We have now had two presidential debates, and the issue of healthcare has been front and center.

In New York, nearly 40 percent of the entire state budget is spent on healthcare—and it’s rising every year. It’s clear that our economy won’t be competitive unless we figure out how to improve the quality of healthcare while also lowering costs. President Obama understood this, and it’s part of the reason he pushed so hard to pass healthcare reform.
After two years of arguing and lawsuits, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “Obamacare” is legal. Most Americans are ready to move on and implement the law. Yet the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill—led by Romney’s vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan—is itching for a new, and wrong fight: abolishing Medicaid by turning it into a block-grant program.

If you’re like most Americans, you probably think of Medicaid as primarily providing healthcare to the poor. But it also supports elder care for seniors. In fact, one out of every five seniors in New York state depends on Medicaid, and the program is the main funding source for over 70 percent of New York seniors in nursing homes.

If Mitt Romney wins the presidency, he and Paul Ryan are keen to push Medicaid to the states, giving states more flexibility to run the program—but likely with less federal financial responsibility over time. Progressive states like New York would certainly try to maintain current eligibility requirements, but realistically would face unsustainable budget shortfalls over time. And we all know where the cost burden will rest if neither state nor federal resources are forthcoming. Thousands of seniors on fixed incomes would suddenly face not only additional costs for living expenses—but also for prescription drugs.

This sounds like a bad deal for seniors, and it is. The good news is that seniors are increasingly wary of the Romney/Ryan entitlement plans, and these issues are impacting the presidential election (even if the GOP Medicaid plans are not well-known). Polls show voters in the all-important swing states of Florida, Ohio and Virginia oppose the far-reaching changes to Medicare and Medicaid proposed by the GOP ticket. Ironically, Obama is now gaining ground with a demographic group that he struggled with in 2008. Seniors backed Republicans in the last two presidential elections, but that support is quickly eroding because they don’t trust Republicans on the issue of entitlement reform.
Republican leaders love to talk about entitlement program reform as the main solution to the country’s budget deficit. But entitlement programs alone are not responsible for our budget deficit. Republicans never mention they created the overwhelming majority of this deficit by voting for President George W. Bush’s unfunded prescription drug program, an unfunded tax cut that mostly benefited the wealthiest in our society, and support for two wars that had no end.

Certainly, entitlement programs need to be reformed, or they won’t be there for the generations to come. But the notion that this burden should be shouldered by the men and women who are now in their twilight years goes against the time-honored values of American society. All must sacrifice—the top 1 percent , the 47 percent that Mitt Romney doesn’t care about and everyone else in America—but we cannot lose our essential core along the way. As Americans, we have always cared about our fellow man, and we can’t allow that to change because we now are living through difficult times.

The stakes this fall are high. For New Yorkers—and others in America, for that matter—this presidential election matters a lot. We all should participate in government, by holding our elected officials accountable. That begins on Nov. 6.

Most recently, Clyde Williams was a congressional candidate for CD 13. He served as national political director at the Democratic National Committee under President Barack Obama, domestic policy advisor to President William Jefferson Clinton, as vice president at the Center for American Progress and as deputy chief of staff of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Alan Chartock. Photo courtesy of wamc.org.

To understand what he did and why he did it, you have to understand the realities of elections. Since about half the eligible people don’t bother to vote in presidential elections, the name of the game is to get your voters to turn out. When Romney chose Ryan he was offering a huge incentive for conservative Republicans to get out and vote. He was lighting a fire under their behinds. That’s the way elections are won or lost.

The Romney problem is that there are more Democrats and independents in the United States than there are conservative Republicans. Romney’s vice presidential choice will light an even bigger fire under the keisters of the Democrats and independents who do not want to lose Social Security as we know it or the highly popular Medicare program. Ryan is death on both of these programs.

There may be a lot of people who don’t like what the Republicans are calling “Obamacare,” but just ask any senior or anyone who just can’t wait to get to Medicare, what they think of the incredibly popular senior medical program; or ask seniors (or their appreciative children) what they think of Social Security.

