The following is an opinion sent to New Bedford Guide. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of New Bedford Guide, nor is it an OP-ED. In fairness and objectivity, we share opinions from our readers whether we agree or disagree with their opinion.

Do you have a counter opinion to this opinion? Have an opinion about something else? Email us at info@newbedfordguide.com.

_____________________________________________________________

“As the inevitability of a Biden and Trump re-match for the presidency becomes more of a reality the electorate will have to concentrate on the vice presidential selections as they cast their ballots and make their donations.

There are no guarantees that the Trump indictments will produce any convictions with imprisonment or probation. But should there be a pre- or post-election jail sentence for Trump, who he has selected as his vice president takes on immense significance.

And by the same token if Biden becomes cognitively impaired his selection of vice president is equally important.

Historically the selected vice president has had virtually no bearing on the election except possibly to pander to a particular state or voting bloc with only minimal impact on the outcome.

But this time undoubtedly there will be far more media attention devoted to the speeches and debating ability of the vice presidential candidates.

Trump has far more flexibility as to whom he chooses as his running mate. There will be no hue and cry from his supporters for not selecting Pence for obvious reasons.

Biden has a real conflict as to his chosen running mate. Kamala Harris has not generated the favorability or enthusiasm that had been hoped for by so many supporters. If Biden selects someone else he will antagonize a significant portion of voters. Conversely, if he names Harris there may be an equally dissatisfied electorate.

Unless Harris graciously declines to run he is in a no-win situation as regards this issue.

Obviously the field may change drastically within the next year and a half, but as matters stand the vice presidential candidates may decide the election more than any other issue.”-Betty Ussach, Dartmouth.

Chris Lisinski
State House News Service

More than 33,000 Bay Staters lost MassHealth coverage in June after being dubbed no longer eligible or failing to provide enough documentation, officials said Tuesday.

Since the state kicked off a year-long eligibility review of all 2.4 million members in April, just shy of 69,000 people have been stripped from the MassHealth rolls, according to new data published by the Executive Office of Health and Human Services. Nearly half of that reduction took place in June, the third month of the process.

In a summary of the latest data, MassHealth officials called the trend “an expected modest increase” after the first two months did not show sizable losses. MassHealth, which combines the state’s Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program, also added 15,497 new members in June. Officials described that as a relatively routine monthly increase.

Most of the people kicked from the rolls last month, about 23,000, were between the ages of 21 and 64. Another 5,857 were younger than 20, while 3,937 were 65 or older. Health insurance is required in Massachusetts and people losing MassHealth eligibility must obtain private insurance through their employer or spouse’s employer, secure a plan offered through the Health Connector, or face tax penalties for not being insured.

The Licensing board officially voted to ban the sale of nip bottles in the city of New Bedford. The ban is estimated to take in order starting November 1st as the board decided to give business owners time to sell their current stock.

This comes after a fiery meeting between citizens on both sides of the matter on Monday night. Most notably Mark Riley, the owner of “Freitas Package Store” has been voicing his objection to the ban.

“This decision was made by a hand picked committee appointed by the mayor, because the mayor knows if you put this in front of the voters it would not pass.”

Mark Riley gave an interview after the ruling which was captured live by Carlos Pimental Felix:

City Councilman Ian Abreu also voiced his opinion to the board in opposition of the ban, “I believe in adults being able to make adult decisions for whats best in their lives.” Abreu went on stating, “Lets not punish these commercial tax paying hard working individuals, because they have a right to earn a living.”

Several other members of the community that were in opposition of the ban announced they will be filing an ethics complaint in regards to the ruling from the licensing board. Mark Custodio announced to reporters, “Tomorrow we will file an ethics complaint that the debate took place outside public view and the board did not debate this issue in a public room.”

Carlos Pimental Felix photo.

There was a heavy presence of individuals who supported the ban on nips as well, some bringing bags full of bottles they collected off of the ground as an example of the issue they are causing on New Bedford streets.

Regardless of what side citizens are on, this seems to be a critically important topic for many. Which leads to the question, should citizens of voted on this matter rather than leave it to a board to decide?

Carlos Pimental Felix photo.

On Monday night, the New Bedford Licensing Board unanimously voted to ban all liquor stores from selling what are colloquially called “nips,” those miniature bottles of alcohol. Currently, statewide only Chelsea, Falmouth, Mashpee, Newton and Wareham have bans on nips.

