Recent editorials of statewide and national interest from New York’s newspapers:
___
The (Middleton) Times-Herald Record on Oprah Winfrey’s speech on sexual assault.
Jan. 8
When Oprah speaks, millions listen. Sunday night she spoke at the annual Golden Globes ceremony as the recipient of the Cecil B. DeMille Award for lifetime achievement and brought the crowd to its feet with her conclusion that “a new day is on the horizon.”
Millions watched live and millions more will be talking about it for some time. This is the case not only because she addressed the hottest topic in the nation today, abuse and discrimination in all forms, but because of her own credibility.
As a true self-made billionaire, a successful brand, she has the respect of the business world. As a star she has the affection and attention of millions. As a woman who rose from poverty to power, she provides the kind of example that Americans have long cherished, one that we could use even more today.
No doubt there will be those who dismiss this as Hollywood talk. They would be mistaken.
Add up the time that Americans spend watching television, watching media on computers or on apps on phones and other devices, listening to music whether streaming or on the radio and all of the other media choices available today, including binge-watching series, and the total figure is a daunting nine and a half hours per day, according to a Netflix survey but backed up by numbers from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics which calculates the time Americans spend doing everything.
Add to that the amount Americans spend going to the movies in theaters, a total of $11.38 billion in 2016, the highest ever reflecting both steady traffic and increased prices, and it is safe to say that we are a media nation.
By itself that makes the Golden Globes, the first awards show of the season, meaningful every year. Add the downfall of Harvey Weinstein which launched the #metoo movement and Oprah was the perfect choice to deliver the powerful message.
And deliver she did.
She reminded Americans of the importance of a free and aggressive press:
“We also know it’s the insatiable dedication to uncovering the absolute truth that keeps us from turning a blind eye to corruption and to injustice. To tyrants and victims, and secrets and lies. I want to say that I value the press more than ever before as we try to navigate these complicated times.”
She broadened the horizon:
But it’s not just a story affecting the entertainment industry. It’s one that transcends any culture, geography, race, religion, politics or workplace. … They’re the women whose names we’ll never know. They are domestic workers and farm workers. They are working in factories and they work in restaurants and they’re in academia, engineering, medicine and science. They’re part of the world of tech and politics and business. They’re our athletes in the Olympics and they’re our soldiers in the military.”
And she closed with a challenge and a promise, one that is likely to echo for a long time:
“For too long, women have not been heard or believed if they dare speak the truth to the power of those men. But their time is up. Their time is up.”
Online: http://bit.ly/2Eq98GM
___
The Post-Standard on the state’s Interstate 81 project.
Jan. 6
When Gov. Andrew Cuomo wants something done, it gets done. Cuomo drove the $3.8 billion, 3.1-mile replacement for the Tappan Zee Bridge from concept to completion in seven years. The governor boasted that his leadership ended a decade of talking about it. He got it done.
On Wednesday, Cuomo announced yet another wrinkle in the Interstate 81 planning process that will push a decision on the highway’s future into 2019. It’s another frustrating development in a process that already has gone on for 10 years.
Why isn’t there more urgency? Replacing the 1.4-mile viaduct through downtown is only the most potentially transformative project to hit this city since the interstate was built 50 years ago.
We’ve only been talking about it since 2008, and planning it in earnest since 2013. The viaduct was forecast to reach the end of its useful life in 2017. The longer it stands, the more it will deteriorate, the more maintenance it will require and the greater the temptation will be to simply drop the whole project. That would be a travesty.
We certainly don’t advocate a rash decision - but this never-ending loop of study, debate and more study is wearing thin.
The New York State Department of Transportation was on track to have a plan for I-81 last year. The years of study and discussion led the agency to recommend two options: building a bigger, safer viaduct or improving city streets (“the community grid”) to handle local traffic while sending through traffic around the city along Interstate 481. NYSDOT engineers rejected the idea of building a high-speed tunnel as too expensive and disruptive.
In January 2017, congressional, state and local legislators and powerful business interests prevailed on Cuomo to commission an independent study to see if a tunnel was feasible. Yet another year went by. The tunnel study came out in December. Sure enough, a tunnel is feasible. It also is costly (up to $4.5 billion) and disruptive (a 10-year construction timeline).
Wednesday, in his State of the State speech, the governor ordered NYSDOT to include a tunnel in an environmental study of I-81 project alternatives. Hearts sank in Syracuse. It now will be 2019 before we get a decision on I-81, pushing the start of construction into 2020, at the earliest, with a potential completion date of 2030.
The need to replace this critical segment of I-81 has coincided with Syracuse’s progress in reviving its economic engine. Whatever the speed bump is, resulting in yet more study and debate over the roadmap to progress, we say, step on the gas. The city is ready to exit from this circuitous examination and re-examination and move forward with this key artery through the heart of Central New York.
