R Sen. George Borrello

The bill's vague language would eliminate opportunities for employers to invest in training for people who cannot afford it themselves, such as 16-year-old lifeguards or truck drivers needing CDL licenses. Existing labor laws already protect against employer abuse.

Argued the bill is hypocritical because it mandates disclosure of price increases from private sources but prohibits disclosure of increases caused by government regulations, and noted New York's tendency to overregulate increases costs.

Criticized the bill as wasteful, noting it creates a commission to study whether to create a study on public banks. He also objected to the absence of Republican appointments on the commission.

Argued the bill unfairly burdens nursing homes, which are already underfunded with low Medicaid/Medicare reimbursement rates and high regulations. Questioned why responsibility should shift to nursing homes rather than funeral homes already trained and equipped for body handling. Raised practical concerns about implementation in dense urban areas like Manhattan.

Argued the bill creates an illogical distinction between fresh-made and prepackaged items, since consumers can ask about ingredients at the counter in both cases. Expressed concern about legal liability for small businesses and questioned whether the requirement meaningfully improves safety. Noted that people with allergies are typically conscientious about asking and that larger food processors are better equipped to comply.

The bill is overly complex and creates unnecessary hoops for farmers and municipalities to jump through. The 51 percent sourcing standard is too low and could benefit large national distributors over 100 percent New York-based farms. Municipalities lack expertise to evaluate environmental and social equity standards. The existing Farm-to-School program is underutilized due to complexity; this bill should simply allow government agencies to pay more for New York-grown food without additional criteria.

Voted in opposition to the measure.

Argued the bill is fraught with conflicts of interest by placing a paid faculty member on community college boards of trustees and encouraged the Governor to veto if it reaches her desk.

Argued that New York's workers' compensation insurance is the most expensive in the nation and that this bill would shift costs from the federal government to state taxpayers, making an already expensive system worse.

Argued the bill incentivizes wind and solar sprawl that destroys the natural environment while producing minimal energy and few permanent jobs. Criticized the property tax reduction as unnecessary giveaways that deprive communities of needed revenue.

Opposed the bill as ineffective and un-American, arguing that products can still be purchased online and shipped to consumers' homes, and that the ban would only result in products being imported from other states.

Raised extensive concerns about lack of waiting periods after prescription decision, inaccuracy of six-month prognosis predictions, absence of controlled environment requirements, no chain of custody oversight, and potential for financial coercion of family members.

The bill represents government overreach into parental responsibility and personal choice. It could generate frivolous litigation over obvious exaggerations (Lucky Charms being "magically delicious," Red Bull giving wings), and would be ineffective given the ubiquity of advertising. Sen. Borrello suggested restricting SNAP benefits to healthy foods would be a more direct and effective approach.

Argued the bill is impractical for commercial vehicles modified by multiple vendors and would unfairly hold manufacturers responsible for third-party modifications. Expressed concern it would increase costs for small businesses and aftermarket warranties, and questioned how liability would be determined in complex commercial vehicle situations.

Opposed the bill as vaguely defined and likely to enable litigation against small rural businesses that are the only service providers in their areas. He argued the bill would create incentives for 'litigation bounty hunters' to target operators like single gas stations or convenience stores, and noted that New York State itself encourages monopolies through laws governing liquor and beer distribution. He cited opposition from the Farm Bureau, bankers, and business organizations.

Argued the bill goes beyond Europe and California in stringency without proven cost-benefit analysis. Questioned how companies can develop New York-specific packaging and whether technology exists for 30% reduction goals. Noted Kraft Heinz opposition despite being 87% compliant.

The bill unfairly punishes a shrinking population of state-chartered community banks and sets a dangerous precedent by telling banks what they can invest in. Advocacy has already worked to convince federally-chartered banks to divest. Private prisons in other states have lower recidivism rates and newer facilities, and New York State—facing its own prison crisis—should not dictate prison operations to other states.

The bill allows providers to opt out of plans based on reimbursement rates, which could disrupt continuity of care for children with chronic conditions like asthma and diabetes. Without consultation with providers and insurers, the bill risks unintended consequences that undermine the state-sponsored program's effectiveness.

Argued the bill has a flaw that allows seizure of victims' firearms while releasing domestic abusers on appearance tickets. Contended that criminals should be jailed rather than released.

Questioned feasibility of electric school bus mandate in rural areas with long routes and subzero temperatures. Asked why pilot programs weren't conducted in urban, suburban and rural areas before full mandate. Expressed concern about technology that doesn't exist and mandates that cannot be met.

Acknowledged the goal of increasing poll worker compensation is laudable but opposed the bill because it comes with no funding mechanism, which would burden county boards of elections already operating on limited budgets.

Argued the bill should include a $16-22 fee per mattress like successful programs in other states, which have achieved 67% recycling rates. He expressed concern that manufacturers in his district (Serta, Jamestown Mattress) would bear unfair costs while consumers could purchase non-compliant mattresses across the border in Pennsylvania.

The bill creates inherent conflicts of interest by allowing a paid faculty member protected by union representation to participate in executive sessions discussing compensation and discipline that directly affect them. The bill lacks specific language defining recusal requirements and penalties for confidentiality breaches, and is too vague and broad.

Criticized the $100 million monthly National Guard cost as the result of the Governor's mismanagement and noted the Governor could federalize the troops to shift costs to the federal government, calling the situation egregious.

Expressed concerns about automatic Medicaid renewal, citing fraud in the system and the inability to verify over a million recipients. Argued that 44 percent of New Yorkers and 60 percent of New York City residents are on Medicaid, and questioned whether automatic renewal is the right policy path.

Argued that while the bill prevents private employers from enforcing no-rehire clauses after compensation is offered, Governor Hochul is applying the same restrictions to state, county, and local positions, creating a double standard. Contended the corrections officers were likely not in violation of the Taylor Act due to dangerous working conditions.

Argued the bill lacks adequate security measures for mobile polling sites and that the answer of using standard polling site security is insufficient for sites in RVs. Expressed concern that the bill undermines public faith in fair and secure elections and characterized it as a 'gimmick' that moves in the wrong direction.

Opposed the bill citing the 600 percent TDI premium increase as an excessive burden on small businesses, arguing it will drive employers out of New York and increase program participation in questionable ways. Contended the state is running out of revenue and cannot afford additional business mandates.

He argued the bill represents a double standard, contending the state should be equally transparent about CLCPA costs rather than requiring transparency only from private businesses. He questioned whether data on ESCO savings exists and noted the PSC already offers online comparisons.

Questioned the contradiction of mandating energy companies continue supplying fuel while fining them for doing so, and argued costs will inevitably pass to consumers. Noted state policy requires continued provision of gas and electric services for public health and welfare.