[ THEME MUSIC ] ON THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF "NEW YORK NOW" WE UNPACK THE HISTORY AND IMPACT OF A NEW LAW THAT EXPANDS THE DEFINITION OF RAPE IN NEW YORK STATE.

THEN, WE SPEAK WITH ASSEMBLY MEMBER JESSICA GONZALEZ-ROJAS ABOUT HER BILL THAT WOULD GRANT CONTINUAL COVERAGE TO CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF SIX ENROLLED IN MEDICAID.

I'M SHANTEL DESTRA AND THIS IS NEW YORK NOW.

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

I'M SHANTEL DESTRA.

IT WAS A"LONG ROAD TO GET THE RAPE IS RAPE ACT OVER THE LEGISLATIVE FINISH LINE, BUT THINGS CHANGED THIS WEEK WHEN GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL SIGNED THE LEGISLATION THAT UPDATES THE STATE'S DEFINITION OF RAPE TO INCLUDE FORCED SEXUAL CONTACT THAT IS NOT PENTRATION.

WE'RE REASSURING SURVIVORS THAT IS WHEN THEY WALK INTO A POLICE STATION OR APPROACH THE WITNESS STAND, THE FULL WEIGHT OF THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK IS BEHIND THEM.

IT'S BEHIND THEM NOW GOING FORWARD.

PRIOR TO THE LAW, NEW YORK DEFINED RAPE SOLELY AS FORCED VAGINAL INTERCOURSE.

NOW THE STATE WILL RECOGNIZE OTHER FORMS OF FORCED INTERCOURSE INCLUDING ORAL AND ANAL FORCED CONTACT AS RAPE.

AFTER WORKING TO GET THE BILL PASSED FOR YEARS, THE BILL'S SPONSORS STATE SENATOR BRAD HOLYMANSIGAL AND ASSEMBLY MEMBER CATALINA CRUZ CELEBRATED THE SIGNING ALONG WITH THE GOVERNOR FORCED SEXUAL CONTACT AGAINST YOUR WILL, WHETHER IT INVOLVES VAGINA, ANUS, OR MOUTH IS AN ABSOLUTE VIOLATION OF SELF AND YOUR TRUST, AND IT'S CALLING ANYTHING -- CALLING IT ANYTHING OTHER THAN RAPE NEGATES WHAT WE AS SURVIVORS HAVE ENDURED.

THIS INSUFFICIENT AND DISCRIMINATORY NARRATIVE NARRATIVE ALSO LEAVES OUT VICTIMS OF MALE OR MALE, FEMALE AND FEMALE ATTACKS, OFTEN RESULTING IN FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THE RAPES COMMITTED UPON MEMBERS OF OUR LGBT COMMUNITY.

BUT TODAY, RAPE IS RAPE BECOMES LAW, AND IT IS MORE THAN JUST A SIMPLE CHANGE IN WORDS.

IT'S A SYSTEMATIC SHIFT IN HOW WE THINK ABOUT WHO IS A RAPE VICTIM AND WHO IS A RAPIST.

WHILE THE LAW HE WAS FIRST INTRODUCED IN 2011 AND FOR YEARS PASSED IN THE ASSEMBLY, IT STRUGGLED IN THE STATE SENATE WITH SENATOR HOYLMANSILGAL UNDERSCORED IN HIS REMARKS.

AT TIMES IT SEEMED LIKE THE SENATE WOULDN'T TAKE YES FOR AN ANSWER, BUT WE GOT THERE TODAY.

AND THE SENATOR WENT ON TO EXPLAIN HOW THE EXPANDED DEFINITION OF RAPE IN THE STATE WILL WILL EMPOWER MALE VICTIMS AND MEMBERS OF THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY TO COME FORWARD AND REPORT FORCED SEXUAL CONTACT.

HERE TO DISCUSS THE NEWLY-PASSED RAPE IS RAPE LAW, WE'RE JOINED IN STUDIO BY MAYSOON KHAN OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS AND ASHLEY HUPFL OF THE DAILY GAZETTE.

THE JURY DID NOT FIND HER ATTACKER GUILTY OF RAPE, BUT HE DID FIND -- THEY DID FIND HIM GUILTY OF SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND SINCE THEN LYDIA CUOMO HAS BEEN ADAMANT THAT WE NEED TO UPDATE THE STATE'S LAW AND EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF RAPE.

