[MUSIC] >> ON THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF NEW YORK NOW.

NEW YORK BRACES FOR THE US SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN ROE V. WADE.

WE'LL TELL YOU WHAT'S HAPPENING AND WHAT COULD BE NEXT.

PLUS HOW DOES CONGRESSMAN ANTONIO DELGADO'S NEW POSITION AS A CANDIDATE FOR LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR SHAKE UP THIS YEAR'S ELECTIONS?

ANNA GRONEWOLD FROM POLITICO AND DAVID LOMBARDO FROM THE CAPITOL PRESSROOM ARE HERE TO BREAK IT ALL DOWN.

THEN HARRY WILSON WANTS TO BE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY'S NOMINEE FOR GOVERNOR IN NEW YORK THIS YEAR.

HE JOINS US IN STUDIO TO CHAT ABOUT CRIME AND MORE.

AND LATER A NEW EDITION OF ON THE BILL.

I'M DAN CLARK.

AND THIS IS NEW YORK NOW.

[MUSIC] WELCOME TO THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF NEW YORK NOW.

I'M DAN CLARK.

WE START THIS WEEK WITH A SHORT HISTORY LESSON ON ABORTION IN NEW YORK.

UNTIL THREE YEARS AGO ABORTION WAS ACTUALLY PART OF NEW YORK'S CRIMINAL LAW.

IT WAS LEGAL BUT IN A SORT OF ROUNDABOUT WAY.

IT GOES BACK TO 1970 WHEN NEW YORK FIRST LIFTED ITS BAN ON ABORTION.

IT WAS ONE OF ONLY TWO STATES TO DO SO AT THE TIME.

BUT BEFORE THAT ABORTION WAS A CRIME IN NEW YORK.

AND INSTEAD OF TAKING IT OUT OF THE CRIMINAL LAW LAWMAKERS LEFT IT IN AND LARGELY JUST CARVED OUT WHEN IT WOULD BE LEGAL.

AND AT THE TIME THAT WAS A REALLY BIG DEAL.

THE FIRST FREESTANDING ABORTION CENTER IN THE COUNTRY OPENED IN SYRACUSE THAT YEAR.

THEN THREE YEARS LATER THE US SUPREME COURT LEGALIZED ABORTION NATIONWIDE UNDER ROE V. WADE AND FOR THE NEXT FIVE DECADES NOT MUCH CHANGED IN NEW YORK.

THAT WAS UNTIL THREE YEARS AGO IN 2019.

DEMOCRATS IN NEW YORK WERE WORRIED AT THE TIME THAT ROE V. WADE WOULD BE OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT.

SO THEY PASSED A BILL THAT BASICALLY ENSHRINED ROE V. WADE INTO STATE LAW AND TOOK IT OUT OF THE PENAL CODE.

THAT MEANS THAT IF THE SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS ROE WHICH WE NOW KNOW IS ON THE TABLE THIS YEAR ABORTION WILL STILL BE LEGAL IN NEW YORK.

AND BECAUSE OF THAT DEMOCRATS ARE NOW EXPECTING PEOPLE TO START COMING HERE FROM OUT OF STATE TO GET AN ABORTION.

SO THE STATE IS SETTING ASIDE $35 MILLION TO SUPPORT ABORTION PROVIDERS AND EXPAND ACCESS.

GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL THIS WEEK.

>> WE'LL KEEP PLAYING OFFENSE.

IT'S WHERE I'M MOST COMFORTABLE ON THE PLAYING FIELD, BEING AGGRESSIVE ON THESE ISSUES.

AND WE'LL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO DEFEND THE RIGHTS OF NOT JUST NEW YORK WOMEN, BUT WOMEN ALL ACROSS THIS NATION, NEW YORK WILL BE THERE.

>> AND WE'RE NOW EXPECTING THE LEGISLATURE TO DO MORE ON ABORTION THIS YEAR PLUS SOME NEW POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS.

LET'S GET INTO IT WITH ANNA GRONEWOLD FROM POLITICO AND DAVID LOMBARDO FROM THE CAPITOL PRESSROOM.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> SO WE HAVE THREE WEEKS OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION LEFT, I THINK, AFTER THIS.

IT'S ALL APPROACHING VERY QUICKLY.

ABORTION SEEMS TO BE THE TOPIC THAT DEMOCRATS CAN COME TOGETHER ON RIGHT NOW.

THAT SEEMS TO BE ONE OF THE VERY FEW THINGS THAT THEY CAN AGREE ON THAT THEY WANT TO PROTECT ACCESS TO NEW YORK.

ANNA, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS?

DO WE KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO?

>> THERE'S A NUMBER OF BILLS PROPOSED THAT WOULD EXPAND ACCESS IN WAYS THAT WOULD ALLOW MORE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO INDIVIDUALS EVEN COMING FROM OUT OF STATE, BECAUSE ABORTION IN NEW YORK IS ALREADY FAIRLY AVAILABLE AND IT WILL PROBABLY STAY THAT WAY.

BUT AS THE GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE HAVE SUGGESTED, THEY WANT THAT TO BE A THING THAT THEY CAN OFFER TO PEOPLE MAYBE FROM OTHER STATES, IF IT SHOULD CHANGE IN THEIR REGIONS.

