Albany Times Union. March 6, 2024.
Editorial: Burdett decision is Health Department’s to make
The attorney general has not offered a valid reason for her probe of the proposal to close the maternity center.
The Burdett Birth Center is vital to Rensselaer County, and the state Department of Health should reject St. Peter’s Health Partners’ proposal to close the facility and shift its operations to Albany.
That’s been our position since the closure was first proposed, and we’ve heard nothing from St. Peter’s or Trinity Health, its parent company, that would change our stance. Rensselaer County families deserve and need a safe, accessible place for women to give birth — period.
With that said, we have a question: Why has New York Attorney General Letitia James waded into this debate?
We find ourselves concurring with much of the lawsuit filed in state Supreme Court last week by St. Peter’s Health Partners and Samaritan Hospital, which operates Burdett. The suit argues that the attorney general “lacks a legitimate or sufficient basis” for believing that the decision to close the center violates state law.
Moreover, it says that subpoenas from Ms. James’ office, including more than 200 demands for technology and testimony, amount to an abusive “fishing expedition” and that the investigation “is no more than a disguised means for the AG to shake every tree and overturn every rock in the hopes of finding anything, no matter how out of context, to support the AG’s predetermined endgame.”
We agree that the attorney general has not articulated a valid reason for her involvement. While Ms. James, a Democrat, has said the potential closure of Rensselaer County’s only maternity ward is “deeply concerning” — which it is — her concern alone isn’t justification for an investigation. And although a public hearing Ms. James held in September provided a service by highlighting community opposition to the closure, that isn’t justification, either.
Even if Ms. James is motivated only by a desire to help, she is straying beyond her jurisdiction. And since her motivation appears more political than legal, it smacks of overreach.
The decision on the closure ultimately rests with the state Health Department, which must consider and investigate Trinity Health’s claims that Burdett loses millions of dollars annually and is no longer financially viable, given low Medicaid or Medicare reimbursement rates and high insurance costs. Trinity also says losses at Burdett, a 16-bed facility, curtail its ability to provide health services elsewhere in its system.
Those are important considerations for the Health Department to weigh. Its officials must also consider other factors, including whether St. Peter’s Hospital in Albany can handle the influx of patients, and how the move could affect pregnant women for whom the journey to Albany would be difficult. Already, the Health Department has issued a cease-and-desist order to Samaritan Hospital, making clear its authority while warning officials not to reduce services at Burdett without approval.
While the agency’s order suggests the Health Department is fully aware of its responsibilities, we will note that it has been nine months since St. Peter’s first announced its desire to close Burdett. The Health Department should hurry up, weigh the consequences and issue a decision — a decision that, we hope, will keep the birthing center open.
And Ms. James should stay out of its way.
___
Dunkirk Evening Observer. March 4, 2024.
Editorial: State must enact journalism sustainability act
As objective and independent news writers and editors, we have an imperative to cover the issues most important to the people of Chautauqua County.
Every day, our team is on the ground questioning elected officials, uplifting the stories of community changemakers, and uncovering truths that some would rather keep hidden. But, amidst industry challenges, it is no longer unfathomable to picture a future when New York State is completely without local newspapers and other local news outlets.
According to the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University, two-and-a-half newspapers now close each week in the U.S. More than 3,000 newspapers have shuttered across the country since 2004, and New York has been particularly hard hit. In 2004, New York boasted 501 newspapers; today, it’s only 260. In 2022 alone, 30 newspapers closed across the state. A quarter of New York’s counties are news deserts — down to their last newspaper. Orleans County recently became the first in the state to have none though it has an online source. These closures have also resulted in thousands of lost journalism and newsroom-supporting jobs.
Local news matters. Studies show that when a community loses its source of local news, it experiences decreased voter turnout and civic engagement; increased municipal borrowing costs that lead to higher taxes; and decreased transparency among government and business officials, leading to increased waste, fraud, and abuse.
As newspapers shutter, communities become more polarized, leaving us stuck in a never-ending doom loop where we lose sight of our shared values. During this era of intense national partisanship, local news offers a path forward.
The time to act is now. That is why The Post-Journal and OBSERVER has joined with over 150 other New York local newspapers to launch the Empire State Local News Coalition.
The Empire State Local News Coalition, comprising both print and online local newspapers, is advocating for sound public policy that ensures the important work of local news organizations can continue in our state.
