(* WMHT PBS's NYNOW (* THEME MUSIC) - Today, the Senate majority will pass legislation.

- I will fight like hell for you every single day, like I've always done, and always will.

- Welcome to this special edition of "New York Now," Now I'm Dan Clark.

The end of the summer is finally here, and we're taking a break for the week.

That means we'll be re-airing some content you've seen before if you're a regular viewer.

So if you wanna skip this week and come back next week, no offense taken.

But I wanted to use this week to re-air two important segments from this year.

First up is our interview with Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado.

It's been about a year and a half since Delgado took office, but he's no stranger to New York.

Before governor Kathy Hochul picked him as LG, Delgado was a member of Congress, representing part of the Hudson Valley.

He served for two terms.

That was until last May, when Governor Kathy Hochul picked him as her new LG.

The old one, Brian Benjamin, had been indicted on federal corruption charges.

And since then, Delgado has been busy, traveling across the state for events, leading New York's Regional Economic Development Councils, and heading the state's efforts to combat hate and bias.

We sat down with Delgado earlier this year to chat about all of that, and what's ahead.

- Lieutenant Governor, thank you so much for being here, I appreciate it.

- Good to be here.

- So you've been in office a little bit more than a year now, you've been kind of crisscrossing the state, doing a whole bunch of things.

Can you tell us how it's been going?

What have you been doing?

- It's been great.

You know, it's a big state.

My old congressional district had 11 counties, and I thought that was big.

- Yeah.

(chuckles) The Hudson Valley, the Mohawk Valley southern tier.

But now we're talking about the Finger Lakes, we're talking about Western New York, we're talking about North Country, we're talking about downstate.

And so for me, it's been an opportunity to get around and just meet folks in every part of the state, every nook and cranny, learning the different main streets, learning the different ways communities are coming together to empower themselves, be it in the healthcare space, educational space, be it in the economic space.

But just learning the ebb and flow of the state, and understanding what the needs are across communities.

- You know, what do people tell you about that?

It's gotta be a very different job than being a member of Congress, which you formerly were before this.

And when you're a member of Congress, you're really dealing with your district directly.

As Lieutenant Governor, you have to go all over the state and talk to a whole bunch of people.

What do they tell you?

- Well, first I wanna say, when you're in Congress, too, you're focusing on legislation.

Right, you're focusing on how to make policy into law that you know will have a direct impact on the constituents you represent.

Intellectually, it's a different endeavor than the executive side.

You're mindful, obviously, of legislation, but you're not responsible for ushering any legislation through.

So really, what I've learned is, a lot of it is about understanding what the vision is, and ultimately, where are we going?

How do we knit all of this together in a way that is a narrative that people can be inspired by, and can feel encouraged by.

And I think, you know, whether it's addressing affordability, you know, comprehensively, whether it's making sure that we are empowering all communities, particularly those communities that have been distressed, or that are distressed, or that have been overlooked or marginalized.

So we talk about economic growth, we're talking about it in a way that's more holistic.

And how do we do that in a more intentional way?

And I think people are thirsty for that type of prioritization, where they truly believe that every community is seen, every community is heard, and every community is empowered, not through a one-size-fits-all approach, 'cause that wouldn't make sense.

That means you have to be on the ground, you gotta do the work, and you have to understand what's unique about every community - You know, for me, some issues get more attention on this show and in my life, because I find them more personal to me.

Two of them, mental health, criminal justice, I like to focus on those quite a bit.

As you're traveling the state, I assume certain issues are on your mind as well.

What stands out to you?

- Well, the biggest thing that stands out to me, especially because a lot of the work that I'm doing is through the lens of the Hate and Bias Prevention Unit.

If I had to cut out two narratives that I've been sort of really using as platforms to get around the state, one would be through my work as chair of the Hate and Bias Prevention Unit.

And the other is, I've been traveling with the Division of Criminal Justice Services as they do their 15-city tour, working with community partners to better understand some of the social determinants of health and wellbeing, and crime, and what are those aspects that we need to be wrestling with to prevent those dynamics.

So those are the two spaces, along with being the chair of the REDCs, right.

And so, whether it's an economic lens, or whether it's a enrichment lens, where we're empowering communities from the ground up, that has been the entry point.

So you might imagine that my conversations are really being informed by advocates on the ground who are dedicated to this work, who are working to provide services to communities, whether it's in the housing space, whether it's in the healthcare space, in the educational space, in the economic space.

