New York

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 must protect both public health and farmers’ ability to produce an affordable, reliable food supply. Decisions about pesticides should be based on the strength of scientific evidence rather than political pressure or assumptions that every pesticide is either completely safe or inherently unacceptable.

I would evaluate independent toxicological research, exposure levels, long-term health studies, environmental persistence, effects on pollinators and other wildlife, and the risks to farmworkers and nearby communities. Regulators should consider the dose, method of application, frequency of exposure, and whether safer effective alternatives are available.

Where evidence identifies significant risks, New York should restrict or phase out particularly harmful products while helping farmers transition to safer alternatives. Where uncertainty remains, the state should invest in independent research, transparent monitoring, and regular reassessment as new findings emerge.

Farmers should have access to integrated pest management, technical assistance, and affordable alternatives that protect crop yields. Regulations should be enforceable and understandable, and the public should have access to relevant safety information.

Fair policy protects consumers, workers, farmers, and the environment together. Food security must never be used as an excuse to ignore credible health risks.

KEYWORDS: Public health, pesticide safety, food security, independent 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?

New York farmers deserve practical support when extreme weather threatens their livelihoods, food production, and local economies. Protecting agriculture is also essential to keeping food supplies dependable and reducing unnecessary price increases for families.

I support expanding access to disaster assistance, affordable crop insurance, emergency recovery funding, and technical resources that help farms prepare for droughts, floods, extreme heat, and unpredictable growing seasons.

New York should work with agricultural universities, local extension programs, farmers, and independent researchers to identify which adaptation measures work best in different regions. Potential investments include improved drainage, efficient irrigation, soil conservation, cover crops, weather-monitoring systems, and crop diversification where appropriate.

The state should establish clear procedures for assessing damage and distributing assistance quickly and fairly, particularly to small and family-owned farms that may lack the resources to recover from a major loss. Programs should be evaluated for effectiveness and accessibility rather than judged by spending alone.

I would also support better forecasting and emergency communication so farmers can prepare before disasters strike.

Farmers should not have to face increasingly unpredictable conditions alone. Helping them prepare protects jobs, rural communities, and New York’s food supply.

KEYWORDS: Agricultural resilience; disaster assistance; soil and water conservation; food security.

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 don’t think we should treat every pesticide the same. We should look at the science behind each active ingredient—its toxicity, actual exposure, effects on workers and consumers, environmental impacts, and whether there are practical alternatives. I would work with farmers and agricultural organizations to find a common sense solution. This may mean reducing sprays of certain pesticides near environmentally sensitive areas or restricting the amount of treatments annually to ensure there are no unintended consequences. However, we need to make sure that farmers can yield their crops and properly make a living without the government getting in their way. Additionally, we should consider the effect that the reduction of pesticide sprays will have on our grocery prices. If farmers only yield half of their crop due to an aphid infestation, then we are only making it harder for New York farmers to support their business and for families to put food on the table. Further, the state should work with farmers to find alternatives to pesticides whether it be beneficial bugs, companion and trap crops, or less harmful pesticides.

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?

Radical environmentalists want to bypass hard science to impose sweeping pesticide bans that would instantly collapse our crop yields and threaten national food security. My opponent, George Latimer, campaigns on a trillion-dollar Green New Deal designed to smother our agricultural sector under mountain ranges of unscientific EPA red tape.

I refuse to allow unelected bureaucrats to dictate policy based on political activism. If pressed to make federal legislative decisions on agricultural inputs, I will seek out the best, most reliable, peer-reviewed scientific information available to evaluate real safety risks against production needs.

We must protect our food supply chain from progressive scarcity mandates. By defending scientific integrity and cutting regulatory overreach, we ensure New York farmers have the free-market tools to thrive.

George Latimer offers bureaucratic rationing. I offer scientific abundance and economic freedom.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join our common-sense movement.

KEYWORDS: Science, Abundance, Supply, Security

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?

Agricultural damages highlight why we must reject radical, top-down mandates. My opponent, George Latimer, campaigns on the trillion-dollar Green New Deal, which expands EPA red tape and skyrockets fuel costs for farmers.

I have unwavering faith in private enterprise to innovate. To help farmers adapt, we must slash the bureaucratic regulations paralyzing the private sector. I support expanding tax-free capital savings accounts so agricultural businesses can retain profits to invest directly in resilient crop tech, automated irrigation, and private catastrophe insurance.

Furthermore, we must redirect federal infrastructure spending to modernize our century-old water, sewer, and drainage networks. This shields farmlands from flooding while bringing billions in high-paying union construction jobs to our region.

KEYWORDS: Enterprise, Market, Innovation, 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?

As a community architect, my agricultural policy prioritizes the health of our families and the independence of our local farmers over corporate profits.

When evaluating pesticide use, my decisions will be guided by independent, peer-reviewed data on water quality and public health—not corporate lobbying.

My fight for the Aqueduct water filtration hub reflects my commitment to clean water; we cannot allow toxic agricultural runoff to poison our communities. We must restrict harmful chemicals while providing state grants to help farmers transition to safe, sustainable alternatives.

We also must break the mafia-style monopoly of multinational agro-corporations.

Right now, predatory seed conglomerates are strong-arming independent farmers into a vicious cycle: forcing them to buy genetically modified (GMO) corn and the proprietary pesticides required to grow it.

Just like the junk fees and high interest rates I am fighting in Queens, this isn’t a free market; it’s agricultural loan-sharking.

I will stand in line to outlaw these predatory seed contracts, protect New York’s independent farmers from corporate intimidation, and ensure a safe, transparent food supply for our families.

You really need to study my website for my non-scientific study at www.rubencruz.nyc

KEYWORDS: Aqueduct water filtration hub

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?

As a builder for infrastructure resilience in Queens, I understand that extreme weather is a statewide crisis—devastating both urban neighborhoods and upstate farmland.

To help farmers adapt, we need to invest heavily in water management and energy infrastructure. My plan for the Aqueduct Community Energy & Resiliency Hub focuses on restoring historical aqueducts and filtration systems to capture dangerous stormwater runoff. We should fund similar state-wide reservoir and aqueduct infrastructure to capture excess rainwater during severe storms, preventing crop floods while saving that water for agricultural irrigation during droughts.

Furthermore, farmers need reliable power when the grid fails during extreme weather. I support state grants for farms to adopt Vanadium flow battery storage. These safe, water-based batteries will ensure our food supply chain stays operational during climate disasters. True resilience requires building robust, publicly owned infrastructure.

KEYWORDS: Vanadium, Aqueduct

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 listen to every one and make my own informed Decision

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 need practical help, not more mandates.

I’d support cutting red tape so they can adapt faster—things like easier permitting for drainage, irrigation, or crop insurance improvements—and targeted tax relief or grants that don’t pile new costs onto taxpayers. Let farmers make the decisions that work for their land instead of Albany dictating solutions.

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?

Agriculture is the backbone of Wayne County’s economy, and any decisions on pesticide use must be based on sound science, not politics.

Farmers rely on pesticides to protect crops, maintain yields, and keep food affordable. At the same time, we have a responsibility to ensure these products are safe for farm workers, consumers, wildlife, and the environment.

When evaluating restrictions or regulations, I would look to independent scientific research, real-world field data, recommendations from agricultural universities and extension services, and assessments from state and federal regulatory agencies. I would also want input from the farmers who use these products every day and understand the practical impacts of policy decisions.

If evidence shows a pesticide poses an unacceptable risk, we should take appropriate action. But if restrictions would significantly reduce crop yields, increase food costs, or put family farms at a competitive disadvantage, those impacts must also be considered.

As an Independent, I support a balanced, science-based approach that protects public health while ensuring New York farmers have the tools they need to remain productive, competitive, and sustainable.

KEYWORDS: Science-Based Decision Making! Protect Family Farms! Balance! Safety and Food Security! Farmer Input Matters!

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?

Agriculture is the backbone of Wayne County, and our farmers are already dealing with unpredictable weather, flooding, drought conditions, crop disease, and rising costs. When disaster strikes, family farms can’t simply pass those costs on the way many large corporations can.

I support practical policies that help farmers become more resilient while keeping farms productive and profitable. That includes investing in drainage and water management systems, supporting soil health and conservation practices, expanding access to crop insurance and disaster assistance, and strengthening agricultural research through Cornell Cooperative Extension and other agricultural partners.

We should also review state regulations to make sure they don’t create unnecessary barriers for farmers trying to adapt to changing conditions. Every farm is different, and policies should provide flexibility rather than one-size-fits-all mandates.

Most importantly, farmers need a seat at the table. Those who work the land every day understand better than anyone what challenges they face and what solutions will actually work.

As an Independent, I support a commonsense approach that helps protect family farms, strengthens our food supply, and ensures agriculture remains a vital part of Wayne County’s economy for generations to come.

KEYWORDS: Protect Family Farms! Farm Resilience & Disaster Preparedness! Practical, Farmer-Led Solutions! Strengthen Local Food Security!

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?

There needs to be a cost benefit analysis of what specific health concerns any particular pesticide raise as compared to the pesticide’s efficacy in increasing production

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?

We have to battle climate change as a first priority. Farmers should receive tax incentives to implement infrastructure which wil help mitigate the damage from erratic weather.

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?

Farmers feed us, and they deserve tools that work. Farmworkers and rural families deserve not to be poisoned by those tools. I don’t believe we have to choose. But I do believe that when the evidence points to serious harm, the burden of proof should shift to whoever profits from the risk, not to the people bearing it.

I would weigh five kinds of evidence. First, health outcomes in the people most exposed, including long-term federal studies that have followed tens of thousands of farmworkers, pesticide applicators, and their families for decades. Second, the regulator’s own record, including where federal reviews are incomplete, delayed, or under challenge in court. Third, what peer nations have decided; when dozens of countries ban a product, that doesn’t settle the question, but it tells us where to look harder. Fourth, real-world alternatives: for each crop, what replaces the product, at what cost, and with what effect on yields. Cornell’s integrated pest management research gives New York a strong base here. And fifth, who carries the risk. The heaviest exposure falls on farmworkers, many of them low-wage and without a strong voice in the policy process, and they should be at the table.

Applied to paraquat, the case for acting is strong. The bill before the Legislature would ban it starting in 2028. Paraquat is already restricted federally because it is so acutely toxic, and studies link exposure to Parkinson’s disease. It’s banned in the European Union, the United Kingdom, China, and Brazil, and no paraquat products remain registered in Canada. Meanwhile, the federal review has been reopened and could take years. A phase-out with a clear date gives farmers time to adjust, and I’d pair it with technical help and cost-share funding so the transition doesn’t fall on small family farms.

Going forward, my principle is that every product gets judged on its own evidence, not with blanket bans or blanket approvals. Where the data shows serious harm and workable alternatives exist, phase it out. Where the science is uncertain, fund the research and monitor exposure, so the next decision is better informed. In Congress, I’d fight to protect states’ right to set stronger protections, fund faster and more transparent federal pesticide reviews, and expand USDA support for farmers adopting safer pest management. Concern about pesticide safety now crosses party lines, and that’s a coalition worth building.

KEYWORDS: Pesticide safety; public health; food security; agriculture; New York farmers; family farms; farmworker health; farmworker protection; rural families; paraquat; paraquat ban; phase-out; Parkinson’s disease; acute toxicity; restricted use pesticides; EPA review; federal pesticide 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?

When a late freeze wipes out a cherry crop in Wayne County, the cost shows up in Manhattan too; at the farmers market, the grocery store, and the school cafeteria. This spring, New York farmers lost an estimated $30 million to freezes, hail, and flooding. Our farmers aren’t asking for a bailout. They’re asking for a system built for the weather they actually face.

Prevention pays, so fund it up front. Every dollar spent before a disaster saves money after one. I’d expand cost-share funding for the tools that protect harvests like: frost protection for orchards; high tunnels and irrigation; drainage and water storage; and soil health practices that help fields hold water in drought and drain it in floods.

These are proven practices, and Cornell Cooperative Extension (CCE) already helps farmers use them. Extension needs stable funding so every county has the experts farmers rely on.

Replace debt with real protection. Right now, the main federal response to a disaster designation is emergency loans. A loan helps a farmer survive the season, but it adds debt to a business that just lost its crop. Federal crop insurance has also long been built around commodity crops like corn and wheat. New York grows apples, cherries, vegetables, and dairy, and those farmers often face gaps in coverage. I’d push to make insurance work better for specialty crops and small farms. I’d also support a standing disaster program, so aid arrives in weeks instead of waiting on Congress to pass emergency bills.

Keep the early warning systems strong. Accurate forecasts let farmers protect their crops before a freeze hits. That means fully staffing the National Weather Service and supporting local weather networks farmers already use.

Protect the people who do the work. Hotter summers put farmworkers at risk. Clear heat-safety standards protect workers and keep farms running.

Build steady markets. Programs that connect New York farms to schools, hospitals, and food banks give farmers reliable buyers in hard years. That’s stability for farmers and fresh food for families.

These ideas have support from farm groups, conservation groups, and both parties. Farming isn’t a partisan issue; it’s a food security issue.

KEYWORDS: Extreme weather; farm resilience; climate adaptation; New York farmers; family farms; food security; food prices; disaster designation; disaster relief; emergency loans; crop insurance; specialty crops; standing disaster program; prevention funding; cost-share; frost protection; irrigation; soil health; Cornell Cooperative Extension; National Weather Service

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?

I will listen to the scientists and farmers when weighing in on these issues. In an ideal world we’d reduce and eliminate these chemicals as soon as possible but we need to balance the loss of productivity with potential benefits.

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 funds to increase the resilience of our agriculture. Proven programs that can help farmers adapt should be supported with federal and state 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?

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

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 look to peer-reviewed research to find the type of evidence and data I need, any time a bill like the one shared is up for debate. We’ve seen corporate interests tip the scales when it comes to regulation, and that ultimately hurts farmers, hurts the farm workers who are handling these products, and puts people at risk when consuming food.

On the food security side, I want to know what a product is used for here, how much of it is used, and what alternatives exist.

KEYWORDS: pesticide, food security

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?

Based on the data provided for this question, Erie County was named a federal disaster area after the flooding at the end of March, and frost and freezes in April and May damaged crops across the state. Farmers can’t plan around weather like this on their own, and the state should be an additional partner in finding solutions when erratic weather impacts crops.

I would expand the Climate Resilient Farming program so more farms can afford drainage, irrigation, soil health work, and frost protection before the next storm hits. I’d also support a state emergency relief fund that gets money to farmers quickly.

