Summary#
S-10702 would amend New York’s Social Services Law by adding a required “true cost of economic security” study. Its stated goal is to create a tool for measuring the income and other resources families need for economic security; the bill does not itself change benefits, taxes, wages, or eligibility rules.
- The Department of Labor must hire a third party to collect and analyze data and calculate the measure.
- The calculation must account for family size, composition, and location down to the county level. It must include specified household costs, income sources, and a savings target at least as large as the one in the most recent national measure.
- The department must report findings to the governor and legislative leaders within one year after the law takes effect, and every two years after that.
- The bill is introduced and has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee; it is not law. Its start date would be April 1 after it becomes law.
What it means for you#
- New York residents and families: The study could provide information about household costs and resources by location and family composition. It would not give families money, require them to apply, or change their eligibility for public programs.
- Department of Labor: The department must contract with a third party and submit the required reports.
- Contractor: The selected contractor would collect and analyze data for the calculation.
- Current law: The supplied materials do not include the existing Social Services Law, so I could not verify what related studies or requirements already exist.
Money#
The bill requires the Department of Labor to contract for the study, but no cost estimate or funding amount is provided.
- The bill does not specify how the contract will be funded or how much it may cost.
- It does not set fees, fines, or payments to families.
What is unclear#
- “Base level of economic security,” “certain types of debt,” and “reasonable food budget” are not defined in the bill.
- The bill does not specify the calculation method or how gaps in available data would be handled.
- It calls for data broken down by county and, where available, by smaller areas, but does not say what happens where such data is unavailable.
- The bill does not set out a process for reviewing or challenging the calculation, or require government agencies to act on the findings.
- It does not say how the study would relate to existing programs or online budget calculators.
Case for#
- A measure that accounts for different family sizes and local costs could give policymakers a more detailed way to assess whether proposals and programs support economic security.
- Including housing, health care, child care, taxes, debt, income, and savings could show cost pressures that a narrower measure might miss.
- Regular reports could help identify areas where costs are high relative to available resources.
Case against#
- The bill requires the study and reports, but does not require policymakers to respond to the findings or change any policy.
- Important terms and calculation choices are left open, which could affect how useful or comparable the results are.
- The bill requires a contractor but provides no cost estimate or funding plan.