With over a decade in office, through his control of the budget process and state agencies, Governor Cuomo owns New York’s higher education policy.  As lawmakers considered his eleventh annual budget last week, there was a focus on the increasingly precarious financial situation for some of New York’s colleges and universities.

The governor’s proposals to limit support for community colleges and eliminate state support for independent colleges and universities were discussed by lawmakers and members of the Cuomo Administration, unions, faculty, and student representatives. 

In terms of support for private colleges, for decades the state has provided assistance through the Bundy Aid program.  Bundy Aid provides unrestricted financial support to independent colleges and universities in New York.  The program’s goals are to: (1) Maximize the total postsecondary educational resources; (2) Promote and foster the diversity of educational options; and, (3) Provide increased access to these programs by assisting institutions to minimize tuition increases.

For many of the smaller independent colleges without the enormous endowments of the large universities, Bundy Aid can make the critical difference in helping campuses to manage their budgets.  Despite these benefits, Governor Cuomo proposes to eliminate Bundy Aid.  The program has been funded at $35 million annually for many years.  In addition, the governor proposes not to restore any of the state support that was withheld from the campuses since the pandemic began. 

Unless lawmakers restore the aid, many private colleges will be facing serious financial difficulties.  And those difficulties are already showing up.  For example, recently Concordia College in Westchester announced that it is closing, and the College of St. Rose in Albany announced that it is eliminating 25 academic programs and laying off 20 percent of its tenured faculty.  

Financial problems are not confined to the independent sector.  Public colleges are facing hard times, too.  Community colleges are under extreme stress.  In an analysis released by the New York Public Interest Research Group, the state’s policy of stagnating support, coupled with rising tuition, has contributed to financial difficulties for these important community-based institutions.

The review examined the last decade of community college tuition increases and student populations at the campuses.  NYPIRG’s review found:

• The rate of community college tuition hikes over the past decade far outstrips inflation.
• There has been a significant shift in who bears the burden of paying for college education.
• Over the past ten years, more than half of the SUNY community colleges (16 of 29) had tuition rate increases that exceeded the rate approved for the SUNY four-year public colleges and universities.

At last count, there were more than 50,000 fewer full-time SUNY community college students in AY 2019-20 than there were in AY 2010-11.  And without exception, every SUNY community college lost population, some with catastrophic enrollment declines.

Much of what ails the state’s community college system is the result of stagnating local populations, particularly among young adults.  However, there are steps that the state can take to bolster support for community colleges and offset the costs borne by college students and their families.  The new state budget should ensure that:

• Full restoration of the 20% reduction in state aid that has been “withheld” since the pandemic began.
• State support for community colleges must at least match the tuition costs borne by college students, on a full-time equivalent basis and to freeze the cost of tuition.
• State aid should set a financial floor for covering the costs of community colleges.
• New York’s TAP financial aid awards should be raised to ensure that the tuition needs of low-income students are covered by the state.

Of course, the budget debate this year is largely driven by anticipated revenues – a significant portion of which is supposed to come from the federal government. 

But shortchanging colleges and universities not only makes attaining a college education more difficult for some students, it also can devastate local communities.  Colleges employ lots of people, local businesses provide lots of services to colleges, and students who go to school provide significant sales tax revenues as they spend their money on local small businesses.

Undermining higher education options for students as well as creating job losses and depressed business activities while ignoring taxing investors who are making money hand over fist on Wall Street, is a wrongheaded policy.

As the budget season heats up, let’s hope that the Legislature can reset state priorities – one that is forward looking and one that invests in higher education.

The big news in Albany last week was the dramatic report released by the New York State Attorney General’s office.  The report examined the Cuomo Administration’s estimates on the number of nursing home patients who died due to COVID-19. 

Using data from the state and nursing homes, the report found that the Cuomo Administration had publicly acknowledged far fewer nursing home deaths than had occurred.  The report was the first outside look at the COVID death rate in New York nursing homes.  Governor Cuomo has repeatedly reported nursing home death numbers but had steadfastly refused to provide the detailed information to back up his claims.  Reporters and outside advocates have requested the public data through the state’s Freedom of Information Law but have been repeatedly blocked.  Indeed an advocacy group filed a lawsuit urging a court to order release of the state Health Department’s underlying data.

Until last week, that information had not been made public.

The state’s Attorney General, Letitia James, had launched an investigation into the situation and last week released her findings. 