SO WHETHER OR NOT THEY'LL GET SOME OF THESE PIECES OF LEGISLATION DONE ALWAYS REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

BUT IT DOES SEEM TO BE SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE CAN RALLY AROUND.

AND IT MIGHT PROVIDE THEM SOME COVER FROM DOING SOME THINGS THEY DON'T WANT TO DO.

>> RIGHT.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU.

DOES THIS SEEM TO BE THE END-OF-SESSION ISSUE NOW?

THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS ON THE TABLE, BUT ABORTION SEEMS TO BE THE THING THAT DEMOCRATS, AS WE SAID, CAN COME TOGETHER ON, WHEREAS MAYBE THINGS LIKE CRIME THEY CAN'T COME TOGETHER ON.

DOES THIS SEEM TO BE A PLACEHOLDER FOR OTHER ISSUES THAT MIGHT HAVE PUT THEM IN POLITICAL HOT WATER HAD THEY GONE FORWARD?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

IT'S AN ELECTION YEAR.

AND THERE'S ALWAYS A LITTLE BIT OF AN ENERGY LAG AFTER THE BUDGET IS PASSED.

SO THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THEY NEED TO DO.

IF THEY ARE GOING TO EXTEND MAYORAL CONTROL OF NEW YORK CITY SCHOOLS, THAT'S SOMETHING THEY WOULD NEED TO DO BEFORE END OF SESSION, FEW OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT THIS SEEMS TO BE THE MAJOR ISSUE.

IF YOU CAN GET ALL EYES ON SOMETHING EVERYBODY AGREES ON, WHAT A BEAUTIFUL WAY TO END.

>> EXACTLY.

DAVE, GOING TO YOU ON POLITICS.

ABORTION IS POPULAR IN NEW YORK.

I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT MOST NEW YORKERS DO NOT WANT TO SEE ROE V. WADE OVERTURNED IN TERMS OF POLLING.

>> RIGHT.

>> BUT MY QUESTION FOR YOU, IS THAT ENOUGH TO PUT DEMOCRATS IN A BETTER POSITION POLITICALLY THIS YEAR?

>> RUNNING ON THAT ISSUE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP IS SOMETHING THAT WILL BENEFIT DEMOCRATS, BUT IT'S MORE COMPLICATED WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT ABORTION IN DIFFERENT SENSES, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT LATE-TERM ABORTION, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE MONEY AVAILABLE FOR OUT-OF-STATE ABORTIONS.

THOSE THINGS MIGHT NOT POLL AS POLITICALLY BENEFICIAL TO DEMOCRATS.

IT'S GOING TO BE INTERESTING THROUGH NOW AND NOVEMBER HOW THEY GO ABOUT FRAMING THIS ISSUE, BECAUSE HOW THEY FRAME IT IS REALLY GOING TO BE IMPORTANT TO WHETHER IT ACTUALLY IS BENEFICIAL TO THEM.

IF I'M THE REPUBLICANS, I'M TRYING TO MAKE THIS NOT JUST ABOUT ROE V. WADE, BUT ABOUT OTHER THINGS SUCH AS THE COST OF ACTUALLY RAISING A CHILD IN NEW YORK, WHICH IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE EVERY DAY.

MAYBE NOT THE FAULT OF NEW YORK DEMOCRATS, BUT THAT'S THE FRAMING I'M FOCUSING ON.

SO DEMOCRATS HAVE A REAL TIGHT, TIGHT, TIGHTROPE THEY HAVE TO WALK HERE, BUT IT COULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS ESPECIALLY IN THE SUBURBS WHERE KATHY HOCHUL REALLY NEEDS TO RUN UP THE SCORE IF SHE WANTS TO HAVE A BIG VICTORY IN NOVEMBER.

>> TO ME, I SEE THIS ISSUE AS VERY IMPORTANT TO VOTERS, OBVIOUSLY, BUT I DON'T NOT IF IT'S NECESSARILY MORE IMPORTANT THAN TOP ISSUES LIKE CRIME AND COST OF LIVING.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GET TO NOVEMBER AS KATHY HOCHUL VERSUS WHOEVER THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE IS, ASSUMING SHE WINS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GET TO NOVEMBER AND YOU SWING THE VOTES BASED ON ABORTION.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> THIS IS TYPICALLY A FEDERAL ISSUE.

THIS ISN'T SOMETHING WE THINK OF ON A STATE LEVEL, BECAUSE, AS ANNA SAID, THE BROAD PROTECTIONS ON ACCESSIBILITY WE HAVE IN NEW YORK.

THIS IS SOMETHING, WHERE IF I'M A MEMBER OF CONGRESS, IF I'M A SENATE CANDIDATE, NOT NECESSARILY IN NEW YORK, I'M GOING TO MAKE A BIG DEAL ABOUT THIS.

IF I'M A MEMBER OF THE ASSEMBLY, IF I'M A MEMBER OF THE STATE SENATE, I DON'T THINK THAT ARGUMENT ABOUT ABORTION RESONATES AS MUCH WITH VOTERS WHO THINK ABOUT THIS AS A NATIONAL ISSUE, WHICH IT OBVIOUSLY IS BASED ON THE SUPREME COURT RULING.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

AND ANNA, I SHOULD SAY, BEFORE I THINK IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS AS WE TALK MORE AND MORE ABOUT ABORTION IN NEW YORK, I CAN ALREADY SEE BIG THINGS HAPPENING ONLINE.

