[ THEME MUSIC ] MEANWHILE, GOVERNOR CUOMO'S POWERS ARE NO MORE.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR NEW YORKERS?

BERNADETTE HOGAN FROM THE POST IS HERE TO TALK ABOUT THOSE STORIES.

THEN VIN BONVENTRE FROM ALBANY LAW SCHOOL TELLS US WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE NEWEST JUDGES TO JOIN NEW YORK'S COURT OF APPEALS AND LATER, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT.

I'M DARRELL CAMP AND THIS IS "NEW YORK NOW."

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

I'M DARRELL CAMP IN FOR DAN CLARK.

SO WE WON'T HAVE FINALIZED RESULTS IN THE NEW YORK CITY MAYORAL PRIMARY FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS.

PARTIALLY DUE TO A SYSTEM CALLED RANK CHOICE VOTING.

THAT'S WHERE VOTERS RANK THEIR TOP FIVE CANDIDATES WITH THE LOWEST SCORING CANDIDATE BEING ELIMINATED IN EACH ROUND UNTIL SOMEONE GETS ABOVE 50% OF THE VOTE.

MEANWHILE, IN BUFFALO, MAYOR BYRON BROWN WAS UPSET IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY BY CHALLENGING INDIA WALTON AND IN ROCHESTER, INCUMBENT LOVELY WARREN WAS DEFEATED BY MALIK EVANS, AND THEN THE DAY AFTER THE PRIMARY, GOVERNOR CUOMO ANNOUNCED THAT HE WOULD BE ALLOWING HIS EMERGENCY POWERS GRANTED BY THE LEGISLATURE AT THE START OF THE PANDEMIC TO EXPIRE.

BUT THAT COULD IMPACT CERTAIN BUSINESSES.

SO NOW TO BREAK DOWN THOSE STORIES WE HAVE BERNADETTE HOGAN FROM THE "NEW YORK POST".

HOW ARE YOU?

>> GOOD.

HOW ARE YOU?

>> I AM FANTASTIC.

SO I WAS THROWN OFF HONESTLY THE MOST BY BYRON BROWN.

HE'S BEEN AROUND FOR OVER A DECADE IN BUFFALO.

HE'S A STRONG CUOMO ALLY AND HE WAS UPSET.

WHY DID THAT HAPPEN?

>> RIGHT.

AS YOU SAID, BYRON BROWN, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN HIS FIFTH TERM, RIGHT?

HE'S BEEN IN OFFICE QUITE A WHILE, DEMOCRAT, ESTABLISHMENT DEMOCRAT, AND HE WAS UPSET BY INDIA WALTON, SOMEONE ENDORSED BY THE WWFP AND THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST OF AMERICA, SOMEONE DEFINITELY MORE TO THE LEFT AS OPPOSED TO BYRON BROWN WHO, AS YOU SAID, AN ALLY OF GOVERNOR CUOMO AND WHO DID SERVE ALSO AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

THIS WAS A BIG DEAL BECAUSE BYRON BROWN WOULDN'T ENGAGE IN DEBATES WITH INDIA WALTON DESPITE MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO HAVE THAT KIND OF INTERPLAY OF IDEAS AND GIVE VOTERS A CHANCE TO FIGURE OUT, HMM, MAYBE WE WANT TO KNOW WHO THIS OTHER PERSON THAT IS CHALLENGING BYRON BROWN WHO HAS BEEN IN OFFICE A WHILE.

THAT WAS A BIG UPSET ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING, IF YOU LOOK AT VOTER TURNOUT, THE PRIMARIES IN NEW YORK, WE HAVE A CLOSE PRIMARY STATE AND REALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHAT MATTERS.

AND DEMOCRATS DO DECIDE THOSE VOTES ESPECIALLY IN THE UPSTATE CITIES WHERE THERE'S A MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATIC REGISTERED VOTERS, AND SO THIS WAS A BIG DEAL BECAUSE INDIA WALTON WILL BE THE FIRST SOCIALIST, MORE LEFT-LEANING DEMOCRAT IN A WHILE TO RUN A MAJOR CITY, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, BYRON BROWN WASN'T ENGAGING IN NORMAL TACTICS AGAIN.

HE WAS NOT-- HE THOUGHT HE COULD JUST GO RIGHT IN AND NOT HAVE TO ENGAGE WITH HIS OPPONENT AND MAYBE VOTERS WERE SICK OF THAT.

>> YEAH.

THEY VERY WELL MAY HAVE BEEN.

IN ROCHESTER, IT WAS FAR LESS SURPRISING BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE LOVELY WARREN-- SHE'S GOTTEN BAD PRESS LATELY BECAUSE OF THINGS SURROUNDING HER AND SHE IS HAVING PERSONAL ISSUES RIGHT NOW.

