Sen. Pete Harckham
Pete Harckham chairs the Environmental Conservation Committee and anchors his legislative identity in environmental policy, sponsoring 44 Environmental Conservation Law bills in the 2025 session — the largest share of his 311 total sponsored bills — alongside active engagement on climate change mitigation, PFAS remediation, and renewable energy infrastructure, reflected in 13 committee hearing engagements and 32 floor speech mentions. He holds a 94.6% party loyalty rate, though his cross-party votes break consistently against local occupancy and hotel tax measures supported by the Democratic caucus, and 18 of his sponsored bills were signed into law in the current session against 3 vetoes. His D+12 district carries a base lean of D+10 in 2026 modeling, but every election he has personally contested has been rated competitive, including a 7.2-point margin over the same Republican opponent in 2024 and a 3.8-point margin in 2020, indicating structural vulnerability despite the partisan registration advantage of 88,817 Democrats to 60,735 Republicans. His campaign raised $818,966 between 2022 and 2026, with 84.6% from individuals and only 2.6% from corporations and PACs, while lobbying contacts in Energy & Natural Resources — Environmental Conservation/Preservation, Waste Management, and Oil/Fuel/Gas directly overlap with his committee chairmanship, with Clean and Healthy New York, Inc. logging 5,092 lobbying contacts in the most recent reporting period.AI
Topic Focus AI
Topics extracted by AI from floor speeches, committee hearing transcripts, and sponsored legislation. Bill and hearing citations link to source records for verification. Tag size reflects number of supporting citations.
Key Issues AI
From committee hearings, floor debate, and bill sponsorship.
Legislative Activity (2025–2026)
Based on complete Senate roll call records.
Bill Outcomes 2025 Session
Covers Senate-sponsored bills only. Status from Open Legislation API.
Committee Assignments
Electoral History SD-40
General Elections
| Year | Winner | Runner-up | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Peter B. Harckham 53.6% (88,582) | Gina M. Arena 46.4% (76,660) | ⚡ 7.2pts |
| 2022 | Peter B. Harckham 53.4% (66,419) | Gina M. Arena 46.6% (57,925) | ⚡ 6.8pts |
| 2020 | Peter B. Harckham 51.9% (83,819) | Rob Astorino 48.1% (77,688) | ⚡ 3.8pts |
| 2018 | Peter B. Harckham 51.6% (62,155) | Terrence P. Murphy 48.4% (58,321) | ⚡ 3.2pts |
| 2016 | Terrence P. Murphy 57.8% (80,312) | Alison Boak 42.2% (58,737) | 15.5pts |
| 2014 | Terrence P. Murphy 55.3% (46,884) | Justin R. Wagner 44.7% (37,875) | 10.6pts |
| 2012 | Gregory R. Ball 51.0% (64,991) | Justin R. Wagner 49.0% (62,325) | ⚡ 2.1pts |
| 2010 | Greg Ball 51.1% (50,705) | Michael B. Kaplowitz 48.9% (48,567) | ⚡ 2.2pts |
| 2008 | Vincent L. Leibell, III 100.0% (74,537) | Uncontested | — |
| 2006 | Vincent L. Leibell, III 55.9% (53,172) | Michael B. Kaplowitz 44.1% (41,939) | 11.8pts |
| 2004 | Vincent L. Leibell, III 62.6% (79,340) | Joseph A. D'Ambrosio 37.4% (47,341) | 25.3pts |
| 2002 | Vincent L. Leibell, III 92.3% (60,301) | James J. Hamilton 4.0% (2,622) | 88.3pts |
| 2000 | John J. Bonacic 94.6% (70,924) | Matthew T. Tierney 5.4% (4,064) | 89.2pts |
| 1998 | John J. Bonacic 50.6% (46,836) | Guy W. Chirico 38.3% (35,389) | 12.4pts |
| 1996 | Charles D. Cook 58.5% (64,509) | Stephen P. Ruelke 33.0% (36,405) | 25.5pts |
Primary Elections
| Year | Winner | Runner-up | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 (Democratic) | Peter B. Harckham 53.5% (11,647) | Robert T. Kesten 46.5% (10,119) | ⚡ 7.0pts |
| 2016 (Democratic) | Alison Boak 78.7% (4,344) | Andrew I. Falk 21.3% (1,179) | 57.3pts |
| 2014 (Republican) | Terrence P. Murphy 69.8% (4,566) | Bob Castelli 30.2% (1,976) | 39.6pts |
| 2014 (Green) | Terrence P. Murphy 53.8% (50) | Justin Wagner 30.1% (28) | 23.7pts |
| 2012 (Green) | Justin R. Wagner 65.9% (29) | Gregory R. Ball 18.2% (8) | 47.7pts |
| 2010 (Republican) | Greg Ball 61.1% (10,087) | Mary Beth Murphy 38.9% (6,425) | 22.2pts |
| 2010 (Conservative) | Greg Ball 65.7% (698) | Mary Beth Murphy 34.3% (364) | 31.5pts |
| 1998 (Republican) | John J. Bonacic 55.5% (10,429) | John J. Guerin 44.5% (8,359) | 11.0pts |
Source: NYS Board of Elections certified results. ⚡ = margin under 10 pts.
