Hochul Emerges From Budget Talks Unbowed, but Not Unscathed

Democratic lawmakers were forced to reach bitter compromises with Ms. Hochul that alienated some from the party’s vocal left wing. Many spoke out forcefully not only against the bail changes and the N.F.L. subsidy, but the exclusion of undocumented immigrants from certain state programs and what they saw as too-modest wage increases for home care workers.

The emerging budget deal led many left-wing Democrats to draw parallels between Ms. Hochul and Mr. Cuomo, with Michael Gianaris, the deputy majority leader in the Senate, likening them “in terms of looking out for corporate interests and her ideological positioning.”

Legislative Democrats nonetheless secured policy priorities of their own, moving Ms. Hochul to the left on some issues and convincing her to spend $4 billion more than she had initially proposed. And the budget deal was as much a fiscal plan as a political document, filled with potentially voter-friendly measures that Ms. Hochul, as well as many Democratic lawmakers, will rally behind on the campaign trail.

Bruce Gyory, a Democratic political consultant, said that despite the criticism, the budget included a balance of policies that could help Democrats statewide in November, saying that Ms. Hochul “had adapted what one might call a vital center strategy.”

“There’s always a rugby scrum going into the budget,” he said. “But then, once the budget is passed, everybody who voted for it joins the parade in terms of trying to get the message out that it was a good budget.”

Lawmakers were still voting on the budget on Friday, but under the deal, the state will make a series of targeted alterations and expansions to the existing bail laws, and impose harsher rules for repeat offenders. Despite Ms. Hochul’s push, it will not create a new standard allowing judges to assess the danger that a defendant poses to others when setting bail.

State Senator Diane J. Savino, a moderate Democrat from Staten Island, said that Senate Democrats ultimately agreed to bail changes because of the number of lawmakers, especially upstate and suburban members, who were feeling “pressure” from their constituents.