KEYWORDS: Farming, weather, crops

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 risk, exposure and credible scientific evidence rather than treating every product or agricultural use as identical.I would consider peer reviewed toxicology and epidemiology, environmental monitoring effects on pollinators and water quality, occupational exposure, Federal and state safety assessments and real world application data. At the same time, policymakers should examine what a restriction would mean for crop yields, food prices, farm viability, pest resistance, whether safer and economically practical alternatives are available. Integrated pest management, precision application, farmer education, targeted restrictions can reduce unnecessary exposure without automatically eliminating tools farmers may need. When evidence shows that a particular use presents an unreasonable risk and viable alternatives exist, restrictions may be appropriate. Where evidence is uncertain, New York should continue monitoring, research and consultation with farmers, scientists, public health experts, environmental specialists before imposing broad mandates.

KEYWORDS: Public health/agriculture:pesticides.

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 before disasters occur rather than relying on emergency assistance afterwards. I would support targeted, accountable programs that help farmers improve drainage and water management, irrigation and water storage, soil health, erosion control, backup power, crop protection, other infrastructure that reduces losses from floods, drought, heat and severe storms. Existing resilience programs should be evaluated by measurable outcomes and made accessible to small and family farms, not only operations with the resources to navigate complicated grant processes. The state should also strengthen agricultural weather information, extension services, emergency planning, coordination with federal crop insurance and disaster programs. Investments that reduce repeated losses can protect farmers, strengthen New York’s food supply and lower the long term cost of disaster recovery.

KEYWORDS: Agriculture/environment : extreme weather.

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?

On the topic of pesticides and our food supply, we can’t let corporate chemical giants write the rules. If we’re going to weigh food security against public safety, the data I trust will come from independent, peer-reviewed researchers—not industry-funded lobbyists trying to protect their profit margins.

Passing the Birds and Bees Protection Act was a great step, because if we poison our pollinators and our soil, our food supply collapses anyway. But we can’t just ban things and leave independent family farmers out to dry.

If science shows a pesticide is too dangerous for our drinking water or our farmworkers, we have to pull it. But the state has to step up and financially support small local farmers so they can afford to transition to safer pest management without losing their livelihoods. We can protect our food supply by backing family farms and listening to real scientists, not by giving giant agribusinesses a free pass to spray whatever they want.

KEYWORDS: Independent Science, Protect Family Farms, Farmworker Safety, Hold Chemical Giants Accountable

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?

Waiting around for the federal government to declare a disaster area after the damage is already done isn’t a long-term survival plan. Our local family farms are getting hammered by late frosts, crazy rainstorms, and droughts. They need help preparing for the next storm, not just a loan after their crops are ruined.

We can’t let extreme weather wipe out our local food supply or bankrupt upstate farmers. New York needs to step up with proactive, state-level grants targeted specifically at small and mid-sized family farms—not massive corporate agribusinesses.

We should be giving our local farmers direct financial support to adapt right now. That means the state covering the costs for things like better drainage systems, water storage for droughts, and soil health practices that prevent flooding.

When we help working family farms afford the infrastructure they need to survive this wild weather, we protect our local food supply, keep grocery prices down, and keep our neighbors in business.

KEYWORDS: Support Family Farms, Climate-Resilient Infrastructure, Proactive Relief, Protect Local Food

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?

As a member of the Senate’s Agriculture Committee, I continue to work with my colleagues to balance the needs of our agricultural sector with public safety concerns. As Chair of the Senate’s standing committee on Women’s Issues, I have consistently advanced legislation to keep toxic chemicals out of cosmetics, menstrual products, and other products that we and our families encounter and use daily. I sponsor legislation (S2057) to regulate ingredients in personal care products and ban the use of toxic chemicals in beauty products. I supported recently passed legislation to prohibit the sale of products containing PFAS (S9073A).

KEYWORDS: public health, agriculture

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?

My district is no stranger to the effects of extreme weather and the climate crisis. Here in the Southern Tier, we understand the dangers posed by climate change first hand. The city of Binghamton, in Broome County, is located in the floodplain at the meeting of the Susquehanna and Chenango rivers. Our community has experienced multiple “once in a generation” flooding events following intense rains, in 2006, and again in 2011. What was once extreme weather is becoming common and we all understand the dangers posed by the climate from flooding, historic storms, violent winds, and rising temperatures.

As a member of the Senate’s standing committee on Agriculture, I have been and will continue to support increasing funding and resources for our farmers. In last year’s budget, we extended the Farm Workforce Retention Credit and included $5 million for the Farmworker Housing Program and increased funding for the Young Farmers Loan Forgiveness Program. Additionally, we continued funding for agriculture programs including $2.2 million for the Farm Viability Institute, $1 million for the Beginning Farmers Fund, $1 million for the Socially & Economically Disadvantaged Farmers Fund, and $25 million for Farmland Protection.

KEYWORDS: Agriculture, environment

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 put its residents first when making decisions about AI data centers. I oppose allowing large-scale data center construction to proceed without addressing its effects on electricity costs, water resources, the environment, and local communities.

Technology can create jobs and support innovation, but private companies should not receive public subsidies while residents face rising utility bills or taxpayers absorb the costs of infrastructure expansion. I support reviewing existing tax exemptions and ending subsidies that fail to demonstrate clear, measurable public benefits.

I would support a moratorium on new data center approvals while New York independently evaluates their cumulative effects on energy demand, water consumption, emissions, and utility rates. Any future approvals should require transparent environmental assessments, meaningful community input, enforceable limits on resource use, and proof that costs will not unfairly shift to households.

My administration would prioritize investments that create good-paying jobs and improve people’s lives without sacrificing affordability or environmental responsibility. Innovation should benefit New Yorkers, not simply corporate shareholders.

KEYWORDS: AI accountability; affordable electricity; environmental protection; community oversight.

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 matters, but technology used by law enforcement must not eliminate people’s reasonable expectations of privacy or operate without accountability. Automated license plate readers can assist legitimate investigations, but their use should be limited, transparent, and governed by clear laws.

I would support legislation establishing strict rules for collecting, accessing, retaining, and sharing license plate data. Access should be limited to authorized personnel for documented, legitimate law enforcement purposes. Agencies should maintain access logs, conduct regular independent audits, and publish transparency reports that protect active investigations and personal information.

Data should not be retained indefinitely. I would support a short, clearly defined retention period for data that is not connected to a documented investigation, with narrowly defined exceptions subject to oversight. Sharing with federal agencies or outside jurisdictions should require a lawful basis and documented authorization, with safeguards against unauthorized secondary uses.

New York should prohibit using these systems to target people unlawfully based on protected characteristics or to conduct indiscriminate tracking without appropriate legal authority. Residents should have a process for reporting misuse and seeking remedies when their rights are violated.

Technology should help protect communities without turning everyday travel into unrestricted government surveillance.

KEYWORDS: Privacy rights; public safety; data retention limits; independent 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?

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?

New York’s data center moratorium proves that progressive scarcity policies are strangling our technological future. While my opponent, George Latimer, votes to smother artificial intelligence with heavy-handed regulations and treats data centers as a dangerous drain on a fragile grid, I believe we must aggressively encourage tech infrastructure construction.

As your congressman, I will support federal legislation encouraging data center development and protecting existing tax exemptions for tech equipment. We don’t balance costs by blocking innovation.

We solve the energy equation by expanding supply. By heeding the call to ““Drill, baby, drill!”” and recommissioning the Indian Point Energy Center for Small Modular Reactors, we generate the hyper-abundant, 2,720-megawatt grid required to power the AI revolution safely.

This attracts billions in tech investments and creates thousands of high-paying union construction jobs without placing a single ounce of strain on residential ratepayers.

George Latimer offers stagnation. I offer technological freedom.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join us.

KEYWORDS: Construction, Grid, Innovation, Technology

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?

Radical progressives are panicking over public safety technology, trying to completely disarm local law enforcement. Citizens possess a legal right to record public spaces, and automated license-plate readers are highly effective tools for local police to track stolen vehicles and violent felons.

However, we must prevent private tech companies from turning public safety into a corporate surveillance dragnet. While Latimer’s allies push extreme bans that leave our streets unprotected, I advocate for strict, common-sense Fourth Amendment guardrails.

I propose legislation mandating a strict 72-hour data purge for innocent citizens, explicitly banning private vendors from selling driver location data, and requiring federal agencies to secure a judicial warrant before executing broad historical tracking.

George Latimer’s ideology leaves police blind and privacy exposed. I back our police while fiercely defending your constitutional rights.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to review our common-sense platform.

KEYWORDS: Privacy, Guardrails, Warrant, Safety

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?

Tech companies are raking in tens of billions of dollars in AI-driven IPOs, yet New Yorkers are expected to subsidize their massive energy and water use through state tax exemptions. This is corporate welfare. We shouldn’t force Queens families to face higher utility bills and grid instability just to pad the profits of Wall Street and Big Tech.

I strongly support repealing these tax exemptions. If multi-billion-dollar AI data centers want to operate in New York, they must pay like everybody else.

Instead of subsidizing tech billionaires, New York must invest in community-owned infrastructure like my Queens Community Energy & Resiliency Hub at the Aqueduct. By deploying safe, water-based Vanadium flow batteries, we can secure our grid against massive future power demands. Let’s use the tax revenue from these highly profitable data centers to fund this hub, eliminate residential electric bills, and protect our neighborhoods from chronic flooding.

KEYWORDS: Repeal these tax exemptions. Invest in my community-owned infrastructure Queens Community Energy & Resiliency Hub at the Aqueduct.

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?

As a ““Community Architect,”” I believe clean, safe streets are the foundation of a vibrant city.

However, public safety cannot be outsourced to unaccountable tech corporations.

The pushback against Flock ALPR cameras shows what happens when mass surveillance is deployed without transparency.

Just as I reveal the hidden fees and predatory practices draining blue-collar paychecks, I will monitor the unwarranted harvesting of our data. A family’s privacy is part of their ““castle,”” and it must be protected.

My ALPR legislation will demand ““Community Ownership”” of data, reflecting the core philosophy of my Aqueduct Energy & Resiliency Hub. I will mandate:

Strict Retention Limits: A 14-day cap on storing ALPR data unless tied to an active judicial warrant.

Data Protection: A total ban on sharing ALPR data with private brokers or federal agencies without a strict court order.

Transparency: Mandatory public audits to ensure these cameras aren’t disproportionately targeting working-class neighborhoods.

True safety comes from empowering communities through real infrastructure investment—like my Aqueduct plan to eliminate electric bills and stop flooding—not mass surveillance.

KEYWORDS: community ownership of data

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 building new data centers and I wouldn’t support any legislation that gets in the way. I’d also support legislation that lets data centers build their own power plants — coal or whatever — so they don’t put the burden on regular people.

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 cameras can help catch criminals, but they can’t turn into a surveillance system.

Access should be limited to a small number of authorized officers, and they should only be allowed to check the data for a specific crime investigation—not for general monitoring or fishing expeditions. Clear rules on how long the data is kept and who can share it would keep it useful without invading people’s 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?

Data centers can play an important role in New York’s economy by supporting innovation, attracting investment, and creating jobs. But they cannot come at the expense of taxpayers, ratepayers, or local communities. Concerns about energy use, water consumption, and higher utility costs are legitimate and should be addressed before projects move forward.

I support a balanced approach: welcome data centers that provide a clear benefit to the community while requiring developers to bear the costs they create. Companies should pay for needed infrastructure upgrades, meet strong environmental standards, and demonstrate measurable local benefits such as jobs, tax revenue, and community investment.

I’m also cautious about broad tax exemptions for large, profitable corporations. Any incentives should be transparent, performance-based, and tied to benefits for local residents. If taxpayers are asked to support a project, they deserve a clear return on that investment. New York is currently considering repealing certain data center tax exemptions because of these concerns.

As an Independent, I’ll support responsible economic development that strengthens our economy without shifting costs onto families and small businesses.”

KEYWORDS: Responsible Economic Development! Protect Taxpayers and Ratepayers! Community Benefit First! Corporate 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?

Public safety and personal privacy are both important, and we shouldn’t have to choose one over the other.

Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) technology can be a valuable tool for locating stolen vehicles, finding missing persons, and helping law enforcement solve serious crimes. However, its use must be limited, transparent, and subject to clear oversight to protect the privacy rights of law-abiding citizens.

I would support legislation that establishes statewide standards for how ALPR data is collected, stored, shared, and retained. Data should only be accessible for legitimate law enforcement purposes, retained for a limited period of time, and protected from unauthorized access. There should also be transparency requirements so the public understands how the technology is being used.

I do not support the creation of a mass surveillance system that tracks the movements of citizens who are not suspected of criminal activity. Access to data should be restricted, audited, and subject to strict penalties for misuse.

As an Independent, I believe we can strike the right balance: give law enforcement effective tools to keep our communities safe while protecting the constitutional rights and privacy of the people they serve.

KEYWORDS: Public Safety & Privacy! Limited Government Surveillance! Transparency & Accountability! Protect Constitutional Rights!

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 oppose data centers on Long Island. Long Island’s geography, population, reliance on a sole source aquifer, and issues involving the electric grid makes the island particularly ill suited for construction of data centers

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?

Law enforcement should have access to the videos from these cameras but there should be regulations as to the length of time that footage can be maintained and limit the use to law enforcement agencies

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?

The question isn’t whether New York builds the infrastructure of the AI economy. It’s who pays for it and who shares in what it earns.

Right now the deal is lopsided. Data centers bring real construction work and real investment. But once a facility is running, it employs relatively few people. Meanwhile, families risk paying more on their utility bills for the grid upgrades these facilities need. Our sales tax exemption was written for the dial-up era, and it now subsidizes some of the richest companies in the world. When the profits are private and the costs are public, I call that an extraction economy. We can fix it without shutting the door on innovation.

I support the Governor’s moratorium as what it is: a one-year pause to set standards. It is not a ban. When it lifts, I’d build on four principles.

Pay your own way on power. If a facility makes the grid bigger, it pays for the upgrade, not the ratepayer. Michigan already requires data centers to pay higher rates in exchange for its tax break. Its law passed with bipartisan support. That is a working model.

Replace blanket exemptions with earned incentives. Tax relief should be tied to permanent jobs, prevailing wages, and local hiring. It should come with clawbacks if those promises aren’t kept. Today it is handed out automatically.

Disclose energy and water use. Communities can’t negotiate a fair deal without facts. Every large facility should report what it consumes.

Put communities and workers at the table. Hosting communities should get binding benefit agreements, and construction should come with project labor agreements.

