Chris Brown
RepublicanQ1 Data centers are a controversial part of America’s growing AI industry, supporting cutting-edge innovation and potential job creation, but raising issues of resource use and utility costs. New York now has a moratorium on data center construction. At the same time, state tax law grants tax exemptions to equipment and services used by data centers, which some proposed legislation would repeal. What do you see as the right balance of costs and benefits for new data center construction in New York, and how would your policies accomplish that balance?
I support expanding AI data centers because they drive innovation, high-paying jobs, and tax revenue that strengthen our economy. New York’s current moratorium is a job-killing overreach that cedes leadership to other states.
The right balance prioritizes growth while protecting ratepayers. We must increase reliable energy supply, nuclear, natural gas, and next-generation sources, rather than ration power or drive up costs through scarcity. Tax exemptions for data-center equipment remain useful tools to attract investment, but they should be paired with clear local benefits and efficiency standards so communities see returns without unfair burden on households.
My policies would lift the moratorium, streamline permitting for responsible projects, and expand domestic energy production so data centers can locate here without straining the grid or hiking utility bills. Innovation and prosperity come from opportunity, not bans.
KEYWORDS: Lift the moratorium; Expand energy supply; Innovation and jobs; Tax exemptions for investment
Q2 New York currently generates about 47% of its energy from low carbon sources including nuclear, hydropower, and wind and solar, with the remainder coming from combustion sources (natural gas, oil, biofuel, and solid waste). While New York committed to shifting to low-carbon energy sources and emissions reductions in passing the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), Governor Hochul recently moved to delay implementation of several components of the state’s climate law to December 31, 2028. As concerns about energy costs, reliability, and emissions grow, what energy sources would you prioritize, under what timeline, and what evidence would guide that decision?
I prioritize reliable, affordable energy that keeps the lights on and rates down for families and businesses. That means expanding nuclear power, both existing plants and advanced reactors, alongside natural gas as a flexible bridge fuel, while maintaining our strong hydropower base. Intermittent wind and solar have a role, but only where they do not compromise grid stability or drive up costs.
The CLCPA’s aggressive timelines have already proven unrealistic, which is why Governor Hochul wisely delayed key deadlines. We should use this window through 2028 and beyond to pursue a technology-neutral approach focused on results, not rigid mandates. New nuclear and gas capacity can come online in the near term; we should accelerate permitting for both rather than force premature plant retirements.
Evidence must guide us: NYISO reliability reports, actual ratepayer cost data, and real-world outcomes from states that over-relied on intermittent sources. Emissions matter, but so do blackouts, manufacturing flight, and household energy bills. Reliability and affordability come first.
KEYWORDS: Expand nuclear power; Natural gas as bridge fuel; Reliability and affordability first; Technology-neutral approach
Q3 Young adults say that social media is their top source of science information, but acknowledge that it is less trustworthy compared to other sources. In addition, the widespread usage of social media and other sources of scientific information has resulted in the spread of misinformation that has spurred public education policies to curb it, such as a NYC vaccine misinformation legislation. What role should public education play in combatting misinformation and disseminating trustworthy, up to date scientific information to students and their families?
public education’s primary role is teaching students how to think critically, not what to think. Schools should equip young people with strong media literacy, scientific method skills, and the ability to evaluate sources, evidence, and claims for themselves. That includes recognizing bias, distinguishing correlation from causation, and understanding that even “official” sources can be wrong or incomplete.
Government should not become the arbiter of “misinformation.” Laws like New York City’s vaccine misinformation measures risk chilling legitimate debate and eroding trust. Parents and families deserve transparency and the right to question prevailing narratives without schools acting as enforcers of orthodoxy.
Prioritize rigorous science education grounded in evidence, open inquiry, and intellectual humility. Teach students to demand data, scrutinize incentives, and update views when new facts emerge. That approach builds lasting resilience against bad information far better than top-down speech controls.
KEYWORDS: Educate don’t dictate
Q4 Pesticides are widely used in food production to help manage pests and support crop yields, but ongoing debates over their safety have raised questions about their long-term use and led to proposals to restrict certain pesticides. What data and evidence will you use to weigh the role of these products in food security against safety concerns when shaping policy on their use in New York agriculture?
I will rely on rigorous, science-based evidence, not fear or activism, when weighing pesticides. The data that matter most are peer-reviewed risk assessments from the EPA and USDA, actual residue monitoring results, and real-world studies on crop yields, food prices, and farmer livelihoods.
Pesticides remain essential tools for protecting New York’s agricultural productivity and keeping food affordable and secure. Blanket restrictions that ignore dose, exposure levels, and proven benefits risk higher costs, lower yields, and greater reliance on imports produced under weaker standards. I will prioritize targeted, evidence-driven regulation that addresses genuine risks while preserving farmers’ ability to manage pests effectively. Decisions must rest on measurable outcomes for safety, food security, and economic viability, not political pressure.
KEYWORDS: Science-based evidence; EPA and USDA risk assessments; Protect agricultural productivity; Targeted, evidence-driven regulation
Q5 New York has the second largest international student population of any U.S. state, the majority of which study in STEM fields. The federal government is pursuing largescale changes to student visa approval, including increased visa denials, revoking existing visas, restricting travel from certain countries, and decreasing student visa durations. How, if at all, should New York respond to federal visa changes affecting international STEM students and researchers, and the resulting projected changes in the scientific workforce supply?
New York should respect federal authority over immigration and visas while competing to attract top STEM talent through excellence, not by resisting lawful enforcement. International students contribute to our universities and innovation economy, but national security, reciprocity, and prioritization of American students must come first.