The AG did not find that the number of New York’s total overall reported COVID deaths was undercounted, just the location of where those deaths occurred.  The state’s data collection methodology counted nursing home patients who died in hospitals as being hospital deaths, not nursing home deaths.  Why that matters is that if nursing home residents contracted COVID in nursing homes, reporting that they were among the others who died from COVID in the hospitals undermines confidence in state reporting and its oversight of nursing homes policies.

Hours after the AG’s report was released, the state Health Department finally issued its own – belated – report that essentially agreed with the AG’s conclusion that 50 percent more nursing home patients died than had been previously reported.

The following day the governor defended the state’s policies arguing that the total number of COVID deaths was unchanged.  The governor said that he believed “everybody did the best they could.  I believe the state Department of Health, they gave their best guidance and made the best decisions on the facts they had.”

The Attorney General’s report also highlighted the poor quality of care in many nursing homes, including failure to enforce infection control policies, the inadequate ratios of nursing staff to residents as well as failure to ensure proper personal protective equipment, and that the shift from non-profit ownership to effectively for-profit ownership contributed to these inadequacies. 

The report is likely to drive public debates at the state Capitol.  There are some sobering realities that the state policymakers must address:

• If the AG’s report is correct about the poor quality of care and the inadequate numbers of nursing home staff, where were government regulators?  Nursing homes are licensed and regulated by the government; if the facilities’ performed in a substandard manner, why did it take a pandemic to bring light to these situations?
• Why did it take the Attorney General of the state of New York to make this information public?  Requests for public access to the nursing home data has been pending for months.  The state dragged its feet and had the AG not acted; we might all still be in the dark.  How can the state’s Freedom of Information Law be improved to strengthen public access?
• The wisdom of having a separately elected Attorney General (and for budget and state contracting matters a state Comptroller) could not be clearer.  Had the AG been appointed by the governor; would this investigation have occurred?

Now it’s up to the Legislature, which is a branch of government equal to the executive branch overseen by the governor, to do its job and dig deep into this issue.  The Legislature has been far too willing to cede its constitutionally-mandated power to oversee the executive branch.  And since the executive and legislative branches are now all controlled by one political party, this will be a test of where their loyalties lie – with the public or their political party.

In a healthy, functioning government hearings would be held, the Attorney General would testify, the state Health Commissioner would testify, nursing homes and hospitals would be questioned, reports would be written, and legislation prepared to respond to any policy failures – both with regard to the state’s response to the pandemic as well as any systemic regulatory failures that were identified in the AG’s report.

The Legislature is currently deliberating over the state’s budget.  At the end of this month, the Health Commissioner is scheduled to testify on the governor’s proposed health budget and related policy recommendations.  The quality of care offered in New York’s nursing homes, hospitals, and other health care settings should be at the top of the list when that hearing occurs.

Between now and then, lawmakers must get to work digging into the AG’s report and preparing for how best to respond.  Their response will be of critical importance – not only to have an accurate record of the state’s pandemic response, but also to ensure that our loved ones receive high quality care in nursing homes.

Governor Cuomo unveiled his proposed budget for the state’s upcoming fiscal year, which starts on April 1^st.  The governor’s presentation focused on the amount of aid that the state could receive from a federal stimulus package.  The strategy of the Administration since the pandemic began has been to “kick the can” – putting off critical decisions – until it became clear what the Congress would do.

By the end of the calendar year, the Congress had approved stimulus plans, but little of the $4 trillion in aid was earmarked for New York State government.  During that time, the governor engaged in keeping the state solvent by withholding approved spending to various agencies – both inside and outside of government.  But withholding monies from programs targeted to get funding is not without pain.

Over time, that pain grew as over $2.5 billion in approved state spending was withheld from agencies.  This strategy of withholding state payments was done largely outside of public view. 

The November election of President Biden and the results of the Georgia special elections earlier this month offered the governor new hope that his strategy would succeed.  Now a Democratic President and a Congress controlled by Democrats offers the possibility of a financial bailout for the state.  The new President has called for Congressional approval of a new $1.9 trillion federal stimulus with hundreds of billions of dollars to help state and local governments staggered by the pandemic and the economic downturn.

Additional reasons for the state to be optimistic is that the new U.S. Senate Majority Leader is New York’s Senator Chuck Schumer.  However, he only has a razor-thin majority.  Whether the Biden administration and Congress can reach an agreement is unclear.  Republicans are now in the minority and after years of reckless tax cuts that benefitted the wealthy and big corporations, they are now positioning themselves as fiscal conservatives.  It is highly likely that there will need to be Senate Republican support for a new federal bailout if one is to pass.