IT'S BEEN 12 YEARS SINCE THAT ALL TOOK PLACE, SO WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG FOR THIS TO COME TO FRUITION?

WELL, I THINK PART OF THE REASON IS THAT WE DID HAVE A REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED SENATE UP UNTIL, I BELIEVE, A FEW YEARS AGO.

THERE WAS REALLY NOT MUCH APPETITE FOR THE BILL TO PASS.

THE ASSEMBLY DID PASS IT EACH YEAR, BUT IT DIDN'T REALLY GO ANY FURTHER.

I THINK WITH HAVING THE FIRST FEMALE GOVERNOR REALLY -- SHE'S TALKED A LOT ABOUT THAT, CHALLENGES AROUND THAT THAT SHE'S BROUGHT WOMEN'S ISSUES INTO THE FOREFRONT THAT I THINK THAT REALLY GOT IT OVER THE HILL.

AS YOU SAID, IT PASSED TIME AND TIME AGAIN IN THE ASSEMBLY, BUT THERE WAS SOME HURDLES IN THE STATE SENATE.

WHAT WERE SOME OF THE BILL'S HURDLES THAT PREVENTED IT FROM GETTING OVER THE FINISH LINE?

I THINK THERE'S BEEN A SERIES OF CULTURAL SHIFTS IN THE WAY WE VIEW RAPE.

I THINK THAT WAS DEFINITELY A COMPONENT AND JUST MORE POLITICAL WILL TO HAVE THIS GETTING OVER THE FINISH LINE AS OPPOSE TO DO BEFORE.

I THINK ONE OF THE LAWMAKERS SAID THERE WAS AN ARCHAIC VIEW ON HOW WE VIEW THE SUBJECT OR TALK ABOUT THE SUBJECT.

I THINK THAT DEFINITELY HAS BEEN A HUGE COMPONENT IN GETTING IT OVER THE FINISH LINE.

I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE, HAVING THE FIRST FEMALE GOVERNOR, I THINK THAT DEFINITELY HELPS.

ESPECIALLY WITH PAST REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP.

I THINK THINGS ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT NOW COMPARED TO THE PAST.

DEFINITELY.

IN THE GOVERNOR'S REMARKS SHE BROUGHT UP E. JEAN CARROLL'S CASE, WHICH THE WRITER ACCUSED FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP OF RAPE.

THE FORMER PRESIDENT WAS NOT CONVICTED OF RAPE, AND THE JUDGE IN THAT SPECIFIC CASE CITED THE STATE'S NARROW AND TECHNICAL DEFINITION OF RAPE AS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE JURY DID NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RAPE CHARGE.

IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DEFINITELY PROSECUTORS WERE AWARE OF, BUT THE STATE HAD A VERY NARROW VIEW OF RAPE, AND IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME.

FROM A LEGALITY STANDPOINT, HOW WILL THIS HELP SURVIVORS AND PROSECUTORS MOVE FORWARD WITH RAPE CHARGES?

WELL, AS YOU SAID, IT BROADENS THE DEFINITION.

PREVIOUSLY THE DEFINITION OF RAPE WAS VAGINAL PENETRATION.

NOW IT'S BROADER TO ANAL AND ORAL PENETRATION.

IT OPENS THE DOOR FOR US TO DISCUSS RAPE WHEN IT COMES TO LGBTQ COMMUNITY AND REALLY A LOT OF -- AS YOU SAID, IN THE CASE OF LYDIA CUOMO, THEY COULDN'T PROVE THERE WAS VAGINAL PENETRATION, SO HE WAS CONVICTED OF SEXUAL ASSAULT.

I THINK WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT MORE THE IDEA THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE JUST A VAGINAL -- LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S A VERY NARROW DEFINITION.

YEAH.

IT REALLY OPENS THE DOOR FOR A LOT MORE CLAIMS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

ALSO, IT JUST KIND OF INSURES INCLUSIVITY, AND IT INCLUDES ALL FORMS OF NONCONSENSUAL SEX.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE VAGINAL PENETRATION BY A PENIS.

I HOPE HOCHUL SAID THIS EARLIER IN THE WEEK.

IT WILL BE EASIER FOR VICTIMS TO HOLD PERPETRATORS ACCOUNTABLE IN THE COURT OF LAW BECAUSE OF THIS EXPANDED LEGAL DEFINITION.

