>> From WXXI News.

This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection this hour was made on Tuesday when Governor Kathy Hochul followed up her state of the state address with a formal budget plan, and my colleague Jimmy Vielkind reports that this year's budget from the governor is different from the norm.

There are fewer big fights brewing in Albany, but there are some.

The biggest Valkyrie reports is probably the governor's opposition to raising taxes on the very richest New Yorkers.

She says the state has enough revenue without a tax increase on super earners.

Today we begin a series of conversations with the lawmakers from our region who will take up some of these issues as the state budget is shaped.

What are their priorities?

What do they think needs to get done in 2026?

My guest this hour is a New York state senator, chair of the Senate Transportation Committee Committee.

Committee is the word Senator Jeremy Cooney easy for me to say.

New York State District number 56, the Senate district number 56.

Welcome back to the program.

>> Great to be back in Rochester, Evan.

>> Let me just ask out of the gate here if you agree with Jimmy Vielkind reporting that the biggest fight with the governor might be over taxing, taxing the rich, so to speak, here.

What do you think?

>> Well, I think the headline for this budget proposal from the governor is that things are different than they have been in the past.

And the biggest factor that's different is that we cannot rely on our federal government partners the way that we have in the past.

And so we have heard, and it seems like every week is a new week of news here.

But, you know, this program is being cut.

This project now is being, you know, threatened here.

And so those dollars that come from Washington into New York State are a big portion of the state's budget.

And I want to be very clear to all the listeners here today, New York State can't make up the difference between what may be withheld from our federal government partners and what we need to spend here in New York.

And this is so frustrating to me because as a New Yorker, we actually pay more money in our federal taxes.

These are, you know, these are our tax dollars that we are paying into Washington, D.C.

then we get back.

We are what we call a donor state in New York.

And yet, despite that, we are not getting the resources proportionate to the citizens that we represent in New York.

So how that impacts our state level budget is that we have to try to, you know, stand up for New Yorkers, but also make sure that our New Yorkers get the resources they need to live their daily lives.

>> I think what I hear you saying is that even in normal circumstances, New York State would be a, quote, donor state.

Correct.

But these are not normal circumstances.

And and the federal government, well, one place where the federal government and the Trump administration is trying to withhold funding is over child care.

And we see an actual scandal in Minnesota.

And I understand that they're investigating that.

But now the Trump administration is saying, well, there's a handful of other states, five states that were concerned about fraud, and we're not going to send the federal money until we know that there's no fraud.

Now, they all happen to be states that don't vote for the president.

>> What a coincidence.

>> But listen do you want to say anything about whether you think there's actual fraud and that there's any legitimacy to the concern there?

>> Look, we, as government officials, have to make sure that taxpayer resources, whether they're federal taxes or state taxes, are spent in accordance with the wishes of our local governments.

And we want to make sure that there's no fraud, and we want to make sure the dollars are getting to the families that need them most.

Right.

So any sort of due diligence, oversight, enforcement?

I'm I'm fine with that.

But at the end of the day, when you pick winners and losers, when you go into states like New York and say, we're going to take away your child care benefits so that we can get less families into quality care, that's that's just wrong.

It's absolutely wrong.

And thankfully, we have a governor that is leading the way nationally on providing universal child care across New York.

And I'm really excited to talk about that.

>> Well, so let's start there then.

>> tell us a little bit more about what is coming and whether what is being done.

I mean, the big news conference that the governor had was with the new mayor of New York City.

And there's, of course, there's a lot of focus on, on, you know, Zohran Mamdani a week into his term, getting sort of a win on a big issue.

But what about the rest of the state?

What's happening?

>> Well, some good news on that.

but as I always like to remind people, there are actually two Indians in New York state government.

There's there's a great guy down in New York City.

I forgot his name, but but there's also the Indian and upstate, and we're and we're asking that question as well.

what does that mean for communities outside of New York City?

to Mayor Mamdani credit, he is leading with integrity on the issue of making sure every two year old gets access to high quality care in New York City.

It's a different scenario outside of New York, in communities like Monroe County, we are focused on children ages 0 to 3 and recognizing that we have some more work to do than some of the infrastructure that New York City has already done, starting with mayor de Blasio many years back.

So the good news here is that this governor recognizes that Monroe County has struggled with getting more of our youngest residents into high quality child care, especially when you think about the fact that in Monroe County, we have such a high rate of child poverty that this issue is, you know, impacting our our daily lives.

So Monroe County is one of three counties to receive a $20 million pilot program funding to help get again ages 0 to 3, enrolled in high quality care.

The goal is to get 1000 new slots open by 2027.

That's that's the goal.

And so she is working hand in hand with Monroe County and our county executive, Adam Bello, to kind of figure out what that will look like in terms of what Rochester Monroe County's needs are.

But that is a huge win for our community.

I mean, I can't tell you how many phone calls, how many town halls how many community meetings I go to where child care is impacting everyone's life.

>> Whether it's just a pilot.

>> Right.

It's a pilot.

But the idea is to show and prove the model.

I think this is where it can get a little complicated when it comes to child care.

It's not just about having more slots available.

It's about making sure that we actually have physical spaces for children, safe spaces for children, making sure that we have a workforce that can meet that need.

And I'd like to go one step further and say, we have to pay that workforce appropriately so that they can live lives of dignity, right?

So it has to be a holistic solution.