Vulnerability Index SD-40
Base lean: D+10
- Recently competitive (margin < 10pts)
- District redrawn after 2020 Census — limited same-boundary history
Scenario model: ±5pt national environment shift applied to district base lean (D+10). Base lean blends voter registration (40%) with recent contested general election margins (60%), using up to the last 4 general elections with margins under 40 points. Ratings: Safe D/R = 20+ pts, Likely = 10–19 pts, Lean = 4–9 pts, Toss-up = within 3 pts. Generic ballot from Silver Bulletin (Nate Silver), as of 5/20/2026 — see current figure on the district map. Not a prediction — reflects structural competitiveness under different cycle environments.
Top Co-Sponsors
District 40 Profile
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (2024). Voter registration: NYS Board of Elections (Nov. 2025).
Voter Registration
Campaign Finance (2022–2026)
Top Donors
Source: NYS Board of Elections via data.ny.gov. Itemized monetary contributions only. ↔ Bills = donor industry aligns with bill sponsorship focus area.
Data through 2026-03-28.
Lobbying Activity 2025
Top Lobbying Issues
Top Organizations Lobbying This Senator
Source: NY Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government via data.ny.gov. Counts reflect bi-monthly disclosure records filed with the Ethics Commission — not individual meetings. ★ Chair = lobbying issue overlaps with a committee this senator chairs. ↔ Overlap = matches committee membership or bill sponsorship focus.
Demographics
Commute Mode
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (2024). Race and ethnicity figures may not sum to 100% — Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity category that overlaps with racial groups.
Voting Record
Dissenting Votes by Topic
8 additional dissenting votes across other topics
From 1,443 recorded floor votes via OpenLeg API. Dissenting votes grouped by law section to reveal policy patterns.
Votes through 2026-02-10.
Floor Speeches: In Support (57) AI
Sponsor argued that No. 4 fuel oil is harmful to public health, particularly in high-asthma areas like Northern Manhattan and the Bronx, and that cleaner alternatives such as No. 2 fuel oil, biodiesel, and heat pumps are available, with some being more affordable or requiring no equipment changes.
Sponsor argued the bill would save ratepayers $1 billion annually and $58 billion over the life of the panels through lower wholesale costs and direct utility bill savings. Emphasized that distributed solar has been a success in New York, with the state already meeting the 6-gigawatt mark and on track to surpass 10 gigawatts. Noted the bill focuses on smaller projects (1-5 megawatts) on rooftops, warehouses, parking lots, and other locations subject to local zoning control, not large utility-scale projects on farmland.
The grid operates at only 50 percent efficiency, and this bill simply requires studying how to utilize new technologies already in use across the country to make the grid more efficient and cost-effective for ratepayers.
The sponsor emphasized that 870,000 workers in New York are estimated to be misclassified and that the bill includes due process protections. He noted the "knowingly misclassified" standard requires investigation and pattern-finding before enforcement, and that he met with last-mile courier representatives to address concerns.
Defended the $2.4 billion in Clean Energy Fund as accounted for and targeted to programs. Argued the budget takes a structural approach to energy affordability through PSC reforms and clean energy investments.
Floor Speeches: In Opposition (1) AI
Argued the CLCPA's net benefit exceeds $100 billion and that rising rates are driven by data farms, AI, and cryptocurrency infrastructure, not clean energy. Cited Texas as an example of successful renewable energy deployment.