These are all lanes that I have been able to engage with and get a better understanding, and try to figure out how folks on the ground are doing the work, and are they being supported in a way that can truly maximize the value that they bring to bear.

- Now let's talk about the Hate and Bias Prevention Unit.

This is a unit within the Division of Human Rights.

You're leading it.

There are also regional groups, I guess, I don't know what they're called.

- Councils.

- Councils.

Can you, it might seem obvious, but what's the work intended to do of those councils?

- So a lot of the work around hate and bias up to this point, I think, has typically been about reacting.

There's a horrible incident or tragedy that occurs, and the community rallies around it and figures out a way to sort of react to that, whether it's in the criminal side, or whether it's just in the healing side from the victim standpoint.

And we want to be more intentional, more forward-leaning, more proactive in, how do we create an atmosphere that is more collective and rooted in compassion, and understanding, and tolerance.

And that means identifying partners on the ground, across the state, on a regional basis, that are dedicated to coming together, consistently, to think about how to engage their community in any number of endeavors.

It could be as simple as creating spaces for constructive dialogue.

It could also be more concrete, formal events that bring together opportunities to work through challenging issues, or just to come together in fellowship and build a sense of community.

I think we all know that we're living in very divisive times, where hate is being normalized.

And I think it's incumbent upon us to normalize love again, to uplift love again, and to make sure that we understand how powerful love actually is.

No one's born to hate.

That is a learned behavior.

It is taught, as Nelson Mandela once said, you know, love is natural, we're born loving.

And I think it's incumbent upon us to do the work on the ground to bring that together.

So this is a statewide effort.

I can't tell you how humbled I am to be the chair of these councils.

There are 10 councils all across the state.

We've met now with 8 of the 10, I think we still have to do the North Country in western New York.

Those are our two last regions.

But by the end of, hopefully the next couple of weeks, we'll have a month or so, we'll have introduced and met with all 10 councils.

And then each of those councils will, in their own way, begin to engage with their communities.

- This is something that is so difficult for me to even think about, because I feel like it's something that we shouldn't need.

You know, as you were saying, we shouldn't need people to come up with plans to prevent bias, and hate, and things like that.

We are living in such divisive times.

You're going around to all of these councils and talking to a lot of people.

I'm wondering, do you see any common trends among either the hate and bias in their areas, or how they're responding?

- Well, I wanna say, to the point about something that we shouldn't need.

I can understand why, intuitively, you might think that.

But when you think about the way we are sharing information or not, you think about the echo chambers of misinformation and manipulation, and the rabbit holes that people can fall down now, so easily, in ways that they might not have been decades ago.

You think about how conspiracy theories, now, that were once really on the margins, way, way out, now, can catch fire on the internet and become normalized in a heartbeat.

And we have folks out there who'd rather demagogue, and who'd rather be divisive in their rhetoric in order to, sort of, assume power for themselves as a result.

So this is the challenge that we face.

But to answer your question, the thread is that I think people, despite all those challenges, right, despite those structural realities, I think people are thirsty for authenticity and genuineness, and being able to disagree, but agreeably.

More often than not, people want to feel okay saying what they mean, and knowing that they won't be judged, because they want to come from the right place.

But we have to create those environments.

We have to create opportunities for folks to make mistakes, to maybe say the wrong thing, but in the name of getting to a better outcome, right.

And I think the more we can create that kind of environment, the less people will run to their corners, or clam up, or dig their heels in, or be rigid in their points of view.

It's incumbent for all of us, no matter what side of the political spectrum you come from, that we go into the conversation with an open mind.

And instead of with arms closed, arms extended.

I think that that has to be the work that we do moving forward.

Because otherwise, all these other issues that are very, very complicated, are gonna be challenging to solve.

- I used to think, honestly, I used to think that journalism was the answer to this problem, that people like me could kind of dissect the disinformation and prove it wrong, and take it apart.

But your point about echo chambers is so true.

I mean, somebody can create a Facebook group and invite a hundred people, and just share in that, and convince these 100 people about a conspiracy theory that has no weight to it.

It's really tough to think about as a journalist, and as somebody who wants to do something about this.

As you're going around to these councils, I don't know what the timeline looks like.

This is something, obviously, that isn't an easy answer, but when do you think that we see something from those councils that could be some kind of tangible change?

- That's a great question.

It's a question that we pose to every single council.

You know, there's different ways you can measure success, you know, and sometimes it's counterintuitive.

