The following is an opinion sent to New Bedford Guide. It does not 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.

_____________________________________________________________________________

“The right wing Republican pro-Israel stance is not wavering!

For those liberal Democrats and voters of middle eastern decent, who are withholding or rejecting support of President Biden because he has not taken the final step of advocating for the cessation of military aid to Israel, it would be wise to reconsider their position.

At least there has been some equivocating by Biden as he has incrementally become more critical of Netanyahu and his right wing coalition. Biden’s full throated support for Israel’s response to Hamas, with only tepid recommendations to avoid civilian casualties, has been replaced with public criticism and veiled threats of eliminating aid to Israel. And Biden is publicly rebuking Netanyahu and clearly considering other options to end the war.

The Neo-Cons of old in alliance with the right wing caucus however are providing unequivocal support for Israel‘s response to Hamas.

Their steadfast devotion to Israel, with scant consideration of the thousands of innocent Gazans who have lost their lives, is hardly encouraging if disaffected Democrats vote Republican, third party or stay home.

It was Donald Trump who moved the American Embassy to Jerusalem during his presidency, which in no small measure encouraged Netanyahu and his right wing to feel invincible from American criticism and further enraged the Palestinians.

It may seriously conflict with alleged Democratic values by voting for Biden, but if Trump is re-elected it will be the elimination of a century of progressive legislation that benefitted a majority of Americans, and authoritarian rulers everywhere will rejoice and be emboldened.”-Betty Ussach, Dartmouth.

Did you hear that Americans now pay $1 trillion in interest on the national debt? No? That is by design.

There is nothing more important to America’s future than our crushing national debt yet Joe Biden and congress distract us with global warming, Russia, Israel, and Trump trials. Look at this boogey man, but not politicans selling off our future. The Roman politicians figured this out over two thousands years ago; distract the population with wars and gladiators and some free bread while stealing all the wealth. Two men who didn’t know each other fighting to the death. Symbolically, today’s gladiators are just Democrat versus Republican, liberal versus conservative and black versus white. We pick a side, jump on social media and battle it out with people we don’t even know. Sometimes the combat hits the street. Today, we are willing to hate and fight with people we don’t even know while our politicians from both parties enrich themselves.

The United States Government is now paying $1 trillion annually in interest on the national debt and that debt is now increasing at a rate of $1 trillion every 100 days. A trillion is a big number and hard to comprehend so let’s see if I can help you understand how big it is relative to the gross domestic product (GDP) other countries and then the consequences of it.

America’s nation debt is now at $34 trillion, twice the size of the world’s second largest economy, China. In other words, America’s future generations owe twice as much money than the entire Chinese economy and that debt is growing fast. There are only 19 counties on earth with an economy larger than $1 trillion. Our $1 trillion interest payment is equal to the size of the entire Saudi Arabia economy ($1 trillion GDP). We pay annual interest payments that are larger than the total economy of 194 of 213 countries on earth. American tax payers pay more interest than the entire Switzerland economy is worth. You can see the list of countries by GDP here.

$1 trillion annual interest payments is about $2.7 billion a day. For some local perspective, the City of New Bedford budget for FY2024 is $513 million. This means America’s daily interest payment is more than five times larger than New Bedford annual city budget. Instead of sending $500 million to 5 American cities each day, we send the interest payments to the banks and wealthiest in the world who buy up the debt. Is the lightbulb on your head going off yet?

It’s important to note that these interest payments are paid off by printing more money and collecting more taxes, which is horrible for Americans. Printing more money leads to more inflation (too many dollars chasing the same amount of goods) and collecting taxes transfers money from mostly the middle class to the wealthiest. China is the largest country outside America holding our debt so you are building their cities with the interest payments, not America’s.

