Gov. Cuomo (photo: Kevin P. Coughlin/Governor's Office)
Governor Cuomo has worked hard to cultivate a national reputation as the Emmy Award-winning hero of his own covid reality show – so why is he stripping federal resources from hospitals, clinics, and health centers on the front lines of the crisis?
Last year, the Cuomo Administration included a provision in the state budget that would cost safety net providers an estimated $154 million in federal resources the first year and $1.5 billion over five years. This Albany accounting gimmick, set to take effect on April 1, would “carve out” the state’s Medicaid pharmacy benefit. The problem is that this “carve out” results in the state rejecting federal resources provided by the 340B drug discount program. This program makes it possible for health care providers to serve New York’s most vulnerable communities.
Fortunately, there’s a legislative fix that will buy time for a long-term solution. A bill sponsored by Assembly Health Committee Chair Richard Gottfried (A. 1671) would delay implementation of this “carve out” for three years, giving us time to work with the Governor, Legislature, and fellow stakeholders to ensure that the state doesn’t give up federal resources for vulnerable New Yorkers just to fill a budget shortfall.
As pharmacists in organizations that receive federal support under the Ryan White Care Act, we are on the frontlines in caring for patients with HIV/AIDS and vaccinating thousands of New Yorkers every week against COVID-19. To understand how devastating these cuts are, you have to understand the communities we serve. Half of all Americans living with HIV/AIDS receive medical care from a Ryan White clinic. Our patients are 70% Black or Hispanic, a majority are LGBTQ, 61% live at or below the poverty line, and 62% are experiencing homelessness or need housing assistance.
Our patients have been hit hardest by the pandemic and there remains great mistrust in the health care system from historical wrongs perpetrated against communities of color. Just last week, the Governor traveled to a public housing residence in Brooklyn to call attention to this crisis within a crisis – with Black and Latino Americans 2.8 times more likely than whites to die from COVID-19.
We work every day to build trust with our patients in these hardest hit communities, and now we’re the ones working to build trust in the vaccine. We are the ones responsible for getting that vaccine into arms – twice – so why would the Governor divert critical funding from that effort?
While the Governor often speaks about vulnerable communities, his own budget is attacking a proven and effective weapon against covid – the 340B drug discount program. The resources 340B brings to safety net providers allows us to engage these most at-risk communities. It provides resources for physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and outreach staff. It supports vaccine clinics where we manage check-in, patient flow, post-vaccine observation, and data transmission to the state. And it allows us to provide transportation to bring patients to the vaccine or the vaccine to patients.
Community health centers reeling from the pandemic have already had to deal with the state withholding funds. Now, on top of that, the state is removing what for many is our largest resource – the discount from the federal 340B drug pricing program. Undermining this resource will make it impossible for health centers to reach the communities that Albany and Washington so desperately want and need us to reach.
New York State’s most vulnerable communities need more than an Emmy-award winning TV show. We need a real covid hero.
***
Mark Malahosky is Vice President of Pharmacy Services for Trillium Health. Dr. Patrick Hildenbrandt is Chief Pharmacy Officer at Evergreen Health Services.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Liz Crotty (photo: Liz Crotty for DA)
In this race for Manhattan District Attorney, candidates will talk your ear off criticizing the current occupant of the office, and cataloging all the things wrong with prosecutions. While there are a great deal of legitimate criticisms, nevertheless one might be left scratching their head to understand what candidates actually plan to do as DA. That is why candidates must outline not only what the next DA must stop doing, but also what she should do.
So what should the Manhattan District Attorney do? First and foremost, she must seek justice for all and protect and support crime victims and witnesses. The DA’s office should investigate and prosecute criminal activity in Manhattan, both on its own and with the NYPD and other law enforcement agencies, in order to save lives and keep every neighborhood in the borough safe for those who live, work, and visit here.
The DA should use every available legal resource to ensure prosecutions are based on credible, reliable, and admissible evidence, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecutions should not be based on the defendant’s celebrity status, the publicity the case would generate, or the prosecutor’s personal empathy with the victim. Besides fairly prosecuting the guilty, the DA should also protect the innocent. The office should look at each case individually when deciding whether to pursue a criminal prosecution, dismiss a case, or divert to drug treatment or another program, using its prosecutorial discretion wisely, thoughtfully, and appropriately.