In 2019, we shared an op-ed about a variation of this ban that focused solely on the most popular “nip,” the cinnamon-flavored “Fireball.” It would be no exaggeration to say that 4 out of every 5 nips you find will be of this brand.

At the time of that article there had already been chatter in the community about the issue of nips and as people voiced their complaints with New Bedford City Council and town meetings, the chatter became a roar and residents were not going to let go of the issue.

Against the ban, were local liquor stores who knew that their bottom-line would take a hit. “Nips,” are as Massachusetts as Dunkin’ and make up a fair share of revenue for these stores. One liquor store, Freitas Package Store took to social media to spread an information campaign to keep nips legal. They also used their letter sign to ask people to “Stop NB Nip Ban” and come inside and sign the petition.

Alas, it was an uphill battle in a stream too powerful to fight against.

Of course, the cynics who love nips will be angry and upset, but they only have themselves to blame. The very people who declare constantly, “New Bedford sucks!!” are the same ones making it “suck.” An irony that will be indubitably lost on them. Because people act irresponsible and just chuck their nip out of their car window or on the ground if they are walking, we now have this unanimous vote to ban them.

You will find most nip bottles within 100′ feet of anny “packie” and as you get farther and farther away they are less frequent. Generally, people buy them, walk out of the store, “shoot” the nip and then throw it on the ground like an animal. New Bedford Licensing Board Chairman Edmund Craig said, “Too many times, the nips will leave a package store — the next thing we know, we’re going to find them on the streets.”

When does the ban take effect? Lquor stores will be given 90 days’ notice of the new ordinance. The liquor stores will be allowed to sell off their current inventory. City officials estimate that the slow fizzling out of nip sales will come to a stop at the end of October or the first week of November.

“The Board of Election Commissioners reminds residents that Nomination Papers for the 2023 Municipal Election are available in the Election Office located in City Hall, 133 William Street — Room 114. The deadline for obtaining nomination papers is Friday, July 28th, at 5 p.m.

Candidates are required to sign up and will be given an information packet that contains the Election Calendar and nomination papers. Before issuance of nomination papers, the candidate must sign a statement containing the person’s name, address, and the office the person intends to be a candidate. Anyone other than the candidate must present a signed authorization to secure papers on their behalf. Candidates must obtain 50 certified signatures, per MGL 53 9A, to be eligible to appear on the Preliminary Ballot scheduled for October 3rd.

The Municipal Election is scheduled for Tuesday, November 7, 2023. In the Preliminary Municipal Election, New Bedford voters will be casting their votes for Mayor, Assessor-At-Large, School Committee, Councilors-At-Large, and Ward Councilors. Please see the attached updated election calendar for further details including information regarding early voting locations and dates.

City of New Bedford
Municipal Election Calendar
Preliminary Election – October 3, 2023
Municipal Election – November 7, 2023

• APRIL 4
First day on which nomination papers can be obtained from the office of the Board of Election Commissioners for the offices of Mayor, City Council, Assessor-At-Large, and School Committee. Each candidate must sign with the Board of Election Commissioners before he/she can obtain papers. A signed statement containing the person’s name, address, and the office for which the person intends to be a candidate. Each candidate will be issued five (5) nomination papers.

• JULY 28 by 5:00 P.M.
Last day and hour to obtain nomination papers from the Board of Election Commissioners.

• AUGUST 1 by 5:00 P.M.
Last day and hour to submit nomination papers to the Board of Election. Commissioners for certification of signatures.

• AUGUST 15 by 5:00 P.M.
Last day and hour to officially accept nomination once signatures certified with the Board of Election Commissioners.

• AUGUST 17 by 5:00 P.M.
Last day and hour for filing withdrawals or objections of nomination Papers with the Board of Election Commissioners.

• SEPTEMBER 22 by 5:00 P.M.
Last day to register to vote for the Preliminary Election.

• SEPTEMBER 23/9:00 A.M. TO 4 P.M.
In-person Early Voting at Main Public Library.

• SEPTEMBER 26 by 5:00 P.M.
Last day and hour to apply for a mail-in or absentee preliminary ballot.

