1 [ THEME MUSIC ] ON THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW," EARLY VOTING HAS BEEN AVAILABLE TO NEW YORKERS SINCE 2019, BUT IS INCREASED ACCESS TO THE POLLS IMPROVED VOTER TURNOUT?

NEW YORK STATE HAS CONTINUES TO GRAPPLE WITH THE SUPREME COURT'S OVERTURNING OF ROE V. WADE.

WE'LL ASK REPUBLICAN STATE SENATOR PHIL BOYLE HIS IDEAS ON THE DIRECTION OF POLICY RELATED TO THE FUNDING OF ABORTIONS IN NEW YORK.

AND WE'LL DIG INTO THE WEEK'S NEWS MORE WITH DAVE LOMBARDO OF THE CAPITOL PRESSROOM AND JOSH SOLOMON FROM THE TIMES UNION CAPITOL BUREAU.

I'M CASEY SEILER AND THIS IS "NEW YORK NOW."

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> HI, AND WELCOME TO THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW."

I'M CASEY SEILER, EDITOR AND CHIEF OF THE TIMES UNION IN FOR DAN CLARK.

THE JUNE 28th PRIMARY ELECTION SET THE BALLOT FOR NEW YORK'S GOVERNOR'S RACE BUT VOTER TURNOUT WAS LOW.

WHAT DOES THAT LOW LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION SAY ABOUT THE HEALTH OF OUR DEMOCRACY, AND ARE THE INVESTMENTS NEW YORK HAS MADE IN PROVIDING EARLY ACCESS TO THE POLLS WORTH IT WHEN VOTER DON'T SHOW UP?

"NEW YORK NOW" PARTNERED WITH THE TIMES UNION'S BRENDAN LYONS, MANAGING EDITOR FOR INVESTIGATIONS AND CAPITOL BUREAU CHIEF TO EXAMINE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EARLY VOTING IN NEW YORK.

2 TAKE A LOOK.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >>Reporter: SINCE 2019, NEW YORKERS HAVE HAD THE OPTION TO VOTE EARLY IN ELECTIONS.

EARLY VOTING WAS INTENDED TO INCREASE VOTER TURNOUT AND IMPROVE ACCESS TO THE POLLS, BUT THERE WERE MORE BALLOTS CAST IN EARLY VOTING LAST YEAR.

EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE NO STATEWIDE RACES.

>> EARLY VOTING IS NEW, SO THE FIRST TIME WE HAD EARLY VOTING WAS NOVEMBER OF 2019 AND THEN THE PANDEMIC CRISIS HIT US.

THERE WERE MAJOR SHIFTS IN HOW PEOPLE VOTED DURING THE PANDEMIC.

DURING THE 2020 PRIMARIES, THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE CASTING VOTES BY ABSENTEE BALLOT SKYROCKETED, AND SO DID THE TURNOUT FOR EARLY VOTING.

SO WE'RE STILL IN A PHASE WHERE WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF HISTORICAL DATA IN NEW YORK IN ORDER TO PREDICT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS A GOOD EARLY VOTING TURNOUT AND WHAT IS A POOR TURNOUT.

THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS WITH EARLY VOTING ARE MAKING SURE THAT SITES ARE FAIRLY DISTRIBUTED.

>> IT REALLY IS ESSENTIAL THAT SITE IS LOCATED IN A CENTRAL LOCATION THAT IS EASY TO ACCESS FOR, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE.

>>Reporter: NEW YORK'S EARLY VOTING LEGISLATION REQUIRES POLLS TO BE OPENED FOR NINE DAYS WITH AT LEAST ONE EARLY VOTING LOCATION FOR EVERY 50,000 REGISTERED VOTERS IN A COUNTY.

EARLY 3 VOTING SITES MUST BE OPEN WITH A MINIMUM NUMBER OF HOURS SET BY THE STATE, DEPENDING ON WHETHER IT'S A WEEKDAY OR WEEKEND.

COUNTIES PAY FOR THE POLL WORKERS AND IN SOME CASES, NEED TO RENT POLLING SITES.

IMPLEMENTING THE RULES HAS PRESENTED CHALLENGES FOR MANY COUNTIES.

>> THE COUNTIES ARE GETTING MUCH BETTER, BUT THE LEGISLATURE STILL HAD TO STEP IN TO MAKE ADDITIONAL RULES THIS YEAR BECAUSE A COUPLE OF COUNTIES WERE EGREGIOUSLY VIOLATING THE SPIRIT OF THE EARLY VOTING STATUTE.

THE COUNTIES THAT HAVE THE LARGEST NUMBER OF EARLY VOTING SITES ALSO TEND TO HAVE THE HIGHER EARLY VOTING TURNOUT.