I remember my late mother’s appreciation for her Social Security check. My mom had worked all her life putting money into Social Security. I admit that my mother hated most Republicans but the thought of losing Social Security or of the Republicans trying to “modify” Roosevelt’s signature program by handing it over to the Wall Street crowd to get their hands on the highly efficient program would have brought this liberal lady out onto the streets. By threatening Social Security and Medicare, Romney has given the Democrats the gift of life. No matter what he says to save the day, the words and actions of Ryan will prove to be fatal to Romney. In fact, Romney has committed political suicide by choosing Ryan.

Finally, there is Medicaid, a program designed primarily to help the poor and elderly who have no other place to turn. When those often non-voting poor realize that their health care is being threatened by the draconian Ryan, they will have a good reason to vote. As we saw, not that long ago in Florida, just a few votes can swing an election.

In New York, the Democrats should be celebrating. The New York state Senate is up for grabs and if the lower-income voters turn out, it is inevitable that they will vote for Democratic candidates down the line. Democrat Andrew Cuomo has given Dean Skelos and the Republican Senate majority every break. He didn’t veto their self-serving gerrymander bill as he promised he would. I am old enough to remember the Democratic landslide in Goldwater-Johnson in which all kids of Republicans got thrown out in New York.

To turn this election in their favor, you had better believe that the Democrats are going to plaster the television airwaves with Ryan’s picture and what he wants to do with two of the most popular social programs in American history. You’ll see crying babies and seniors threatened with eviction. When I explained how this was going to work to some elderly friends, one of them said, “You don’t have to worry, it will only be younger people who will lose these benefits.” In response, I said, “These younger folks have been putting money into these programs for years. They are looking forward to Social Security and Medicare. They are going to be very angry when and if all of this comes down.”

Poor Mitt Romney; he may be good at making a lot of money. That doesn’t make him smart. He’s just committed political hara-kiri. In New York, he’s probably the best thing the usually hapless Democrats have going for them.

Alan S. Chartock is president and CEO of WAMC/Northeast Public Radio and an executive publisher at The Legislative Gazette.

rep. Maloney Hails Benefits of all
Last week, Rep. Carolyn Maloney met with local health care providers, patients and advocates to tout the benefits of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), as it was recently upheld by the Supreme Court.
“It’s important to remember that, because of the ACA, insurance companies can no longer remove young adults under the age of 26 from their parents’ health care policies, refuse to provide coverage to kids under age 19 with pre-existing conditions or place lifetime limits on coverage, all of which have been pushing families into bankruptcy when facing a catastrophic illness or condition,” Maloney said. “Already, the ACA is offering significant tax credits to thousands of small businesses in our congressional district access to help insure their workers.”
Jeff Gold, chairman of the board of directors of the Metro New York Health Care for All campaign, an Upper East Sider and a general partner in the JI Associates tech firm, joined Maloney in praising the ACA’s benefits to small businesses like his own.
“With the United States paying more for medical coverage than any of our industrial/commercial competitors, we must ensure that small businesses and their employees have access to high-quality, affordable medical coverage,” Gold said. “The ACA will allow millions to get affordable coverage instead of going to the most inefficient hospital emergency rooms for basic coverage, and remove the burden of shoving small businesses like mine into stratified risk pools that make coverage harder to buy, afford or even evaluate.”
Other local residents joined in to voice their support and explain how the ACA has personally affected them. Kenneth Davis, president and CEO of The Mount Sinai Medical Center, also expressed his support for the law.
According to data from a 2012 study prepared by the House Energy & Commerce Committee minority staff, the ACA has saved 10,200 seniors in Maloney’s district $7.7 million in drug costs and allowed 6,100 young adults in the district to retain their health insurance, among other local benefits from grants given to local health centers and hospitals and provisions that prevent patients from being denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

Hunter Renovation recently Completed
Last week, Hunter College president Jennifer Raab and City Council Member Dan Garodnick cut the ribbon to reopen historic Thomas Hunter Hall. The 1913 Tudor-style building, which was named after Hunter College’s founding president, has been newly restored, with historically consistent new windows and stones. The renovation cost nearly $12 million and included replacing the roof, repairing existing wood window frames and leaded-glass windows and stone replacement and restoration. The building at one time held Hunter College High School and will be available again to house student clubs, lounges, classrooms and the college’s dance program.