But this governor, again, credit where credit is due, is prioritizing child care in a way that we have not seen from other countries and other states across the country.

>> One question for you about Mamdani.

I mean, certainly there are substantive and political reasons that the governor and the New York City mayor would stand side by side early in his term and roll out what they're calling a victory.

But there's going to be times where the governor of New York does not agree with the mayor of New York City.

They the governor of New York, is not a democratic socialist.

She's going to view some of his ideas as too far unaffordable.

Probably there will be some clash.

What are you looking at with New York City?

I mean, do you think there are certain things you're hearing proposed, discussed already that you say, you know, as a state lawmaker, this is going to be hard for the state to be partner with?

Or do you think there are some ideas that you're genuinely curious about that you want to see how they roll?

>> Well, I'm certainly keeping an open mind.

of course I'm always going into these conversations around the budget around, well, what does that mean for Rochester?

What does that mean for upstate New York?

I want to make sure that we get our fair share.

But we also recognize that New York City is the economic center of our state as that city goes strong, so does the rest of the state.

We look at the same way here in Rochester, right as the city of Rochester is strong.

The rest of Monroe County benefits.

So that same scenario applies.

I think the key part is that we have to make sure that we are being as intentional as possible to grow population across New York State.

So, of course, you know, we think about New York City and attracting the, you know, new talent to to all the new jobs that are coming to New York City.

But I'm thinking about upstate New York and making sure that we can get as many workers families to relocate to upstate New York.

And I think if we work hand in hand, we can get that done.

>> Some of Mamdani opponents have said, look, you're going to tax people out of New York City.

Some of the governor's rhetoric indicates she is not interested in a super wealth tax this year.

Are you?

Is this the one place where you agree or disagree with the governor?

>> Well, actually, I have signed on to legislation even before this year's conversation around taxes and revenue.

I signed legislation to make sure that people are paying their fair share.

I do not believe that in a time when there is such great need here in Rochester, but really across New York State, that that that some people can be continuing to make millions and millions of dollars and not pay forward that wealth to help children, to help families, to help all New Yorkers realize their piece of the American dream.

Now, this is also a unique year in the budget state budget process, because we recognize that we are seeing an increase in state tax collections in 2024, 2025, meaning that we have more resources available to us than we're budgeted for.

We saw that for higher than expected.

collections in December.

In the fourth quarter of last year, mostly from Wall Street bonuses.

Right.

You know, these folks down in Wall Street, they make a lot of money.

They they get bonuses at the end of the year and they pay taxes on it.

And that tax revenue goes to the state of New York.

So we have upwards of 4 billion with a B more dollars than were expected into the state.

This governor is saying at this point, let's put that money in towards safeguarding some of the costs that may come from the federal government.

Let's put that money towards making the dream of universal childcare a reality in New York.

And let's not raise state income taxes on people.

When people's property taxes at the local level are already going up.

So people are getting people are getting pinched.

We recognize that affordability is a huge issue.

It is not a buzz term.

This is real.

I have people coming in to my office here in Rochester, from gates, from Greece, from Brighton, from Henrietta, telling me they can't afford their property taxes.

Right.

And so this is very real.

This is what we believe we can do at the state level.

>> Some of your colleagues will say, you're absolutely right.

And most New Yorkers wouldn't pay that super wealth tax.

It's targeted at just the top, top, top earners.

Why not?

>> That's right.

Look, New York is fortunate to have a very successful business environment.

We do have some of those top earners, not just top earners in New York, top earners in the country, top earners in the world, quite frankly.

Right.

And so what we're asking those individuals to do is to pay their fair share.

Now there's lots of proposals on how to do that.

Some of that is based on income tax, some of that on taxes on luxury items.

Some of that is tax on stock transfers.

There's a whole suite of proposals that's going to unfold over the course of the budget process.

Is there.

>> You're open to that?

>> Oh, I've signed on to a number of those pieces of legislation.

So, you know, we have to see do we have the resources in the budget to deliver on the promise to New Yorkers if we need more resources?

That's where that conversation can come into play.

>> And you also mentioned the Trump administration and the challenge this year of maybe not getting that federal funding.

So as the transportation chair, obviously things would be different if it was Transportation Secretary Buttigieg or someone who's more of a fellow traveler in politics last time we talked, we talked about how frosty things might get with Secretary Duffy or others in the Trump administration.

And you've got big goals.

You've got very ambitious goals with with rail, with transportation options for New Yorkers.

So what is the state of the relationship with the Trump administration now in 2026?

And what does that mean for your big goals there?

>> Listen, I truly believe I've said this on the show before and I believe it.

transportation, whether we're talking about local roads and bridges, whether we're talking about big ideas like high speed rail or talking about some of the new aircraft technology, transportation is one of those few policy issues where Republicans and Democrats and blue states and red states can agree on it, literally and figuratively brings people together.

And so I'm hoping that transportation does not become a political tool or some sort of retribution, because we are New York.

look, this is a president who does like to build things.

You've heard him talk about Penn Station down in New York City and him wanting to take an active role in reshaping one of the largest rail stations in the country.

Right.

So he has an interest in infrastructure and growth.

He knows Rochester.

He knows Buffalo.

Right.

So, you know, recognizing that we have unique transportation needs in upstate New York that requires federal funds is such a huge opportunity for both the Trump administration and the state of New York.