Governor Cuomo’s budget presentation last week focused on the federal stimulus response.  He argued that the state would have to enact big budget cuts and hike taxes if the bailout package did not provide $15 billion in immediate relief to New York.  The budget that he presented to the Legislature assumed that the federal government would provide $6 billion in aid.  If the state received the full $15 billion that the governor said is needed, some of the cuts and revenues proposals could be changed, he said. 

But in terms of a proposed budget, the governor assumed $6 billion in federal relief.  If that occurred, the governor proposed in his $193 billion budget the following:

1. New revenues would be generated by an income tax hike for those making over $5 million as well as taxes generated by the sale of marijuana and from sports betting – both of which are currently illegal in New York.  The governor would generate additional revenues by proposing a $1 per online transaction every time a driver uses the Department of Motor Vehicles.
2. Public college students could pay automatic tuition hikes of $200 per year for each of the next few years.
3. The governor proposes cuts to hard-hit community colleges and eliminates direct aid to financially strapped private colleges (although he argues that federal aid will offset these cuts).
4. Remember that the governor was withholding 20 percent of approved state aid?  Well, he’s willing to return most of it, but plans on making permanent cuts of 5 percent, instead of 20 – although it’s not clear if that percentage cut will be applied equally.
5. And the governor proposes that the Legislature grant him continued authority to unilaterally decide on changes to state spending.

The Legislature kicks off public hearings on the governor’s budget plans this week.  Much more will be discussed as lawmakers and the public dig into the details of the governor’s proposals.  The ultimate fate of the state’s finances, however, may not be determined in Albany, but in another Capitol Building in Washington D.C. 

Governor Cuomo is scheduled to release his proposed state budget this Tuesday.  His budget will be the first to comprehensively analyze the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the state’s finances and it will also be the first budget of the second decade of the Cuomo Administration.

New York requires that state budgets be balanced.  How will he balance the budget?  There can be no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic has devastated the state’s finances.  While there is some dispute over the size of the looming budget deficits over the next few years, there is no disagreement that the state’s finances have been badly damaged. 

Moreover, the state’s finances were in bad shape even before the pandemic hit.  Last year, the state faced a $6 billion deficit, a deficit that the governor and the Legislature were grappling with just as the pandemic emerged.  All those budget problems were swept into the state’s emergency plans as it faced the pandemic, but those imbalances are still there and continue to aggravate the state’s financial woes.

It is expected that there will be another federal stimulus, one that will help state and local governments.  How much of the state’s revenue shortfall will be covered by this stimulus? 

Will the governor add new revenues beyond his recent pledges to tax the sale of marijuana and online sports betting – both of which are currently illegal and therefore will take some time to get off the ground? 

Will the governor make publicly available his Administration’s decisions to withhold from agencies state monies that were supposed to be spent?  The Administration has stated that in many cases they withheld as much as 20 percent of approved spending for the current fiscal year, which ends March 31^st.  

Will the governor fundamentally reshape state government?  In his 2010 campaign, then-candidate Cuomo promised to fundamentally reorganize state government – stating that the former Governor Al Smith’s plan was his inspiration.  Nothing much has come of that pledge.  It is clear from fiascos like the efforts to get unemployment insurance to the pandemic-impacted unemployed and the recent roll out of the COVID vaccine that the years of cuts to state agencies have taken their toll. 

How will he reform health care?  Despite a decade of Cuomo Administration oversight, New York’s health care system continues to deliver uneven services, often ones that leaves the poor and underserved to face poor quality care.  The impacts of the COVID pandemic turned a harsh spotlight on New York’s health care delivery system and its woefully underfunded public health programs.  Will he offer a vision of reform?

How will he stabilize the higher education sector?  As colleges and universities moved to on-line, remote education in the spring, new challenges emerged in how to teach and equip students.  The pandemic also showed how the decades-long state pullback of support for higher education left some colleges teetering on the financial brink.  Particularly small independent colleges – those without large endowments – and public community colleges – those who normally see a surge in enrollment when the economy tanks, but have not seen that during the pandemic – are struggling to survive and may not unless the state steps in.  Will the governor do so?

How will he address the state’s crumbling infrastructure?  The governor spent a significant part of the State of the State presentations on how he will restore New York’s old, crumbling, municipal infrastructure.  How will he pay for it?  The cost of improving the state’s water and sewage infrastructure, for example, will costs tens of billions of dollars.  How will he pay for that and other mass transit and roadway needs?

How will he attack festering environmental problems?  The governor has stated that he will advance proposals to push New York toward a greener energy future.  Will he include a detailed reporting system so that the public can monitor progress?  And what about other environmental hazards, such as the legacy of industrial pollution that threatens drinking water supplies?