In Congress, I’ll work to put ratepayer protections into federal law, so that large energy users carry the costs they create in every state. I’ll also push for national energy and water disclosure standards, and invest public dollars in public-interest computing rather than private windfalls.

FDR built the Tennessee Valley Authority so that power would serve the people of the valley. Our standard for the AI buildout should be the same: build it, and make sure New Yorkers share in it.

KEYWORDS: Ratepayer protection, Pay your own way, Earned incentives, not blanket exemptions, Extraction economy, Public costs, private profits Pause, not a ban, Shared prosperity / share in the gains

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?

[Disclosure: I used to serve on an independent ethics advisory council for Axon, one of the companies in this market. That’s exactly why I believe the rules have to bind every vendor, including the ones I’ve advised.]

License plate readers can help find a stolen car, a missing child, or a hit-and-run driver. That’s real public safety value. But the same cameras also log the movements of every law-abiding driver who passes. In Syracuse, residents learned that their driving data had been searched by agencies across the country, including for immigration enforcement. The city never decided to allow that. The problem in Syracuse wasn’t one vendor. It was the absence of rules. Switching companies doesn’t fix that. Laws do.

This is what I would support:

• Short retention. Data that doesn’t match an active investigation should be deleted within days, not stored for years.
• Narrow, documented uses. Searches should be limited to serious crimes and missing persons, and each one should be tied to a case number. No use for immigration enforcement, monitoring protests, or tracking people seeking reproductive health care.
• No back-door sharing. Out-of-state and federal agencies should get access only with a warrant. National data-sharing networks should be off by default, and vendors should be barred from selling or pooling data.
• Audits and public reporting. Every search should be logged and auditable. Agencies should publish annual reports on how many plates were scanned, how many matched, and what the system actually helped solve. Violations should carry real penalties, and;
• Local consent. No new surveillance system should go up without public review and a vote by elected officials.

New York’s Legislature already has bills that would set statewide standards, and I’d urge them to pass.

In Congress, I’d work to require a warrant before federal agencies can obtain Americans’ location data, whether from police or from data brokers. That idea has drawn support from both progressives and libertarian-minded conservatives. Privacy isn’t left or right. It’s American. I’d also attach these same safeguards to any federal grant money used to buy surveillance technology.

My career has been about making technology accountable to the people it affects. The test is simple: if a tool keeps us safe, it can survive rules that keep us free.

KEYWORDS: License plate readers; ALPR; surveillance technology; privacy; civil liberties; data retention; data sharing; warrant requirement; Fourth Amendment; federal access; immigration enforcement; back-door sharing; national lookup networks; public safety; missing persons; serious crimes; audits; transparency; public reporting; local consent; community oversight; vendor-neutral rules; Flock; Axon; Syracuse

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?

I support the Responsible Data Center Development Act and have been advocating for the Governor to sign that bill.

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 Assemblywoman Hunter’s efforts to limit their use and that all data stored be kept only for 48 hours. Flock is not a trustworthy company and has numerous breaches and overreaches, they in particular should be blacklisted.

I would also support legislation that criminalizes the use of of alpr to stalk or track persons not involved in an active criminal investigation - too often this technology has been used to harass ex-partners “

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

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 Yorkers cannot be on the hook for the energy and water resource needs that come with AI data center construction. I fully support the AI data center moratorium while New York figures out the right way to protect people, protect communities, and protect our resources. Policy-wise, I would not feel comfortable with any AI data center construction without clear guidelines on how local communities would be involved in the project review, clear guidelines as to how any private company would be responsible for infrastructure and grid improvement in the community they are looking to build in, and evaluation of tax exemptions on any development.

I think the biggest component of finding this balance is ensuring local input, while also ensuring the state has guardrails in place to support residents.

KEYWORDS: Ratepayer protection, energy use, water, tax break

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’ve spent months on this issue. I spoke at the Cheektowaga Town Board against expanding our Flock contract, and I’ve pushed with local candidates for real oversight. Last month, a Cheektowaga police officer and dispatchers were accused of using Flock cameras to track a fellow employee. That’s exactly the kind of misuse people have been warning about.

Plate data shows where people go: to the doctor, to church, to a protest, to a friend’s house. That information should stay under tight local control, and federal agencies should never be able to search it without a warrant. When data gets shared through national networks with little oversight, New Yorkers lose control over who sees it and why.

If elected, I will co-sponsor the Hinchey-Hunter bill (S9890/A10808). It would require plate data to be deleted within 48 hours by default, ban sharing outside New York government except under a felony warrant, require annual public reporting on how cameras are used, and make illegally obtained data inadmissible in court.

I’d work to strengthen it in three ways. First, independent audits, because Virginia found dozens of agencies breaking its sharing rules after they passed. Second, a warrant requirement to track any individual’s movements. Third, real penalties for officers who misuse the system, along with competitive bidding and a public hearing before any town signs a surveillance contract.

KEYWORDS: ALPR, data sharing, cameras

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 would favor a predictable permitting framework rather than an indefinite blanket prohibition. Large projects should demonstrate that adequate electric capacity, water, transmission, local infrastructure are available; disclose projected resource demands, mitigate costs they impose on the grid and host communities. Tax incentives should be tied to measurable public benefits such as permanent New York jobs, workforce training, energy efficiency, infrastructure investment with periodic review to determine whether the incentives are producing value for taxpayers. The goal should be to keep New York competitive in AI and advanced technology while protecting ratepayers and ensuring that growth is supported by the infrastructure needed to sustain it.

KEYWORDS: AI:Data centers

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 help law enforcement locate stolen vehicles, identify vehicles connected to serious crimes and respond to public safety threats. But a useful tool should not become a system for unrestricted tracking of people who are not suspected of wrongdoing. I would support statewide rules defining permissible law enforcement uses, access controls, audit logs, cybersecurity standards, retention limits for data that is not connected to an investigation, clear rules governing sharing with other agencies and private vendors. Access should be tied to legitimate public safety purposes and appropriate legal process with emergency exceptions where necessary to protect life. New York should also require transparency about agency policies and meaningful penalties for misuse. The objective should be to preserve the legitimate investigative value of ALPR technology while protecting privacy and preventing indiscriminate surveillance.

KEYWORDS: AI/public safety: ALPR data.

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?

As an auto shop manager and renter, I see working families in our district already squeezed by high electric bills, and feel the same pain. We can’t allow tech monopolies to privatize profits while dumping their resource and infrastructure costs onto everyday New Yorkers.

I support immediately repealing state tax exemptions for data center equipment. If any new data center is permitted, it must meet three non-negotiable conditions:

1. Ironclad environmental guarantees: Facilities must run entirely on dedicated, on-site clean renewable energy with zero strain on local water supplies or New York’s CLCPA climate targets.

2. Full corporate liability: Owning corporations must be legally and financially liable for 100% of grid upgrades and utility cost increases, ensuring working-class ratepayers never pay a single dime for their power draw.

3. Community profit-sharing: We must mandate community wealth models where profits and municipal revenues generated from the facility are returned directly to the host municipality and neighborhood residents through local dividend funds and neighborhood improvements.

True innovation serves the public good, not corporate greed. If tech giants want to build in New York, they must enrich the community, not exploit it.

KEYWORDS: Ratepayer Liability, Community Wealth Sharing, Environmental Mandates, End Corporate Subsidies

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 believe New York should outright ban local governments and police departments from contracting with private surveillance companies like Flock.

Nobody should have their everyday movements tracked and turned into corporate profits just for driving to work, the grocery store, or the doctor. Handing our public infrastructure over to private, out-of-state tech corporations to build an unchecked mass-surveillance network is a direct violation of our basic right to privacy.

If a municipality uses any public camera systems, they must be publicly owned, locally accountable, and subject to strict rules:

-Warrants required: Police must have a judge-signed warrant showing probable cause to access any license plate data. No snooping or fishing expeditions.

-Immediate deletion: Non-flagged data must be permanently erased within 14 days.

-No outside sharing: Zero data sharing with ICE or out-of-state authorities trying to prosecute people for traveling to New York for reproductive or gender-affirming healthcare.

Public safety means protecting constitutional rights, not handing millions in taxpayer dollars to private companies to treat every driver like a suspect.

KEYWORDS: Ban Private Surveillance, Civil Liberties, Privacy Protections, Warrant Requirement

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?

Fueled by major corporate interests. Large-scale, AI data centers are spreading across the country. Here in my district, TeraWulf has secured an 80-year lease for a data center that could at max capacity consume enough electricity in one year to power roughly 500,000 homes. Residents have voiced their strong opposition to this project due to concerns for our environmental health, our lake, and the projected impact on utility bills. I have urged Governor Hochul to sign the Responsible Data Center Act, which is a stronger and more comprehensive approach to regulating data centers than the moratorium we passed this year. KEYWORDS: AI

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 do not support FLOCK. My office has received concerns from the community about FLOCK related to safety and data-use concerns. I support legislation (S9890) which would introduce a regulatory framework for New York to ensure that we balance the legitimate uses of ALPR technology, such as toll collection, while making sure we protect the privacy of individuals.

KEYWORDS: AI, FLOCK

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 Yorkers deserve energy that is affordable, reliable, and environmentally responsible. My goal is to reduce dependence on polluting combustion sources while ensuring that families and businesses are not burdened with unaffordable utility bills.

I would prioritize maintaining safe existing nuclear and hydropower resources, expanding responsibly sited wind and solar, improving energy storage, and investing in energy efficiency and grid modernization. Natural gas and other combustion sources should be evaluated transparently as part of the transition, with reliability and emissions considered together.

I would establish measurable milestones for the next two, five, and ten years rather than promise a transition on a timeline unsupported by available infrastructure. Major decisions should be guided by independent scientific research, grid reliability assessments, lifecycle emissions data, projected construction costs, and the effects on household utility bills.

New York should not delay climate protections without explaining the consequences, but implementation must also account for practical constraints and protect working families. Any transition should include public reporting, independent oversight, and assistance for low-income households facing higher energy costs.

The objective is a cleaner energy system that works for everyone, not one that makes basic electricity unaffordable.

KEYWORDS: Energy affordability; reliable clean energy; evidence-based policy; grid modernization.

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?

Governor Hochul’s decision to delay the climate law proves that top-down green mandates are an expensive, unreliable failure. My opponent, George Latimer, campaigns on the trillion-dollar Green New Deal to force New York onto a fragile grid that has sent our utility rates soaring to 71% higher than the national average.

Solar and wind lack the reliable production capacity necessary for an economic leader like New York. I prioritize immediate energy abundance. We must heed the call to ““Drill, baby, drill!”” to expand our traditional fuel supply and lower costs immediately. Concurrently, we must recommission the Indian Point Energy Center for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).

Nuclear energy must be a central part of our long-term solution. This blueprint delivers a hyper-abundant, 2,720-megawatt baseline grid while bringing billions in high-paying union jobs to our region.

George Latimer offers scarcity. I offer clean, reliable power.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join us.

KEYWORDS: SMR, Abundance, Nuclear, Production

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?

Governor Hochul’s delay of the CLCPA targets proves we cant rely on top-down approaches that ignore our communities. My priority is immediate, community-owned clean energy infrastructure, starting with the Queens Community Energy & Resiliency Hub at the abandoned Aqueduct Racetrack.

Instead of waiting for 2028, let’s prioritize safe, long-duration energy storage. I will champion Vanadium flow batteries. The evidence is clear: Vanadium is water-based, non-flammable, and produces no toxic fumes. A facility at the Aqueduct can store enough clean power for 3.1 million homes—covering all of Brooklyn and Queens.

Coupled with restoring historical aqueducts to capture stormwater, this hub will mitigate local flooding and generate $24 million annually from excess power sales to eliminate residential electric bills. True climate action means zero emissions, zero electric bills, and public ownership.

KEYWORDS: Vanadium flow batteries, water-based, non-flammable, and produces no toxic fumes.

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 would prioritize nuclear and cola and and only move to any other way if and when there is a way to make any other way affordable

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 strategy that keeps electricity affordable, reliable, and cleaner over time.

New York’s climate goals are important, but we can’t ignore the reality that families and businesses are already struggling with high energy costs. The transition to a lower-carbon economy must be driven by results, not arbitrary deadlines. The CLCPA set ambitious targets, including 70% renewable electricity by 2030 and 100% clean electricity by 2040.

I would prioritize preserving and expanding nuclear power, maintaining hydropower, investing in renewable energy where it makes sense, and upgrading our electric grid and energy storage capacity. At the same time, natural gas will continue to play an important role in maintaining reliability until replacement technologies are proven, affordable, and available at scale.

The evidence guiding my decisions would be straightforward: energy affordability, grid reliability, emissions reductions, and economic impact on families and employers. If a policy reduces emissions but dramatically increases utility bills or threatens reliability, it needs to be reevaluated.

As an Independent, I believe New York should pursue cleaner energy responsibly, balancing environmental goals with the need for affordable and dependable power that supports economic growth.

KEYWORDS: All-of-the-Above Energy Strategy! Affordable & Reliable Power! Preserve Nuclear & Hydropower! 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 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 oppose the delay in the implementation of the climate leadership act. I support off shore wind farms because they provide a reliable source of renewable energy

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 get the sense that New Yorkers want three things from their power: (1) that it’s affordable, (2) that it stays on, and (3) that it doesn’t make their kids sick. Those goals only conflict when we plan badly. My test for every energy decision is all three at once, measured by evidence.

Now through 2028, I do think we need to finish what we started, and keep the lights on. The cheapest, cleanest power is power we don’t waste. So I’d lead with efficiency, weatherization, and demand response, and target them first to low-income households carrying the heaviest energy burdens. At the same time, we should bring online the projects already built or under way, like:

• the Champlain Hudson line, now delivering Canadian hydropower to the city;
• offshore wind under construction off Long Island; and
• battery storage to replace the dirty peaker plants in neighborhoods like Sunset Park and the South Bronx.

We should also keep our existing nuclear plants running. And we should retire fossil plants only when the grid operator confirms that replacements are actually online. Closing a plant before then is a promise, not a plan.

Beyond 2028, I do think we need to start building the backbone. That means new transmission connecting upstate generation to downstate demand. It means new nuclear capacity, which the state has already begun pursuing, as a firm, zero-carbon complement to wind and solar. And it means a cap-and-invest program in place by the 2028 deadline, with revenue returned directly to households so that cutting pollution lowers bills instead of raising them.

I’d measure every option against four things:

the grid operator’s reliability margins; the full cost per delivered megawatt-hour, including transmission and backup; bill impacts on the lowest-income families; health outcomes in the communities that have breathed our pollution for decades.

