Hudson River Radio dot com.
It beats listening to nothing.
My goodness, it's Frank being Frank.
Were the only way to be is Frank. Hello everyone, and welcome to being Frank. We're the only way to be is Frank. I'm your host, frankle Borno, and I'd like to thank you for joining us on what we like to call the Intelligent Conversation Podcast, where no conversations out of bounds and all points of view are welcome. Listeners are familiar with our routine. We record live to tape and I give you the date till you have some context and relevance. It is the second of February.
Ground all day. It is a very busy day in every sense of the word, and that's why we are here. Of all the draconian policies initiated by the Trump administration, perhaps none have proven to be more divisive than that of his mass deportation orders. The president and then did campaign with the promise of executing those orders, much to the approval of his base. However, none but his most ardent supporters could have envisioned the kind of chaos this
policy has created. Especially in Minnesota, families are being attacked and separated. Journalists are being arrested, Clashes between ordinary citizens and ICE agents are occurring daily, and perhaps most frightening of all, American citizens are being murdered in the streets by federal agents. It has also become painfully obvious that the President is also using these tactics to intimidate those he sees as his enemies, that being democratic states and cities.
All of those transgressions are forcing those within mister Trump's sites to take preventative, proactive measures. One of those states and counties making plans to meet the challenge. In New York and Rockland County, a group of Democratic larmens have proposed a Safety and Dignity for All Act that will be designed to limit cooperation with federal immigration agencies while
explicitly preserving cooperation for criminal investigations within the county. Of course, proposal is not without opposition, particularly from the GOP and Mike Lawler, who is in a dogfight to keep his New York seventeen congressional seat. That seat remains key in the national effort for either party to control the House. It's bound to create intelligent conversation. Well, at least it'll
be intelligent. Here on being Frank and joining me now are three of the Democratic warmakers who support the safety and Dignity for All act First up is Beth Davidson. She has been on being Frank once before. We welcome her back. She's a county legislator and a candidate running for mister Lawler's crucial House seat. Beth, welcome back. We appreciate We know you're very busy. You had to be day, so we appreciate it.
Thank you so much for having me.
Next up, doctor Dana Stilly is also a county legislator. She also have to be an educator. She is the vice president of student Services at Sunny RCC and she joins us for the first time here on being Frank. Welcome, Thank you again, another busy woman. Thank you for joining us.
Thank you Frank. It's great to be here.
And of course returning. He was here recently to talk about his senatorial New York State senatorial campaign. Is the mayor of Nayak and as I mentioned, he's a candidate for that Senate seat where his opponent will be Republican Bill Weber, who is opposing the Safety and Dignity for All that it's we're going to get into all of that in just a minute. Welcome back, Mayor Joe Rand.
Thank you, Frank.
Yeah, I really appreciate everyone being here. As I said, I know you're all very busy. I had a busy day, and that's why I want to get into it right away. You know, but before we get into the specifics, you know, I can't help but wonder how did we get here? In a broader sense, you know, I borrow a turn from from Hunter Thompson Fear and loathing? How did we get to this state of fear and loathing?
You know?
I write periodically in my own blog and sometimes in NIAC News and Views, and I write about my neighborhood. So it's kind of a working class, blue collar neighborhood. So it's very mixed, a lot of immigrant families here, most of them Latins. Latins love it. It's safe, it's friendly, it's happy, it's clean. So if you would, and maybe it's a rhetorical question, how did we get to the point where there's this hysteria that not only the bad
guys got to go, they all got to go. So again, we'll start there, and then we'll focus because I know that's kind of the point of all of this. How did we get here? And I'll open the conversation whoever we'd like to take it first.
I'm happy to jump in if that's okay. I think each have our own perspectives. But from my perspective, in the last election, I don't feel like Democrats addressed this issue in a way that people believed we were ready to really address it head on. When Doctor Stilly and I and let me take a positive because it is Black History Month and you may, I hope you know or everyone should know that doctor Stilly is the first African American woman elected to the county Legislature and now
the first to sit in leadership. She's our new deputy majority leader. So we're very excited about that. So happy Black History Month, doctor Stilly and everyone else.
Thank you for bringing that up. I appreciate that.
But when she and I were running for County Legislature, I knocked four thousand doors. I know she knocked close to as much, and a lot of people we're talking about immigration then a year before all of this, and you know, there was reasons for that. There was there have been plans exposed from the City to potentially bus
asylum seekers up to Rockland County. So it was front of mine for folks, but it really went to in general and economic anxiety that people were feeling, was my experience, and I feel as though Democrats didn't really in d C, didn't really address that in the twenty twenty four election.
And then in tandem with that was the fact that the Senate did pass the most bipartisan border safety bill ever proposed endorsed by the Border Patrol would have been, you know, finally the comprehensive immigration reform bill we've been waiting for for twenty five years and again passed by the Senate, but you know, declared doa in this House by Speaker Mike Johnson and you know, aid into Bett by Mike Lawler because they didn't want to give Donald
excuse me, Joe Biden a win right before the election and give Donald Trump a loss or you know, one less thing to run on. So that's technically how we got here. But obviously, you know, what Donald Trump has done since, and I'll let doctor Stilly take it from here, has really weaponized the issue really to the expense of our immigrant communities. As you as you so correctly indicate Frank right here in Rocklands.
Doctor Stilley, please take it from here.
When you first asked that question, I went somewhere else outside of politics, please, because I think my sense, and I would venture to guess that that might be the sense of many in the black community, is that this is all about some degree of hatred for those who are not white, for those who are of color, for those who are different, for those who are perceived as being poor and or lazy and or illegal.
Right.
And I as much as the current administration refers to President Obama, I think that there is a uh and inability for Trump to accept anything that Obama put in place, and to accept the fact that generally he's judged as a pretty successful president. And so when you think not only about immigration, in terms of what Trump has tried to do, he's tried to dismantle everything that has to
do with black history. He's tried to dismantle DEI because he thinks that black people are the primary beneficiaries, which is not true actually if you know the facts of that, right, So, I see it as something far deeper than just being solely about immigration.
