Gothamist78%

Albany lawmakers prepare for mad dash on Trump fund, redistricting as session wraps 23%

By Jimmy Vielkind0% Jon Campbell0%

5/30/2026, 5:19:27 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 16.3% saturation with 192 hits. Analysis detected 1,795 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,175 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 36.7% and a BS Rank of 23% (15,684 of 20,370 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 77.00% of the article peer group.

Entering the national redistricting wars, considering new rules for pricing goods and reviewing ticket-scalping laws are on the agenda in Albany as New York state lawmakers convene for their final week. 
The annual legislative session is scheduled to end Thursday, but lawmakers acknowledged it may stretch into Friday. 
Many members of the state Senate and Assembly are eager to return to their home districts in time to campaign in primary elections on June 23. 
Normally the Capitol operates around two peaks of activity: the passage of the budget in late March and early April, and the close of session in June. 
Because this year’s budget was only adopted last week  nearly two months after the April 1 deadline  everything is crashing together. 
“It crowds out the opportunity for lawmakers to tackle controversial items after the budget because there simply won't be enough time,” said Blair Horner, senior policy adviser for the New York Public Interest Research Group and a longtime advocate at the Capitol. 
Last year, 920 bills passed either the Senate or Assembly during the last week of session  roughly half of all the legislation that moved. 
Lawmakers have so far advanced more than 1,000 bills through the houses this year. 
Horner said he’ll be curious to see how the protracted budget talks affect the final tallies. 
Lawmakers acknowledged that some of their priorities, like new regulations on e-bikes, won’t get done because of the truncated timetable. 
But other measures are very much on the table, setting up a furious scramble this week. 
“It's unpredictable,” said Assembly Minority Leader Ed Ra, a Nassau County Republican who worries Democrats will pass bills that increase costs for businesses and consumers. 
“Things that you think are dead come back to life. 
Things that you think are happening end up not happening. 
So, I think we wanna all get out of town before we do anything that is gonna make New Yorkers' lives more unaffordable.” 
Here are five things to watch in the final week: 
Redistricting 
Democrats control what bills come to the Assembly and Senate floors, and leaders in both chambers say they’ll start the process of amending the state constitution in order to change how New York draws its congressional districts. 
Several states have updated their maps this year, a deviation from the normal redistricting process that takes place once a decade after the completion of a U.S. 
Census. 
President Donald Trump urged Republican-led states to start the process. 
New York Democrats say they want to respond. 
“It's unfortunate that you're fighting fire with fire, but to sit there  the options are terrible,” said U.S. 
Rep. 
Paul Tonko, a Capital Region Democrat. 
Ra said Republicans oppose the changes. 
Horner said his group is open to changing the structure of the independent commission that currently draws New York’s legislative districts but that he wanted to keep constitutional language prohibiting partisan gerrymandering intact. 
State Senate Deputy Majority Leader Mike Gianaris said Friday that the exact redistricting plans are still being worked out in consultation with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a Brooklyn Democrat who is urging New York to act. 
Gianaris said multiple options will be passed this year. 
A constitutional amendment must be approved by voters and can’t go on the ballot before 2027. 
Responding to the Trump fund 
Gianaris is also sponsoring a bill that would tax 100% of payouts from a new federal fund that Trump is trying to create. 
The Republican president says the $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” is needed to reimburse people he says were unfairly prosecuted during the Biden administration. 
Democrats and some GOP federal lawmakers are pushing back. 
As they do, Democrats in California and New York are considering plans to tax any payments. 
”This fund is incredibly corrupt and unprecedented and we should do what we can to hinder it,” Gianaris said. 
Plastic reduction and bottle deposits 
Environmental organizations are hoping to convince lawmakers to pass a bill requiring companies to reduce the amount of plastic they use in their packaging. 
The key provisions include a 30% reduction in single-use plastic packaging over the next 12 years, a 75% recycling rate for all packaging by 2055 and a ban on using a number of toxic chemicals, including PFAS and lead. 
Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics, said this year’s budget was “the most anti-environmental budget in recent memory,” pointing to a measure rolling back some of the state’s landmark 2019 climate law. 
“So post-budget, I think legislators need to ask: Is there something positive and affirmative that they can adopt that actually protects the environment and saves tax dollars?” 
said Enck, a former regional administrator for the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency. 
“And that's this bill.” 
Another bill would double the state’s 5-cent deposit on bottles and cans while expanding it to more beverages, like iced tea. 
The Business Council, the state’s top business lobbying group, opposes both bills. 
“The burden falls directly on businesses, but the impact is going to be felt by consumers through increased costs and reduced choices in the stores,” said Ken Pokalsky, the Business Council’s vice president. 
Surveillance pricing 
Some Democratic lawmakers are hoping to pass a pair of bills cracking down on “surveillance pricing”  or using an algorithm to change the price of a product based on a consumer’s personal data. 
One bill would ban businesses from engaging in the practice, with an exception for loyalty or discount programs that a customer willfully signs up for. 
Another bill would ban grocery stores and pharmacies from using electronic price tags on their shelves, an effort to prevent them from being used to instantly change prices depending on who’s in the store. 
Attorney General Letitia James is backing the legislation. 
So too are labor unions who represent grocery workers, in part because electronic price tags could lead to fewer workers in the stores. 
Business groups have generally opposed the bills. 
That includes Chamber of Progress, a wide-ranging trade group representing tech giants including Amazon and Apple, which argues that it would severely curtail loyalty programs even with the language in the legislation meant to protect them. 
Ticket scalping 
A state law that allows tickets to concerts and sporting events to be resold on places like StubHub is expiring, and a Hudson Valley lawmaker is again hoping to increase consumer protections as it is renewed. 
State Sen. 
James Skoufis, an Orange County Democrat, wants to prohibit people from selling tickets for more than face value. 
He also wants to cap the percentage of fees that ticketers and resale platforms can charge. 
“Fans are really angry, and rightfully so,” Skoufis said. 
He said the current system is rigged by bots and scalpers who increase prices. 
Resale platforms say the proposed changes will push people into the black market. 
“Price caps might sound like consumer protection, but in practice these misguided policies limit consumers’ choice, force fans onto unregulated social media platforms that are rife with fraud,. 
Includes reporting by Rosemary Misdary. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.2%Jimmy Vielkind: 2.7%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias5.2%This article: 1.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias1.4%This article: 4.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.7%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic4.3%This article: 3.1%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic3.1%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.8%Gothamist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.9%Gothamist: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 16.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 9.9%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect16.3%This article: 6.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.4%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion6.4%This article: 7.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.6%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias7.7%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.5%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.1%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias3.5%This article: 7.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.9%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias7.7%This article: 16.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 6.7%Gothamist: 8.6%Negativity Bias16.3%This article: 3.6%Jimmy Vielkind: 4.6%Gothamist: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias3.6%This article: 2.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.5%Gothamist: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error2.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 4.6%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias1.3%This article: 3.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.5%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.5%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.6%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.5%Gothamist: 1.0%Ad Hominem1.6%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.6%Gothamist: 4.5%Appeal to Authority5.4%This article: 4.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.7%Gothamist: 1.2%False Dilemma4.0%This article: 1.1%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.8%Slippery Slope1.1%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 10.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 4.3%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization10.4%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.7%Jimmy Vielkind: 7.3%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion6.7%This article: 2.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.6%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question2.3%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.0%Gothamist: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 3.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Appeal to Nature3.3%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.3%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal0.3%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.9%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.9%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 1.6%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy1.6%This article: 2.4%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote2.4%This article: 5.5%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection5.5%This article: 11.1%Jimmy Vielkind: 3.1%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice11.1%This article: 3.9%Jimmy Vielkind: 1.3%Gothamist: 1.6%Indoctrination3.9%This article: 2.9%Jimmy Vielkind: 2.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias2.9%This article: 6.9%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias6.9%This article: 0.0%Jimmy Vielkind: 0.4%Gothamist: 1.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1175 words analyzed.