In Congress, I’d protect permitted offshore wind projects from political stop-work orders. I’d also back bipartisan work on nuclear licensing and transmission permitting. Republicans and Democrats have already found common ground on both.

KEYWORDS: Affordable energy; reliable power; clean air; grid reliability; energy affordability; clean energy; CLCPA; climate law; cap-and-invest; household rebates; energy efficiency; weatherization; demand response; low-income energy burden; peaker plants; battery storage; Champlain Hudson Power Express; hydropower; offshore wind; nuclear power; existing nuclear; advanced nuclear

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?

I support production of more low carbon generation, including nuclear in Oswego county. I also support community and individually owned solar and wind so that people can own and control their own generation and consumption separate from utility companies that are gouging us regardless of consumption.

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 New York’s move to clean energy, and I think the CLCPA’s goals are worth reaching. How we get there has to be guided by science, engineering, reliability, and cost. My priorities are hydropower, more wind and solar, battery storage, energy efficiency, and real upgrades to our transmission system.

Here in Western New York, we’re already living with the effects of climate change: harder storms, flooding, and hotter summers. We’re also living with utility bills that keep going up. Our timelines should be ambitious, and they also need to account for grid reliability, actual emissions cuts, whether a technology is ready, and what families are paying.

First, we need to fix transmission so the power we generate upstate can get where it’s needed. Then we scale up solar, onshore wind, and storage with project labor agreements, so these are good union jobs that stay local. Niagara’s hydropower is one of the best things we have going, and we need to protect it. I also don’t want us shutting down any working clean power source before its replacement is up and running. And as I’ve written before, big users like AI data centers need to pay for the power and grid upgrades they use. Families in Cheektowaga and Lancaster shouldn’t be stuck with that bill.

KEYWORDS: Wind, solar, energy efficiency

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 needs an energy strategy that reduces emissions while keeping electricity reliable and affordable. I would support an “all of the above “ low carbon approach that preserves and where feasible, expands reliable nuclear and hydropower, while adding wind, solar, storage, transmission and other technologies where they are cost effective and technically sound. The timeline should be driven by measurable readiness rather than by retiring dependable generation before replacement capability, transmission, storage and reliability resources are actually operating. Natural gas may remain necessary during the transition to maintain reliability during periods when demand is high or intermittent resources are unavailable. I would rely on independent reliability assessment, system demand forecasts, total consumer costs, lifecycle emissions, project performance, New York’s actual progress in building generation and transmission. Climate goals matter, but the transition must also keep the lights on and avoid imposing unaffordable energy costs on families and businesses.

KEYWORDS: Energy/climate

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?

Governor Hochul pushing our climate law deadlines back to 2028 is a massive mistake. Working families in our district are already getting hammered by sky-high electric and gas bills. Delaying our clean energy goals doesn’t save ratepayers a dime—it just protects corporate fossil fuel profits while our air quality gets worse.

We need to move as fast as humanly possible. My priority is rapidly scaling up wind, solar, and geothermal right now, keeping our zero-emission hydro and nuclear running so the grid stays reliable, and shutting down dirty plants in working-class neighborhoods. We also need to pass the NY HEAT Act immediately to cap utility bills for working families and stop forcing us to subsidize new gas pipelines we don’t even want.

The evidence guiding my decisions won’t come from utility lobbyists protecting their monopolies. It will come from independent climate scientists and grid engineers. Moving to clean energy isn’t just about the planet—it’s about breaking up energy monopolies, creating good local union jobs, and actually lowering bills for everyday New Yorkers.

KEYWORDS: NY HEAT Act, Break Up Monopolies, Public Renewables, Working-Class 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?

I am committed to fighting for legislation to address the climate crisis head on and empower our communities with the resources to end our reliance on fossil fuels. I have passed bipartisan legislation through both houses to ban CO2 fracking, fought to increase funding for the Clean Water Infrastructure Grant Program, the Environmental Protection Fund, NYSERDA’s EmPower+ program and I have supported investments in green technology jobs and workforce development. We know that renewable energy is better for our planet and our pockets. We need to build out our solar and wind power, while strengthening our grid. We need to make polluters pay for the harm that they’ve done to the planet.

KEYWORDS: energy,climate

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 Yorkers deserve energy that is affordable, reliable, and environmentally responsible. My goal is to reduce dependence on polluting combustion sources while ensuring that families and businesses are not burdened with unaffordable utility bills.

I would prioritize maintaining safe existing nuclear and hydropower resources, expanding responsibly sited wind and solar, improving energy storage, and investing in energy efficiency and grid modernization. Natural gas and other combustion sources should be evaluated transparently as part of the transition, with reliability and emissions considered together.

I would establish measurable milestones for the next two, five, and ten years rather than promise a transition on a timeline unsupported by available infrastructure. Major decisions should be guided by independent scientific research, grid reliability assessments, lifecycle emissions data, projected construction costs, and the effects on household utility bills.

New York should not delay climate protections without explaining the consequences, but implementation must also account for practical constraints and protect working families. Any transition should include public reporting, independent oversight, and assistance for low-income households facing higher energy costs.

The objective is a cleaner energy system that works for everyone, not one that makes basic electricity unaffordable.

KEYWORDS: Energy affordability; reliable clean energy; evidence-based policy; grid modernization.

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?

Governor Hochul’s decision to delay the climate law proves that top-down green mandates are an expensive, unreliable failure. My opponent, George Latimer, campaigns on the trillion-dollar Green New Deal to force New York onto a fragile grid that has sent our utility rates soaring to 71% higher than the national average.

Solar and wind lack the reliable production capacity necessary for an economic leader like New York. I prioritize immediate energy abundance. We must heed the call to ““Drill, baby, drill!”” to expand our traditional fuel supply and lower costs immediately. Concurrently, we must recommission the Indian Point Energy Center for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).

Nuclear energy must be a central part of our long-term solution. This blueprint delivers a hyper-abundant, 2,720-megawatt baseline grid while bringing billions in high-paying union jobs to our region.

George Latimer offers scarcity. I offer clean, reliable power.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join us.

KEYWORDS: SMR, Abundance, Nuclear, Production

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?

Governor Hochul’s delay of the CLCPA targets proves we cant rely on top-down approaches that ignore our communities. My priority is immediate, community-owned clean energy infrastructure, starting with the Queens Community Energy & Resiliency Hub at the abandoned Aqueduct Racetrack.

Instead of waiting for 2028, let’s prioritize safe, long-duration energy storage. I will champion Vanadium flow batteries. The evidence is clear: Vanadium is water-based, non-flammable, and produces no toxic fumes. A facility at the Aqueduct can store enough clean power for 3.1 million homes—covering all of Brooklyn and Queens.

Coupled with restoring historical aqueducts to capture stormwater, this hub will mitigate local flooding and generate $24 million annually from excess power sales to eliminate residential electric bills. True climate action means zero emissions, zero electric bills, and public ownership.

KEYWORDS: Vanadium flow batteries, water-based, non-flammable, and produces no toxic fumes.

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 would prioritize nuclear and cola and and only move to any other way if and when there is a way to make any other way affordable

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 strategy that keeps electricity affordable, reliable, and cleaner over time.

New York’s climate goals are important, but we can’t ignore the reality that families and businesses are already struggling with high energy costs. The transition to a lower-carbon economy must be driven by results, not arbitrary deadlines. The CLCPA set ambitious targets, including 70% renewable electricity by 2030 and 100% clean electricity by 2040.

I would prioritize preserving and expanding nuclear power, maintaining hydropower, investing in renewable energy where it makes sense, and upgrading our electric grid and energy storage capacity. At the same time, natural gas will continue to play an important role in maintaining reliability until replacement technologies are proven, affordable, and available at scale.

The evidence guiding my decisions would be straightforward: energy affordability, grid reliability, emissions reductions, and economic impact on families and employers. If a policy reduces emissions but dramatically increases utility bills or threatens reliability, it needs to be reevaluated.

As an Independent, I believe New York should pursue cleaner energy responsibly, balancing environmental goals with the need for affordable and dependable power that supports economic growth.

KEYWORDS: All-of-the-Above Energy Strategy! Affordable & Reliable Power! Preserve Nuclear & Hydropower! 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 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 oppose the delay in the implementation of the climate leadership act. I support off shore wind farms because they provide a reliable source of renewable energy

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 get the sense that New Yorkers want three things from their power: (1) that it’s affordable, (2) that it stays on, and (3) that it doesn’t make their kids sick. Those goals only conflict when we plan badly. My test for every energy decision is all three at once, measured by evidence.

Now through 2028, I do think we need to finish what we started, and keep the lights on. The cheapest, cleanest power is power we don’t waste. So I’d lead with efficiency, weatherization, and demand response, and target them first to low-income households carrying the heaviest energy burdens. At the same time, we should bring online the projects already built or under way, like:

• the Champlain Hudson line, now delivering Canadian hydropower to the city;
• offshore wind under construction off Long Island; and
• battery storage to replace the dirty peaker plants in neighborhoods like Sunset Park and the South Bronx.

We should also keep our existing nuclear plants running. And we should retire fossil plants only when the grid operator confirms that replacements are actually online. Closing a plant before then is a promise, not a plan.

Beyond 2028, I do think we need to start building the backbone. That means new transmission connecting upstate generation to downstate demand. It means new nuclear capacity, which the state has already begun pursuing, as a firm, zero-carbon complement to wind and solar. And it means a cap-and-invest program in place by the 2028 deadline, with revenue returned directly to households so that cutting pollution lowers bills instead of raising them.

I’d measure every option against four things:

the grid operator’s reliability margins; the full cost per delivered megawatt-hour, including transmission and backup; bill impacts on the lowest-income families; health outcomes in the communities that have breathed our pollution for decades.

In Congress, I’d protect permitted offshore wind projects from political stop-work orders. I’d also back bipartisan work on nuclear licensing and transmission permitting. Republicans and Democrats have already found common ground on both.

KEYWORDS: Affordable energy; reliable power; clean air; grid reliability; energy affordability; clean energy; CLCPA; climate law; cap-and-invest; household rebates; energy efficiency; weatherization; demand response; low-income energy burden; peaker plants; battery storage; Champlain Hudson Power Express; hydropower; offshore wind; nuclear power; existing nuclear; advanced nuclear

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?

I support production of more low carbon generation, including nuclear in Oswego county. I also support community and individually owned solar and wind so that people can own and control their own generation and consumption separate from utility companies that are gouging us regardless of consumption.

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 New York’s move to clean energy, and I think the CLCPA’s goals are worth reaching. How we get there has to be guided by science, engineering, reliability, and cost. My priorities are hydropower, more wind and solar, battery storage, energy efficiency, and real upgrades to our transmission system.

Here in Western New York, we’re already living with the effects of climate change: harder storms, flooding, and hotter summers. We’re also living with utility bills that keep going up. Our timelines should be ambitious, and they also need to account for grid reliability, actual emissions cuts, whether a technology is ready, and what families are paying.

First, we need to fix transmission so the power we generate upstate can get where it’s needed. Then we scale up solar, onshore wind, and storage with project labor agreements, so these are good union jobs that stay local. Niagara’s hydropower is one of the best things we have going, and we need to protect it. I also don’t want us shutting down any working clean power source before its replacement is up and running. And as I’ve written before, big users like AI data centers need to pay for the power and grid upgrades they use. Families in Cheektowaga and Lancaster shouldn’t be stuck with that bill.

KEYWORDS: Wind, solar, energy efficiency

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 needs an energy strategy that reduces emissions while keeping electricity reliable and affordable. I would support an “all of the above “ low carbon approach that preserves and where feasible, expands reliable nuclear and hydropower, while adding wind, solar, storage, transmission and other technologies where they are cost effective and technically sound. The timeline should be driven by measurable readiness rather than by retiring dependable generation before replacement capability, transmission, storage and reliability resources are actually operating. Natural gas may remain necessary during the transition to maintain reliability during periods when demand is high or intermittent resources are unavailable. I would rely on independent reliability assessment, system demand forecasts, total consumer costs, lifecycle emissions, project performance, New York’s actual progress in building generation and transmission. Climate goals matter, but the transition must also keep the lights on and avoid imposing unaffordable energy costs on families and businesses.

KEYWORDS: Energy/climate

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?

Governor Hochul pushing our climate law deadlines back to 2028 is a massive mistake. Working families in our district are already getting hammered by sky-high electric and gas bills. Delaying our clean energy goals doesn’t save ratepayers a dime—it just protects corporate fossil fuel profits while our air quality gets worse.

We need to move as fast as humanly possible. My priority is rapidly scaling up wind, solar, and geothermal right now, keeping our zero-emission hydro and nuclear running so the grid stays reliable, and shutting down dirty plants in working-class neighborhoods. We also need to pass the NY HEAT Act immediately to cap utility bills for working families and stop forcing us to subsidize new gas pipelines we don’t even want.

The evidence guiding my decisions won’t come from utility lobbyists protecting their monopolies. It will come from independent climate scientists and grid engineers. Moving to clean energy isn’t just about the planet—it’s about breaking up energy monopolies, creating good local union jobs, and actually lowering bills for everyday New Yorkers.

KEYWORDS: NY HEAT Act, Break Up Monopolies, Public Renewables, Working-Class 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?

I am committed to fighting for legislation to address the climate crisis head on and empower our communities with the resources to end our reliance on fossil fuels. I have passed bipartisan legislation through both houses to ban CO2 fracking, fought to increase funding for the Clean Water Infrastructure Grant Program, the Environmental Protection Fund, NYSERDA’s EmPower+ program and I have supported investments in green technology jobs and workforce development. We know that renewable energy is better for our planet and our pockets. We need to build out our solar and wind power, while strengthening our grid. We need to make polluters pay for the harm that they’ve done to the planet.

KEYWORDS: energy,climate

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 deserve practical support when extreme weather threatens their livelihoods, food production, and local economies. Protecting agriculture is also essential to keeping food supplies dependable and reducing unnecessary price increases for families.

I support expanding access to disaster assistance, affordable crop insurance, emergency recovery funding, and technical resources that help farms prepare for droughts, floods, extreme heat, and unpredictable growing seasons.

New York should work with agricultural universities, local extension programs, farmers, and independent researchers to identify which adaptation measures work best in different regions. Potential investments include improved drainage, efficient irrigation, soil conservation, cover crops, weather-monitoring systems, and crop diversification where appropriate.

The state should establish clear procedures for assessing damage and distributing assistance quickly and fairly, particularly to small and family-owned farms that may lack the resources to recover from a major loss. Programs should be evaluated for effectiveness and accessibility rather than judged by spending alone.

