The State of Our State

Connect Edition in January: NY: Review "State of the State", which is announced every year by Governor Andrew Cuomo. 2020 was the year of many challenges for the Empire state. Along with the political expert team, we analyze the current state of the New Year's state.

• Share this video on Facebook
• Share this video on Twitter
• Embedded code of this video
• Copy the link to this video to the clipboard

Embed Video

CONNECT NY

The current state of the state

Season 7 Episode 1

Fixed iFrame

Width: PX Pixel Units High: PX Pixel Units Copy! The copy failed. Please retry.

Responsive iFrame

Copy! The copy failed. Please retry.

Is there a problem with video playback? Report the problem | Closed caption

Report a Problem

See the Trouble Shooting Guide before reporting an error.

The report was sent normally. Thank you for your cooperation in improving the PBS video.

near

• Financial and distribution
• copy

Connect NY is a local public television program provided by WCNY.

That's right. In January, a legislative conference began at the State Conference Hall, and we heard about the legislation and financial issues of Governor Kuomo and the State Assembly this year.

In this episode in Connect New York, we will examine the priority of 2021 and look at future races in Albanny.

Then again.

Hello, welcome to Connect New York.

This is David Rombard in the WCNY press room.

Earlier this month, the Governor of Quoi announced a 193 billion dollar's New York State Expenditure Plan, and was the beginning of a few months, which is likely to be controversial between the governor and the Democratic Party of the State Congress.

Even at the best time, al l-bunny political ruling does not always produce a unified chorus when budgeting.

This year, Kuomo and Congress leaders are in conflict over how to eliminate the billions of dollar deficit expected by Pandemic (global trends), and sweet harmony by March 31. It doesn't seem easy to find.

In today's Connect New York, we will look for the state's budget, what we expect from the leaders of the legislature, which seems to be gaining momentum, and others.

To do so, you will be joined by journalists, political consultants, and softball superstars.

Banadet Hogan, a reporter in the New York Post Capitol, is the founder of Seneca Strategies, a political consulting company that supports advanced candidates and a cause.

Bill Mahony, a fan of the Buffalo Building and a reporter of New York Political, and a partner for the political consulting company November Team, Bill Mountain.

I would like to start a video from the Governor of Quomo's budget, which proposed an incredibly promoted state tax increase as a part of the global toy planeg.

"The new tax plan is a proposal to make the state budget a part of the federal budget. If the income tax is raised to the maximum tax rate 8, 8, the state tax rate 10, 8, the city tax rate 14, 7, and the maximum tax rate of 9 billion. The budget is part of the federal budget.

Then, a significant reduction is required.

Bill Mahony was like a salesman who didn't believe in his product.

Can you explain the 1 0-year relationship between the governor and the maximum income tax rate of income tax?

(Bitter smile). The governor has never strongly claimed the tax increase to the wealthy.

Through his tradition, he had to deal with the lef t-wing chorus.

The extraordinary parliament in December of the first year of the inauguration extended the tax rate applied by the previous administration, but has never been applied since then.

He was one of the Democrats's moderate groups, and proposed to the Republican Party that if they were taxed to the rich, the rich would go out of the state and would be more disadvantageous than before.

It is not a terrible surprise that the budget is shorter, resisting this crisis, and starting from the first spring and first construction.

And even now, it is certain that the degree of hesitation is clear at the end.

That's right. As of 2018, you have won many Democrats in the state council, but they are very dissatisfied with the governor's tax increase and are called new poly.

What are the alternatives they propose?

What is an alternative? Of course, the tax increase not only requires enough tax revenue, but also means returning money to the rich in 2024 and 2025.

It is not a tax increase.

Do you want to give a rebate after a temporary rental? Bill Mahony, a fan of the Buffalo Building and a reporter of New York Political, and a partner of the political consulting company November Team, Bill Mountain.

I would like to start a video from the Governor of Quomo's budget, which proposed an incredibly promoted state tax increase as a part of the global toy planeg.

"The new tax plan is a proposal to make the state budget a part of the federal budget. If the income tax is raised to the maximum tax rate 8, 8, the state tax rate 10, 8, the city tax rate 14, 7, and the maximum tax rate of 9 billion. The budget is part of the federal budget.

Then, a significant reduction is required.