Imagine an elderly couple with a combined income of $100,000 a year with $120,000 in debt. Instead of paying off the debt, they just pay on the interest and keep spending recklessly knowing death will come before they’ll have to pay off the debt in full. Now imagine their children and grandchildren inheriting the debt and you have an accurate picture of your federal government spending and debt balance. President Biden is 81-years old and overseeing $1 trillion being added to the nation debt every 100 days and he’s asking for more addition spending – nearly $100 billion for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. He can print more money and raise taxes because the debt will go to the next generations and he’ll be long dead before the debt bomb explodes on his grandchildren.

It doesn’t matter if you are the horrible politicians who spend the money, or just a person ignoring it, you are equally responsible for destroying our future generations. Stop being distracted and call your local congressman.

By Sam Drysdale
State House News Service

Gov. Maura Healey has frequently pointed to getting more migrants authorized to work as a key step in moving people out of the state’s overwhelmed emergency family shelter system, but the number of new arrivals who have work authorizations has stagnated since December.

About half of the families in the state’s Emergency Assistance family shelter system are newly arrived immigrants, refugees or asylum-seekers, many of whom are not authorized to work in the United States. As the number of immigrants coming into Massachusetts has skyrocketed in the last year, Healey has repeatedly called on the federal government to expedite the work authorization process to help migrants who are eager to work leave state-funded housing and support their families financially.

With family shelter cost estimates of close to $1 billion per year, both the House and Senate are now considering putting time limits on how long a family can stay in emergency shelter. Shelter limits would add urgency to the need for these authorizations as parents would need to be able to work to pay for housing once they are no longer able to stay in the shelter system.

The House has proposed a nine-month limit on shelter stays, while the Senate will take up a bill later this week to impose a nine-month limit with opportunities for extensions. Either option would be a significant change to the system, where most families stay for over a year, according to the Healey administration.

“The federal government is allowing people into the United States. And my position has been, if you’re going to allow people in, then work with us states on getting people working — expedite those work authorizations,” Healey said last fall.

The administration held two “clinics” in November with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to help process work authorizations for shelter residents, where they said they helped “thousands” of new arrivals become eligible to work in the country.

Though the clinics seemed to lead to a sharp increase in work authorizations, that number has since stagnated.

As of Dec. 12, 2023, 813 newly arrived immigrants, refugees or asylum-seekers in Massachusetts’ shelter system had federal work authorizations. That number climbed to 2,713 individuals two weeks later.

Since late December 2023, however, the number of non-citizens living in shelters and able to legally work in the U.S. has remained unchanged, according to reports from the governor’s administration.

The most recent report on the EA family shelter system to come out of the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities showed that as of March 7, there were still only 2,713 of these individuals with work authorizations.

A Healey aide said the work authorization numbers are derived from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and recommended reaching out to them.

Despite this stagnation, Healey continues to point at the success of the November clinics in expediting this process that she deems as critical to helping people out of shelter and opening up space for other families in need.

At an unrelated press conference at the State House on Monday, responding to a reporter’s question about whether the migrant population is an “untapped labor market,” Healey replied, “I do. That’s why I’ve focused from the outset on getting work authorizations.”

“I’m proud that we as a state have really led when it came to getting folks processed. I called on the federal government to act for a long long time, and I also said we’re not going to wait. And so we were able to get folks from DHS here on the ground… That work has continued,” she said.

The News Service followed up, pointing out there have been no new work authorizations reported by her office since late December.

“The work does continue… We continue to process people for work authorization,” Healey replied. “It’s a good thing right now that Salem Hospital was able to fill its janitorial and cleaning staff. It hadn’t been able to do that for years. So we’re continuing to look for opportunities.”

She did not directly respond to a question on why her administration had not reported an increase in work authorizations over the last three months.

In the time since late December when the number of new migrants eligible to work flatlined, hundreds of families have been added to the waiting list of folks waiting to be let into shelter. Around 400 families were on the waitlist — waiting for a spot after Healey capped the system at 7,500 families last fall. By early March, that number had reached about 780 families.

Earlier this month, the Healey administration announced partnerships with eight resettlement agencies to help families exit shelter by connecting with resources such as housing, job searching and social services. Healey’s office said the initiative, funded by money included in last year’s supplemental budget, will enable families to access permanent housing.