The District Attorney should continue to use a vertical prosecution system. This means that, with very few exceptions, each felony case is assigned to one Assistant District Attorney, who stays with the case from the time it is first written up until the time the case is resolved. That ensures case continuity for victims and witnesses, which is the best approach for prosecution.
The DA should seek bail selectively, following the factors enumerated in section 510 of the New York Criminal Procedure Law. The DA should protect defendants’ rights to presumption of innocence, a speedy trial, and detention only after due process. Forcing defendants to spend weeks, months, or even years in pretrial detention, or the threat thereof, should not be a tool to coerce people into accepting plea deals.
The DA should examine all the facts and underlying circumstances of a case before deciding whether a plea offer is a fair, just, and appropriate resolution of the case. The offer should not become less favorable the more time passes, as “punishment” for the defendant not accepting a deal earlier. And she should lobby Albany not to enact lengthy mandatory minimum sentences that compel defendants to plead guilty to avoid the prospect of spending decades in prison.
The DA should present cases to a grand jury only after a thorough investigation and a review of all available evidence. She should not manipulate the proceedings to “indict a ham sandwich” or not indict someone as a personal favor. Nor should she present cases only because doing so is popular with the public.
The District Attorney should always protect the right to a fair trial. She should expeditiously provide the defendant with the full body of evidence, including any that may be exonerating. She should ensure that the jury is impartial, and not chosen because they are conducive to finding someone guilty. And she must realize that some law enforcement officers are not credible, and inform the defense of this should any such officer testify.
The DA should make every effort to accommodate the schedules of all witnesses.
The DA should seek fair, just, and appropriate sentences in all cases, including non-jail sentences. And the DA should consider, when fair, just, and appropriate, “re-pleader” offers, wherein a defendant is permitted to plead guilty with specified conditions, such as restorative justice, community service, and/or treatment programs, and if a defendant avoids re-arrest and successfully completes the conditions of the plea, a defendant may then withdraw the plea and earn a conviction to a lesser offense, or even a violation or outright dismissal.
The DA should consider, when fair, just, and appropriate, and after consulting with the victim, offering restorative justice programs to all eligible defendants who demonstrate a willingness to learn from past mistakes.
The District Attorney should always scrupulously avoid activities that pose a conflict of interest. She should not give special treatment to defendants or defense attorneys who have given donations to the DA and other elected officials. The DA also should not accept donations from unions representing law enforcement officers, because she may have to investigate those officers accused of misconduct.
The DA should endeavor to hire attorneys and support staff who are as diverse as the borough of Manhattan, and who are caring, fair, smart, have common sense, and are dedicated to serving the public. They should live in New York. And the DA should require her attorneys to participate in mandatory training programs that teach best practices and ethics.
Finally, the District Attorney should regularly conduct community-based events and presentations in schools. Manhattan’s communities, including those that have received the least fair treatment from the criminal justice system, should have faith in the office, and the DA must do her part to cultivate it.
We cannot fall into the trap of believing there is a choice between safety and civil rights, but we must be honest about our legally feasible paths to achieving both.
The responsibilities of the District Attorney differ from those of the mayor, a legislator, or the police commissioner. When criminal justice reforms are sold to the public by candidates who will never be able to carry them out it equates to campaign smoke and mirrors, which ultimately leaves voters feeling frustrated and disgruntled election cycle after election cycle.
The most important reforms the District Attorney can enact must come from within the confines of her mandated responsibilities and discretionary latitude. To claim that the DA can formulate and institute public policy is fallacious. That is the job of our state and city lawmakers.
The next Manhattan District Attorney, whoever she is, must have a proactive vision for her tenure, and find real, workable solutions within the purview of the job. She cannot merely enumerate grievances with the current office and the criminal justice system. Because the District Attorney is a leader, not a critic.