• SEPTEMBER 27/11:00 A.M. TO 3 P.M.
In-person Early Voting at Taber Mills

• SEPTEMBER 28/11:00 A.M. TO 3 P.M.
In-person Early Voting at Hazelwood Senior Center.

• OCTOBER 2 by 12:00 P.M.
Last day and hour to apply for an in-person absentee preliminary ballot

• OCTOBER 3
PRELIMINARY ELECTION – POLLS OPEN 7:00 A.M. – 8:00 P.M.

• OCTOBER 9 by 5:00 P.M.
Last day and hour to file recount petition with Board of Electio”The Board of Election Commissioners reminds residents that Nomination Papers for the 2023 Municipal Election are available in the Election Office located in City Hall, 133 William Street — Room 114. The deadline for obtaining nomination papers is Friday, July 28th, at 5 p.m.

• OCTOBER 27 5:00 PM Last day to register to vote for the Municipal Election.

• OCTOBER 289:00 A.M. TO 4 P.M. In-person Early Voting at Main Public Library.

• OCTOBER 31 by 5:00 PM Last day and hour to apply for a mail-in or absentee election ballot.

• NOVEMBER 1/11:00 A.M. TO 3 P.M. In-person Early Voting at Taber Mills.

• NOVEMBER 2/11:00 A.M. TO 3 P.M. In-person Early Voting at Hazelwood Senior Center

• NOVEMBER 6 12:00 P.M. Last day and hour to apply for the in-person absentee election ballot.

• NOVEMBER 7 Municipal Election – Polls open from 7:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M.

• NOVEMBER 17 by 5:00 P.M. Last day and hour to file for a recount for the Election.”-City of New Bedford.

The following is an opinion sent to New Bedford Guide. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of New Bedford Guide, nor is it an OP-ED. In fairness and objectivity, we share opinions from our readers whether we agree or disagree with their opinion.

Do you have a counter opinion to this opinion? Have an opinion about something else? Email us at info@newbedfordguide.com.

_____________________________________________________________

“My name is Hadley Zibel and I am the Special Assistant to Sheriff Heroux. I am writing to submit a response on behalf of the BCSO to a recent opinion piece posted online. We wanted to make sure correct and accurate information was available to the public.

Communicating with the public about the work that is done at the BCSO is an important part of what we do. In the absence of information, people make things up or assume the worst. There is a reason for everything, and the Sheriff never makes decisions alone. With that in mind, let us take a moment to address some of the concerns raised in this recent letter.

First, it is the duty and obligation of any administration to change the mission statement to reflect the will of the majority of the voters of Bristol County. That is what Sheriff Heroux recently did with the revised mission statement. The new mission statement was posted on the BCSO website.

Second, allow us to explain to the community what we are doing and why with respect to eliminating programs that do not have anything to do with running a jail. The elimination of these programs is not a reflection of the importance of the programs but a reflection of the role that this Sheriff and this jail should need to be focused on, as indicated by the will of the voters who voted for change at the BCSO.

TRIAD – This is a program where a BCSO staff was paid to organize spending for various community Councils on Aging. BCSO staff reached out to all of the COAs that we worked with on this program. Our role was to hold the money. We sent their money back to them. It was a total of about $26,000. TRIAD was not something which we had a big role. The TRIAD program continues as it was without the participation of the BCSO. The BCSO staff member is now working in Internal Affairs.

RUOK – This was a program where 130 senior citizens were called on a daily basis to ask “are you ok?” This is the job of a Council on Aging. As such, the person working for the BCSO reached out to all of the COAs in Bristol County that had people in this program and asked them to take on the small caseload of phone calls. Most did. The COAs who did not, now find their constituents being called by another local COA. The phone calls to senior citizens continue. The staff person who was doing the calls is now working in Human Resources.

Project Lifesaver – Enough has been written about this program. It is an outdated technology where the BCSO was paying one staff over $80,000 a year to drive to users’ homes to change batteries in the locating devices. All participants in the program were encouraged to use an Apple AirTag, which is cheaper to tax payers, easier to use, and a superior technology in its locating ability. The security staff changing the batteries is now a correctional officer again.

School programs – The research is unequivocal – Scared Straight style programs (like Project Slam) make youth worse off. Project Slam was a non-aversive scared straight program, which was making kids more likely to end up behind bars for several reasons one of which was because said programs removes the fear of incarceration.