There are questions for lawmakers:  Will the Legislature roll back the unprecedented “super powers” it granted the governor to attack the pandemic?  Those powers are supposed to end at the end of March for his budget “super powers” and in April for his non-budget “super powers.” 

Unprecedented times demand bold, imaginative responses.  The big question in this year’s budget is whether the governor will seize on this opportunity to remake the state’s finances and governance.  New Yorkers will have a clearer picture on Tuesday.

Last week the President of the United States attempted to overturn the 2020 election through the use of force.  There can be no other interpretation of his actions.  His effort was planned for months and executed after all his other measures to overturn the election failed. 

The actions of President Trump are a dark stain on America.

For sure, the nation has seen worse events: Slavery, the Civil War, the genocide of native peoples, the post reconstruction apartheid in the South.  But never has the nation witnessed an attempt by an incumbent President to use mob rule to overturn the vote of the people.

Let us start with the facts.  The President was elected in 2016 despite having lost the popular vote by 3 million ballots.  In the run up to the 2016 election he was laying the groundwork to challenge the results.  In his mind a victory by his opponent could only be an example of an election that was “rigged.”  A classic “heads I win, tails you lose.” 

In 2020 the same scenario unfolded.  The President knew he would lose the popular vote – which he did by 7 million – and he launched attacks on the election on multiple fronts.  Tellingly the challenges he issued were only in states where his electoral loss was close. 

In every state, his challenges were thrown out of court.  Yet, he and his collaborators continued with the public messaging that the election was stolen.  The President personally intervened in Georgia in a failed effort to pressure Republican election officials to find just enough votes to overturn the win for President-elect Biden. 

Having lost legal and illegal efforts to overturn the election, the increasingly desperate President took the lead in urging his followers to march on Washington – an effort that he believed would add mob pressure on members of Congress for them to throw out the result of the election.  He knew that he had collaborators in the Congress who would work hand-in-glove with his effort; the mob would add pressure to those on the fence.

At last week’s rally, the President urged his followers to march on the Capitol and to “be wild.”  After repeating a long list of lies about the election and his dangerous conspiracy theories, he went on to say, “We’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you.  You’ll never take back our country with weakness.  You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”  These calls echoed language calling for violent action circulating among extremist groups.

And march they did.  Many were wearing military equipment – helmets, body armor, camouflaged military garb, and carrying batons as well as other hand-held weapons – clothing that is not worn when people are expecting a peaceful protest.  No, they were ready for a fight. 

The attack on the U.S. Capitol followed.  Had the President’s insurrection succeeded, leaders of Congress could have been kidnapped – or worse.  And it would have advanced the president’s agenda, creating an unprecedented political convulsion that would have halted the Congress’s acceptance of the Electoral College’s vote affirming the victory by former Vice President Biden. 

Luckily, that didn’t happen.  But America is still roiling from the attempted coup.

Questions need to be answered.  Why were the Capitol police so unprepared?  Without doubt law enforcement was aware of what could happen.  Michigan had recently experienced a military-style attack on its state Capitol and the governor there was the target of an attempted kidnapping by fascists. 

Instead, the national Capitol police were overwhelmed and injured – one killed – by the coup attempt.  The President’s response to the violence did nothing to quell the mob.  In fact, he emboldened them, telling the rioters that “These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace.  Remember this day forever!”

Another question is what happens next?  Clearly, the President violated his oath of office and schemed to overthrow the election.  The danger has not passed – the President is still in office for another week and anything can happen.  He has not shown remorse or stopped with his propaganda.  He must be removed from office, even if there are only a few days until the new President is sworn in.  His actions simply cannot be ignored.

For the individuals involved in the storming of the Capitol, they should be arrested and face legal consequences for their actions.  If convicted, they should face long prison sentences.  In addition, there must be a 9/11-style commission to look at the security threats posed by domestic terrorists across the nation.

That leaves the Congressional collaborators who abetted the President’s efforts to overturn the election.  They too must face the consequences for their part in the coup attempt.  By echoing the President’s lies and working to overturn the will of the people, they must face sanction.  Here in New York, four Congressional Representatives Jacobs, Malliotakis, Stefanik and Zeldin – were among this group.

The Trump Presidency has been a stress test for our system of government, and it has exposed weaknesses in the American form of democracy.  Why keep the Electoral College?  Why is the President immune from investigation for corrupt actions?  Why are governmental watchdogs and whistleblowers not protected from Presidential retribution? 

America has always thought of itself as a beacon for democracy and freedom.  After the actions of last week, that beacon has been dimmed.  Will it be extinguished?  What happens next will answer that question.