Here’s Every Bill That Kathy Hochul Vetoed in 2024

Hochul has consistently blamed many vetoes on a lack of cash. In nearly half of her veto memos this year, she argued that the bills she rejected would have required funding that hadn’t been allocated in the state’s budget. Those included some 29 bills mandating studies, task forces, or commissions, again following the pattern of the last two years. One bill — a measure to increase school bus funding — remains in limbo, risking a “pocket veto” if the governor does not act on it this month.

As always, it will be up to the Senate and Assembly whether to lock horns again over the bills Hochul rejected this year. One bill on this year’s list has passed six times and was vetoed just as many — including three times by Hochul. State lawmakers seem to prefer such standoffs to direct veto overrides, which are unheard of in Albany despite Democrats holding supermajorities in both chambers since 2021.

Here are some highlights among the scores of bills Hochul vetoed in 2024. You can also browse the full list yourself — including the governor’s “veto memos” justifying each — in our database below. —Colin Kinniburgh

For the third straight year, Hochul vetoed a bill that would overhaul wrongful death claims in New York by allowing families of alleged victims to sue for emotional damages, as is allowed in almost every other state.

It’s a longstanding fight between two of Albany’s most powerful interest groups. The New York State Trial Lawyers Association has led the charge for the bill, arguing that only allowing lawsuits for economic losses devalues the lives of people of color, women, children, seniors, and those with disabilities. The Greater New York Hospital Association has fiercely opposed it, arguing that the legislation would cause medical liability insurance premiums to skyrocket and force doctors to leave the state.

In past years, Hochul proposed a set of amendments to dramatically narrow the bill — including by limiting its scope to the deaths of children — but legislative sponsors have balked.

Last session, the legislature did amend the bill to narrow which family members could file such lawsuits. Hochul still rejected it, writing in her December veto message that the legislature had again passed a bill that posed “significant risks to consumers, without many of the changes I expressed openness to in previous rounds of negotiations.” She cited concerns about rising insurance premiums and risking the “financial well-being of our healthcare system, including those hospitals that serve disadvantaged communities.”

The president of the state Trial Lawyers Association, Victoria Wickman, said that while the legislature and her association “came prepared to find common ground, narrowing the bill again and again, the Governor remained entrenched in the same positions she held on Day One.” — Chris Bragg

For the sixth time, and the third under Hochul, a New York governor has vetoed a bill to acknowledge and recognize Long Island’s Montaukett Indian Nation.

State judges revoked Montaukett tribal recognition in the 1910s, after the nation filed a series of lawsuits alleging that a real estate developer illegally purchased its tribal territory. In their rulings, judges argued that the nation’s “purity of blood” had been diluted and that its culture had dissipated. Proponents of recognition decried the rulings for perpetuating the racist history of the government annexing Indigenous lands.

Hochul and former Governor Andrew Cuomo have repeatedly vetoed bills that would reinstate Montaukett state recognition, which the legislature began passing in 2013. Hochul’s 2023 veto message cited the century-old court rulings.

Unlike federal tribal recognition, which comes with a degree of sovereignty over lands and access to federal programs, state recognition offers limited perks, like consultative relationships with environmental agencies. “They’ve just been trying to get the dignity and recognition that they deserve,” said state Senator Anthony Palumbo, the bill’s sponsor, on the Senate floor in June.

While Hochul’s December veto message claimed that the Montaukett “have not yet demonstrated that they meet the requirements necessary for recognition,” her office privately expressed concern that a state-recognized tribe would try to reclaim annexed land, legislators told Newsday. The 2024 bill’s Assembly sponsor, recently retired Democrat Fred Thiele, said that concern about land claims was “so speculative as to be ridiculous.”

“I can’t emphasize how badly the governor’s office has treated the Montauketts this past year,” Thiele said. — Chris Gelardi

One dollar can determine whether a family keeps or loses hundreds of dollars in public benefits. That’s because eligibility for programs like SNAP and Medicaid is largely based on income, creating so-called benefits cliffs: cutoff points where a small increase in someone’s income leads to a larger decrease in the value of their benefits.