Online: http://bit.ly/2EsLVUx
___
The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle on the Rochester Monroe Anti-Poverty Initiative.
Jan. 6
Two years ago, the Rochester Monroe Anti-Poverty Initiative was held up as a “successful” model for the entire state to follow.
In his 2016 State of the State address, Gov. Andrew Cuomo proposed replicating RMAPI in 10 other cities across Upstate New York. He committed hundreds of thousands of dollars to help them begin combating poverty the Rochester way. That followed his 2015 address, in which he announced the creation of RMAPI.
This past Wednesday, however, there was no mention of RMAPI or the statewide anti-poverty effort in Cuomo’s 2018 State of the State address. He mentioned the word “poverty” a half dozen times, and “Rochester” came up more than twice that. But the two words never appeared in the same sentence, or even in close vicinity.
Sometimes what goes unsaid speaks volumes.
As Democrat and Chronicle investigative journalist Patti Singer recently reported, RMAPI is struggling under the weight of community misperceptions, political friction, an inability to control anti-poverty spending, slow program implementation, poor branding, and concern over future funding to sustain itself. These challenges were largely laid out by RMAPI Executive Director Leonard Brock in a series of reports to state officials. The documents were obtained by Singer through Freedom of Information Law, or FOIL, requests.
The issues have not been widely discussed in public, but they should be. Sometimes leaving things unsaid hinders progress.
No one expected Rochester’s latest anti-poverty initiative to be easy. When Cuomo labeled it a success in 2016, this Editorial Board cautioned it was far too early to make that call. Significantly reducing poverty will be a long process, and hard work is being done behind-the-scenes.
And, to be fair, there appears to be slight forward motion on several fronts. In those same reports obtained by Singer, Brock outlined some of RMAPI’s accomplishments: the city has made at least one policy change based on RMAPI recommendations, there are a few pilot programs underway, a handful of local businesses are beginning to hire and train people who live in poverty, and the idea of “collective impact” - the notion that all of us can do something about the problem - is taking hold in some corners of the community. RMAPI officials say other cities setting up anti-poverty initiatives remain eager to gain insight from Rochester.
In addition, many of the economic, educational and early childhood programs included in Cuomo’s speech this year align with RMAPI recommendations. There is growing awareness of what needs to be done. This is undoubtedly due, in part, to RMAPI’s work and the state’s involvement in it.
But, Cuomo appears to be setting up a presidential bid, and much of this year’s State of the State either highlighted the ways he believes New York is already leading the nation - or how it will lead in the near future. RMAPI’s “success” is not listed in either category, for obvious reasons. After three years, RMAPI is still being dragged down by many of the same anchors that pulled all the previous anti-poverty efforts under.
In early 2015, one of the early RMAPI leaders, Irondequoit Assembly Member Joseph Morelle met with the Editorial Board.
“Everybody has a right to be skeptical,” he said. “Poverty’s been with us since the dawn of time. A lot of people are saying this is silly and we’re not going to be able to fix it. That’s OK. Challenge us.”
Today, we do challenge every government, business, nonprofit, and community leader who rallied around the initiative three years ago - to come back to the table with the same energy and commitment to having a collective impact on poverty. The obstacles RMAPI faces today are not nearly as daunting as the poverty problem it is supposed to solve. Some are simply a matter of communication, or the lack thereof. But overcoming these obstacles soon is critical.
Online: http://on.rocne.ws/2miLW6O
___
Newsday on legalizing marijuana and the issue of states’ rights.
Jan. 9
Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ announcement that the federal government will prosecute possession and sale of marijuana in states where it is legal is stunning conservative hypocrisy.
Throughout American history, conservatives have championed “states’ rights.” Sessions himself has done so on countless occasions, such as when he rescinded the Obama policy interpreting federal law to protect transgender students. But when Sessions does not like what states are doing, such as legalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana, his commitment to federalism and states’ rights vanishes.
In 2013, the Justice Department issued the “Cole memo”, which said that the federal government would not enforce the federal Controlled Substance Act’s prohibition of marijuana in states that had legalized it. In this way, the federal government announced that it would let these states deal with marijuana so long as they did not threaten other federal priorities, such as preventing the distribution of the drug to minors and targeting cartels.
The Cole memo allowed local marijuana sellers to be confident that they would not be prosecuted if licensed by a state. On Thursday, Jan. 5, Sessions said that he was rescinding the Cole memo and returning to the “rule of law.”
Twenty-nine states, including California, have approved the sale of marijuana for medical purposes. Eight states - Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington - also have legalized sale and possession of small amounts of marijuana. Sessions’ announcement undoubtedly was in response to the California law going into effect at the beginning of this year. The shift in federal policy creates great uncertainty for businesses that sell and distribute marijuana.
The federal government clearly has the legal authority to prosecute and punish sale or possession of marijuana under current law. Marijuana remains a Schedule 1 controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act, along with opioids like heroin, and hallucinogenics like LSD.