SO ARE DEMOCRATS CONSIDERING ANY EXPANSION TO THE STATE'S ACCESS TO ABORTION IN TERMS OF WEEKS WHEN IT'S ALLOWED, INSTANCES WHEN IT'S ALLOWED, IS THAT ON THE TABLE AT ALL?

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF MOVEMENT ON SPECIFIC BILLS THAT WOULD DO THAT.

BUT I DON'T THINK ANYTHING'S OUT OF THE QUESTION.

>> I AGREE.

I THINK THERE'S A LOT ON THE TABLE.

THE THING ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH PROGRESSIVE ABORTION LAWS IN NEW YORK, THERE'S NOT A LOT MORE TO DO HERE.

SO IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN DEMOCRATS COME TOGETHER WITH A PACKAGE, IF THEY DO IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.

I WANT TO TURN TO CONGRESSMAN ANTONIO DELGADO.

WHICH WE WERE OFF LAST WEEK FOR THE SHOW.

I WANT TO BRING IT UP NOW.

HE'S GOING TO BE THE NEW LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR AND HE'S GOING TO BE NEW CANDIDATE FOR LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR.

I WANT TO ASK YOU THIS FIRST, ANNA, SO DO YOU THINK THAT CHANGES THE RACE FOR LG?

HOW DOES IT CHANGE IT?

WE HAVE THE TWO CANDIDATES, DIANA REYNA AND ANA MARIA ARCHILA.

AND BRIAN BENJAMIN HAD TO RESIGN.

NOW HE'S OFF THE BALLOT THERE'S A LOT WE COULD GO THROUGH WITH THAT, BUT I WON'T REHASH IT.

DO YOU THINK DELGADO IS A SHOE-IN?

>> AT THIS POINT I DON'T THINK ANYONE COULD BE CONSIDERED A SHOE-IN.

OBVIOUSLY HE'S RUNNING WITH THE GOVERNOR, BUT IT'S A SEPARATE ELECTION.

PEOPLE CAN CHOOSE OF THE THREE CANDIDATES THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW WHO THEY WOULD LIKE BEST.

HE'S A GREAT PICK, THOUGH.

AND I THINK THAT HE COMES OFF, HE IS CHARISMATIC, SUCCESSFUL, AND HE HAS A LOT OF SUPPORT, NOT ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY HE SPENT TIME IN CONGRESS, BUT THAT COMES ALSO WITH RESOURCES SO I DON'T KNOW HOW VOTERS ARE FEELING ABOUT HIM SPECIFICALLY RIGHT NOW.

BUT HE DEFINITELY HAS A SOLID CAMPAIGN AHEAD OF HIM AND THE SUPPORT OF THE GOVERNOR, IT SEEMS LIKE HE HAS A PRETTY GOOD SHOT.

AND THAT CHANGES THE DYNAMICS FOR THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES.

>> DAVE, WHAT DOES DELGADO NEED TO DO IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS TO WIN THIS PRIMARY?

I DON'T KNOW THAT HE'S ALL THAT KNOWN TO VOTERS.

I DON'T THINK THEY KNOW DIANA REYNA OR ANA MARIA ARCHILA EITHER.

I CAN SEE AS A DEMOCRAT, IF I WAS A DEMOCRAT VOTING IN THE PRIMARY, I SEE THESE THREE NAMES, I DON'T KNOW WHO ANY OF THEM ARE.

FEELS LIKE I'M THROWING A DART AT A BULLS-EYE TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT.

>> RIGHT.

THE THING ABOUT A DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY LIKE THIS, IT'S MOSTLY GOING TO BE HIGHLY ENGAGED, HIGHLY ACTIVE VOTERS WHO ARE NOT LIKE YOUR TYPICAL REGISTERED VOTERS.

THEY MIGHT HAVE A BETTER CHANCE KNOWING THESE NAMES.

BUT WHAT DELGADO HAS IS HAVING THE BACKING OF THE DEMOCRATIC ESTABLISHMENT WHICH IS GOING TO MOBILIZE INFORMED VOTERS, WHETHER THEY COME FROM THE ACTUAL PARTY APPARATUS, LIKE COUNTY LEVEL AND CITY LEVEL, AND THEY'LL GO OUT TO VOTE.

BUT ALSO MORE IMPORTANTLY PROBABLY ARE THESE LABOR UNIONS THAT ARE SO CONNECTED TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

AND THEY'RE GOING TO MOBILIZE ON HIS BEHALF, BASICALLY WITHOUT HIM EVEN DOING ANYTHING.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN, THOUGH, THAT HE CAN'T TRAVEL AROUND THE STATE.

TRY TO DRIVE UP VOTES IN AREAS WHERE THE ESTABLISHMENT IS GOING TO BE BETTER RECEIVED.

I THINK IN THE BRONX, WHICH HAS A LARGE BLACK VOTING POPULATION, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AS PROGRESSIVE AS THE BLACK VOTING POPULATION IN BROOKLYN, IS AN AREA WHERE HE'S GOING TO WANT TO FOCUS ON, BECAUSE I THINK ANA MARIA ARCHILA WILL COME AT HIM FROM THE LEFT AND DIANA REYNA FROM THE RIGHT AND THERE'S A NARROW GAP WHERE HE CAN TRY TO DRIVE UP THE VOTE.