Because it is wonder that's why you're all here to give us all of your wonderful perspectives. And next up, mayor rand your your perspective. Just how did we get here this? You know, the statue, the open arms that give us your how did we wind up from there to here? In your mind?
I think there's a couple of things to go on here. One of them is, you know, one of the responsibilities I think that we have as Democrats is that when we are in power, we have to govern well. We have to make good decisions, and we have to run government effectively or else we you know, because we're the party of government doing things, and so if we don't do things well, then I think it redounds to us much worse than it does Republicans.
Republicans are always like government doesn't work, and.
So when they're in government and it doesn't work, they're like, see, it doesn't work. But they're the ones in charge. We're in charge. We've got to make it work. And I think that God love them. But Joe Biden did not do a good job with the border.
Now, as Beth says, they tried to.
They had a good bill ready to go that would have fixed a lot of these problems, and then Trump killed it with because he wanted to run on the issue, not actually fix the issue, which he then did and unfortunately successfully. You know, Republicans are very good at finding
someone to blame for your problems. Your problems are not your fault, they're the fault of somebody else, and they will and in this case, it's immigrants, or it could be uh, you know, there were times when there's African Americans, there are times when it's trans kids, there are times when it's Latinos or you know, whoever is the person that they can throw the blame on to try to you know, maintain power is where it comes from, and
and and they'll do that. That's their game plan. And now it's it's you know, undocumented immigrants and in some cases even legal immigrants because Donald Trump has spoken out against legal immgrance and trying to he's trying to take away citizens citizenship from people who have who have earned citizenship. So it's really, you know, when you put it all that together, it's not about the legal status. It's about people that are different from us, and they're the ones
to blame for the problems that we have. Now, we do need to get We needed to get control of the border, and it's good that we did that. We do need to enforce our immigration laws, and it's good that we're doing that. I think that what a lot of people have reacted to is the fact that Trump really did represent that they were going to start with the worst. They're gonna start with the people have committed crimes, and the people who permitted crimes do deserve to get convicted and deported.
And the particularly the people who are violent.
And every time you bring this up, people say, well, what about this person who got killed by an immigrant or an llege, you know, an undocumented person, And that's horrible.
Those are horrible.
Stories, and our hearts go out to the families, and certainly we do not we're not standing with that person.
But that's who Trump is supposed to go after, and instead they've put in quotas.
And what they're doing is they're going after they're they're they're they're looking, they're they're taking the easy hang and fruit where they go to home depot, or they go to target, or they go to the back of restaurants to see what the bus boyson, or they go to construction sites to see who's working on the new homes that we need to get built in this country.
Yeah, those are easier pickups.
It's a lot harder to go after people have committed crimes because they hide out better. But that's not what Trump promised, and that's not what the American people wanted.
And that's why we've had the souring on.
This effort by the American people, is that the what what Trump promised, he hasn't done. And what Ice has done, particularly what we've seen in some of these we've all seen with their own eyes of Minnesota has really really concerned.
People and and and uh and.
Created this this sense of anxiety within the within our communities.
That brings us to today literally figuratively literally and interesting the term and and Beth, you and I discussed a little bit. I also discussed with Diane Sarator a little bit because I had put a promo out and the and the term sanctuary County was used, and that's it's almost a pejorative, and it's used as a cudgel as a weapon because more accurately, it's the Safety with Dignity Act. So first let's talk about what it is. What is the Safety with Dignity Act, then we'll talk about what
it is not. So let's let's go around again and we'll go in rotation. I guess it's as fair as any other way. Best take it first there, please, if you will, sure.
And it's very appropriate for all of us to talk about this because Governor Hochel did propose her own framework to address this issue on Friday, and as we were so excited that Joe Rand is running for State Senate. So the Safety and Dignity for All Acts and that name is intentional because what we've seen in the last few weeks is that no longer are immigrants the only targets of ICE and this you know, administration in its
determination to stomp out this issue. And so we've seen now you know, two tragically civilians killed in Minnesota over the weekend. If you haven't seen the footage, it's very disturbing of a woman being her car being stopped and masked gunman jumping out of the car and drawn and walking in front of her car again, which was you know, the issue with Renana cole Good because she was deemed
to be an agitator. So they're going after, you know, all sorts of folks, and so we wanted to make sure that this law includes would cover that as well, and so it's still being worked on, but in its current form, based on the Westchester law that's been on the book since twenty eighteen.
I to mention this is not rand new well, no thinking no.
And I'll also note that, as Paul Cleary, our chair, did this morning, that what Westchester is neither a crime ridden healthscape. It is the sixth safest county in the entire country. Rockland's the third, but we're smaller and slightly different demographics, but Westchester's number six, and it's been working well there. What it does is make sure that no county employees or resources are used to comply with civil
immigration matters. And so it doesn't preclude folks the Rockland County sheriff or any other county employee from providing information when there's a judicial warrant or criminal ongoing criminal active criminal investigation. And it you know, fully complies with federal law and uh, you know, complies with judicial warrants, and so it just is a way to ensure that again we're not using the county tax paradigm to have masked thugs go after our neighbors, be they immigrants or not.
Doctor Stilly, what can you add please?
I think I would add that it protects protects confidential and non public information collected by County services personnel right to be delivered to any any ICE agent. And I think that's an important piece when you think about people just feeling safe.
You know, I'm going to if if I just could jump, well, forgive me, I'll just interrupt for one second, because eventually I'm going to read a part of the statement from law enforcement within the county and I want you to address that as well. And you know what's coming, but yes, we will address that. Forgive me for interrupting.
