New York

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 are dealing with increasingly unpredictable weather, and we should focus on practical solutions that help them protect their farms and our food supply. I would support targeted assistance for irrigation, drainage, water storage, crop protection and other infrastructure that makes farms more resilient. We should also make sure farmers can quickly access disaster assistance and crop insurance when major losses occur. Farmers know their land and their businesses better than Albany does. Our role should be to give them the tools to prepare, recover and continue producing food without adding unnecessary mandates or costs.

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

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

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?

Pesticide policy should be based on evidence, not fear and not pressure from industry. I would look to peer-reviewed research and the work of public health and environmental agencies, with particular attention to actual exposure levels, long-term health effects, water quality, farmworker safety, pollinators, and impacts on food production.

Where credible evidence shows an unacceptable risk, New York should act. At the same time, farmers need realistic alternatives and enough time and support to transition. I also support integrated pest management and continued research into safer and more targeted ways to protect crops.

KEYWORDS: Evidence-based regulation; Pesticide safety; Integrated pest management; Farm viability

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?

For farmers, extreme weather is not an abstract issue. It can mean losing a crop and an entire year of income. I support expanding assistance for drainage, irrigation, frost protection, soil health, water management, and other farm-specific resilience projects.

We should also strengthen emergency relief, help farmers access federal disaster and insurance programs, and invest in agricultural research and extension services so farmers have practical information about changing conditions. Albany should work with farmers on solutions that fit their land and crops rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all approach

KEYWORDS: Farm resilience; Extreme weather; Agricultural research; Disaster relief

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?

Public health physicians are in place to ring the alarm when an outbreak occurs potentially pointing the finger at pesticides. The EPA at the federal level and the NYS Bureau of Pesticide Management also serve as regulatory agencies responsible for tracking pesticide use. The example of Paraquat provided? It can create permanent harm and has no known specific antidote. It is banned in many jurisdictions for it’s capability to harm humans and animals. Also research shows that eliminating paraquat does not reduce agricultural productivity when appropriate alternatives are adopted. This makes it a good candidate for a ban.

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?

The federal government subsidizes crop insurance. Estimated costs before subsidies are $20 to $40 per acre and after subsidies drop to $12 to $25 per acre. Federal subsidies also cover livestock. Upon reports of extreme adverse weather conditions experts as well as farmers can be surveyed to understand what the expected problems are. Wind? Flooding? Hail? Then appropriate measures can be taken such as potentially buying crop covers in bulk or preparing water runoff solutions in advance.

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’d let the evidence guide these decisions, not slogans from either side. My approach is to weigh what a product does for farm yields, food supply, and farmers’ costs against what independent data show about its risks to human health, water, pollinators, and farm workers.

For safety, I’d rely on federal and state regulators’ own risk assessments: the EPA’s registration reviews and tolerance levels, the USDA’s Pesticide Data Program, which tests residues on food, and the FDA’s residue monitoring. In New York, I’d use the DEC’s pesticide registration and use data, the state’s mandatory pesticide sales and use reporting, and Department of Health findings. For international scientific consensus, I’d look at the National Academies, the World Health Organization, and the European Food Safety Authority.I’d also want to hear directly from New York farmers, farmworkers, and public health experts, because data on paper doesn’t always show what works in the field. When the evidence shows a real risk, we act. When it shows a tool is safe and important to farmers’ livelihoods, we protect access to it. And any restriction should come with a workable alternative, so we don’t lose farms or push production out of state.

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 already supports farm resilience through the Climate Resilient Farming Grant Program, which helps farms prepare for flooding, drought, and extreme weather through county Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Recent rounds have awarded more than $25 million to 133 farms. The state also funds water quality projects and supports Cornell’s research and extension services, and farmers can turn to federal crop insurance and USDA disaster programs. I’d keep those programs and make them work better: simpler applications and faster payments for small family farms, more investment in irrigation, drainage, and flood protection, continued support for Cornell research that gets practical tools to growers, and quicker disaster aid coordinated with federal programs. I’d also keep state mandates and costs from piling onto farms that already run on thin margins. The approach should be voluntary and farmer-led, because the people best equipped to decide what works on a farm are the farmers, not Albany.

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 would weigh independent, peer reviewed research, EPA and New York DEC assessments and Cornell agricultural studies. I would examine long term health effects, exposure among children, and farm workers, water contamination, and impacts on pollinators alongside crop yields food prices, and the effectiveness of alternatives. I support restricting pesticides when evidence shows unacceptable risks and helping farmers adopt safer, effective pest management methods.

KEYWORDS: Evidence based policy, public health, clean water ,food security, farmer support.

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?

I would support grants for flood protection, efficient irrigation, soil conservation, and crops suited to changing weather conditions. I would also prioritize timely disaster relief and Cornell Cooperative extension guidance, with simple applications accessible to small farms. investing in preparation helps farmers’ livelihoods and our food supply.

KEYWORDS: preparation, climate resilience, flood protection disaster reliefn, disaster relief

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?

First of all the same thing with pesticides , steroids and lab meat should be banned. Safety is paramount what we eat should be safe and free from pesticides , steroids , dyes, vaccines and fake meat made in lab. Now all of a sudden all the new snacks and dyes they are coming out with. It’s def not something you want your child to eat. Better safe and healthy

KEYWORDS: safe and healthy

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?

I support helping farmers adapt through expanded crop-insurance and disaster assistance, grants for water-management and resilient infrastructure, and funding for soil-health and climate-resilient farming practices. The goal should be to protect farms from unpredictable weather while keeping food production and family farms economically viable.

KEYWORDS: save our farmland from foreign countries

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?

Agricultural policy should be guided by the best available science and a commitment to both food security and public health. Decisions regarding pesticide use should be based on peer-reviewed research, environmental monitoring data, public health evidence, and guidance from scientific and regulatory agencies.

I support evaluating pesticides on a case-by-case basis, considering both their effectiveness and potential impacts on farmworkers, consumers, pollinators, water quality, and ecosystems. Where evidence identifies significant risks, New York should support safer alternatives and help farmers transition to effective pest-management practices.

Any restrictions should be paired with technical assistance, research investments, and support for integrated pest management strategies that maintain productivity while reducing risks.

KEYWORDS: Evidence-Based Policy, Food Security, Public Health, Integrated Pest Management

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?

Farmers are already experiencing the impacts of more frequent flooding, droughts, and severe storms. New York should help agricultural producers build resilience through investments in climate-smart farming practices, soil health, water management infrastructure, and emergency preparedness.

I support expanding technical assistance programs, improving access to crop insurance, investing in drainage and irrigation improvements, and strengthening disaster recovery resources. Research partnerships between universities, extension services, and farmers can also help identify practices that improve productivity while reducing vulnerability to extreme weather.

KEYWORDS: Climate Resilience, Farm Sustainability, Disaster Preparedness, Soil Health

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?

New York should protect the safety of consumers, farm workers, and our environment while also protecting farmers’ ability to produce an affordable and reliable food supply. I would not support blanket pesticide bans that are based on politics rather than sound evidence.

My policy decisions would be guided by peer-reviewed scientific research, toxicology and epidemiological studies, pesticide residue testing, worker-exposure data, environmental impacts, and the effectiveness and availability of safer alternatives. I would also consider the economic impact on New York farmers, including whether restrictions could reduce crop yields, increase food prices, or put New York agriculture at a competitive disadvantage.

Where a pesticide is shown through strong, credible evidence to present an unacceptable risk, appropriate restrictions or removal should be considered. But where products meet established safety standards, farmers should be able to use them responsibly according to the law and product labels.

I also support expanding Integrated Pest Management, which uses monitoring, prevention, targeted treatments, and less-risky alternatives before resorting to broader pesticide applications.

The standard should be simple: protect public health, protect our farmers, and base decisions on the best available evidence and not fear, politics, or one-size-fits-all mandates.

KEYWORDS: Food Safety, Farmers, Scientific Evidence, Responsible Regulation

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 should help farmers prepare for unpredictable weather without burdening them with unnecessary regulations or higher costs. Farmers are often the first to experience the economic consequences of drought, flooding, extreme temperatures, and severe storms.

I would support expanding access to crop insurance, disaster assistance, and low-interest financing for farms that need to repair or improve infrastructure. I would also support investments in drainage, irrigation, water storage, soil conservation, and other practical measures that help farms withstand extreme weather.

Government programs should be targeted, transparent, and focused on measurable results. New York should also work with the federal government, agricultural organizations, and researchers to make sure farmers have access to useful weather data, agricultural technology, and new farming techniques.

Our goal should be simple: protect New York’s food supply, help farmers remain financially viable, and give them the tools and flexibility to adapt without imposing unnecessary government mandates.

KEYWORDS: Farm Resilience, Disaster Assistance, Agricultural Infrastructure

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?

New York’s pesticide policies should be guided by sound science, reliable data, and the practical realities facing farmers. Pesticides play an important role in protecting crops, maintaining yields, controlling invasive pests, and keeping food affordable, but legitimate concerns about human health and environmental impacts must also be taken seriously.

When considering restrictions, I would look at peer-reviewed research, EPA and New York Department of Environmental Conservation safety assessments, monitoring data on residues and environmental impacts, and evidence regarding risks to farm workers and surrounding communities. I would also consider whether effective alternatives are actually available, affordable, and capable of maintaining crop yields.

