Fiscal priorities

To the editor:

The recent legislative activity in Albany shows a misunderstanding by the Democrats who control state government, of what New Yorkers really care about.

The budget plan adopted on December 2, while a step in the right direction, does not get the job done. It is, in many ways, a deficit-deferral plan rather than a deficit-reduction plan. It only partially corrects a bloated state budget that should never have been adopted in the first place.

The issue of gay marriage was important for some people. It has now been voted on. The fact that the Democrats have held three votes on gay marriage this year, but have refused to vote even once on property tax reform, or tax relief for small business, speaks volumes about their priorities, and shows they do not understand the issues, which the vast majority of New Yorkers care most about.

We need lower taxes with better jobs and a balanced budget. Those things should have been and should be the priority if we are to save the state’s fiscal health.

More cuts for the disenfranchised

To the editor:

Last month, NYS Health Commissioner Richard F. Daines announced that New York has more people living with HIV/AIDS than in any other state. “More needs to be done, especially concerning the spread of infection through sexual transmission— the predominant route of the virus,” he said. Yet the state decided on December 2 to cut HIV/AIDS funding by $521,000 as part of the Deficit Reduction Plan.

This means that AIDS-Related Community Services will be forced to close or scale back its HIV-prevention programs in the Hudson Valley. The largest HIV/AIDS service organization in the region, ARCS, will lose another 10 percent of its core funding for a total of more than $1.25 million lost since 2008. The NYS legislature has effectively forced us to shutter services and lay off employees, while the state deals with the largest HIV-positive population it has ever seen.

New York’s budget cannot be balanced on the backs of the poor and disenfranchised. Prevention measures actually save money by avoiding costly infections. How much does one HIV infection cost? Julie Geberding, former director of the CDC, testified before Congress that the cost exceeds $1 million, including lost work productivity of infected individuals.

We are doing everything we can to continue to provide the comprehensive management and oversight that public funding rightfully demands. Daines knows that more, not less, needs to be done to stop HIV infection and AIDS in New York State. Retreat from the historic commitment to this fight is not an option.