[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. It's the day 100. It's day 100 of the Trump administration, which maybe you're already sick of hearing about, and it's only ten o'clock in the morning. It's also day one of some consequential new policies in New York state that the governor and legislature just agreed to last night in their annual budget agreement. You may not have heard about these things yet, so we'll start there today. We'll go on to Trump and authoritarianism, and Trump and public health later in the hour.

We're going to start in New York State with all these new policies on masks, on cell phones in schools, on medical aid and dying for certain people who are terminally ill and want to choose that, on removing people involuntarily from the streets, and also, yes, on some actual budget items in the budget. Many of you will be getting a check in the mail from the state of New York, it looks like. Some of you with kids will be getting a bigger break on your state income taxes, and there's more. Let's go down this checklist and also invite some of your first reactions with Jon Campbell, who covers Albany for us here at WNYC and on Gothamist. Thanks for coming on on quick turnaround to follow this news this morning, Jon, happy April 29th.

Jon Campbell: Happy April 29th, Brian. 29 days, the state budget's late.

Brian: Let's just dive right in. Cell phones in schools, where'd it wind up?

Jon Campbell: Well, this is one that has been pretty much settled since mid-March, but it was finalized as part of this agreement yesterday. It's going to be what's known as a bell-to-bell ban on smartphone use in public schools in New York State. That means from opening bell to closing bell, students won't be allowed to use their smartphones or similar internet-enabled devices. That bell-to-bell nature of it was very important to Governor Hochul and the teachers' unions. They pushed for that, while administrators pushed for a little more flexibility and maybe allowing for students to use their phones during recess or lunch.

They didn't get that. Opening-bell-to-closing-bell smartphone ban in public schools. The public schools will have to come up with-- Each district will have to come up with a plan to implement this, and maybe they have pouches for kids. Maybe they have lockers. Maybe they have kids keep them in their regular lockers. They're going to have to implement this by September, by the next school year. That's in the budget agreement.

Brian: Next item on the checklist, a ban on wearing masks in some circumstances. Where did it wind up?

Jon Campbell: They created a new crime, or they're about to create, because they have to pass the budget still, and put it into legislation. This was a big one for Governor Hochul after there were concerns from the Jewish community, in particular, after there were these viral images of anti-Israel demonstrators on a train last year with masks on asking about Zionists on the train. She at first had talked about perhaps restrictions on wearing masks in public.

That got pared down to what we ended up with, which is a new crime, which is essentially evading arrest while masking or concealing your face. What that means is you can be charged with a class B misdemeanor, which is a lower level misdemeanor, if you are wearing a mask with the intent to conceal your identity while committing a separate crime. There's a lot there. It's essentially a secondary offense that you can be charged with that is implemented if you commit a class A misdemeanor or a felony. Got all that? That's confusing, but that's where they landed. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

Brian: Well, I was just gonna say here's the tension around that, or some of it. You talked about those incidents, or an incident where people seem to be wearing masks while engaged in what might have been anti-Semitic harassment. At least anti-Israel. In the case you described, it sounded like also anti Semitic. Among those concerned about any kind of mask ban are specifically college students and others engaged in political protests. They say the masks are, in the vast majority of cases, not to conceal their identities while they're being violent or committing other crimes or harassing people.

They're to protect the identities of peaceful protesters, especially pro-Palestinian ones who've been getting doxxed when they're not wearing masks. That is, opponents of their position take their photos and post them on social media sites. Then it's the protesters who might be subject to organized harassment campaigns or even become victims of violence, or now with Trump, maybe get deported, even if they're Green Card holders. With what you just described, can people wear masks at protests if they're not committing crimes?

Jon Campbell: The answer is, yes, they can wear them at protests if they're not committing crimes, but if it were to escalate into some sort of property damage or something where they could get charged with a class A misdemeanor or above, and they were wearing-- This is another key part. They have to have been wearing the mask with the intent of concealing their identity. In that case, you probably could make that case. Yes, I mean, you have to commit a crime, allegedly commit a crime first, to be charged with the secondary crime, which is concealing your identity to evade arrest.