Policy should distinguish between pesticides based on their demonstrated risks rather than treating all products the same. Where evidence identifies a significant risk, reasonable restrictions or mitigation measures should be considered. Where evidence supports safe use, farmers should not face unnecessary restrictions that could reduce production or increase food costs.

Farmers should also have a voice in the process. New York should encourage integrated pest management and safer alternatives where practical, while preserving farmers’ ability to protect their crops and livelihoods.

The goal should be safe food, productive farms, and evidence-based regulation—not regulation based on fear or politics.

KEYWORDS: Science-Based Regulation, Farmers’ Choice, Food Security, Safety & Accountability

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 should help farmers prepare for increasingly unpredictable weather without adding unnecessary regulations or costs to already challenging operations. Farmers need practical tools and flexibility, not one-size-fits-all mandates.

I would support expanding access to crop insurance, disaster assistance, and low-interest financing for improvements that make farms more resilient, such as drainage systems, irrigation, water storage, wind protection, and improved soil management. The state should also work with the federal government to ensure disaster assistance reaches farmers quickly when extreme weather causes significant losses.

New York should invest in agricultural research and extension services to help farmers identify crops, planting practices, and technologies that can better withstand changing weather conditions. Decisions should be guided by measurable data and the experience of farmers who understand their land and local conditions.

I would also support stronger partnerships among farmers, universities, and agricultural organizations to develop practical solutions while preserving farmers’ freedom to choose what works for their operations.

Our goal should be straightforward: help New York farmers remain productive, profitable, and resilient while protecting food security and respecting the independence of the people who grow our food.

KEYWORDS: Farmer Choice, Resilient Agriculture, Practical Solutions, Food Security

Q1 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 oppose a blanket moratorium on data centers. New York should be leading in AI, innovation and job creation, not pushing investment and jobs to other states. At the same time, taxpayers and ratepayers should not be subsidizing the enormous energy demands of these facilities. Data centers should pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs they create. We also need more reliable energy, including nuclear power, to meet growing demand without driving utility bills even higher. Tax incentives should be tied to real investment and real jobs in New York. We can protect ratepayers while still keeping New York competitive and open for innovation.

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?

I strongly support ALPR technology as a public safety tool. It can help law enforcement find a kidnapped child, identify a vehicle involved in human trafficking, locate a stolen car, find someone who fled an accident or connect a vehicle to a serious crime. The public safety benefits are significant, and I believe they outweigh the privacy concerns when the technology is being used for legitimate law enforcement purposes. I support sharing relevant data between local and federal law enforcement when it can help prevent or solve crimes. Technology should help law enforcement identify vehicles and evidence, but decisions about guilt, arrests or penalties should remain with human beings. Used responsibly, ALPR technology can save lives, solve crimes and make our communities safer.

Q1 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

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

Q1 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?

Data centers can bring investment and innovation to New York, but New Yorkers should not be asked to subsidize massive private energy and water demands. I support the current pause while New York puts strong rules in place. New data centers should be required to account for their energy and water use, protect residential ratepayers, provide real benefits to host communities, and pay their fair share of any grid upgrades they require. I also support reevaluating blanket tax exemptions for the largest facilities.

The same basic principle applies to AI itself. We should encourage useful innovation while requiring strong privacy protections, transparency, safety standards, and human accountability when AI is used to make decisions that affect people’s lives.

KEYWORDS: Responsible AI; Data center regulation; Ratepayer protection; Privacy and accountability

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?

I have serious concerns about the growing use of Flock cameras and similar automated license plate reader networks. Public safety is important, but that cannot mean creating a massive database that tracks where law-abiding people travel and allows that information to be stored or shared with little oversight.

New York needs strong statewide limits on these systems, including strict limits on data retention and sharing, transparency about where cameras are operating and who can access the information, and meaningful consequences for misuse. Technology can assist law enforcement without creating a surveillance network that treats every driver like a potential suspect.

KEYWORDS: Privacy; ALPR regulation; Data retention;

Q1 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?

Data centers have not proven their benefits yet. Speculation should not be shouldered by the taxpayers. Tax exemptions should be reviewed on an ongoing basis with community input and transparency guardrails in place. All resources including water and electricity must prioritize residents access first. Commercial use of community resources means that the use of data centers should become subject to ongoing review. Technology serves to magnify one’s efforts be it for good or for bad. The potential benefits of data centers are matched by their potential for harm. Hacking risks and anti-consumer practices by tech companies must be resolved before charging ahead down this path which will have broad reaching effects on our workforce, our environment and our security.

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?

When you are in a public space you can be recorded on video. This is the law. There is potential for abuse of collected data for purposes of stalking, profiling and so forth. Does the best person running a secure server work for the government or for a tech company? Also people’s locations are already being tracked via their cellphones, their GPS devices in their dashboard. One of the more troubling ways that this information can be used is surveillance pricing, where a profile of you can be used to make you pay more then others would for the same product. We need to make broad and specific rules and guidelines regarding how data can be used and clear penalties for breaking these rules have to be established.

Q1 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?

New York shouldn’t have to choose between the jobs and investment AI can bring and protecting families’ utility bills, and a blanket moratorium fails on both counts. My approach starts with one principle: data centers pay their own way, and ratepayers never subsidize them. Large facilities should cover the full cost of the generation and grid upgrades they require, and they should bring new capacity with them rather than draw down what homeowners and small businesses rely on. That means solving the supply problem instead of freezing demand: keeping existing plants running, expanding natural gas infrastructure, and taking a serious look at advanced nuclear. Local communities should decide whether a project goes forward, under firm, predictable statewide standards on water, noise, and grid impact. On taxes, I would replace open-ended exemptions with performance-based incentives tied to real jobs and investment, with clawbacks if a company doesn’t deliver, rather than repeal them outright and watch this investment move to Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas. Data centers are coming somewhere, and I’d rather they be built here, on terms that protect New York families.

KEWTORDS: balance, taxpayer protection, supply problem

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?

License plate readers can be a valuable tool for recovering stolen vehicles, finding missing persons, and solving violent crimes faster. But a network that logs where ordinary people drive and shares it across state lines with little oversight calls for clear guardrails, and New York currently has none, so every department and vendor contract sets its own rules. I’d support statewide legislation built on five principles: use limited to defined public safety purposes, not general monitoring; short retention, with data that doesn’t match an active case deleted in days, not months; warrants or court orders for sharing with outside agencies, including out-of-state and federal ones, with narrow emergency exceptions and no sale of data to private companies; auditable logs of every search, public reporting, and penalties for misuse; and vendor contracts that keep the data under local government control, with security standards and breach notification. Communities should still decide whether to use the technology, as Syracuse did, but within clear statewide rules that protect both public safety and privacy.

Q1 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 responsible innovation that creates good jobs while protecting our communities. Data center owners must be accountable for their energy and water use, environmental impacts and worker safety. Residents and small businesses should not have to pay higher utility bills to subsidize these facilities. As an Assembly member I would support requiring independent assessments of electricity demand, water use, and community impacts before construction is approved. Companies should pay the full cost of the infrastructure upgrades they require, meet enforceable environmental and safety standards, and publicly report their resource use. Local residents must have a meaningful voice in the approval process.

The cost should not be on the backs of the residents. I would support ending automatic tax exemptions for data centers. Any incentive should depend on measurable public benefits, including permanent good paying local jobs, strong labor protections, and compliance with environmental standards, with repayment required if companies fail to deliver.

KEYWORDS: Accountability, affordable utilities, clean water, worker safety, responsible innovation, community input.

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?

i support license plate readers for legitimate public with strong privacy safeguards. I would propose legislation limiting collection and searches to defined purposes, requiring secure storage, access logs, independent audits, and deletion after a short retention period unless needed for a specific investigation. Sharing with local or federal agencies should require a documented lawful purpose, with judicial approval for tracking a persons’s movements over time and penalties for misuse.

KEYWORDS: public safety, privacy, defined purposes, judicial approval

Q1 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?

support responsible data-center development that brings investment and jobs without shifting the costs to New York taxpayers and utility customers. New projects should pay their fair share of electricity and infrastructure costs, meet strong environmental standards, and provide measurable local jobs and economic benefits. On the other hand I am worried about the amount of water to keep these sites running.

My policy would be to evaluate the pros and cons and have environmentalist do research and reevaluate on a quarterly process.

KEYWORDS: Save our water

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?

Most NYPD cars have plate readers this is nothing new .On federal level and local law we should govern and keep all of NYS safe at all times . i would propose ALPR date to collected , stored and retained but not shared with anyone other than Local authorities of federally.

At times crimes and terror attscks have been solved from plate readers so i can imagine a flock cameras they can assist with crimes and bigger issues.

KEYWORDS: Safety first

Q1 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?

Artificial intelligence presents significant opportunities for economic growth, research, and job creation, but those benefits cannot come at the expense of ratepayers, local communities, or our climate goals. I was a big supporter of legislation establishing a moratorium on large-scale data centers because New York needs a framework that fully evaluates their impacts on energy demand, water use, and utility costs.

New York should welcome innovation, but we have to ensure that taxpayers and utility customers are not subsidizing projects that strain our electric grid or undermine our climate commitments.

KEYWORDS: Responsible AI, Energy Infrastructure, Labor Standards, Community Benefits

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?

Public safety agencies should have access to effective tools that help solve crimes and protect communities, but those tools must be accompanied by strong privacy protections and public accountability.