The following is an opinion sent to New Bedford Guide. It does not 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.

_____________________________________________________________________________

“Governor Healey’s proposed executive pardon of incarcerated people and those previously convicted of simple marijuana possession is fair, humane and definitely will save significant taxpayer funds.

From all perspectives this is a commendable executive action.

It will save taxpayers money that is being expended to incarcerate people who are serving time solely for simple possession. Those previously convicted of possession who have been denied employment, housing, child custody or unsupervised visitation, and other benefits available to the general public, will be returned to a non-criminal status and the onus of conviction will be lifted.

With rampant unemployment in certain business sectors, with hiring signs everywhere, jobs will finally be filled. This will be a win for businesses in desperate need of employees and the taxes paid by those hired will inure to all residents of Massachusetts.

And from a purely humanitarian perspective this is the right thing to do, especially in view of the many states that have de-criminalized simple possession. And once again Massachusetts will lead in removing an unnecessary and unfair impediment that has been shown to disproportionately penalize certain less fortunate members of society.”-Betty Ussach, Dartmouth.

The following is an opinion sent to New Bedford Guide. It does not 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.

_____________________________________________________________________________

The presidential immunity case is the last opportunity for the Supreme Court to save democracy.

One can hope that the Supreme Court decision denying individual state’s ability to disqualify Donald Trump from the ballot, will be timely followed by a ruling that there is no such right as absolute presidential immunity. The ballot decision,though disappointing to some, was not unexpected and the unanimity of the court supports the position that an opposite ruling would produce great chaos. Legal scholars, as well as legislators from both parties predicted the outcome and were hoping for this ruling.

The presidential immunity case, however, is perhaps the weightiest case to come before the court during this divisive period in American history. It could be argued that democracy versus autocracy is the real underlying issue and that the justices understand the full import of their decision. If the court ruling is unjustifiably delayed until after the election or decided in Trump’s favor it will assuredly be the death knell for democracy.”-Betty Ussach, Dartmouth.

New Bedford voters in Ward 1, Precinct D, expressed frustration and concern when they discovered that their polling location at Vibra Hospital did not have Republican ballots available in the early morning of Super Tuesday. Reports indicated that while Democrat and Libertarian ballots were present, there were no Republican ballots for voters to use.

This morning, the New Bedford city election department was notified that Republican ballots were missing from the polling materials for 1D – Vibra Hospital.#mapoli #MassGOP #ElectionIntegrity

— MassGOP (@massgop) March 5, 2024

Joanne Hodgson, candidate for the Republican State Committee, told WBSM on Tuesday morning,

“Apparently when packing the supply boxes, they missed the Republican ballots. The City election department was made aware of the issue by the warden at 7:15 (a.m.), and were able to rectify it by 7:40, as this precinct is on the other side of the city. Despite having received specific training to count all ballots prior to opening and contacting the election office with any issues, the warden in Ward 1 failed to do that.”

Once the issue was resolved, The Massachusetts GOP took to Twitter noting, “It is unacceptable for any precincts to not have Republican Ballots. Such failures only deepen the distrust between Republican voters and election authorities. Thank you RSC Member Jo-Anne Hodgson for her work to rectify the issue.”

Although the issue has since been fixed, this is not the start to the election season that we hoped for. Needless to mention, there has been rigorous debate the past 4 years over whether there was election interference and voter fraud in the 2020 election. Hiccups like what happened today in New Bedford will just be adding fuel to the already blazing fire.

“New Bedford is now home to the Cadillac of vote counting machines. The DS450 from Election Systems & Software will help make the process of counting mail-in, early and absentee ballots more efficient.

For example: In November, it took a dozen election workers about two 12-hour days to hand-feed all the early ballots into a counting machine on the weekend before Election Day. The new high-speed tabulator can now process and count them much more quickly.

How quick? We’ll find out on Saturday morning, starting at 9 a.m. at the Elections Office at City Hall, when the public is able to observe the new machine and how it works while we process the early ballots.