Bill Mahony was like a salesman who didn't believe in his product.

Can you explain the 1 0-year relationship between the governor and the maximum income tax rate of income tax?

(Bitter smile). The governor has never strongly claimed the tax increase to the wealthy.

Through his tradition, he had to deal with the lef t-wing chorus.

The extraordinary parliament in December of the first year of the inauguration extended the tax rate applied by the previous administration, but has never been applied since then.

He was one of the Democrats's moderate groups, and proposed to the Republican Party that if they were taxed to the rich, the rich would go out of the state and would be more disadvantageous than before.

It is not a terrible surprise that the budget is shorter, resisting this crisis, and starting from the first spring and first construction.

And even now, it is certain that the degree of hesitation is clear at the end.

That's right. As of 2018, you have won many Democrats in the state council, but they are very dissatisfied with the governor's tax increase and are called new poly.

What are the alternatives they propose?

What is an alternative? Of course, the tax increase not only requires enough tax revenue, but also means returning money to the rich in 2024 and 2025.

It is not a tax increase.

Do you want to give a rebate after a temporary rental? Bill Mahony, a fan of the Buffalo Building and a reporter of New York Political, and a partner for the political consulting company November Team, Bill Mountain.

I would like to start a video from the Governor of Quomo's budget, which proposed an incredibly promoted state tax increase as a part of the global toy planeg.

"The new tax plan is a proposal to make the state budget a part of the federal budget. If the income tax is raised to the maximum tax rate 8, 8, the state tax rate 10, 8, the city tax rate 14, 7, and the maximum tax rate of 9 billion. The budget is part of the federal budget.

Then, a significant reduction is required.

Bill Mahony was like a salesman who didn't believe in his product.

Can you explain the 1 0-year relationship between the governor and the maximum income tax rate of income tax?

(Bitter smile). The governor has never strongly claimed the tax increase to the wealthy.

Through his tradition, he had to deal with the lef t-wing chorus.

The extraordinary parliament in December of the first year of the inauguration extended the tax rate applied by the previous administration, but has never been applied since then.

He was one of the Democrats's moderate, and proposed the Republican Party that if he taxed a rich man, the rich would go out of the state and be a disadvantageous situation than before.

It is not a terrible surprise that the budget is shorter, resisting this crisis, and starting from the first spring and first construction.

And even now, it is certain that the degree of hesitation is clear at the end.

That's right. As of 2018, you have won many Democrats in the state council, but they are very dissatisfied with the governor's tax increase and are called new poly.

What are the alternatives they propose?

What is an alternative? Of course, the tax increase not only requires enough tax revenue, but also means returning money to the rich in 2024 and 2025.

It is not a tax increase.

Do you want to give a rebate after a temporary rental?

Today's legislative proposal proposed six taxes, $ 50 billion.

It is everything, from capital gain tax to financial transaction tax, wealthy tax, and true progressive income tax for setting the current uniform income tax.

The reason for demanding $ 50 billion is not only the $ 15 billion deficit as the governor claims.

It is actually more necessary, just because the governor does not recognize or not care.

He continues to reduce Medicade, and the educational system is subjective, such as SUNY, CUNY, and PRE-K-12.

In this way, there are still many financial resources that each organization needs, which is why they are seeking more revenues than the governor.

I agree. I think so too, and I want to make it clear, but according to the Governor's books, the Governor predicts that the spending covered by the governor is about 2 %, so if you look at other accountants, a little more. There may be many.

It is not now that the Democratic Party demands a new tax increase.

At least for me is the rhetoric of the legislative leaders.

What are they saying and how seriously they take their remarks?

Andrea Stewar d-Kazunds and Karl Husti, the General Affairs Institute of House, have stated that they support more progressive taxes, and the members have been discussing countless bills for several years.

Both brains have not yet guaranteed specific proposals and some proposals, but after all, if Washington does not receive sufficient assistance from the federal government, there will be some tax increase. Is threatening.

As Bill said, that is not what he wants.

I don't know if I get a revenue from somewhere else or get a dollar from the federal government.

Congress leaders have cards in their vests.

The parliamentarians seem to be louder what they want.

And, of course, this is in line with the tax increase. < SPAN> Today's legislative proposal proposed six taxes, $ 50 billion.