I THINK HE'LL BE HITTING ALL OF NEW YORK OUTSIDE OF THE 19th CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT WHERE HE IS KNOWN.

EVEN THAT I THINK ISN'T THE BEST KNOWN PERSON IN THERE.

SO, AND IF I'M ANTONIO DELGADO I'M FEELING PRETTY GOOD, BUT I STILL NEED TO GO THROUGH THE MOTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M KATHY HOCHUL'S RUNNING MATE IN NOVEMBER.

>> 30 SECONDS LEFT.

I'LL THROW THIS TO YOU, ANNA.

THEY'RE BOTH FROM UPSTATE, CATHY AND DELGADO.

DELGADO IS FROM UPSTATE IN MY BOOK, HUDSON VALLEY DISTRICT.

DOES THAT HURT THEIR CHANCES?

>> I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN GET OUT AND GET THEIR NAMES AROUND DOWNSTATE.

I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS BAD THAT THEY ARE FROM NORTH OF THE BRONX, BUT I DO THINK THAT THEY NEED TO GET TO WHERE VOTERS ARE AND THEY NEED TO GET THEIR MESSAGE OUT ON THE GROUND.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'VE NECESSARILY BROKEN THROUGH THERE YET.

>> I GUESS WE'LL SEE.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.

I APPRECIATE IT.

ANNA GRONEWALD FROM POLITICO AND DAVID LOMBARDO FROM THE CAPITOL PRESSROOM.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

MORE NOW IN THIS YEAR'S RACE FOR GOVERNOR.

VOTERS FROM BOTH MAJOR PARTIES WILL HEAD TO THE POLLS IN JUNE TO VOTE IN THIS YEAR'S PRIMARY.

AND WHOEVER WINS IN JUNE WILL BE THEIR PARTY'S NOMINEE IN THIS YEAR'S RACE FOR GOVERNOR.

REPUBLICANS WILL HAVE FOUR CHOICES ON THE BALLOT: CONGRESSMAN LEE ZELDIN THE PARTY'S FAVORITE ANDREW GIULIANI SON OF FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR RUDY GIULIANI FORMER WESTCHESTER COUNTY EXECUTIVE ROB ASTORINO AND BUSINESSMAN HARRY WILSON.

NOW WILSON IS AN OUTLIER HERE.

HE'S THE MOST REMOVED FROM POLITICS OUT OF THE BUNCH BUT HE'S POPULAR IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

HE RAN FOR STATE COMPTROLLER IN 2010 AND CAME CLOSER TO WINNING STATEWIDE THAN ANY OTHER REPUBLICAN HAS IN TWO DECADES.

AND HE'S NOW OUT WITH A NEW CRIME PLAN.

WE SAT DOWN TO GO THROUGH HIS PLAN AND HEAR MORE ABOUT HOW HE GOT HERE.

HARRY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE I APPRECIATE IT >> GOOD TO BE HERE.

THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE NEW TO OUR AUDIENCE.

I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE CHANCE TO KIND OF INTRODUCE YOURSELF.

PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE SEEN YOU ON TV FROM YOUR ADS THAT ARE OUT.

TELL PEOPLE WHO YOU ARE, WHY YOU'RE RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR.

>> I GREW UP NOT FAR FROM HERE JOHNSTOWN, NEW YORK, HALFWAY BETWEEN ALBANY AND UTICA.

MY DAD'S PARENTS AND MY MOM ALL MOVED THERE FROM GREECE.

WILSON IS A PURE ELLISON CREATION, FIRST-GENERATION GREEK AMERICAN.

WE ONLY SPOKE GREEK AT HOME WHILE I WAS GROWING UP.

DIDN'T LEARN ENGLISH UNTIL NURSERY SCHOOL.

WORKING CLASS FAMILY.

MY DAD WAS A BARTENDER AT MY UNCLE'S RESTAURANT IN TOWN.

AND MY MOM OPERATED A SEWING MACHINE AT A LOCAL FACTORY.

I WAS THE FIRST IN MY FAMILY TO GO TO COLLEGE.

FORTUNATE TO GO TO HARVARD HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL AND WENT INTO BUSINESS, SPENT MY CAREER FIXING COMPANIES, COMING INTO SITUATIONS WHERE COMPANIES WERE IN OR NEAR BANKRUPTCY, WHERE MANAGEMENT HAD FAILED THE PEOPLE IN THE COMPANY AND MADE TERRIBLE MISTAKES.

WE CAME IN TO FIX THEM.

WE'VE SAVED, OVER THE COURSE OF NEARLY 30 YEARS OF DOING THAT, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN JOBS.

REALLY MADE A BIG DIFFERENCE FOR THOSE COMPANIES.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY THE SKILL SET I THINK WE NEED IN A GOVERNOR.

I THINK WE HAVE THE MOST FAILED INSTITUTION IN AMERICA IN NEW YORK STATE GOVERNMENT.

I THINK THAT TURNAROUND SKILL SET THAT WE NEED TO FIX THE STATE IS WHAT WILL BENEFIT ALL 20 MILLION NEW YORKERS, IF I CAN GET ELECTED IN NOVEMBER.

>> UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE NONE OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES RUNNING HAVE THAT KIND OF TRAJECTORY IN TERMS OF CAREER.