WHAT WAS INTERESTING TO ME WAS THAT NEW YORK DEFINITELY ISN'T A LEADER IN THIS.

IN FACT, THERE ARE SEVERAL STATES WHO HAVE ALREADY EXPANDED THE DEFINITION OF RAPE TO INCLUDE THESE OTHER FORMS OF FORCED SEXUAL CONTACT.

WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT THE STATE THAT NEW YORK TOOK SO LONG TO KIND OF BRING THIS OVER THE FINISH LINE?

I MEAN, I TALKED TO A FEW PEOPLE ABOUT THIS, AND I WAS VERY SURPRISED THAT THEY DID NOT KNOW THIS.

THEY WERE SURPRISED THAT IT'S JUST THE LEGAL DEFINITION.

I THINK, AGAIN, SOME OF THE ASPECTS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY, THE FIRST FEMALE GOVERNOR AND REALLY BRINGING THESE ISSUES UP INTO THE FOREFRONT, IT JUST HADN'T BEEN TALKED ABOUT I THINK MUCH OR PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW.

AS YOU SAID, PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW.

NOW THIS IS A HUGE CHANGE AND EXPANSION OF THE DEFINITION.

WHAT CAN LAWMAKERS AND PROSECUTORS DO TO INSURE THAT PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF THIS BIG CHANGE?

I DEFINITELY THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN.

I KNOW A LOT OF LAWMAKERS AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE REALLY CARRIED THIS BILL.

THEY HAD THEIR WHOLE PRESS CONFERENCE EARLIER IN THE WEEK.

I THINK THEY MIGHT HAVE PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS.

THAT'S JUST A GUESS.

JUST TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC.

I KNOW, AS YOU SAID, PROSECUTORS, DAs, EVERYONE IS AWARE THAT THERE NEEDED TO BE A CHANGE.

EVEN THE JUDGE IN THE TRUMP CASE ACKNOWLEDGED IT.

I THINK MAYBE AS TIME GOES WE'LL SEE HOW THAT UNFOLDS.

I THINK THE TRUMP TRIAL ALSO HAS DONE A LOT OF PUBLIC AWARENESS WITHIN ITSELF.

I MEAN, THE WHOLE NATION WAS WATCHING.

I THINK MAYBE NOT JUST -- I THINK THE WAY WE TALK ABOUT RAPE AND IT BEING MORE OF A PUBLIC ISSUE JUST WITHIN ITSELF, THE ISSUE OF RAPE ALONE I THINK WILL HELP THE CONVERSATION.

GOING BACK TO THE WAYS IN WHICH THIS BILL -- OR THIS LAW WILL HELP THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY AND HIS REMARKS, SENATOR BRAD HOYLMAN-SIGAL UNDERSCORED THIS POINT.

HE JUST SAID THE STUDIES OF HOW MANY TRANSGENDER PEOPLE ARE EXPERIENCING RAPE AND ARE FEARFUL TO COME FORWARD BECAUSE OF THE CHALLENGES.

WHAT ARE SOME OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HELP THIS COMMUNITY REPORT RAPE AND SEXUAL MISCONDUCT?

WELL, I THINK THE SENATOR SPOKE ABOUT HOW THE PREVIOUS DEFINITION, THE OLD DEFINITION WAS SUPER HETERO-NORMATIVE.

I THINK THE PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN IS NECESSARY JUST TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE ARE VARIOUS FORMS OF NONCONSENSUAL SEX THAT MAY RESULT IN THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I DEFINITELY THINK JUST PUBLIC AWARENESS.

THEN EVEN JUST THE SIMPLE CHANGE.

I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE VICTIMS FINALLY WILL HAVE A MEANS TO COME FORWARD WITH THEIR CASE IF THEY CHOOSE TO.

I THINK A MAJOR COMPONENT IS EDUCATION.

I MEAN, TO TALK TO PEOPLE THAT NO MEANS NO AND REALLY THE MORE -- YEAH, I GUESS EDUCATION TO EVERYONE, ALL ACROSS THE BOARD.

I WANT TO GET BOTH OF YOUR PERSPECTIVE'S ON THE RED ROOM SIGNING OF THE BILL.

I WOULD SAY A LOT OF THE SIGNINGS OF BILLS ARE VERY INFORMATIVE.

THEY ARE JUST VERY CELEBRATORY.

THIS ONE DEFINITELY FELT VERY HEAVY.