Brian: Got it. Listeners, which of these items in the budget agreement do you have a strong opinion about or a question about, for Jon Campbell, our Albany reporter, 212433-WNYC. 212-433-9692 call or text on this consequential policy day in New York State with the backdrop, I guess we should say, of Governor Hochul trying to set herself up for reelection next year, including a possible primary from the left and possible November challenge if she gets the nomination from Republicans like Mike Lawler or Elise Stefanik. 212-433-WNYC 433-9692. Let's keep going down this list of policies agreed to last night. Medical Aid in Dying, did that pass?

Jon Campbell: That's separate from the budget, actually. That's not being debated as part of the budget, but there is some stuff happening on that. You're referring to a bill that would allow terminally ill patients who only have a little time left to live to request, essentially, medication from a doctor that would end their life. This has been a controversial topic in Albany for well over a decade. Every single year, you have demonstrators in the halls pushing for this and pushing for this. It's never gotten a vote. It's looking like it's going to get an assembly vote, perhaps even today, which is a big step.

That is not something that has happened before. Now it is. The Senate has always been viewed as perhaps the bigger roadblock, and the Senate has not committed to taking that bill up. The fact that the assembly is taking it up could be a sign that they think there's a chance the Senate could, because otherwise, why would you take that vote and put your members in perhaps a politically vulnerable position if it's not going to get approved? Yes, there could be a vote on that as soon as today, in the Assembly.

Brian: I should say, as a correction to myself, I overstated in the intro, then, what happened on this. I saw a headline that said Medical Aid in Dying Bill moves forward in Albany, and I thought, "Oh, that got wrapped into the budget, too." You're saying it, it got out of committee in the assembly, and that's the first of several steps that's further than it's gotten before, but to be clear, that was not passed.

Jon Campbell: It's looking like it's going to get a full assembly vote, but no, it hasn't been wrapped up in the budget negotiations in the sense that it hasn't been negotiated with the governor. We don't know where the governor stands on that. Obviously, if the assembly passes it, the Senate's got to pass it, the governor's got to sign it into law.

Brian: Right, and the Catholic Church is against and some advocates for people with disabilities or other vulnerable groups, who fear that they may be pressured into requesting aid in dying or early termination of their lives when they're terminally ill, that those are some of the groups opposed. All right, next item, then. There was another rollback from the 2019 law, generally called the bail reform bill. This rollback is not about bail itself, rather, it's about when prosecutors have to share the evidence they have with the defense. Now, this can sound legalistic and wonky and make people's eyes glaze over, but tell us briefly, Jon, what's it really about, and why did prosecutors and some politicians want this so much?

Jon Campbell: Yes, this is about what's known as criminal discovery. That's the rules and the deadlines for when prosecutors and defense have to share evidence prior to a trial. The idea is if you are charged with a crime and you are weighing whether to go to trial or whether to take a plea, you have the right to see the evidence against you. You have the right to know, essentially, the pillars of the case against you, from an evidentiary basis. In 2019, they passed some reforms to tie those deadlines to speedy trial deadlines and essentially get the evidence to the defense in a quicker manner.

Prosecutors have claimed, and with some evidence, that these deadlines have been difficult to meet and have led to an increase in dismissals because they forgot this piece of evidence or they missed this piece of evidence. They didn't get it until after the deadline. Essentially, the governor and district attorneys, largely from New York City, insisted on changes to that to make it a little easier on prosecutors. That was a big fight with the legislature, which stood behind these 2019 reforms. Where they ended up is they made a few changes.

We still haven't seen language, but as the governor laid it out last night, they're adding in more leeway for judges to consider the totality of the evidence. If maybe a piece of evidence wasn't handed over that wasn't terribly, wasn't super critical to the case, maybe they can allow the case to continue rather than dismiss it. They also are going to allow the judges to determine whether there was any prejudice against the defendant, whether the defendant was harmed by a piece of evidence that wasn't shared in deciding whether to allow the case to go on.

Brian: We'll get into some of the actual budget items in the budget in a minute. Some people are calling and texting about some of the non-budget items in the budget that we've touched on so far. I think Tristan in Brooklyn is not happy with this masking compromise. Tristan, you're on WNYC. Thank you for calling in.

Tristan: Hi. Yes, thanks for having me.

Brian: What are you thinking?