I would also support better forecasting and emergency communication so farmers can prepare before disasters strike.

Farmers should not have to face increasingly unpredictable conditions alone. Helping them prepare protects jobs, rural communities, and New York’s food supply.

KEYWORDS: Agricultural resilience; disaster assistance; soil and water conservation; 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 prepare for wildfire smoke as a recurring public health and environmental challenge. Smoke can affect air quality over large areas, and residents need reliable information and practical protection when pollution levels become unhealthy.

I would invest in air-quality monitoring, improved forecasting, and clear public alerts that explain when conditions are dangerous and what precautions people can take. Information should be accessible to people with disabilities and available in multiple languages.

Schools, public buildings, libraries, and other appropriate community facilities should be assessed for their ability to provide cleaner indoor air during severe smoke events. The state should prioritize assistance for communities with limited resources and residents who may have difficulty accessing air filtration or relocating temporarily.

I would support coordination among environmental agencies, public health departments, emergency services, and local governments to establish consistent response plans. Public health officials should monitor emergency visits and other health indicators during smoke events while supporting research into possible long-term effects.

New York should also evaluate the costs and benefits of investments in early warning systems, building ventilation, filtration, and emergency preparedness.

Protecting residents requires planning before the next smoke event, not waiting until air quality becomes hazardous.

KEYWORDS: Air quality monitoring; public health preparedness; clean indoor air; emergency planning.

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?

Agricultural damages highlight why we must reject radical, top-down mandates. My opponent, George Latimer, campaigns on the trillion-dollar Green New Deal, which expands EPA red tape and skyrockets fuel costs for farmers.

I have unwavering faith in private enterprise to innovate. To help farmers adapt, we must slash the bureaucratic regulations paralyzing the private sector. I support expanding tax-free capital savings accounts so agricultural businesses can retain profits to invest directly in resilient crop tech, automated irrigation, and private catastrophe insurance.

Furthermore, we must redirect federal infrastructure spending to modernize our century-old water, sewer, and drainage networks. This shields farmlands from flooding while bringing billions in high-paying union construction jobs to our region.

KEYWORDS: Enterprise, Market, Innovation, 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?

Using out-of-state wildfires to panic families and expand state regulations is classic progressive overreach. My opponent, George Latimer, uses smoke events to justify the trillion-dollar Green New Deal—a radical plan that imposes choking EPA regulations while doing absolutely nothing to manage forests in Canada.

We cannot control the Canadian wilderness, but we can protect our own infrastructure. Instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on radical green subsidies, we must put out accurate health data so families can make their own common-sense choices on high-smoke or high-pollen days.

Concurrently, we must invest federal resources into modernizing our century-old water, sewer, and drainage networks to protect local public safety from severe weather. My platform focuses on infrastructure reality, free-market resilience, and creating high-paying union construction jobs right here in our community.

George Latimer offers bureaucratic exploitation. I offer economic freedom.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join us.

KEYWORDS: Reality, Information, Resilience, Freedom

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?

As a builder for infrastructure resilience in Queens, I understand that extreme weather is a statewide crisis—devastating both urban neighborhoods and upstate farmland.

To help farmers adapt, we need to invest heavily in water management and energy infrastructure. My plan for the Aqueduct Community Energy & Resiliency Hub focuses on restoring historical aqueducts and filtration systems to capture dangerous stormwater runoff. We should fund similar state-wide reservoir and aqueduct infrastructure to capture excess rainwater during severe storms, preventing crop floods while saving that water for agricultural irrigation during droughts.

Furthermore, farmers need reliable power when the grid fails during extreme weather. I support state grants for farms to adopt Vanadium flow battery storage. These safe, water-based batteries will ensure our food supply chain stays operational during climate disasters. True resilience requires building robust, publicly owned infrastructure.

KEYWORDS: Vanadium, Aqueduct

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?

When wildfire smoke hits New York as it has in the past, families and seniors suffer most. This is an infrastructure crisis we must prepare for now.

To protect our neighborhoods, I will prioritize:

1. Lowering Local Emissions: We can’t stop Canadian fires, but we can cut local pollution. My Aqueduct Energy Hub replaces dirty fossil-fuel plants with zero-emission Vanadium batteries. Better everyday air quality means stronger lungs when smoke arrives.

2. Clean Air Hubs: I will secure state funding to install commercial-grade air filtration systems in public schools, NYCHA buildings, and senior centers, creating safe indoor spaces during emergencies.

3. Green Infrastructure: Expanding our urban tree canopy in Queens will act as a natural air filter for our streets.

Resilience means building infrastructure that protects our families.

KEYWORDS: Emission, Clean Air Hubs

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 need practical help, not more mandates.

I’d support cutting red tape so they can adapt faster—things like easier permitting for drainage, irrigation, or crop insurance improvements—and targeted tax relief or grants that don’t pile new costs onto taxpayers. Let farmers make the decisions that work for their land instead of Albany dictating solutions.

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?

Start raking up the leaves before every winter, pick up all the fallen trees, and dig water wells in the woods to keep them wet so they don’t catch fire so easily.

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?

Agriculture is the backbone of Wayne County, and our farmers are already dealing with unpredictable weather, flooding, drought conditions, crop disease, and rising costs. When disaster strikes, family farms can’t simply pass those costs on the way many large corporations can.

I support practical policies that help farmers become more resilient while keeping farms productive and profitable. That includes investing in drainage and water management systems, supporting soil health and conservation practices, expanding access to crop insurance and disaster assistance, and strengthening agricultural research through Cornell Cooperative Extension and other agricultural partners.

We should also review state regulations to make sure they don’t create unnecessary barriers for farmers trying to adapt to changing conditions. Every farm is different, and policies should provide flexibility rather than one-size-fits-all mandates.

Most importantly, farmers need a seat at the table. Those who work the land every day understand better than anyone what challenges they face and what solutions will actually work.

As an Independent, I support a commonsense approach that helps protect family farms, strengthens our food supply, and ensures agriculture remains a vital part of Wayne County’s economy for generations to come.

KEYWORDS: Protect Family Farms! Farm Resilience & Disaster Preparedness! Practical, Farmer-Led Solutions! Strengthen Local 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?

The Canadian wildfire smoke events we’ve experienced are a reminder that public health emergencies don’t always begin within our borders. While researchers continue to study the long-term impacts, we know these events can worsen air quality and increase respiratory problems, especially for children, seniors, and individuals with asthma or other lung conditions.

New York should focus on practical preparedness measures. That includes improving air quality monitoring and public notification systems, ensuring schools and public buildings have effective air filtration, supporting emergency planning for vulnerable populations, and providing clear public health guidance when smoke events occur.

We should also continue supporting scientific research so future decisions are based on evidence rather than speculation. Any investments should be targeted, cost-effective, and focused on protecting public health.

As an Independent, I believe government’s role is to provide accurate information, prepare communities for known risks, and protect vulnerable residents while avoiding unnecessary mandates. The goal should be resilience and preparedness, ensuring New Yorkers can respond effectively when these events occur.

KEYWORDS: Public Health Preparedness! Protect Vulnerable Populations! Air Quality Monitoring & Alerts! Practical, 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?

We have to battle climate change as a first priority. Farmers should receive tax incentives to implement infrastructure which wil help mitigate the damage from erratic weather.

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 State needs to institute measures to combat fires in the 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?

When a late freeze wipes out a cherry crop in Wayne County, the cost shows up in Manhattan too; at the farmers market, the grocery store, and the school cafeteria. This spring, New York farmers lost an estimated $30 million to freezes, hail, and flooding. Our farmers aren’t asking for a bailout. They’re asking for a system built for the weather they actually face.

Prevention pays, so fund it up front. Every dollar spent before a disaster saves money after one. I’d expand cost-share funding for the tools that protect harvests like: frost protection for orchards; high tunnels and irrigation; drainage and water storage; and soil health practices that help fields hold water in drought and drain it in floods.

These are proven practices, and Cornell Cooperative Extension (CCE) already helps farmers use them. Extension needs stable funding so every county has the experts farmers rely on.

Replace debt with real protection. Right now, the main federal response to a disaster designation is emergency loans. A loan helps a farmer survive the season, but it adds debt to a business that just lost its crop. Federal crop insurance has also long been built around commodity crops like corn and wheat. New York grows apples, cherries, vegetables, and dairy, and those farmers often face gaps in coverage. I’d push to make insurance work better for specialty crops and small farms. I’d also support a standing disaster program, so aid arrives in weeks instead of waiting on Congress to pass emergency bills.

Keep the early warning systems strong. Accurate forecasts let farmers protect their crops before a freeze hits. That means fully staffing the National Weather Service and supporting local weather networks farmers already use.

Protect the people who do the work. Hotter summers put farmworkers at risk. Clear heat-safety standards protect workers and keep farms running.

Build steady markets. Programs that connect New York farms to schools, hospitals, and food banks give farmers reliable buyers in hard years. That’s stability for farmers and fresh food for families.

These ideas have support from farm groups, conservation groups, and both parties. Farming isn’t a partisan issue; it’s a food security issue.

KEYWORDS: Extreme weather; farm resilience; climate adaptation; New York farmers; family farms; food security; food prices; disaster designation; disaster relief; emergency loans; crop insurance; specialty crops; standing disaster program; prevention funding; cost-share; frost protection; irrigation; soil health; Cornell Cooperative Extension; National Weather Service

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?

In June 2023, New York City’s sky turned orange and asthma emergency visits spiked across all five boroughs. The research since then gives us a clear lesson, and an honest one.

Researchers have found real short-term harm: a sharp rise in asthma-related emergency visits on the worst smoke days. Other researchers found that this spike was only slightly higher than on a bad spring pollen day. And no one yet knows the long-term effects. I take both findings seriously. That points to a strategy of smart preparation, not panic: invest in measures that protect people from smoke, and that also pay off on high-pollution, high-pollen, and extreme-heat days.

To address this, I would invest in a few things. First, I would invest in clean air where people spend their days. Upgrade air filtration in public schools, senior centers, and public housing. Better filters protect children from smoke, and also from everyday pollution and respiratory viruses. Second, I would provide help for the most vulnerable households. Provide air purifiers to low-income families with asthma or heart and lung disease, through Medicaid and public health programs. Asthma doesn’t fall evenly on New Yorkers, and our response shouldn’t either. Finally, I would clean air centers, using the cooling center model so people without good ventilation at home have a safe place to go during bad air days. Protections for outdoor workers. Delivery workers, construction crews, and sanitation workers can’t stay inside. Clear rules for masks, breaks, and adjusted schedules during hazardous air protect them.

In Congress, I’d protect the federal systems that make all this possible: air quality monitoring, smoke forecasting, and public health tracking. I’d also support stronger U.S.–Canadian cooperation on wildfire prevention and response. And I’d keep working to cut the emissions that are making fire seasons longer and more severe.

KEYWORDS: Wildfire smoke; air quality; clean air; public health; asthma; respiratory health; emergency department visits; PM2.5; preparedness; clean air centers; air filtration; schools; senior centers; public housing; air purifiers; vulnerable households; health equity; outdoor workers; worker protections; air quality alerts

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 funds to increase the resilience of our agriculture. Proven programs that can help farmers adapt should be supported with federal and state resources.

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?

We need to invest in better filtration systems but also we should consider being more neighborly and providing support to help put these fires out. Unfortunately the time may come when we’ll have fires of our own in the Adirondacks or elsewhere.

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

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?

Based on the data provided for this question, Erie County was named a federal disaster area after the flooding at the end of March, and frost and freezes in April and May damaged crops across the state. Farmers can’t plan around weather like this on their own, and the state should be an additional partner in finding solutions when erratic weather impacts crops.

I would expand the Climate Resilient Farming program so more farms can afford drainage, irrigation, soil health work, and frost protection before the next storm hits. I’d also support a state emergency relief fund that gets money to farmers quickly.

KEYWORDS: Farming, weather, crops

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 before disasters occur rather than relying on emergency assistance afterwards. I would support targeted, accountable programs that help farmers improve drainage and water management, irrigation and water storage, soil health, erosion control, backup power, crop protection, other infrastructure that reduces losses from floods, drought, heat and severe storms. Existing resilience programs should be evaluated by measurable outcomes and made accessible to small and family farms, not only operations with the resources to navigate complicated grant processes. The state should also strengthen agricultural weather information, extension services, emergency planning, coordination with federal crop insurance and disaster programs. Investments that reduce repeated losses can protect farmers, strengthen New York’s food supply and lower the long term cost of disaster recovery.

KEYWORDS: Agriculture/environment : extreme weather.

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 recurring wildfire smoke as a public health preparedness issue. The state should continue improving real time air quality monitoring and forecasting and make warning easy for schools, employers, local governments, health providers, families to understand and act upon. Preparedness should include plans for distributing high quality masks during severe smoke events, improving filtration in school and other public building where feasible, identifying clear air spaces for vulnerable residents, and providing clear guidance for children, older adults, outdoor workers, people with respiratory or cardiovascular conditions. The state should also collect health and exposure data so future decisions are based on New York specific evidence because smoke crosses borders, New York should coordinate with neighboring states, federal agencies and Canadian authorities on forecasting and emergency communications.

KEYWORDS: Environment/public health: wildfire smoke.

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?

Waiting around for the federal government to declare a disaster area after the damage is already done isn’t a long-term survival plan. Our local family farms are getting hammered by late frosts, crazy rainstorms, and droughts. They need help preparing for the next storm, not just a loan after their crops are ruined.

We can’t let extreme weather wipe out our local food supply or bankrupt upstate farmers. New York needs to step up with proactive, state-level grants targeted specifically at small and mid-sized family farms—not massive corporate agribusinesses.

We should be giving our local farmers direct financial support to adapt right now. That means the state covering the costs for things like better drainage systems, water storage for droughts, and soil health practices that prevent flooding.

When we help working family farms afford the infrastructure they need to survive this wild weather, we protect our local food supply, keep grocery prices down, and keep our neighbors in business.

KEYWORDS: Support Family Farms, Climate-Resilient Infrastructure, Proactive Relief, Protect Local Food

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?

When the sky turned orange from Canadian wildfire smoke, it wasn’t wealthy executives who suffered—they just worked from home with their expensive air purifiers. It was our construction workers, farmworkers, and delivery drivers who were forced to stay outside and breathe it in, along with our kids sitting in older public schools with outdated ventilation.

New York has to get serious about preparing for the next bad fire season. First, we need state funding to massively upgrade HVAC and air filtration systems in our public schools, community centers, and affordable housing complexes. Working-class neighborhoods need guaranteed safe, clean-air shelters.