But I can tell you, you know, sitting right here in downtown Rochester, I'm thinking about Inner Loop North.

I'm making sure that we get that $100 million that the Biden administration signed off on and that is still being litigated with the Trump administration today.

That will be a transformative project that every Rochester and Monroe County resident will see for generations.

>> When should that get decided?

That 100 million.

>> Look, it's going through the litigation process.

you know, I'm hoping that we can get decided sooner rather than later.

I'd like to see some additional resources go into the state budget process to see if we can start getting the process underway.

The planning process.

I mean, this is such a huge project that it's going to take years to go, but we can't delay for every year that we delay, we put off the jobs that are going to be created.

These are good paying union jobs, by the way, and the cost goes up.

So taxpayers are going to have to pay more money if we don't do that work.

Now let's get a shovel in the ground.

Let's start the process.

>> What is the reason that the Trump administration wants to block it?

>> So the Trump administration is blocking the $100 million for the Inner Loop North, because it was connected to a program called Reconnecting Communities.

This was a Biden era program that the Department of Transportation came out with, which was to recognize that a lot of these big highway road developments in the 60s and 70s actually bifurcated low income communities or communities of color.

And that's exactly, by the way, what happened with Inner Loop North?

If you look at the community to the north of of the Inner Loop, right.

So you're thinking about Marketview Heights, that part of the neighborhood, and then downtown, which is you know, on the other side of the inner loop, we could create a better connection between those two neighborhoods.

We could create more housing, more jobs.

Right.

This is valuable land for a part of the road that doesn't get used a lot.

Again, the state of New York put in $100 million, and Governor Hochul came to Rochester and announced that I actually remember Mayor Evans jumping out of his seat, you know, being very excited and supportive of that.

The Biden administration, under the leadership of Senator Schumer secured that money.

He worked very closely with Senator Gillibrand and Congresswoman Morelli.

They got it done.

We had the money to build Inner Loop North and to create this new land in downtown Rochester.

And the Trump administration got into office, and they put the brakes on.

So, you know, we're still hoping that we can still get there, because despite the fact that it's attached to the Reconnecting Communities program, it's still good development.

It's still good paying jobs for Americans, for New Yorkers, for Rochesterians.

>> Is it possible that if this was just an infrastructure project, the Trump administration would have said, all right, but they see the language and it feels like die to them?

It feels like telling an American history that they're not comfortable with.

>> I mean, your guess is as good as mine.

It seems arbitrary to me.

Some people will take that stance.

You know, my view is this is a good project on the merits.

It creates good paying jobs.

Let's go forward.

>> okay, so keep us apprized of that one as we go.

I will, I will.

Let me grab a phone call from Jack in Greece.

This is Jack.

I'm with state Senator Jeremy Cooney.

Hi, Jack.

Go ahead.

>> Oh, hi.

Thanks for taking my call, Senator Cooney.

Cooney.

I guess, you know, I'm a Democrat.

I've voted for you.

I've voted Democratic.

my, basically my whole life.

but I'm looking at, you know, reading today's paper and trying to get a, you know, I'm retired, been retired.

I received no increase on my pension, and I never will.

seeing my, as you said, my cost my property taxes just horrendous now.

And I know that's not under your purview, but from a New York State resident, I look at all the everything.

The total cost of living in New York State.

And I'm not certain of this, and I haven't double checked, but I think we're the highest.

Were the most expensive state to live in in the country.

I'm sure that's debatable.

pros and cons, but the reality is I spend a lot to live here, and so do my four adult children.

And and you know, I would hope that you would also advocate for people like us.

I want to pay my fair share.

I believe in the initiatives that you're talking about, but I think the Democratic Party in total should work harder at the national level.

You got to you got to find a way to make this more of a level playing field from state to state across the country, because we've seen the decline in New York state population.

That's reality.

So, I mean, all this idea of putting you got $4 billion, well, let's spend it.

Maybe you should rethink that a little bit for, you know, there's more to the Democratic Party than, than just these issues that bring the fringe, you know.

But I'm thinking you might need to figure a way to work more with national level.

>> Thank you.

All right, Jack, thank you.

Senator.

>> Jack, thanks so much for that point.

And I completely agree with you.

In fact, I think that we don't do a good enough job talking about some of the tax cuts that we have done.

I mean, this is the largest middle class tax cut that we have seen in years over the over the previous budget.

But if people don't feel it or they're getting pinched at the other end at the town level, right, it doesn't change their quality of life.

There's just a certain reality here.

and so I agree with you.

We need to find ways to just lower that cost of living to be in New York.

and I think one of the ways, in addition to childcare is what the governor has proposed around car insurance and utility costs.

you know, I'm thinking a lot about car insurance because I chair the transportation committee.

I'm on the insurance committee.

In addition to being, as Jack said, one of the highest taxed states in the nation, we also have the highest car insurance rate in the nation, an average over $4,000 per year.

That's about $1,500 more than what other states see.

And so again, thanks to the leadership of our governor, we have proposed some ideas to lower that premium.

So that's more money you keep in your pocket.

And we're talking about $1,500.

That's not nothing.

Right.

And so she has proposed a number of ways to lower the cost of everyday consumers car insurance costs.

And by the way, it's not if you don't own a car.

This is still impacting you because car insurance rates impacts the price of of ride sharing Ubers and lifts.