SO THE CONVENIENCE OF EARLY VOTING SITES DOES APPEAR TO BE A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN WHETHER PEOPLE ARE GOING TO USE EARLY VOTING.

OF COURSE, THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF EARLY VOTING IS TO MAKE IT MORE CONVENIENT FOR THE VOTER.

SO THE VOTER IS NOT LOCKED IN TO HAVING TO GO THE DAY DESIGNATED FOR ELECTIONS.

>> YOU KNOW, IT'S THE END OF THE SCHOOL YEAR.

THERE'S GRADUATIONS, MOVES ARE UP, SO PARENTS ARE MAYBE STILL BUSY.

I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THIS EARLY VOTING GOES FOR, BUT I HOPE THAT PEOPLE DO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT.

I THINK IT'S-- I THINK IT'S GREAT.

>> I WANT TO SAY THANK GOD, 4 BUT THAT'S MY SPEECH THAT WE HAVE EARLY VOTING BEFORE THE TIME OF THE PRIMARY VOTING COME IN.

EVERYBODY NEED TO COME DOWN HERE AND VOTE EARLY.

GET IT OVER WITH.

GET IT DONE.

>>Reporter: ACROSS THE STATE, ROUGHLY 14% OF THE VOTERS IN THE JUNE 28th PRIMARY HAD CAST THEIR BALLOTS USING EARLY VOTING POLLING SITES.

THAT'S ACCORDING TO UNOFFICIAL NUMBERS FROM THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

FOR SMITKA, IT'S NOT ABOUT NUMBER BUS ACCESS.

>> ANY VOTE CASTS DURING THE EARLY VOTING TIME PERIOD MAKES EARLY VOTING WORTH IT.

ANY ADDITIONAL TIME THAT WE CAN PROVIDE PEOPLE TO, AGAIN, GET THAT ACCESS TO THE POLLS WHO MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET THERE MAKES THE PROCESS WORTH IT AND ENSURES THAT WE HAVE A DEMOCRACY IN WHICH EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS THE ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE.

>>Reporter: A REVIEW OF THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH KEEPING POLLING SITES OPEN FOR MORE THAN A WEEK SHOWS A VARIATION IN THE PRICE PER VOTE.

FULTON COUNTY WAS $33.

RENSSELAER COUNTY, $13.

SARATOGA COUNTY, $19 AND ALBANY COUNTY CAME IN AT $65 PER VOTE.

IN CORTLAND COUNTY, THE COST PER VOTE WAS $1,500 FOR THE FEW HUNDRED VOTERS WHO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF EARLY VOTING.

ED McDONOUGH, THE DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS COMMISSIONER IN RENSSELAER COUNTY, SAID IT ISN'T WORTH 5 IT.

HE SAID IT'S DIFFICULT TO FIND PEOPLE WILLING TO STAFF POLLING SITES FOR NINE DAYS.

AND AS HE PUT IT, WAIT FOR NOBODY TO COME IN.

>> IT COSTS BETWEEN $10 AND $25 PER VOTER FOR CONDUCTING THE LIVE ELECTION IS REASONABLE, BUT WHEN YOU START TO GET COSTS THAT WORK OUT ABOVE $25 PER VOTER, THEN I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AND SAY, WELL, IS THIS REALLY COST EFFECTIVE?

ELECTIONS DO HAVE A COST THAT GOES WITH THEM AND SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO SWALLOW HARD AND BEAR THAT COST.

>>Reporter: FIGURING OUT THE COST EQUATION IS CRITICAL AND IT'S HARD TO DRAW GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE COST OF EARLY VOTING AND HOW THEY BALANCE WITH NEW YORKERS' RIGHT TO ACCESS THE BALLOT BOX.

>> IF EARLY VOTING GOES AWAY, IT WILL DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECT THOSE WHO HAVE HAD THE MOST DIFFICULTY GETTING TO THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY.

SO THAT'S PEOPLE WHO DO SHIFT WORK, PEOPLE WHO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE MOBILITY IMPAIRMENTS THAT MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO GET TO THE POLLS.

THEY MIGHT NEED TO ARRANGE A RIDE.

PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE CHILD CARE SET UP ON-- WITHIN THOSE VOTING HOURS ON ELECTION DAY.

REALLY, ANYBODY WHO DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE A FLEXIBLE 6 SCHEDULE, IT CAN BE HARD TO GET TO THE POLLS ON ONE SINGLE DAY.

>> FOR SMALLER TURNOUT ELECTIONS, LIKE PRIMARY ELECTIONS OR SPECIAL ELECTIONS, MAYBE NINE DAYS OF EARLY VOTING IS OVERKILL.

