New York, NY – En respuesta a la decisión del Presidente Trump de retirar a los Estados Unidos del Acuerdo Climático de París, los neoyorkinos que han sido afectados por el cambio climático fueron a Albany este martes a presionar para que se apruebe la legislación que elevaría a rango de ley estatal el compromiso del estado con la energía limpia y la reducción de carbono.

Los neoyorkinos afectados hicieron un llamado a los legisladores estatales para que hagan ley las metas del estado sobre energía limpia. Gente de todo el estado se reunió en el capitolio para demandar la pronta aprobación de la Iniciativa de Clima y Protección Comunitaria, CCPC por sus siglas en inglés.

Dan Sherrel, coordinador de campaña de New York Renews, dice que la decisión del Presidente Trump de retirarse del Acuerdo Climático de París provocó que quienes ya han sido víctimas de eventos climáticos extremos vuelvan a tomar acciones.

“La gente de Rockaways, del Lower East Side, gente del norte cuyas granjas fueron destruidas por el huracán Irene, vieron la decisión de Trump, dijeron basta y vinieron a Albany con nosotros a contar sus historias.”

La CCPA haría que las ambiciosas metas de reducción de carbono de Nueva York fueran legalmente obligatorias para la generación de energía, edificios y transporte.

Sherrell destaca que los planes actuales del gobernador sobre clima, aunque son loables, se enfocan casi exclusivamente en la energía eléctrica.

“Pero Nueva York casi no tiene planes integrales para de veras descarbonizar el transporte y los edificios, lo que se necesita con urgencia. El transporte es actualmente el mayor emisor del estado.”

Dice que la aprobación de la CCPA daría al estado de Nueva York la legislación más robusta en clima, empleo y justicia ambiental.

Sherrel opina que cuando el Presidente Trump anunció su salida del Acuerdo Climático de París, abandonó su responsabilidad y perdió el liderazgo americano sobre energía limpia.

“Si Nueva York, que es la 12ª economía más grande del mundo, cae en ese incumplimiento, incluso podemos revertir mucho del daño que Trump está haciendo y marcar un avance real, incluso si nuestro gobierno federal se niega a hacer otra cosa que aventarnos bajo el autobús.”

La CCPA fue presentada en la Asamblea Estatal el lunes por la noche y pronto será llevada al Senado.

La iniciativa 0342 de la Asamblea, en http://tinyurl.com/m3fsrxg


get more stories like this via email

Access to reduced-price medication is a necessity for many rural Missourians with low income.

Rep. Cindy O'Laughlin, R-Shelbina, the Senate Floor Leader, said Big Pharma is trying to confuse legislators with unrelated hot-button topics such as abortion access and illegal immigration in a last-ditch effort to stop the state from joining a program to force drugmakers to sell medicines at a discount.

"Appealing to nuclear topics, which really do not apply in this situation, is a disingenuous way to try to defeat a bill that is actually good for Missouri," O'Laughlin asserted.

O'Laughlin pointed out the program is transparent, and uses the tax money saved to help low-income families deal with chronic conditions such as diabetes.

The drugmakers object to the government forcing them to give significant discounts, arguing hospitals' and for-profit pharmacies' bottom lines, particularly those owned by pharmacy benefits managers, are being exploited. Nationally, 46% of contract pharmacy agreements involve pharmacies linked to the three largest benefits managers.

Rep. Tara Peters, R-Rolla, introduced the 340B contract pharmacy access billand said the lobbying is absurd.

"Federally, 340B program does not allow for abortion drugs," Peters stressed. "Why would any legislation that we're trying to pass in the state allow for that? I mean, the thought of that even being in existence is absolutely ludicrous."

The Missouri Senate passed the bill 27-3 on Monday and it now goes to the House.


get more stories like this via email

Alabama is running out of time to tackle Medicaid expansion this legislative session.

More than 230 people gathered earlier this month with the group Alabama Arise, urging state lawmakers to prioritize the issue. Their message: Access to health care isn't just a matter of policy, it can be a matter of life and death.

Debbie Smith, Cover Alabama campaign director for Alabama Arise, said as the session winds down, the group will continue to echo the call for increased access to health coverage. She thinks it would not only save lives but revitalize communities across the state.

"Over 80% of our rural hospitals are operating in the red," Smith pointed out. "Not a great stat. About 19 rural hospitals are at immediate risk of closure, and those are the lifeblood of those communities. They're on life support."

Smith emphasized hospitals at financial risk also put their workforce at risk. Those who are against Medicaid expansion believe it is ultimately unaffordable for the state. However, Smith argued it could save the state nearly $400 million over the next six years. According to the Public Affairs Research Council of Alabama, those savings would be enough to cover the cost.

The council's study also showed Medicaid expansion would generate nearly $2 billion of economic growth. Beyond economic benefits, Smith pointed to the stark disparities in maternal and infant mortality rates in Alabama.

She stressed Medicaid expansion would do more than provide health care coverage during pregnancy or postpartum, it is about ensuring comprehensive coverage.

"We've been lucky enough to expand Medicaid coverage up to 12 months postpartum but we still need to figure out how to cover people before they even get pregnant," Smith asserted. "It's really important for people to have health coverage so they can address any kind of issues they might have, like if they have diabetes or high blood pressure that might affect their pregnancy in the future."

With limited time left in the legislative session, she noted one option could be Gov. Kay Ivey's executive authority to enact Medicaid expansion. Smith added using the power could be the simplest path forward, backed by the promise of additional funding from the American Rescue Plan.

A Connecticut bill would expand the state's paid sick leave law.

The initial 2011 law requires 40 hours of paid sick leave for workers at employers with 50 businesses or more. The new bill covers all workers regardless of their employer's size.

Janée Woods Weber, executive director of the nonprofit She Leads Justice, said the legislation can benefit workers without access to paid sick leave.

"These are people for whom taking a few hours off when their child has a cold or perhaps they need to take themselves to a doctor's appointment are the kinds of challenges that many of us don't worry about, those of us who do have access to paid sick days," Woods Weber explained.

Small businesses were concerned about how the change could affect them. To address worries, the bill has a three-year implementation cycle giving them time to adapt. It also creates a task force studying the feasibility of providing tax credits to businesses with the smallest workforces. The bill passed the House and awaits a vote in the Senate.

An estimated 11% of workers are eligible for paid sick leave under the current criteria. Though expanding the law has taken over a decade, Woods Weber argued it has always been necessary.

"Nobody should be forced to make what is often times a very difficult and sometimes impossible choice between their livelihood," Woods Weber emphasized. "Getting a paycheck and getting to take paid time off to take care of themselves or a loved one if they get sick."

She added once the bill is passed, the state can build on it by allowing people to earn additional time off, at least up to 40 hours. It stems from the pandemic, when people had to isolate for up to five days if they contracted COVID-19, which could burn through their allotted sick time.


get more stories like this via email