So if you rely on an Uber or Lyft platform to get to work or what have you that impacts that cost there, it impacts the cost of of public transportation as well.

So again, I think that is a very concrete way it's going to be I think it's going to be somewhat controversial, to be honest with you, in the budget process.

But but you know, that is a way to start keeping money in your pocket so that you can afford and continue to be in New York.

>> Let's talk a little bit about why it might be controversial, and I want to read from my colleague Jimmy Vielkind reporting on this.

He said that next to super earners tax, this may be the next big fight.

And here's what Jimmy Velikyan reports quote, the governor said one of the biggest fights she expects in this year's budget talks will involve wonky car insurance standards.

She's proposing to tighten up the definition of a serious physical injury under state law, a designation that allows someone involved in an auto crash to win damages for pain and suffering, in addition to their medical expenses, the governor said.

That is driving up premiums.

Andrew Finkelstein, president of the New York State Trial Lawyers Association, said the governor has no evidence to back up the claim.

He said her proposal would just make it harder for injured people who his members represent, to get compensation when they're hurt in a car.

And so there's going to be a fight.

The insurance companies love this proposal because they feel like we're paying for.

I mean, I'm I'm paraphrasing, but everything I'm reading, Senator, I want you to correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think the insurance companies are saying this is too loose a definition and claiming pain and suffering to stretch it and get a big settlement is hurting us.

And then it drives everyone's premiums up.

So let's narrow that.

Let's tighten that.

The trial lawyers are going, oh good, I hope you don't get hurt in a car because now you're not going to get paid.

And so those are the people who are going to suffer.

Most are the people who are legitimately hurt.

And both of those, by the way, is Jimmy Vielkind reports are pretty big donors to political campaigns.

And so the governor's hearing it from both sides.

But she's got a position on this.

Where exactly do I want to know?

Do you think that we do need to tighten up the definition of a serious injury in a car crash?

>> Listen this is where leadership matters.

And again, I applaud Governor Hochul for for jumping into this issue because there are some common sense things we can do that I think most New Yorkers would agree upon.

obviously, we want to find that balance.

We don't want New Yorkers who get injured in a car accident to not have recourse in the court process.

They have the right to sue, and they should be able to do that.

and at the same time, we don't want all of us who, you know, the majority of New Yorkers, let's just say this.

The majority of New Yorkers are good drivers, right?

They drive, they follow.

>> The rules.

>> They well, come on.

I mean, look, majority.

>> I'm on Lake Avenue every day.

>> That's true.

That's true.

You have a you have one perspective.

And that's why we need to invest in public transportation so that we get more cars off the road on Lake Avenue.

But but let me say, yeah, let's stay here.

Look, there are things that we can do through some of the new technologies.

Telemetrics.

Right.

Let's reward the good drivers, the ones who are not reporting the accidents, the ones who are driving the speed limit, the ones who are stopping at stop signs.

Right.

Let's reward those drivers with lower rates.

Lower, lower premiums.

Let's also look at the bad actors.

If you choose to get into a motor vehicle and you're driving on Lake Avenue or you're driving on 490 and you're maybe you're you're intoxicated, right?

And you get into an accident, why should you be entitled not only to recover?

you know, any health benefits, but also the damage to your car.

You've hurt someone else.

You chose to get into that position, you know, why are good drivers the victims in this?

Paying for the bad actors?

Now, obviously, there has to be, you know, very clear, bright line rules.

What counts, what doesn't count.

That's where the discussion is going to be.

but I do think this, you know, no fault kind of everyone gets whatever they ask for in court is just raising the rates to a way that it's becoming unaffordable to drive.

And in a community like Rochester, where we depend on cars.

Right.

And I know that our friends at reconnect and others will say we should get more public transportation.

I agree with you.

But people, at the end of the day, still rely on their vehicles to get to work, to pick up their kids from from childcare.

We have to make the car insurance more affordable.

>> Do you think the trial lawyers are wrong?

>> I think trial lawyers are going to argue, and I think that's what they're really good at doing.

>> All right.

So that's one to watch.

Do you think by the way, there's enough support politically to pass changes to this to tighten it up?

>> That's a good question.

I think it's still early.

but I will say that there is actually some data on what other states have done in 2022, the state of Florida went through a whole comprehensive, what we call tort reform.

Right now, I'm not saying that we mimic everything that the state of Florida does, but now, years later, they're seeing a significant decrease in car insurance rates.

So there are some things that we can learn of what has been applied in other states that we could bring to New York.

>> So let me put a bow on what Jack was calling about.

So he's talking about just general affordability.

And this is an area insurance is one that may, in your view, get better, more affordable for New Yorkers.

Child is another.

Anything else in the realm of affordability that you think the state can do this year?

>> Utilities.

I mean, I think many of us who are cold right now outside here in Rochester are turning up our thermometers, but then thinking twice about how high we turn those thermometers, because it is expensive.

And there have been proposed rate increases by our genie, but not just our genie all across the state.

and so what we're saying as a legislature is the regulatory agency, which is called the Public Service Commission, or PSC, which gets to decide whether a utility provider can raise their rate or not, should take in some higher levels of scrutiny.

So, for example, if there is some executive compensation for some of these large private utility companies, that should be taking a look at, are they making the investments in our communities, the what they said they were going to do?

are they making sure that we're prepared for future weather events and storms?