In November, Hochul vetoed state Senator Roxanne Persaud’s bill to create a task force researching these cliffs, along with 28 other bills creating task forces and requiring agencies to conduct policy studies. Those bills covered everything from the state’s thruway authority to wildlife crossings on public roads. In her veto message, the governor wrote that the state’s financial plan does not include funding for the bills, which could lead to agency staffing limitations.

This is the third year that Hochul has vetoed a collection of research bills. The governor directed agencies to address as many of the issues covered by the bills as possible using their existing budgets and urged the legislature to work out additional funding through the annual budget process. — Spencer Norris

In November, Hochul vetoed a bill that would have directed the state Department of Health to evaluate reimbursement rates for early intervention services for children under three with developmental delays or disabilities.

The state reimburses providers for these services but has not updated its rates since the 1990s. As a result, some providers have left the program, and children are waiting months to receive care that is considered crucial during a child’s early development, according to a memo of support by bill sponsor Assemblymember Jonathan Rivera.

The bill, passed by the legislature in June, would have required the Department of Health to determine the actual cost of providing these services and make recommendations for updating or maintaining reimbursement methods. The legislation did not allocate funding for the study.

Hochul included the bill in a package of 29 bills that she vetoed, all of which either created commissions or required the state to conduct studies. Altogether, the bills would have cost the state $24 million, she wrote in her veto message, which the state did not budget for. — Bianca Fortis

For the third year in a row, the state legislature in 2024 passed a bill that would let watchdog groups recoup some of their expenses from participating in utility proceedings — the months-long, court-like cases that determine a large part of New Yorkers’ energy bills and a raft of other policies.

Hochul once again vetoed the bill on November 22, arguing that it could raise utility rates “at a time when affordability is a top priority for most New Yorkers.”

The bill’s proponents argued the opposite: Consumer and climate advocacy groups that participate in utility proceedings help rein in unnecessary spending that pads utilities’ bottom lines, they said. But these groups are severely outgunned by the utilities themselves, who bring a battery of lawyers and consultants to every case.

The bill would have effectively allowed consumer groups to charge customers a small amount — likely no more than a few cents per month — to increase their own firepower by hiring more staff and outside experts. The main ratepayer advocacy group in California brings in roughly $5 million a year through similar legislation and estimates its work saves Californians billions of dollars per year.

Hochul remained unconvinced of the return on investment. In her veto memo this year, she again noted that two state agencies already handle ratepayer protection. As I reported in August, those offices are far smaller than those in many other states and than New York itself once had. — Colin Kinniburgh

In New York, anyone convicted of a felony is automatically barred for life from serving on a jury, with very limited options to become eligible again. A bill supported by the state’s court system, several civil rights groups, and the New York State Bar Association sought to restore the right to serve after individuals complete their sentences, including probation or parole.

Several states, such as California and North Carolina, allow people convicted of felonies to return to jury duty once they have completed their sentences. A state courts spokesperson said in August that the judiciary “embraces this measure’s vision of reintegrating into society those who have fully served the terms of their sentences.”

But nearly all Republican state legislators opposed the bill, along with the opinion pages of the New York Post, which called it “racist.”

Hochul’s veto message didn’t express opposition to the bill’s basic concept, but cited unspecified “technical and operational challenges” that she said would hamper its implementation.

Hochul spokesperson Avi Small said that the main reason for the veto is that the law would have required the court system to track the fines, fees, and other penalties imposed as part of offenders’ sentences, which it doesn’t currently have a method for doing.

Though her veto message didn’t mention it, Hochul had been willing to pass the bill with an amendment that maintained the jury ban for perpetrators of high-level felonies and sex crimes, according to Megan French-Marcelin, policy director for the Legal Action Center, which supported the bill. That was a dealbreaker for the bill’s supporters.

“In the case of a bill that’s inherently about democracy, do we really want to carve people out from that?” French-Marcelin said.

The bill’s supporters plan to reintroduce it this year, said French-Marcelin. — Sam Mellins