Tristan: Yes, I've been really disappointed to see the masking stuff make it into the budget process. I called both my representatives, found my displeasure with it. I'm glad it got watered down. I really see this as a pattern with Kathy Hochul, where she's trying to be some sort of, I don't know, tough-on-crime person. In very, to me, honestly, fascistic ways, she's trying to make it a crime to wear a mask. CUNY added someone for Palestinian studies. They added a position in the CUNY system, and she stepped in to quash that and just a lot of other things she's done that I see her running the government, and I'm just incredibly disappointed with her as governor. I don't know if I could vote for her again in a general election.

Brian: If you had to choose between Kathy Hochul, say Elise Stefanik, or abstaining-

Tristan: I know, a nightmare scenario.

Brian: -would you take that risk, from your point of view?

Tristan: It's hard. Maybe I wouldn't if it's Elise StefaniK. I really just lost complete support for her as governor. I'm really hoping someone else runs against her in the primary.

Brian: Tristan, thank you very much for your call. Jon, you think he speaks for a lot of progressives who are unhappy with even this compromise on the masks or even the fact that she tried, in the first place, even if she failed to go further on the masks, I don't know if you know the CUNY situation that Tristan referred to. Did she impose a faculty member or cancel a faculty member? Is she going to get primaried from the left next year on issues like these?

Jon Campbell: Well, when you brought up Elise Stefanik there, I could hear Tristan's heart sink right through the radio. I could tell that that was a difficult one for him. Tristan said that the governor is trying-- I can't remember his exact words, but he said something to the effect of public safety measures, and she's trying to be this public safety governor. That is accurate. Yes. Why is that? It's because, in 2022, Lee Zeldin, the Republican candidate, used the issue of public safety and the perception of a lack of public safety against the governor, in a really targeted, calculated, expert way and only lost by five and a half points to the governor in a deep blue state. Since then, Kathy Hochul has been trying to--

She would quibble with me, saying she's trying to shore up her record on public safety, but she's certainly trying to sell her record on public safety. The mask issue is part of that. The discovery reform issue is part of that. Involuntary commitment changes, which we haven't discussed yet, that's part of this budget agreement as well. That's part of presenting herself as the public safety governor, and that is intended to help ward off challenges from the right when she's up for reelection next year if she gets through a Democratic primary.

Brian: Craig in Brooklyn is calling about the changes to the discovery laws. Craig's a lawyer. Craig, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Craig: Hi. Thank you for having me. One of the things that was a major, major blow, and I think that we're going to feel, is this change to this discovery reform that was thrown through as part of this budget. Really, what disturbs me here is that most people in New York do not even realize the limited amount of discovery we were given in criminal defense, oftentimes taking pleas without really knowing what the case was, really, how good the DA's case was. We wouldn't get grand jury minutes until basically we were being sent out to trial and having to review files, literally, and needing to pick a jury very quickly.

Really, really a terrible setback, especially at a time when we're seeing defense counsel being attacked on all fronts now. Again, the other thing that disturbed me about it is that these discovery reforms were being put through without any real consultation with any of the major criminal defense bars, even in New York City and New York State, or even federally. It's really, really a strong arm tactic that I think that's being unfairly put forth and really going to hurt defendants.

Brian: The argument here in this too, of course, is part of Kathy Hochul, public safety governor, the argument that I've heard from proponents of this change is that so many cases that would have resulted usually in plea bargains and guilty pleas, have now not been able to get there and the cases have been dismissed because the prosecutors were given too short a timeframe to gather and present their evidence to the defense. That's hurt public safety, that there's then been recidivism, repeat offenses by some of the same people as a result. What's your response to that?

Craig: Well, my thing is that there are other states that are known for being very strong on crimes, such as Florida. Florida actually always has had much more liberal discovery policies in place, which is shocking, basically, where we have someone whose liberty's at stake. Again, I can understand the question becomes is that why are then prosecutors bringing cases immediately to trial that they really have a thin file on, or don't have enough on? And I understand that some prosecutors feel that they're rushed, and maybe there's

been a few cases where there may have been something dismissed on the 30.30 grounds because of failure to abide with discovery laws.

Again, we really do owe a duty to protect the innocent and the wrongly accused. It goes back to saying that many times the pleas that were being given to us that we were forced into, were being given without us having full information and discovery on the defendant side. That's the real problem here. We're being told to zealously defend our clients, and yet the same time, not being given anything that the prosecutor has, and being rushed.