EVERYBODY ELSE HAS EITHER BEEN IN POLITICS OR NOT REALLY BEEN IN A SPECIFIC INDUSTRY LIKE THAT.

IT'S AN INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE.

BUT I DO WANT TO TALK TO YOU, I WANT TO START WITH YOUR CRIME PLAN THAT'S NEW OUT IN MAY.

IT'S COMPREHENSIVE.

MORE THAN OTHER CANDIDATES HAVE PUT OUT FOR SURE.

AND IT HAS FOUR STEPS THAT ARE BROKEN DOWN INTO SMALLER STEPS.

SO THE FIRST ONE THAT I WANT TO START WITH IS CASHLESS BAIL, BECAUSE THAT'S OBVIOUSLY THE HOT TOPIC OF THE ELECTION.

I THINK CRIME IS ON THE MINDS OF VOTERS.

WE SEE IT IN THE POLLS.

SO YOUR PLAN, YOU WANT TO END CASHLESS BAIL, WHICH ISN'T NECESSARILY UNIQUE AMONG REPUBLICANS.

YOU WANT JUDGES TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT'S CALLED DANGEROUSNESS.

SOMEBODY'S PERCEIVED THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND I'LL ASK YOU FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE WILL SAY DANGEROUSNESS MAY BE A SLIPPERY SLOPE FOR SOME PEOPLE.

SO IN YOUR PLAN, IN YOUR MIND, HOW DO YOU DEFINE WHEN SOMEBODY IS DANGEROUS AND WHEN SOMEBODY IS NOT?

>> SURE.

SO I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT KIND OF HOW WE'VE GOTTEN TO THIS PLACE.

WE HAVE MUCH HIGHER CRIME RATES THAN WE DID JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

AND I BELIEVE AN IMPORTANT IS THE BAIL REFORM LAWS THAT WERE PASSED.

THE BEAUTIFUL THING ABOUT DEMOCRACY WE HAVE 49 OTHER STATES TO COMPARE NEW YORK'S RESULTS TO.

AND SO WHAT WE KNOW IN THOSE 49 OTHER STATES, VIRTUALLY ALL OF THEM HAVE JUDICIAL DISCRETION AROUND BAIL.

>> RIGHT.

>> WE ALSO KNOW EVERY SINGLE OTHER STATE AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALL ALLOW FOR A DANGEROUSNESS STANDARD.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT I THINK IS COMMON SENSE WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR KEEPING SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN ACCUSED OF A CRIME OFF THE STREETS.

GENERALLY TWO BIG.

ONE'S FLIGHT RISK.

AND THEY MAY FLEE JUSTICE.

BUT ALSO DANGEROUSNESS.

THAT'S WHY 49 OTHER STATES AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALLOW FOR THAT.

SO I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE AS CONTROVERSIAL AS IT'S BECOME.

I THINK THERE'S IDEOLOGY THAT KIND OF CLOUDS THE COMMON SENSE REALITY OF THE SITUATION.

AND I WOULD LEAVE IT NOT TO MYSELF OR A POLITICIAN BUT TO JUDGES WHO HAVE BEEN SELECTED TO BE IN THAT POSITION.

>> SO YOU DON'T THINK THERE SHOULD BE LIKE A SPECIFIC RUBRIC OF QUESTIONS THEY SHOULD ASK, IT REALLY SHOULD BE AT THE DISCRETION OF JUST THE JUDGES WHO CAN DECIDE BASED ON EACH CASE INDIVIDUALLY?

>> I THINK IN GENERAL THERE'S AN EXCESSIVE TENDENCY BY PEOPLE IN ALBANY TO TRY TO LEGISLATE EVERYTHING I THINK WHAT WE SHOULD DO SET CLEAR RULES OF THE ROAD, BROAD PRINCIPLES, ALLOW PEOPLE TO OPERATE IN THOSE PRINCIPLES AND TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE PROBLEMS WE SHOULD ADDRESS THOSE.

AND SO I THINK THAT ENDS UP BEING A FAR MORE EFFECTIVE WAY OF RUNNING ANY ORGANIZATION, WHAT I'VE DONE IN MY BUSINESS CAREER BUT IT'S ALSO FAR MORE FULFILLING FOR PEOPLE IN IT.

WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS PEOPLE DEVELOP GOOD JUDGMENTS AND DECISIONS AND TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE ISSUES YOU CAN REFORM THOSE THROUGH TRAINING AND WAYS TO ADDRESS THOSE.

>> NOW, HOW DO YOU BALANCE THAT WITH THE IDEA BEHIND BAIL REFORM WAS TO GET RID OF THE SYSTEM WHERE YOU HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO CAN PAY TO GET OUT ON BAIL AND OTHERS ARE NOT AND INCARCERATED PRETRIAL.

HOW DO YOU BALANCE YOUR IDEA TO END CASHLESSNESS BAIL AND DANGEROUSNESS WITH THE IDEA OF MAKING THE SYSTEM MORE EQUITABLE, MORE FAIR?

>> WHEN PEOPLE RAISE SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONS, ONE I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO SOCIOECONOMIC ISSUES.

GREW UP IN A WORKING CLASS FAMILY.

DIDN'T HAVE ANY MONEY GROWING UP.

I RECOGNIZE THERE ARE FOLKS WHO ARE OBVIOUSLY IN DIFFERENT MEANS BUT THE STANDARD SHOULDN'T BE ABOUT SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS.