A LOT OF THE REMARKS FROM THE SENATE SPONSOR, IT WAS VERY EMOTIONAL, VERY FILLED WITH A LOT OF PASSION.

DID YOU GUYS FEEL THAT AS WELL?

ABSOLUTELY.

I SAW WOMEN CRYING.

IT SEEMED LIKE THIS WAS JUST SOMETHING THAT SOME PEOPLE, LYDIA CUOMO HAD BEEN WORKING FOR FOR SO LONG.

I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT THAT WOULD BE LIKE.

YOU ALSO FELT A HEAVINESS IN THE ROOM.

JUST I THINK IT WAS AN EMOTIONAL MOMENT FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IN JUST PASSING THIS AS WELL.

YEAH.

AND THEN BEFORE THE BILL WAS SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR, THE LEGISLATURE DID PASS A REVISED VERSION WITH CHAPTER AMENDMENTS, AND USUALLY WE DON'T SEE THAT.

USUALLY WE'LL SEE THE GOVERNOR WILL PASS A BILL WITH CHAPTER AMENDMENTS WITH THESE SPECIFIC CHANGES.

THE BILL CAN THEN MOVE FORWARD AND BECOME LAW.

WHAT WAS THE POLITICAL STRATEGY OF THE LEGISLATURE DOING THAT?

HOCHUL WAS ASKED ABOUT THAT.

I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY SOME TRUTH TO THE FACT THAT TO MAKE THAT KIND OF SHIFT IN PENAL CODE IS THAT THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A LOT OF WORK BEHIND THE SCENES TO DO THAT ACROSS THE BOARD.

I'M SURE, LIKE EVERY BILL, THERE WAS DETAILS THAT WENT BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE ASSEMBLY, SENATE, AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE.

WE'RE NOT -- I DON'T THINK -- WE DON'T KNOW THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WENT ON, BUT I DO THINK THERE'S A LOT OF TRUTH TO THE FACT THAT THEY PROBABLY HAD TO DO A LOT OF OVERALL CHANGE IN THE LANGUAGE AROUND THIS ISSUE.

REALLY QUICKLY, BECAUSE WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

NOW THAT THE BILL IS FINALLY INTO LAW, WHAT ARE SOME WAYS THAT THE LAWMAKERS CAN CONTINUE TO HELP SURVIVORS IN THE YEARS TO COME?

I THINK WHENEVER A LAW IS PASSED, YOU KIND OF SEE IT ROLL OUT EFFECTIVELY, AND THAT'S WHEN AMENDMENTS COME IN.

I DEFINITELY THINK THAT TIME WILL TELL.

I THINK THE LAW TAKES EFFECT SEPTEMBER 1st.

SO WE STILL HAVE A WAYS TO GO.

I'M SURE IF ANY ADVOCATES RAISE ISSUES WITH CERTAIN PARTS, THEY MIGHT MAKE CHANGES.

YEAH, I AGREE.

THERE'S ALWAYS A ROCKY ROLL-OUT TO ANYTHING.

I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATION AROUND -- WE'VE SEEN CHANGES TO THE SEX OFFENDER LIST.

I THINK REALLY, LIKE SHE SAID, TIME WILL TELL.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'LL HAVE TO LEAVE IT HERE FOR NOW.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR JOINING US TODAY.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.

WE WERE SPEAKING WITH MAYSOON KHAN OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS AND ASHLEY HUPFL OF THE DAILY GAZETTE.

IN THE MIDST OF GETTING BILLS PASSED AND SIGNED BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS ARE UNDERWAY.

THE LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN HOLDING PUBLIC HEARINGS TO EXAMINE THE GOVERNOR'S FISCAL YEAR '25 EXECUTIVE BUDGET PROPOSAL ON TOPICS RANGING FROM TRANSPORTATION TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATION.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE TO GIVE THEIR PERSPECTIVE AND QUESTION THE GOVERNOR'S APPROACH TO THE BUDGET AND RECEIVE PUBLIC INPUT.

AT THE PUBLIC HEALTH HEARING A BIG PART OF THE CONVERSATION DEALT WITH MEDICAID SPENDING.

NEW YORK SPENDS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS PER YEAR ON MEDICAID AND THAT FIGURE WAS ONLY EXASPERATED BY THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

WHILE UNVEILING HER EXECUTIVE BUDGET, GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL SAID THE STATE NEEDED TO FIND WAYS TO SAVE IN MEDICAID SPENDING, AND THE STATE'S HEALTH COMMISSIONER JAMES MCDONALD INVITED MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE TO HELP IN THOSE EFFORTS DURING HIS TESTIMONY.