It is everything, from capital gain tax to financial transaction tax, wealthy tax, and true progressive income tax for setting the current uniform income tax.

The reason for demanding $ 50 billion is not only the $ 15 billion deficit as the governor claims.

It is actually more necessary, just because the governor does not recognize or not care.

He continues to reduce Medicade, and the educational system is subjective, such as SUNY, CUNY, and PRE-K-12.

In this way, there are still many financial resources that each organization needs, which is why they are seeking more revenues than the governor.

I agree. I think so too, and I want to make it clear, but according to the Governor's books, the Governor predicts that the spending covered by the governor is about 2 %, so if you look at other accountants, a little more. There may be many.

It is not now that the Democratic Party demands a new tax increase.

At least for me is the rhetoric of the legislative leaders.

What are they saying and how seriously they take their remarks?

Andrea Stewar d-Kazunds and Karl Husti, the General Affairs Institute of House, have stated that they support more progressive taxes, and the members have been discussing countless bills for several years.

Both brains have not yet guaranteed specific proposals and some proposals, but after all, if Washington does not receive sufficient assistance from the federal government, there will be some tax increase. Is threatening.

As Bill said, that is not what he wants.

I don't know if I get a revenue from somewhere else or get a dollar from the federal government.

Congress leaders have cards in their vests.

The parliamentarians seem to be louder what they want.

And, of course, this is in line with the tax increase. Today's legislative proposal proposed six taxes, $ 50 billion.

It is everything, from capital gain tax to financial transaction tax, wealthy tax, and true progressive income tax for setting the current uniform income tax.

The reason for demanding $ 50 billion is not only the $ 15 billion deficit as the governor claims.

It is actually more necessary, just because the governor does not recognize or not care.

He continues to reduce Medicade, and the educational system is subjective, such as SUNY, CUNY, and PRE-K-12.

In this way, there are still many financial resources that each organization needs, which is why they are seeking more revenues than the governor.

I agree. I think so too, and I want to make it clear, but according to the Governor's books, the Governor predicts that the spending covered by the governor is about 2 %, so if you look at other accountants, a little more. There may be many.

It is not now that the Democratic Party demands a new tax increase.

At least for me is the rhetoric of the legislative leaders.

What are they saying and how seriously they take their remarks?

Andrea Stewar d-Kazunds and Karl Husti, the General Affairs Institute of House, have stated that they support more progressive taxes, and the members have been discussing countless bills for several years.

Both brains have not yet guaranteed specific proposals and some proposals, but after all, if Washington does not receive sufficient assistance from the federal government, there will be some tax increase. Is threatening.

As Bill said, that is not what he wants.

I don't know if I get a revenue from somewhere else or get a dollar from the federal government.

Congress leaders have cards in their vests.

The parliamentarians seem to be louder what they want.

And, of course, this is in line with the tax increase.

I agree. In your opinion, the real indicators of the members of the Diet, rather than whether the budget proposals of the Diet, that is, the Senate and the House of Representatives actually introducing the premise of their actions, are worth the rhetoric. Does that mean?

is that so? Yes, it will eventually be a budget negotiations by three leaders.

Was it so last year, right? In the case of government bond reform, it is not embarrassing to what we want, but in negotiations, there were many members of the parliament with the leader of the parliament.

So what you hear from one side is the will of the members of the Diet, not what they want to place, trade, trade, and trade.

The budget is to vote for ants.

There is a long time by then

is that so? Certainly, there are many time in the year.

Bill O'Reilly has been Bill O'Reilly for the last 10 years, and Bill O'Reilly has been in the New York Democratic members who have approved the tax increase in the previous large budget crisis, following the crisis. Is recognized.

Do you think there is a chance to be the Democratic Party members in the debate on how much you should increase your income tax?

## Progecomers want is not a fair tax on the rich.

They want a fair tax for the rich.

Many billionaire and billionaire paid tax rates established at the federal level, not at the state level, as Monica pointed out.

What they want is the unfair of the whole country's tax.

Aside from whether to realize a wise policy, let's say frankly.

I think most of the New York, the Democratic Party, the tax of the tax, and the billionaire are ranked higher in the Democratic Party.