We also had the comfort dog program that started in the fall of 2022 where the dogs visited schools throughout the county on a regular basis. This was a public relations program well beyond the scope of a jail operation. We will leave the schools to run a comfort dog programs for students, and we will run a jail. The three dogs that were in this program are either being retired per the request of the owner (as with one dog), or are getting retrained in being a drug detection dog for use inside the jail to find illegal drugs in the jail or coming into the jail.

Additionally, the Homeland Security Program was eliminated because that program was offering a service that was well beyond the scope of running a jail. Part of that program was a class that offered students life skills in case of an emergency. This is important but it is beyond the scope of corrections operations. This program was created to give work to two individuals. Creating jobs is not the job of the BCSO. The $170,000 that was being spent on this on the Homeland Security Program is money we are putting into inmate reentry services.

As you can see everything was thought through and there was a reason for everything. We have identified about $2 million in jobs that had nothing to do with running a jail. Resources are being redirected inside the jail to make our jail a better run facility, which will improve public safety for everyone in Bristol County and beyond. That is our mission.”

The New Bedford Police Department was a big topic of discussion in this week’s “weekly update” with Mayor Jon Mitchell on New Bedford Cable Network. He began with an update on New Bedford Police Detective Lavar Gilbert who was shot in the face on Monday July 17th.

“It was a really close call for him, he had a bullet lodged literally in his face.”

After the recording of the mayors update, the New Bedford Police Department have since announced that Detective Gilbert has been released from a hospital in Boston. He may need to have a procedure in the future, but is expected to make a full recovery.

“Police officers will continue to take risks and we certainly appreciate what they do, we need to let that appreciation be known.” Mayor Mitchell noted as a transition from speaking about the recent shooting, to the future of the New Bedford Police Department.

“We want to make sure everybody is clear that what police do is really important, it’s really the foundation for civilized society.”

The New Bedford Police Union and the City of New Bedford were in a long and difficult negotiation process for salary increases which led to a new collective bargaining to be reached on July 12th 2023. In response to the agreement, the Police Union noted:

“Hiring and retention have been major areas of concern which the New Bedford Police Union has consistently drawn attention to. We believe this agreement is a step in the right direction in addressing those concerns, while also acknowledging that there is work still to be done in order to fully resolve those issues.”

The New Bedford Police Union have been extremely vocal about issues such as decreased staffing, posting updates consistently on social media alerting the public about the situation. Every update they posted would end with the same message stating:

“The purpose of this notice is to keep city residents and visitors aware of the decrease in the number of officers on the street and a possible decrease in the expected level of service promised to them by city officials.”

Continuing with the Mayors weekly update, Mayor Mitchell went on stating:

“We will continue to invest as we have in the police department. Last week we announced some major increases in compensation for our police officers, and benefits so that we can continue to recruit and retain officers.”

Another hot button issue regarding the New Bedford Police Department has been the absence of body-cams on officers. It was announced on July 12th that body-cams will now be coming to the department. Mayor Mitchell continued in the update:

“We are investing also in equipment. Body cameras, weapons, tasers, cameras, cruisers, you will see more of that in the weeks and months ahead.”

I believe it is fair to say that New Bedford residents benefit greatly from a fully funded police department. The shooting of 17 year veteran detective Lavar Gilbert was a stark reminder that officers face grave risk every day on the job and should be supplied with the latest equipment as well as competitive salaries.

“Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, and Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez (NY-07) today announced the introduction of the Fueling Alternative Transportation with a Carbon Aviation Tax (FATCAT) Act, legislation that would increase fuel taxes for private jet travel from the current $0.22 to $1.95 per gallon—the equivalent of an estimated $200 per metric ton of a private jet’s CO2 emissions—and remove existing fuel tax exemptions for logging and oil or gas exploration.

Tax revenue generated by the FATCAT Act would be transferred to the Airport & Airway Trust Fund and a newly created federal Clean Communities Trust Fund to support air monitoring for environmental justice communities and long-term investments in clean, affordable public transportation across the country—including passenger rail and bus routes near commercial airports.