THE COUNTY BOARDS OF ELECTIONS, AS THEY GAIN EXPERIENCE, SHOULD ALSO ADJUST THEIR STAFFING ACCORDING TO THE ANTICIPATED TURNOUT.

THE IDEA IS TO RUN IT LIKE A BUSINESS, SO IF YOU GO TO THE LOCAL HAMBURGER JOINT, THEY MAY BE OPEN FROM 6:00 A.M. UNTIL 9:00 P.M., BUT THEY DON'T HAVE THE SAME STAFFING ALL DAY LONG.

THEY WILL INCREASE THE STAFFING FOR THE TIMES THAT THEY EXPECT IT TO BE BUSIER AND I WOULD URGE THE COUNTY ELECTION OFFICIALS TO LOOK AT THAT MODEL AND TRY TO ADJUST THEIR STAFFING ACCORDINGLY.

>>Reporter: ERICA SMITKA, WITH THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS, SAID NO MATTER HOW YOU CHOOSE TO VOTE, EARLY VOTING, VOTE BY MAIL, OR CASTING A BALLOT ON ELECTION DAY, THE IMPORTANT THING IS TO TURN OUT FOR ALL ELECTIONS.

>> I HOPE THAT FOR SOME, IF YOU DO SEE THAT VOTER TURNOUT IS LOW AND YOU DIDN'T MAKE IT TO THE POLLS THAT YEAR, I HOPE IT'S A BIT OF A WAKE-UP CALL BECAUSE IT REALLY IS THOSE LOCAL ELECTIONS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE THE MOST IMPACT ON WHAT HAPPENS IN THEIR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES.

YOU KNOW, YOUR VOTE 7 FOR YOUR CITY COUNCIL PERSON IS GOING TO HAVE A MUCH GREATER IMPACT ON YOUR DAY-TO-DAY LIFE THAN, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS YOUR VOTE ON A LARGER NATIONAL SCALE.

SO I WANT PEOPLE TO REMEMBER HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO SHOW UP FOR THOSE LOCAL ELECTIONS, TO LET THEIR VOICE BE HEARD AND YOU KNOW, TO USE EARLY VOTING AS A WAY TO DO THAT.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> YOU CAN FIND THE TIMES UNION'S REPORTING ON EARLY VOTING TURNOUT AT NYNOW.ORG AND TIMESUNION.COM.

AND NOW FOR MORE ANALYSIS OF THE WEEK'S NEWS, I'M HAPPY TO BE JOINED AT THE REPORTERS' ROUNDTABLE BY JOSH SOLOMON BY THE CAPITAL BUREAU OF THE TU AND DAVID LOMBARDO FROM OF THE CAPITAL PRESSROOM.

GREAT TO SEE YOU.

THANKS SO MUCH FOR COMING IN.

ALL RIGHT.

LET'S TALK GUNS.

SPECIFICALLY REPUBLICAN PUSHBACK TO THE PROVISIONS THAT WERE SIGNED INTO LAW JUST ABOUT A WEEK AGO BY KATHY HOCHUL AFTER THE EXTRAORDINARY SESSION THAT WHEN LAST WE MET AT THIS ROUNDTABLE HAD NOT YET BEEN PASSED BUT THE PROVISIONS INCLUDE, OF COURSE, AN EXPANDED LIST OF SO-CALLED SENSITIVE PLACES WHERE CONCEALED CARRY AND CARRY PERIOD WILL NOT BE ALLOWED AS WELL AS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER BARS FOR THOSE WHO WANT A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT.

THIS, OF COURSE, ALL COMES AS A RESULT OF THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF TWO RENSSELAER 8 COUNTY MEN WHO WERE TURNED DOWN FOR CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT.

I THINK THAT THE REPUBLICAN OPPOSITION WAS EXPECTED, AND THEY HAD FORECASTED THAT FOR A WHILE.

THEY, OBVIOUSLY, ARE VERY PROUD DEFENDERS OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT, BUT THEY'VE ALREADY COME OUT AND SAID, WE'RE GOING TO SUE ON THIS, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY CHAIRMAN, THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY CHAIRMAN ON THURSDAY MADE THEIR ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON IT, AND FUNNY ENOUGH, THE OPPONENT OF REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN NICK LANGWORTHY IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RACE, CARL PALADINO, HAS ALSO ANNOUNCED HIS PLANS TO SUE ON THOSE GUN LAWS.

SO WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS ON HOW STURDY THEY ARE, BUT DEMOCRATS HAVE SAID THAT THE REASON IT TOOK SO LONG TO PUT IT TOGETHER WAS THEY WERE MAKING SURE THEY HAD A STURDY FOUNDATION.

>> AND TOOK SO LONG IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD PROBABLY GO IN AIR QUOTES BECAUSE THIS IS A BILL THAT WAS REALLY RUSHED THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE.