Opposition to most of New York, especially in the central and western suburbs, is not politically advantageous. < SPAN> That's right. In your opinion, the real indicators of the members of the Diet, rather than whether the budget proposals of the Diet, that is, the Senate and the House of Representatives actually introducing the premise of their actions, are worth the rhetoric. Does that mean?

is that so? Yes, it will eventually be a budget negotiations by three leaders.

Was it so last year, right? In the case of government bond reform, it is not embarrassing to what we want, but in negotiations, there were many members of the parliament with the leader of the parliament.

So what you hear from one side is the will of the members of the Diet, not what they want to place, trade, trade, and trade.

The budget is to vote for ants.

There is a long time by then

is that so? Certainly, there are many time in the year.

Bill O'Reilly has been Bill O'Reilly for the last 10 years, and Bill O'Reilly has been in the New York Democratic members who have approved the tax increase in the previous large budget crisis, following the crisis. Is recognized.

Do you think there is a chance to be the Democratic Party members in the debate on how much you should increase your income tax?

## Progecomers want is not a fair tax on the rich.

They want a fair tax for the rich.

Many billionaire and billionaire paid tax rates established at the federal level, not at the state level, as Monica pointed out.

What they want is the unfair of the whole country's tax.

Aside from whether to realize a wise policy, let's say frankly.

I think most of the New York, the Democratic Party, the tax of the tax, and the billionaire are ranked higher in the Democratic Party.

Opposition to most of New York, especially in the central and western suburbs, is not politically advantageous. I agree. In your opinion, the real indicators of the members of the Diet, rather than whether the budget proposals of the Diet, that is, the Senate and the House of Representatives actually introducing the premise of their actions, are worth the rhetoric. Does that mean?

is that so? Yes, it will eventually be a budget negotiations by three leaders.

Was it so last year, right? In the case of government bond reform, it is not embarrassing to what we want, but in negotiations, there were many members of the parliament with the leader of the parliament.

So what you hear from one side is the will of the members of the Diet, not what they want to place, trade, trade, and trade.

The budget is to vote for ants.

There is a long time by then

is that so? Certainly, there are many time in the year.

Bill O'Reilly has been Bill O'Reilly for the last 10 years, and Bill O'Reilly has been in the New York Democratic members who have approved the tax increase in the previous large budget crisis, following the crisis. Is recognized.

Do you think there is a chance to be the Democratic Party members in the debate on how much you should increase your income tax?

## Progecomers want is not a fair tax on the rich.

They want a fair tax for the rich.

Many billionaire and billionaire paid tax rates established at the federal level, not at the state level, as Monica pointed out.

What they want is the unfair of the whole country's tax.

Aside from whether to realize a wise policy, let's say frankly.

I think most of the New York, the Democratic Party, the tax of the tax, and the billionaire are ranked higher in the Democratic Party.

Opposition to most of New York, especially in the central and western suburbs, is not politically advantageous.

For example, the Republican Party should talk about the structural issues in New York. This crisis is a chance to review the whole state. In 2010, Harry Wilson, a stat e-o f-law candidate, uses data to examine the validity of all programs in the state, and confirm that it can be integrated and do major structural things. He talked a lot about conducting complete audits in unpolted states.

We will ultimately use Cavid.

The federal government's budget will eventually fall into the same situation.

So the Republican Party needs to talk about structural things, and is not a dissatisfied party, but to return to the idea party.

However, it is necessary to present a reliable proposal that can appeal to general editorial committee members and some Democrats in Congress.

We need to confirm that we have the right to create differences. And I want to mention the word Fairness raised by Monica and Bill.

He will talk about the tax increase, but the leftist hears the same thing that this is fair.

Where do you draw a line?

Where is it fair to stop taxing the millionaire?

How do you decide their burden?

How much do you pay? In other words, there is a relatively unfair income tax system in New York.

It pays 6, 5 % of the $ 2, 000 or $ 1 million.

We don't think it's fair.

Tax rate exceeding percent.

Higher than the tax rate. If it is more than that.

The $ 21, 000 is 6, 4 %.

Basically the same.

When this system was created a long time ago, there was a bigger difference between $ 210, 000 and $ 50, 000.

So what we are looking for is fairness.

Pay taxes to buy a cup of coffee, and the money is used to build schools and roads.

If you buy stocks and bonds, there is no tax.

It is a relatively simple adjustment to make the tax system up to date and make it more fair.

