR FACTOR OUT

OF IT.

MR. DINOWITZ: WELL, FEAR IS NOT IN THE BILL, SO FEEL

FREE TO VOTE FOR IT.

MR. MANKTELOW: ALL RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT

YOU'RE SAYING. BUT OUT OF RESPECT FOR OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, OUR

HEALTHCARE WORKERS, OUR ESSENTIAL WORKERS, TRUCK DRIVERS, SANITATION

INDIVIDUALS, EVERYBODY THAT HAD TO WORK THE WHOLE TIME THROUGH THIS

PANDEMIC AND ESPECIALLY IN THE EARLY MONTHS AND EARLY DAYS AND HOURS

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

OF THIS, I THINK A LOT OF THEM WERE VERY FEARFUL. AND I THINK A LOT OF

THEM, INCLUDING OUR HEALTHCARE WORKERS, OUR NURSES THAT WE SAW IN

NEW YORK CITY THAT DIDN'T HAVE THE PROPER PPE GEAR, THEY WERE -- THEY

WERE ASKED AND TOLD TO WEAR A GARBAGE BAG. WEAR YOUR MASK FOR TWO

WEEKS OR WHATEVER. FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT WORK. THESE INDIVIDUALS

FOUGHT THE FEAR, NOT ONLY THE FEAR OF GETTING COVID, BUT THE -- THE FEAR

OF TRANSMITTING IT BACK TO THEIR LOVED ONES BACK AT HOME.

SO, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. I WANT TO GO ON THE

BILL. THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. DINOWITZ: OKAY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON THE BILL, SIR.

MR. MANKTELOW: MR. SPEAKER, ON THE BILL. IF

YOU GO BACK IN HISTORY OF WHO WE ARE AS AMERICANS AND WHAT WE'VE

BEEN THROUGH, WHETHER IT'S CIVIL RIGHTS MARCHES AND STUFF THAT WE

TALKED ABOUT A FEW DAYS AGO, WHETHER IT'S THE WARS THAT WE'VE BEEN IN,

WHETHER THE THINGS WE'VE DONE TO HELP OTHER COUNTRIES TO BRING THEM

FOOD, SECURITY, HELP, RECONSTRUCTING, YOU KNOW, AFTER A TSUNAMI, DO WE

NOT HERE IN NEW YORK OWE THIS PART OF IT TO OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, TO OUR

HEALTHCARE WORKERS, TO OUR NURSES, TO OUR DOCTORS? DO WE NOT OWE

THEM SOMETHING? THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE FOUGHT THIS FIGHT SINCE DAY

ONE. THEY'VE MADE IT WORK. THEY'VE MADE IT -- THEY'VE FOUND A WAY TO

PROTECT THEMSELVES, GOING TO THEIR JOB EVERY SINGLE DAY. AND WE'RE --

HERE WE'RE ALLOWING VOTERS THAT COULD VOTE BUT THEY MAY HAVE A LITTLE

BIT OF ANXIETY OR THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING THE COVID. AS THE

SPONSOR OF THE BILL SAID, GET VACCINATED. GET YOUR BOOSTER OR GET YOUR

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

SECOND BOOSTER OR GET YOUR THIRD BOOSTER. WEAR YOUR MASK. WEAR PPE

IF YOU WANT. YOU COULD GET TO THAT VOTING PLACE AND DO IT SAFELY.

THERE'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND. AS MY COLLEAGUE JUST SAID EARLIER,

THEY'VE GOT MULTIPLE DAYS TO GO AND VOTE. WELL, GO ON THE DAYS WHERE

THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE SO THAT LESSENS THE RISK. OUT OF RESPECT FOR

OUR WORKERS THAT HAVE -- THAT HAVE FOUGHT THIS FIGHT SINCE THE BEGINNING

OF THIS AND STILL ARE TODAY, IF YOU TOOK THAT -- THAT PART OF THE BILL OUT OR

IF THEY'RE NERVOUS OR IF THEY FEEL INTIMIDATED OR THEY -- THEY DON'T WANT

TO GET SOMETHING, IF YOU TOOK THAT OUT I -- I WOULD -- I WOULD SUPPORT

THIS BILL. BUT, MR. SPEAKER, OUT OF RESPECT FOR EVERYONE ELSE I'M GOING

TO VOTE NO. BECAUSE THERE ARE -- THIS IS ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF. IT'S

ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF IN OUR -- IN OUR ELECTION LAWS, IT'S TAKEN CARE OF

IN OUR CONSTITUTION. OUT OF RESPECT FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND -- AND

SOME OF THOSE FRONTLINE WORKERS THAT HAVE PASSED AWAY FROM COVID,

I'LL BE VOTING NO. I'M GOING TO ASK ALL OF YOU TO VOTE NO OUT OF RESPECT

FOR THEM.

SO, THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU, SIR.

MS. BICHOTTE HERMELYN.

MS. BICHOTTE HERMELYN: THANK YOU, MR.