Please come, that's okay, that's okay. And I think probably the best way that that makes sense to everyone is suppose I had some county business and I were receiving services on some level right and all of a sudden, with the potential of ICE waiting outside of the County building for me to come out to begin to harass me or ask me questions or and or being concerned about the fact that any county employee may share my
status with an ICE agent. So that's the other important piece that I think needs to be expressed here.
Mayor and some of the highlights and things that you see in this act.
Yeah, I think the really important point they've referenced it. But just to emphasize the fact that this is about civil enforcement of immigration law, not criminal enforcement of criminal laws. So it doesn't affect it doesn't have anything to do with the local police forces in Orangetown and Clarkstown. They're not even covered by this. They they continue to do whatever they've been doing.
It also doesn't I mean, honestly, it doesn't.
Prevent Ice from coming to Rockland County and doing its job. It would be nice if they actually did the job they're supposed to do and not the job that they've been doing in Minnesota. But they can continue to enforce immigration laws. It doesn't say that we don't enforce immigration laws. It doesn't say that we're going to we're gonna you know, people think sanctuary and they think the way that you know, if you go to a Catholic church and you go inside,
they won't let you in. That's not what the county is doing. Let me give you an example of what this law is designed to do. Because you've got to remember what we're seeing right now in Minnesota and what we've seen other places where ice has gone.
On, it's kind of its rampage, is that it chills everybody.
It's not just undocumented immigrants who feel the chill it's there. It's it's documented immigrants who are properly documented who have been detained and have been in times removed from Minnesota and taken away and the ultimately they still some of them have been detained for weeks. But they've had citizens who get detained because they're on papers with them, and
then they get returned. You know, I remember the story of someone getting brought down to Texas and they said, okay, you are, says, and that's great, you can go home now. Then the person's in Texas without their wallet, without their phone.
What are they supposed to do?
So it affects everybody, not just the people who but you know, give you a let me give you a crystal clear example of how this really does play havoc with with what's going on in our in our county. Let's say there's a woman and let's say that she's documented, she's she's a legal immigrant in this country, and she's abused by her her partner. She's a victim survivor of
domestic violence. The Center for Safety and Change exists to help people like that here in Rockham County, and I know that organization very well.
My wife was the.
Chair of the board, is still on the board there. She was chaired for six years, so I know the organization really well. They provide services to her. Is she still going to go to the Center for Safety and Change if that information about her is going to be communicated to from the county because the center has to share the information with the county by virtue of the fact that they get funded in part by the county.
Is that information then going to be shared with ICE, who then might pay her a visit to check on immigration stass But also, you know, think about that person if she might be documented correctly, but she might be living with somebody who might be undocumented or is also documented, but you know, has other issues.
She may know people in the community.
She doesn't want ICE to come around because she's made a complaint and start to investigate her and her family. And that means she lives with an abuser without getting help that she needs and deserves from the Center for Safety and Change.
And that sort of dynamic plays out.
With all of the non all the nonprofits. I spoke with Dian with people, that's the problem, yes, practical problem with all this. I'm sorry, don't talk over you, fran.
No, no, no, please, Joe. It's just it's it's emotional and we all feel it, you know it direct, We all know people that this effects. As I said, I spoke with the uh uh, the CEO of People of People, Diane Seratory, who's been on a program a number of times, and explain that very thing we live on trust people
trust us. We will lose that trust. Okay. Now, of course you have to expect some opposition, and you knew where it would be coming from the GOP, the Republicans led by Michael Lawler and Bill Weber, and they had a it was kind of a dueling press conference thing going on this morning. I know Bethew ran one for information with the Safety with Dignity for All Act and Lawler had his own with a group of law enforcement people. They are the Sheriff's Association, the Police Chiefs Association, etc.
And they put out a statement. If you'll allow me, I'd like to read a few paragraphs from it. And get your thoughts on it, because I think it's important to address because I think people have in their mind even though you have started to address it already, you've made directly that this is going to infringe on proper law enforcement. So let me read what they said and
get your comments if you will. Proposed legislation, if enacted, risks disrupting effective and long established partnerships that support officer safety and the successful resolution of complex incidents that often cross municipal and jurisdictional boundaries. Womening lawful cooperation between agencies may result in unintended consequences that negatively impact public safety throughout Rockland County. Together, we remain committed to constitutional policing, professionalism,
and the fair and respectful treatment of all individuals. We believe that public safety policies should be informed by the experience and expertise of local law enforcement professionals and should preserve the tools necessary to protect the communities we serve.
We stand united in our willingness to engage in constructive dialogue with elected officials and community leaders to ensure that any legislative action strengthens public safety, preserves effective partnerships, and allows law enforcement in Rockland County to continue serving our residents in a safe, responsible and effective manner. Okay, sounds entirely reasonable. Now break it down for US Legislator Davidson, if you would begin, please.
Well, certainly the last three paragraphs of what you said. I don't disagree with any of it. I'm guessing the paragraphs. I did see it briefly that this morning. Look, we fully intend to cooperate with law enforcement as we continue to draft and iterate this bill, which, as I've noted, is very much still a work in progress. This morning, I kicked off our press conference by stressing how much I value our partners in law enforcement, what a great
job they do keeping Rockland County safe. As I said, it's the third safest county in the country, and that if what went down for the woman in Saint Pete, Minnesota over the weekend happened to me, Luthalca would be my first call, and I know that he would do the right thing for anyone in our county, not just me, but anyone who found themselves in that predicament. And he takes very seriously his role in safeguarding county residents from ice overreach because he and I've spoken about it, and
I really appreciate that in him. And so you know, what I would just go back to is what we said that this policy will be drafted with that with their input, because we do want to make sure we understand any impediments the law may have on them doing their job. We believe it does not and certainly any police chiefs of the other agencies. Is only applies to the sheriff, doesn't apply to any municipal police police departments, any village police departments, state police, none of the above.