I agree. The word fair has been questioned for many years.

I understand what you are saying.

And you may have made a moral claim. < SPAN> For example, the Republican Party should talk about the structural issues in New York. This crisis is a chance to review the whole state. In 2010, Harry Wilson, a stat e-o f-law candidate, uses data to examine the validity of all programs in the state, and confirm that it can be integrated and do major structural things. He talked a lot about conducting complete audits in unpolted states.

We will ultimately use Cavid.

The federal government's budget will eventually fall into the same situation.

So the Republican Party needs to talk about structural things, and is not a dissatisfied party, but to return to the idea party.

However, it is necessary to present a reliable proposal that can appeal to general editorial committee members and some Democrats in Congress.

We need to confirm that we have the right to create differences. And I want to mention the word Fairness raised by Monica and Bill.

He will talk about the tax increase, but the leftist hears the same thing that this is fair.

Where do you draw a line?

Where is it fair to stop taxing the millionaire?

How do you decide their burden?

How much do you pay? In other words, there is a relatively unfair income tax system in New York.

It pays 6, 5 % of the $ 2, 000 or $ 1 million.

We don't think it's fair.

Tax rate exceeding percent.

Higher than the tax rate. If it is more than that.

The $ 21, 000 is 6, 4 %.

Basically the same.

When this system was created a long time ago, there was a bigger difference between $ 210, 000 and $ 50, 000.

So what we are looking for is fairness.

Pay taxes to buy a cup of coffee, and the money is used to build schools and roads.

If you buy stocks and bonds, there is no tax.

It is a relatively simple adjustment to make the tax system up to date and make it fairer.

I agree. The word fair has been questioned for many years.

I understand what you are saying.

And you may have made a moral claim. For example, the Republican Party should talk about the structural issues in New York. This crisis is a chance to review the whole state. In 2010, Harry Wilson, a stat e-o f-law candidate, uses data to examine the validity of all programs in the state, and confirm that it can be integrated and do major structural things. He talked a lot about conducting complete audits in unpolted states.

We will ultimately use Cavid.

The federal government's budget will eventually fall into the same situation.

So the Republican Party needs to talk about structural things, and is not a dissatisfied party, but to return to the idea party.

However, it is necessary to present a reliable proposal that can appeal to general editorial committee members and some Democrats in Congress.

We need to confirm that we have the right to create differences. And I want to mention the word Fairness raised by Monica and Bill.

He will talk about the tax increase, but the leftist hears the same thing that this is fair.

Where do you draw a line?

Where is it fair to stop taxing the millionaire?

How do you decide their burden?

How much do you pay? In other words, there is a relatively unfair income tax system in New York.

It pays 6, 5 % of the $ 2, 000 or $ 1 million.

We don't think it's fair.

Tax rate exceeding percent.

Higher than the tax rate. If it is more than that.

$ 21, 000 is 6, 4 %.

Basically the same.

When this system was created a long time ago, there was a bigger difference between $ 210, 000 and $ 50, 000.

So what we are looking for is fairness.

Pay taxes to buy a cup of coffee, and the money is used to build schools and roads.

If you buy stocks and bonds, there is no tax.

It is a relatively simple adjustment to make the tax system up to date and make it fairer.

I agree. The word fair has been questioned for many years.

I understand what you are saying.

And you may have made a moral claim.

If you make $1 billion and pay 6%, you pay 6% of $1 million.

If you make $20, 000 and pay 6%, you pay 6% of $20, 000.

Is this not the definition of fair?

Isn't it fair? I don't know the definition of fair.

What? I think what Monica is saying is that fair means paying what you can pay, not necessarily paying the exact same amount.

Is that right? I mean, there is no chance of a flat tax in New York.

But fairness is paying a percentage of your income, but that's a losing battle.

It's a losing battle. Unfortunately, we can't talk about that today.

The governor initially maintained for years in his budget speech that he was not Ver Boateng on this issue, but now he is moving forward with the legalization of online sports betting.

Ver Boateng? We also have a proposal to add revenue, mobile sports betting, we believe it could raise $500 million.

It's happening in a lot of states.

The question here is not whether to do mobile sports betting.

The question is how to do it.

Who will benefit?

And it's very lucrative.

This proposition allows casinos to do mobile sports betting.

This is very good for the casinos and for the people who support them.