Through our independent journalism, we aim to serve, inform, uplift, and protect New Yorkers. Our coalition cares deeply about our local communities as well as the future of New York’s free press. However, market forces are making it nearly impossible for us to survive. So, together, we are sounding the alarm bell for our leaders in Albany to hear.
At the heart of our advocacy is the Local Journalism Sustainability Act. Sponsored by state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assemblymember Carrie Woerner, with the bipartisan support of 55 co-sponsors, this bill provides tax credits to local news outlets for the employment of local news journalists. News organizations are incentivized to actually add jobs, returning reporters to many of the state’s newsrooms, which are becoming increasingly desolate. Importantly, the bill is also content neutral, meaning that any legitimate local news outlet–left, right, or in between–can benefit from this bill. The objectivity of the bill’s eligibility requirements means the legislation cannot be weaponized to penalize news organizations critical of government officials.
As New York loses talented journalists, lawmakers must act to ensure the industry is allowed not only to survive but also to thrive. Only local news outlets — with boots-on-the-ground journalists — can deliver the hyperlocal updates and investigations necessary to sustain a community’s civic and financial well-being. Imagine no stories about the village board meeting or the school budget debate. No pictures of your granddaughter’s first soccer goal. No obituary of your friendly (and eccentric) neighbor. No investigative reporting to hold public officials to account. And no trusted institution to convene the community around a family in need.
We need your help to save local news in New York. To get the Local Journalism Sustainability Act across the finish line, lawmakers need to hear from you about why our newspaper matters and why this bill is important to you. If you would like to help, reach out to Governor Hochul and your local representatives to let them know you stand with local news.
Support the New York Local Journalism Sustainability Act by calling Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office at 518-474-8390;
Assemblyman Andrew Goodell, R-Jamestown, at 518-455-4511 or state Sen. George Borrello, R-Sunset Bay, at 518-455-3563.
Our newspaper is a proud member of the Empire State Local News Coalition: support the coalition at SaveNYLocalNews.com.
___
Jamestown Post-Journal. March 4, 2024.
Editorial: Independently Done Redistricting May Not Be Possible In NY
Republicans’ decision not to challenge redistricting maps passed last week and signed into law by Gov. Kathy Hochul is telling.
It says the state’s GOP realizes that the maps they will use in the November congressional election could have been a lot worse. Democrats made minor changes in the maps approved by the Independent Redistricting Commission to give them advantages in a handful of congressional races, but the changes don’t appear on their face to rise to the level of gerrymandering.
The end result is workable. The process to get there is not.
We tend to agree with Assemblyman Andrew Goodell, who in his comments on the Assembly floor last week waved goodbye to the Independent Redistricting Commission’s recommendations. It was, in our opinion, a fitting gesture for the Independent Redistricting Commission as a whole.
The Independent Redistricting Commission is an idea we wholeheartedly support, but after a decade in existence it’s obvious there will never be anything independent about redistricting. Between the commission’s composition that lends itself to the deadlocked commission we saw two years ago and the ability of the state Legislature to disregard the commission’s maps if party officials disagree with the maps.
The idea of an Independent Redistricting Commission doesn’t acknowledge a basic fact – redistricting is a political process. And as long as redistricting determines boundaries that decide control of Congress, the stakes will be high enough that the worthy ideals of independent redistricting will lose out to the political realities that one party will always be trying to secure an edge over the other party.
It’s been said history is written by the winners. So are congressional lines. And until the Republican Party starts winning a lot more elections, it will remain sidelined when congressional lines are written.
___
New York Post. March 6, 2024.
Editorial: NY Democrats want to make crime pay with crackbrained bill to hand tax bucks to ex-cons
The latest pro-crime measure bubbling up in Albany may be among the worst yet: a crackbrained plan from Harlem Assemblyman Eddie Gibbs and Brooklyn state Sen. Kevin Parker to provide criminals leaving prison with nearly $2,600 in taxpayer-funded pocket money.
Gibbs and Parker literally want to undo the old adage and make crime pay.
And have non-criminals foot the bill.
The hard-left duo justifies the scheme with the usual noise about poverty causing crime (news flash: it doesn’t)and whining about the “dignity” and “stability” of ex-cons.
Nary a thought spared, of course, for the dignity and stability of people who never break the law.