Brian: Thank you very much for your call. We appreciate it. I guess we will see how this plays out once it gets implemented. A few more minutes with our Albany reporter Jon Campbell, on the many budgetary and non-budgetary items that got agreed to in the annual New York State budget bill announced by Governor Hochul last night. Just as you say, Jon, that Hochul wants to be a public safety governor now, based on what happened nationally in the elections last year as well as in New York, she also wants to be the affordability governor. Based on another thing that helped Trump get elected, and some Republicans get elected. Let's go to some of the actual budget items in the budget. Many New Yorkers will be getting a check in the mail from the state.

Jon Campbell: Yes, that's right. She's calling it an inflation refund check. These checks will cost New York State about $2 billion. She says they're going to go to more than 8 million New Yorkers. Checks would be up to $400 per family, $200 for individual filers. Now, that is scaled down from what the governor originally proposed in January, when she proposed $500 and $300 checks that would have cost about $3 billion.

She cut $1 billion off of that as part of this final deal. Lawmakers were kind of mixed on the idea from the start. The governor insisted on it, pared it back. We don't have the exact eligibility requirements yet. That's something that we'll see when the bills are printed, and we see it in the actual bill. Yes, no, a whole bunch of New Yorkers are going to be getting checks mailed straight to them as part of this budget.

Brian: Bigger child tax credits, too.

Jon Campbell: Yeah. The child tax credit in New York would be increased to $1,000 for kids younger than 4, $500 for kids 4 to 16. That basically doubles the credit for the average family. That was another big thing for the governor. Now, that said, also, this is the budget, but if there are big federal cuts, lawmakers might have to come back later this year and rejigger the budget to account for that. Some of these things, it's like, okay, it's in there now, but if three months from now, the Trump administration and Congress make big federal cuts to New York. New York's budget has more than $90 billion in federal funding in it. Who knows what's going to happen?

Brian: In the Trump era, there's nothing more certain than uncertainty. That's certainly true in the case of funding for the states, funding for all kinds of things, as we know, so yes, there may be revisions in the middle of the New York State fiscal year when they figure out what's going to happen in the next federal fiscal year. To that point, we had Republican, Hudson Valley Congressman, and likely gubernatorial hopeful, Mike Lawler, on the show last week, and he walked an interesting line on the size of the New York State budget. Listen to this clip in which he starts by distancing himself from Elon Musk's term, for how he's approaching the federal budget. Musk famously said he's taking a chainsaw to it, but we'll hear where else Lawler goes.

Mike Lawler: It doesn't mean that you take a chainsaw to it. It doesn't mean that you slash and burn, but it does mean that there needs to be a level of introspection and really verifying that the dollars being spent are necessary and effective.

Brian: Do you think that sets up a big debate on the budget for next year? Jon Lawler also said in our interview, "New York spends more than Texas and Florida state governments combined, despite having tens of millions fewer people." Has Hochul been asked, yet, to defend this much spending per person and whether it's wasteful and comes with too much of a tax burden?

Jon Campbell: I don't know that she's been asked directly like that, but she's certainly been asked a lot about Medicaid. Medicaid in New York, along with education, they are the two biggest cost drivers in the New York State budget. This budget is $254 billion. That's more than a quarter trillion dollars. I mean, it is very, very big. It grows every single year. A big driver of that is increases in Medicaid costs, which that is generally split between the state and federal government. New York offers a lot of Medicaid services that, for example, Florida does not provide, dental services, for example.

The question is, how do you rein in those costs? There is an acknowledgment from the governor's office and specifically from the state budget director that the growth in Medicaid is unsustainable in New York. Now the question is, how do you make structural changes so over the long term, you get those back into whack, so to speak? Yes, I mean, the governor has faced some of those questions and has acknowledged that the growth is unsustainable. I think critics would say that there's probably not enough done to make those structural changes necessary, going forward, to get things in line here.

Brian: Jon Campbell, our Albany reporter. Hear more about the budget through the day on the radio or read his article on Gothamist, our local news website. Jon, thanks a lot for hopping on.

Jon Campbell: Thank you so much, Brian.

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.