The other option is for the people of New York to actually receive the benefits of mobile sports betting and run it just like a state lottery.

I'm on the side of the people of the state.

I think the people of the state should get the revenue.

This is not a money-making scheme to increase tax revenue for personal gain.

We want real revenue from sports betting.

Bernadette, do you think this outreach from the governor will make a difference on this issue that's been undermined by only the Democrats in the Senate for the last two years?

I don't know. At the end of the day, it's certainly going to be a different conversation than it's been.

I mean, it's certainly news that he supports mobile sports betting and said he's going to legalize it.

That, at the end of the day, moves the needle. But this is not a cheap source of income that can be counted on for the next budget.

This proposal is different from what the legislative government has recently supported in a recent parliament.

Basically, the government will be determined because it will pass through the State Gaming Committee-although not already regulated, in contrast to various options in New Jersey. Further regulations will be provided.

However, after all, it will not come to a conclusion next year.

In the future, some budgets will be set up, and revenue may be obtained.

However, as far as I saw New Jersey, it was popular.

New Yorkers go to New Jersey and participate in this bet.

They go to New Jersey to see this. Monica and sports gambling are by no means a form of progressive taxation.

In fact, some people may say that they are reversed because they can't afford sports gambling spending.

However, the Democratic members are positive to this idea, including the members who had previously opposed the expansion of electronicization, and this year, in the future, in the future, in the future.

Is this a problem that produces concerns in Albanny, or is it a problem for advanced members?

gt; & amp; gt? I think this is a problem in that the governor is saying two things at the same time.

The $ 5 billion tax for the wealthy is a drop of a bucket and is not enough, but at the same time, it is necessary to legalize mobile, sports and marijuvenors.

He says he needs to revenue and needs to decide where to raise it or not.

In particular, the Manhattan Research Institute, which is not particularly progressive, says these are reversal tax.

Taxes to lo w-income earners and taxes on UV rays proposed by the Democratic Party.

I think it is necessary to clarify why to choose a reverse tax instead of progressive taxation.

I agree. This is the third proposal of marijuana in the last three years.

The legislative leaders hoped to legalize marijuana, and Qomo wants it.

Is it finally realized this year?

Is this year that year? There have been many discussions on what to do with that money. < SPAN> This proposal is different from what the legislative government has recently supported in a recent parliament.

Basically, the government will be determined because it will pass through the State Gaming Committee-although not already regulated, in contrast to various options in New Jersey. Further regulations will be provided.

However, after all, it will not come to a conclusion next year.

In the future, some budgets will be set up, and revenue may be obtained.

However, as far as I saw New Jersey, it was popular.

New Yorkers go to New Jersey and participate in this bet.

They go to New Jersey to see this. Monica and sports gambling are by no means a form of progressive taxation.

In fact, some people may say that they are reversed because they can't afford sports gambling spending.

However, the Democratic members are positive to this idea, including the members who had previously opposed the expansion of electronicization, and this year, in the future, in the future, in the future.

Is this a problem that produces concerns in Albanny, or is it a problem for advanced members?

gt; & amp; gt? I think this is a problem in that the governor is saying two things at the same time.

The $ 5 billion tax for the wealthy is a drop of a bucket and is not enough, but at the same time, it is necessary to legalize mobile, sports and marijuvenors.

He says he needs to revenue and needs to decide where to raise it or not.

In particular, the Manhattan Research Institute, which is not particularly progressive, says these are reversal tax.

Taxes to lo w-income earners and taxes on UV rays proposed by the Democratic Party.

I think it is necessary to clarify why to choose a reverse tax instead of progressive taxation.

I agree. This is the third proposal of marijuana in the last three years.

The legislative leaders hoped to legalize marijuana, and Qomo wants it.

Is it finally realized this year?

Is this year that year? There have been many discussions on what to do with that money. This proposal is different from what the legislative government has recently supported in a recent parliament.

Basically, the government will be determined because it will pass through the State Gaming Committee-although not already regulated, in contrast to various options in New Jersey. Further regulations will be provided.

However, after all, it will not come to a conclusion next year.

In the future, some budgets will be set up, and revenue may be obtained.

However, as far as I saw New Jersey, it was popular.

New Yorkers go to New Jersey and participate in this bet.