Of note: nothing is changing on Election Day itself, this new machine is only used for early ballots. And a reminder: Polls are open all day on Tuesday, March 5, for the Presidential Primary. Contact the Elections Office with any questions at 508-979-1420.”-City of New Bedford.

In a landmark development for reproductive healthcare access in Massachusetts, leading pharmacy chains CVS and Walgreens have announced plans to begin dispensing the abortion pill, mifepristone, this March. This decision comes amidst ongoing legal debates and reflects a significant step in ensuring accessibility to abortion services following the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Both CVS and Walgreens have received certification to offer mifepristone, a medication approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for terminating pregnancies up to 10 weeks. This certification allows them to dispense the drug in compliance with federal and state laws, signaling a new phase in the availability of reproductive healthcare services.

Walgreens has indicated that it will initiate the dispensing of mifepristone within a week at selected locations in New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, California, and Illinois. CVS, on the other hand, plans to start offering the pill in Massachusetts and Rhode Island in the coming weeks, with intentions to expand to additional states where legally permissible.

CVS spokesperson Amy Thibault emphasized the pharmacy’s commitment to filling prescriptions for mifepristone where it’s legally allowed, highlighting the effort to work with manufacturers and suppliers to secure the medication. The company anticipates a gradual rollout to more states, adhering to legal guidelines.

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, has praised the move by CVS and Walgreens. The governor’s office released a statement commending the pharmacies for their initiative to expand access to mifepristone, underlining Massachusetts’ dedication to safeguarding reproductive care, including medication abortion.

The introduction of mifepristone at pharmacy chains comes at a critical juncture, with the Supreme Court set to hear arguments regarding the drug’s access this spring. The Biden Administration is hopeful for a ruling that will overturn previous appellate decisions potentially restricting access to the pill, including limitations on mail delivery. However, spokespeople from CVS and Walgreens have confirmed that their customers will not be able to receive the pill by mail.

This development is particularly significant as abortion pills have become the most common method for terminating pregnancies, especially in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s overturn. Mifepristone, used in combination with misoprostol, has been a key component of medication abortion for decades, though its accessibility has faced challenges from legal disputes.

As CVS and Walgreens gear up to offer mifepristone, their actions represent a pivotal moment in the ongoing fight for reproductive healthcare access, reflecting broader efforts to ensure that individuals can make informed decisions about their bodies and futures.

Massachusetts Attorney General Joy Campbell has filed a lawsuit against the town of Milton, alleging non-compliance with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Communities Law. The lawsuit, announced on Tuesday, February 27th, has sparked controversy and highlighted the ongoing debate over housing regulations and enforcement in the state, against the backdrop of a migrant crisis and a housing shortage.

Massachusetts is facing a dual crisis, with a surge in illegal immigration and a persistent shortage of affordable housing. The MBTA Communities Law, enacted to address the region-wide need for housing, requires that MBTA communities have at least one zoning district where multi-family housing is permitted as of right.

The law sets specific criteria for these zones, including a minimum gross density of 15 units per acre and proximity to public transportation hubs such as commuter rail stations, subway stations, ferry terminals, or bus stations. Additionally, the housing must be suitable for families with children and cannot have age restrictions.

In a statement posted on Twitter, Attorney General Campbell emphasized the importance of enforcing the law, stating, “The housing crisis is going to take all of us to solve, which is why we filed a suit today against Milton. Compliance with [the MBTA Communities Law] is mandatory. My Office will not hesitate to enforce the law.”

The lawsuit comes at a critical time for Massachusetts, as the state grapples with the challenges of providing adequate housing for both its residents and the influx of migrants. The outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications for housing policy and enforcement across the state, making it a topic of considerable interest and debate among policymakers, residents, and housing advocates.

By Colin A. Young
State House News Service

From the edge of the Atlantic Ocean in Lynn to the state’s western border in Richmond, people in Massachusetts are letting the state know how they feel about wallet-busting energy bills.