Private air travel is the most energy-intense form of travel. Per passenger, private jets pollute up to 14 times more than commercial flights and 50 times more than trains, producing as much emissions as millions of cars every year in the United States. Despite their sky-high emissions per passenger, private air travel is taxed considerably less than commercial air travel.

“The 1 percent can’t free ride on our environment and our infrastructure at a discount,” said Senator Markey. “Billionaires and the ultra-wealthy are getting a bargain, paying less in taxes each year to fly private and contribute more pollution than millions of drivers combined on the roads below. It’s time to ground these fat cats and make them pay their fair share so that we can invest in building public transportation that communities across the country and our economy desperately need.”

“Working families shouldn’t subsidize the ultra-wealthy to fly private and destroy our environment,” said Congresswoman Velázquez. “If billionaires want to travel on private jets, they should pay similar taxes to those flying commercial. It’s time for the rich to pay for their pollution so we can fund environmental justice initiatives and affordable public transportation across the country.”

A copy of the legislation can be found HERE.

Cosponsors include Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).

The legislation is endorsed by Transportation for America, Americans for Tax Fairness, Patriotic Millionaires, Public Citizen, and the Sunrise Movement.

“Private air travel is one of my greatest loves in this world – there really is nothing like it. But after learning about the disproportionate damage that private air travelers wreak on the environment, I made the decision to sell my private jet this past May. I could no longer in good conscience continue to put my convenience and comfort ahead of the good of the planet. I highly doubt that other wealthy jet owners will follow my example.

But if my wealthy peers are going to willfully destroy the planet, the least they can do is pay for it – which they haven’t been doing for some time. By increasing the excise tax on fuel used by private jets, Senator Markey’s new bill takes a step in righting this wrong. It’s not going to stop the ultra-rich from flying private altogether, but it will at least make them pay some of the social and ecological costs for their selfish habit,” said Stephen Prince, Founder of Card Marketing Services and Vice-Chair of the Patriotic Millionaires.

“When I was a little girl, I used to love the trips that my family and I took on our private jet. Now I know better. Last Friday, I was arrested at the East Hampton Airport in Wainscott, NY while lying on the ground, protesting the use of private jets by my wealthy peers.

I had a change of heart on private air travel after fully appreciating how damaging they are to the environment. And as we’ve all seen over the last week, our environment is in serious trouble. Climate change is not some far-off worry for our grandchildren to handle: it’s here now, and will only get worse if we don’t take major and immediate action to stop it.

Through their private jet use (and other excesses), the rich are the ones driving our world’s most existential problem. Therefore, it is only right that they pay the cost. By putting a steep price tag on private jet fuel, Senator Markey’s bill meets the mark here, and will hopefully work to disincentivize this most destructive practice,” said Abigail Disney, Philanthropist, and Social Activist.

“Our upside-down tax system has given preference to the wealthiest for too long. If the wealthiest were paying their fair share in federal taxes, there would be more revenue entering the system to fund services and programs that we all rely on, including ensuring that we have clean air and safe drinking water. An Increase in Excise Tax for Fuel Use by Private Jets begins to right this system, taxing a luxury item that the richest use,” said David Kass, Executive Director of Americans for Tax Fairness.

“The private jet class may be under the delusion that they can fly away from their responsibility for worsening the climate crisis, but Senator Edward Markey’s FATCAT bill lands just in time to correct that misimpression,” said Robert Weissman, President of Public Citizen. “This bill taxes some of the most climate destructive activity of the super-rich and invests the revenues to promote public transportation and environmental justice, a double win for climate justice.”

“Transportation is the major emissions contributor in the United States,” said Benito Pérez, Policy Director of Transportation for America. “It is critically important that those who are contributing the most to this problem are held accountable. At the same time, we need to incentivize and invest in clean and sustainable mobility choices for communities that are most impacted by harmful emissions. This bill takes important steps to accomplish both of these goals.”

“Private jet users should pay the real environmental costs of their indefensible luxury transportation choice. Senator Markey’s legislation is a bold step in right direction and generates funds for urgently needed transportation alternatives,” said Chuck Collins, Director of the Program on Inequality and the Common Good of Institute for Policy Studies and Co-author of High Flyers 2023: How Ultra-Rich Private Jet Travel Costs the Rest of Us and Burns Up the Planet.