FAR LESS SURPRISING THAT MALIK EVANS WAS ABLE TO WIN THAT ONE THERE.

IN CITIES WHERE-- AND ALBANY'S ONE OF THEM-- WHERE THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY IS OFTEN THE GENERAL ELECTION THIS WAS MORE IMPORTANT THAN I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE REALIZED AND ALSO SPEAKING OF PRIMARY, IN NEW YORK CITY WE HAD RANK CHOICE VOTING.

IT IS A SYSTEM THAT CONFUSES EVERYONE, EVEN JOURNALISTS, AND THERE ARE DELAYS BECAUSE OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS.

HOW MUCH LONGER ARE WE EXPECTING TO WAIT TO KNOW WHO OFFICIALLY-- I KNOW ERIC ADAMS IS THE FAVORITE-- WHO OFFICIALLY WILL BE THE NEXT NEW YORK CITY MAYOR?

EVEN MYSELF, MY COLLEAGUES IN THE CITY AT THE "NEW YORK POST" DID A FANTASTIC JOB FIGURING THIS OUT.

AS YOU SAID, ERIC ADAMS, HE WAS A FORMER NYPD COP.

I THINK HE WAS HIGHER UP.

HE ALSO SERVED AS NEW YORK STATE SENATOR AND HE WAS BRONX-- NOT BRONX, BROOKLYN BOROUGH PRESIDENT AND HE RAN A CAMPAIGN IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT WHO WENT FOR HIM, WHO ENDED UP VOTING FOR HIM, HE'S CAPTURED LARGE SWATHS OF THE BRONX, BROOKLYN AND HE RIGHT NOW IS IN THE LEAD AND BEHIND HIM IS KATHRYN GARCIA, THE SANITATION COMMISSIONER OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, AND MAYA WILEY WHO SERVED IN THE DI BLASIO ADMINISTRATION AND THOSE TWO WOMEN ARE IN SECOND PLACE IN THIS RANK CHOICE VOTER STRUCTURE.

IN ORDER FOR THEM TO OVERCOME ERIC ADAMS WHO HAS A COMMANDING LEAD RIGHT NOW OF 9, 10 POINTS, THE WAY THAT THE SYSTEM IS SET UP IS THEY WOULD HAVE TO, ONE OR THE OTHER WOULD HAVE TO GAIN A MAJORITY OF THESE ABSENTEE OR I SUPPOSE SECOND PLACE FINISHING SPOTS TO OVERTAKE ERIC ADAMS AND ADAMS IS INTERESTING BECAUSE HE IS SOMEBODY THAT, AGAIN, HE'S REALLY MADE CRIME AND PUBLIC SAFETY A BIG PART OF HIS CAMPAIGN.

>> AS THE GOVERNOR HAS TALKED ABOUT RECENTLY AS WELL.

>> RIGHT.

TRULY, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATES AND UPSETS, I MEAN HE'S SOMEBODY THAT, NEW YORKERS OR NEW YORK CITY CITIZENS WERE REALLY GRAVITATING TOWARD ESPECIALLY AS THE CITY IS I TRYING TO GET BACK FROM THE LAST YEAR OF THE PANDEMIC RAVAGING THE CITY AND WE HAVE SEEN THE SPIKE IN CRIME IN NEW YORK CITY AS WELL AS THOSE OTHER CITIES ACROSS THE STATE.

>> YEP.

>> BUT IT'S DEFINITELY AN INTERESTING SYSTEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT AND SEE HOW THAT WORKS AND WE GO TO THE GENERAL, AND THERE'S MONTHS BETWEEN THAT.

>> IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WILL MAKE ITS WAY UPSTATE.

LAST THING WE HAVE TIME FOR IS THE GOVERNOR.

THE GOVERNOR SAYS I'M NOT GOING TO EVEN ATTEMPT TO RENEW MY EMERGENCY POWERS BUT THERE WERE RAMIFICATIONS.

A LOT OF RESTAURANT OWNERS ARE SAYING, HEY, ALCOHOL TO GO IS SOMETHING WE LOVED AND WE CAN'T DO THAT ANYMORE.

IN A SENSE, DID WE SUCCESSFULLY SELL SALT TO A SLUG HERE?

THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE CALLING FOR HIS EMERGENCY POWERS TO BE REMOVED, ARE THEY NOW RETHINKING THAT?

>> WELL, SO THE EMERGENCY POWERS ALLOW THE GOVERNOR TO ISSUE A WHOLE HOST OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS, RIGHT, THAT DID CHANGE.