SPEAKER, FOR ALLOWING ME TO AFFIRM MY VOTE IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL

WHICH EXTENDS ABSENTEE VOTING WITHOUT AN EXCUSE DUE TO THE RISK OF

SPREADING THE DISEASE. EARLIER THIS WEEK WE CELEBRATED DR. REVEREND

MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., AND AS WE REMEMBERED HIS LEGACY WE

REMEMBERED HOW HE CHAMPIONED FOR US AND FOR OUR VOTING RIGHTS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

AND BECAUSE FOR TOO LONG WE HAVE MANY COMMUNITIES SUCH AS

COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, NEW AMERICAN COMMUNITIES, AS WELL AS

LOW-INCOME COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN SYSTEMATICALLY DENIED THEIR

RIGHTS TO VOTE IN A VERY DISENFRANCHISING AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL WAY. WE

ONLY NEED TO LOOK AT GEORGIA TO SEE HOW THIS IS STILL HAPPENING NOW.

THERE'S ONGOING ATTACKS ON HOW OUR VOTING RIGHTS ACROSS THE NATION IS

BEING THREATENED AND DESTROYING OUR DEMOCRACY. WE, AS AMERICANS,

WE, AS NEW YORK STATERS, WANT AS MANY QUALIFIED VOTERS AS POSSIBLE TO

EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE. THE THREAT OF COVID-19 IS STILL BEFORE US.

I SAID THIS LAST YEAR, BUT WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN OUR

LIVES AND OUR RIGHT TO VOTE. PARTICIPATION IN OUR DEMOCRACY IS A

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT. OMICRON HAS HIT OUR CITY AND STATE WITH FORCE.

MANY NEW YORKERS REMAIN VULNERABLE TO THIS DISEASE. SO WHAT THIS

BILL DOES, IT EXTENDS THE PROVISION THAT ALLOWS VOTERS TO CAST AN ABSENTEE

BALLOT IN THE INSTANCES WHERE THERE'S A RISK OF CONTRACTING OR SPREADING

OR BEING FEAR OF A DISEASE CAUSING ILLNESS. THIS IS THE BARE MINIMUM. I

BELIEVE YOU SHOULDN'T NEED AN EXCUSE TO VOTE BY NOW. YOU SHOULDN'T

NEED TO FEAR FOR YOUR LIFE IN ORDER TO EXERCISE YOUR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO

PARTICIPATE IN OUR DEMOCRACY.

MR. SPEAKER, I AM THE CHAIR OF THE LARGEST PARTY IN THE

STATE OF NEW YORK. AND I AM ALSO A RESIDENT OF THE LARGEST BOROUGH IN

THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITH MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE

REGISTERED TO -- TO -- TO VOTE. IT IS MY DUTY, MY DUTY, TO MAKE SURE THAT

EACH OF THESE REGISTERED VOTERS ARE NOT DENIED OF THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE

BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT HEALTH CIRCUMSTANCES. I BELIEVE THAT IN ADDITION

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

TO EXPANDING VOTING RIGHTS DUE TO ILLNESS, WE NEED TO EXPAND THEM

WITHOUT A REASON.

SO, WITH THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I WANT TO THANK THE

SPONSOR FOR INTRODUCING THIS BILL AND I WILL BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE

AND I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO DO SO AS WELL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: THANK YOU SO MUCH TO

MAKE COMMENTS ON THIS BILL. I REALIZE THAT IT DOES CREATE DISCREPANCIES

FOR SOME BECAUSE THERE IS PART OF OUR SOCIETY, QUITE HONESTLY, MR.

SPEAKER, THAT WOULD NOT LIKE EVERYONE TO HAVE THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE. THE

1965 VOTING RIGHTS ACT, THAT'S WHAT IT WAS ABOUT. PEOPLE WERE BEING

DENIED ACCESS TO VOTE. WELL, IN 2020, MR. SPEAKER, WE BOTH KNOW THAT

MORE PEOPLE VOTED THAN HAD AT THE SAME TIME IN AT LEAST A CENTURY.

AND THOSE NUMBERS AND THAT RACE WERE SO SHOCKING TO PEOPLE THAT

SOME PEOPLE STILL THINK THAT IT'S A LIE. WELL, IT WAS NOT A LIE. IT'S THE

TRUTH. WHEN YOU MAKE ACCESS TO ALL AMERICAN VOTERS TO VOTE, THEY WILL

VOTE. AND BECAUSE OF THE RESULTS OF THAT ELECTION, THERE ARE NOW 19

STATES THAT ARE WANTING TO CHANGE OR DIMINISH PEOPLE'S ACCESS TO THE

POLLS. THAT'S WHAT SHOULD BE THE LIE. THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO

THINGS TO DENY PEOPLE A RIGHT TO VOTE. NOW, I'VE HEARD THE BILLS TALKED

ABOUT A LOT HERE. I'M A MAJOR BILLS FAN. I'VE BEEN A BILLS FAN SINCE I

GREW UP, BETWEEN TWO BROTHERS AND MY PARENTS. I HAVE NOT BEEN TO BUT

ONE BILLS GAME. AND THE ONE I WENT TO, IT WAS IN A CLUBHOUSE WITH

ONLY 60 PEOPLE. THAT'S A PERSONAL CHOICE. BUT THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WERE THERE, THEY MADE THE CHOICE TO SIT NEXT TO OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE

ON A MASK WHO SOMETIMES WOULD TAKE IT OFF. BUT THEY ALL WALKED IN

THE DOOR WITH A VACCINATION CARD. THAT'S NOT A GUARANTEE AT THE

SUPERMARKET THAT EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BE VACCINATED. BUT IT IS A

GUARANTEE IF YOU GO TO A BILLS GAME. AND SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

PEOPLE'S ACCESS TO VOTING, WE NEED TO KEEP TWO THINGS IN MIND, AND I

WANT TO COMMEND THE SPONSOR FOR DOING SO. ONE IS THAT THIS VIRUS IS

NOT GONE YET. AND, TWO, IS THAT EVERYBODY HAS A RIGHT TO VOTE. GIVE

THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY.

THIS DOES THAT, SO I WILL CERTAINLY BE VOTING IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE. I WOULD IMPLORE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE YES ON THIS ONE IN

SPITE OF THE NEGATIVE RHETORIC THAT WE'VE HAD HEARD TODAY ON THIS ISSUE.

THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON SENATE PRINT 7565-B. THIS IS A PARTY VOTE. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED AS AN EXCEPTION TO THEIR CONFERENCE

POSITION IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE

NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

MR. GOODELL.

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

REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE IS GENERALLY OPPOSED TO THIS BILL. BUT AS YOU

CORRECTLY NOTED, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT PLEASE CONTACT

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THE MINORITY LEADER'S OFFICE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: MR. SPEAKER, THE

MAJORITY CONFERENCE WILL GENERALLY BE VOTING IN FAVOR ON THIS PIECE OF

LEGISLATION. HOWEVER, COLLEAGUES DECIDING THAT THEY WOULD NOT LIKE TO

VOTE FOR THIS BILL PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE MAJORITY LEADER'S

OFFICE AND WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT YOUR VOTE IS PROPERLY RECORDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THANK YOU.

MR. DINOWITZ TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. DINOWITZ: THANK YOU. I ALMOST NEVER

EXPLAIN MY VOTE AFTER I'VE DEBATED A BILL BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO TAKE

ANY MORE TIME. BUT I -- I REALLY FEEL I HAVE TO SAY A FEW THINGS. YOU

KNOW, WE FACE SO MANY ISSUES IN THIS STATE AND OUR COUNTRY, WHETHER

IT'S THE ECONOMY, WHETHER IT'S FOREIGN POLICY. SO MANY ISSUES THAT ARE

REALLY CRITICAL. BUT TO ME THERE'S ONE BASIC ISSUE THAT RUNS THROUGH

EVERYTHING, AND THAT'S THE FUTURE OF OUR DEMOCRACY. I THINK WE'VE SEEN

IN THE PAST YEAR, CERTAINLY SINCE JANUARY 6TH OF LAST YEAR, HOW PRECIOUS

DEMOCRACY IS. THIS WEEK WE CELEBRATED MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. DAY.

THIS -- THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS, THE DISCUSSION IS ON VOTING RIGHTS.

I HAVE TO SAY THAT IF THERE'S ONE ISSUE WHICH DIVIDES THE POLITICAL

PARTIES, IT'S THIS. THERE'S ONE PARTY THAT IN MY OPINION WANTS PEOPLE TO

VOTE. AND THE OTHER PARTY, I DON'T BELIEVE DOES. ONE PARTY WANTS TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MAKE IT OPEN AND MAKE IT EASIER TO VOTE, ONE PARTY DOESN'T. ONE PARTY

WANTS TO MAKE IT SO THAT THE VOTES CAN BE COUNTED. AND I DON'T BELIEVE

THAT'S THE CASE IN THE OTHER PARTY. WE'VE SEEN WHAT'S HAPPENED

THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. AND I THINK THAT'S THE CASE HERE. I'M NOT -- I'M

NOT SAYING THAT ANYBODY IN THIS ROOM IS, YOU KNOW, BAD OR -- OR

ANYTHING. I'M JUST SAYING THAT I THINK IT'S A DIFFERENT OUTLOOK ON LIFE. I

BELIEVE, AND I BELIEVE MOST PEOPLE ON OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE BELIEVE, THAT

WE WANT EVERYBODY TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR DEMOCRACY. REGARDLESS OF

HOW THEY VOTE, WE WANT THEM TO PARTICIPATE. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL

IS ABOUT. IT'S NOT ABOUT GIVING ONE SIDE AN ADVANTAGE OVER THE OTHER.