I've talked to our genie about this specifically, and, you know, they have big plans to to do weatherization.

but also looking at some of the users of this electricity and utilities.

Right.

So when we think about the new jobs that are coming into play, we just broke a broke the ground on micron last week in Central New York.

You know, huge new job provider.

But there are new data centers that we're looking to attract to the greater Rochester region, to the Finger Lakes, to the upstate area.

Right.

Huge consumers of power.

And the governor has said maybe we should make sure that these new data centers are paying their fair share of that utility cost.

Not all the ratepayers like you and me should be paying for them.

So I think those are the conversations that she's having with the Public Service Commission.

And I think the legislature is going to look at ways to reduce the cost to everyday New Yorkers.

>> Is the micron thing happening?

>> I feel really good about what happened in Central New York last week.

I mean, we had the Trump administration sent the secretary of the Treasury, Howard Lutnick, was there.

We had Chuck Schumer there.

We had members of Congress, I think Joe Morelli, I think I saw him in some of the pictures was there, which is great.

You know, all of these, you know, federal officials working with our governor, you know, cut the ribbon.

And the CEO of micron was there.

Right.

They have deep working relationships with Rochester based suppliers.

They have training programs with RIT and the University of Rochester.

I mean, we are going to benefit from this.

I think that program moves forward.

I absolutely do.

>> I'm going to get back to phone calls and emails in our second half hour.

I want to hit one other point before we jump back to listeners here.

And by the way, listeners, if you want to call the program, it's 844295 talk.

8442958255263 WXXI.

If you're in Rochester, 263999 for Mike in Rochester, I'll take your call next.

Please hang in there.

email Connections at wxxi.org.

And if you're watching on YouTube, you can join the chat there.

So the second half hour, we're going to get a lot of your questions in.

But but two other brief points here.

First of all, Senator Schumer took some some guff for, you know, reporters were asking him with Howard Lutnick, there, some pretty pointed questions about the Trump administration.

And you could see that in the moment.

My read was Senator Schumer was there to kind of cut a ribbon and at least honor a partnership that isn't always easy to have, and try to celebrate what he thinks is going to be a victory for Central New York and not necessarily necessarily bring a lot of recriminations in with the Trump administration.

But a lot of progressives looked at that, and they were like, that was weak.

I mean, come on, this is not a normal situation.

I know it's tough.

There are times you got to walk that line.

What did you make of the criticism of Senator Schumer about that?

>> look, I would I would like to see a more forceful reply.

Of course.

You know.

>> Even in the moment.

>> There, I think this was a, you know, a moment of celebration.

And I think he might have not been in that same mindset at the same time.

There is no doubt in my mind micron would not have happened without Chuck Schumer.

Let's be very clear about that.

I mean, he, as the former majority leader of the Senate, now he's the minority leader.

But at the time, right.

Made sure that deal got done.

And he deserves a lot of credit for that.

At the same time, this is not an ordinary time to be you know, go along to get along with our federal partners.

As we started this program, our state budget is dependent in large part on the federal contributions we get, whether we're talking about Medicaid rates, whether we're talking about childcare, whether we're talking about infrastructure projects, and this federal government is more punitive, more negative, more anti New York than we have seen in a generation.

And they need to be called out for that.

>> Okay.

And then the other part of that is, you know, the bigger picture is I've got listeners saying how are you talking policy when things are so, you know, sort of fraught with everything we're seeing with Ice, with the way the federal government is talking about states like New York, talking about sending more troops in to more cities.

>> and, you know, obviously, Governor Hochul has had some things to say and do about that.

But from your perspective, I want you to just tell us a little bit about what you're seeing with ice and what you see about New York State's response.

>> Well, this is deeply personal to me, and I get a little emotional when talking about this as an immigrant coming from India.

Now, mind you, that was years ago.

But the concept is the same.

I came to this country at the opportunity to be adopted at a very young age by a brave single mom in the South Wedge part of Rochester.

She raised me in this community.

She gave me the chance to have a life and to live into the American Dream.

And what an honor it is to represent my hometown of Rochester as an immigrant, as an Indian American.

That same promise is not being extended to immigrants, to Americans in 2026, period.

Full stop.

What we have seen over the past several weeks, not just what happened in Minneapolis, but what has happened over the past several weeks, months with Ice immigration raids.

>> Including in this state.

>> Including in this state including a constituent of mine has happened in a way that is just fundamentally not our best selves, not who we are as Americans.

The ice of President Obama, of President Biden, because Ice existed under this administration, was vigorous.

They went after the worst of the worst offenders.

Right.

They rounded them up, but they did it in a different way.

The ice of those days is not the same ice that we see today.

We don't have.

We didn't have masked individuals snatching people off of the streets, harassing people at daycares, in grocery stores, outside of schools, barging down people's apartment doors without a judicial warrant.

I mean, it is out of control.

I think that we have this false dichotomy in the in the narrative around immigration, that either you have an open borders and you have no enforcement, or you have this vigorous violence that we see coming out of ice.

And I just I can't stand for that.

There are ways that we can enforce our laws, that we can remove individuals who are here illegally and are causing harm to others.

But we can do it in a humanistic way, in a way that upholds people's civil rights, in a way that doesn't create fear across our streets.

And you know what?

It's wrong.

And it should be talked about at every moment because this has got to stop.

>> How is the governor doing in dealing with it?