IT MADE IT EASIER FOR HIM TO MAKE CHANGES TO MANAGE THE PANDEMIC AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS, ASSISTED WITH BUSINESSES THAT WERE ALREADY, YOU KNOW, LOSING EITHER WERE CLOSED, WERE LOSING REVENUE HAND OVER FIST AND ONE OF THOSE BIG POINTS, LIKE YOU JUST SAID IS ALCOHOL TO GO MEASURE WHICH PERMITTED THE STATE TO REWRITE THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS THAT THE STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY HAS HAD FOR YEARS AND YEAR THAT BANNED RESTAURANTS AND BARS FROM SELLING COCKTAILS TO GO.

THAT'S A PROBLEM BECAUSE AGAIN, RESTAURANTS ARE STILL STRUGGLING.

HOWEVER, THE LEGISLATURE COULD HAVE PASSED A BILL THAT WOULD HAVE CEMENTED THAT AND CHANGED THE CURRENT STATUTE WITHOUT THE GOVERNOR'S EMERGENCY POWERS AND IT'S DEFINITELY POSSIBLE WITHIN THE NEXT SESSION CYCLE OR NEXT YEAR, THOUGH, SO IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME, BUT OVERALL, COUNTY LEADERS HAVE SAID THAT THESE EMERGENCY POWERS, THESE EXECUTIVE ORDERS HAVE BEEN PROBLEMATIC AND POTENTIALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

THEY JUST RELEASED A NEW BOOK THAT COUNTY LEADERS WERE SAYING WE WERE FIGHTING WITH THESE DIRECTIVES THE ENTIRE WAY WHEN THE GOVERNOR WOULD ANNOUNCE THEM TO THE POINT WHERE WE WOULD HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THEM IN THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT CHANGED THE WAY THAT THEY OPERATED WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

SO SOMETHING LIKE ALCOHOL TO GO IS DEFINITELY AN IMPORTANT MEASURE BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WHAT THIS DOES IS IT BRINGS THE POWER BACK.

IT PROVIDES MORE OF AN EQUAL BALANCE BETWEEN HOW LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN HANDLE THEIR COMMUNITIES AND THE INTERPLAY WITH THE STATE WHICH IS CONSTANT COMMUNICATION >> THERE'S ALWAYS MORE WE CAN TALK ABOUT.

WE'RE FRESH OUT OF TIME.

BERNADETTE HOGAN FROM THE POST, I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>>> SO WE TOLD YOU A FEW WEEKS AGO ABOUT THE TWO NEW JUDGES CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE TO THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS, NEW YORK'S HIGHEST COURT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT JUDGES ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, THERE ARE USUALLY QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR IDEOLOGIES AND HOW THEY'LL INFLUENCE THE COURT'S DECISIONS.

SAME IS TRUE IN NEW YORK WHERE JUDGES ON THE COURT OF APPEALS HAVE A LOT OF POWER TO INTERPRET AND CHANGE STATE LAW.

AND THE TWO NEWEST JUDGES ON THE COURT COULD MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THAT MOVING FORWARD.

FOR MORE ON THAT, OUR DAN CLARK TURNED TO VIN BONVENTRE, OUR COURT OF APPEALS EXPERT FROM ALBANY LAW SCHOOL.

>> VIN BONVENTRE FROM ALBANY LAW SCHOOL.

GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK.

>> ALWAYS GLAD TO BE WITH YOU, DAN.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE COURT OF APPEALS, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

NOW THE TWO JUDGES THE GOVERNOR PICKED HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE.

THEY WILL START SERVING ON THE COURT OF APPEALS IMMEDIATELY.

THEY DON'T HAVE SESSION FOR A LITTLE BIT.

I WANT TO GO THROUGH BOTH JUDGES THAT WERE CONFIRMED.

LET'S TALK ABOUT MADELINE SINGAS FIRST.

SHE CAUSED MORE CONTROVERSY THAN ANTHONY CANNATARO, THE OTHER NOMINEE THAT IS BECAUSE SHE IS THE FORMER NASSAU COUNTY D.A.

HOW DO YOU SEE HER SHIFTING THE COURT?

WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THIS IS CONSERVATIVE COURT IN TERMS OF NEW YORK CONSERVATIVISM.

DO YOU SEE HER SHIFTING THAT MORE TOWARD THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE?

>> WELL, DAN, ONCE SHE'S ON THE COURT, SHE'LL BE WEARING A ROBE.

SHE'LL BE AT THE PINNACLE OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION.

YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT AS THOUGH THERE WILL BE ASPIRATIONS ON HER PART TO GO HIGHER THAN THAT.

AND SO YOU DON'T KNOW.

WE'VE HAD PROSECUTORS IN THE PAST WHO HAVE TURNED OUT TO BE SOME OF THE VERY FINEST JUDGES ON THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ITS HISTORY.

HAVING SAID THAT, HAVING SAID THAT AND THERE'S ALWAYS THE BUT.

>> THERE'S ALWAYS THE BUT.