THIS ISN'T SOMETHING WHERE WE HAD HEARINGS.

THERE WASN'T A LOT OF PUBLIC DISCUSSION.

SO WITH AN ISSUE LIKE THIS, WITH GUNS AND LEGISLATION THAT'S PASSING AT THE DEAD OF NIGHT IN A RUSHED FASHION, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE TWO TYPES OF CRITICISM.

ONE IS PROBABLY VALID BECAUSE IF YOU ARE RUSHING LEGISLATION YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE MISTAKES.

IT'S GOING TO BE 9 THE OPPORTUNITY TO SCREW THINGS UP AND THEN THE OTHER ISSUE IS WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH GUNS, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME SORT OF PARTISAN PUSHBACK AUTOMATICALLY.

IT MIGHT NOT BE LEGITIMATE, BUT YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO GET THAT ON GUNS AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S ASPECT OF THIS LEGISLATION THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST WITHIN NEW YORK STATE, IN FACT, LEGISLATION THAT WAS RUSHED THROUGH DEALING WITH GUNS, THERE WERE PROBLEMS WITH IT.

PARTS OF IT WERE THROWN OUT BY JUDGES.

SO I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF WE SEE THE SAME THING HERE.

>> ONE PROVISION THAT HAS ESPECIALLY RAISED IRE IS THE REQUIREMENT IF YOU WANT A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT, YOU HAVE TO DISCLOSE ALL OF YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS DEFINITELY OF CONCERN TO SECOND AMENDMENT ADHERENCE.

>> IT'S OF CONCERN TO OTHER PEOPLE ON FIRST AMENDMENT GROUNDS AS WELL.

BUT I THINK WHERE THAT WAS BORNE OUT OF WAS WITH THE BUFFALO SHOOTER AND THE LONG TRAIL AND WHEN WE SEE THESE MASS SHOOTINGS, THEY OFTEN SAY, WELL, HE POSTED IT ON HIS SOCIAL MEDIA.

HOW COULD YOU HAVE NOT KNOWN?

SO THAT APPEARS TO BE WHAT THE INTENT WAS, BUT NONETHELESS, PEOPLE ARE, YOU KNOW, LAWMAKERS, SECOND AMENDMENT, FIRST AMENDMENT FOLKS ARE 10 CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS IF YOU HAVE TO TURN OVER YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA.

HOW DOES THAT WORK?

WHAT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DISTANT ACCOUNTS AND IT GETS A LITTLE SQUISHY PRETTY QUICKLY.

THERE'S ALSO CONCERNS OVER WHERE YOU CAN CARRY IN THE ADIRONDACKS.

STATE SENATOR DAN SACKOS BROUGHT THAT UP.

AND THE ADMINISTRATION HASN'T BEEN COMPLETELY CLEAR ON IT.

>> THE ADMINISTRATION HAS SAID NOTHING-- NOTHING IN THIS LAW WOULD PREVENT YOU FROM NORMAL THINGS LIKE HUNTING.

IT REALLY-- THAT INSIDE THE BLUE LINE, THAT'S FOREST PRESERVE, NOT ESSENTIALLY A PUBLIC PARK WHICH IS WHAT DAN STACK AND ELISE STEFANIK HAVE BEEN SAYING.

>> BUT THIS LAW, WE NEED TO REMEMBER, IS JUST THE FIRST STEP HERE.

WE NEED TO HAVE REGULATIONS THAT ARE STILL TO COME FROM THE HOCHUL ADMINISTRATION, STATE POLICE, DCJS, DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES, FOR THEM TO ACTUALLY LAY OUT THE RULES OF WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD ON THIS RULE.

>> SO WE ARE TALKING ON WHAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE LAST DAY OF OPERATION FOR THE STATE JOINT COMMISSION ON PUBLIC ETHICS.

AND THEY'RE GOING OUT IN CLASSIC JCOPE FASHION.

ON THURSDAY, THEY VOTED 10-1 WITH GOVERNOR'S CUOMO-- FORMER GOVERNOR CUOMO'S LAST APPOINTEE ON 11 THE PANEL VOTING IN OPPOSITION OF THE RELEASE OF A REPORT PREPARED BY AN OUTSIDE LAW FIRM LOOKING AT HOW JCOPE APPROVED THE GOVERNOR'S BOOK DEAL, HIS SECOND BOOK DEAL ON HIS COVID MEMOIR.

WHAT, DAVE, DID IT REVEAL BEEN THAT PROCESS?

>> WELL, IF YOU ARE TO BELIEVE THIS REPORT, WHICH, YOU KNOW, I FIND IT QUESTIONABLE BECAUSE THIS REPORT LAYS OUT AN AVERSION OF ADMINISTRATION THAT BULLIES PEOPLE TO GET ITS WAY AND AN ETHICS WATCH DOG THAT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH OF A SPINE TO STAND UP TO SAID ADMINISTRATION.