For example, if we end up getting more outreach in certain communities where people are experiencing hate, and they are sharing that they've encountered something, you could argue that, well, that's not a good indication that we're actually having success.

But on the contrary, it could mean that the environment now is such that more people feel comfortable sharing, you know, what they feel.

So we could actually see stats that, on the surface, might look counterintuitive, or counter to the objectives.

But actually when you really analyze them, it just means that we're actually getting the conversations going, and that people are willing to have these discussions and make themselves vulnerable in the first place.

So I give that as an example to say it's hard, you know, it's not an easy way, initially, to figure that out.

And I charge the councils to do the work, with, of course, our assistants, to figure out what are some of those concrete things they can do, tangible things they can measure over the course of the next year.

I think first and foremost, as you might appreciate right now, just getting these councils together, and having them communicate, and figure out ways to engage each other was the initial start.

And then, you know, over the next several months we'll be figuring out, within each council, what are those tangible, concrete things that we can measure six months out from now.

- You know, I don't know how involved you are in the budgeting process, but do you think this kind of work would inform the kind of budgeting that the state does in the future for nonprofit groups that maybe offer some services to combat hate and things like that?

- Everything that I try to do, whether it's in the hate and bias prevention unit, or whether it's visiting distressed communities to better understand the dynamics on those grounds, is with an eye towards how we at the state level can better allocate our resources to empower communities in a more thoughtful, in more equitable way.

It's that simple.

And so, ultimately, we have to do all we can at the state level to be as informed as we can.

And that means be informed not, by just the folks who are very equipped to inform, but to be informed by everybody across the state, whether or not they have the capacity to share or not.

It is incumbent upon us to go there, to be present, to be seen, to be heard, and to listen to every community to better understand.

And I firmly believe that the better sense we have of that across the state, and the more we intentionally invest in these communities in meaningful ways, everybody benefits.

The economy grows, all around, in a holistic way.

And so it's a win for everybody.

- A rising tide lifts all ships, as one might say.

- Exactly.

- Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado, thank you so much for having this conversation.

- Thank you.

Appreciate it.

- And we'll check back in with Delgado sometime soon.

But staying, now, in state government, and specifically the state legislature, if you watch the show, you already know how our government works.

But what you might not know is how the state legislature operates when they're on a tight deadline.

It's not uncommon for big, controversial bills, like the state budget, to be passed in the middle of the night, like 2 or 3:00 AM.

And a procedural rule to speed up the legislative process in an emergency, called a message of necessity, is often used casually, without a clear reason.

For some, those are ways to make the legislative process more efficient.

But others say it reduces transparency in state government.

That includes State Senator Jim Tedisco, who sponsors a bill aimed at that.

We spoke earlier this year about the bill, and how it could change things at the State Capitol.

Senator Tedisco, thank you so much for being here, I appreciate it.

- My pleasure, it's good to get out of the rain a little bit here.

- (chuckles) I Know.

We're looking forward to some drier days here.

- I'm praying for some sun and a little bit less humidity.

Hopefully we'll get there.

- Yeah, I hope so.

So this bill is actually a pretty simple bill, but the interesting thing about this bill that we're talking about, is, I think, what's inside of the bill, and the intent of the bill, are things that the public has no idea about, because the bill is kind of targeted towards things that the public doesn't know anything about.

I want to go over the first part first, which is something called messages of necessity.

These are used when a bill is introduced, and usually a bill would have to age three days in the legislature.

The governor can issue a message of necessity that just bypasses that at all.

So somebody could introduce a bill, and 10 minutes later you could vote on it and pass it.

What this bill would do, would require lawmakers to have two-thirds of a majority in each chamber to accept that message of necessity and move forward with a bill.

So talk to me about that.

Why do you think that that is the right way to go?

Why should it be two-thirds of people, and not just kind of an automatic thing from the governor?

- Well, the bill itself is called the New York State Budget Transparency Act.

And you know, we're not only public servants, and senators, and assemblypeople, we're representatives.

And the real purpose of it is transparency.

You know, someone once said that in darkness, democracy dies, had a little bit to do with the Watergate issue.

And that's a fact, and that's a truism.

But in this case, you're right.

The Constitution and our founders were very smart.

They said, if you're a representative, you've gotta have a bill on your desk, and you've gotta be able to read it in at least three days, give us the opportunity to read it.

But they also said, you may need a message of necessity.

Now what is a necessity?

It's an emergency.

99% of the time they never use it as an emergency.