They go to New Jersey to see this. Monica and sports gambling are by no means a form of progressive taxation.

In fact, some people may say that they are reversed because they can't afford sports gambling spending.

However, the Democratic members are positive to this idea, including the members who had previously opposed the expansion of electronicization, and this year, in the future, in the future, in the future.

Is this a problem that produces concerns in Albanny, or is it a problem for advanced members?

gt; & amp; gt? I think this is a problem in that the governor is saying two things at the same time.

The $ 5 billion tax for the wealthy is a drop of a bucket and is not enough, but at the same time, it is necessary to legalize mobile, sports and marijuvenors.

He says he needs to revenue and needs to decide where to raise it or not.

In particular, the Manhattan Research Institute, which is not particularly progressive, says these are reversal tax.

Taxes to lo w-income earners and taxes on UV rays proposed by the Democratic Party.

I think it is necessary to clarify why to choose a reverse tax instead of progressive taxation.

I agree. This is the third proposal of marijuana in the last three years.

The legislative leaders hoped to legalize marijuana, and Qomo wants it.

Is it finally realized this year?

Is this year that year? There have been many discussions on what to do with that money.

Many Democrats are clamoring for giving back to communities adversely affected by the drug war.

And there's no consensus on how to do that.

There have been some moderate Democrats in the past who didn't support it, but there are enough Democrats, especially in the Senate, that it probably shouldn't be held, especially if it's focused on the budget.

If they're desperate for revenue, I wouldn't be surprised if they find a way to deal with it this year. It might not bring in revenue right away, but it might help down the road if we're talking about the long-term budget impacts of Covid.

That's a good thing. In the bill we just talked about cannabis in the context of it being a criminal justice issue and a hindrance to revenue.

Do you think the focus of this debate on legalization is right?

Well, I don't think so, and I think at least the governor is honest about marijuana and about sports betting.

Electronic sports betting.

It's all about the money.

It's about the revenue.

You're going to wonder what other tidbits New York has to offer as they dabble in side hustles.

Will they feel it then?

It's all about finding a way to make money.

When it comes to marijuana, the fact that you can't make your own homemade marijuana says it all.

It's like... it's not there anymore.

I'm sober, but if I wasn't, this room would be a great self-improvement room.

I mean, it's all about the cash.

Same with sports betting.

It's a regressive tax, especially on the gambling side.

New York spends tens of millions of dollars a year advertising the lottery in poor neighborhoods.

People can't stand to stand in front of the lottery.

They're taking cash from people who can afford it, and now they're trying to do it with mobile betting.

If drugs and gambling are the solution, the state has a real problem.

Right. Your point about homegrown development is important because it's an element that's in the governor's bill, but not in the bill we saw in the Legislature.

Many Democrats are pushing for giving back to communities negatively affected by the drug war.

And there's no consensus on how to do that.

There have been some moderate Democrats in the past who didn't support it, but there are enough Democrats, especially in the Senate, that it probably shouldn't be held, especially if they're going to focus on the budget.

If they're desperate for revenue, I wouldn't be surprised if they find a way to deal with it this year. It might not bring in revenue right away, but it might help down the road if we're talking about the long-term budget impacts of Covid.

That's a good thing. In the bill we just talked about cannabis in the context of it being a criminal justice issue and a revenue impediment.

Do you think the focus of this discussion on legalization is right?

Well, I don't think so, and I think at least the governor is honest about marijuana and about sports betting.

Electronic sports betting.

It's all about the money.

It's all about the revenue.

You're going to wonder what other gimmicks New York has when they get into side hustles.

I wonder if they'll feel it then?

It's all about finding a way to make money.

When it comes to marijuana, the fact that you can't make homemade marijuana says it all.

It's like... it's not there anymore.

I'm sober, but if I wasn't, this room would be a great self-help room.

I mean, it's all about cash.

Same with sports betting.

It's a regressive tax, especially on the gambling side.

New York spends tens of millions of dollars a year advertising the lottery in poor neighborhoods.

People can't stand in front of the lottery.

They're scamming cash from people who can afford it, and now they're trying to do it with mobile betting.

If drugs and gambling are going to be the solution, the state has a real problem.

Yes. Your point about homegrown development is important, because it's an element that's in the governor's bill, but not in the bill we saw in the Legislature. Many Democrats are pushing hard for giving back to communities that have been adversely affected by the drug war.