SO I MEAN, CASEY, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THIS WITH A GRAIN OF SALT.

I'M NOT SO SURE I'M READY TO BUY ALL THIS.

>> YOU'RE SPEAKING WITH TONGUE AND CHEEK.

THE REPORT, SERIOUSLY, SORT OF SUGGESTS THAT JCOPE STAFF ESSENTIALLY WORKED ALMOST AS A KIND OF AN EXTENSION OF THE EXECUTIVE CHAMBER IN THE APPROVAL THAT THEY DIDN'T ASK ENOUGH QUESTIONS TO PUSH IT THROUGH.

YES, EXACTLY.

>> IT'S WHAT WE EXPECTED FROM JCOPE DURING ITS 10 YEARS, 11 YEARS OF EXISTENCE, THIS WAS NOT AN AUTONOMOUS ETHICS WATCH DOG; THAT IT WAS HERE, BASICALLY TO RUBBER STAMP THE WISHES OF ITS, I GUESS, BENEFACTORS, PEOPLE WHO APPOINTED IT, AND THAT IT WOULD GO AFTER PEOPLE WHO WERE OUT OF POLITICAL FAVOR 12 OR HAD NO POLITICAL POWER IN ALBANY, AND YOU KNOW, REAL QUESTION NOW MOVING FORWARD IS WITH THIS NEW BODY THAT'S GOING TO REPLACE JCOPE, IS THIS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WILL STAND UP TO THE ADMINISTRATION?

DOES IT HAVE ANY SORT OF AUTONOMY?

THAT'S WHAT WE WILL HAVE TO SEE MOVING FORWARD.

>> ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT ON JCOPE.

ONE LAST ISSUE.

GOVERNOR HOCHUL AND NEW JERSEY'S PHIL MURPHY SIGNED A DEAL FOR THE GATEWAY TUNNEL PROJECT, $14 BILLION.

THAT'S JUST THE FIRST OUTLAY FOR A TWIN TUNNEL PROJECT CONNECTING THE GARDEN STATE AND THE EMPIRE STATE.

COULD THIS TURN OUT TO BE SORT OF GOVERNOR HOCHUL'S TAPPAN ZEE BRIDGE, AN EMBLEMATIC BIG INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT?

>> SHE MAY WANT IT TO BE.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LONG TIME TO BUILD A TUNNEL, BUT SHE'LL BE ABLE TO HAVE OPPORTUNITIES DURING-- IN THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, ALL THAT TYPE OF SPACE, BUT WILL IT BE THE SAME TYPE OF BRIDGE, SAME TYPE OF SITUATION?

THAT SEEMS TO BE MAYBE A STRETCH THERE, BUT FOR NOW, SHE'S GOING TO PUSH FOR IT ESPECIALLY WHILE THERE'S FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE MONEY FROM PRESIDENT BIDEN AND THEY WANT 20 PUSH FORWARD AT LEAST WHILE THEY CAN.

SO TAPPAN ZEE BRIDGE, MARIO CUOMO BRIDGE, I'M NOT SURE YET.

13 >> A TUNNEL IS NOT EXACTLY THE SAME KIND OF VAULTING PIECE OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT A BIG, BEAUTIFUL BRIDGE LIKE THAT CAN BE, RIGHT?

>> CAN'T PUT IT ON A LICENSE PLATE, CASEY.

>> THAT'S TRUE.

YOU CAN'T.

THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE IT.

THANKS VERY MUCH TO JOSH SOLOMON FROM THE TIMES UNION'S CAPITOL BUREAU, AND DAVE, PLEASE STICK AROUND.

>> SOUNDS GOOD.

>> FINALLY, THE OVERTURNING OF ROE V. WADE MEANS STATES WILL DECIDE WHETHER THEY WILL PRESERVE OR DENY ACCESS TO AN ABORTION.

IN NEW YORK, PROTECTIONS FOR LEGAL ABORTION PRE-DATE THE ORIGINAL ROE V. WADE DECISION.

IN RECENT DAYS, THE HOCHUL ADMINISTRATION HAS ATTEMPTED TO ENSHRINE ACCESS TO ABORTION IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION FURTHER STRENGTHENING THOSE PROTECTIONS.

ON THURSDAY OF THIS WEEK, GOVERNOR HOCHUL PROVIDED A PATH FOR FUNDS THAT WOULD BOLSTER SECURITY AT REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE CENTERS ACROSS THE STATE.