IT SHOULD BE ABOUT DANGEROUSNESS.

SOMEONE WHETHER THEY'RE POOR OR WEALTHY, IF THEY'RE A THREAT TO SOCIETY WHILE THEY'RE AWAITING TRIAL, THAT'S WHERE THE JUDGE'S DISCRETION SHOULD COME IN.

AND SO THAT'S WHY I RELY ON THAT AS OPPOSED TO WHETHER SOMEONE IS WHERE THEY ARE ON THE SOCIOECONOMIC SPECTRUM.

IF YOU COMPARE THAT WITH A SPEEDY TRIAL WHICH ALL AMERICANS ARE ENTITLED TO ACCUSED OF A CRIME ARE ENTITLED TO, YOU CAN ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS IN THE PAST WITHOUT THROWING OUT THE BROADER SYSTEM.

THE CORE PROBLEM WAS THAT WE HAD SOME HIGH PROFILE SITUATIONS WHICH WERE TRAGIC AND THAT ACTUALLY HAD VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH BAIL MUCH MORE ABOUT LACK OF A SPEEDY TRIAL.

AND WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENED EVEN THOUGH THERE HAVE BEEN SOME REFORMS AROUND THAT, IT'S CREATED AN UNDUE BURDEN ON PROSECUTORS AND DEFENSE ATTORNEYS.

NOW YOU HEAR FROM BOTH SIDES.

THEY'RE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE DISCOVERY CHANGES, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MADE ACCESS TO SPEEDY TRIAL MORE COMPLICATED NOT LESS ACTUALLY COMPOUNDED THE PROBLEM BECAUSE WE HAVE POLITICIANS TALKING ABOUT SOUND BITES AS OPPOSED TO REALLY TRYING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

>> WHAT DO YOU ABOUT THE SPEEDY TRIAL PROBLEM?

IS IT MORE JUST ABOUT MORE FUNDING FOR COURTS, MAKING ONE IDEA HAS BEEN TO CREATE MORE JUDGESHIPS, OF COURSE THAT COMES WITH INFRASTRUCTURE AS WELL.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEAS ON HOW TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HAS A SPEEDY TRIAL SO NOBODY IS LANGUISHING IN THESE JAILS.

>> SURE.

I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE IMPORTANT ISSUES ONE IS BECAUSE OF CHANGES IN DISCOVERY RULES, THAT'S MADE IT HARDER TO GET TO A SPEEDY TRIAL.

IF WE HAD, FOR EXAMPLE, MATERIALITY OR REASONABLENESS STANDARD, WHICH IS TRUE IN ANY KIND OF WALK OF LIFE, WHETHER IT'S A BUSINESS DEAL YOU CAN SAY IS THIS MATERIAL IF IT'S NOT THEN WHY SPEND TIME ON IT.

THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH THE CHANGE IN DISCOVERY SESSION THAT'S GONE AWAY.

THAT'S MADE THINGS MORE CUMBERSOME.

I THINK FIXING THAT SO THAT WE FOCUS ON MATERIALITY, STANDARD WOULD HELP.

SECOND PART STAFFING.

PART OF THE REASONS WE'RE RUNNING INTO PROBLEMS ON TRIALS IS BECAUSE CRIME IS UP.

MORE PEOPLE IN THE SYSTEM.

AND SO I THINK IF WE CAN KIND OF FOCUS ON THE 14-PAGE PLAN THAT WE HAVE, I BELIEVE WILL REDUCE CRIME AND RECIDIVISM AND REPEAT OFFENDERS, PARTICULARLY WHICH I THINK ARE A CORE PART OF THE PROBLEM, WE'LL HAVE FEWER CASES IN THE SYSTEM.

IF IT TURNS OUT THAT'S NOT FAST ENOUGH, THEN YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT EXPANDING THE SYSTEM MAKE SURE PEOPLE GET TO A SPEEDY TRIAL.

>> YOU'RE AGAINST THE DEFUND THE POLICE MOVEMENT.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FUNDING, OBVIOUSLY.

HOW DO YOU BALANCE THE DEFUND THE POLICE MOVEMENT WITH THE NEED TO HAVE OFFICERS WHO ARE NOT TREATING PEOPLE OF COLOR IN A DISPROPORTIONATE WAY?

OBVIOUSLY EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE TREATED EQUALLY WE WANT TO RESPECT MEMBERS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT BUT HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE BOTH OF THOSE THINGS?

>> SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE FACTS OF NEW YORK STATE SPECIFICALLY.

THERE ARE SOME HORRIBLE SITUATIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED AROUND THE COUNTRY.

THERE'S BEEN VERY LITTLE IN NEW YORK STATE OVER THE LAST DECADE.

AND THAT'S A TESTAMENT TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADERSHIP AROUND THE STATE WHO DEALT WITH SOME PROBLEMS THAT EXISTED BEFORE THAT PERIOD OF TIME AND INVESTED IN TRAINING AND REALLY KIND OF TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT DID NOT HAPPEN.

AND SO I THINK WE'VE MADE GREAT STRIDES IN NEW YORK IN DEALING WITH THOSE ISSUES.

THAT'S WHY I THINK WE LEAD OTHER STATES, WHICH I THINK IT'S A TERRIFIC TESTAMENT TO THOSE LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADERS ACROSS THE STATE.

