Audio & Rush Transcript: Governor Cuomo Updates New Yorkers on State's Progress During COVID-19 Pandemic

Earlier today, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo updated New Yorkers on the state's progress during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The number of new cases, percentage of tests that were positive and many other helpful data points are always available at forward.ny.gov.

The Governor also announced the State has launched a new diagnostic testing site in the Town of Ramapo, a community heavily impacted by COVID-19 in partnership with Good Samaritan Hospital. The clinic, open today between noon and 5 p.m., is at the Town of Ramapo Cultural Arts Center at 64 North Main Street in Spring Valley. The clinic will run from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday.

AUDIO of today's remarks is available here.

A rush transcript of the Governor's remarks is available below:

Thank you very much operator. Good morning guys. Want to give you an update on where we are today. I'm joined by Melissa DeRosa, Rob Mujica, Jim Malatras and Gareth Rhodes. Let's do the New York numbers first.

Today is day number 144. New York conducted 67,000 tests yesterday. 705 were positive. That's a rate of about 1 percent, technically 1.04. Nine New Yorkers passed away from COVID yesterday. And again, they are in our thoughts and prayers. 714 New Yorkers were hospitalized, that's 10 fewer than the day before, that's the lowest numbers since March 18. So New York is doing very very well.

And we are in Phase IV of reopening all across the state. We expected the infection rate to go up after we reopened. We thought we could control it, but we thought it would go up. Actually it hasn't even gone up, it's gone down. So we are doing better than we had anticipated, and the phased reopening worked. We still are very concerned about the growing number across the country, versus Americans. We hate to see other Americans suffering. Also there is a COVID ricochet effect that we're now seeing where the infection rate will just bounce throughout the country. To say New York will be fine when you see the increases in Florida, Texas, Arizona, California. We know that's not the case. We know that the infection rate travels across the country because people are mobile and the virus travels with people.

We have offered our assistance to localities across the nation, anything we can do to help. First of all, because everybody was there for us when we needed help, and I said that we would repay that, and we were grateful for it. Also, practically, if we don't get the infection rate down in the rest of the country than we can anticipate that this is going to be on the upswing in New York sooner or later, and the people in New York paid too high a price for what we've accomplished to see it go backwards.

The President said yesterday that he suggested people wear masks. I think that was a positive step forward, especially from where we had been. I think the President should take the next step and should have a federal mandate on masks. You are in public service to make a difference. I can't think of a time when the experts said "If you take this action you can save 40,000 lives." That is the President's opportunity on the mask mandate. The IHME model funded by Gates, which is the model followed by the White House said if there was a national mask mandate you would save 40,000 lives. Just by signing a piece of paper, the President can save 40,000 lives. Why wouldn't you do that? And I would urge him once again, as I have repeatedly, to do that.

I spoke to the President yesterday. The President had suggested that he was considering sending federal agents to New York among other cities - New York City. To deal with what he saw as an increase in crime problem. I spoke to the President about it. I said that I was also concerned about the increase in crime in New York City and that people in New York City are concerned about the increase in crime. I also said that at this point I think situation can be managed by the state to the extent anything has to be done, and that I am totally prepared to do that, that there was no need for federal involvement. If the federal government had any concern about a federal asset that they thought needed to be protected, I was more than willing to protect any federal asset that the federal government had a bona fide concern for. And we left the conversation that if the President had any additional concerns, we would talk before he took any action.

So, that was a good conversation. And again, he expresses concern about the crime in New York City. People in New York are concerned about crime. They are very familiar with what is going on. The State is willing and able to do what it needs to do; it falls within the jurisdiction of the state. The city is a creature of state law and the state understands and respects the constitution of the United States, and we have no need at this time for any assistance from the federal government. Again, if the President has additional thoughts, we would talk before any action was taken.

We are also very concerned about what we hear from Washington on the bill that they are talking about to help the nation and the economy recover from the COVID epidemic. The Republicans still are refusing to include assistance for state and local government. That is wholly inconsistent with their stated goal of getting the economy up and running. Wall Street Journal, Chairman Powell, there have been numerous experts who have pointed out the proven fact that there will be no national economic recovery if you starve state and local governments. If the Republicans care about the economy, they'll put their politics aside and they will fund state and local governments. This is no longer just Democratic states that have been hurt. When the Republicans first failed to fund state and local governments they were primarily Democratic states and the Republican senators put their politics first and wouldn't fund Democratic states even though they were suffering from COVID. You now have states all across the country that are suffering, Republican states are suffering also. The National Governors Association has called for funding; not Democratic governors, not Republican governors - all governors.

Again, this is a matter of basic economics. Every study has shown that when you starve the state and local governments the economy does not recover as quickly. Also, it is really the epitome of hypocrisy for these Republican senators, particularly from the southeast, to say they refuse to fund state and local governments, because they're concerned about the amount of spending that the federal government is doing. If they were really concerned about the amount of federal spending then the suggestion would be don't take as much money for your state from the federal till. Kentucky takes $37 billion more every year than they pay in to the federal government. If a Senator from Kentucky was concerned about the federal budget, well the first place to start is in your own home, the first place to start is in your own activity. If you're taking more than you are giving, if you are taking $37 billion more every year, and that is your bona fide concern, federal government is spending too much money, obviously the starting place is to say, "I'll go first. I won't take more than I put in." That would at least be a genuine effort.

It's not genuine to say a state like New York that has suffered from COVID shouldn't get federal assistance at a time of an emergency when New York has subsidized your state for years. You find savings in places of excess. Why should the people of this nation fine any state more than it puts in? And that's true for Virginia and Maryland and Kentucky and Alabama and Florida. If you're sincere, that's where you would start - save money from the excess and save money by rejecting the largesse of states like New York and New Jersey and Massachusetts and Connecticut and California and Illinois. These are the states that are subsidizing you and have been for years. So, I understand political speeches, I also understand that actions speak louder than words