Second, we need enforceable, strict state regulations to protect our outdoor workforce. If the air quality hits a dangerous level, employers must be mandated to provide N95 masks, extra indoor breaks, and hazard pay or paid time off if conditions are too toxic to work in. We have to protect the working people on the frontlines of this crisis, not just tell them to tough it out.

KEYWORDS: Protect Outdoor Workers, School HVAC Upgrades, Clean Air Infrastructure, Hazard Pay

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?

My district is no stranger to the effects of extreme weather and the climate crisis. Here in the Southern Tier, we understand the dangers posed by climate change first hand. The city of Binghamton, in Broome County, is located in the floodplain at the meeting of the Susquehanna and Chenango rivers. Our community has experienced multiple “once in a generation” flooding events following intense rains, in 2006, and again in 2011. What was once extreme weather is becoming common and we all understand the dangers posed by the climate from flooding, historic storms, violent winds, and rising temperatures.

As a member of the Senate’s standing committee on Agriculture, I have been and will continue to support increasing funding and resources for our farmers. In last year’s budget, we extended the Farm Workforce Retention Credit and included $5 million for the Farmworker Housing Program and increased funding for the Young Farmers Loan Forgiveness Program. Additionally, we continued funding for agriculture programs including $2.2 million for the Farm Viability Institute, $1 million for the Beginning Farmers Fund, $1 million for the Socially & Economically Disadvantaged Farmers Fund, and $25 million for Farmland Protection.

KEYWORDS: Agriculture, environment

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?

We must ensure that municipalities across New York have the resources needed to keep people safe during air quality advisories due to wildfire smoke. Additionally, I will advocate for programming and resources so that the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation and Department of Health can track air quality and make sure the public are informed and ready for dangerous air-quality levels.

KEYWORDS: Environment, Public Health

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 protect its ability to attract scientific talent while respecting federal immigration law and ensuring fair opportunities for people who study, work, and conduct research here.

International students and researchers contribute to universities, laboratories, innovation, and economic activity. Sudden changes to visa approvals or duration can disrupt research projects, create uncertainty for employers, and weaken the state’s ability to compete in science and technology.

I would direct relevant state agencies and public universities to assess the effects of federal visa changes on research programs, workforce needs, and university finances. New York should coordinate with universities, employers, and federal representatives to communicate the practical consequences of disruptive policy changes and advocate for transparent, consistent rules.

I would also expand opportunities for New York residents to enter STEM careers through affordable education, apprenticeships, research placements, and workforce training. Publicly funded research programs should emphasize fair hiring, lawful employment, and opportunities for qualified New Yorkers.

International talent and local workforce development should complement each other rather than be treated as competing priorities. My goal is a fair, competitive scientific workforce that creates jobs, advances research, and benefits New York communities.

KEYWORDS: STEM workforce; research investment; educational opportunity; fair employment.

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?

Relying on foreign student visas to fill our scientific workforce is a symptom of a broken domestic system. My opponent, George Latimer, matches a toxic ideology that protects failing union monopolies over academic excellence.

New York must respond to federal visa changes by looking inward and fixing our own classrooms. Our public schools must do better to prepare New York students for higher academic performance in STEM fields.

While Latimer collaborates with the DSA to trap children in underperforming public systems pushing radical social agendas, I offer educational freedom. I propose universal school choice and privatization reforms. Letting tax dollars follow the child forces market competition that restores academic standards, elevates STEM training, and secures a home-grown workforce.

George Latimer serves the bureaucracy. I serve New York’s children and our national security.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join our movement.

KEYWORDS: STEM, Choice, Competition, Classrooms

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?

As a ““Community Architect,”” I believe these federal visa restrictions are a wake-up call: New York cannot rely solely on importing tech talent while overlooking our own working-class youth. We really must respond by building a massive, homegrown STEM and green-collar workforce right here in Queens.

We cannot control federal visa policy, but we can control local investment. Building and operating the Queens Community Energy & Resiliency Hub at the Aqueduct Racetrack—our community-owned Vanadium battery and water filtration facility—will require a new generation of skilled engineers, environmental scientists, and tradespeople.

To secure our scientific workforce, New York must heavily invest in local CUNY STEM programs, vocational training, and union apprenticeships. By training our own neighbors to build this safe, water-based energy grid, we secure our local economy, solve chronic flooding, and eliminate residential electric bills through homegrown green innovation.

KEYWORDS: Homegrown STEM talent

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 shouldn’t fight the federal government on visa rules.

We need to focus on training our own STEM workforce so we’re not so dependent on foreign students. Grow local talent through better programs and apprenticeships, keep the skilled people we already have, and put New York workers first.

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 benefits from having world-class colleges, universities, and research institutions that attract talented students from around the world. International students, particularly in STEM fields, contribute to scientific research, innovation, and our economy. At the same time, immigration and visa policy are federal responsibilities, and national security concerns must be taken seriously.

As a state legislator, my focus would be on ensuring New York remains a place where universities, research centers, and businesses can attract and retain talent while also creating opportunities for New York students. We should continue investing in STEM education, workforce development, apprenticeships, and partnerships between schools and employers so we grow our own talent pipeline.

If federal visa changes lead to workforce shortages in critical research, healthcare, engineering, or technology fields, New York should work with educational institutions and employers to assess those impacts and respond accordingly. Policy decisions should be guided by workforce data, economic impact, and the needs of key industries.

As an Independent, I believe the goal should be balanced: support innovation and economic growth, respect federal authority over immigration, and ensure New York students and workers are well-positioned to fill the jobs of the future.

KEYWORDS: Strengthen New York’s STEM Workforce! Support Innovation & Research! Grow Local Talent Pipelines! Evidence-Based Workforce Planning!

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?

Although mostly a federal issue, NY State can provide student aid for individuals who want to come to this country to study in the STEM fields

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 is one of the great talent magnets in the world. Nearly 138,000 international students study here, and most of them study science, technology, engineering, and math. Many stay to start companies, staff our labs, and teach the next generation. When federal policy makes it harder for them to come or stay, New York’s research and innovation economy pays first.

Security and openness can go together. Rigorous vetting is a legitimate national interest, and I support it. But the new federal rule caps student stays at four years, while most doctoral programs and many postdoctoral appointments run longer than that. A rule that forces our best researchers to reapply in the middle of their work doesn’t make us safer. It makes us less competitive.

New York should start by helping students navigate the new rules. SUNY and CUNY should give every affected student clear guidance on the new extension process, so no one falls out of status because of a paperwork deadline. The state should also track enrollment, research output, and workforce changes in real time, so policy responds to evidence rather than anecdotes. And we should treat the loss of international talent as a warning about how thin our domestic pipeline has become. New York should expand STEM pathways for first-generation and community college students, especially at CUNY and SUNY, so they are first in line for the opportunities a stronger science economy creates.

In Congress, I would push to align the four-year cap with the real length of doctoral and research programs, and to require clear standards and a chance to respond before any visa is revoked. I would support bipartisan efforts to offer a path to permanent residence for advanced STEM graduates, because we shouldn’t train the world’s best scientists and then send them to our competitors. And I would reform high-skill visa programs so wages reflect real market rates, so international talent strengthens American jobs rather than undercutting them. That last point matters. Openness to talent and protection of American workers aren’t opposites. Both depend on rules that are fair and enforced.

KEYWORDS: International students; STEM students; international researchers; scientific workforce; student visas; F-1 visa; J-1 visa; duration of status; four-year cap; extension of stay; PhD students; postdoctoral researchers; visa revocations; due process; travel ban; visa vetting; national security; talent retention; brain drain; global competitiveness; innovation economy; research universities; SUNY; CUNY; domestic STEM pipeline; first-generation students; community colleges; workforce development; green card for STEM graduates; high-skill immigration; H-1B reform; fair wages; protecting American workers; economic impact; data-driven policy

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 be friendly for immigrants and people visiting on student visas.

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

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?

My current work as Assistant Dean for Enrollment at UB lets me see daily how damaging the federal government’s decision have been when it comes to international student mobility. Ultimately, Visa decisions and those changes must be fixed at the federal level. However, New York can, and should take a strong stance on pushing back against the range of harmful policies that have been proposed and implemented by the Trump administration. Not only will this have negative impacts on the scientific workforce supply, but is putting enrollment and financial pressures on our colleges and universities, and hurting the overall fabric of higher education.

KEYWORDS: higher education, international student

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 is primarily a federal responsibility, but New York has a strong interest in maintaining a world class scientific and technology workforce. International students and researchers contribute to universities, laboratories, hospitals, startups, others employers across the state. New York should work with universities and employers to identify workforce shortages, provide accurate guidance to affected institutions and students, advocate to federal officials for visa policies that are predictable, timely, secure, merit based. National security and research integrity concerns should be taken seriously, but legitimate students and researchers should have clear rules and fair processes. At the same time, the state should strengthen its own stem pipeline through SUNY, CUNY, community colleges, apprenticeships, Research partnerships and career pathway so New Yorkers are prepared for the scientific and technical jobs being created here.

KEYWORDS: Jobs & workforce: international stem students and researchers.

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?

When the federal government makes it harder for international students and researchers to get visas, it hurts everyday New Yorkers. Our state’s universities, hospitals, and clean-tech industries rely on top-tier talent from all over the world. Driving these people away doesn’t create local jobs—it just pushes life-saving research and innovation to other countries.

New York can’t just throw up its hands and let bad federal policies gut our scientific workforce.

First, we should create state-funded research fellowships and grants through SUNY and our public institutions to keep international STEM graduates working in New York. Second, the state should partner with our public colleges to provide free legal navigation and visa defense services, so students aren’t left stranded by red tape and arbitrary crackdowns.

When international students come to New York, pay tuition, contribute to our research, and work in our labs, they are a vital part of our working class. We should be making it easier for them to stay and build our future, not harder.

KEYWORDS: Protect International Students, Retain STEM Talent, Fund SUNY Research, Support Working Class

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?

Federal policies regarding student visas have been challenging and disruptive to many of the students who have come to New York for their studies. This policy has led to a decline in enrollment in our universities, leading to lost revenue and lost job opportunities. I will continue to urge our representatives in the federal government to support our system of higher education by reversing these damaging policies. International students deserve to feel welcome here in New York.

KEYWORDS: jobs, workforce

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 must protect both public health and farmers’ ability to produce an affordable, reliable food supply. Decisions about pesticides should be based on the strength of scientific evidence rather than political pressure or assumptions that every pesticide is either completely safe or inherently unacceptable.

I would evaluate independent toxicological research, exposure levels, long-term health studies, environmental persistence, effects on pollinators and other wildlife, and the risks to farmworkers and nearby communities. Regulators should consider the dose, method of application, frequency of exposure, and whether safer effective alternatives are available.

Where evidence identifies significant risks, New York should restrict or phase out particularly harmful products while helping farmers transition to safer alternatives. Where uncertainty remains, the state should invest in independent research, transparent monitoring, and regular reassessment as new findings emerge.

Farmers should have access to integrated pest management, technical assistance, and affordable alternatives that protect crop yields. Regulations should be enforceable and understandable, and the public should have access to relevant safety information.

Fair policy protects consumers, workers, farmers, and the environment together. Food security must never be used as an excuse to ignore credible health risks.

KEYWORDS: Public health, pesticide safety, food security, independent research.

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 prepare for wildfire smoke as a recurring public health and environmental challenge. Smoke can affect air quality over large areas, and residents need reliable information and practical protection when pollution levels become unhealthy.

I would invest in air-quality monitoring, improved forecasting, and clear public alerts that explain when conditions are dangerous and what precautions people can take. Information should be accessible to people with disabilities and available in multiple languages.

Schools, public buildings, libraries, and other appropriate community facilities should be assessed for their ability to provide cleaner indoor air during severe smoke events. The state should prioritize assistance for communities with limited resources and residents who may have difficulty accessing air filtration or relocating temporarily.

I would support coordination among environmental agencies, public health departments, emergency services, and local governments to establish consistent response plans. Public health officials should monitor emergency visits and other health indicators during smoke events while supporting research into possible long-term effects.

New York should also evaluate the costs and benefits of investments in early warning systems, building ventilation, filtration, and emergency preparedness.

Protecting residents requires planning before the next smoke event, not waiting until air quality becomes hazardous.

KEYWORDS: Air quality monitoring; public health preparedness; clean indoor air; emergency planning.

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 don’t think we should treat every pesticide the same. We should look at the science behind each active ingredient—its toxicity, actual exposure, effects on workers and consumers, environmental impacts, and whether there are practical alternatives. I would work with farmers and agricultural organizations to find a common sense solution. This may mean reducing sprays of certain pesticides near environmentally sensitive areas or restricting the amount of treatments annually to ensure there are no unintended consequences. However, we need to make sure that farmers can yield their crops and properly make a living without the government getting in their way. Additionally, we should consider the effect that the reduction of pesticide sprays will have on our grocery prices. If farmers only yield half of their crop due to an aphid infestation, then we are only making it harder for New York farmers to support their business and for families to put food on the table. Further, the state should work with farmers to find alternatives to pesticides whether it be beneficial bugs, companion and trap crops, or less harmful pesticides.

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?

Radical environmentalists want to bypass hard science to impose sweeping pesticide bans that would instantly collapse our crop yields and threaten national food security. My opponent, George Latimer, campaigns on a trillion-dollar Green New Deal designed to smother our agricultural sector under mountain ranges of unscientific EPA red tape.

I refuse to allow unelected bureaucrats to dictate policy based on political activism. If pressed to make federal legislative decisions on agricultural inputs, I will seek out the best, most reliable, peer-reviewed scientific information available to evaluate real safety risks against production needs.

We must protect our food supply chain from progressive scarcity mandates. By defending scientific integrity and cutting regulatory overreach, we ensure New York farmers have the free-market tools to thrive.

George Latimer offers bureaucratic rationing. I offer scientific abundance and economic freedom.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join our common-sense movement.

KEYWORDS: Science, Abundance, Supply, 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?

Using out-of-state wildfires to panic families and expand state regulations is classic progressive overreach. My opponent, George Latimer, uses smoke events to justify the trillion-dollar Green New Deal—a radical plan that imposes choking EPA regulations while doing absolutely nothing to manage forests in Canada.

We cannot control the Canadian wilderness, but we can protect our own infrastructure. Instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on radical green subsidies, we must put out accurate health data so families can make their own common-sense choices on high-smoke or high-pollen days.

Concurrently, we must invest federal resources into modernizing our century-old water, sewer, and drainage networks to protect local public safety from severe weather. My platform focuses on infrastructure reality, free-market resilience, and creating high-paying union construction jobs right here in our community.