They use it as a message of convenience, not to have to answer to ourselves, who are the representatives, which should interact with the public so we can get their input, and the media, like yourself, and others, who can report on it, and tell us what direction it's going, and what we should debate, and the questions we should ask.

So my bill tries to take care of those two areas, and really provide a representative democracy approach where people, not senators, assemblypeople, and governors are the most important part of this government.

- Now, you've been in the legislature for about 40 years now.

First in the assembly for a long time, now you're in the State Senate.

How have you seen this evolve over time?

Has it always been this way since you've been here?

That they've used messages of necessity pretty liberally?

- I just passed a bill, VIP, Veteran's Internship Program.

It took me 10 years to get that bill to the floor, and I finally passed it this year.

Believe it or not, I've had this bill for 12 years, okay.

And for 12 years, in many cases, both sides of the aisle have used messages of necessity.

Democrats would blame Republicans for late budgets, Republicans would blame Democrats.

But in this case, now, truly, there's only one group to blame, 'cause there's only one voice from one political affiliation, from one region of the state.

Super majority in the Senate, super majority in the Assembly.

And a Democratic governor, who's maybe a little bit more moderate, but still very progressive, 'cause they're turning her in that direction.

So this has been an old chestnut.

But, this year, I think we made some headway, because the other part of this whole thing, when I said in darkness, democracy dies, besides this message of necessity, where they give us an hour and a half and say, "Here's a 200-page budget document."

And by the way, it's not only for the budget bills themselves, it's for extenders.

They know three, four days in advance.

They know a week in advance.

they won't give it to us for an hour and a half before so we can read it.

You only use message of necessity when it is a necessity.

'Cause it's supposed to be for an emergency, like a terrorist attack, a financial disaster, an impending storm, maybe a pandemic.

You might want to have used it back when the pandemic was taking place.

But not for the convenience of not having to answer questions.

So yeah, it's been a long haul.

We've talked about it a lot in the past, but this year we put so much pressure on them, they did most of the work between 8:00 AM and 12.

But they still use that message of necessity, really as a message of convenience.

And that's a slap in the face to our constituents, and to all the rank and file members, as well as ourselves.

Of course, when I say rank and file, the majorities have the bill way in advance of us.

We're the ones who have to catch up.

And that's an affront, I think, to the people who I said are most important in this representative democracy, and those are the constituents, the voters, and the people we represent, the taxpayers.

- Right, the majorities, as you mentioned, have a kind of ongoing conversation within their conferences about how the legislation is developing.

But by the time that they get to it and have a deal, they kind of have an understanding of where it's headed, or maybe what's gonna be in it.

The minorities don't get anything unless they're leaked something by another member, or the media uncovers it.

That being said, this is such a common practice in Albany to, as you said, I think, intentionally, a lot of the time, to shadow what's happening at the Capitol.

The majorities are so entrenched in this.

I think on when Republicans were in the majority, as you said, they used this, too.

Democrats did, too.

This bill, I should mention, importantly, is a bipartisan bill.

It's not being just led by one party.

How do you convince everybody else who's so used to this system to come over to your side, and see that you could work in a different way to benefit constituents?

- Well, as I said, the most important, but also the most powerful individuals in this representative democracy are not senators, assemblymen, or governors.

They're the public.

Because I'm in the minority, my colleagues in the assembly are in the minority, all three parts of government are controlled by one body.

And by the way, first time in 40 years that's the case that they've controlled this.

And they really have proven, Dan, they can't do a budget (chuckles) in a timely fashion, 'cause it was, the latest budget in the last 10 years, 30 days late.

So I think we have to do our best to harness the public and say, you have to put the pressure on them to help us get the message that you want some transparency.

You want your elected officials not only to be senators, not only to be public servants and the assemblypeople, you want them to be representatives.

And a representative can only do that if they can tell them what's happening at the Capitol, and get their input, and find the direction they want their state to be taken in.

That's not happening right now.

- So the second part of the bill would deal with when you work, as you mentioned before, you wanna work, or should work, from 8:00 AM to 12:00 AM, to midnight.

This bill would say that the legislature can't pass a bill between midnight and 8:00 AM, unless, again, there's a two-thirds majority of members who want to do that when there is an actual emergency at 3:00 AM.

The timing element is interesting to me.

Why just 12:00 AM to 8:00 AM?

Why not go, even from, you have to pass bills from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM?

- Well, we wanted to give a reasonable amount of time, because we don't want to rush the debate.

That's another part of transparency.

But because they'd love to limit the debate on some issues that are controversial, that's a part of this whole thing.