GOVERNOR HOCHUL HAS STATED THAT SHE INTENDS FOR NEW YORK'S COMPREHENSIVE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES TO BE AVAILABLE TO WOMEN AND FAMILIES WHETHER THEY RESIDE IN NEW YORK STATE OR NOT, AND NEW YORK IS LIKELY TO SEE AN INCREASE IN OUT-OF-STATE RESIDENTS 14 SEEKING ABORTION SERVICES IN NEW YORK.

THAT HAS SOME REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS CONCERNED ABOUT WHO WOULD CARRY THE COST.

DAVE LOMBARDO FROM THE CAPITOL PRESSROOM SPOKE TO REPUBLICAN SENATOR PHIL BOYLE FROM THE FOURTH DISTRICT.

BOYLE PROPOSE ADD I BILL THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THE USE OF STATE FUNDS FOR NON-NEW YORK RESIDENTS SEEKING AN ABORTION WITHIN THE STATE'S BORDERS.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> WELL, WELCOME TO THE SHOW, SENATOR.

I APPRECIATE YOU MAKING THE TIME.

>> THANK YOU, DAVID.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE.

>> SO THIS SPRING, GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL, IN ANTICIPATION OF INCREASED DEMAND FOR NEW YORK ABORTION PROVIDERS, DIRECTED $35 MILLION TO BEEF UP THE CAPACITY OF PROVIDERS IN NEW YORK AS WELL AS IMPROVE THEIR SECURITY IN ANTICIPATION OF ROE V. WADE BEING OVERTURNED.

YOU'VE INTRODUCED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD RESTRICT STATE SPENDING FOR NON-NEW YORK RESIDENT ABORTIONS.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW YOUR BILL WOULD WORK IF IMPLEMENTED?

>> SURE.

SO DAVID, ONE THING I THINK PEOPLE NEED TO REALIZE, DESPITE THE DECISION ON ROE V. WADE, NEW YORK STATE IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE A PRO-CHOICE STATE.

THAT IS NOT 15 CHANGING.

IT IS PROTECTED IN STATE LAW NOW AND ALSO ANOTHER THING WE CAN BE PRETTY SURE ABOUT IS THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF WOMEN COMING FROM THOSE STATES THAT ARE EITHER BANNING OR RESTRICTING ABORTIONS.

MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THERE'S ABOUT 626 STATES THAT WILL COMPLETELY BAN OR RESTRICT A, WOULDS SO IT'S VERY LIKELY THAT WOMEN WILL BE COMING FROM THOSE STATES TO NEW YORK TO OBTAIN ABORTIONS, WHICH IS THEIR RIGHT.

MY BILL IS DIRECTED TOWARDS THE IDEA OF NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS PAYING FOR THOSE ABORTIONS.

I COULD SEE, PARTICULARLY WITH THE LEFT THAT'S CONTROLLING MUCH OF THE AGENDA IN ALBANY, IS THE USE OF NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYER MONEY TO FLY WOMEN FROM TEXAS TO LOUISIANA UP TO NEW YORK, OVERNIGHT HOTEL STAYS, OBTAINING THE ABORTION PROCEDURE, AND FLYING THEM BACK TO THEIR STATE.

THIS COULD BE DONE THEORETICALLY BY THE TENS OF THOUSANDS AND WILL COST NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OR EVEN BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER THE COURSE OF YEARS, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS COMPLETELY INSANE AND UNACCEPTABLE.

>> SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR CONCERN THEN IS ABOUT COST AND NOT NECESSARILY, I GUESS, RESPECTING WHAT OTHER STATES HAVE DECIDED TO DO WITH REGARDS TO ABORTION MEASURES?

16 >> WELL, I MEAN, I PERSONALLY AM OPPOSED OF THE IDEA OF THEM USING NEW YORK PROSECUTORS OR TRYING TO PROSECUTE WOMEN THAT COME FROM THEIR STATE.

THAT'S THEIR OWN LAW.

I'M MOSTLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TAXPAYERS OF NEW YORK PAYING FOR IT.

OBVIOUSLY, NEW YORK TAXPAYERS HAVE PAID FOR ABORTIONS FOR MANY YEARS THROUGH MEDICAID.

SO MEDICAID FUNDING FROM TAXPAYERS IN NEW YORK FUND ABORTIONS FOR INDIGENT NEW YORK WOMEN, BUT THIS IS A WHOLE NEW BALL GAME.

THIS IS TALKING ABOUT NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS PAYING FOR ABORTIONS FOR WOMEN WHO DON'T EVEN LIVE HERE.

>> AT THIS POINT, THOUGH, IS THERE ANY INDICATION THAT STATE POLICY MAKERS, LIKE THE GOVERNOR, HAVE PLANS TO INVEST IN MAYBE TRAVEL OR ACCOMMODATIONS FOR NON-NEW YORK WOMEN SEEKING ABORTIONS?