>> THERE'S ALWAYS THE BUT, AND YOU KNOW AS A TOTAL NERD AND GEEK ABOUT THE COURT OF APPEALS, I LOOK INTO THESE THINGS, I JUST DON'T SEE ANYTHING OBVIOUS IN MADELINE SINGAS' RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT SHE'S WELL QUALIFIED TO BE ON A COURT OF LAST RESORT.

SHE MIGHT BE AND IT COULD BE THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS SOME INSIGHTS ABOUT HER.

MAYBE CHIEF JUDGE JANET DIFIORI KNOWS HER WELL AND KNOWS ABOUT HER.

I'M JUST SAYING ON THE RECORD, IT CERTAINLY NOT EVIDENT AND IT WASN'T EVIDENT TO MOST OF THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS AROUND THE STATE.

>> RIGHT.

>> I MEAN, SHE WAS BARELY APPROVED, AND SOME OF THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS SAID NO, NOT APPROVED.

AND THEY ARGUED SHE OUGHT TO BE REJECTED.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHETHER SHE WILL BE A GREAT JUDGE AND OF COURSE, WE HOPE SHE WILL BE A GREAT JUDGE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT WOULD SUGGEST THAT.

>> RIGHT.

THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION WHEN THEY WERE DEVELOPING THE LISTS OF THE NOMINEES AND THEY WENT OUT, THE BAR ASSOCIATION EVALUATED THEM AS QUALIFIED OR HIGHLY QUALIFIED AND MADELINE SINGAS DID NOT GET THE HIGHLY QUALIFIED.

I THINK THAT SAID A LOT TO THE VARIOUS LEGAL GROUPS THAT TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT HER AND MAYBE SEE LIKE WHAT'S ON THE RECORD ABOUT HER.

ON THAT NOTE, CHIEF JUDGE JANET DIFIORE WHEN SHE WAS NOMINATED AND SHE WAS THE WEST CHESTER AND DID WE SEE HER SHIFT TO THE MORE CONSERVATIVE SIDE WHEN SHE CAME IN, OR WAS IT GOING THAT WAY ALREADY?

>> NO.

UNDER JONATHAN LIPPMAN, THE COURT WAS PRETTY BOLD, PRETTY PROGRESSIVE.

JANET DIFIORE HAS BEEN MUCH MORE CONSERVATIVE AT LEAST IN CRIMINAL CASES.

NOT NECESSARILY ON A SOCIAL ISSUES BUT CERTAINLY IN THE CRIMINAL CASES, SHE HAS BEEN MUCH MORE PRO-PROSECUTION THAN HE WAS.

SO THERE'S BEEN QUITE A SHIFT IN THE COURT OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, AND IT'S NOT JUST THE DECISIONS OF THE COURT, BUT THE KINDS OF CASES AND THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT THE COURT IS ACCEPTING FOR REVIEW.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE COURT TODAY, THE JUDGES ON THE COURT ARE ACCEPTING ABOUT ONE-THIRD THE NUMBER OF CRIMINAL APPEALS THAT THEY DID WHEN LIPPMAN HAPPENED TO BE CHIEF.

RIGHT, IT WENT FROM AN AVERAGE OF ABOUT 90 A YEAR.

THAT IS, THAT THE JUDGES WOULD ACCEPT FOR APPEAL AND NOW DOWN TO ABOUT 30.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S QUITE EXTRAORDINARY AND THAT'S WHY THE CRIMINAL DEFENSE BAR IS SO UPSET ABOUT CUOMO NOMINATING MADELINE SINGAS BECAUSE THEY FIGURE SHE'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER PRO-PROSECUTION JUDGE WHO, AGAIN, IS NOT GOING TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS TO HAVE THEIR CASES HEARD AT THE COURT OF APPEALS.

>> IT'S FASCINATING AND I WANT TO SWITCH GEARS TO THE NEW OTHER JUDGE, ANTHONY CANNATARO.

HE HAS BEEN ON THE BENCH.

HE WAS PREVIOUSLY BEFORE HE WAS CONFIRMED THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE OF THE NEW YORK CITY CIVIL COURT.

THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A MUCH DIFFERENT POSITION THAN WHAT MADELINE SINGAS WAS IN AND UNLIKE HER, HE WAS DETERMINED TO BE HIGHLY QUALIFIED BY THOSE BAR ASSOCIATIONS.

SO HOW DO WE SEE HIM SHIFTING THE COURT?

AND WHEN WE TALKED BEFORE, IT WAS MORE LIKE THESE JUDGES THAT WERE RETIRING.

WE'RE KIND OF LIKE IN THE MIDDLE.

SO I SEE HIM AS MAKING THE SAME WAY, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR YOU ON THAT.