I support clear statewide standards governing ALPR systems, including limits on data retention, restrictions on sharing information with unauthorized entities, auditing requirements, and transparency regarding how data is used. Access should be tied to legitimate law enforcement purposes and subject to oversight.

KEYWORDS: Privacy, Public Safety, Transparency, Accountability

Q1 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?

New York should welcome responsible investment in artificial intelligence and data centers while protecting taxpayers, utility customers, and local communities. I do not believe Albany should pick winners and losers or impose broad restrictions that drive technology, investment, and jobs to other states.

My approach would be straightforward: allow data centers to be built where they make economic and infrastructure sense, but require developers to pay their fair share of the infrastructure and energy costs they create. New projects should not result in higher utility bills for ordinary families and small businesses.

I would support a predictable, transparent permitting process, strong local input, and infrastructure requirements for large data centers. Tax incentives should also be reviewed based on measurable public benefits such as jobs, investment, and tax revenue rather than being provided indefinitely without accountability.

New York should also pursue policies that increase reliable and affordable energy supply. If we want to attract AI companies and the jobs and investment that come with them, we need an energy policy capable of supporting that growth.

The goal should not be to stop AI development in New York. The goal should be to make sure technological growth happens responsibly, creates real economic opportunity, and does not shift its costs onto working families.

KEYWORDS: Economic Growth, Job Creation, Energy Reliability, Affordable Utilities, Taxpayer Protection, Ratepayer Protection, Private Investment, Local Control, Infrastructure Investment, Regulatory Accountability, Responsible Development, Technology, Limited Government

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 an important tool for law enforcement to investigate crimes, locate stolen vehicles, and protect public safety. At the same time, government should not collect or retain Americans’ location data indefinitely without clear rules and accountability.

I would support legislation establishing clear limits on how ALPR data is collected, stored, accessed, and shared. Data should be collected for legitimate public-safety purposes, retained only for a defined period, and access should be limited to authorized law-enforcement personnel. Sharing with other agencies, including federal agencies, should follow transparent legal standards and appropriate oversight.

I would also support strong cybersecurity requirements and penalties for unauthorized access or misuse of ALPR information. Law-abiding New Yorkers should not have their movements permanently tracked simply because they drove past a camera.

The goal should be to give law enforcement the tools they need to keep communities safe while protecting individual privacy, due process, and constitutional rights.

KEYWORDS: Public Safety, Privacy Rights, Data Security, Due Process, Law Enforcement Accountability, Constitutional Protections

Q1 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 responsible data center development in New York, but taxpayers, homeowners, and small businesses should not be forced to subsidize the infrastructure costs created by large private facilities.

Data centers can bring significant private investment, construction activity, technology investment, and high-skill jobs. At the same time, they can place substantial demands on electricity, water, and local infrastructure. New York needs a balanced approach that recognizes both realities.

I would support clear, predictable standards for new facilities rather than indefinite moratoriums or constantly changing regulations. Projects should be evaluated based on their actual impacts, including electricity and water use, and companies should be responsible for the incremental infrastructure costs they create rather than shifting those costs to ordinary ratepayers.

I also support local communities having a meaningful voice through zoning and permitting, along with appropriate protections for neighboring properties and natural resources.

Tax incentives should be transparent, measurable, and tied to demonstrated public benefits such as investment, jobs, and infrastructure improvements. If taxpayers provide an incentive, New Yorkers should receive a clear return.

New York should be open for business, but businesses should pay their fair share of the costs they create.

KEYWORDS: Growth, Accountability, Local Control Innovation Without Taxpayer Burden Jobs, Investment, Fiscal Responsibility Pro-Growth, Pro-Taxpayer, Pro-Community

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?

ALPR technology can be a valuable law enforcement tool for solving crimes and locating stolen vehicles, missing persons, and suspects. However, the ability to collect location data on large numbers of people who are not suspected of wrongdoing requires appropriate safeguards.

I would support legislation requiring clear limits on how ALPR data is collected, accessed, stored, and shared. Data should be collected for legitimate public-safety purposes, with access limited to authorized law enforcement personnel and documented investigative needs. Retention periods should be limited, with information unrelated to an active investigation deleted after a reasonable period.

Sharing ALPR data with other agencies, including federal agencies, should require clear legal authority and accountability. Agencies should maintain access logs and conduct regular audits to ensure the system is being used appropriately. There should also be penalties for unauthorized access or misuse.

At the same time, I would not support eliminating a technology simply because it can be misused. The goal should be to preserve its legitimate public-safety benefits while protecting law-abiding New Yorkers from unnecessary government surveillance.

Public safety and privacy should not be mutually exclusive.

KEYWORDS: Public Safety & Privacy, Responsible Data Use, Limited Retention, Accountability

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 support an all of the above energy policy focused on affordability and reliability. I would prioritize expanding nuclear power, which provides reliable, zero emission energy around the clock, while continuing to use natural gas as needed to keep the grid reliable and costs manageable. I support solar, wind and hydropower where they make economic sense, but they cannot replace reliable baseload power on their own. New York should not shut down dependable energy sources before adequate replacements are actually operating. Our timeline should be based on grid reliability, consumer costs and measurable emissions reductions, not arbitrary political deadlines.

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

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 support New York’s transition to lower-carbon energy, but our energy policy should be driven by science, engineering, reliability, and cost. I would prioritize a diverse mix that includes hydropower, more wind and solar, energy storage, and upgrades to our transmission system. I also think advanced nuclear and other new technologies should remain on the table.

We should not shut down able low-carbon energy before replacement power is actually available. Our timelines should be ambitious, but they also need to reflect grid reliability, actual emissions reductions, technological readiness, and what families are paying on their utility bills.

KEYWORDS: Science-based energy policy; Grid reliability; Affordability

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?

Our need for energy, particularly electricity, is growing rapidly. Usually activism as it is seen by the public is really just one millionaire force fighting another millionaire force while many aspects of the truth, particularly those impacting the “little people” go unaddressed. The electric industry has become overpowering and taints the activism regarding environmental and energy issues. However, electricity will become more and more essential with the growing prevalence of computer chips in everything. This huge need for energy makes nuclear energy worthy of consideration. Unfortunately state subsidies can lead to huge waste and can work counter to the overall goals of sustainability. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/06/250611083736.htm <- this article outlines some examples. We must not let slogans convince us to greenlight poorly thought out solutions or implementation that runs counter to the original goals.

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?

New York’s energy policy has to pass three tests: affordable, reliable, and lower-emission. Albany has treated only the last as if it counts, and even Governor Hochul now admits the mandates would cost families thousands of dollars a year, which is why she pushed the emissions rules back to the end of 2028, years after the original deadline. My priorities start with keeping what works: nuclear, hydropower, and our existing natural gas plants, which stay online until replacement power is built and proven. Next, we build new firm power, including extending existing nuclear, advancing new nuclear, and expanding gas and storage where the grid needs it. Wind and solar belong in the mix where they make economic sense and have local support. Instead of date-certain mandates, I would tie each milestone to results, moving to the next step only when independent evidence shows the grid is reliable and bills aren’t rising. That evidence should be public: grid operator reliability assessments, the state’s own cost analyses, and what families actually pay. In the Senate, I’d require a published cost estimate and reliability sign-off before any new mandate takes effect.

KEYWORDS: all of the above options

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 support a cleaner energy future that keeps electricity affordable and reliable for families and small businesses.

Over the next two years, I would prioritize energy efficiency, rooftop and community solar, and modernizing or electric grid, while maintaining safely operated existing nuclear and hydropower facilities. Over the following three to five years, I would support expanding responsibly located wind and solar projects, together with the transmission and storage necessary to support them. I support New York’s climate goals, with annual public reviews to measure progress and address obstacles. Before retiring existing power plants, independent assessments must demonstrate that replacement resources can meet demand during extreme weather and periods of low wind or sunlight. My decisions would be guided by independent grid reliability studies, the total cost to consumers, emissions reductions, public health impacts, and community input. I would also push for transparent utility spending, assistance for struggling households, and good union jobs throughout the transition. We need measurable progres that protects both oir environment and peoples ability to pay their bills.

KEYWORDS: Affordable, reliable, clean energy, grid modernization, accountability, good union jobs.

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?

My priority would be making electricity affordable and reliable for New York families while continuing to reduce emissions. I believe we need to focus on the cost of energy today while building a stronger energy system for tomorrow.

As an Assemblyman i would prioritize the cost of electricity for all of NYS , the timeline once i’m sworn in and able to put the bill on the table. The evidence is each constituent constantly complains about the unlivable high electricity bills.

KEYWORDS: lower electricity prices

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 believe we have to continue implementing the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act while ensuring affordability and grid reliability. I support an “all-of-the-above” clean energy strategy that prioritizes renewable energy, energy storage, hydropower, existing nuclear generation, energy efficiency, and transmission upgrades.

We know that climate change is already affecting New York through extreme weather, flooding, and public health impacts. At the same time, families are concerned about utility bills and reliability. Those concerns must be addressed through investments that lower long-term costs, expand clean energy supply, and modernize our grid.

KEYWORDS: Clean Energy, Reliability, Affordability, Climate Action

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?

New York’s energy policy should begin with three priorities: affordability, reliability, and reducing emissions. We should not pursue an energy transition on an arbitrary timeline if doing so makes electricity less affordable or puts reliability at risk.