IT'S ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT NOBODY IS DENIED THEIR ABILITY TO VOTE

BECAUSE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES. AND IF WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT EVEN A

FEW MORE PEOPLE VOTE BECAUSE WE PASSED THIS, THEN WE'VE DONE WHAT'S

THE RIGHT THING TO DO IN A DEMOCRACY, AND I WOULD HOPE EVERYBODY

WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

SO I VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. DINOWITZ IN THE

AFFIRMATIVE.

MS. WALSH.

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

MY VOTE. I'M OPPOSED TO THIS BILL BECAUSE IT IS OVER BROAD. IT IS A

COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE STANDARD THAT IS UNVERIFIABLE. IT'S DISRESPECTFUL

TO OUR NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION AND IT'S DISRESPECTFUL TO THE VOTERS

WHO RESOUNDINGLY REJECTED THE BALLOT PROPOSITION FOR NO EXCUSE

ABSENTEE VOTING LAST NOVEMBER. IT'S AN END AROUND AND A BACK DOOR TO

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING. IT IGNORES THE PROGRESS THAT WE HAVE MADE

IN THIS STATE WITH COVID, WHICH OUR OWN GOVERNOR SAID LAST WEEK

WE'RE -- WE'VE GOT A GLIMMER OF HOPE. THIS BILL STILL RUNS, THOUGH, AND

ALLOWS THIS NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING -- OR A WHISPER OF AN EXCUSE,

MAYBE. I MEAN, IT'S JUST -- IT'S COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE. IT'S IF YOU FEEL

LIKE YOU MIGHT BE POSSIBLY AFRAID ON A GIVEN DAY, YOU CAN GET AN

ABSENTEE BALLOT. AND IT -- YOU KNOW, THE TALK ABOUT NEGATIVE RHETORIC,

I'VE GOT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, FOR ALL THAT WE'RE QUOTING DR. KING AND

WANTING A MORE HEALTHY AND POSITIVE ENVIRONMENT IN THIS CHAMBER AND

THROUGHOUT THIS STATE AS WE DEBATE BILLS, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY SAYING

THAT ONE SIDE OF THE AISLE DOESN'T WANT VOTING OR DOESN'T WANT PEOPLE TO

PARTICIPATE, I WANT EVERYBODY TO GET OUT AND VOTE. I THINK THAT THERE ARE

MANY, MANY WAYS THAT PEOPLE CAN GET OUT AND MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD.

AND I THINK JUST BECAUSE WE OBJECT TO A BILL DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE'RE

LIKE SOMEHOW IN FAVOR OF VOTER SUPPRESSION. YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK

THAT IT WAS INTERESTING AFTER THE VOTING PROPOSITION FAILED RESOUNDINGLY

BY LIKE 300,000 VOTES LAST NOVEMBER, ONE OF THE -- ONE OF THE PEOPLE

SAID -- NOT IN THIS CHAMBER -- BUT PEOPLE SAID THERE WAS A STRONG

ANTI-DEMOCRATIC PUSH AND THE PRO-DEMOCRACY FOLKS STAYED HOME. I

MEAN, COME ON. YOU KNOW, WE WANT PEOPLE TO VOTE. WE ALSO WANT TO

FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION AND I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG

WITH THAT. THAT'S PROBABLY WHY WE HAVE ONE.

SO THIS BILL IS A BAD BILL AND I'LL BE VOTING NO. I VOTED

YES FOR IT LAST TIME, BY THE WAY - FULL DISCLOSURE - BECAUSE WE WERE IN A

DIFFERENT POINT IN THE PANDEMIC. I THINK RIGHT NOW I THINK IT'S

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

STRETCHING. AND I THINK THE NEXT BILL WE'RE GOING TO GET IS A BILL TO

REDUCE THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES WE NEED ON PETITIONS, AND THEN WE'RE

GOING TO GET MORE AND MORE USING COVID, AS MY COLLEAGUE SAID, AS AN

EXCUSE TO JUST CONTINUE TO PUSH AND PUSH AND MAKE THINGS -- I DON'T

KNOW, I VOTE IN THE NEGATIVE. I'M SORRY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MS. WALSH IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. LAWLER.

MR. LAWLER: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I JUST

WANT TO NOTE FOR MY COLLEAGUES, NEW YORK CITY VOTER TURNOUT HITS

RECORD LOW OUT FOR A MAYORAL ELECTION, DECEMBER 1, 2021. A SMALLER

PERCENTAGE OF NEW YORK CITY VOTERS TURNED OUT IN THE NOVEMBER 2021

GENERAL ELECTION THAN IN ANY OTHER MAYORAL ELECTION IN NEARLY SEVEN

DECADES. WE GAVE VOTERS EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW UP TO THE POLLS.