>> IT'S JUST NOT CLEAR ABOUT HIM.

NOW, YOU KNOW, HE'S THE SECOND OPENLY GAY JUDGE TO HAVE BEEN APPOINT TO THE COURT OF APPEALS AND MANY OF US CELEBRATE THAT BECAUSE OF THE DISCRIMINATION HISTORICALLY AND THE COURT OF APPEALS UNTIL RECENTLY HAS NOT BEEN PARTICULARLY BEEN GREAT IN REGARD TO FIGHTING DISCRIMINATION AND HE SERVED AS A LAW CLERK TO A JUDGE ON THE COURT OF APPEALS AND A QUITE LIBERAL, SOCIALLY AND POLITICALLY LIBERAL JUDGE, AND THAT'S CARMEN SAPPARA, AND IN TERMS OF QUALIFICATIONS, LET'S START WITH THAT.

HIS RECORD SHOWS THAT HE PROBABLY UNDERSTANDS THE IMPORTANCE OF ANY COURT OF LAST RESORT AND HOW DECISIONS ARE ACTUALLY MADE, RIGHT?

AND HE'S BEEN A JUDGE SO HE KNOWS THE ROLE OF A NEUTRAL JUDGE AND LIKE THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS THAT RATED HIM MUCH MORE FAVORABLY THAN THEY DID MADELINE SINGAS, IT SEEMS FROM HIS RECORD THAT HE PROBABLY IS GOING TO DO A PRETTY DARN GOOD JOB AT THE COURT OF APPEALS.

HE ALSO STUDIED THE CLASSICS AT COLUMBIA AS AN UNDERGRAD WHICH, TO ME,A DEFINITE POSITIVE.

[LAUGHTER] >> SO THE COURT OF APPEALS DOESN'T MEET AGAIN UNTIL LATE AUGUST, EARLY SEPTEMBER, RIGHT?

>> YES.

>> SO IT WILL BE REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE WHEN THAT HAPPENS BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO SEE-- >> YES.

>> HOW THESE TWO JUDGES ACT WHEN THEY'RE HEARING THESE ARGUMENTS.

>> YES.

>> UNLIKE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, THE COURT OF APPEALS IN NEW YORK LIVE STREAMS ON THE WEB THEIR ARGUMENT.

ANYBODY WATCHING THIS, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO TAKE A LOOK.

>> EARTH THAT.

>> IT'S REALLY INTERESTING.

WE DO HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE.

VIN BONVENTRE FROM ALBANY LAW SCHOOL, THANK YOU AS ALWAYS FOR YOUR ANALYSIS.

>> AND THANKS FOR INVITING ME, DAN.

>> WE'LL KEEP AN EYE ON WHERE THOSE JUDGES LAND WHEN THE COURT OF APPEALS COME BACK IN LATE AUGUST.

IN THE MEANTIME, THE DEBATE OVER NEW YORK'S HEALTHCARE SYSTEM CAME TO A STANDSTILL EARLIER THIS MONTH WHEN THE LEGISLATURE DECIDED NOT TO PASS THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT.

THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT WOULD ESSENTIALLY SET UP A SINGLE-PAYER HEALTHCARE SYSTEM IN NEW YORK LIKE MEDICARE FOR ALL APPROACH.

A FEW WEEKS AGO, WE GAVE YOU ONE SIDE OF THAT ISSUE.

THIS WEEK, WE'RE SHOWING YOU THE OTHER.

OUR DAN CLARK SPOKE WITH TWO SUPPORTERS OF THAT BILL, SENATOR JABARIA BRISPORT FROM BROOKLYN AND ELIZABETH BENJAMIN FROM THE COMMUNITY SERVICE SOCIETY OF NEW YORK.

[ THEME MUSIC ] >> SENATOR JABARI BRISPORT AND ELIZABETH BENJAMIN FROM THE COMMUNITY SERVICE SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, THANK YOU BOTH SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU, DAN.

>> THANK YOU.

OF COURSE, ANYTIME.

SENATOR BRISPORT, I WANT TO GO TO YOU FIRST, THE SESSION ENDED, THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT DID NOT PASS.

WHY DO YOU THINK THAT IS?

FOR THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE A MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS IN BOTH CHAMBERS THAT SIGNED ONTO THE BILL.

WHY AREN'T WE SEEING IT MOVE?

>> THERE WERE A CONFLUENCE OF FACTORS THAT WORKED TOGETHER TO STALL AND STOP THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT FROM COMING TO A VOTE.

I WOULD SAY OUTSIDE PRESSURES CAME FROM LOBBYIST GROUPS THAT SHARED MISLEADING INFORMATION ABOUT JOB LOSS AND INCREASED PREMIUMS.