I would support an all-of-the-above energy strategy that preserves and expands reliable sources of electricity, including natural gas where necessary, nuclear power, hydropower, and renewable sources such as wind and solar. I believe nuclear energy deserves particular attention because it can provide reliable, low-carbon electricity around the clock.

I would also support expanding energy production and transmission infrastructure while reducing unnecessary regulatory delays. New York needs enough reliable electricity to support families, businesses, manufacturing, and the growing demand from technologies such as artificial intelligence.

Rather than setting policy based solely on mandates or political deadlines, I would evaluate energy decisions using measurable evidence: electricity prices for households and businesses, grid reliability, emissions reductions, energy supply and demand, infrastructure costs, and the effect on jobs and economic growth.

My goal would be to reduce emissions without sacrificing affordability or reliability. New York should use technology and competition to determine how we reach that goal, rather than forcing taxpayers and ratepayers to bear unnecessary costs.

KEYWORDS: energy Affordability, Energy Reliability, All-of-the-Above Energy, Nuclear Energy, Natural Gas, Hydropower, Renewable Energy, Energy Independence, Grid Modernization, Lower Utility Costs, Infrastructure Investment, Technology Neutrality, Emissions Reduction, Economic Growth, Evidence-Based Policy, Ratepayer Protection

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?

New York should pursue cleaner energy while protecting affordability, reliability, and consumer choice. I support slowing the implementation of policies that would force New Yorkers toward an all-electric system before our electric grid and energy infrastructure are ready.

I would prioritize a diverse energy portfolio that includes nuclear, natural gas, hydropower, and renewables such as wind and solar. Reliable, dispatchable sources are essential while we continue developing renewable generation, energy storage, and transmission infrastructure.

I support a phased, evidence-based approach rather than arbitrary deadlines. Before requiring additional electrification, New York should demonstrate that adequate generation and transmission capacity exists and that the transition will not significantly increase utility costs or threaten grid reliability.

Energy policy should be guided by measurable evidence, including electricity prices, grid reliability, projected demand, available generation, emissions reductions, and the costs imposed on families and businesses.

New York can reduce emissions and invest in cleaner technologies without eliminating consumer choice or forcing residents and businesses into one energy source. Our priority should be a reliable, affordable, and diverse energy system that meets New Yorkers’ needs while technology and infrastructure continue to develop.

KEYWORDS: Reliability Before Mandates, Affordable, Reliable Energy, Energy Choice, Grid Reliability, Practical, Evidence-Based Transition

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 support an all of the above energy policy focused on affordability and reliability. I would prioritize expanding nuclear power, which provides reliable, zero emission energy around the clock, while continuing to use natural gas as needed to keep the grid reliable and costs manageable. I support solar, wind and hydropower where they make economic sense, but they cannot replace reliable baseload power on their own. New York should not shut down dependable energy sources before adequate replacements are actually operating. Our timeline should be based on grid reliability, consumer costs and measurable emissions reductions, not arbitrary political deadlines.

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

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 support New York’s transition to lower-carbon energy, but our energy policy should be driven by science, engineering, reliability, and cost. I would prioritize a diverse mix that includes hydropower, more wind and solar, energy storage, and upgrades to our transmission system. I also think advanced nuclear and other new technologies should remain on the table.

We should not shut down able low-carbon energy before replacement power is actually available. Our timelines should be ambitious, but they also need to reflect grid reliability, actual emissions reductions, technological readiness, and what families are paying on their utility bills.

KEYWORDS: Science-based energy policy; Grid reliability; Affordability

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?

Our need for energy, particularly electricity, is growing rapidly. Usually activism as it is seen by the public is really just one millionaire force fighting another millionaire force while many aspects of the truth, particularly those impacting the “little people” go unaddressed. The electric industry has become overpowering and taints the activism regarding environmental and energy issues. However, electricity will become more and more essential with the growing prevalence of computer chips in everything. This huge need for energy makes nuclear energy worthy of consideration. Unfortunately state subsidies can lead to huge waste and can work counter to the overall goals of sustainability. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/06/250611083736.htm <- this article outlines some examples. We must not let slogans convince us to greenlight poorly thought out solutions or implementation that runs counter to the original goals.

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?

New York’s energy policy has to pass three tests: affordable, reliable, and lower-emission. Albany has treated only the last as if it counts, and even Governor Hochul now admits the mandates would cost families thousands of dollars a year, which is why she pushed the emissions rules back to the end of 2028, years after the original deadline. My priorities start with keeping what works: nuclear, hydropower, and our existing natural gas plants, which stay online until replacement power is built and proven. Next, we build new firm power, including extending existing nuclear, advancing new nuclear, and expanding gas and storage where the grid needs it. Wind and solar belong in the mix where they make economic sense and have local support. Instead of date-certain mandates, I would tie each milestone to results, moving to the next step only when independent evidence shows the grid is reliable and bills aren’t rising. That evidence should be public: grid operator reliability assessments, the state’s own cost analyses, and what families actually pay. In the Senate, I’d require a published cost estimate and reliability sign-off before any new mandate takes effect.

KEYWORDS: all of the above options

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 support a cleaner energy future that keeps electricity affordable and reliable for families and small businesses.

Over the next two years, I would prioritize energy efficiency, rooftop and community solar, and modernizing or electric grid, while maintaining safely operated existing nuclear and hydropower facilities. Over the following three to five years, I would support expanding responsibly located wind and solar projects, together with the transmission and storage necessary to support them. I support New York’s climate goals, with annual public reviews to measure progress and address obstacles. Before retiring existing power plants, independent assessments must demonstrate that replacement resources can meet demand during extreme weather and periods of low wind or sunlight. My decisions would be guided by independent grid reliability studies, the total cost to consumers, emissions reductions, public health impacts, and community input. I would also push for transparent utility spending, assistance for struggling households, and good union jobs throughout the transition. We need measurable progres that protects both oir environment and peoples ability to pay their bills.

KEYWORDS: Affordable, reliable, clean energy, grid modernization, accountability, good union jobs.

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?

My priority would be making electricity affordable and reliable for New York families while continuing to reduce emissions. I believe we need to focus on the cost of energy today while building a stronger energy system for tomorrow.

As an Assemblyman i would prioritize the cost of electricity for all of NYS , the timeline once i’m sworn in and able to put the bill on the table. The evidence is each constituent constantly complains about the unlivable high electricity bills.

KEYWORDS: lower electricity prices

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 believe we have to continue implementing the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act while ensuring affordability and grid reliability. I support an “all-of-the-above” clean energy strategy that prioritizes renewable energy, energy storage, hydropower, existing nuclear generation, energy efficiency, and transmission upgrades.

We know that climate change is already affecting New York through extreme weather, flooding, and public health impacts. At the same time, families are concerned about utility bills and reliability. Those concerns must be addressed through investments that lower long-term costs, expand clean energy supply, and modernize our grid.

KEYWORDS: Clean Energy, Reliability, Affordability, Climate Action

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?

New York’s energy policy should begin with three priorities: affordability, reliability, and reducing emissions. We should not pursue an energy transition on an arbitrary timeline if doing so makes electricity less affordable or puts reliability at risk.

I would support an all-of-the-above energy strategy that preserves and expands reliable sources of electricity, including natural gas where necessary, nuclear power, hydropower, and renewable sources such as wind and solar. I believe nuclear energy deserves particular attention because it can provide reliable, low-carbon electricity around the clock.

I would also support expanding energy production and transmission infrastructure while reducing unnecessary regulatory delays. New York needs enough reliable electricity to support families, businesses, manufacturing, and the growing demand from technologies such as artificial intelligence.

Rather than setting policy based solely on mandates or political deadlines, I would evaluate energy decisions using measurable evidence: electricity prices for households and businesses, grid reliability, emissions reductions, energy supply and demand, infrastructure costs, and the effect on jobs and economic growth.

My goal would be to reduce emissions without sacrificing affordability or reliability. New York should use technology and competition to determine how we reach that goal, rather than forcing taxpayers and ratepayers to bear unnecessary costs.

KEYWORDS: energy Affordability, Energy Reliability, All-of-the-Above Energy, Nuclear Energy, Natural Gas, Hydropower, Renewable Energy, Energy Independence, Grid Modernization, Lower Utility Costs, Infrastructure Investment, Technology Neutrality, Emissions Reduction, Economic Growth, Evidence-Based Policy, Ratepayer Protection

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?

New York should pursue cleaner energy while protecting affordability, reliability, and consumer choice. I support slowing the implementation of policies that would force New Yorkers toward an all-electric system before our electric grid and energy infrastructure are ready.

I would prioritize a diverse energy portfolio that includes nuclear, natural gas, hydropower, and renewables such as wind and solar. Reliable, dispatchable sources are essential while we continue developing renewable generation, energy storage, and transmission infrastructure.

I support a phased, evidence-based approach rather than arbitrary deadlines. Before requiring additional electrification, New York should demonstrate that adequate generation and transmission capacity exists and that the transition will not significantly increase utility costs or threaten grid reliability.

Energy policy should be guided by measurable evidence, including electricity prices, grid reliability, projected demand, available generation, emissions reductions, and the costs imposed on families and businesses.

New York can reduce emissions and invest in cleaner technologies without eliminating consumer choice or forcing residents and businesses into one energy source. Our priority should be a reliable, affordable, and diverse energy system that meets New Yorkers’ needs while technology and infrastructure continue to develop.