WE GAVE THEM BASICALLY NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING AND THEY CHOSE

NOT TO VOTE. NOW, MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE DACC AND ITS CHAIRMAN DIDN'T

SPEND ANY MONEY TO GET A CAMPAIGN TOGETHER TO ENCOURAGE VOTERS TO

SUPPORT NO EXCUSE ABSENTEE BALLOTING. BUT THEY REJECTED IT, THE ONES

WHO DID SHOW UP. SO AT THE END OF THE DAY HERE, THIS ISN'T ABOUT ONE

SIDE WANTING DEMOCRACY TO WORK AND VOTERS TO VOTE AND THE OTHER SIDE

BEING AGAINST IT. NO. THIS IS ABOUT ENSURING THAT OUR LAWS ARE

FOLLOWED. THE CONSTITUTION IS CLEAR, AND THE VOTERS - NOT ME, THE VOTERS

- REJECTED THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT WAS PROPOSED IN

NOVEMBER. AS I SAID, I VOTED FOR THE BILL IN THIS BODY. AND THE VOTERS

SAW OTHERWISE. SO LET'S ACTUALLY RESPECT THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF NEW

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

YORK AS THEY ARE FAR MORE CAPABLE OF DECIDING WHAT IS IN THE BEST

INTEREST OF THIS STATE THAN THE 150 MEMBERS WHO ARE HERE.

SO I ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO VOTE NO ON THIS

LEGISLATION.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. LAWLER IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. GOODELL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

SPEAKER. FIRST, ON BEHALF OF ALL MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES I WANT TO

MAKE SURE EVERYONE HERE UNDERSTANDS THAT OUR PARTY CERTAINLY SUPPORTS

THE RIGHT OF EVERYONE TO VOTE. AND I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK ABOUT THE

OTHER PARTY BECAUSE THAT'S NOT REALLY MY ROLE. AND WE RESPECT HOW THE

VOTERS ACTUALLY VOTE. AND SO, THE REPUBLICANS ARE WILLING TO HAVE

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS PRESENTED TO THE -- TO THE VOTERS AND WE'VE

SUPPORTED THAT IN THE PAST. BUT IF THE VOTERS TURN IT DOWN, WE'RE WILLING

TO GO AND CERTAINLY SUPPORT THEIR VIEWS ON THAT AS WELL. AND WE WANT

TO ENCOURAGE MORE PEOPLE TO VOTE, WHICH IS WHY MY CONFERENCE HAS

INTRODUCED LEGISLATION TO HAVE AUTOMATIC VOTER REGISTRATION FOR

TAXPAYERS WHEN THEY PAY THEIR PROPERTY TAX OR THEIR INCOME TAX. OR

WHEN THEY APPLY FOR A BUSINESS PERMIT OR MAYBE A HUNTING LICENSE. BY

THE WAY, ALL THOSE BILLS HAVE BEEN BLOCKED, NOT BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

(INAUDIBLE) TO HAVE THEM COME UP FOR A VOTE. WE'VE COME A LONG WAYS

IN THE LAST YEAR. VACCINES ARE WIDELY AVAILABLE. COVID TESTS ARE

WIDELY AVAILABLE. N95 MASKS ARE WIDELY AVAILABLE. I REMEMBER WHEN

COVID FIRST HIT I HAD TO DELAY A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT BECAUSE I

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

COULDN'T GET A MASK. THEY'RE NOW WIDELY AVAILABLE. AND THE ECONOMY

IS FULLY REOPENED, ISN'T IT? YOU CAN GO TO EVERY SPORTS BAR YOU WANT,

YOU CAN TO GO SPORTING EVENTS, RESTAURANTS. BEACHES AND POOLS ARE

OPEN WITHOUT MASKS. SUBWAYS, MASS TRANSIT. ALL BUSINESSES ARE OPEN

FOR IN-PERSON PARTICIPATION. SCHOOLS REOPENED. HERE'S THE IRONY: YOU

KNOW WHAT'S NOT REOPENED? YOU MAY BE THINKING, WAIT A MINUTE,

EVERYTHING'S OPEN, RIGHT? NO. THE STATE LEGISLATIVE OFFICES, THEY'RE

CLOSED. NO IN-PERSON MEETINGS THERE. AND WE AUTHORIZED LOCAL

MUNICIPALITIES TO FOLLOW THAT DESTRUCTIVE LEAD BY CLOSING THEIR

MEETINGS. WE'RE NOT LEADING THE COUNTRY OUT OF THE PANDEMIC, WE'RE

HOLDING IT BACK. LET'S GET BACK TO NORMAL. RETURN TO IN-PERSON VOTING.

RETURN TO IN-PERSON PROCEEDINGS IN THE LEGISLATURE, AND LET'S MOVE

FORWARD.

THANK YOU.

OH, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. GOODELL IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. SALKA.

MR. SALKA: MR. SPEAKER, TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: PLEASE.

MR. SALKA: YOU KNOW, THE BIG MOTIVATING FACTOR

BEHIND THESE -- MAKING THESE CHANGES IS FEAR. PROBABLY BECAUSE

SOMEONE MIGHT BE AFRAID OF BEING EXPOSED TO -- BY GOING TO THE POLLS.