I KNOW DURING THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY DEBATE, GOVERNOR HOCHUL WAS ASKED THIS SPECIFIC QUESTION AND SHE SAID NO TO THE IDEA OF PROVIDING TRANSPORTATION.

SO IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE SEEING THAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING THAT WOULD PROMPT THIS BILL TO TAKE EFFECT, OR IS THIS MORE ABOUT FUTURE CONCERNS?

>> WELL, I ACTUALLY WAS WORKING ON THIS BILL PRIOR TO THE DECISION.

WE STARTED WORKING ON IT WHEN THE LEAK HAPPENED A FEW MONTHS BACK OF THE DECISION.

BUT I 17 THINK IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE, DAVID, BECAUSE-- SO GOVERNOR HOCHUL SAID, OKAY, WE WANT TO PUT $35 MILLION ASIDE OF TAXPAYER MONEY TO EXPAND ACCESS TO ABORTION IN NEW YORK STATE.

FOR EXAMPLE, SHE WANTS TO PUT, I THINK, $10 MILLION OF THOSE FUNDS TOWARD SECURITY AT REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CENTERS.

FINE.

THAT'S COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDABLE.

OKAY.

THE OTHER 25 MILLION, WE HAVEN'T GOT THE DETAILS ON THAT.

SHE WANTS TO USE IT TO EXPAND ABORTION ACCESS, WHATEVER THAT MEANS, HIRING MORE PEOPLE AT ABORTION CLINICS, OR I COULD SEE EITHER HER OR MAYBE SOME OF THE LIBERALS THAT CONTROL THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOR THE NEW BUDGET CYCLE PUTTING MONEY ASIDE TO GIVE NOT-FOR-PROFITS.

SO IT'S NOT DIRECTLY GOING TO SALLY JONES IN LOUISIANA TO COME TO NEW YORK, BUT IT WILL GO TO A NOT-FOR-PROFIT, TAXPAYER MONEY GOING TO A NEW YORK TAXPAYER NOT-FOR-PROFIT, AND THEY WILL GIVE THE MONEY TO WOMEN.

SO EITHER WAY, I DON'T WANT NEW YORK STATE TAX PAYER TOES HAVE TO PAY AFFORD ABORTIONS FOR WOMEN WHO DO NOT RESIDE IN NEW YORK STATE.

>> HOW WOULD THIS BILL AFFECT, IF AT ALL, WOMAN WHO COULD AFFORD TO COME TO NEW YORK AND AFFORD TO PAY FOR AN ABORTION ON THEIR OWN?

>> WELL, THAT IS THEIR RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE DIFFERENT POTENTIAL SITUATIONS.

FOR 18 EXAMPLE, A WOMAN COMING FROM LOUISIANA CAN EITHER-- MAYBE SHE WORK FORCE A COMPANY THAT'S WILLING TO PAY FOR IT.

I HEARD THAT DISNEY, GOOGLE, APPLE, SOME OTHER COMPANIES HAVE AGREED TOW PAY FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES TO COME TO OTHER STATES TO OBTAIN THEIR ABORTIONS.

THAT'S THEIR RIGHT, OR MAYBE MIKE BLOOMBERG OR TEN OTHER BILLIONAIRES WANT TO CREATE A PRIVATE FUND WITH THEIR OWN MONEY TO PAY FOR THESE WOMEN.

THAT'S THEIR RIGHT, TOO IT'S THEIR MONEY.

I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT PROTECTING NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS FROM HAVING TO PAY TO WOMEN TO COME TO THIS STATE TO RECEIVE THEIR ABORTIONS.

>> ANY QUALMS, THOUGH, ABOUT ESSENTIALLY LIMITING ACCESS TO ABORTION THEN TO PEOPLE WHO COULD AFFORD TO PAY FOR IT ON THEIR OWN BY ESSENTIALLY SAYING, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO MAKE IT TO NEW YORK, YOU'RE OUT OF LUCK?

>> WELL, OUT OF LUCK IS A RELATIVE TERM.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THESE WOMEN CERTAINLY HAVE RIGHTS TO OBTAIN ABORTIONS AND IF SOMEONE CAN AFFORD IT, ASSUME THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT THEMSELVES OR HAVE A FAMILY MEMBER, FRIEND OR COMPANY THAT WOULD DO IT OR PRIVATELY FUNDED FUND.

I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT SAYING, NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYER, WE HAVE THE HIGHEST TAXES IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, AND PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS COMPLAINING ABOUT OUR 19 TAXES AND MANY PEOPLE ARE LEAVING THE STATE BECAUSE OF IT.