What do you think?

>> So the governor in her state of the state address talked about creating a new civil action at the state level so that if an individual, a New Yorker, was roughed up, violated in the Ice enforcement process, they could bring a civil claim in New York state court.

This is one of the challenges.

And by the way, I support I support the governor in that proposal.

This is one of the challenges.

A lot of people call my office and say, take their masks off.

You got to get them to stop doing this.

Make them have a judicial warrant.

We as state officials, cannot mandate that our federal partners tell their federal employees how to act, right.

We can tell them.

>> That it's outside of.

>> Your but it's outside of our authority.

Right.

But something we can do is we can sure as heck stand up for New Yorkers and say, when you mess around with us, when you hurt us, when you scare us, you have some recourse in by following our due process system of laws.

you know, look, you know that I'm a lawyer by training.

one of the things that is so scary and does not get talked about in the context of Ice is this Supreme Court decision that came down from our U.S.

Supreme Court last fall, which basically says for the first time in our history as Americans, that you could stop somebody on the street based on the color of their skin, the accent that they're using, or the type of job that they're performing.

And you can detain them.

They could be a legal citizen.

It could be me.

Right?

I've got brown skin.

I don't have a strong Indian accent.

I have that Rochester accent for sure, but it could be me.

And so I literally carry my passport card wherever I go.

It doesn't matter that I'm a state senator.

I don't want my my rights to be violated.

And if I'm feeling that way, you better believe millions of Americans are feeling that way.

>> So last question on this.

And then what we'll do is we'll break.

And Mike, I'll take your call.

I've got some emails to read.

We're going to talk about some other issues.

High Falls State Park, there's a lot more, but when you say this is not who we are as America.

I think the best evidence for that is the fact that right now, this white House is and this president's approval rating is cratering with independents who, you know, are not MAGA, but they're also not Democrats.

And they moved in his direction a lot in the last in the last election, you hear people like Joe Rogan saying, yes, we voted for deportation, but we did not vote for this.

We did not vote for Ice to behave this way.

So so there is some evidence that what we've seen, especially in the last month, has really hurt this president's approval rating with Americans.

But he was he was elected a second time after January 6th, running on a platform where at the Republican National Convention, it was mass deportation.

Now.

So are you sure that this is not who we are as Americans?

>> This is not who we are as a country.

When we think about where we started, right?

When we think about what the dream was by our founding fathers and by our patriots, this is not who we are.

Over the course of years where we have been a welcoming place.

I mean, look, my frame of reference is Rochester right over the years and not just in the last 5 to 10 years.

I'm talking about 50 years, right?

We've seen Italian Americans make Rochester home.

Ukrainians make their Rochester their home.

We've seen a large Indian and Asian American population make Rochester home when when Kodak and Xerox were were recruiting back in the day.

Right.

This has always been a safe and wonderful place to raise your family, send your kids to school, maybe save for your first home and achieve that part of the American dream.

And now that's under threat.

We've got universities who can't recruit international students.

We've got families who are here, who are now leaving and going back because they're not sure they can stay in this country.

They may be here on a temporary work visa, right, but they don't want to go back home and not be able to come back.

Right.

So this is changing.

our, our everyday experience.

At the same time, we've got companies like micron like our agricultural sector who are reliant on workers, and we can't find people to take these jobs.

Right.

So it's hurting our, our economic output for, for New York State.

So, you know, look, at the end of the day I want to create a community that is safe, that honors due process that follows the law.

but that creates opportunity for everyone.

And we should be so proud of all the good things that we have done here locally.

But but as a country and, you know, all this recent stuff around Venezuela and Greenland and what happened with Renee Good in Minneapolis and what's happening now Portland, you know, that stuff can't distract from who our best selves are.

We should be proud of who we are.

We should be proud of our heritage, and we should make the American dream available to everyone.

>> State Senator Jeremy Cooney, my guest.

short break.

We're coming right back with feedback from listeners on Connections.

Coming up in our second hour, we talked to local Catholics about what they are seeing from Pope Leo, who is not afraid to step in and talk about what he sees with Ice, with deportations, and what he thinks are inhumane treatments of people all across this country.

Now, the white House has shot back, saying that the Pope is wrong.

We're going to talk next hour about what Catholics are seeing in their new leader.

That's on Connections.

>> Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Excellus Blue Cross Blue Shield, providing members with options for in-person and virtual care, creating ways to connect to care when and where it's needed.

Learn more at Excels Ebsco.com and Bob Johnson Auto Group.

Proud supporter of Connections with Evan Dawson.

Believing an informed public makes for a stronger community.

Bobjohnsonautogroup.com.

>> This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

and so let's let's hit some points here that are coming in from listeners here.

we lost Mike, but Mike in Rochester had called in about insurance, and he says things are just more expensive to repair.

And I was very curious to know if he was going to advocate for right to Repair, which is this really interesting concept that I'm reading more about.

Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez out in Washington state is very big on right to repair.

that just the idea that everything in our lives, from these phones to, you know, a lot of the tech that we have to have, we're not able to repair it ourselves.

We have to rely on very expensive fixes and power to the consumer.

People are saying.

>> Absolutely.

>> I support that repair.

>> Absolutely.

>> So how come I haven't heard about this until recent weeks here?

I'm just probably not reading.

>> There actually has been legislation at the state level on right to repair, on right to repair, and it's.