It only applies to county employees. So I just want to make that really clear. And then it doesn't apply to any criminal matters of any kind. It's civil immigration status. And I would just point back to what Joe just went through that it's also important to take into account the lived experiences of folks in our county and the nonprofits in particular, but also schools. We've heard from hospitals, clinics, others who who you feel that their services are either
not being availed because people are nervous. You know, we've seen a ten percent every single day absenteeism rate in the Easter Post school district and that's you know, in large part of attributed to fear of vice activities. And another point that Brooke molloy made this morning to build off of what Joe was saying, is that there's risk exposure for the nonprofits if somebody's confidential information is shared and that results in a terrible outcome the likes of
which we've seen in Minneapolis around the country. And so we take all of that very seriously. And while we certainly plan to engage law enforcement as we continue to revise and work on this bill, it's important to take other matters into consideration. That's our job as county legislators is to consider everyone that we serve, and that's what we're trying to do.
Doctor Stilly, I think it's really important to change the narrative and stress that in no way were we intending to quickly rush through.
This legislation. From the very on set, we laid out our plan, made the list of who we knew that we needed to engage in, we determined who would be the point person for the various departments to engage in, and we purposefully elongated the proposed date for the public hearing. Right, we didn't say we're doing it this week, We're doing it next week because we knew that there were many conversations and we wanted to work hard and ensure that everyone was on the same page and really had an
understanding of the goal of the bill. And so moving forward, what plan, what we're planning to do tomorrow, I think it's been all over the place is we were planning to set the date for the public hearing tomorrow. And I'm sure that at the legislative meeting which begins at seven, there will be a lot of public comment, which quite frankly, we welcome. We want to hear what people are thinking.
We want to understand their opposition, right. We want to be able to address everyone's concerns and not just rush to any kind of judgment about that. And then once if the decision is made to set a public hearing, then we will move forward continuing those conversations with law enforcement and with the county executive and everyone else who needs to be fully knowledgeable and fully aware of how we plan to move forward. And so let's stop the this is we're doing this in a hurry. We are not.
We're thoughtful legislators, right who want to be sure that the public safety of everyone is taken care of, and that we hear from from everyone. So I really think it's important just to change that. There's no rush to judgment here. We're working hard.
Yeah, I'm going to get to Mayor Rand in just a second. But but what I might want to say here is it seemed to me that the opposition seemed to rush to judgments and condemning it quite quickly. Uh uh, that again, that was the impression that immediate this is awful. It seems to me you guys are open to talk and knowing more, learning more, presenting your position as well. Where the Republicans immediate Now this is bad. This is
just bad. It can only be bad. Therefore it will be immediately rejected.
So, in frank as usual, the Republicans aren't necessarily interested in finding a solution to a problem. They're interested in creating an issue for themselves. You know, just look at just just let's just read between the lines here. Where
did this story break. Was there a public announcement by the Democrats that they were considering doing legislation like this, No, there was a there was a story planted in the New York Post, which is not a publication that is particularly aligned with Democrats, and the story put out that they're rushing through this legislation to do all these terrible things. Well, the fact is this legislation is that it's very infancy
that people don't necessarily understand. There is not going to be anything passed on Tuesday, other than maybe a resolution to call for a future public hearing that will then in the meantime there will be a deliberative and drafting process to get legislation on the table.
That then can be voted on it.
Even then there'll probably be future proceedings involving it.
This is not something that's getting rushed in any way. And so that's the first thing.
The second thing is I want to make clear again I want to reiterate with what Dana and Beth said. You know, I have enormous overriding respectful law enforcement. I've worked with them as mayor. I have nothing but respect for them in the difficult job they do. I stand with them, and I understand how they are always going to be leery of this sort of thing, and they are are They're going to stand in solidarity with their colleagues in uniform, and I get that that is understandable
how they approach these things. I have said that I don't believe what Ice has done in what we've seen in Minnesota is quote unquote law enforcement, because what I see it is I see it as a bunch of people who were amassed and unidentified, and they're doing things that I've never seen police do, not just in terms of the shootings, but just in the way that they've treated people, just in the way they're behaving themselves and conducting themselves and the disrespect they have for the public.
I don't think that they're acting like the way the way my experience with law enforcement has been where I've always found on law enforcement professionals to be polite and constructive and not escalating situations the way we see in Minnesota. But the last time I make them, I want to make the point about that statement from the different police organizations. I thought it was a very constructive statement. I thought it was very sober minded. I thought that they made
the point. But if you read what they say is they don't say anything that we don't oppose this. They're not striking, they're not saying this can't possibly pass. What they're saying is we want to engage in a constructive dialogue. They're saying that the proposed legislation risks disrupting effective law enforcement and that law limiting. You know, there has to be cooperation, and there should be public safety policy should be informed by the experience and expertise of local law
enforcement professionals. All of that is true, and that's exactly what's.
Going to happen.
And I hope that they are able to work out legislation that's that's going to be acceptable to everybody that will do what we're trying to do. And I just want to again say this legislation was passed eight years ago in Westchester and has worked effectively at accomplishing its objectives. But again, I respect law enforcement. I expect, I really respect the way they engaged in this that their their statement was very constructive in trying to approach and have
a dialogue about what's trying to be accomplished. Right, I think they understand what the legislation is trying to do, and I think they're they're explaining what the issues might be from their perspective, which is exactly what I would expect from them.
Well, very very well taken. Yeah, thank you, doctor s agree. Yeah, points very very well taken.
Everyone connect piggyback on one thing Joe said was that you know about it being on the books in Westchester for song and not only that, but this this whole law as you know, as suppose it, you know, using the term sanctuary law. Sole issue was adjudicated again during Ken Jenkins's campaign last year for County executive, and his Republican opponent, Christine Sculty, tried to make all the same
arguments that's a sanctuary county and YadA, YadA. If you look on Trump's list of sanctuary counties and he does have one, Westchester is not on there.
So it's an out and out. Lie, lie, lie, lie.