Rather than litigating or circumventing federal changes, we should focus on making New York’s universities and research institutions more competitive: streamlining state-level research partnerships, expanding domestic STEM pipelines, and ensuring strong vetting so that those who do receive visas are high-caliber contributors. Shorter durations and tighter screening can reduce overstays and security risks without shutting out legitimate talent.
The evidence that guides me is workforce data showing genuine shortages in certain advanced fields, paired with the clear need to protect American graduates and national interests. New York’s best response is to raise its own standards and competitiveness, not to fight the federal government’s responsibility to control its borders and visas.
KEYWORDS: Respect federal authority; Attract talent through excellence; Prioritize American students; Expand domestic STEM pipelines
Q6 Extreme weather events are increasingly impacting farmland and food supplies across NY, including up to 30 million dollars in damages to farmer livelihoods. This has prompted the USDA to designate 30 counties in New York as Natural Disaster Areas. What policies, if any, would you support to help farmers adapt to and prepare for increasingly erratic weather?
New York farmers face increasingly unpredictable weather, from late freezes and flooding to drought, hail, and extreme heat. Albany should help them protect their land, crops, and livelihoods.
I would support practical resilience investments, including improved drainage and water management, irrigation and water storage, frost protection, soil-health practices, and better weather monitoring and warnings.
When disasters strike, assistance must reach farmers quickly. I would support targeted disaster-recovery grants or low-interest aid that complements federal programs and helps family farms recover from substantial documented losses.
Farmers also need a seat at the table. Albany should avoid one-size-fits-all solutions and work with the people who know the land best. Our policies should strengthen preparedness, protect productive farmland, keep food affordable, and ensure New York family farms remain viable for future generations.
KEYWORDS: Farm Resilience; Disaster Recovery; Protecting Farmland; Family Farms
Q7 Law enforcement agencies across New York have contracted with Flock to install Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras as a public safety tool. The technology is receiving pushback over concerns over privacy and data sharing, resulting in city councilors in Syracuse voting to remove Flock cameras. What are your views on accessibility and utilization of ALPR data by local and federal law enforcement, and what legislation, if any, would you propose governing how ALPR data is collected, stored, shared and retained?
Automated License Plate Readers can be valuable tools for law enforcement when used to locate stolen vehicles, find missing or endangered people, and investigate serious crimes. I support giving police access to effective technology, but that access should come with clear safeguards protecting the privacy of law-abiding citizens.
New York currently lacks a comprehensive statewide framework governing law-enforcement ALPR data, and legislation addressing these issues is already being considered in Albany.
I would support statewide standards requiring ALPR searches to have a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, with auditable records showing who accessed the system and why. Data on vehicles not connected to an investigation should be retained only for a limited period, while relevant evidence could be preserved for legitimate investigations.
Sharing with other local, state, or federal law-enforcement agencies should be permitted for legitimate criminal investigations and public-safety emergencies, with stronger judicial oversight when accessing historical location information or conducting broader searches.
The goal should be straightforward: give police the technology they need to protect our communities without creating an unrestricted database of the movements of innocent New Yorkers.
KEYWORDS: Public Safety; Personal Privacy; Law-Enforcement Accountability; Judicial Oversight
Q8 Smoke from Canadian wildfires in recent summers has pushed New York air quality to unhealthy levels. The long-term consequences, if any, of these wildfires are unknown: Short-term data show a rise in asthma-related emergency department visits during smoke events, though some studies suggest the increase is comparable to that seen on high-pollen days. With extreme wildfire seasons projected to become more frequent as global temperatures rise, what measures, if any, do you think New York should invest in to prepare for future smoke events?
Wildfire smoke does not stop at international borders, and New York needs a practical plan for protecting residents when air quality reaches unhealthy levels.
I would support improving real-time air-quality monitoring and public notification systems so schools, families, employers, and outdoor workers receive clear and timely information when conditions become dangerous. We should also help schools, senior centers, and other public facilities improve filtration and HVAC systems where needed and identify community clean-air locations for severe smoke events.
Particular attention should be given to children, seniors, people with respiratory or heart conditions, and those whose jobs require them to work outdoors. Emergency planning should include clear guidelines for schools, youth sports, outdoor workers, and public events based on air-quality conditions.
These investments should be targeted and evidence-based. We should continue studying the health effects of repeated wildfire-smoke exposure and adjust our response as better data becomes available. New York cannot control Canadian wildfires, but we can make sure our communities are informed, prepared, and equipped to respond when smoke reaches us.
KEYWORDS: Air-Quality Monitoring; Emergency Preparedness; Clean-Air Facilities; Evidence-Based Response
Q9 New York is the second largest recipient of funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Proposed federal budgets would significantly reduce NIH funds going to New York hospitals, universities, and research institutions. Where do you stand on the proposed changes to NIH funding levels, and what steps, if any, would you take to address their potential effect on New York’s research sector?
New York’s hospitals, universities, and research institutions are national leaders in medical and scientific research, and NIH funding supports important work while also contributing significantly to our state’s economy.
I support responsible federal spending and believe every government program should be accountable for results. However, I would be concerned about significant across-the-board reductions in NIH research funding that could disrupt promising medical research, eliminate skilled jobs, or put New York institutions at a competitive disadvantage.
I would work with New York’s congressional delegation, universities, hospitals, and research institutions to identify the potential impact of federal changes and advocate for continued investment in high-value, evidence-based research. I would also look for opportunities to strengthen partnerships between universities, healthcare institutions, and New York’s private biotechnology and technology sectors.
Taxpayers deserve accountability for how research dollars are spent, but fiscal responsibility and supporting scientific innovation do not have to be competing goals. New York should work to remain a national leader in research that produces measurable medical, scientific, and economic benefits.
KEYWORDS: Medical Research; Fiscal Accountability; Scientific Innovation; New York Jobs