>> Never gone.

>> Anywhere, especially.

Yeah, it has especially with our phones specifically.

Right.

The idea that look, every it seems like every two years we have to buy an upgrade and the battery is not working.

And if we empowered consumers with the ability to get access to the instruction manuals and to be able to do the repair ourselves, or to find a local person to do those work, you know, it would, you know, obviously it would take away some of the profits of these big companies that are that are making money on trading in old phones and getting new phones.

But regardless of which, the most important thing is that we are dependent on technology, we should be able to afford to use that technology.

>> Okay, so what does it take to get that kind of legislation over the finish line?

I mean, like I understand who would oppose it, but would it fundamentally change things for Americans?

Do you think if we had a right to repair.

>> I certainly hope so.

I mean, look, there's some things that the federal level, as you mentioned, there's a federal legislation.

I think that would be most impactful when it gets tough, when you allow consumers in one state to act differently.

>> There's more of a.

>> National other.

Correct?

Correct.

But look, there are things we can do at the local level and state level that I am very supportive of.

On consumer protection.

There's more that can be done.

>> Charlie says, Evan, I just returned from three weeks in Hirosaki, Japan to visit my son and his wife, who moved there in July.

While there, I developed a sinus infection.

My son took me to the public healthcare clinic, where I was seen by a doctor and three assistants.

She examined me with a camera, cleaned me out, put me on a nebulizer, and gave me three prescriptions.

Total cost $75 U.S.

My son was also seen for a follow up appointment for the same ailment, $10 U.S.

Because he's a resident, Japan has had universal health since 1938. and he says, essentially, what about our future?

We need universal health care.

What are families who can't afford it supposed to do?

Is this a federal issue, or is this a state issue that Charlie is raising?

>> It's both.

And it's a human being issue.

I truly believe health care is a right, and that's why I support the the New York Health Act.

I know it's a kind of a lightning rod for policy conversations.

That is a single payer.

I do believe that it would be most successful on a federal level.

But look, at the end of the day, Congress isn't passing bills.

The action is happening at the state level.

And we are.

And so actually, I'm going to be talking a little bit next week on on my plan for making healthcare more affordable in New York.

I'm going to be doing a press conference with our friends over at Trillium Health next week.

But at the end of the day, again, it comes back to the reality that our state budget is facing.

We are seeing a threat from our federal government of cutting coverage for 1.7 million New Yorkers.

These are low income New Yorkers who rely on health benefits through our exchange program.

Right.

When we cut health care benefits, people don't stop getting sick.

And so what does that mean?

Okay, so you get sick, you get the flu.

Everyone seems to be getting the flu.

Everyone get your flu shot.

If you haven't gotten it, get your flu shot.

I got my flu shot.

What happens?

You go to the emergency department, you sit in the emergency department, you get treated in the emergency department.

Okay?

That's expensive.

That's a lot more expensive to give someone treatment in the emergency department than it is to give them access to their primary care physician so they can get, you know, get the flu shot.

They can they can get diagnoses.

They can get on medication before something catastrophic happens.

Would you rather give someone medication to lower their blood pressure or have to go into emergency cardiac surgery?

Right.

What's better for the person and what's better for the system is to give people access to preventative care.

And so I'd like to see at the national level, a way to help push more preventative care options at the state level.

I'd like to see more people have access to affordable health care.

We have people's premiums are going through the roof.

I mean, absolutely mine.

Mine went up dramatically.

Right?

They again, it comes back to what what Jack said in Greece.

Right.

People can't afford to live in New York.

And we have got to get health care under control.

It's with child care.

Health care is, if not even more, the greatest impact on our bottom line and our wallets.

>> A state single payer system.

>> I do support that.

I want to be clear on that.

I am proposing some additional legislation that I'm going to announce next week.

>> Okay, come on back here.

Whenever you're ready to talk about that.

>> That sounds good.

>> Ray writes to say to to Senator Cooney, let's also fund Medicaid in the face of the federal government's cuts.

Please.

I am a senior on Medicare and Medicaid, and I was just diagnosed with cancer.

Also, I'm glad to hear you support raising taxes on the rich, since New York has the greatest gap between the rich and the poor.

That is from Ray.

>> Can I just say something?

Ray, we hear you on Medicaid, and this has been something that the entire Rochester state delegation has been focused on, like a laser for the last couple of years.

we know that Medicaid rates are not where they need to be, which is causing challenges in our long term care facilities are especially our not for profit nursing homes, which are doing wonderful things, but they just don't have the resources to get more people into them.

and so we have been focused on this.

The governor has, again leading the way here with putting some money aside so that if there are federal cuts to Medicaid, she can try to blunt some of that blow at the state level by putting state level resources in.

But again, I want to I want to emphasize this point for all the cuts that are coming down from Washington, DC, New York State taxpayers cannot make up the difference.

We cannot be left holding the bag, which is why it is critical that things change in the midterm elections.

But that's a different conversation.

let me just also mention on Ray's point around kind of the the politics of taxing the rich and everything else.

I do believe that this is not a left versus right battle.

I know that's I know that's what our, our pundits like to make us and divide us.

But I'd say all these Democrats are doing this, and these Republicans are doing this.

This is a top versus bottom.

for the first time in a generation, we have not seen that wealth gap be as large as it is today.