What have we come to expect from this Republican party, especially when they know they're on the wrong side of a deeply unpopular issue, is they lie? And Ken Jenkins won that race with I think seventy six percent of the vote, so you know it obviously didn't work.
Perfect segue to my next question points and going to get a little personal if you will here hear me out. I'm concerned with personal attacks, both physically and emotionally online, and I'm not exactly shy in my social media presence and so I hear it as well. So I can only imagine what you guys go through. And I know, Joe, you and I have had discussions where you've actually had to turn off both of us being big believers in the First Amendment. I don't care. You don't have to
agree with me. You can viscerally disagree with me, but at some point it just gets ugly. And doctor Stilly, of course, and as an educator and part of Rockley Community College, you have a valid point here as well. Guys talk a little bit about that are how are you dealing with it? And what can we do to deal with it? Kick it off first, Beth, and then Joe you pick it up, and Dana and you put some in as well too.
Please first, I'm a i'm a want to be factual, So sorry, Ken Jenkins won sixty four percent of the vote to Sculties thirty six percent, So.
I just want to correct that significant.
I mean, I mean, so the when you get into the political arena, you sort of know at this point that this is what's coming. And when doctor Stilly and I ran for county legislature, we were attacked by even the state Republican Party and paid media that had racist overtones, you know, classiest overtones, anti poverty, and so it's something that we're used to at this point. And you know,
you just got a my family. The deal we made when I announcement for Congress is that you're not allowed to read the comments.
And so I've really that.
Probably pretty healthy. I've read so believe we don't some of only in fairness, it's true, but it's the fact that people get so ugly about it. Again, I don't certainly, and I'm sure you don't mind, as it has been put forward to the whole idea of dialogue, discourse, etceter. Not to agree all the time, but it gets ugly.
And we're here to represent everybody, and this law is intended to protect everyone, whether it's people who voted for us or not, people who agree with us or not. It's our job to protect all Rockland residents. And I just stand firm in my belief that this is the right thing to do and that we're on the right side of history. And Facebook is not real life. When we go out and we're talking to folks, we know that this is something that they want us to do.
You know, another response in you know that this has been rushed to. People have been asking us what the county can do about this for months, and it was really when these two horrific murders happened that we knew that this was our moment to not stand by one more day and say that we were okay with the threat of ice coming into our communities and disappearing our neighbors, you know, beating up, pepper spraying our are anyone who protests.
I'm sure you've seen the attacks, you know, on school when parents were picking up their kids, they were trying to pick up somebody and they were Ice was pepper spring parents. These are not well trained people. Another distinction I would draw between law enforcement and Clarkstown, which I've been to their graduation ceremonies. They you know, study and train and work really hard to become police detective police officers, you know, ICE agents only need for seven days of
training to become a nice agent. They are just not comparable to me. And so it's, uh, you just just going back to original question. It's about just being sure that you're right and going ahead and knowing that the internet's not real life.
Jelse, a few your thoughts.
Yeah.
I just actually wrote something literally an hour ago that I posted on Facebook about the level of discourse we have in our politics today. And it's just it's it's so non constructive. And I'll make I'll say very plainly, I have been I've had a good relationship with Bill Webber, my opponent that our State Center. I think he's a good man of good faith, who's who's working to as
he sees it, to make Rockland better. But I don't understand, you know, I don't understand how he can look at I wrote two very thoughtful and discoursive pieces about where I stood on this issue, and then he replies with your sanctuary, Joe.
And you hate law enforcement. And it's just it's just like I think it's beneath all of us. I think it's I think it's beneath us.
And then you know, you go on these Facebook, these toxic Facebook pages where there's these are not all these keyboard cowards behind uh you know, anonymous of just their masks, just like the Ice people are a mass and they hide behind their masks and they say things that they would never be able to say in person.
And it's just it's I don't even.
Engage with them, because why am I going to engage with someone who doesn't even.
Exist in the real world.
And you know, now I would love to have a more thoughtful dialogue with Center Weber.
I think that would be very good. You know.
I know we're not going to get back to the Lincoln Douglas debates, but at least we can have a debate that is of a higher level than your sanctuary.
Joe. Maybe you could do it here. We'll put it out now. You're welcome to the airtime, the two of you. You know, you're welcome here to be Frank on being Frank. That's kind of the point of intelligent conversation. And of course I had to get a plug in.
But with all seriousness, I mean, that's what it really is about, and we're speaking of you know, controversy will take care of itself. This is about information and presenting information in a way that people can understand. And we appreciate comments. I will put this out on face but you mentioned for what it's worth social media to at least get some comments and reply in a reasonable way to all reasonable comments. So yes, I just want to
keep moving on to a doctor still your thoughts. Also, again, as an educator, you have a valid point of view here as well. And also you ran for office as well too, though you're not currently so you've had that experience.
Yes, I have had that experience and had to go through, you know, the methodology of learning not to respond ever, or most of the time never on Facebook. For me, I usually will say, you know, I'd love to talk to you about this or whatever, but I won't engage in any back and forth on Facebook. But I can say that some of what I read, and it's funny because Beth said that it's not real. I wish that I believe that some of the hate that some folks
are spewing on Facebook wasn't real. But when I think about education and what we're teaching our children, that's when it really becomes a concern because, as has previously been stated, we have to learn how to engage in discourse that moves us forward, and what we're seeing now quite often in the political arena, it just is not that.
It's just not that, and this is going to bed to therapy. Can I just say that, Dana, and I don't dismiss anything of what you're saying. I guess I just mean that, like, if you looked at Facebook, you think that everyone is opposed to this, and or that everyone was supposed to us running for legislator and we were going to lose in a landslide. That's what I meant that it doesn't they're the loudest voices in the room.
Yes, but I'm glad that you said that, because you reminded me that even as I sit here, you guys may have heard this opining. I'm sorry, but I have constituents who are emailing saying, please support this bill, Please support this bill. And they're not just saying that in one sentence, they are outlining why they believe that it's important for us to move this forward. So that's a pleasant reminder that, yeah, it's not a loud noise, negative energy.