KEYWORDS: Reliability Before Mandates, Affordable, Reliable Energy, Energy Choice, Grid Reliability, Practical, Evidence-Based Transition

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 are dealing with increasingly unpredictable weather, and we should focus on practical solutions that help them protect their farms and our food supply. I would support targeted assistance for irrigation, drainage, water storage, crop protection and other infrastructure that makes farms more resilient. We should also make sure farmers can quickly access disaster assistance and crop insurance when major losses occur. Farmers know their land and their businesses better than Albany does. Our role should be to give them the tools to prepare, recover and continue producing food without adding unnecessary mandates or costs.

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?

believe New York needs a better early warning and public information system for wildfire smoke events. People should receive clear information as early as possible about expected air quality, health risks and appropriate precautions. When air quality reaches dangerous levels, there should also be clear guidelines for schools, outdoor activities and outdoor workers to limit unnecessary exposure. The goal should be simple: give people accurate information early and have common sense protections in place when conditions become unsafe.

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

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

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?

For farmers, extreme weather is not an abstract issue. It can mean losing a crop and an entire year of income. I support expanding assistance for drainage, irrigation, frost protection, soil health, water management, and other farm-specific resilience projects.

We should also strengthen emergency relief, help farmers access federal disaster and insurance programs, and invest in agricultural research and extension services so farmers have practical information about changing conditions. Albany should work with farmers on solutions that fit their land and crops rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all approach

KEYWORDS: Farm resilience; Extreme weather; Agricultural research; Disaster relief

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?

New York should treat wildfire smoke as a recurring public health and emergency preparedness issue. I support better air-quality monitoring and public alerts, upgraded filtration in schools and other public buildings, clean-air spaces during severe smoke events, and making high-quality masks and filtration more accessible to people at greatest risk.

The State should also help schools, nursing homes, local governments, and employers develop clear response plans before the next major smoke event occurs. We may not be able to control where the smoke originates, but we can use the science and data we have to reduce exposure and protect people when it arrives.

KEYWORDS: Wildfire smoke; Air quality; Public health preparedness; Filtration

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?

The federal government subsidizes crop insurance. Estimated costs before subsidies are $20 to $40 per acre and after subsidies drop to $12 to $25 per acre. Federal subsidies also cover livestock. Upon reports of extreme adverse weather conditions experts as well as farmers can be surveyed to understand what the expected problems are. Wind? Flooding? Hail? Then appropriate measures can be taken such as potentially buying crop covers in bulk or preparing water runoff solutions in advance.

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?

Albuterol is the most common medication for severe asthma incidents. Making sure that the supply chain for this product remains intact is key. The Canadian wildfire in 2023 was an outlier as can be seen from this chart. https://www.statista.com/statistics/553520/area-burned-of-forest-fires-canada/ There were no direct deaths in NYC attributed to pollution from the wildfires from Canada even though the amount of pollution was more then 3x the average. Because of the PROJECTION of increased wildfires, at risk communities such as senior centers and hospitals should review equipment such as physical barriers to particulate matter and air filters.

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 already supports farm resilience through the Climate Resilient Farming Grant Program, which helps farms prepare for flooding, drought, and extreme weather through county Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Recent rounds have awarded more than $25 million to 133 farms. The state also funds water quality projects and supports Cornell’s research and extension services, and farmers can turn to federal crop insurance and USDA disaster programs. I’d keep those programs and make them work better: simpler applications and faster payments for small family farms, more investment in irrigation, drainage, and flood protection, continued support for Cornell research that gets practical tools to growers, and quicker disaster aid coordinated with federal programs. I’d also keep state mandates and costs from piling onto farms that already run on thin margins. The approach should be voluntary and farmer-led, because the people best equipped to decide what works on a farm are the farmers, not Albany.

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?

The smoke is a real health issue for New Yorkers, and this summer’s alerts, on top of the record-breaking event in 2023, show it isn’t a one-time problem. I do think Canada has a responsibility here. Smoke crosses the border without any regard for it, and New York families and taxpayers bear the health costs. But the state can’t hold another country accountable directly, so my first step would be pushing Washington to make it a priority with Ottawa. The existing U.S.–Canada air quality cooperation wasn’t built for wildfire smoke. I’d press our congressional delegation and the federal government for a real agreement on prevention, forest and fire management, early warning, and shared firefighting resources.

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?

I would support grants for flood protection, efficient irrigation, soil conservation, and crops suited to changing weather conditions. I would also prioritize timely disaster relief and Cornell Cooperative extension guidance, with simple applications accessible to small farms. investing in preparation helps farmers’ livelihoods and our food supply.

KEYWORDS: preparation, climate resilience, flood protection disaster reliefn, disaster relief

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?

investing in air quality monitoring, timely public alerts, and improved air filtration systems in schools and public buildings. New York shold provide accessible clean air shelters and help low income families obtain air purifiers, prioritizing children, seniors, and people with heart and lung conditions. Clear plans fpr schools and outdoor workers, along with research on long term effects, should guide our preparation.

KEYWORDS: preparation, accessible shelters, research

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?

I support helping farmers adapt through expanded crop-insurance and disaster assistance, grants for water-management and resilient infrastructure, and funding for soil-health and climate-resilient farming practices. The goal should be to protect farms from unpredictable weather while keeping food production and family farms economically viable.

KEYWORDS: save our farmland from foreign countries

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?

An evaluation of what is truly going on in Canada wlld fires need to be conducted , are they being set can they utilize a water system so they can water the grass and etc on a daily basis.

I would also support clear public alerts, protections for outdoor workers, and funding to help vulnerable households obtain air purifiers.

The goal should be to make sure New Yorkers can breathe safely when wildfire smoke reaches our communities

This happens ever year we need to know the studies of Canada and to move forward to make sure our residents have safe air quality at all times “

KEYWORDS: Breath of Fresh Air is needed investigate the fires

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?

Farmers are already experiencing the impacts of more frequent flooding, droughts, and severe storms. New York should help agricultural producers build resilience through investments in climate-smart farming practices, soil health, water management infrastructure, and emergency preparedness.

I support expanding technical assistance programs, improving access to crop insurance, investing in drainage and irrigation improvements, and strengthening disaster recovery resources. Research partnerships between universities, extension services, and farmers can also help identify practices that improve productivity while reducing vulnerability to extreme weather.

KEYWORDS: Climate Resilience, Farm Sustainability, Disaster Preparedness, Soil Health

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?

The wildfire smoke events that affected New York demonstrated how environmental challenges can quickly become public health emergencies. New York should invest in improved air-quality monitoring, public notification systems, emergency preparedness, and community resilience measures.

Schools, childcare centers, senior facilities, and public buildings should have access to effective air filtration systems, particularly in communities with vulnerable populations. Public health agencies should also continue educating residents about reducing exposure during poor air-quality events.

Preparation is especially important because these events can affect children, seniors, and individuals with respiratory conditions.

KEYWORDS: Air Quality, Public Health, Emergency Preparedness, Community Resilience

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 should help farmers prepare for unpredictable weather without burdening them with unnecessary regulations or higher costs. Farmers are often the first to experience the economic consequences of drought, flooding, extreme temperatures, and severe storms.

I would support expanding access to crop insurance, disaster assistance, and low-interest financing for farms that need to repair or improve infrastructure. I would also support investments in drainage, irrigation, water storage, soil conservation, and other practical measures that help farms withstand extreme weather.

Government programs should be targeted, transparent, and focused on measurable results. New York should also work with the federal government, agricultural organizations, and researchers to make sure farmers have access to useful weather data, agricultural technology, and new farming techniques.

Our goal should be simple: protect New York’s food supply, help farmers remain financially viable, and give them the tools and flexibility to adapt without imposing unnecessary government mandates.

KEYWORDS: Farm Resilience, Disaster Assistance, Agricultural Infrastructure

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?

New York should focus on practical preparedness rather than costly mandates. I would support investing in real-time air-quality monitoring, public alerts, clean-air shelters, and support for schools and vulnerable residents during severe smoke events. We should also improve coordination with local and federal agencies so communities can respond quickly when air quality becomes dangerous. Our priority should be protecting public health while using taxpayer dollars responsibly.

KEYWORDS: Public Safety, Air Quality, Emergency Preparedness

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 should help farmers prepare for increasingly unpredictable weather without adding unnecessary regulations or costs to already challenging operations. Farmers need practical tools and flexibility, not one-size-fits-all mandates.

I would support expanding access to crop insurance, disaster assistance, and low-interest financing for improvements that make farms more resilient, such as drainage systems, irrigation, water storage, wind protection, and improved soil management. The state should also work with the federal government to ensure disaster assistance reaches farmers quickly when extreme weather causes significant losses.

New York should invest in agricultural research and extension services to help farmers identify crops, planting practices, and technologies that can better withstand changing weather conditions. Decisions should be guided by measurable data and the experience of farmers who understand their land and local conditions.

I would also support stronger partnerships among farmers, universities, and agricultural organizations to develop practical solutions while preserving farmers’ freedom to choose what works for their operations.

Our goal should be straightforward: help New York farmers remain productive, profitable, and resilient while protecting food security and respecting the independence of the people who grow our food.

KEYWORDS: Farmer Choice, Resilient Agriculture, Practical Solutions, Food Security

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?