AND I THINK WE'VE GIVEN PEOPLE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES TO MINIMIZE THAT

RISK. BUT MY FEAR IS THIS: MY FEAR IS WE ARE WATCHING -- WE ARE

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

WATCHING AS WE SPEAK THE DEGRADATION, THE DOWNSIZING OF OUR

DEMOCRACY. WE'RE LETTING FEAR TAKE OVER ANY KIND OF RATIONALE THAT WE

MIGHT HAVE HAD TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT OUR MOST IMPORTANT ASSET, AND THAT

IS IN THE VOTE. WE ARE LETTING FEAR TAKE OVER ANY KIND OF REASON THAT WE

ARE GOING TO USE TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THE POLLS AND VOTE LIKE WE SHOULD

BE DOING AS AMERICANS. SO WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE NEXT FEAR FACTOR THAT

WE'RE GOING TO USE IN THE NEXT ELECTION? CLIMATE CHANGE? WE'RE GOING

TO BE AFRAID THERE'S GOING TO BE A SNOWSTORM AND WE'RE GOING TO SLIP

AND BREAK OUR LEGS? AS RIDICULOUS AS THAT SOUNDS, IT'S ABOUT AS

RIDICULOUS AS THIS VOTE HERE IS TODAY. BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE DOING IS

WE'RE USING FEAR. AND FEAR IS NEVER A GOOD TOOL FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO

MAKE RATIONAL DECISIONS, ESPECIALLY SOMETHING THAT'S PROTECTING THE

INTEGRITY OF OUR VOTE.

I WILL BE VOTING NO, AND I'M PROUD TO VOTE NO BECAUSE

THIS IS JUST A BAD BILL. THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SALKA IN THE

NEGATIVE.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

ON CONSENT, A-CALENDAR, RULES REPORT NO. 7, THE

CLERK WILL READ.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08592, RULES REPORT

NO. 7, CLARK, REYES. AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH LAW, IN

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

RELATION TO THE STATE LONG-TERM CARE OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM; AND TO

AMEND PART C OF A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2021 AMENDING THE PUBLIC

HEALTH LAW RELATING TO INCLUDING ACCESS TO STATE LONG-TERM CARE

OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS WITHIN THE PANDEMIC

EMERGENCY PLAN PREPARED BY RESIDENTIAL HEALTH CARE FACILITIES, AS

PROPOSED IN LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S.612-B AND A.5436-B, IN

RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF AN ACT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC HEALTH

LAW.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY 8592. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY

MEMBER WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO

CONTACT THE MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY

PROVIDED.

(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. A08694, RULES REPORT

NO. 8, THIELE. AN ACT TO AMEND THE TRANSPORTATION LAW, IN RELATION TO

REQUIRING THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ANNUALLY PREPARE AND

SUBMIT TO THE LEGISLATURE CERTAIN HIGHWAY PAVEMENT AND BRIDGE

CONDITION REPORTS.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: READ THE LAST

SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER HUNTER: THE CLERK WILL

RECORD THE VOTE ON A.8694. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER WHO

WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ARE THERE ANY OTHER

VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08700, RULES REPORT

NO. 9, DINOWITZ. AN ACT TO AMEND THE PENAL LAW, IN RELATION TO THE

CRIME OF FALSIFYING COVID-19 VACCINATION RECORDS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08704, RULES REPORT

NO. 10, LUPARDO. AN ACT TO AMEND THE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW, IN

RELATION TO THE OPERATION OF A THREE-WHEELED VEHICLE.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 8704. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. PLEASE RECORD MY

COLLEAGUES MR. BYRNE AND MR. DIPIETRO IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED. THANK

YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08708, RULES REPORT

NO. 11, BRONSON. AN ACT TO AMEND THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION LAW,

IN RELATION TO CLAIMS FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES; AND TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE

LAWS OF 2021 AMENDING THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION LAW RELATING TO

ATTORNEY'S FEES, AS PROPOSED IN LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S.946-B AND

A.1034-B, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08716, RULES REPORT

NO. 12, ENGLEBRIGHT. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO COMPILATION OF DATA ON PESTICIDES;

AND TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2021 AMENDING THE

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW RELATING TO COMPILATION OF DATA ON

PESTICIDES, AS PROPOSED IN LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S.4596 AND

A.4596, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 8716. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. PLEASE RECORD MY

COLLEAGUE MR. DIPIETRO IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08717, RULES REPORT

NO. 13, ENGLEBRIGHT. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE

GEOLOGICAL TRAIL AND THE STATE GEOLOGICAL PLANNING AND ADVISORY

COUNCIL; AND TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2021 AMENDING THE

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

LAW RELATING TO ESTABLISHING A STATE GEOLOGICAL TRAIL, AS PROPOSED IN

LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S.7071 AND A.4328-A, IN RELATION TO THE

EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

100

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 8717. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(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. A08718, RULES REPORT

NO. 14, ENGLEBRIGHT. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO PROVIDING THAT 100 PERCENT OF IN-STATE

SALES OF NEW PASSENGER CARS AND TRUCKS SHALL BE ZERO EMISSIONS BY

2035.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE BILL IS LAID ASIDE.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08719, RULES REPORT