The move has nothing to do with preventing future crime.
Indeed, the data show that Albany’s monstrous efforts at criminal justice reform have had the opposite effect.
Like driving a 66% recidivism rate among offenders with recent prior arrests — with almost half of the re-arrestees getting hit with a felony charge.
Or tripling the number of teen shooters and victims since 2017.
No, this bill is about signaling to law-abiding citizens whose side these “public servants” are actually on.
When push comes to shove, progressive Dems say, we back the crooks.
The program’s expected to cost at least $25 million —and the handout would rise to match inflation every year.
And of course the bill has nothing about tracking how the money gets spent.
Why aren’t people who don’t rob liquor stores or mug straphangers in line for such largesse?
The proposal expresses the same ugly spirit as woke judges letting thugs like cellist-clobberer Amira Hunter free to prey on average New Yorkers.
For Gibbs to claim the bill is “investing in the safety and prosperity of our communities” is a brazen insult.
But it’s an inversion all too typical of the Empire State’s pro-crime Democrats.
___
Wall Street Journal. March 5, 2024.
Editorial: The Letitia James Anti-Business Business Model
The New York AG sues a meat company because it sells too much meat.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul declared the state wouldn’t target businesses with political cases after winning a $454 million judgment against Donald Trump. That vow didn’t last long. Last week Attorney General Letitia James charged the world’s largest beef producer, JBS USA, with misrepresenting its carbon emissions.
“The JBS Group has profited from its fraudulent and illegal business activities across New York State,” the AG claims in a lawsuit filed in state court. Pray tell, how? Her argument is that eating beef is bad for the climate, and that JBS duped consumers into buying its products by making overly ambitious pledges to cut emissions. Seriously. That’s the case.
“Beef has the highest total greenhouse gas emissions of any major food commodity,” the lawsuit notes, and livestock production contributes about 32% of anthropogenic methane emissions each year. JBS says it plans to become “net zero” by 2040. But Ms. James complains that JBS didn’t quantify its so-called Scope 3 emissions from suppliers and customers. In any case, neither New York nor federal law says companies must disclose their greenhouse-gas emissions.
The politically ambitious AG also says the company’s emissions goals are incompatible with its plan to increase meat production. “The JBS Group forecasts increased demand for its products over the coming decades, and it intends to meet that demand,” the lawsuit says. So in her view the company’s offense is doing what it is in business to do—producing meat to satisfy growing public demand.
JBS’s emissions will invariably increase, Ms. James argues, because commercial technology doesn’t exist to reduce methane from cow burps. Buying carbon allowances to offset JBS’s emissions would also be inordinately expensive. She’s right that they wouldn’t be cheap, but the same criticisms applies to New York state’s net-zero pledge.
If JBS committed fraud, so have Democrats who control Albany. Ditto the climate lobby, which has misrepresented that the world can achieve “net zero” merely by banishing fossil fuels. Sorry, that won’t be enough. People will also have to eat a lot less meat, among other coerced sacrifices.
Ms. James charged JBS with violating the state’s Executive Law Section 63(12), the same law she used to sue Donald Trump for allegedly defrauding banks by inflating his assets. Courts have interpreted the sweeping law to provide for disgorgement of “ill-gotten gains” even when there are no victims who lost money.
Ms. James argues that JBS’s climate promises enabled it to sell more meat and charge more for it. “One study found that consumers are willing to pay more—up to 30 percent more—for products with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions,” the lawsuit says. So JBS could be on the hook for profits it made from selling meat in the state.
Proceeds from the lawsuit would go to the state, as will the recent $454 million judgment against Mr. Trump and his company. New York is struggling to pay for growing Medicaid and migrant care. Ms. James’s response is to loot businesses that are unpopular with the left. Who’s next?
On Thursday she announced an investigation into AT&T over last week’s cell-service outage. In November she sued PepsiCo for selling food in single-use plastic packaging without warning consumers about “the known and foreseeable risks that follow from the intended use and foreseeable misuse”—i.e., litter.
Ms. James’s political business model is suing companies for doing business she doesn’t like. Her JBS lawsuit also illustrates how the left plans to exploit the Securities and Exchange Commission’s proposed climate disclosure rule. Companies will be forced to report their emissions publicly, which will open them up to suits by plaintiff attorneys and politicians for alleged misrepresentations. What a racket.
END