“I struggle to pay my bills, my electric runs $250 a month and in the winter I am paying $500 a month to heat our home. I have many other bills aside from these bills including car payments, insurance, food cost and everyday necessities. I don’t qualify for assistance of any kind,” Dacia Clark, a single Pittsfield mother of four children who also cares for her disabled mother, wrote to state officials last month. “I know many other residents of Massachusetts have the same struggle as me. My time is limited with my family because I work so much in order to keep up on the bills, I pray there will one day be something done to help take a little weight off all the responsibilities we carry as responsible parents trying to juggle it all.”

Travis Roger from Richmond shared a copy of a recent electric bill showing that it cost him “over $500 a month to keep our electric on.”

“We are a family trying to raise three young children, living pay check to paycheck. We simply CANNOT afford to pay over $500 a month to keep the electric on. My weekly paycheck isn’t much more than my monthly Eversource bill and my electric is only one bill of the many bills that I need to pay each month.

More than half our of Eversouce bill is delivery fees!! We are left helpless,” Roger wrote. He added, “Families are struggling to make ends meet, struggling to keep the lights on, and struggling to feed their familes. Something needs to be done.”

Clark, Roger and more than a dozen others submitted their comments as part of an official “inquiry” the Department of Public Utilities launched in early January scrutinizing the high costs of energy bills and potential improvements to energy affordability programs that could reduce that burden on residential ratepayers.

After a public input period that runs through Friday, DPU will hold meetings to explain the changes under consideration and then issue a written order detailing any changes it might mandate to the energy affordability programs that utility companies are required to offer.

“Possible measures include offering varying levels of discounts depending upon income or placing a cap on the percentage of income spent on bills from energy utilities,” the department said in its announcement.

Blanca Hurrutia and a handful of other Lynn residents shared similar comments with DPU, writing in Spanish that no one should have to reduce their food consumption to keep their lights on “pero eso está sucediendo ahora,” which means “but that’s happening now.” Hurrutia and others also suggested to DPU that the state should cap utility bills at a maximum amount based on the customer’s income.

Massachusetts has some of the highest energy costs in the country. Many households that earn 80 percent or below the state median income level “endure financial hardships in relation to paying utility bills,” DPU said, and lower-income households pay as much as 3.5 times more of their income on energy than other households.

As part of its clean energy pursuit, the state is pushing businesses and residents to use electric-based energy and vehicles, an effort that is causing all parties to further scrutinize electricity costs.

A letter submitted by the chair of the Longmeadow Energy and Sustainability Committee said that “the electricity bills have increased substantially” for residents who have already begun the electrification transition.

“At the same time, because contractors continue to recommend that homeowners continue to keep, and use in cold weather, gas-burning furnaces, these homeowners incur gas charges that have yet to decrease in significantly meaningful ways,” Andrea Chasen wrote in a letter that included detailed information on the supply and delivery charges that specific Longmeadow residents have faced. “As a result, homeowners who are working to meet the state goals of transitioning to using more electricity and less fossil fuel, are faced with the much higher than anticipated utility bills.”

An analysis from the Department of Energy Resources found that heating oil was the most expensive fuel to heat an average household last winter, costing $2,023 to get through the 2022-23 winter. Propane customers paid $1,492 while natural gas heat cost $907 for the heating season. Electric heating, primarily electric baseboard heating, cost an estimated $1,080, though DOER said that also “reflects the smaller average home size for units that heat with electric resistance (baseboard) heat.”

For this winter, DOER estimated that heating with oil would cost $2,220, up 10 percent; that propane heat would cost $1,606, up 8 percent; that natural gas heat would cost $911, down 0.5 percent; and that electric heat would cost $862, down 20 percent.

The federal government is also keeping an eye on the burden that energy bills put on household budgets. When the U.S. Department of Energy announced Tuesday morning that 17 energy improvement projects in rural or remote areas (the nearest to Massachusetts is a project in Maine) would receive a total of $366 million in federal funding, a DOE official said that energy burden was one of the things the department considered when choosing projects to fund. The DOE official said that energy costs are 33 percent higher, on average, in rural and remote parts of America.