“Raising the jet fuel tax is a no-brainer. Private flights already contributed 37 million tons of CO2 in the last few years, which are driving the heat, wildfires and floods that so many of us are experiencing right now. If you’re riding in a private jet, your net worth is likely over $100 million, and you can afford to pay a little more so the rest of us can survive,” said Varshini Prakash, Executive Director of Sunrise Movement.

Senator Markey has long pushed for reducing emissions from the transportation sector. Senator Markey has championed vehicle emission and fuel economy standards, such as the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. That law included then-Congressman Markey’s language that set the standard to at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020 and required the “maximum feasible standard” to be set every year.

In April of this year, Senators Markey and Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) celebrated the Environmental Protection Agency for heeding their calls to swiftly issue regulations to curb greenhouse gases among other pollutants for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles for Model Year 2027 and beyond. Senator Markey also supported emission reductions from ports and vessels through the Expanding Maritime Environmental and Technical Assistance Program (META) Act.”

“Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) today announced the reintroduction of the Equity in Pre-Trial Health Coverage Act, legislation that would protect the continuity of federal health benefits under Medicaid, Medicare, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Veterans Affairs for Americans who have been detained while they await trial and, in many cases, remain in custody because they cannot afford bail.

This would make it easier for people to continue to access essential health care during and after incarceration, including substance use disorder and mental health treatment. This legislation would partially reverse the 1965 Federal Medicaid Inmate Exclusion Policy.

“Health care should be a right, not a privilege, and that means it should not be contingent on whether a person can afford to pay their bail,” said Senator Markey. “It is long past time for Congress to eliminate discriminatory policies that make it harder for people to get the health care they need, including substance use disorder or mental health services.

People who are arrested are so often left behind in our health care system, leaving our poorly-equipped criminal legal system to fill in the gaps will keep working with counties across Massachusetts to break down barriers to essential health care and create a system that puts people’s care before incarceration. I thank Senator Merkley for his continued partnership in making sure that we end these unjust policies once and for all.”

“Americans who have serious health conditions — including those who are awaiting trial — need access to quality healthcare and can’t afford to be kicked off of those benefits,” said Senator Merkley. “In America, you are innocent until proven guilty, and the Equity in Pre-Trial Health Coverage Act will ensure that pre-trial detainees can keep their health coverage and seek the medical treatment they need.”

Currently, individuals who have been arrested and are able to post bail maintain their coverage. People who remain in custody—but have not been convicted of the crime for which they have been charged—can lose it. As a result, a gap exists in coverage for individuals covered by federal health programs awaiting trial, which keeps them from being able to access essential care in their community and shifts the cost of medical treatment for pretrial detainees to local city, county, and state agencies. This gap is particularly challenging for people with substance use disorders and other mental health conditions which require consistent and sustained medical treatment.

Last Congress, Senator Markey secured provisions in the end-of-year Omnibus spending package which allow Medicaid coverage to be accessible on a state level for juveniles who are in custody pending deposition of charges. The Equity in Pretrial Health Coverage Act would go further, extending coverage to anyone no matter their age.

A copy of the legislation can be found HERE.

Cosponsors in the Senate include Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.).

The Equity in Pretrial Health Coverage Act is endorsed by National Commission on Correctional Health Care, National Sheriffs’ Association, Major County Sheriffs of America National Association of Counties, Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association, Association of Oregon Counties, Oregon State Sheriffs’ Association, and National Council for Mental Wellbeing.

“All incarcerated individuals have a constitutional right to health care, which many desperately need. The gap in federal health benefits for individuals awaiting trial is unfair and unjust, both to those individuals and to the local agencies that need to cover health care costs. The National Commission on Correctional Health Care, the only organization in the country devoted solely to improving the health care provided in jails, prisons, and juvenile confinement facilities, wholly supports the Equity in Pretrial Health Coverage Act and the continuity of care it would provide,” said Deborah Ross, CEO of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care.

“Individuals in pre-trial custody are presumed innocent until proven guilty and, therefore, should continue to receive their Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and VA benefits. This is why Major County Sheriffs of America believes Congress should enact the Equity in Pretrial Health Coverage Act. Passing this bill is not only good public health policy; it is also good public safety policy,” said Megan Noland, Executive Director of the Major County Sheriffs of America.