Speakers

10speakers41%attributed speech688writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageBlair Horner • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageBlair Horner • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageEd Ra • 25 words • 100.0% coverageEd Ra • 10 words • 0.0% coverageEd Ra • 10 words • 0.0% coverageEd Ra • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coveragePaul Tonko • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coveragePaul Tonko • 6 words • 0.0% coverageEd Ra • 6 words • 0.0% coverageBlair Horner • 33 words • 0.0% coverageMike Gianaris • 37 words • 0.0% coverageMike Gianaris • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageMike Gianaris • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageMike Gianaris • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageJudith Enck • 32 words • 0.0% coverageJudith Enck • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageJudith Enck • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageBusiness Council • 12 words • 0.0% coverageKen Pokalsky • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageLetitia James • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageChamber of Progress • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJames Skoufis • 18 words • 100.0% coverageJames Skoufis • 16 words • 100.0% coverageJames Skoufis • 9 words • 0.0% coverageJames Skoufis • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ken Pokalsky

100%flagged-word coverage
33 attributed words6.8% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning +100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Ken Pokalsky: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-19.0 ptsWriter: 19.0%Ken Pokalsky: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-9.4 ptsWriter: 9.4%Ken Pokalsky: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-4.1 ptsWriter: 4.1%Ken Pokalsky: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.