Yorkville Historic Resource Survey
Friends of the Upper East Side Historic Districts is holding a survey of Yorkville to catalogue the neighborhood’s unique historic elements and is looking for volunteers to help with the efforts. The group will be studying a section of the Upper East Side from East 59th to 96th Street, from Lexington Avenue to the East River, encompassing a neighborhood known for its history as a center of German, Hungarian, Irish and Czechoslovakian immigrant communities.
Those interested in helping can contact Matthew Coody at 212-535-2526 or mcoody@friends-ues.org to sign up. Volunteers will get an introduction and instructions at the Friends office, then go out with clipboards and cameras to document building information (address, types of windows, characteristic features, construction material, architectural style) to add to the survey report.

By Alan S. Chartock

With Chief Justice John Roberts supporting the congressional right to pass the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), the politics of health care rises to the top of the list in New York state. Let there be no mistake about it: Politics in New York can get very dirty, especially when big money is involved. We had better be careful.

State Sen. Pedro Espada serves as a perfect example of the toxic mixture of health care, politics and money. His Soundview Health Center clinic is now closed, thanks to his political corruption. First he raised people’s expectations about health care, then he crashed them.

New York is certainly not the only state where politics can get dirty—it’s just the way the game is too often played. When you are a state senator, you are powerful. When you are a corrupt state senator, not only are you powerful, you can put your dirty hand into the pot and take money that should go to people who need it a lot more than you do.

We have seen it time and again. When dirty politicians like Carl Kruger get to vote, that vote and that influence become toxic. A system that allows this kind of thing—in health care or any other area—is poison.

In New York, a lot of influence is doled out to individual senators. In order to put together a winning coalition that can rule the political roost, a leader has to find the votes to make a majority. When the Democrats got their chance, they needed Espada so much that they gave him enormous power. When the Republicans had to put together a winning coalition, they likewise gave the corrupt Kruger enormous power in order to get him on board. When people wanted something from him, they went to his bagman, Richard Lipsky, who put in the order, not unlike a waitress at the local greasy spoon.

When President Barack Obama, as part of his health care legislation, asked that states establish “exchanges” where people could buy their health care insurance, state Senate Republicans balked. As a result, instead of having a state law establishing the exchange, Gov. Andrew Cuomo established the exchange in New York by executive order. The last thing that Republicans, taking cues from the national party of the same name, were going to do was to help Obama win re-election with his signature heath care program.

The problem is, things are going to get complicated. The same political influences that allowed Espada and Kruger to do their dirty work will undoubtedly show their faces in this complicated exchange system. The more complicated it is, the more points of access there will be for the few rotten apple politicians who give a bad name to all their colleagues. We will need to police the new system—and that’s easier said than done. In my mind’s eye, I see some politicians drooling over the potential opportunities here.

The question, of course, is one of political will. If we truly want to make the new system corruption-free, we will be able to. In the past, however, we have been known to present crooks with opportunities. Our mistake was that we should have extended a single payer system, like Medicare, to all Americans. After all, that system works and we know it.

Of course, there are crooks who try to game that system, but it has by and large been highly successful and uncomplicated. Now the powers that be are insisting that the insurance companies get their greedy hands into the mix, hence the complicated exchange system.
Once again, the foxes have been put in charge of the hen house. As Pete Seeger wrote in “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?” “When will we ever learn?”

Alan S. Chartock is president and CEO of WAMC/Northeast Public Radio and an executive publisher at The Legislative Gazette.