George Latimer offers bureaucratic exploitation. I offer economic freedom.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join us.

KEYWORDS: Reality, Information, Resilience, Freedom

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?

As a community architect, my agricultural policy prioritizes the health of our families and the independence of our local farmers over corporate profits.

When evaluating pesticide use, my decisions will be guided by independent, peer-reviewed data on water quality and public health—not corporate lobbying.

My fight for the Aqueduct water filtration hub reflects my commitment to clean water; we cannot allow toxic agricultural runoff to poison our communities. We must restrict harmful chemicals while providing state grants to help farmers transition to safe, sustainable alternatives.

We also must break the mafia-style monopoly of multinational agro-corporations.

Right now, predatory seed conglomerates are strong-arming independent farmers into a vicious cycle: forcing them to buy genetically modified (GMO) corn and the proprietary pesticides required to grow it.

Just like the junk fees and high interest rates I am fighting in Queens, this isn’t a free market; it’s agricultural loan-sharking.

I will stand in line to outlaw these predatory seed contracts, protect New York’s independent farmers from corporate intimidation, and ensure a safe, transparent food supply for our families.

You really need to study my website for my non-scientific study at www.rubencruz.nyc

KEYWORDS: Aqueduct water filtration hub

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?

When wildfire smoke hits New York as it has in the past, families and seniors suffer most. This is an infrastructure crisis we must prepare for now.

To protect our neighborhoods, I will prioritize:

1. Lowering Local Emissions: We can’t stop Canadian fires, but we can cut local pollution. My Aqueduct Energy Hub replaces dirty fossil-fuel plants with zero-emission Vanadium batteries. Better everyday air quality means stronger lungs when smoke arrives.

2. Clean Air Hubs: I will secure state funding to install commercial-grade air filtration systems in public schools, NYCHA buildings, and senior centers, creating safe indoor spaces during emergencies.

3. Green Infrastructure: Expanding our urban tree canopy in Queens will act as a natural air filter for our streets.

Resilience means building infrastructure that protects our families.

KEYWORDS: Emission, Clean Air Hubs

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 listen to every one and make my own informed Decision

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?

Start raking up the leaves before every winter, pick up all the fallen trees, and dig water wells in the woods to keep them wet so they don’t catch fire so easily.

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?

Agriculture is the backbone of Wayne County’s economy, and any decisions on pesticide use must be based on sound science, not politics.

Farmers rely on pesticides to protect crops, maintain yields, and keep food affordable. At the same time, we have a responsibility to ensure these products are safe for farm workers, consumers, wildlife, and the environment.

When evaluating restrictions or regulations, I would look to independent scientific research, real-world field data, recommendations from agricultural universities and extension services, and assessments from state and federal regulatory agencies. I would also want input from the farmers who use these products every day and understand the practical impacts of policy decisions.

If evidence shows a pesticide poses an unacceptable risk, we should take appropriate action. But if restrictions would significantly reduce crop yields, increase food costs, or put family farms at a competitive disadvantage, those impacts must also be considered.

As an Independent, I support a balanced, science-based approach that protects public health while ensuring New York farmers have the tools they need to remain productive, competitive, and sustainable.

KEYWORDS: Science-Based Decision Making! Protect Family Farms! Balance! Safety and Food Security! Farmer Input Matters!

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 Canadian wildfire smoke events we’ve experienced are a reminder that public health emergencies don’t always begin within our borders. While researchers continue to study the long-term impacts, we know these events can worsen air quality and increase respiratory problems, especially for children, seniors, and individuals with asthma or other lung conditions.

New York should focus on practical preparedness measures. That includes improving air quality monitoring and public notification systems, ensuring schools and public buildings have effective air filtration, supporting emergency planning for vulnerable populations, and providing clear public health guidance when smoke events occur.

We should also continue supporting scientific research so future decisions are based on evidence rather than speculation. Any investments should be targeted, cost-effective, and focused on protecting public health.

As an Independent, I believe government’s role is to provide accurate information, prepare communities for known risks, and protect vulnerable residents while avoiding unnecessary mandates. The goal should be resilience and preparedness, ensuring New Yorkers can respond effectively when these events occur.

KEYWORDS: Public Health Preparedness! Protect Vulnerable Populations! Air Quality Monitoring & Alerts! Practical, 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?

There needs to be a cost benefit analysis of what specific health concerns any particular pesticide raise as compared to the pesticide’s efficacy in increasing production

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 State needs to institute measures to combat fires in the state.

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?

Farmers feed us, and they deserve tools that work. Farmworkers and rural families deserve not to be poisoned by those tools. I don’t believe we have to choose. But I do believe that when the evidence points to serious harm, the burden of proof should shift to whoever profits from the risk, not to the people bearing it.

I would weigh five kinds of evidence. First, health outcomes in the people most exposed, including long-term federal studies that have followed tens of thousands of farmworkers, pesticide applicators, and their families for decades. Second, the regulator’s own record, including where federal reviews are incomplete, delayed, or under challenge in court. Third, what peer nations have decided; when dozens of countries ban a product, that doesn’t settle the question, but it tells us where to look harder. Fourth, real-world alternatives: for each crop, what replaces the product, at what cost, and with what effect on yields. Cornell’s integrated pest management research gives New York a strong base here. And fifth, who carries the risk. The heaviest exposure falls on farmworkers, many of them low-wage and without a strong voice in the policy process, and they should be at the table.

Applied to paraquat, the case for acting is strong. The bill before the Legislature would ban it starting in 2028. Paraquat is already restricted federally because it is so acutely toxic, and studies link exposure to Parkinson’s disease. It’s banned in the European Union, the United Kingdom, China, and Brazil, and no paraquat products remain registered in Canada. Meanwhile, the federal review has been reopened and could take years. A phase-out with a clear date gives farmers time to adjust, and I’d pair it with technical help and cost-share funding so the transition doesn’t fall on small family farms.

Going forward, my principle is that every product gets judged on its own evidence, not with blanket bans or blanket approvals. Where the data shows serious harm and workable alternatives exist, phase it out. Where the science is uncertain, fund the research and monitor exposure, so the next decision is better informed. In Congress, I’d fight to protect states’ right to set stronger protections, fund faster and more transparent federal pesticide reviews, and expand USDA support for farmers adopting safer pest management. Concern about pesticide safety now crosses party lines, and that’s a coalition worth building.

KEYWORDS: Pesticide safety; public health; food security; agriculture; New York farmers; family farms; farmworker health; farmworker protection; rural families; paraquat; paraquat ban; phase-out; Parkinson’s disease; acute toxicity; restricted use pesticides; EPA review; federal pesticide 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?

In June 2023, New York City’s sky turned orange and asthma emergency visits spiked across all five boroughs. The research since then gives us a clear lesson, and an honest one.

Researchers have found real short-term harm: a sharp rise in asthma-related emergency visits on the worst smoke days. Other researchers found that this spike was only slightly higher than on a bad spring pollen day. And no one yet knows the long-term effects. I take both findings seriously. That points to a strategy of smart preparation, not panic: invest in measures that protect people from smoke, and that also pay off on high-pollution, high-pollen, and extreme-heat days.

To address this, I would invest in a few things. First, I would invest in clean air where people spend their days. Upgrade air filtration in public schools, senior centers, and public housing. Better filters protect children from smoke, and also from everyday pollution and respiratory viruses. Second, I would provide help for the most vulnerable households. Provide air purifiers to low-income families with asthma or heart and lung disease, through Medicaid and public health programs. Asthma doesn’t fall evenly on New Yorkers, and our response shouldn’t either. Finally, I would clean air centers, using the cooling center model so people without good ventilation at home have a safe place to go during bad air days. Protections for outdoor workers. Delivery workers, construction crews, and sanitation workers can’t stay inside. Clear rules for masks, breaks, and adjusted schedules during hazardous air protect them.

In Congress, I’d protect the federal systems that make all this possible: air quality monitoring, smoke forecasting, and public health tracking. I’d also support stronger U.S.–Canadian cooperation on wildfire prevention and response. And I’d keep working to cut the emissions that are making fire seasons longer and more severe.

KEYWORDS: Wildfire smoke; air quality; clean air; public health; asthma; respiratory health; emergency department visits; PM2.5; preparedness; clean air centers; air filtration; schools; senior centers; public housing; air purifiers; vulnerable households; health equity; outdoor workers; worker protections; air quality alerts

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?

I will listen to the scientists and farmers when weighing in on these issues. In an ideal world we’d reduce and eliminate these chemicals as soon as possible but we need to balance the loss of productivity with potential benefits.

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?

We need to invest in better filtration systems but also we should consider being more neighborly and providing support to help put these fires out. Unfortunately the time may come when we’ll have fires of our own in the Adirondacks or elsewhere.

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

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 look to peer-reviewed research to find the type of evidence and data I need, any time a bill like the one shared is up for debate. We’ve seen corporate interests tip the scales when it comes to regulation, and that ultimately hurts farmers, hurts the farm workers who are handling these products, and puts people at risk when consuming food.

On the food security side, I want to know what a product is used for here, how much of it is used, and what alternatives exist.

KEYWORDS: pesticide, food security

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 risk, exposure and credible scientific evidence rather than treating every product or agricultural use as identical.I would consider peer reviewed toxicology and epidemiology, environmental monitoring effects on pollinators and water quality, occupational exposure, Federal and state safety assessments and real world application data. At the same time, policymakers should examine what a restriction would mean for crop yields, food prices, farm viability, pest resistance, whether safer and economically practical alternatives are available. Integrated pest management, precision application, farmer education, targeted restrictions can reduce unnecessary exposure without automatically eliminating tools farmers may need. When evidence shows that a particular use presents an unreasonable risk and viable alternatives exist, restrictions may be appropriate. Where evidence is uncertain, New York should continue monitoring, research and consultation with farmers, scientists, public health experts, environmental specialists before imposing broad mandates.

KEYWORDS: Public health/agriculture:pesticides.

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 recurring wildfire smoke as a public health preparedness issue. The state should continue improving real time air quality monitoring and forecasting and make warning easy for schools, employers, local governments, health providers, families to understand and act upon. Preparedness should include plans for distributing high quality masks during severe smoke events, improving filtration in school and other public building where feasible, identifying clear air spaces for vulnerable residents, and providing clear guidance for children, older adults, outdoor workers, people with respiratory or cardiovascular conditions. The state should also collect health and exposure data so future decisions are based on New York specific evidence because smoke crosses borders, New York should coordinate with neighboring states, federal agencies and Canadian authorities on forecasting and emergency communications.

KEYWORDS: Environment/public health: wildfire smoke.

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?

On the topic of pesticides and our food supply, we can’t let corporate chemical giants write the rules. If we’re going to weigh food security against public safety, the data I trust will come from independent, peer-reviewed researchers—not industry-funded lobbyists trying to protect their profit margins.

Passing the Birds and Bees Protection Act was a great step, because if we poison our pollinators and our soil, our food supply collapses anyway. But we can’t just ban things and leave independent family farmers out to dry.

If science shows a pesticide is too dangerous for our drinking water or our farmworkers, we have to pull it. But the state has to step up and financially support small local farmers so they can afford to transition to safer pest management without losing their livelihoods. We can protect our food supply by backing family farms and listening to real scientists, not by giving giant agribusinesses a free pass to spray whatever they want.

KEYWORDS: Independent Science, Protect Family Farms, Farmworker Safety, Hold Chemical Giants Accountable

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?

When the sky turned orange from Canadian wildfire smoke, it wasn’t wealthy executives who suffered—they just worked from home with their expensive air purifiers. It was our construction workers, farmworkers, and delivery drivers who were forced to stay outside and breathe it in, along with our kids sitting in older public schools with outdated ventilation.

New York has to get serious about preparing for the next bad fire season. First, we need state funding to massively upgrade HVAC and air filtration systems in our public schools, community centers, and affordable housing complexes. Working-class neighborhoods need guaranteed safe, clean-air shelters.

Second, we need enforceable, strict state regulations to protect our outdoor workforce. If the air quality hits a dangerous level, employers must be mandated to provide N95 masks, extra indoor breaks, and hazard pay or paid time off if conditions are too toxic to work in. We have to protect the working people on the frontlines of this crisis, not just tell them to tough it out.

KEYWORDS: Protect Outdoor Workers, School HVAC Upgrades, Clean Air Infrastructure, Hazard Pay

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?

As a member of the Senate’s Agriculture Committee, I continue to work with my colleagues to balance the needs of our agricultural sector with public safety concerns. As Chair of the Senate’s standing committee on Women’s Issues, I have consistently advanced legislation to keep toxic chemicals out of cosmetics, menstrual products, and other products that we and our families encounter and use daily. I sponsor legislation (S2057) to regulate ingredients in personal care products and ban the use of toxic chemicals in beauty products. I supported recently passed legislation to prohibit the sale of products containing PFAS (S9073A).

KEYWORDS: public health, agriculture

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?

We must ensure that municipalities across New York have the resources needed to keep people safe during air quality advisories due to wildfire smoke. Additionally, I will advocate for programming and resources so that the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation and Department of Health can track air quality and make sure the public are informed and ready for dangerous air-quality levels.

KEYWORDS: Environment, Public Health

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 indiscriminate federal funding cuts that undermine valuable medical research, weaken New York institutions, and threaten jobs without demonstrating that the reductions will improve efficiency or research outcomes.

NIH-supported research contributes to medical discoveries, scientific training, university activity, and economic development. Significant reductions could disrupt ongoing studies, affect researchers and support staff, and delay work that may benefit patients and communities.

I would urge the federal government to make funding decisions through transparent, evidence-based processes that consider scientific merit, public health priorities, research outcomes, and the long-term consequences of interrupted projects.

At the state level, I would assess which research programs face the greatest risk, identify opportunities to protect essential ongoing work, and explore targeted state investment where funding gaps threaten substantial public benefits. I would also encourage collaboration among universities, hospitals, research institutions, and responsible private partners, with appropriate safeguards for research independence and public accountability.

State assistance should be transparent, fiscally responsible, and evaluated against measurable outcomes. New York should also continue investing in research training and opportunities for its own residents.

Scientific research is an investment in public health, future innovation, and good-paying jobs. Funding decisions should be guided by evidence and public value rather than arbitrary reductions.

KEYWORDS: Medical research; scientific funding; public health; research workforce.

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?

The NIH has become a bloated, unchecked bureaucracy that routinely fuels government waste, fraud, abuse, and redundancy. While my opponent, George Latimer, blindly demands unconditional taxpayer funding to preserve the institutional deep state, I support proposed federal budget reductions to enforce strict fiscal accountability.