AND YET KEEP INVESTING IN TRAINING.

WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN CERTAIN AGENCIES AROUND THE STATE IS THERE'S BEEN A REDUCTION IN TRAINING BECAUSE OF BUDGET CUTS BECAUSE IT HASN'T KEPT PACE WITH INFLATION THAT'S MORE LIKELY TO LEAD TO A PROBLEM AS OPPOSED TO DO WHAT'S BEEN WORKING IN THE PAST DECADE INVESTING IN TRAINING.

ONE PIECE OF IT.

THE SECOND PIECE OF IT THE HIT TO MORALE THAT'S HAPPENED TO POLICE OFFICERS ACROSS THE STATE REQUIREMENTS AND DEPARTURES ACCELERATED DRAMATICALLY AND RECRUITING HAS GOTTEN HARDER.

AS A RESULT STAFFING HAS COME DOWN IN MOST PARTS, I THINK MOST ALL PARTS OF THE STATE THAT MAKES PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY PEOPLE IN COMMUNITIES THAT ARE MORE, HAVE MORE CRIME, MORE AT RISK.

SO I BELIEVE THAT THERE'S -- AGAIN THIS KIND OF COMES DOWN TO POLITICS VERSUS PROBLEM SOLVING I'M A PROBLEM SOLVER NOT A POLITICIAN.

I THINK THAT POLITICIANS TEND TO KIND OF TAKE ONE SIDE OF THE DEBATE.

THE ANSWER IS WE'VE ACTUALLY DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB IN THE STATE.

CAN WE DO BETTER?

OF COURSE WE CAN.

WE SHOULD TRY TO DO BETTER.

BUT WE SHOULD FOCUS ON HOW DO WE DO BETTER AS OPPOSED TO DEMONIZING THE OTHER SIDE, NOT TRYING TO SOLVE THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM.

>> PART OF YOUR PLAN TALKS ABOUT BREAKING DOWN THE SILOS WE HAVE BETWEEN MEMBERS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND ADDICTION SERVICES TOO.

TELL ME WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE UNDER YOUR ADMINISTRATION?

HOW WOULD YOU MAKE EVERYBODY WORK A LITTLE BIT BETTER TOGETHER SO WE DON'T HAVE THESE SITUATIONS WHERE PEOPLE WITH A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE AREN'T GETTING THE HELP THAT THEY NEED.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

SO I'LL GIVE YOU AN ANECDOTE, COME BACK TO THE SPECIFIC SOLUTION.

THE ANECDOTE.

WE INTERVIEW TONS OF PEOPLE ACROSS THE STATE TO BUILD OUR CRIME PLAN, PEOPLE ON THE FRONT LINES, LAW ENFORCEMENT, PROSECUTORS, DEFENSE ATTORNEYS.

ONE THING WE HEARD VERY FREQUENTLY IS THAT FROM A NUMBER OF SHERIFFS, WAS THEIR LAW ENFORCEMENT, THE MEMBERS OF THEIR TEAM WERE FORCED INTO MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES THEY FELT THEY WEREN'T EQUIPPED TO DEAL WITH.

IT WAS LOSE, LOSE, IT WAS BAD FOR THE PERSON IN QUESTION.

BAD FOR THE POLICE OFFICER.

AND SO TO ME THE WAY TO DEAL WITH THAT IS START AT THE TOP AND CREATE A LITTLE SWAT TEAM THAT BASICALLY BREAKS DOWN SILOS AND KIND OF GOES AFTER LOOKING AT IT SYSTEMATICALLY STATEWIDE WHERE ARE THE HAND-OFFS THE DROPS IN HAND-OFFS IN COVERAGE.

THE BIGGEST ARE CRIME, MENTAL HEALTH, TO HOMELESS.

AND OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A NEXUS FOR SOME PORTION OF PEOPLE ACROSS THOSE, BUT THEN PEOPLE WHO ARE ONLY IN ONE OF THOSE BUCKETS, OBVIOUSLY.

SO THE QUESTION IS FOR PEOPLE WHO KIND OF SPILL ACROSS THOSE VARIOUS BUCKETS, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THEY'RE GETTING THE SERVICES THEY NEED AT A STATE LEVEL AND KIND OF BRINGING IT DOWN TO LOCAL AGENCIES.

WE WANT -- IN GENERAL, I'M FOR BRINGING SERVICES AS CLOSE TO PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.

SO INVESTING IN LOCAL SUPPORT, NOT AT THE STATE LEVEL.

BUT WE CAN HAVE A STATEWIDE PERSPECTIVE THAT THEN BRINGS IN TO DRIVE THOSE CHANGES KIND OF LOCALLY.

THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD START.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK IT WILL END UP BEING CREATING ENOUGH OF AN INFRASTRUCTURE AROUND MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS AND HOMELESS NEEDS THAT WE KIND OF AUGMENT THE POLICE AS OPPOSED TO EXPECT THEM TO DO SOMETHING THEY HAVEN'T NECESSARILY BEEN TRAINED TO DO, NOT IN THEIR BEST WHEELHOUSE.

I THINK THAT WILL END UP BEING A WIN-WIN FOR BOTH THE PEOPLE WHO NEED THE SERVICES AS WELL AS PEOPLE TRYING TO HELP THEM.