“Oregon is in the midst of an unprecedented shortage of housing and substance abuse treatment. Community members are entering our jails and youth detention facilities with immediate and complex health needs. Uninterrupted Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans’ benefits will allow for better coordination of health care services and improved health outcomes, lowering short-term costs to local taxpayers and long-term costs to the federal government,” said Derrick DeGroot, Klamath County Commissioner and President of the Association of Oregon Counties.

“People living with a mental health or substance use challenge are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. At no point should a justice-involved individual be denied access to mental health and substance use disorder care based on a change in health care coverage. Continuity of care is critical, especially for those living with mental health and substance use challenges – it not only helps save lives but also reduces recidivism. We applaud Senator Markey for prioritizing this issue and look forward to working with him and his fellow lawmakers to continue closing gaps in access to care,” said Chuck Ingoglia, President and CEO of the National Council for Mental Wellbeing.

“The Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association, and the 14 duly-elected Sheriffs of the Commonwealth, unequivocally and overwhelmingly support the Equity in Pretrial Health Coverage Act. The current inequities place an undue strain on our law enforcement, public safety, public health, our communities at large, and most importantly, the individuals themselves. The Sheriffs have been advocating for years for the need to eliminate the Federal Medicaid Inmate Exclusion Policy. Expanding the health coverage for eligible incarcerated individuals pending disposition of charges can and will change lives,” said Nicholas Cocchi, President of the Massachusetts Sherriffs’ Association.

“This legislation furthers the commitment of federal health benefits under Medicaid, Medicare, CHIP, and Veterans Affairs. This would be another great step in helping many sheriffs with the continuation of health care services that their community members need,” said Jim Skinner, Sheriff of Collin County, Texas.”

“The Ware Police Department would like to bring an important matter to your attention: the proposed anti-gun Bill currently under consideration (HD 4420, An Act Modernizing Firearms Laws). We understand that this state-level legislation has raised concerns among law-abiding citizens who value their Second Amendment rights.

We recognize that the right to bear arms is a fundamental aspect of our nation’s history and an essential component of personal and collective security. As members of the police force, we are committed to upholding the law and defending the rights of our community members.

A plethora of blatantly unconstitutional proposals litter this travesty of a Bill, too many to mention here; however, of particular egregiousness is the criminalization of carrying firearms in certain so-called “prohibited locations”, including businesses and private properties, EVEN WHILE HOLDING A VALID LICENSE TO CARRY. Not even off-duty police officers will be exempted from this appalling mandate.

Gun Free zones have been proven to have no effect on stopping crime, in fact they embolden criminals to seek out these areas as soft targets of opportunity, where their chances of meeting resistance will be minimal.

This Bill does not address criminals. Rather it focuses on making criminals out of law-abiding citizens and further hampers police agencies from combating true crime.

We believe that public input and engagement are crucial in shaping legislation that reflects the diverse perspectives and concerns of our citizens. Therefore, we encourage you, the citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, who have a long and storied history of throwing off the chains of our oppressors (let not this tradition die in the hands of our generation), to actively participate in the democratic process by voicing your opinions and taking appropriate actions to safeguard your rights.

Here are a few ways you can make a difference:

1. Educate yourself: Familiarize yourself with the details of the proposed anti-gun Bill. Read the legislation, study its potential impact, and understand its implications for your rights as a responsible gun owner.
2. Communicate with your elected representatives: Reach out to your local, state, and federal representatives to express your concerns about the Bill. Write letters, and make phone calls to ensure your voice is heard.
3. Encourage open dialogue: Foster constructive conversations about gun ownership, emphasizing responsible practices and the importance of preserving individual liberties. Engage in respectful discussions with friends, family, and neighbors to promote understanding and awareness.
4. Stay informed and mobilize: Keep yourself updated on the progress of the bill and its potential impact on your rights. Stay connected with local gun rights organizations and be prepared to mobilize if necessary.

Remember, your involvement in shaping legislation that impacts your rights is vital. By actively participating and voicing your concerns, you contribute to the democratic process and help ensure that legislation is fair, balanced, and respects the rights of responsible citizens.

The Ware Police Department encourages respectful and law-abiding civic engagement on this matter. We are committed to maintaining the safety and security of our community while upholding the rights enshrined in our Constitution..

Thank you for your attention and active participation.-Ware PD”