NO. 15, ENGLEBRIGHT. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO LIMITING THE EXCEPTIONS TO CERTAIN

EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS IN NASSAU AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES AND REQUIRING

CERTAIN ELIGIBLE PROJECTS FOR STATE AID INVOLVING WATER POLLUTION

CONTROL REVOLVING FUND AGREEMENTS TO TAKE COUNTY-WIDE OR REGIONAL

WASTEWATER PLANNING INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY;

AND TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2021 AMENDING THE

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW RELATING TO LIMITING THE EXCEPTIONS

TO CERTAIN EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS IN NASSAU AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES AND

REQUIRING CERTAIN ELIGIBLE PROJECTS FOR STATE AID INVOLVING WATER

101

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

POLLUTION CONTROL REVOLVING FUND AGREEMENTS TO TAKE COUNTY-WIDE OR

REGIONAL WASTEWATER PLANNING INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN DETERMINING

ELIGIBILITY, AS PROPOSED IN LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S. 5022 AND

A.4637, IN RELATION TO THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

ENGLEBRIGHT, 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 ON SENATE PRINT 7723. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(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. A08720, RULES REPORT

NO. 16, ENGLEBRIGHT. AN ACT TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2021

RELATING TO DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION TO

STUDY ALTERNATIVE MUNICIPAL USES FOR RECYCLED GLASS, AS PROPOSED IN

LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS A.6333 AND S.4094, IN RELATION TO CONDUCTING

A STUDY ON GLASS COLLECTION, PROCESSING AND RECYCLING.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

102

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 8720. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(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. A08721, RULES REPORT

NO. 17, ENGLEBRIGHT, PAULIN. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO SMALL PLASTIC BOTTLE HOSPITALITY CARE

PRODUCTS IN HOTELS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 8721. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. GOODELL TO EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. THE BILL-IN-CHIEF --

THIS IS A CHAPTER AMENDMENT. THE ORIGINAL BILL BARRED HOTELS AND

MOTELS AND OTHER HOSPITALITY FACILITIES FROM PROVIDING COURTESY BOTTLES

OF PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS LIKE SHAMPOO OR CONDITIONER OR -- OR OTHER

PRODUCTS OF THAT NATURE. AND THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THAT WAS THAT THE --

103

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THESE SMALL PLASTIC BOTTLES CONTRIBUTE TO THE -- TO THE PROBLEMS WITH THE

ENVIRONMENT. LAST YEAR THERE WERE 37 NO VOTES, AND THE NO VOTES

PRIMARILY NOTED THAT OR WERE BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE IMPACT ON THE

ENVIRONMENT OF ELIMINATING A SMALL SHAMPOO BOTTLE IN THE HOSPITALITY

INDUSTRY WOULD HAVE A NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. THOSE

SHAMPOO BOTTLES ARE RECYCLABLE, AND THAT ALL IT WOULD DO IS CREATE AN

INCONVENIENCE FOR THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO COME TO NEW YORK STATE

AS FAR AS OUR HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY. AND, IN FACT, AS PART OF THE BUDGET

MESSAGE THAT WE SAW YESTERDAY, THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET STAFF POINTED

OUT THAT THE AREA THAT'S RECOVERED THE SLOWEST IN NEW YORK STATE IS THE

HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY, WHICH IS STILL SUBSTANTIALLY BELOW THE EMPLOYMENT

RECORD FROM BEFORE COVID.

SO THOSE ARE THE REASONS WHY MOST OF US AMONGST

THOSE 37 VOTED NO. I'M SUPPORTING THIS CHAPTER AMENDMENT BECAUSE

THIS CHAPTER AMENDMENT DELAYS THE IMPLEMENTATION BY AN ENTIRE YEAR,

WHICH PRESUMABLY GIVES OUR HOSPITALITY MORE TIME -- HOSPITALITY

INDUSTRY MORE TIME TO RECOVER. SINCE IT'S ONLY ENFORCEABLE BY THE

DEC, THAT AVOIDS THAT POTENTIAL SPECTER OF A DEC EMPLOYEE MAKING A

RAID ON A HOTEL. AND BECAUSE IT DELAYS THE IMPLEMENTATION FOR A YEAR, I

HOPE IT ENABLES US TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON WHETHER OR NOT WE

REALLY NEED TO MAKE NEW YORK LESS HOSPITABLE TO VISITORS WHO MAY

HAVE FORGOTTEN THEIR SHAMPOO.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SMULLEN TO

EXPLAIN HIS VOTE.

104

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

MR. SMULLEN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR.