And that two-thirds vote is giving them a way to really have a message of necessity.

If we said you couldn't do a two-thirds vote to override the message of necessity when it really is a terrorist attack or something like that, that would kind of be problematic.

Sometimes there are real issues, very rarely I think, but on occasion, like we talked about the pandemic.

But I think you need that debatable time.

And sometimes we'll go, we each get two hours of debate.

So if my 21 members took two hours, of course, that would go way past the 8:00 AM to 12.

So I think it's reasonable to do that.

And we want to give a reasonable proposal, especially when we know they have a super majority, and we'd have to bring them kicking and screaming.

And I think Hochul brought them kicking and screaming to make some type of reforms with the cash bail thing.

But she didn't go to the place where, I think, makes it plausible to have safety, like 49 other states have, to put in place the judge having discretion to consider danger to a certain extent.

But yeah, I think 8:00 AM to 12 is reasonable.

It'll allow us to debate, but it won't be in the middle of the night.

The media can follow through and get a report the next day, or the day after, and we can get back to the public, our constituents, which, as I said, they're the most part important part of this representative democracy.

- You know, the system in place right now is really designed in ways, as we've mentioned, to not be very transparent, to sometimes slip things kind of under the cover of darkness, if you will.

It's a strategy that I've never quite understood, because as a reporter having to watch a debate at 2:00 AM, I'm really not getting the information that's there unless I've had eight hours of sleep beforehand.

So for us as journalists, too, it's tough to kind of have to tune in at 2 or 3:00 AM and decipher what you guys are talking about, because it might be a part of the budget that I know nothing about.

- You know nothing about.

- And here's something I just thought about, and I've said it before.

They like the media, my colleagues, both sides of the aisle.

That's the way we get our messages across, and during an election period, that's how we get elected.

We have press conferences, we tell 'em what we're supporting, what we've worked on, what we've done.

So I say to my colleagues, here's the argument I make.

If it's so good to do a budget bill, the most important thing we do, 2, or 3, or 4:00 AM in the morning, on the floor when the TV camera has us on TV, why don't you hold your press conferences 2 or 3 or 4:00 AM, in the middle of the night?

You know why?

'Cause the media won't be there.

The press conference won't take place when you want to talk about something positive you're putting forward, or a bill you want support for, or an honor you've received, or something like that.

You don't do it 3 or 4:00 in the middle of the night.

You do it at 10:00 AM in the morning when the media, 10 30, when they're ready to report the full extent of the day.

So that's an indication that they want some confidentiality about some of the issues that they feel a little bit uncomfortable about, but they wanna still support and get in place.

So I asked them, you know, if you wanna do it at 4:00 AM in the morning, you should do your press conferences at the time.

But nobody does that right now, Dan, you know that.

- I do quite know that.

(laughing) So this would be an amendment to the State Constitution.

Meaning the legislature would have to pass it either this year if you come back, or next year, and then you would have to pass it again after the next election of the legislature, and then it would go to voters on the ballot.

We've had a in-depth conversation about this, but if I was a voter watching this, give me your 30-second elevator pitch.

- Well, I would just tell them, you are the most important part of our representative democracy.

I know you have a busy life, and this is a problem with that.

And when you have a lack of transparency, they don't sometimes even know, this is a process that is not working.

The working process they use is not working, 'cause I think every extender for a late budget, every budget bill itself this year, was voted upon with a message of necessity.

There was no reason for that, to rush it through, to not inform the public.

So if you want representative democracy, call your governor, call your elected official, and tell my colleagues across the state, all sides, south, west, east, north, tell their elected officials and their constituents, relatives, friends, pass this bill so you have more transparency, so we involve more fully the most important part of this representative democracy, and that's the taxpayers and the voters.

So that's the best we can do right now, because we do have that lack of transparency, and that's a key part of representative democracy.

- Senator Jim Tedisco, thank you so much.

- Thanks for having me, Dan.

An important issue, I appreciate you taking it up.

- Of course.

And we'll let you know if that bill gains support.

There is talk of the legislature coming back to Albany before the end of the year to focus on specific issues, like the state's migrant crisis.

But the next legislative session will begin in January.

In the meantime, we've got more content from the State Capitol and across the state on our website.

That's also where you can find us on social media.

All that and more is at nynow.org.

Thanks for watching this week's "New York Now."

Have a great week and be well.

(intense music) (intense music continues) - Funding for "New York Now" is provided by WNET.

(tone whirring) (objects banging)