A state’s choice to legalize marijuana, for medical or recreational use, means that the state government will not prosecute sale or possession. But that cannot keep the federal government from doing so.
States can have any law they want - including none at all - with regard to marijuana. A state may choose to have no law prohibiting marijuana or a law prohibiting marijuana with an exception for medical use or a law allowing possession of small amounts of marijuana or anything else it wants.
But the choice by a state to legalize marijuana does not have any effect on the federal law or federal enforcement of it. Under current law, possession of marijuana is still a federal crime and the federal government can choose to enforce its law however it chooses. Legalization by a state, in some or all circumstances, just means that it is not a state crime.
Contrary to what many believe, marijuana laws continued to be enforced. According to statistics from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in 2013, 693,482 individuals in the United States were arrested and charged with marijuana violations and of these, 609,423, or 88 percent, were arrested for simple possession.
There is an enormous cost in terms of law enforcement resources, the criminal justice system, and people’s lives for marijuana to remain illegal. Even for those arrested and never prosecuted or convicted, arrest records have real harms in terms of the ability to get jobs, loans, housing and benefits.
Like all drug laws, the prohibition against marijuana is much more likely to be enforced against African-Americans and Latinos than against whites. According to a 2013 study, whites and blacks use marijuana at roughly the same rates, but blacks are 3.7 times more likely than whites to be arrested for possession of marijuana.
Yet, there is little benefit of illegality. The primary argument for keeping marijuana illegal is that it is harmful. But as President Barack Obama observed, pot is not “more dangerous than alcohol.” Many things are harmful - cigarettes, foods high in sugar and salt and cholesterol - but that does not mean that they should be illegal. In fact, there is a good deal of evidence that marijuana is significantly less harmful than tobacco or alcohol and that it has benefits in treating some medical conditions, such as glaucoma and seizure disorders, and alleviating some of the ill effects of chemotherapy.
Ultimately, though, the question is whether states should be able to decide this question for themselves, including choosing to gain the taxes from legal marijuana. One would expect that a conservative president and attorney general would think so.
Online: https://nwsdy.li/2DdbYj2
___
The New York Times on the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Jan. 8
Children from lower-income families could soon lose access to affordable health care because the Republican leaders in Congress have failed to renew the Children’s Health Insurance Program. This is a travesty.
After passing a lavish tax cut for corporations and wealthy families, Congress hastily left town last month without reauthorizing the federal-state health insurance program, which benefits nearly nine million children. Authorization expired in September, and so far states have kept CHIP going with unspent funds carried over from previous appropriations. Before Christmas, Congress allocated $2.85 billion to the program, saying that the money would take care of the children’s needs until the end of March. But that appears to have been a gross miscalculation, because the Trump administration said on Friday that some states would start running out of money after Friday, Jan. 19.
CHIP was created in 1997 and has helped halve the percentage of children who are uninsured. It has been reauthorized by bipartisan majorities of Congress in the past. But Republican leaders in Congress all but abandoned the program last fall and devoted their time to trying to pass an unpopular tax bill that will increase the federal debt by $1.8 trillion over the next decade, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis released last week. By contrast, CHIP costs the federal government roughly $14.5 billion a year, or $145 billion over 10 years.
Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times’s products and services.
Republicans have held children’s insurance hostage to force Democrats to accept cuts to other programs. Last year, House Republicans insisted that they would reauthorize CHIP only if Democrats agreed to offset spending on the program with cuts to Medicare and a public health program created by the Affordable Care Act. Democrats balked at those demands, given that Republicans did not bother to offset the loss of revenue from their boondoggle tax cuts.
A deal between the two sides should theoretically be easier to reach now. That’s because the C.B.O. said last week that reauthorizing CHIP would add just $800 million to the federal deficit over 10 years, much less than the $8.2 billion it had projected earlier. The budget office updated its estimates after the adoption of the tax law. That law will significantly reduce federal spending on health care by eliminating the requirement that people buy insurance, which many people do with the help of government subsidies. The budget office says that provision and a separate change to insurance regulations by the Trump administration will reduce the cost of insuring children.
Yet funding for CHIP is still far from assured. Congress has a lot on its plate, chiefly passing a spending bill by the end this week to avoid a government shutdown.
If Congress does not act on CHIP, state governments will be forced to freeze enrollment, cut benefits, end their programs or come up with another source of money. For some families, the program, which costs them nothing or very little, is essential. Losing it would be a big blow. Many cannot afford coverage in the private market.
After meeting with Mr. Trump during the weekend at Camp David, Republican leaders suggested they wanted to work with Democrats on bipartisan legislation this year. If they are serious, they can start with CHIP. America’s children are counting on it.
Online: http://nyti.ms/2CXrt0P
___
Please read our comment policy before commenting.