Mayor, Council Deliver ‘On-Time, Balanced Budget’
Last week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the New York City Council passed a $68.5 billion budget for 2013 that will save some children’s programs and 20 fire companies.
“Working with our partners in the Council, we’ve again produced an on-time, balanced budget for our city that doesn’t raise taxes on New Yorkers and that preserves the essential services that keep our city strong,” Bloomberg said. “These actions…have allowed us avoid the severe service cuts that many other cities are facing.”
According to Bloomberg’s press release, the budget increase will allow the city to add about 1,000 teachers to the school system and about $150 million to after-school programs.
Funding for cultural institutions will be increased by roughly $50 million, slightly more than in 2012, with the city citing the institutions’ effect on tourism as a reason for the boost.
The city also expects to see $635 million in taxi medallion revenue in 2013.
“We face a significant challenge again next year, but given the effective and fiscally responsible partnership we’ve had with the Council, and the leadership we know we can rely on from Speaker Christine Quinn, I’m confident we’ll meet any challenges that arise,” Bloomberg added.

Bath Salts and Synthetic Marijuana Now Illegal
The U.S. Senate passed new legislation last Wednesday that will ban certain chemicals found in specific types of the drugs known as “bath salts” and synthetic marijuana. The ban will head to President Barack Obama for final consent.
The bill particularly targeted MDPV and mephedrone, two active ingredients found in bath salts. The salts aren’t your grandmother’s bath time treat, though—they are sold online, in smoke shops and convenience stores under brand names like Zoom, Red Dove, Legal Phunk and Vanilla Sky. When ingested, they cause hallucinations similar to the effects of cocaine or meth.
The bill will also ban 20 primary components that make up synthetic marijuana. The substance, also known as Spice, K2 or Blaze, is sold in smoke shops and delis under names like Killer Buzz and Aroma. Synthetic marijuana is essentially a mixture of plants and herbs like bay bean, blue lotus and red clover that are sprayed with chemicals. While the drug is reported to have similar effects to natural marijuana, it goes undetected on drug tests and has increased in popularity over the last two years.
Sen. Charles Schumer fought to ban these substances, citing a rash of recent crimes committed by people who were under their influence.
Earlier last month, a man in Texas under the influence of synthetic marijuana attacked his family members and the family dog. A teen in Iowa committed suicide after smoking K2, and a 17-year-old stabbed his schoolmate while high on the substance.
Recently, a 42-year-old man who had taken bath salts bit a chunk off another individual’s face in Louisiana.
“This bill closes loopholes that have allowed manufacturers to circumvent local and state bans and it ensures you can’t simply cross state lines to buy these deadly poisons,” said Schumer, who had previously expressed concern over differing state laws about the drugs. “We have seen bath salts involved in some of the most heinous crimes in recent months. With the president’s signature, we can eradicate these toxins once and for all.”

Julie Menin Leaves CB1
After a seven-year stint as chair of Community Board 1, Julie Menin left her post last Tuesday with plans to run for Manhattan borough president in 2013.
Catherine McVay Hughes, who is currently serving as vice chair, plans to fill Menin’s spot, running unopposed for the position. Hughes has lived a block away from the World Trade Center site for 24 years and has been a vocal supporter and advocate for WTC construction safety.
Highlights from Menin’s time as chair include helping raise $1 million to open Manhattan Youth’s Downtown Community Center. She also formed a housing committee to protect the existing stock of affordable housing in the downtown area.
According to the New York Times, Menin has already raised more than $450,000 to run for Manhattan borough president. Current Borough President Scott Stringer is focusing on a run for New York City mayor.

Photos Courtesy of Alissa Fleck

A number of groups and individuals met today in Foley Square to rally in support of SCOTUS upholding the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Health Care for All New York organized a “Rally to Respond” to the ruling, which was quickly retitled a “Rally to Celebrate,” announced Director Mark Hannay to the crowd. Hannay was among several speakers—doctors, advocates and elected officials—addressing the jubilant crowd of community supporters at the evening rally.

(by Alissa Fleck)

Hannay called the ruling a “milestone step forward in the history of justice,” pointing to the Declaration of Independence’s insistence on the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hannay said these rights cannot be met without affordable, accessible healthcare for all.

Hannay added SCOTUS making healthcare a right for all means America is finally moving toward other industrialized nations, though he said we are only “9/10ths of the way down the field” and must continue to politically support those who uphold affordable healthcare.