I KNOW FINDING $200 MILLION IN SAVINGS IN LONG-TERM CARE IN MEDICAID IS GOING TO BE HARD.

I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING COLLABORATIVELY WITH YOU AND YOUR TEAM TO IDENTIFY THE BEST WAY TO ACHIEVE THESE SAVINGS.

BUT LAWMAKERS, INCLUDING SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE CHAIR GUSTAVO RIVERA, ARGUED THE STATE SHOULD NOT LOOK AT CUTTING MEDICAID, BUT INSTEAD LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS, LIKE TAPPING INTO FEDERAL AID FOR MIGRANTS, WHICH HE ARGUES, COULD FREE UP DOLLARS TO PREVENT CUTS.

SORRY.

NOT A GOOD ANSWER.

PARTICULARLY SINCE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LAST YEAR TOLD US EXPLICITLY WHEN WE ASKED THEM THEY SENT US A LETTER, I KNOW YOU GOT IT.

I GOT IT.

THAT SAYS EXPLICITLY THAT WE COULD DO THIS.

YET, Y'ALL ARE NOT DOING IT.

YET, YOU'RE COMING HERE TO US TO TELL US THAT WE'VE GOT TO MAKE THESE CUTS THAT ARE NOT REALLY CUTS, AND YOU HAVE $500 MILLION.

APART FROM MEDICAID, SOME LAWMAKERS ALSO FOCUSED EXTENDING CERTAIN PUBLIC HEALTH MEASURES THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE DURING THE PANDEMIC, BUT HAVE NOW EXPIRED.

ONE SUCH MEASURE ALLOWED FOR CHILDREN ENROLLED IN MEDICAID AND THE STATE'S CHILDREN HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN TO NOT HAVE TO REENROLL FOR COVERAGE.

ASSEMBLY MEMBER JESSICA GONZALEZ ROJAS, A QUEENS DEMOCRAT, SPONSORS A BILL THAT WOULD ESTABLISH CONTINUAL COVERAGE FOR CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF SIX.

WE SPOKE WITH THE ASSEMBLY MEMBER ABOUT THE IMPACT OF BILL AND THE CHANCES OF IT BEING INCLUDED IN THE FINAL STATE BUDGET.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

NOW, FROM YOUR PREVIEW, WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS PARTICULAR BILL AND HOW WILL IT IMPACT THE LIVES OF EVERY DAY NEW YORKERS?

COMING OUT OF THE COVID PANDEMIC WE SAW SO MUCH TRAGIC OUTCOMES.

THE POSITIVE OUTCOMES THAT DID COME FROM THE PANDEMIC IS SOME OF THE EMERGENCY MEASURES.

THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY ISSUED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND IT ALLOWED FOR CHILDREN WHO ARE ENROLLED IN CHIP, WHICH IS THE STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM, OR MEDICAID, TO BE CONTINUALLY REENROLLED WITHOUT HAVING TO RECERTIFY EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

THIS ALLOWED CONTINUITY OF CARE, AND IT ELIMINATED A LOT OF BURDENS ON FAMILIES THAT WERE STRUGGLING.

NOW, THAT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY ENDED IN MAY, AND WE HAD TO DO A LOT OF OUTREACH WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.

IN FACT, I GOT TO CO-AUTHOR AN OP-ED WITH THE COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH, AND WE PUSHED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTOOD THAT NOW YOU HAVE TO START RECERTIFYING AND REENROLLING.

WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT 400,000 PEOPLE WERE DROPPED FROM THE MEDICAID ROLLS, AND MANY OF THOSE HAVE BEEN CHILDREN.

OFTEN IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF ELIGIBILITY.

IT WASN'T LIKE THEIR FAMILIES WERE MAKING SO MUCH MORE MONEY THAT THEY WERE DISQUALIFIED.

IT WAS SIMPLY BECAUSE OF PAPERWORK.

SO WHAT MY BILL WOULD DO WITH THE SENATE IS ALLOW FOR CONTINUAL ELIGIBILITY FROM ZERO TO 6 YEARS OLD TO ELIMINATE THAT BURDEN, INSURE CHILDREN ARE HEALTHY, AND ACTUALLY SAVE THE MONEY -- SAVE THE STATE MONEY.