OH, BY THE WAY, WE HAVE A NEW THING WE WANT TO FUND FROM ALBANY AND THAT'S ABORTIONS FOR WOMEN WHO DON'T EVEN LIVE IN THIS STATE, WHICH ARE GOING TO COME UP TO HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF YOUR TAXPAYER MONEY AND THIS COULD BE THE STRAW THAT BROKE THE CAMEL'S BACK IN TERMS OF PEOPLE LEAVING THE STATE.

OUR TAXES ARE HIGH ENOUGH.

WE DON'T NEED TO FIND NEW THINGS TO PAY FOR A, WOULDS FOR WOMEN WHO DON'T RESIDE IN NEW YORK STATE.

IF SOMEONE WAS, SAY, VISITING NEW YORK STATE, AND LET'S SAY THERE WAS SOME SORT OF MEDICAL EMERGENCY THAT REQUIRED A AN ABORTION AND THEY COULDN'T FOOT THE BILL, WOULD THEY GET SENT TO ANOTHER STATE?

HOW WOULD YOU ENVISION THEIR CARE BEING HANDLED IF YOUR BILL BECAME LAW?

>> WELL, I THINK THAT'S-- THERE'S DIFFERENT SITUATIONS LIKE THAT.

IF IT'S AN EMERGENCY SITUATION, OBVIOUSLY THERE CAN BE EXCEPTIONS IN THIS.

I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT A WOMAN WHO IS IN ANOTHER STATE THAT RESTRICTS OR BANS ABORTIONS COMING TO NEW YORK STATE, EITHER FLYING OR DRIVING, HOTEL STAY, THE ABORTION PROCEDURE, AND THEN GOING BACK HOME TO WHEREVER THEY LIVE, THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS OF FUNDING THAT.

I JUST DO NOT WANT THE NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS TO BE ON THE HOOK FOR THAT.

I CAN TELL YOU, 20 DAVID, I HAVE SPOKEN TO PEOPLE ON ALL SIDES OF THIS DEBATE.

OBVIOUSLY, PRO-LIFE PEOPLE ARE OPPOSED TO IT.

THE MODERATES WHO WILL SUPPORT ABORTION RIGHTS ARE BUT THAT'S NOT A HUGE ISSUE FOR THEM, AND VERY PRO-CHOICE PEOPLE.

I HAVE SPOKEN TO MANY OF THEM SINCE I WAS WORKING ON THIS BILL.

SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE VERY UPSET ABOUT THE ROW VERSUS WADE DECISION, VERY PRO-CHOICE AND I ALWAYS ASK THEM, WHAT ABOUT US PAYING, YOUR TAXPAYER MONEY GOING TO FUND A WOMAN FROM ANOTHER STATE?

THEY'RE ALL LIKE NOPE.

THAT'S TOO FAR.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT HAVING SPOKE TO OVER A HUNDRED PEOPLE, TWO OF THEM HAVE SAID THEY WOULD SUPPORT THAT.

SO EVEN THE REAL PRO-CHOICE PEOPLE, IF YOU WILL, OPPOSE THE IDEA OF NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS PAYING FOR ABORTIONS FOR NON-RESIDENTS OF NEW YORK.

>> PUTTING ASIDE THE FISCAL IMPLICATIONS THAT YOU'VE OUTLINED, ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT POTENTIALLY BEING, I DON'T KNOW, ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY?

>> I THINK THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ABORTION DEBATE.

OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE FEEL STRONGLY ON ALL SIDES.

I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT REQUIRING NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS TO FUND ABORTIONS FOR WOMEN WHO DON'T LIVE THERE.

IF THEY WANT TO-- RIGHT NOW, THE 21 DEMOCRATS CONTROL THE WHITE HOUSE AND BOTH BRANCHES OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS.

IF THEY WANT TO CREATE A FEDERAL FUND, YOU KNOW, NOT INCLUDING THE STATE LEGISLATURE'S MONEY THIS HE CAN DO IT.

GO AHEAD.

THAT'S THEIR PREROGATIVE.

BUT I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT STATE LEGISLATORS WATCHING OUT FOR NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL IS ABOUT.

I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY.

>> WELL, WE'VE BEEN SPEAKING WITH STATE SENATOR PHIL BOYLE.

HE IS A LONG ISLAND REPUBLICAN.

SENATOR, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR MAKING THE TIME.

I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANKS SO MUCH, DAVID.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> SENATOR BOYLE'S BILL WAS REFERRED TO THE SENATE RULES COMMITTEE ON JUNE 29th.

IT FACES A TOUGH ROAD AHEAD IN THE STATE'S DEMOCRAT MAKE JOTTER STATE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY.

AND THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEK'S "NEW YORK NOW."

HAVE A GREAT WEEK AND BE WELL.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> FUNDING FOR "NEW YORK NOW" IS PROVIDED BY WNET.