People believe in what we're doing and what we are trying to do.
I've always said before the break, I just said, I've always thought that Facebook what it does is amplify whatever affect you have. So if you're happy, you look delighted. If you're sad, you look depressed. If you're angry or irritated, you look like you're so so angry and and so I think that's that's always going to be a problem. That's just the way it is. We we we we we see that all the time. So, you know, I
post a picture of me with my kids. It's the one picture that they actually smiled in, you know, when we're at the beach and they weren't fighting with each other.
And then everyone's like, oh, he's such a good life living at the beach with his kids, and they don't.
Know that, like there were three hours of fighting that preceded that. And the same thing is, if I post something that you know, I'm a little bit irritated with, it might appear that angry than I am, and I try to be careful of that. I try to be you know, but I do think people appreciate. I mean, I posted on a Facebook page which doesn't get much engagement.
I've posted two long, I mean a thousand words each pieces about what I think about the whole ice problem, and they've each gone over like two hundred and fifty likes and engagements. And that's a lot for a page that I only have three thousand followers, and they're being shared, and then you know, Bill whatever posts something about me being Shanetruary Joe, and he gets like twelve likes. Like I think that people are ready for actual substantive discourse
and they're dying for it. They're they're so hungry for somebody like Dana, like Beth, and I hope, like me that is actually engaging on these issues in a constructive way and digging into them and getting their hands dirty and not just thrown out dumb slogans.
You know, I think it's important to say that it was just an anti Ice Nyak High School organized rally in town and Nayak and I knew Joe. We were all there, including me, and I did some videotaping and I did a live feet of it. And I have to say, with all honesty, and there were some trolls out there, and they literally are. If you sometimes look at the pages, there's no information and one or two photos.
They're just making trouble for the sake of making trouble. Now, with that said, you did have a feeling that the tide was turning just from the amount of comments. I got hundreds and hundreds of comments, most of them the overwhelming amount positive, and the people driving by asking to honk their horns in support of the students was overwhelming, So at least personally, I've been a feeling that maybe the tide is really turning here with your efforts included,
this has been just wonderful coach, intelligent conversation. What we're all about here, guys are going to take a quick break, come back, finish up with some closing thoughts and what the future might bring. So don't go anywhere, and of course our audience, this has been absolutely terrific. This is Being Frank. We're the only way to be is Frank. It's truly in intelligent conversation. I'm your host, Frank Lobono. Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back after these brief commercial messages.
Hudson Riverradio dot.
Com, Hudson River Radio dot com. This is Hudson River Radio dot com.
This is Hudson River Radio dot com.
Welcome back to Being Frank, the Intelligent Conversation podcast. Thanks for sticking with us. I'm your host, Frank Lebono and as always our engineer as the mailman, mister Neil Richter. We bring our audience a fresh topic every week and we stream from Hudson River Radio, located and beautiful and historic Stony Point, New York. But remember, you can catch Being Frank anywhere you get your favorite podcasts like Apple, Spotify,
iHeartRadio and all the others. And because every Being Frank is archived, you can listen to any of our programs anytime you like. You can find a link to Being Frank on the Hudson River Radio Facebook page or at our website, Hudson Riverradio dot com. Just click and you're there. I just want to remind you that if you enjoy this program, you might enjoy some of my writing as well. I have my own blog and you can check it out.
I write virtually every week at ww dot talkdash Frank dot logspot dot com, and Molsto can be found on medium dot com. And I also write every Friday and opinion column for Nyaknews and Views. And we're back with some wonderful, intelligent conversation with three Democrats who have put forth the Safety and Dignity for All Act proposal. And it's important that we make that clear at this point.
It is not legislation, is just a proposal. And we have a county legislator who also happens to be running for Congress, Beth Davidson along with doctor Dana Stilly, who is an educator, the first black woman elected to the Rockland County Legislator legislature, excuse me, and NYAK Mayor Joe Rand who also happens to be running for political office as a Democrat for a New York State Senate against
Bill Weber. Welcome back, everyone, and again I want to thank you for your wonderful conversation in the first part of our program, and I'd like to continue. You know one of the things and guys, you know and doctor Still you've run a campaign, so you understand this, and Joe you're actively camp painting as your Beth. Money in politics, money is reality. You need to buy ads, time, space, et cetera. But how much money is enough money? I mean,
we can see it. I mean Mike Lawler, Beth, your opponent, who seems to be the darling of the GOP. Every other minute he seems to be on CNN and the Republican Party is pouring. But people have to realize that tons of money into his campaign so he can buy these spots to get his word out over anyone else's. So we need to talk about how do we get a leash on that. What can we do to understand that, yes, there needs to be some money in politics, but money
shouldn't rule the day. Your thoughts. Let's start with Beth Well.
I'm not to put my friend Joe Ran on the hot seat, but he is running for state office, and there is partial public financing of state wide elections in New York states, so it would help if we didn't have to raise it all ourselves. But if there were some kind of matching program. There's thoughts about there, you know, shortening the fundraising period. I'm not you know, I'm not sure without completely taking out dark money, if that would
be helpful or harmful. I'm always like a think three steps ahead kind of person, but certainly it's such a long and drawn out process and takes so much time, and you know, leaves everyone wondering who you really answer to at the end of the day when you've raised the last time. This this congression race cost all in with all everyone who pitched in money, both candidates, outside groups,
forty two million dollars, and it's projected this year. Mike Laller himself said it a fundraiser with Ted Cruz that he believed this time, it would be about sixty million. So you know, when you think about, you know, how many world problems you could solve with that kind of money.
It's really depressing, chillous if Europe.
Yeah, it's not done like this anywhere else in the world, this kind of reliance on money.
It's just it's a unique factor. It's a unique part.