AND THE BILL FOCUSES ON CHILDREN AGE 0 TO 6, BUT IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY OR ANY ROOM TO EXTEND IT BEYOND THE AGE OF 6?

I KNOW THAT YOU MENTIONED THE 400,000 NEW YORKERS WHO WERE NOT ELIGIBLE BECAUSE OF ISSUES.

IS THERE ANY ROOM TO ADDRESS THAT ROOT CAUSE AS IT RELATES TO PAPERWORK?

WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO GET THIS PASSED IS IMPLEMENT SOMETHING CALLED 1115 WAIVER, WHICH IS A FEDERAL WAIVER THAT ALLOWS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF HEALTH CARE ACCESS AND REDUCING COSTS.

NOW, MANY STATES HAVE ALREADY IMPLEMENTED THIS WAIVER, SO WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO INSURE THAT WE'RE MODELING WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

OREGON AND WASHINGTON HAVE GOTTEN APPROVAL FOR THIS, AND MANY STATES ARE MOVING FORWARD AS WELL.

IT'S BEEN SORT OF A MODEL.

I CERTAINLY BELIEVE THAT HEALTH CARE IS A HUMAN RIGHT.

I'M FIGHTING FOR THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT, WHICH WILL PROVIDE UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, BUT UNTIL THEN, THIS IS A MODEL THAT WE'RE IMPLEMENTING TO INSURE THAT CHILDREN PRIOR TO MANY OF THEM GOING TO SCHOOL, THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO GET THAT CONTINUAL CARE OF HEALTH CARE.

RIGHT.

WILL THIS COST THE STATE ANYTHING, OR IS IT PARTICULARLY FOCUSED ON THE WAIVER THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD PICK UP THE COST?

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL PICK UP MUCH OF THE COST.

THE WIN WAS THAT THE GOVERNOR DID PUT IT IN HER EXECUTIVE BUDGET, WHICH IS REALLY EXCITING.

WE DID GET SOME COST ESTIMATES.

IT'S ABOUT $7.5 MILLION, BUT THAT IS A DROP IN THE BUCKET IN THE $200 BILLION-PLUS BUDGET FOR THE STATE.

THIS WILL CERTAINLY SAVE US MONEY BECAUSE IT REDUCES THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR WORKERS HERE IN NEW YORK AND INSURES, AGAIN, CONTINUITY OF CARE AND THEN OUR CHILDREN ARE HEALTHY.

I DID SEE, OF COURSE, THE GOVERNOR DID PUT IT IN HER EXECUTIVE BUDGET, LIKE YOU SAID.

THAT'S A WIN.

IT'S A BIG WIN.

WE WERE ADVOCATING, AGAIN, AS THE SENATOR AND I ARE BOTH MOTHERS.

WE CALLED ON OUR FIRST MOM GOVERNOR TO INCLUDE THIS IN HER BUDGET, WHICH IS REALLY EXCITING.

IT WAS ROLLED OUT RECENTLY, AND WE SEE THAT IT'S IN THERE.

WE WANT TO INSURE.

THERE'S BUN U ONE PIECE MISSING THAT ALLOWS FAMILIES TO MOVE FROM S-CHIP, THE STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH AND INSURANCE PROGRAM TO MEDICAID IF IT PROVIDES BETTER CARE FOR THEIR NEEDS.

THAT PROVISION ISN'T IN THERE, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S PRETTY MINOR PROVISION.

WE'LL CONTINUE TO ADD ROW INDICATE FOR THAT IN OUR ASSEMBLY ONE HOUSE AND SENATE ONE HOUSE.

WHAT ARE YOUR CONVERSATIONS LIKE WITH THE ASSEMBLY SPEAKER TO INCLUDE IT IN THE ONE HOUSE BUDGET AND POTENTIALLY BRING IT ON TO THE FLOOR?

WE'VE BEEN STARTING TO MEET AS A CONFERENCE.

THE SESSION JUST BEGAN ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO.

SO THIS CAME UP ACTUALLY YESTERDAY BECAUSE WE'RE REVIEWING THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET.

AGAIN, THERE'S POSITIVE FEEDBACK ON IT.

I BELIEVE THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO INCLUDE IT IN OUR ONE HOUSE AND, AGAIN, GET IT OVER THE FINISH LINE TO MAKE SURE IT'S IN THE FINAL ENACTED BUDGET.