THERE WAS ALSO OUTSIDE INFLUENCE AGAINST THE HEALTH ACT FROM PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS LIKE MY OWN FORMER UNION, THE UFT, THAT SUPPORTED THE HEALTH ACT IN 2015 BUT WHOSE LEADERSHIP WAS VERY AGAINST IT.

NOW THERE WERE JUST ON THE INSIDE, SOME LEGISLATORS WHO COSPONSORED THE HEALTH ACT BUT THEN ASKED LEADERSHIP NOT TO BRING IT TO A VOTE.

AND ULTIMATELY THE DECISION FELL ON LEADERSHIP TO CHOOSE TO BRING IT TO A VOTE OR NOT TO.

SHE CHOSE NOT TO AND THE ASSEMBLY, THE SPEAKER CHOSE NOT TO.

>> IT'S LIKE WE'RE SEEING A SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE PUBLIC I SUPPORT IT BUT PRIVATELY ARE SAYING HOLD OFF.

>> YES.

>> SO I WANT TO COME BACK TO THAT IF WE HAVE TIME BUT I WANT TO GO TO ELIZABETH FIRST BECAUSE AS WE TALK ABOUT THE POLITICS OF THIS, I THINK THE POLICY OF IT IS VERY IMPORTANT.

SO THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT WOULD CREATE A SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM IN NEW YORK BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE MAY NOT KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

LET'S START BROAD.

IF I'M JUST A REGULAR NEW YORKER.

I HAVE MY PRIVATE INSURANCE OR MAYBE I DON'T EVEN HAVE INSURANCE, HOW WOULD MY LIFE CHANGE UNDER THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT?

WHAT WOULD I BE LOOKING AT?

>> YOUR SHOE.

I MEAN, DEPENDING ON WHO YOU ARE, YOUR LIFE WOULD CHANGE NOT SO MUCH BUT-- OR IT WOULD CHANGE A LOT, BUT IN ANY EVENT, IT WOULD BE BETTER.

THIS IS WHY.

IF YOU'RE UNINSURED, WOULD YOU HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE BECAUSE EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN NEW YORK STATE WHO IS A RESIDENT OF NEW YORK STATE REGARDLESS OF IMMIGRATION STATUS, IF YOU'RE A RESIDENT, YOU WOULD BE ELIGIBLE.

WE HAVE A MILLION PEOPLE WHO WOULD INSTANTLY GET COVERED.

FANTASTIC.

IF YOU'RE SOMEONE WHO IS ON MEDICAID OR MEDICARE RIGHT NOW AND IF YOU ARE ON MEDICARE RIGHT NOW FOR OLDER FOLKS, YOU WOULD GET DENTAL AND VISION.

THAT'S BETTER.

OTHERWISE, IT'S THE SAME KIND OF COVERAGE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT'S REALLY MEDICARE FOR ALL.

SINGLE-PAYER DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

IT'S MEDICARE FOR ALL TYPE OF PROGRAM.

THE THIRD THING IS IF YOU HAVE JOB-BASED COVERAGE, YOU'RE PROBABLY FACING A DEDUCTIBLE RIGHT NOW.

EVERY YEAR MORE AND MORE OF YOUR SALARY GOES TO PAYING FOR HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS.

YOU KNOW, WE GET MORE COPAYS, HIGHER DEDUCTIBLES AND MORE COST SHARING BEING PUT UPON THE EMPLOYEES AND IF YOU'RE ON EMPLOYER, YOU JUST LOOK AND THEY JUST FILED THEIR RATE REQUEST FOR NEXT YEAR.

EVEN THOUGH THEY ALL-- THE INSURANCE COMPANIES MADE OUT LIKE BANDITS LAST YEAR BECAUSE NO ONE USED HEALTHCARE, THEY'RE ASKING FOR 9% RATE INCREASES.

WHY?

SO YOU FOE, WE HAD THIS UNCONTROLLABLE COST SPIRAL UP THAT NEEDS TO BE REGULATED.

ONE GREAT WAY TO DO IT IS THROUGH THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT.

THERE'S OTHER GREAT WAYS.

YOU COULD DO HOSPITAL PRICE REGULATION.

YOU COULD DO GLOBAL PAYMENTS BUT THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT IS THE BEST BECAUSE IT SOLVES ALL THOSE PROBLEMS.

LESS BUREAUCRACY FOR PEOPLE, LESS COST SHARING FOR PEOPLE, LESS HEADACHE FOR EMPLOYERS TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH BROKERS AND WHATNOT AND MORE COST CONTROLS.

>> SO PEOPLE WOULD BE PAYING NOTHING OUT-OF-POCKET INCLUDING THAT PREMIUM THAT MIGHT BE COMING OUT OF THEIR PAYCHECK RIGHT NOW AND WE ALSO WOULDN'T HAVE NETWORK RESTRICTIONS.