Of elections in the United States, and it's unfortunate.
And you know it.
What I think people don't necessarily realize is how much both candidates and donors.
The people who contribute, really don't like the system. I've been on both sides.
I've been someone that has been asked for money for candidates, and I've been someone who's gone and asked people for money for candidates.
And I don't like either part of it.
From the perspective that, you know, I would love for there to be you know, as someone who is given to candidates, I don't you know, I would rather they get the money from some sort of public financing rather than relying on me.
I don't have I have never felt this idea that.
Somehow, you know, because I gave money to a candidate, that I have some special infants out of the candidate.
I've never felt like I had that.
I've never gone and tried to get favors from people because I gave them some money for their candidacy, and I've never never dream of having it the other way as a candidate, someone give me money. It's not about the fact that that you know, there's there's undue influence.
It's about the fact that the amount of distraction that it is for candidates to have to raise this money, the amount of distraction and money that could otherwise be donated to the Center for Safety and Change where people to people or Rock and Pride goes to you know, candidates like me, to put it into our campaigns.
I would.
I wish there was a better system of doing this. We should really be working toward it. I think that the Democrats have tried. It's the Republicans who have generally stopped it because they like the influence of money in campaigns. I do appreciate the New York State does have some fun you know, some public money that goes in based on how much you raise from individuals on small donations.
That's a good start for that. I think it's good.
It does encourage people like me to go out and try to get more donations from small donations from lots of people in Rock and County, and proud the fact that we about two hundred or so donations in the first month of the campaign of people qualified donations under under two hundred and fifty dollars from people that lived in the district. And that's what that's what you need to do. And so I appreciate that system at least doing that. But boy, it's not the influence of money.
It's the amount of energy that goes into fundraising that I think is really the problem.
Great point, Doctor Stilley, your thoughts.
I also wonder if the idea of having to raise millions of dollars keeps good candidates from not investing in the idea of running for public office. Right. And I can remember back when I first thought about running, it was like, oh, I have to raise money, and granted to have a successful legislator or campaign did not require what one might think is not an exorbitant amount of money. But to Joe's point, it still requires some energy. Right.
But I'm just and the bigger that number gets and grows, I think it is prohibited to those who might really want to run for public office and just don't see them having that skill set, or having those deep relationships, or really, quite frankly, having to know how it's hard to ask for money sometimes.
One last question, guys, I've got about five or six minutes left, so if we can, and it's it's kind of a broad topic, it's to handle in a few minutes. But I find myself asking this question an awful lot lately, especially to political candidates and people in government. What's going on with voter apathy? The percentage of voting in this country, even for big elections is pitiful. For local elections, it's even worse. If you can briefly, how do we fix that?
And again let's go around at beginning with Beth, how do we fix that?
Well, I think that.
Voters need to believe in something and need to understand that their vote makes a difference. I mean, we've seen, we've seen elections, as you know, well here in Rockland County come down to a handful of votes, so every vote really does make a difference. That just happened again this year. It happened on a couple of races over in Westchester, especially in those off year elections where there's
even lower turnout the local races. I'm really excited that for the first time this year local a number of local elections will be held in the even year this year along with our you know, congressional and state races, and so I'm really hoping that boosts turnout for the local candidates. But it's it's a general problem. It's both how we whether or not we inspire people to get out an exercise their constitutional right, make sure that they
actually do it. So that's all the door knocking we do and the phone calls and make sure that we're competing for every vote, and you know, mobilizing folks to turn out and then making sure that they think that their vote was worthwhile by actually delivering what we promise.
Joseph, I know you were on recently and I think Hey, asked you that question at the same time at that time. But what can we do to increase voter participation?
I think what what we just heard is exactly right.
You know.
I think people come out when they're inspired by a candidate that they want to support, you know, or that they are really motivated to vote against somebody.
You know, That's what either of those things can actually do it both ways.
And and you know, we just saw it down in Texas a special election for the state Senate where a Republican it's a Republican seat that Trump won by seventeen points and the Democrat won it by like fifteen points, huge tund It was a big turnout and a big turnaround that that I think.
Let's turn out as key within that, I'm sorry to me to interrupt, but within that turnout, we've got to get people out.
Yeah, and I think that we're in a position right now looking at what's going on right now. It's it's unfortunate that you sometimes you lose an election and then people get very excited to vote in the next election, Like you have to almost have to lose the election to get people excited for the next one. But I've sensed from talking to people just an enormous amount of pent up enthusiasm among Democrats for the elections coming up this year.
People are motivated.
We've had, you know, a lot of reaction, positive reaction, a lot of people showing up at events, a lot of people commenting and volunteering and whatnot and donating. I think it's going to be you know what what can we do to make it? But we gotta, we gotta, we gotta govern well. We have to do all good things. We have to we have to come up with the good policies. We have to get good candidates, we have
to inspire people. And I think part of it is also just running campaigns that are based on positive messaging rather than dumb, you know, slogans against the other side.
We hear you, Joe, doctor stilly quick? Can you add?
I think I would only add something that you know sounds pretty simple, but in reality it is not. And that's connect the dots. And I know that when Beth and I are running for the legislature, we really worked hard to be sure to do that, meaning we didn't want to have a we didn't want to run on a crazy slogan without folks understanding that in our capacity and as legislators, we would have the ability to do
something about X, Y, Z. Right. And so if you're concerned about sidewalks, then yes, you want to vote for your county legislator legislator, but if you're concerned about zoning, then be sure that you are voting for whoever sits on your municipal board. Right. So it's really making it very very clear what the roles are for those who are running and what they can accomplish that relates to everyone's everyday life. And I think that's a big motivation.