THIS, OF COURSE, IS A VERY BUSY LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

THERE ARE SO MANY LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES.

WHAT IS THE STRATEGY TO INSURE THAT IT DOESN'T GET LOST IN THE POLITICS OF THIS SESSION?

IT IS AN ELECTION YEAR.

WHAT ARE YOU AND THE SENATOR GOING TO BE DOING TO CONTINUE TO GARNER SUPPORT AS THE SESSION PROGRESSES?

WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT RESTING ON OUR LAURELS.

AGAIN, IT'S A REALLY BIG WIN TO HAVE IT IN THE EXECUTIVE BUDGET, BUT WE'RE CONTINUING TO ADVOCATE FOR THIS.

WE'VE BROUGHT UP THE WHOLE COALITION OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS UP TO ALBANY LAST WEEK TO LAUNCH A PRESS CONFERENCE.

WE'RE HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS.

WE'RE MEETING WITH OUR FELLOW LEGISLATORS.

WE'RE REALLY CONTINUING TO PUSH TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T FALL OFF, AND AS, AGAIN, WE COME OUT OF THIS PANDEMIC AND STARTED TO SEE THE ELIMINATION OF MANY OF THE PROGRAMS, INCLUDING FOOD ACCESS PROGRAMS AND HEALTH ACCESS PROGRAMS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CAPTURING THOSE FAMILIES AND THOSE COMMUNITIES AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE HEALTHY IN NEW YORK BECAUSE, AGAIN, UNHEALTHY FAMILIES COST THE STATE MORE MONEY.

IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO DO SO.

AGAIN, AS SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES HEALTH IS A HUMAN RIGHT, IT IS OUR DUTY TO DO THAT.

WHAT HAVE YOU HEARD FROM YOUR CONSTITUENTS IN YOUR DISTRICT ABOUT THIS?

HOW ARE YOU SAYING IT WOULD HELP THEM?

YES.

CERTAINLY THE BURDEN OF COMPLETING PAPERWORK OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN HAS BEEN REALLY TOUGH.

AGAIN, MANY OF THE CHILDREN THAT HAVE BEEN DISENROLLED ARE NOT DISENROLLED BECAUSE THEY'RE INELIGIBLE.

IT'S SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE PAPERWORK BURDEN.

THIS WOULD RELIEVE SUCH A BURDEN ON SO MANY FAMILIES.

I REPRESENT A LARGE WORKING CLASS, IMMIGRANT-RICH COMMUNITY.

THIS, AGAIN, WILL BE VERY HELPFUL FOR THOSE THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN ENROLLED IN THE PROGRAM, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE TO GET OUT THE WORD AND MAKE SURE FOLKS WHO ARE NOT YET ENROLLED GET ENROLLED, AND THEN THEY'RE ABLE TO STAY ENROLLED THROUGH THE AGE OF 6.

THEN IF THEY CONTINUE TO BE ELIGIBLE, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO RE-ENROLL.

THIS, OF COURSE, STARTED BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC OR IN THE MIDST OF THE PANDEMIC, WHICH IS INTERESTING TO ME THAT IT WAS AN EMERGENCY MEASURE THAT WE ARE HOPING GETS EXTENDED.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER EMERGENCY MEASURES THAT YOU THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO EXTEND, JUST LIKE THIS BILL WOULD POTENTIALLY BE DOING AS WE MOVE INTO A POST-PANDEMIC WORLD?

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

THERE'S A LOT OF MEASURES AROUND FOOD SECURITY THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO FAMILIES DURING THE PANDEMIC.

WE'RE LOOKING AT SNAP AND MAKING SURE TO RAISE THE MINIMUM BENEFIT, AS I TALKED ABOUT HERE BEFORE.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SOME OF THE POSITIVE POLICY OUTCOMES FROM THE PANDEMIC DON'T GET LOST SIMPLY BECAUSE THE PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY IS OVER.

WE KNOW COVID IS STILL VERY REAL.

IN FACT, THE RATES ARE GOING UP.

I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF POSITIVE OUTCOMES IN TERMS OF THE POLICY MEASURES THAT CAME DURING THAT EMERGENCY, AND WE HAVE TO MAKE INVESTMENTS AS A STATE TO INSURE THAT OUR COMMUNITIES ARE HEALTHY AND HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO THRIVE.