And there's just no consensus on how to do that.

There have been some moderate Democrats who didn't support it in the past, but there are enough Democrats, especially in the Senate, that it shouldn't be held up, especially if they're going to focus on the budget.

If they're desperate for revenue, I wouldn't be surprised if they find a way to address it this year. It might not bring in revenue right away, but it might help down the road if we're talking about the long-term budget impacts of Covid.

That's a good thing. In the bill we just talked about, cannabis was talked about in the context of being a criminal justice issue and a revenue impediment.

Do you think that's the right focus for this discussion on legalization?

Well. I don't think so, and I think at least the Governor is being honest about marijuana and about sports betting.

Electronic sports betting.

It's all about the money.

It's all about the revenue.

You're going to wonder what other tidbits New York has about side hustling.

I wonder if they'll feel it then?

It's all about finding a way to make money.

When it comes to marijuana, it says it all that you can't make homemade marijuana.

It's like... it's not there anymore.

I'm sober, but if I wasn't, this room would be a great self-improvement room.

I mean, it's all about the cash.

Same with sports betting.

It's a regressive tax, especially on the gambling side.

New York spends tens of millions of dollars every year advertising the lottery in poor neighborhoods.

People can't stand to see a lottery ticket.

They take cash from people who can afford it, and now they're doing it with mobile betting.

If drugs and gambling are the solution, the state has a real problem.

Yes. Your point about homegrown development is important because it's an element that's in the Governor's bill but wasn't in the bill we saw in the Legislature.

Yeah. That's been all the talk for the last two years.

And last year, if it weren't for COVID, recreational marijuana legalization might not have passed.

But if the Legislature really wants to fight for the key elements of the bill that have been brought up over and over again over the past few cycles, they need to take it to the bank.

But yeah, home cultivation is one of them.

The other thing is, Senator Diane Savino is a major supporter of New York's medical marijuana program, and her size means that the barrier to entry is as high as the marijuana capital, the Yuana program.

There could be problems in the future with legal marijuana.

So they're... if they want to get the program up and running, they're going to have to talk about it.

Yeah. If you consult with Democratic lawmakers, if they were familiar with the Seneca strategy and kept the need for all the deliberations, they'd see if it was worth the compromise and maybe make some changes along the way.

Yeah. Marijuana special?

## So you have to decide what's your top priority.

When you negotiate with the governor, whatever he thinks you want, he's going to use that as a weakness against you.

Why should marijuana be off the table when there's so much more we need?

So I say pick the No. 1 issue you want to fight on.

The three men in this room, I think men, you have to decide on a theme.

Right? So the budget process, spoiler alert, will ultimately be kissed off by the Democrats and pass the Democrat votes.

I'm curious how Roy Lai thinks the Democrats should approach this process.

Let me ask you a question. The Governor's presentation I saw today was circumstantial and disappointing.

Lack of specificity and almost nothing decided.

Instead, it depends on what the federal government will do.

He pleaded for more resources and does not trust the federal government for resources taken through the Civid Package twice a year in the past year.

Yes, we need the results from Washington, and we need help from there.

However, we need future plans and need a realistic plan based on numbers that are not just air theory.

$ 15 billion, not the true deficit of New York.

If you send false data and unfounded data and ignore what has been provided by the federal government, you cannot expect a honest and frank answer from Washington.

We are not completely dependent on the federal government.

We are New York.

We are tough New York State.

This state needs leadership to move forward as New York and cooperate with each other without fingering.

We need to work together to survive this situation and survive.

For more information, I want to wait for the governor's announcement.

I heard that there was a briefing.

I haven't done it personally, and I haven't seen any update books so far.

I think the budget proposal will be submitted today and the details will be revealed.

But from my point of view, this budget presented today is not strict in New York.

Weak New York.

Bill Orey, what do you think of this rhetoric?

Bill Orey, what do you think of this rhetoric? I think it was a fair criticism.

The Republican Party should do more.

If there is no alternative, you should work with the governor.

In other words, it is the governor's job to regain as much money as possible from the federal government.

That is his job.

Nevertheless, in the state of the large donors, even if it costs $ 1 billion, it will still be about 25 %.

But you need something that can be used instead.