And if I can, yeah, I could piggyback for thirty seconds on that, I will say that, you know, we did boost turnout by twenty percent the year that we ran for kind of legislature over the previous twenty twenty one, the previous off year election, and that even had a count executive race and ours did not. And so and I think that the reason we did that is because our real deal for Rocklands did speak to issues that people cared about in that moment, you know, Vivaldi had
just happened. People were furious about that. So we part of our real deal was a common sense gun safety proposal that we could pass at the county level, and that we did pass at the county level about eight months after being sworn in. You know, folks were really
angry about Roe versus Wade being overturned. So we you know, looked for something we could called planned parent and they said, we could you propose a buffer bill that you know, would protect folks going to reproductive healthcare facilities from intimidation. So that was part of our real deal for Rockland. Obviously, transit and transportation and lack thereof here in Rockland County is always a huge issue. So it ran on advocating for an elimination of the payroll attack and other ways
we could address our transit problems here. And what am I forgetting? Oh, climate action and making sure that Rockland County finally had a climate action plan because people are always and should be very concerned about climate change and so and that's already also been kicked into gear as we've approved funding and staffed up a Climate Smart Communities Task Force to start getting us a climate action plan in motion and along with some of the grant money
that's available to counties that adopt green initiatives. You if you talk to people about what they care about.
So what in your mind, what is the key issue, the one key issue in your race issue?
I mean right now, certainly the overreach of the Trump administration in so many areas of our lives is and putting a check on that administration by reminding folks that article won in the Constitution is not the president, it's the Congress, and that was by design to make sure that the voice of the people leads the way in policy making and not you know, one single person in
this case, Donald Trump. That having been said, you know, similar to the New York City mayorals race that we just saw, everyone has been talking to me since the day I got into the race.
You know that my top five issues have been.
Affordability, affordability, affordability, affordability, and affordability. It is too expensive to live here in the Hudson Valley and that is driving folks out. We need to bring down the hot cost of housing, of childcare, of healthcare, home heating. People are getting exorbitant energy bills right now, utility bills, and so pushing pushing back against that and trying to at a time when Trump is you know, shutting down some me clean energy projects around New York State and around
the country. But that all that all sort of rolls up to the same issue, which is affordability and making sure that people can actually afford to stay and live here in the Hudson Valley and enjoy the buy a home and enjoy the wonderful life that I've certainly had living here in Rockland.
County may Rand, same question for you. You have single issue, what's the most important issue in your race?
I think the most important issue besides affordable affordability is the overwriting issue for every Democrat running in twenty twenty six. But as part of that, it's it's the issue of that we need a cenator that's going to bring money back from Bobonnie to the district, and right now we don't.
Bill Weber's very good at printing up big novelty checks that he brings around and stands behind, but they're all checks that were that have money that was generated by Democratic majority and that he you know, either didn't vote for or may have voted for, but he didn't carry the day.
He didn't get it.
Or that are just like literally some of them are just there's a formula, and Rocklin County gets a certain amount of that money because every county gets a certain amount of money, and so we get it, but but he didn't get it, and we need someone who's entrepreneurial, who is someone who can be persuasive and can go out there and get money for the district. I got six million dollars in grants, more than six million dollars in grants to NIAC in two years.
That are all grants that are discretionary.
Not nia got, you know, chips money though that every village in town in the state gets, not like that.
I'm talking about discretionary grants that we.
Had to go up against other municipalities to get and we got because I'm good at going getting money for my constituents, which is what I'll do a center.
Right quickly, Joe, if people wanted to get involved of give money, get involved in your campaign websites. How can they find out more about Joe Ran jorran dot com.
That's its simple as possible. Go to jorran dot com. If you want to volunteer, you want to donate, and I'd love for you to do both or either.
Okay, that's the same for you.
That's Davidson four Congress dot com.
Fo R terrific doctor Danas Stilly. If people wanted to get and you had mentioned people are emailing you, if they want to give you in voice to hear this podcast and give you your opinions, how can they get to you.
I'll give them an easy one. Dana G. Stilly at gmail dot com.
Guys, this has been absolutely terrific. You know, I just love when I learned in podcasts, and I learned an awful lot today. This is just terrific. And I know how busy you are. You know they can't see us, but you know, it's a little tired. It's been a long day and it's get it's going to get a longer two guys, so I wish you all the best of luck. This has truly been intelligent conversation Doctor Dana Stilly,
Mayor Joe Rand and Legislator Beth Davidson. We really appreciate you guys having us, oh my pleasure, and of course we offer special thanks to our listeners who take time to give us a voice in their lives. Remember we offer a fresh topic just about every week. Catch us wherever and whenever you get your favorite podcasts that includes Apple, Spotify, iHeartRadio, all the others. Check us out on the Hudson River Radio Facebook page as well. You know, always give you
two least little things. A slogan that I think is appropriate in some great original music. This one comes from Fdr Franklin D. Roosevelt, and he said, remember remember always that all of us, and you and I especially are descended from immigrants and revolutionaries. Okay, so that kind of that kind of hits the spot. We've got some great music coming up from the one and only ken Rawl.
Anybody who knows ken Rawl knows this music is going to be fun for our engineer, the mailman, mister Neil Richter. I'm your host, Frank Bono, and we hope to have you join us on the next being. Frank, We're the only way to be is Frank, Happy Groundhogs Day everybody.
Okay, So I think this is gonna to mean by and I possessed all the time.
I thing then this step two thousand and five out signed the Great Institutions, all the.
Entitles do not hear no thing?
But was it this side of this almost by that's I am not in dress. Oh I'm gonna stand to that. I wist.
You thing go the five around you.
No, the world was the n okay and it wants the oh no, not tran sending.
People give themselves to think they can't just trying to pile.
Rather chane rather just anos side. I be thought to see. I don't think he's somebody they say to you. Don't get up. All they say make out money, not swam about. They got outplaceable a moment long at the place that the little news sad it's gone. It's like i'd something, but you wonder that, well we all went gone. You are almost a John Senator. This is what again?
When the not go directing every once a kid about every kid. Well Aca
Hudson River Radio dot com