Other speakers laid out the main points of what the ruling would mean for Americans, and New Yorkers in particular, including a breakdown of what could be expected by 2014. State Assemblyman Richard Gottfried explained the ACA would help make health funding available for working families, encourage providers to communicate with one another and ensure senior citizens can afford necessary drugs among numerous other modifications. Preventive care will become more widely accessible, particularly pertinent to many women’s health issues.

Georgetown law student and women’s rights advocate Sandra Fluke took the stand to applaud the efforts of Americans who worked to support the SCOTUS decision as well as to remind crowd members the fight is not over.

“I don’t want to see ideologically-driven legislators work to repeal this decision so they can say they fought Obamacare,” said Fluke. “We want the implementation of the whole Affordable Health Care Act and we want it now.”

All the speakers agreed this decision, while important, is foundational and there are still hurdles from here, including building on decisions made in Washington to make laws in New York “even better” and make health care “a right, not a privilege.”

Speaker Quinn called what happened in Washington an “incredibly American act” and said the days of no options for many sick people and “whether you could get treatment [meaning] how big your paycheck was” are coming to an end.

“All have the right to get well, be well and stay well,” said Quinn. “Let’s make it even better.”

Illustration courtesy of Wiki Commons.

By Josh Rogers
John Edwards’ name resurfaced in the news last week with a report that he was a client of the Upper East Side’s “Millionaire Madam” during his 2008 presidential campaign. Regardless of the truth in the allegation, there was a better reason to bring him up again.
It’s hard to remember, but before the first caucus four years ago, Edwards appeared to have a plausible chance to win the Democratic nomination over the two better-financed candidates, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
All three had roughly similar plans to provide health insurance to more Americans, but Edwards talked about a strategic maneuver he planned to pull in the face of certain Congressional roadblocks. His idea was to introduce a bill to end health coverage for Congress, thus challenging opponents to vote for their health care while denying it to others.
With the two-year anniversary of the passage of President Obama’s health care law coinciding with the Supreme Court debating its legality, congressional opponents have had a chance to revive their “rationing medicine” criticism. It’s as if they believe we live in a country where doctors, not insurance companies, decide on the best treatment for patients.
It may work that way under Congress’s gold-plated health plan, but it is not typical in the United States, where medications, tests and doctor referrals are often held up for approval by insurance companies.
When Republican opponents debated “Obamacare” two years ago, they clung to fantasies about what health care is like for many people with insurance. It was so easy for them to say that Obama’s plan would “lead to rationing” that it sounded like a misstatement borne out of genuine ignorance.
Rationing has been going on for a long time. Bureaucrats do make medical decisions. Those decrees are just not the ones we usually hear about because they are made in the private sector.
It still has not sunk in that Obama’s plan was an outgrowth of what used to be conservative mainstream thinking. The Clintons probably could have gotten a similar plan passed almost 20 years ago, but they rejected Republican counter-proposals. Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich were not only for Obamacare before they were against it, they were for it before Obama was.
In more recent years, Republican health care plans have become less reality-based.  When Rudy Giuliani ran for president four years ago, he repeatedly said that he would let individuals shop for the best health insurance at the lowest price. While it’s possible to imagine companies getting into bidding wars to insure young people who have no health problems, the free market is not so kind to people with red flags in their medical records.

Health insurance has become so expensive it can often be an overriding factor in families’ job decisions. I left my full-time job a few years ago to take care of my infant son.  It’s something I wanted to do, but it was also something my wife would have wanted to do. The difference was that I worked for a small company with a health plan that would have cost me many thousands of dollars more to add my wife and son. She works for a large corporation which can bargain for better rates—it costs her an extra $10 a week to cover me.

Ours is by no means a hard-luck story. We were fortunate to have options and were able to pick one we liked. For too many others, health costs forces people to make choices they hate and live in fear

That’s the real-world health system Obamacare is trying to change.

Josh Rogers, contributing editor at Manhattan Media, is a lifelong New Yorker. Follow him at @JoshRogersNYC.