For the first time in a generation, young people today are going to make less than their parents generation before they're going to be able to afford less than the generation that came before them.

If we don't figure this out, if we don't close that gap, then we are going to have a revolution on our hands.

And you know, there are things we can do at the state and local level to help change that dynamic by balancing the scales.

But this isn't about punishing and making some people bad and some people good.

This is about what's doing what's right for all New Yorkers.

>> A question from online does the senator have an opinion on the Medicaid marriage penalty?

Could the state cover that?

I don't know that issue.

>> I'm not as familiar with that, but I can look into that.

>> Okay.

and two questions on ice.

similar here.

I'll read both of them.

Morgan writes to say how should citizens prepare for an onslaught of Ice agents, the likes of which we've already seen in Minnesota?

And Tolly says, what concrete steps will you and your colleagues take to protect citizens and immigrants in Rochester from Ice and CBP?

>> So a couple of couple of thoughts.

One, I support legislation which is called New York for all.

And this is legislation that would forbid state and local law enforcement from working with Ice to do immigration enforcement.

I believe that we have enough challenges.

enough you know, things that we need our local law enforcement to focus on that they should not be deputized into that work.

and so I do support that.

I do support what the governor's proposed in terms of having a civil recourse in place.

I also support funding for our legal legal services, making sure that representation matters.

Right.

you know, when people get detained, even if they're illegal citizen, they could still be detained.

They could be sent to Batavia and detained.

Right.

They should have access to counsel in that process.

because the sooner that they get their rights advocated for, they can get out and rejoin their families, rejoin the workforce.

Right.

So it's a comprehensive way.

but look, at the end of the day, this lies squarely on Congress.

If they wanted to pass a law to say ice, you can't do we can't wear masks, ice, you can't do this.

Enforcement.

You need to have a judicial warrant.

If they wanted to do that, they could do that.

This Congress is feckless.

They they they do not act.

They are not putting any sort of check and balance on this president.

and it's unacceptable.

And we're going to do all we can to stand up for New Yorkers at the state level.

>> Let me squeeze two more issues in before the end of the hour.

It's about a minute each on these.

If we could we've talked a lot in this program recently about manufactured houses and obviously the desire to build more houses is is present in Rochester and a lot of places where the costs are going up, up, up.

what is the state's disposition?

What's your disposition on supporting housing?

I mean, is there money for it from the state.

>> Governor put in $100 million?

I'm strongly supportive of that, especially in communities like Rochester.

Rochester is fortunate.

We have actually one of the largest providers of manufactured homes.

>> I should say factory built factory.

>> Factory built.

Yeah.

In the state.

Cook properties is right here in actually in my district.

Here in here in Rochester.

the mayor, Mayor Evans has put out a RFP and a a new program to get more of these pre-manufactured homes into place.

Buy them one.

These are not the pre-manufactured homes of the 1960s, right?

These are really high end properties that can go up very quickly, that can go up in the middle of the winter, and that, most importantly, rochesterians in New Yorkers can afford, right?

They can get a mortgage for $150,000, not $500,000, right?

I mean, that's just homeownership should be available to every New Yorker.

And I believe that manufactured homes are manufactured homes are that solution for that process.

>> All right.

And lastly, on High Falls, the lot happening right here in our neighborhood.

>> This.

>> Is what do you want people to know?

>> listen I if I, if I could take away one huge win for Rochester and Monroe County.

In addition to the childcare investments that we saw, that $20 million that's coming to Monroe County, the governor proposed in her budget $300 million to be invested literally right here in High Falls.

Evan, right where your studio is.

a lot of people might not know.

I actually used to live in High Falls.

So I've walked around these streets for for years.

And what we see with our Red wings baseball stadium, what we see with MCC downtown campus, what we see with vacant land or parking lots that are half empty, that could be turned into new housing.

Right?

Huge opportunities.

The big key message here is the governor is investing in our state park right here at High Falls.

We have a unique spot in the nation for having an urban waterfall.

We're making that a state park.

But let's not just stop there.

Let's not just have a nice park, let's have housing and jobs and schools, and let's have a state of the art baseball stadium that we can be proud of.

Right here.

Let's work together to build economic development.

>> Oh, no, there's the music.

Because I want to keep talking about this.

20 years ago, one of the first stories I covered in Rochester was Mayor Johnson.

They tried to create the entertainment district down here, and a lot of that, for whatever reason, people didn't take to it like the city thought.

So are you are you fearful that you're misreading what the public will want?

>> No, because we're going to work with the community to design a program that makes sense for them.

We're going to look at it's not prescriptive.

This is going to be a community based input process and economic development focused.

Again, thank you to Governor Hochul for committing these resources.

The state delegation is going to work hand in hand to get this done in the final budget.

>> Well, so that is one for sure that we'll welcome you back.

There's neighborhood leaders.

There's all kinds of folks who are going to want to talk about that.

Let's come back, talk about that soon.

>> Absolutely.

And let me be very clear to your listeners.

I know the inner loop is part of the High Falls area.

It is still moving forward.

We're just fighting it in court.

We're going to get it done.

We're going to build that inner loop thanks to our partners.

>> Thank you.

Senator.

Senator Jeremy Cooney, more Connections coming up.

>> This program is a production of WXXI Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station.

Its staff, management or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience.

Any rebroadcast or use in another medium, without expressed written consent of WXXI is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the link at wxxinews.org.