Committee Hearing Engagement (13) AI
| Date | Committee | Engagement | Stance | Focus Areas | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-01-28 | FINANCE | high | supportive | Bond Act expenditure tracking federal funding freeze impacts cumulative impacts regulations harmful algal blooms Advanced Clean Trucks feasibility 30 by '30 conservation progress salt pollution in drinking water | Chair Harckham asked substantive questions about implementation details and timelines, showing concern about practical challenges while supporting environmental goals. He questioned whether industry concerns about ACT regulations were valid and sought clarification on regulatory processes. |
| 2025-01-28 | FINANCE | high | supportive | Conservation officer and forest ranger staffing On-site treatment of landfill leachate Reliable funding streams for water infrastructure Adirondack protection and land stewardship | Sen. Harckham asked detailed questions about recruitment challenges, mental health support for rangers, and fire training. He expressed support for environmental funding and requested testifiers provide written proposals to him and Assembly leadership. |
| 2024-01-24 | FINANCE | none | unclear | Present at hearing but no questions or engagement recorded in transcript excerpt. | |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | supportive | Renewable energy scaling vs. farmland preservation Financial supports for farmers Parks capital funding adequacy | Sen. Harckham asked substantive questions about balancing renewable energy expansion with farmland protection and whether $200 million in parks capital is sufficient for both restorative maintenance and transformation. He appeared supportive of both commissioners' approaches. |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | supportive | Pesticide-treated seeds ban Organic farming conversion support Certification office funding | Sen. Harckham expressed support for organic farming and questioned what budget support could help organizations like NOFA assist farmers in converting to organic practices. He pressed for specific funding amounts and advocated for early disclosure of budget requests. |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | skeptical | Environmental Protection Fund staffing and allocations Bond Act implementation and timeline Emerging contaminants remediation Solid waste and environmental justice funding Earth and dam replacements PFAS and contaminant remediation Waste management proposals and toxins in packaging Indian Point decommissioning and radiological discharges Environmental Facilities Corporation community assistance teams Forest Ranger staffing and academy plans Land preservation funding bottlenecks | Sen. Harckham, chair of Environmental Conservation, conducted a rapid-fire questioning session focused on budget implementation details and program effectiveness. He expressed skepticism about funding gaps, questioned the vagueness of emerging contaminants language, and pressed for details on waste management proposals, particularly regarding toxins in packaging. He also raised concerns about state authority over radiological discharges at Indian Point. |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | skeptical | Cap-and-invest revenue allocation Separation of powers Climate Action Fund structure Fossil fuel infrastructure expansion | Sen. Harckham raised pointed separation-of-powers concerns about cap-and-invest, noting lack of specificity on non-environmental-justice revenue allocation. Requested written details and expressed concern about legislature granting broad spending authority without guardrails. Also questioned fossil fuel infrastructure expansion in his district. |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | skeptical | Energy usage caps for residential consumers Renewable energy siting pipeline and backlog Indian Point decommissioning and tritiated water concerns | Sen. Harckham raised pointed questions about a budget line item regarding caps on residential energy usage, expressing concern that lack of information could lead to speculation. He sought clarification on whether this would be a pilot or statewide program. He also asked about renewable energy project backlogs and expressed concerns about Indian Point tritiated water potentially entering the Hudson River, signaling skepticism about federal regulatory adequacy. |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | moderate | supportive | Missing items from Governor's budget Climate Law implementation funding Clean Fuel Standard NY HEAT Act | Sen. Harckham conducted a rapid-fire round asking advocates what key items were missing from the Governor's budget, demonstrating engagement with environmental priorities and support for climate legislation. |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | skeptical | Governor's $60 million emerging contaminants plan PFAS contamination Funding adequacy and enforcement | Sen. Harckham asked all four panelists whether the Governor's $60 million plan for emerging contaminants was sufficient, signaling concern about the adequacy of proposed funding and enforcement mechanisms for PFAS and other contaminants. |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | supportive | Incentive structures for clean energy conversion Heat pump incentives and accessibility Energy storage technology | Sen. Harckham asked pointed questions about whether New York has a robust enough incentive structure to drive rapid conversion to clean energy, and later returned to emphasize the critical importance of energy storage technology, noting that 'without storage, the whole thing falls apart.' |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | high | supportive | Energy storage goals and 6 gigawatt target NYSERDA roadmap and Senator Parker's bill Legislative programs and member items EPR vs. alternative approaches Municipal cost savings from EPR | Sen. Harckham asked detailed questions about storage goals and expressed support for the NYSERDA roadmap. He challenged the National Waste & Recycling Association's alternative proposal, pointing out that five states have adopted EPR and questioning whether the PCR alternative would achieve the same municipal cost savings ($240 million cited). |
| 2023-02-14 | FINANCE | moderate | neutral | budget line items funding restoration | Sen. Harckham requested that testifiers provide detailed email summaries of specific budget items that were removed or moved in the Governor's proposal, indicating a focus on understanding what needs to be restored. |
Floor Amendments (1)
| Date | Bill | Description | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-05-29 | S5407 | Amendments to Calendar 1493, Senate Print 5407 | received |