SPEAKER. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE. I -- I DO

WISH TO THANK THE SPONSOR FOR DELAYING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS FOR A

YEAR, PARTICULARLY FOR THE SMALL MOM-AND-POP MOTELS THAT WILL BE

AFFECTED LIKE THIS SINCE IT'S A STATEWIDE LAW. BUT I DO STILL OBJECT TO A

$250 FINE IF YOU GET CAUGHT WITH A SMALL HOTEL -- OR SMALL PLASTIC

BOTTLES IF YOU DIDN'T HEAR ABOUT THE LAW CHANGE OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE

THAT SORT OF THING. I JUST THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT TOO OVER-REACHING FOR THE

STATE TO BE TELLING SMALL BUSINESSES HOW SPECIFIC THEY NEED TO BE FOR

WHAT'S REALLY ALREADY BEEN BECOME INDUSTRY PRACTICE AND IS NOT REALLY A

BIG ISSUE.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND I'M VOTING NO.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: MR. SMULLEN IN THE

NEGATIVE.

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. PLEASE RECORD THE

FOLLOWING COLLEAGUES OF MINE IN THE NEGATIVE: MR. BRABENEC, MR.

DIPIETRO, MR. HAWLEY, MR. SCHMITT AND MR. TAGUE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED. THANK

YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08722, RULES REPORT

105

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

NO. 18, ENGLEBRIGHT. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO BIOHEATING FUEL REQUIREMENTS.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

ENGLEBRIGHT, 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 ON SENATE PRINT 7702. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU, SIR. PLEASE REPORT MY

COLLEAGUE MR. DIPIETRO IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED. THANK

YOU.

MR. GOODELL: ALSO, ASSEMBLYMAN FRIEND SHOULD

BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES? ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

106

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08723, RULES REPORT

NO. 19, ENGLEBRIGHT. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW, IN RELATION TO THE REGULATION OF CHEMICALS IN

UPHOLSTERED FURNITURE, MATTRESSES AND ELECTRONIC ENCLOSURES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: ON A MOTION BY MR.

ENGLEBRIGHT, 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 ON SENATE PRINT 7737. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(THE CLERK RECORDED THE VOTE.)

MS. WALSH.

MS. WALSH: THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WOULD YOU

PLEASE ON THIS BILL RECORD MR. FRIEND IN THE NEGATIVE?

THANK YOU.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED. THANK

YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER VOTES?

MR. GOODELL.

MR. GOODELL: THANK YOU. PLEASE ALSO RECORD OUR

COLLEAGUE MR. DIPIETRO IN THE NEGATIVE.

THANK YOU, SIR.

107

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: SO NOTED.

ANNOUNCE THE RESULTS.

(THE CLERK ANNOUNCED THE RESULTS.)

THE BILL IS PASSED.

THE CLERK: ASSEMBLY NO. A08724, RULES REPORT

NO. 20, THIELE. AN ACT TO AMEND THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

LAW, IN RELATION TO PERMITTING SEAWEED CULTIVATION IN UNDERWATER LANDS

AT GARDINER'S AND PECONIC BAYS AND COMMERCIAL FISHING LICENSES; AND

TO AMEND A CHAPTER OF THE LAWS OF 2021 AMENDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSERVATION LAW RELATING TO PERMITTING KELP CULTIVATION IN

UNDERWATER LANDS AT GARDINER'S AND PECONIC BAYS AND COMMERCIAL

FISHING LICENSES, AS PROPOSED IN LEGISLATIVE BILLS NUMBERS S.6532-A AND

A.7547-A, IN RELATION TO PERMITTING SEAWEED CULTIVATION IN UNDERWATER

LANDS AT GARDINER'S AND PECONIC BAYS AND COMMERCIAL FISHING LICENSES.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: READ THE LAST SECTION.

THE CLERK: THIS ACT SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE CLERK WILL RECORD

THE VOTE ON ASSEMBLY PRINT 8724. THIS IS A FAST ROLL CALL. ANY MEMBER

WHO WISHES TO BE RECORDED IN THE NEGATIVE IS REMINDED TO CONTACT THE

MAJORITY OR MINORITY LEADER AT THE NUMBERS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED.

(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.

108

NYS ASSEMBLY JANUARY 19, 2022

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

HAVE FURTHER HOUSEKEEPING OR RESOLUTIONS?

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: WE HAVE ONE PIECE OF

HOUSEKEEPING.

ON A MOTION BY MS. DICKENS, PAGE 25, CALENDAR NO.

133, BILL NO. A.3924, THE AMENDMENTS ARE RECEIVED AND ADOPTED.

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES.

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

MOVE THAT THE ASSEMBLY STAND ADJOURNED AND THAT WE RECONVENE

TOMORROW, JANUARY THE 20TH AT 11:00 A.M.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: THE ASSEMBLY STANDS

MRS. PEOPLES-STOKES: TOMORROW IS A SESSION

DAY.

ACTING SPEAKER AUBRY: -- ADJOURNED. ON

THURSDAY.

(WHEREUPON, AT 6:18 P.M. THE HOUSE STOOD ADJOURNED

UNTIL THURSDAY, JANUARY 20TH AT 11:00 A.M., THAT BEING A SESSION DAY.)

109