HOCHUL HAS TALKED ABOUT A LIVABLE, SAFER, AFFORDABLE NEW YORK.

HEALTH IS SO CRITICAL TO THAT BEING ABLE TO LIVE AND THRIVE IN THIS STATE.

THESE ARE MEASURES THAT WE WANT TO CONTINUE AND ADVOCATE FOR AND MAKE INVESTMENTS ON.

A HUGE PORTION OF THIS BILL, AS YOU MENTIONED, IS FOCUSED ON A WAIVER THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD PICK UP.

JUST IN CASE THERE IS ANY PUSHBACK FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHAT ARE SOME CONTINGENCIES THAT WOULD PUT IN PLACE TO INSURE THAT WE ARE STILL HELPING CHILDREN FROM AGES 0 TO 6, BUT WE MAY NOT GET THE HELP FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

WHAT WILL YOU BE DOING TO INSURE THAT THEY GET THAT ASSISTANCE?

I ACTUALLY FEEL CONFIDENT THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL APPROVE THIS WAIVER.

WASHINGTON STATE AND OREGON ALREADY GOT APPROVAL.

AGAIN, THAT MODEL OF THE 0 TO 6 IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE SEEING SOME STATES IMPLEMENT AND START TO MOVE FORWARD.

THE WAIVER IS DESIGNED TO INSURE THAT WE HAVE CONTINUITY CARE AND WE'RE ADDRESSING HEALTH INEQUITIES AND SAVING THE STATE MONEY.

WE DO FEEL CONFIDENT IT'S ABOUT GETTING THAT LANGUAGE IN, GETTING THAT WAIVER SUBMITTED AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ACTUALIZING THE PROGRAM.

WE FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT.

AGAIN, IT'S A VERY SMALL COST TO THE STATE AND.

OF IT WOULD BE PICKED UP BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS A WIN-WIN FOR THE STATE AND THE COUNTRY.

WHAT IS AT RISK IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS DOESN'T MAKE IT OVER THE LEGISLATIVE FINISH LINE?

I KNOW YOU ARE GOING TO TRY YOUR BEST TO GET IT PASSED THIS SESSION.

IF IT DOESN'T MAKE IT THIS SESSION, OF COURSE, BRING IT BACK YEAR AFTER YEAR.

WHAT IS THAT RISK?

WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT?

WELL, THE IMPACT WOULD BE THE HEALTH OF OUR CHILDREN.

AS A MOM I KNOW THAT TENDER AGE BETWEEN 0 AND 6 YOU ARE CONSTANTLY GETTING CHECK-UPS AND CONSTANTLY GETTING VACCINES.

AS CHILDREN ENTER THE PRESCHOOL AND PRE-K, YOU ARE EXPOSED TO MORE GERMS.

IT'S REALLY CRITICAL THAT CHILDREN HAVE ACCESS TO THE FULL RANGE OF HEALTH CARE.

ESPECIALLY AT THE TENDER AGE.

THROUGHOUT THEIR WHOLE LIFE, OBVIOUSLY.

THOSE ARE THE AGES YOU HAVE TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE MEETING THE VACCINATION REQUESTS, THE NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS AND EVERYTHING THAT INSURES THAT THEY'RE HEALTHY.

THAT MEANS THE HEALTH OF THEIR COMMUNITIES TOO AND OUR COMMUNITIES.

SO IT WOULD BE TRAGIC, ACTUALLY, TO SEE THIS FALL OFF.

I DON'T BELIEVE IT WILL.

I BELIEVE WE'RE REALLY COMMITTED TO IT, AND WE'LL GET IT DONE.

IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING.

WELL, THERE'S A LOT HERE AND AS YOU UNDERSCORED, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BILL.

WE'LL HAVE TO CONTINUE TO CHECK IN WITH YOU AS THE SESSION PROGRESSES.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

WE WERE SPEAKING WITH ASSEMBLY MEASURE JESSICA GONZALEZ ROJAS.

FOR MORE INFORMATION AND UPDATES ON THE CONTINUAL COVERAGE BILL AND DEVELOPMENTS ON THE STATE'S BUDGET, YOU CAN VISIT OUR WEBSITE.

THAT'S AT NYNOW.ORG.

NOW, THAT DOES IT FOR THIS EPISODE OF NEW YORK NOW.

THANK YOU FOR TUNING IN, AND SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

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

[ THEME MUSIC ]