We must protect our research sector by modernizing it. I advocate utilizing advanced technology to ruthlessly audit federal grants, eliminating duplicated research programs, and clawing back fraudulent administrative overhead. Cutting federal waste ensures that actual scientific capital is directed strictly to high-performing New York hospitals and universities based on raw merit, not bureaucratic patronage.

Furthermore, my platform drives true innovation by lowering small business FICA taxes and slashing red tape, allowing private sector enterprise to out-pace federal agencies.

George Latimer funds the bureaucracy. I offer technological accountability and economic freedom.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join our common-sense movement.

KEYWORDS: Accountability, Audit, Bureaucracy, Efficiency

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 NIH funding is a lifeline for our public hospitals and CUNY research institutions.

Proposed federal cuts will deeply hurt our communities who rely on these centers for care and innovation.I’ll advocate to protect this funding, but New York can’t wait for Washington.

If the federal government steps back, Albany has to step up. We can fill this research funding gap by ending corporate welfare—like the massive tax exemptions given to Big Tech data centers—and redirecting that revenue into our local public health and STEM sectors.

We should also guarantee that publicly funded research serves the people, not pharmaceutical monopolies.

My platform explicitly calls for regulating excessive pharmaceutical costs so that our research yields affordable treatments for Queens families, not corporate windfalls.

Finally, building the Queens Community Energy & Resiliency Hub at the Aqueduct will establish our own homegrown green-tech research economy.

By partnering with local CUNY programs, we will build a robust scientific workforce that is insulated from federal budget games.

KEYWORDS: End corp welfare, STEM, Vanadium

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 believe we should keep funding science.

It’s not just about jobs—it’s about the research that helps make the world a better place. New York’s hospitals and universities do important work, and big cuts to NIH funding would hurt that. I’d fight to protect the money that actually produces results here.

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 is home to some of the world’s leading hospitals, universities, and research institutions, and NIH funding plays a critical role in supporting medical research, innovation, and high-quality jobs. New York is one of the largest recipients of NIH funding, with billions of dollars supporting research and hundreds of organizations across the state.

I’m concerned that significant reductions in NIH funding could slow medical breakthroughs, weaken our research institutions, and negatively impact jobs and local economies. Business groups, universities, and healthcare organizations have warned that these cuts could have substantial consequences for both research and economic development in New York.

While the federal government determines NIH funding levels, New York should continue advocating for stable research funding, support partnerships between universities and private industry, and prioritize workforce development to retain researchers, physicians, and scientists. We should also carefully evaluate state investments in research that generate economic growth and improve public health.

As an Independent, I support responsible investment in scientific research because it saves lives, strengthens our economy, and helps keep New York a leader in innovation and medical discovery.

KEYWORDS: Protect Medical Research! Support Innovation & Jobs! Invest in Life-Saving Discoveries! Strengthen New York’s Research Economy!

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?

Strongly oppose the decrease in national funding. To the extent NYS has resources to off set these cuts it should.

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 the proposed cuts. The administration’s budget would cut NIH funding by about 12% and cap the support research institutions receive for labs, equipment, and compliance at 15%. That’s not reform; it’s retreat. The stakes for New York are concrete. NIH sent nearly $3.6 billion to New York scientists in 2024, supporting about 35,000 jobs. Nearly every new medicine approved in the last decade traces back to publicly funded research, and New York trains one in seven American doctors. When we cut research, we cut the pipeline of treatments and of the people who deliver them. Congress rejected even deeper cuts last year with bipartisan votes, because medical research isn’t a partisan cause. Cancer, Alzheimer’s, and diabetes don’t check party registration.

In Congress, I’d fight to hold NIH funding at least level and grow it with inflation. I’d also reform overhead costs rather than gut them. Taxpayers deserve to know where those dollars go, and research institutions have proposed a more transparent model that I’d advance instead of an arbitrary cap that would close labs. I’d work to restore stability, so grants aren’t terminated midstream without clear cause and due process, because science runs on multi-year commitments and unpredictability alone is driving talent away. I’d protect training grants and early-career awards, especially for young scientists from low-income and first-generation backgrounds who can’t wait out a funding drought. And I’d partner with Albany on state efforts to diversify research funding, so New York isn’t one federal budget away from losing its scientists to Texas, California, or Europe. FDR understood that public investment in discovery is how a nation builds its future. We shouldn’t be the generation that stops building.

KEYWORDS: NIH funding; medical research; biomedical research; New York research sector; research jobs; budget cuts; indirect costs; 15% cap; overhead reform; transparency; appropriations; bipartisan support; grant terminations; due process; research stability; scientific workforce; training grants; early-career scientists; first-generation scientists; brain drain; academic medical centers; new treatments and cures

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?

I oppose these reductions and we should be keeping a tab so that they can be restored once we get a pro-science administration back in office.

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

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 universities, hospitals and research institutions are major contributors to biomedical discovery and the state’s innovation economy. I support stable, competitive federal research funding that rewards scientific merit, protects taxpayers, includes strong safeguards for research integrity, security and accountability. As a state senator, I would work with New York’s congressional delegation, universities, hospitals, research employers to document how federal funding changes affect ongoing research, jobs, clinical innovation, New York competitiveness. The state should also examine targeted partnerships that leverage private investment and state resources in areas of strategic importance. New York cannot realistically replace the scale of federal biomedical research funding, so state policy should focus on maintaining a competitive research environment, retaining scientific talent, ensuring that limited state dollars complement rather than simply substitute for federal support.

KEYWORDS: Science funding: NIH and New York research.

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?

Gutting NIH funding is a direct attack on New York’s economy and our public health. When the federal government slashes billions from our research hospitals and public universities, they aren’t just hurting scientists—they’re killing thousands of good-paying, local union jobs across the state and stalling life-saving medical breakthroughs.

As a state lawmaker, I won’t just stand by while our SUNY campuses and local hospitals get financially choked out by federal budget games. If the federal government walks away from its responsibility, New York has to step up.

How do we pay for it? By finally making billionaires and mega-corporations pay their fair share. We need to end massive corporate tax giveaways and redirect that money into a state-level Scientific Research Fund to keep our labs running and our researchers employed.

Science and medical research are public goods. We have to protect our public universities and ensure New York remains a place that invests in human health and good jobs, rather than more corporate handouts.

KEYWORDS: Tax the Rich, Protect SUNY Jobs, State Research Fund, Public Good

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?

These NIH funding levels have led to cancelled and delayed clinical trials for patients across New York. I will continue to advocate that our federal government reverse these cuts. KEYWORDS: Science Funding

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 help students and families distinguish reliable scientific information from misinformation while protecting critical thinking, open discussion, and freedom of inquiry.

I support teaching scientific literacy, including how to evaluate evidence, recognize misleading claims, understand uncertainty, and identify credible sources. Students should learn how scientific conclusions are developed, tested, challenged, and updated as new evidence becomes available.

Schools should provide age-appropriate information based on current scientific evidence and established educational standards. Teachers should have access to trustworthy educational resources, professional development, and materials that help families understand important public health and environmental issues.

Public education should not become a tool for partisan messaging or punishment of people who ask questions. Government agencies and schools must communicate honestly about what is known, what remains uncertain, and why recommendations change when evidence develops.

I would encourage partnerships among educators, universities, public health experts, and local communities to make reliable information accessible to all families, regardless of income or background.

Trust is earned through transparency, evidence, and accountability. Our goal should be to equip New Yorkers to make informed decisions rather than simply tell them what to believe.

KEYWORDS: Scientific literacy; critical thinking; transparency; evidence-based education.

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?

There is no way governments can keep up with social media to control or limit misinformation. The practical reality is that public bureaucracies move at a snail’s pace compared to the lightspeed of internet platforms.

More importantly, using public education to police speech creates dangerous First Amendment violations. My opponent, George Latimer, aligns with a radical ideology that weaponizes state power to censor dissenting voices and enforce political compliance.

The government must not act as a ministry of truth. Instead, it must put its own accurate information into the marketplace of ideas.

We combat bad information through educational freedom. By introducing universal school choice and privatization reforms, we empower parents to pull children out of systems pushing progressive social agendas, moving them into high-performing private institutions that teach critical thinking.

George Latimer offers government censorship. I offer the First Amendment and parental authority.

Go to Cinquemaniforcongress2026.com to join our common-sense movement.

KEYWORDS: First Amendment, Ideas, Competency, Liberty

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?

When neighbors rely on social media for science information, it often highlights a lack of access to reliable digital resources.

My approach to combating misinformation is rooted in infrastructure. I view health as a ““full circle”” system where digital access is a critical social determinant of health. To empower students and families, public education must be supported by Universal Broadband. I will endorse free broadband citywide, prioritizing NYCHA locations, so our communities can directly access verified educational resources and tele-health rather than relying on social media algorithms.

While we must strengthen practical health education in schools to teach digital literacy, we must also build the permanent infrastructure that protects our neighbors. Guaranteeing digital access empowers Queens families to make informed, trustworthy decisions.

Ruben Cruz Press Conference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbRmB_qpbPA&t=1s This video outlines my Aqueduct Village plan, demonstrating how infrastructure investments tie directly into overall community health and resilience.

KEYWORDS: Digital access, Universal Broadband, Aqueduct Village

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?

both are vary important and the people have lost trust in the institutions so what we need is to rebuild trust so we can educate the people with true unbiased science

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 in helping students and families navigate information, but it should focus on teaching critical thinking and media literacy, not deciding what people are allowed to think.

Students should learn how to evaluate sources, distinguish fact from opinion, recognize bias, verify claims, and understand the scientific method. Science is strongest when it encourages questions, evidence, and open discussion. Teaching students how knowledge is developed and updated is more valuable than simply telling them what information to trust.

Schools should also help families access reliable information from qualified experts, universities, healthcare providers, and government agencies, while making it clear when scientific understanding evolves based on new evidence.

At the same time, I believe government should be cautious about becoming the arbiter of truth. Public trust is built through transparency, open debate, and education, not censorship.

As an Independent, I support empowering people with the skills to think critically and make informed decisions for themselves. The best defense against misinformation.

KEYWORDS: Critical Thinking & Media Literacy! Teach How to Think, Not What to Think! Evidence-Based Decision! Making Informed and Educated Citizens!

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?

Public educational institutions have a duty to teach science without regard to political pressure. In addition, health curriculum should teach truthful information about vaccines

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?

Young people aren’t rejecting science. They’re drowning in content and starving for trust. The same young adults who get their science from YouTube and TikTok say they trust scientists, doctors, and teachers far more than influencers. That gap is our opening. Public schools are where every child, regardless of zip code or family income, can learn how to tell the difference.

Teach how to think, not what to think. The most durable defense against misinformation isn’t a list of approved facts. It’s the habit of checking. Students should learn to ask who is behind a claim, what evidence supports it, and what other credible sources say. Some researchers call this lateral reading, and studies of classroom programs have shown measurable gains. This approach earns trust across the aisle because it doesn’t tell anyone what to believe. It gives them tools to judge for themselves.

Close the trust gap where it’s widest. Young people who aren’t on a college track are less likely to fact-check what they read. They’re the ones a public school system exists to serve first. Information literacy should be part of every high school, not an elective for the lucky few.

Bring trusted messengers into the room. Young people trust doctors and scientists. So we should connect classrooms with pediatricians, nurses, and researchers, and give families the same access. I support the City Council’s effort to give parents clear, accurate vaccine information, delivered with respect. Parents with questions deserve answers, not judgment.

Prepare students for AI-generated content. Deepfakes and synthetic text make this harder every year. Students need to learn how these tools work and how to spot what they produce. I’ve spent my career on technology accountability, and I’d bring that to this work.

In Congress, I’d fight to keep federal science agencies independent and their data public, so teachers and families have honest sources to turn to. I’d also support federal grants for information literacy, structured so local schools design their own programs.

KEYWORDS: Trust in science; scientific misinformation; science education; public schools; information literacy; media literacy; critical thinking; fact-checking; lateral reading; teach how to think; trusted messengers; doctors and scientists; teachers; social media; YouTube; TikTok; young adults; trust gap; non-college-track students; educational equity; vaccine information; vaccine misinformation

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?

Public education should distribute responsible scientific information to families. We must do more at every age to teach people how to spot misinformation online. With the rise of AI, it will only get more difficult.

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

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 play a critical role in combatting misinformation, and as a legislator, I hope to lead when it comes to making sure the public trusts our educators, our science communicators, and those who work in government doing the important work around science information, vaccines, and public health.

I would advocate for any programs, resource, or initiatives that can be created or expanded to not only empower our public school science teachers with more information, but also ways for Departments of Health to connect with the public through outreach and engagement activities through schools to support accurate, up-to-date science and public health information.

KEYWORDS: public health, science communication

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 help students learn how to evaluate information, not tell them what political conclusions to reach. Schools can strengthen scientific literacy by teaching students how the scientific method works, how to distinguish peer reviewed evidence from unsupported claims, how to evaluate sources and statistics and how scientific conclusions can change when better evidence becomes available. When schools provide public health or scientific information to families, it should come from clearly identified current sources and should distinguish established evidence from areas of legitimate scientific uncertainty. Students should also learn responsible digital and media literacy so they can recognize manipulated content, misleading statistics, and misinformation online. Trust is strengthened through transparency. Public institutions should explain the evidence behind their guidance, disclose uncertainty and corrections and encourage questions rather than treating scientific discussion as a partisan issue.

KEYWORDS: Trust in science

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?

Let’s be real about why junk science spreads online: social media algorithms push sensational, clickbait garbage because that’s what makes tech billionaires their ad revenue. Busy, working parents don’t have the time to sit around debunking internet myths every night.

Public schools should be our first line of defense, but we have to give teachers the resources to do it. Instead of just prepping kids for standardized tests, we need to teach real-world digital literacy early on. That means showing students how to question sources, spot paid corporate spin, and understand why an algorithm is pushing certain content into their feeds.

Our schools also need to act as trusted community hubs. When public health guidance comes out, families should get straightforward, plain-English information directly from local schools and neighborhood clinics—no political spin, no confusing jargon. When you treat people with respect and deliver honest facts through voices they actually know in their community, you rebuild trust in real science from the ground up.

KEYWORDS: Digital Media Literacy, Community Hubs, Teacher Resources, Algorithm Accountability

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?

I will continue to fight to fully fund our public schools and institutes of higher education. It is important that our schools have access to funding to implement programming to ensure students learn about media literacy and gain the skills needed to analyze, evaluate, and use media within the evolving landscape of the 21st-century media.

KEYWORDS: science