***
Liz Crotty is a Democratic candidate for Manhattan District Attorney. On Twitter @LizCrotty2021.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
At the Puerto Rican Day Parade (photo: William Alatriste/City Council)
Will Latinos finally help elect the first Latino mayor in New York City history? With a term-limited Bill de Blasio, and with Latinos a growing political force in Gotham, two Latino candidates on the Democratic side are vying to replace him in Gracie Mansion and Fernando Mateo has just announced his candidacy to gain the Republican nomination.
Brooklyn City Council Member Carlos Menchaca and long-time nonprofit executive Dianne Morales have positioned themselves within the progressive wing of the Democratic Party as they seek the city’s top job. Both come to this mayoral race with considerably less name recognition than two previous top-tier Latino candidates that sought the mayoralty, Herman Badillo and Fernando Ferrer.
Badillo, the first Latino to run competitively for mayor, initiated his quest for the seat in 1969, having served as Bronx Borough President for the previous three years. Badillo also gained some notoriety as a commissioner in the John Lindsey mayoral administration.
Ferrer, who also served as Bronx Borough President and as a City Council member before that, sought the mayoralty in 2001 and again in 2005. Badillo never did secure the Democratic nomination (nor the Republican one in 2001). Ferrer did—but subsequently lost to then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg in the 2005 general election.
The context in which Menchaca and Morales find themselves is vastly different from that of Badillo and Ferrer. For one, the Latino base is much more diverse in its ethnic and cultural makeup. For another, the internal dynamics of the Democratic Party seem to be shifting from racial and ethnic identity politics to ideological positioning.
Regarding the diversity found in Latino communities in New York, we see that Puerto Ricans, historically the largest Latino group in New York, are no longer the only ones representing Latinos. Today, New York City has a large number of Dominican, Colombian, Ecuadorian, and Peruvian elected officials. The Bronx, once a hub of Puerto Rican presence, now has the largest Dominican community in the city, and Queens is a hub for Ecuadorians and Colombians. Brooklyn also exemplifies the diversity of the Latino community, including the presence of a significant cluster of Mexican hermanos and hermanas in Sunset Park, for instance, which is part of the district represented by Menchaca, who is Mexican-American. Morales is of Puerto Rican descent.
The diversity among Latinos in New York is worth celebrating. But will this diverse Latino community vote as a bloc and become the power base that it can be? Will New York City elect its first Latino mayor?
Comprising a quarter of the Democratic primary electorate, Latinos are a force to be reckoned with. But by itself the Latino vote is insufficient to elect a candidate, even if the candidate is a Latino. To win, the candidate will need to build coalitions across ideological, geographical, and ethnic differences. The one Latino candidate that was seen as having a viable path from Grand Concourse to Gracie Mansion was Ruben Diaz, Jr. With a sizable campaign warchest and some name recognition as Bronx Borough President, Diaz Jr. would have surely positioned himself among the top-tier candidates on the Democratic side, but he decided not to run.
For the two Democratic Latino contenders this year, forming such a coalition will be difficult, even with the new ranked-choice voting system. Morales and Menchaca remain largely unknown entities at a citywide level. And both candidates, especially Menchaca, lag behind in fundraising and have not received the public matching funds that could give their campaigns new life (Morales says she will hit the requisite threshold at the next filing in March).
Largely because Republicans are vastly outnumbered in New York City, Mateo would have practically no chance of winning the mayoralty, even if he were to win the Republican primary.
Despite challenges, Morales has proven to be a formidable candidate, developing fascinating policy proposals that will appeal to many primary voters. Unfortunately, this may not be enough. But if that’s the case, Morales’ efforts will nonetheless likely help forge a path for her to run for elected office again in the future.
Based on the current crop of Latino candidates and the current dynamics in the mayoral race, Latinos will likely have to wait longer for one of their own to finally become mayor of Gotham City. But with a sufficiently strong voting electoral presence in June, Latinos can again demonstrate that they are a force to be taken seriously and a growing base upon which to win a mayoral race.
***
Eli Valentin is a political analyst and author of the forthcoming book, Reinhold Niebur: A Political Life. On Twitter @EliValentinNYPA.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.