New York should take practical steps to prepare for wildfire smoke events and protect public health, particularly for children, seniors, and people with respiratory conditions. Because the long-term health impacts of repeated smoke exposure are still being studied, our policies should be guided by the best available evidence and updated as the science develops.

I would support strengthening air-quality monitoring and providing timely, easy-to-understand alerts when smoke creates unhealthy conditions. Schools, nursing homes, hospitals, and other public facilities should have plans for maintaining safe indoor air, including appropriate filtration and clean-air spaces when necessary.

The state should also make reliable air-quality information widely available so families and employers can make informed decisions about outdoor activities and work during severe smoke events.

New York should coordinate with local governments and Canadian and federal authorities to improve forecasting and emergency communication during major wildfire events.

Rather than imposing broad new regulations based on uncertain projections, I would prioritize practical preparedness, targeted investments, and measurable outcomes. As additional evidence becomes available, New York should adjust its policies accordingly.

Prepare for the risk, protect public health, and follow the evidence.

KEYWORDS: Practical Preparedness, Public Health Protection, Evidence-Based Policy, Clear Emergency Alerts

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?

I would base pesticide policy on current scientific evidence, including data from the EPA, New York DEC, Cornell and our agricultural community. We need to look at human health, environmental impact, crop yields, food costs and whether farmers have effective alternatives. I do not support banning agricultural tools simply because they are politically unpopular. When credible evidence shows a product creates an unacceptable risk and safer, effective alternatives exist, we should act. The goal should be protecting public health and our environment while making sure New York farmers can continue producing an affordable and reliable food supply.

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

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 be doing everything it reasonably can to remain a place where talented students and researchers want to study, work, and build their careers. Immigration policy is primarily federal, but the State can work with universities and employers on research opportunities, fellowships, legal and administrative support, and programs that help retain highly trained STEM graduates.

I would also work with New York’s congressional delegation to push for a visa system that is secure, predictable, and does not unnecessarily drive talented researchers elsewhere. Scientific talent is an economic asset, and New York should treat it that way.

KEYWORDS: STEM workforce; International students; Research talent; Visa stability

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?

The federal government has sovereignty due to the Supremacy clause in the US Constitution and has the authority to issue or revoke visas. Overall New York should comply with federal law. There is a process to take things to court in special cases, but our universities receive many subsidies and tax exempt status. International students can be targets for exploitation for more than just their finances and are as a rule charged more money for tuition for the same education. Information can be shared, and the benefits for NY in training people who may have difficulty staying in the US are uncertain at best.

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?

Visa policy is set in Washington, not Albany, and I don’t think the state should pretend otherwise. There’s a legitimate case for careful screening and for protecting our research from theft and espionage, but blunt restrictions that push away legitimate students and scientists could hurt New York’s universities, hospitals, and growing tech and semiconductor sector. So I’d do three things. First, work with our congressional delegation and other states to press for targeted security vetting instead of across-the-board limits, with New York colleges and employers at the table. Second, build our own pipeline by expanding STEM education from K-12 through SUNY, CUNY, and community colleges, and by strengthening partnerships with employers and apprenticeships so New Yorkers are first in line for these jobs. Third, support what the state can control: helping universities and employers navigate rule changes, and keeping research funding and incentives competitive so we don’t lose talent to other states. I wouldn’t try to override federal immigration law, which isn’t our role and would only invite legal fights. Our job is to keep New York competitive.

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 help universities provide legal guidance and support to affected students and researchers, advocate for fair federal visa policies, and protect research continuity. We need to track work force gaps and expand STEM scholarship training and university partnerships with local employers. We should welcome international talent while investing in opportunities for New Yorkers.

KEYWORDS: International talent, STEM education, research continuity, workforce development, fair visa policies

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 allow federal visas for work and school as long as the person is vetted and deemed safe. We need stem students from all backgrounds that is what makes us the best state New York. No one should be penalized due to their country.

KEYWORDS: vet students we need them

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?

International students and researchers are essential contributors to New York’s economy, universities, healthcare institutions, and innovation ecosystem. While immigration policy is primarily a federal responsibility, New York should continue positioning itself as a welcoming destination for talented students and researchers from around the world.

If federal visa restrictions reduce the STEM talent pipeline, New York should strengthen partnerships among universities, industry, and research institutions to retain talent and support workforce development. We should also expand state investments in higher education, research, and STEM career pathways for New Yorkers.

Our state’s economic future depends on attracting and retaining highly skilled individuals, no matter their background, who contribute to scientific discovery, entrepreneurship, and technological advancement.

KEYWORDS: STEM Workforce, Higher Education, Innovation Economy, Talent Retention

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?

Immigration and visa policy are primarily federal responsibilities, and New York should respect that authority. At the same time, New York should make sure our universities, research institutions, and businesses can compete for talent while putting American workers first.

I would support policies that strengthen STEM education and workforce development for New Yorkers, expand internships and apprenticeships, and help employers find qualified workers here at home. Where federal visa policies affect New York’s universities and research institutions, the state should work with those institutions and the federal government to understand the economic and workforce impacts.

International students and researchers can contribute to innovation and economic growth, but New York’s priority should be developing a strong domestic STEM workforce so we are not unnecessarily dependent on foreign talent.

The goal should be a competitive workforce that creates opportunities for New Yorkers, protects national security, and allows New York to remain a leader in science, technology, and innovation.

KEYWORDS: American Workers, STEM Education, Workforce Development, Innovation, National Security

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 continue competing for the best students, researchers, and scientific talent from around the world, while respecting federal authority over immigration and student visas. International students who are legally admitted and academically qualified make valuable contributions to New York’s universities, research institutions, and economy, particularly in STEM fields.

I would support New York universities and employers providing clear information and assistance to students and researchers navigating federal visa requirements, while avoiding policies that circumvent federal immigration law.

Admissions, scholarships, research opportunities, and hiring should be based on merit, qualifications, and demonstrated ability—not race, ethnicity, nationality, or political considerations. New York should ensure that efforts to increase diversity do not come at the expense of academic standards or equal treatment.

At the same time, we should strengthen opportunities for talented New Yorkers to pursue STEM education and careers, including scholarships, apprenticeships, and partnerships between schools, colleges, and employers.

The goal should be simple: attract the best talent, maintain high standards, follow the law, and develop more homegrown STEM talent. New York should remain competitive without compromising merit, fairness, or the integrity of our immigration system.

KEYWORDS: Merit-Based Opportunity, Legal Immigration, Academic Excellence, Homegrown STEM Talent

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?

believe New York needs a better early warning and public information system for wildfire smoke events. People should receive clear information as early as possible about expected air quality, health risks and appropriate precautions. When air quality reaches dangerous levels, there should also be clear guidelines for schools, outdoor activities and outdoor workers to limit unnecessary exposure. The goal should be simple: give people accurate information early and have common sense protections in place when conditions become unsafe.

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

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

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?

Pesticide policy should be based on evidence, not fear and not pressure from industry. I would look to peer-reviewed research and the work of public health and environmental agencies, with particular attention to actual exposure levels, long-term health effects, water quality, farmworker safety, pollinators, and impacts on food production.

Where credible evidence shows an unacceptable risk, New York should act. At the same time, farmers need realistic alternatives and enough time and support to transition. I also support integrated pest management and continued research into safer and more targeted ways to protect crops.

KEYWORDS: Evidence-based regulation; Pesticide safety; Integrated pest management; Farm viability

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?

New York should treat wildfire smoke as a recurring public health and emergency preparedness issue. I support better air-quality monitoring and public alerts, upgraded filtration in schools and other public buildings, clean-air spaces during severe smoke events, and making high-quality masks and filtration more accessible to people at greatest risk.

The State should also help schools, nursing homes, local governments, and employers develop clear response plans before the next major smoke event occurs. We may not be able to control where the smoke originates, but we can use the science and data we have to reduce exposure and protect people when it arrives.

KEYWORDS: Wildfire smoke; Air quality; Public health preparedness; Filtration

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?

Public health physicians are in place to ring the alarm when an outbreak occurs potentially pointing the finger at pesticides. The EPA at the federal level and the NYS Bureau of Pesticide Management also serve as regulatory agencies responsible for tracking pesticide use. The example of Paraquat provided? It can create permanent harm and has no known specific antidote. It is banned in many jurisdictions for it’s capability to harm humans and animals. Also research shows that eliminating paraquat does not reduce agricultural productivity when appropriate alternatives are adopted. This makes it a good candidate for a ban.

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?

Albuterol is the most common medication for severe asthma incidents. Making sure that the supply chain for this product remains intact is key. The Canadian wildfire in 2023 was an outlier as can be seen from this chart. https://www.statista.com/statistics/553520/area-burned-of-forest-fires-canada/ There were no direct deaths in NYC attributed to pollution from the wildfires from Canada even though the amount of pollution was more then 3x the average. Because of the PROJECTION of increased wildfires, at risk communities such as senior centers and hospitals should review equipment such as physical barriers to particulate matter and air filters.

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’d let the evidence guide these decisions, not slogans from either side. My approach is to weigh what a product does for farm yields, food supply, and farmers’ costs against what independent data show about its risks to human health, water, pollinators, and farm workers.