FOR EXAMPLE, ME, I LOOK UP WHICH DOCTORS I CAN GO TO AND WHICH RUN ONES ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE MY INSURANCE AND THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATED UNDER THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT.

I THINK SOMETHING PEOPLE GET HUNG UP ON IS THEY'RE PAYING THEIR PREMIUM RIGHT NOW AND THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATED UNDER THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT BUT IT WOULD BE REPLACED BY A PAYROLL TAX FOR PEOPLE MAKING ABOVE $25,000.

I WANT TO STICK WITH YOU, ELIZABETH, JUST FOR A SECOND.

DO WE KNOW IF GENERALLY PEOPLE WOULD BE PAYING LESS UNDER THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT ON THAT PAYROLL TAX THAN THEY'RE PAYING FOR PREMIUMS FOR HEALTH CARE?

>> AS I UNDERSTAND IT AND PLEASE CORRECT ME, SENATOR, IF I HAVE THIS WRONG.

MOST PEOPLE WOULD BE PAYING NO MORE THAN WHAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY PAYING.

I THINK SOME OF THE HIGHER INCOME PEOPLE MIGHT PAY A LITTLE BIT MORE S THAT RIGHT, SENATOR BRISPORT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

VAST MAJORITY OF NEW YORKERS WOULD SEE THE SAME OR LESS IN ANNUAL PAYMENTS FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

>> TO THAT POINT, SENATOR BRISPORT, HOW DO YOU CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT SINGLE PAYER HEALTHCARE IS THE WAY TO GO IN NEW YORK?

I FEEL LIKE THE CONCEPT OF SINGLE PAY HEARS BECOME SO POLITICAL IN NEW YORK AND IN THE COUNTRY WHERE PEOPLE HEAR SINGLE PAYER AND THEY'RE IMMEDIATELY TURNED OFF BY IT.

HOW DO YOU CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE THE WAY TO GO AND HAVE THIS FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE IN NEW YORK?

>> I THINK THE BIGGEST THING IS CONVINCING PEOPLE THAT HEALTHCARE AND INSURANCE ARE NOT THE SAME THING.

YOU TELL PEOPLE THAT THEIR INSURANCE MIGHT CHANGE AND THEY FREAK OUT.

THEY THINK, OH, I MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO SEE MY CURRENT DOCTOR, BUT THAT'S THE THING.

PEOPLE LIKE THEIR DOCTORS.

THEY DON'T LIKE THEIR INSURANCE PROVIDER, AND IT'S A BURRED TON HAMMER HOME THAT THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT, ANY SINGLE PAYER GOVERNMENT OR MEDICARE PROGRAM WOULD EXPAND OPTIONS.

YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE YOUR SAME DOCTOR AND ALSO OTHER DOCTORS BY ELIMINATING IN NETWORK AND OUT OF NETWORK RESTRICTIONS.

>> I'D LIKE TO ALSO JUMP IN HERE.

I MEAN, EVERYBODY LINES THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE FINE WHEN THEY'RE NOT SICK.

BUT NO ONE LIKES OUR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM WHEN YOU ARE AND LET ME TELL YOU WHY.

IT'S NOT JUST THE INSURANCE COMPANIES.

INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM BUT ALSO THE PROVIDERS.

THEY BILL YOU-- WE HAVE ONE GUY THAT WENT IN FOR ONE KIDNEY STONE AND CAME OUT WITH 28 DIFFERENT BILLS.

THAT WOULD NOT HAPPEN UNDER THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT.

LIKE ONE KIDNEY STONE, A BILL FROM THE ANESTHESIOLOGIST AND THE SURGEON AND IT GOES ON AND ON AND ON, AND WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT HOW TO MAKE OUR WHOLE HEALTH INSURANCE AND HEALTHCARE SYSTEM MORE SIMPLE FOR PEOPLE.

THIS IS AN AMAZING WAY TO DO THAT THROUGH THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT.

PAYMENT MEDICAL PROTECTION ACT WHICH ALSO DID NOT PASS THIS SESSION WOULD BE A GOOD START.

WE NEED TO START DOING-- WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING BECAUSE THE SYSTEM RIGHT NOW IS BROKEN FROM THE PATIENTS' PERSPECTIVE.

>> SENATOR BRISPORT FOR NEW YORKERS WHO ARE NOT INSURED, WHERE WOULD THIS LEGISLATION LEAD THEM IF IT PASSES?

>> IT WOULD BRING THEM INTO THE FOLD AND BRING THEM INTO HAVING HEALTH INSURANCE AND WHY I'M SO SCARED RIGHT NOW IS, ONE, WE HAVE A MILLION NEW YORKERS THAT ARE UNINSURED AND MILLIONS MORE WHO ARE UNDERINSURED.