>> THIS TIES INTO THE CONVERSATION, THE LAST QUESTION FOR YOU ABOUT RIKERS ISLAND, AN INTERESTING PART OF YOUR PLAN YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE COMMUNITY JAILS IN YOUR CITY.

YOU SAY RIKERS ISLAND CAN BE IMPROVED BY INVESTING, IMPROVING THE INFRASTRUCTURE, PUTTING FUNDING IN.

TELL ME WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.

RIKERS ISLAND IS NOT GOOD.

THERE'S NO OTHER SIDE TO THAT.

IT'S JUST A BAD PLACE TO BE FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED, FOR THE CORRECTION OFFICERS, FOR THE INCARCERATED PEOPLE.

SO WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE?

>> SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHY DID RIKERS GET AS BAD AS IT DID?

BECAUSE THE DE BLASIO ADMINISTRATION BASICALLY NEGLECTED IT FOR EIGHT YEARS.

DIDN'T INVEST IN ANY IMPROVEMENTS, AND OVER EIGHT YEARS THAT COMPOUNDS.

NOW YOU HAVE, AS YOU SAID, A TOTAL LOSE, LOSE, IT'S BAD FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED.

NOW IN ORDER RATHER THAN ADMITTING TO THE MISTAKE AND TRYING TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKE WHICH THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE YEARS AGO, THE SOLUTION FROM THE DE BLASIO ADMINISTRATION WAS CREATE THESE COMMUNITY JAILS THAT NO ONE WANTS AND NO ONE SAW THE PROBLEM.

AND TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE HOW MISGUIDED IT IS.

RIGHT NOW THERE'S BETWEEN 5,500 INMATES IN RIKERS TODAY.

AND COMMUNITY JAILS HAVE CAPACITY OF 3,000.

WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE 2,000, 2500 INMATES WHO WOULD NOT HAVE A HOME IN THAT?

AND THEN WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION, THERE'S LIKE NO OUTDOOR SPACE AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE FACILITIES AND THE RESOURCES THAT COULD BE DONE IN RIKERS IF IT WAS PROPERLY INVESTED IN.

SO I BELIEVE IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE CHEAPER AND BETTER TO INVEST IN RIKERS AND BY THE WAY THESE COMMUNITY JAILS COULDN'T BE DONE FOR ANOTHER FIVE YEARS OR MORE IN THE BEST CASE SCENARIO.

SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO INVEST IN RIKERS ANYWAYS, AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT THINKING ABOUT IT MORE HOLISTICALLY TRYING TO ADDRESS IT IN THAT WAY IS JUST, I THINK, PEOPLE ARE UNWILLING TO ADMIT THEIR MISTAKES OF THE PAST.

>> VERY INTERESTING PLAN.

VERY COMPREHENSIVE.

HARRY WILSON, REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR.

THANK YOU.

>> GOOD TO SEE.

YOU THANK YOU.

>> NOW AS WE SAID WHOEVER WINS THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION IN JUNE WILL GO ON TO COMPETE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION AGAINST WHICHEVER DEMOCRAT WINS THEIR PRIMARY.

POLLS SHOW GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL AS THE FAVORITE FOR THAT BUT WE WON'T KNOW UNTIL AFTER THE PRIMARY.

THAT ELECTION IS SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 28.

BUT MOVING ON NOW TO ON THE BILL A SEGMENT WHERE WE TELL YOU ABOUT A BILL OUT OF ALBANY THAT YOU MIGHT NOT HEAR ABOUT OTHERWISE.

THIS WEEK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A6943 ALSO CALLED A PLACE AT THE TABLE.

IT'S A BILL THAT NONPROFITS SAY WOULD HELP MORE OF THEM LOBBY LAWMAKERS AT THE STATE CAPITOL.

RIGHT NOW ONLY ABOUT 3% OF NONPROFITS LOBBY.

THAT'S ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON NONPROFITS.

AND THAT'S PARTLY BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST IN NEW YORK IF YOU SPEND MORE THAN $5,000 ON LOBBYING ACTIVITIES.

AND A LOT OF NONPROFITS DON'T HAVE THE TIME OR THE RESOURCES TO DO THAT.

SO THE BILL A6943 WOULD RAISE THAT THRESHOLD TO $10,000, WHICH WOULD ALLOW MORE NONPROFITS TO LOBBY WITHOUT THE RED TAPE.

IT'S SPONSORED BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER JESSICA GONZALEZ-ROJAS.

>> SO MANY ORGANIZATIONS AND NONPROFITS IN PARTICULAR ARE RETICENT TO LOBBY BECAUSE OF THOSE BARRIERS AND THOSE LIMITS.

AND DUE TO THAT, WE ARE LACKING THE VOICES OF PEOPLE MOST IMPACTED BY THE VERY POLICIES WE CREATE.

>> SO FAR THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A LOT OF MOMENTUM FOR THE BILL IN THE LEGISLATURE BUT LAWMAKERS HAVE THREE MORE WEEKS TO CONSIDER IT BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

BUT WE'LL LEAVE IT THERE FOR THIS WEEK.

THANKS FOR WATCHING THIS WEEK'S NEW YORK NOW.

HAVE A GREAT WEEK AND BE WELL.

>> FUNDING FOR NEW YORK NOW IS PROVIDED BY WNET.