For safety, I’d rely on federal and state regulators’ own risk assessments: the EPA’s registration reviews and tolerance levels, the USDA’s Pesticide Data Program, which tests residues on food, and the FDA’s residue monitoring. In New York, I’d use the DEC’s pesticide registration and use data, the state’s mandatory pesticide sales and use reporting, and Department of Health findings. For international scientific consensus, I’d look at the National Academies, the World Health Organization, and the European Food Safety Authority.I’d also want to hear directly from New York farmers, farmworkers, and public health experts, because data on paper doesn’t always show what works in the field. When the evidence shows a real risk, we act. When it shows a tool is safe and important to farmers’ livelihoods, we protect access to it. And any restriction should come with a workable alternative, so we don’t lose farms or push production out of state.

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?

The smoke is a real health issue for New Yorkers, and this summer’s alerts, on top of the record-breaking event in 2023, show it isn’t a one-time problem. I do think Canada has a responsibility here. Smoke crosses the border without any regard for it, and New York families and taxpayers bear the health costs. But the state can’t hold another country accountable directly, so my first step would be pushing Washington to make it a priority with Ottawa. The existing U.S.–Canada air quality cooperation wasn’t built for wildfire smoke. I’d press our congressional delegation and the federal government for a real agreement on prevention, forest and fire management, early warning, and shared firefighting resources.

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 would weigh independent, peer reviewed research, EPA and New York DEC assessments and Cornell agricultural studies. I would examine long term health effects, exposure among children, and farm workers, water contamination, and impacts on pollinators alongside crop yields food prices, and the effectiveness of alternatives. I support restricting pesticides when evidence shows unacceptable risks and helping farmers adopt safer, effective pest management methods.

KEYWORDS: Evidence based policy, public health, clean water ,food security, farmer support.

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?

investing in air quality monitoring, timely public alerts, and improved air filtration systems in schools and public buildings. New York shold provide accessible clean air shelters and help low income families obtain air purifiers, prioritizing children, seniors, and people with heart and lung conditions. Clear plans fpr schools and outdoor workers, along with research on long term effects, should guide our preparation.

KEYWORDS: preparation, accessible shelters, research

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?

First of all the same thing with pesticides , steroids and lab meat should be banned. Safety is paramount what we eat should be safe and free from pesticides , steroids , dyes, vaccines and fake meat made in lab. Now all of a sudden all the new snacks and dyes they are coming out with. It’s def not something you want your child to eat. Better safe and healthy

KEYWORDS: safe and healthy

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?

An evaluation of what is truly going on in Canada wlld fires need to be conducted , are they being set can they utilize a water system so they can water the grass and etc on a daily basis.

I would also support clear public alerts, protections for outdoor workers, and funding to help vulnerable households obtain air purifiers.

The goal should be to make sure New Yorkers can breathe safely when wildfire smoke reaches our communities

This happens ever year we need to know the studies of Canada and to move forward to make sure our residents have safe air quality at all times “

KEYWORDS: Breath of Fresh Air is needed investigate the fires

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?

Agricultural policy should be guided by the best available science and a commitment to both food security and public health. Decisions regarding pesticide use should be based on peer-reviewed research, environmental monitoring data, public health evidence, and guidance from scientific and regulatory agencies.

I support evaluating pesticides on a case-by-case basis, considering both their effectiveness and potential impacts on farmworkers, consumers, pollinators, water quality, and ecosystems. Where evidence identifies significant risks, New York should support safer alternatives and help farmers transition to effective pest-management practices.

Any restrictions should be paired with technical assistance, research investments, and support for integrated pest management strategies that maintain productivity while reducing risks.

KEYWORDS: Evidence-Based Policy, Food Security, Public Health, Integrated Pest Management

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?

The wildfire smoke events that affected New York demonstrated how environmental challenges can quickly become public health emergencies. New York should invest in improved air-quality monitoring, public notification systems, emergency preparedness, and community resilience measures.

Schools, childcare centers, senior facilities, and public buildings should have access to effective air filtration systems, particularly in communities with vulnerable populations. Public health agencies should also continue educating residents about reducing exposure during poor air-quality events.

Preparation is especially important because these events can affect children, seniors, and individuals with respiratory conditions.

KEYWORDS: Air Quality, Public Health, Emergency Preparedness, Community Resilience

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?

New York should protect the safety of consumers, farm workers, and our environment while also protecting farmers’ ability to produce an affordable and reliable food supply. I would not support blanket pesticide bans that are based on politics rather than sound evidence.

My policy decisions would be guided by peer-reviewed scientific research, toxicology and epidemiological studies, pesticide residue testing, worker-exposure data, environmental impacts, and the effectiveness and availability of safer alternatives. I would also consider the economic impact on New York farmers, including whether restrictions could reduce crop yields, increase food prices, or put New York agriculture at a competitive disadvantage.

Where a pesticide is shown through strong, credible evidence to present an unacceptable risk, appropriate restrictions or removal should be considered. But where products meet established safety standards, farmers should be able to use them responsibly according to the law and product labels.

I also support expanding Integrated Pest Management, which uses monitoring, prevention, targeted treatments, and less-risky alternatives before resorting to broader pesticide applications.

The standard should be simple: protect public health, protect our farmers, and base decisions on the best available evidence and not fear, politics, or one-size-fits-all mandates.

KEYWORDS: Food Safety, Farmers, Scientific Evidence, Responsible Regulation

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?

New York should focus on practical preparedness rather than costly mandates. I would support investing in real-time air-quality monitoring, public alerts, clean-air shelters, and support for schools and vulnerable residents during severe smoke events. We should also improve coordination with local and federal agencies so communities can respond quickly when air quality becomes dangerous. Our priority should be protecting public health while using taxpayer dollars responsibly.

KEYWORDS: Public Safety, Air Quality, Emergency Preparedness

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?

New York’s pesticide policies should be guided by sound science, reliable data, and the practical realities facing farmers. Pesticides play an important role in protecting crops, maintaining yields, controlling invasive pests, and keeping food affordable, but legitimate concerns about human health and environmental impacts must also be taken seriously.

When considering restrictions, I would look at peer-reviewed research, EPA and New York Department of Environmental Conservation safety assessments, monitoring data on residues and environmental impacts, and evidence regarding risks to farm workers and surrounding communities. I would also consider whether effective alternatives are actually available, affordable, and capable of maintaining crop yields.

Policy should distinguish between pesticides based on their demonstrated risks rather than treating all products the same. Where evidence identifies a significant risk, reasonable restrictions or mitigation measures should be considered. Where evidence supports safe use, farmers should not face unnecessary restrictions that could reduce production or increase food costs.

Farmers should also have a voice in the process. New York should encourage integrated pest management and safer alternatives where practical, while preserving farmers’ ability to protect their crops and livelihoods.

The goal should be safe food, productive farms, and evidence-based regulation—not regulation based on fear or politics.

KEYWORDS: Science-Based Regulation, Farmers’ Choice, Food Security, Safety & Accountability

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?

New York should take practical steps to prepare for wildfire smoke events and protect public health, particularly for children, seniors, and people with respiratory conditions. Because the long-term health impacts of repeated smoke exposure are still being studied, our policies should be guided by the best available evidence and updated as the science develops.

I would support strengthening air-quality monitoring and providing timely, easy-to-understand alerts when smoke creates unhealthy conditions. Schools, nursing homes, hospitals, and other public facilities should have plans for maintaining safe indoor air, including appropriate filtration and clean-air spaces when necessary.

The state should also make reliable air-quality information widely available so families and employers can make informed decisions about outdoor activities and work during severe smoke events.

New York should coordinate with local governments and Canadian and federal authorities to improve forecasting and emergency communication during major wildfire events.

Rather than imposing broad new regulations based on uncertain projections, I would prioritize practical preparedness, targeted investments, and measurable outcomes. As additional evidence becomes available, New York should adjust its policies accordingly.

Prepare for the risk, protect public health, and follow the evidence.

KEYWORDS: Practical Preparedness, Public Health Protection, Evidence-Based Policy, Clear Emergency Alerts

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?

I oppose significant cuts to NIH funding. New York is a national leader in medical research, and this funding supports our hospitals, universities, scientists and the development of new treatments and technologies. With my background in healthcare, I understand how important continued medical research and innovation are to both patients and our economy. As a State Senator, I would advocate for protecting New York’s research institutions and work with our federal representatives to preserve critical NIH investment. We should be finding efficiencies in government, but cutting productive medical research that can improve and save lives is not where I would start.

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

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?

I oppose major cuts to NIH research funding. Federal research dollars support medical breakthroughs, universities, hospitals, jobs, and the next generation of scientists. New York cannot realistically replace the federal government’s role in biomedical research, but we should protect our research base where we can through targeted bridge funding, research infrastructure, state matching programs, and partnerships with universities and the private sector.

I would also work with our congressional delegation and New York research institutions to advocate for stable, long-term federal research funding. Cutting science may save money on paper in the short term, but it risks costing us much more in lost innovation, jobs, and future treatments.

KEYWORDS: NIH funding; Biomedical research; Research jobs; State bridge funding

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?

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-settlement-civil-fraud-lawsuit-against-former-hunter-college the links takes you to an article titled “U.S. Attorney Announces Settlement Of Civil Fraud Lawsuit Against Former Hunter College Professor And Hunter College For Fraudulently Using Federal Research Funds” Besides corruption, research can often focus on, “trending topics” or areas projected to “make a lot of money” such as erectile dysfunction instead of pursuing more impactful issues such as the overuse of antibiotics in our livestock industry. NIH has to better demonstrate it’s value to the federal government and voters to restore their funding. Refer to the following article. https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/4533574-how-the-national-institutes-of-health-became-a-den-of-cronyism/

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 spends real money on science, but I don’t think we spend it well. Right now our approach is to pick a handful of industries and write very large checks, with semiconductors at the top of the list, then AI and quantum. That’s industrial policy, not a science strategy, and it has four problems.