IT'S SCARY FOR PEOPLE WHEN WHO ARE IN THOSE CATEGORIES THAT WILL BE EXPERIENCING LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF COVID, LOCKED INTO A DANGEROUS JOB BECAUSE THEY WANT THE HEALTH INSURANCE.

I'M SCARED FOR WOMEN WHO ARE STAYING IN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS BECAUSE THEY NEED HEALTH INSURANCE FROM THEIR PARTNER.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO COULD BE FREED AND LIBERATED IF THIS PAS AND THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WE SHOULD BE DOING IT.

>> THE PREMISE OF THIS NEXT QUESTION IS GOING TO SOUND HORRIBLE.

I APOLOGIZE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING THIS.

UNDER THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT, EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE COVERED AND THERE WILL BE NO RESTRICTIONS IN TERMS OF COVERAGE AND WHAT DOCTORS YOU CAN SEE AND WHERE YOU CAN GO.

ELIZABETH, DO WE IN NEW YORK HAVE THE HEALTHCARE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THAT, SUPPORT PEOPLE THAT MAY SEEK THE MEDICAL CARE THAT THEY WERE AFRAID TO SEEK NOW UNDER THEIR CURRENT INSURANCE COVERAGE?

>> THIS IS THE PENT-UP DEMAND ARGUMENT.

[LAUGHTER] SO THERE'S THIS BIG WORRY THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALL THIS PENT-UP DEMAND.

WELL, WE HAD THAT SAME ARGUMENT AND WHEN WE ENACTED THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, EVERYBODY SAID THERE WOULD BE HUGE LINES AND THERE WEREN'T ENOUGH PRIMARY CARE DOCTORS AND THE WHOLE SYSTEM WOULD BE SHOT.

GUESS WHAT.

WE IMPLEMENTED THE NEW YORK-- AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, OBAMA CARE, NO PROBLEMS.

NO LINES.

NO COMPLAINTS.

THE ONLY THINGS LIKE A LITTLE COUPLE OF THINGS ON THE MARGINS, BUT THIS PENT-UP DEMAND THAT THEY SAID WOULD BE THERE WASN'T THERE.

IT JUST DOESN'T EXIST.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT?

IT'S NOT LIKE PEOPLE SIT, YOU KNOW, ON JULY 4TH, WE CAN SAY, OH, I REALLY WANT TO GET SURGERY NEXT WEEK.

IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN.

IT'S NOT REAL AND THE SAME THING HAPPENED IN 1965 AND 1963 AND WE DID MEDICAID AND MEDICARE.

IT NEVER HAPPENS.

THERE'S NO PENT-UP DEMAND.

DOESN'T HAPPEN.

>> SENATOR BRISPORT, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS ISSUE, YOU MENTIONED CLAIMS ARE GOING AROUND ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT.

ONE IS THAT IT WOULD BE A JOB REDUCER IN NEW YORK AND WE'RE LOOKING AT HEALTH INSURANCE JOBS AND MAYBE SOME RIPPLE EFFECTS.

HOW DO YOU CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT WAY TO GO WHEN THEY MAY BE LOOKING AT JOB LOSSES IN THE STATE AND RIPPLE EFFECTS THAT MAY AFFECT THEM?

>> I THINK FIRST THING'S FIRST.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO MENTION THAT INSIDE THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT THERE IS A BRIDGE AND FUNDING FOR JUST TRANSITION FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED TO RETRAIN AND LOOK FOR OTHER JOBS.

IN THE WIDER SENSE, IT'S ABOUT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE AS A JOB CREATOR.

ONCE YOUR HEALTHCARE IS NO LONGER TIED TO YOUR EMPLOYER, IT FREES UP YOUR OPTIONS.

THAT'S GOOD FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO FREELANCE, START THEIR OWN BUSINESS, WHO ARE RUNNING A SMALL BUSINESS AND STRUGGLING TO BRING ON MORE PEOPLE BECAUSE OF HEALTHCARE COSTS.

YOU CAN THINK OF IT AS A JOB CREATOR RATHER THAN A JOB KILLER.

>> I THINK THERE IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS MOVING FORWARD ESPECIALLY AS THE LEGISLATION GAINS MORE SUPPORT IN THE LEGISLATURE.

WE DO HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE.

ELIZABETH BENJAMIN FROM THE COMMUNITY SERVICE SOCIETY FROM NEW YORK AND SENATOR JABARI BRISPORT, THANK YOU BOTH SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WONDERFUL.

>> SO WE'LL SEE HOW THE LEGISLATURE FEELS ABOUT THAT MEASURE WHEN THEY RECONVENE IN JANUARY.

BUT FOR NOW, THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE.

HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND AND WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

[ THEME MUSIC ]