It’s too narrow. Billions go to a few favored sectors, while I’m not aware of any major state program that supports researchers pursuing their own ideas in biology, chemistry, physics, or medicine. Breakthroughs rarely come from the sector the government picked in advance. Cutting stem cell funding in 2021 is a good example: we walked away from a program that helped make New York a leader, and researchers left for states that kept theirs.

It’s driven by economic development, not by science. Much of the money goes to construction, incentives, and commercialization grants, all judged by jobs and private investment. Those goals matter, but they don’t build the pipeline of discovery that future industries depend on. We’re paying for the factories without investing enough in the ideas that fill them.

It leans heavily on Washington. New York’s contribution to research is small compared to federal funding, so when federal support gets uncertain, our universities and labs are exposed. Even the Empire AI board has noted how valuable state-led funding is when federal money is in doubt. That should tell us the state needs a steadier base of its own, not just a few flashy projects.

It’s concentrated in a few places. Much of the flagship spending goes to a handful of sites, and the benefits don’t reach all our campuses, small and mid-sized colleges, or regions.

I’d take a different approach: keep the successful large projects, but hold them to strict performance and accountability standards, and rebalance toward a more stable, merit-based state research program that funds the best ideas across fields and institutions, requires matching private dollars, and reports results publicly. That gives us a research base that produces the next Micron, not just one that hosts it

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?

I oppose deep cuts to NIH research funding. After 36 years in healthcare, I understand the importance of research in improving patient care. I would work with New York’s congressional delegation to defend federal funding and support targeted temporary state funding to preserve critical projects and research jobs.

KEYWORDS: medical research, NIH funding, patient care

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?

At no time should NY hospitals , universities and research institutions should lose or have a change to our NIH funding levels.

As a state legislator, I would work with New York’s congressional delegation to protect NIH funding and advocate for state support throughout NYS .

Hospitals , Universities and Research Institutions are three most valuable sources that should never be compromised.

Hospitals are for patients , college is for next leaders and research Research should never be downgraded. Strong NIH funding supports medical breakthroughs, innovation, jobs, and New York’s world-class research institutions.

KEYWORDS: Leave bush funding levels

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?

I oppose cuts that would reduce NIH funding for New York’s hospitals, universities, and research institutions.

New York is home to world-class research institutions that are advancing treatments for cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, heart disease, and many other conditions. Reductions in federal research funding would threaten scientific progress and weaken our competitiveness. As a State Senator, I plan on advocating for robust federal research investments while supporting state initiatives that strengthen research partnerships, workforce development, and innovation.

KEYWORDS: NIH Funding, Medical Research, Innovation, Economic Development

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?

Federal research funding should be focused on projects that produce measurable public benefits, while avoiding unnecessary bureaucracy and waste. I would oppose cuts that undermine promising medical research, but I also believe NIH funding should be accountable and results-driven. New York should work with federal leaders to protect high-value research, strengthen partnerships with the private sector, and ensure taxpayer dollars are producing meaningful scientific and economic results.

KEYWORDS: Medical Research, Fiscal Responsibility, Innovation

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?

NIH-funded research has produced important medical and scientific advances, and New York has a significant research sector that benefits from federal investment. In FY2025, New York received approximately $2.13 billion in NIH awards. The NIH has a $47.5 billion budget for FY2026, a 1% increase from FY2025. However, I believe every federal research dollar should be subject to transparency, accountability, and rigorous scientific standards.

I would be concerned about significant funding reductions that eliminate promising research, disrupt ongoing studies, or cause talented researchers and institutions to leave New York. At the same time, I support reviewing NIH spending, reducing unnecessary administrative costs, and ensuring funding is directed toward research with strong scientific merit and measurable public benefit.

New York should work with our congressional delegation, universities, hospitals, and research institutions to understand the impact of federal changes and advocate for competitive funding based on scientific quality rather than political considerations. We should also encourage more private-sector investment so our research institutions are not overly dependent on federal funding.

Fund good science, demand accountability, and protect research that delivers measurable public benefit.

KEYWORDS: NIH funding should be earned on scientific merit, independently reviewed, transparent, and subject to strong oversight

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 should teach students how to think critically, evaluate sources, understand scientific evidence and distinguish credible research from something they see on social media. Schools should provide families with current information from qualified medical and scientific sources, while being transparent about where that information comes from. I do not believe schools should become political gatekeepers of information. The goal should be education, transparency and critical thinking so students and parents have the tools to evaluate information and make informed decisions.

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

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 has an important role to play, but the goal should be to teach students how to evaluate information, not simply tell them what to think. Students should understand the scientific method, how to distinguish credible research from unsupported claims, how to identify reliable sources, and how social media can amplify bad information.

Schools should also make accurate, up-to-date scientific and public health information easy for students and families to find. The best answer to misinformation is better information, stronger science literacy, and giving people the tools to ask good questions and evaluate the evidence for themselves.

KEYWORDS: Science literacy; Media literacy; Scientific method; Trusted information

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?

“Scientific information” are words that are easily misused. It is relatively easy for industry to astroturf activism and to take control of the narrative due to advertising relationships with the media. Science itself was a response to the rationalism espoused by Descartes. Science operates on a principle of formation of hypothesis that can be disproved AT ANY TIME through EVIDENCE. Medicine is very often ancedotal and not as scientific as people may think and the lies of Fauci “don’t wear a mask” and then “wear a mask” never led to any real consequences. Ideally the government could publish information that people could trust, but a broad distrust of institutions means that they must earn back trust. Until trust is restored education cannot be effective.

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?

No one should be looking to social media as a top source for science information. The NYS Department of Health has a long history of providing factual information related to vaccine science and should continue in that mission. Science should not be conflated by politics. Individuals should work closely with their health care providers to make decisions about vaccination for themselves and their children.

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?

As a healthcare professional for 36 years, I value evidence based information. Public schools should teach students how to evaluate sources, distinguish evidence from opinion, and recognize misinformation. We need support and training resources for teachers, partnerships with scientists and healthcare professionals, and sharing clear regularly updated information with families. Building trust means welcoming questions and explaining the evidence respectfully.

KEYWORDS: Scientific literacy, critical thinking, reliable sources

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?

First of all NYC vaccine misinformation legislation isn’t true. The fact worldwide that many people had and still getting turbo cancer sbd other issues from covid vaccines .The fact that people are pleading the fifth.

Social media is social media it’s not a source of scientific information.

Public education policy should combat misinformation when it truly has information , not when it will take twenty years to release the information.

KEYWORDS: plead the fifth

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 plays a critical role in helping students and families navigate an increasingly complex information environment. Schools should focus on teaching critical thinking, media literacy, digital literacy, and scientific reasoning so students can evaluate information sources and distinguish credible evidence from misinformation.

Rather than promoting particular viewpoints, educational institutions should equip students with the tools to ask questions, verify claims, and understand how scientific knowledge develops through evidence, peer review, and ongoing research.

I also support strengthening partnerships between schools, universities, public health agencies, libraries, and community organizations to make trusted scientific information more accessible.

KEYWORDS: Media Literacy, Critical Thinking, Science Education, Public Trust

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 has an important role in helping students distinguish reliable scientific information from misinformation, but that role should be based on education rather than government censorship.

I would support teaching students how to evaluate sources, understand the scientific method, recognize credible evidence, identify conflicts of interest, and distinguish established scientific findings from legitimate scientific debate. Students should learn how to ask questions and think critically rather than simply being told what to believe.

Schools should rely on qualified scientists, medical professionals, peer-reviewed research, and established public-health institutions when providing scientific information. At the same time, parents should have transparency about what their children are being taught and access to the underlying sources and materials.

When it comes to public-health issues such as vaccines, families should have access to clear, current, evidence-based information from qualified medical professionals. Government should make reliable information accessible without turning schools into vehicles for political messaging.

My goal would be to give students the tools to navigate social media and the internet intelligently: teach them how to recognize misinformation, verify claims, compare credible sources, and make informed decisions. A scientifically literate citizen is better equipped to think independently and make responsible decisions for themselves and their families.

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 should focus on teaching students how to evaluate scientific information, recognize misinformation, and distinguish credible evidence from opinion or speculation. Schools should provide accurate, current scientific information from reputable sources while encouraging students to ask questions and think critically.

Teachers should present established scientific evidence honestly and explain how scientific conclusions are reached, including appropriate discussion of uncertainty and evolving research. At the same time, teachers should remain objective and should not use the classroom to promote personal, political, or ideological beliefs. Students should be exposed to credible evidence and encouraged to form their own informed conclusions.

Parents should remain involved in their children’s education, and schools should prioritize transparency and credible sources rather than political messaging. I do not believe government should become the arbiter of what information families are permitted to access or believe.

The best defense against misinformation is an educated public capable of evaluating competing claims. New York should invest in science and media literacy and critical-thinking skills so students and families can make informed decisions for themselves.

KEYWORDS: Science Literacy Critical Thinking Teacher Objectivity Parent Involvement