logo
New Hampshire's Medicaid program faces threats on both the federal and state level

New Hampshire's Medicaid program faces threats on both the federal and state level

Yahoo05-03-2025

Gov. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican, speaks with reporters in her office Wednesday, Feb. 26, 2025. Ayotte has proposed several changes to Medicaid aimed at cutting down the cost of the program that would increase the financial burden on recipients. (Photo by William Skipworth/New Hampshire Bulletin)
After being found floating in a pool in Florida following a drug overdose, Shawn Cannizzaro — a Boston native — moved to Littleton to get help with his substance use disorder at a recovery house.
'I'm saying to myself, 'What am I doing going to Littleton, New Hampshire?' he said. 'It's a blizzard out. It's the end of January. I'm coming off every drug you can imagine — alcohol, crack, cocaine, heroin, everything. I am a mess, and I do not want to live anymore.'
Three years after arriving in Littleton, Cannizzaro was sober and beginning to thrive. So he decided to try to help others facing the same struggles. He's now the owner of Hope 2 Freedom Recovery Homes, an organization that operates several sober living homes in Claremont.
'I've been in and out of sober living houses my entire life, and now I own four of my own,' he said. 'I just celebrated six years clean a couple weeks ago.'
Cannizzaro said it's Medicaid — the U.S.' public health insurance program for people with low income or high needs — that makes this work possible. The program funds treatment for 90% of people at his sober living homes. But Medicaid didn't just help his clients.
'This is important on a lot of different levels for me,' Cannizzaro said.
Cannizzaro explained that his organization provided him some income, but not enough to buy private insurance, so he got on Medicaid himself. He said after dealing with some health issues, he was able to earn enough money to no longer need Medicaid.
Cannizzaro, who is one of several who spoke at an event in Manchester last week about how Medicaid helped them, isn't alone in using Medicaid to address substance use disorder. Medicaid paid for 21% of all substance use disorder treatment in the U.S., and 7.2% of Medicaid recipients ages 12 to 64 have a diagnosed substance use disorder, according to analysis of recent years' Medicaid claims data by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
More broadly, around 80 million people across the U.S. receive health care coverage through Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Programs, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported. In New Hampshire, that number is around 183,000.
Medicaid, which is operated jointly by states and the federal government, also finances around 2 of every 5 births in the U.S. — a little over 1 of 5 in New Hampshire — and Medicaid is the primary payer for about 2 of every 3 nursing home patients both across the U.S. and in New Hampshire specifically, per CMS and KFF.
In New Hampshire, the program could be scaled back if proposals from Republican leaders on both the national and federal level come to fruition.
Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution last week outlining a framework for the federal budget — an early step in the lengthy federal budgeting process. That framework seeks to impose a series of spending cuts in order to reduce the federal deficit and introduce tax cuts. Experts believe for the government to make these cuts happen, it would need to remove an estimated $800 billion from Medicaid nationwide, which has drawn concern from Medicaid recipients and advocates.
'What is so frustrating about that is that this is not being done because we have a national emergency,' U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, New Hampshire's Democratic senior senator, said. 'This is being done so that the Republicans in Congress and President Trump and Elon Musk can come up with $2 trillion in cuts so they can pay for their tax breaks for the wealthiest in this country.'
In New Hampshire, the concern is particularly acute due to a so-called trigger law the state passed in 2018 that would cut state funding for New Hampshire's Medicaid program if federal funding falls below a certain level.
In 2014, New Hampshire lawmakers expanded Medicaid using federal funding from the Affordable Care Act, creating what is now known as the Granite Advantage Program. This program has since brought Medicaid to an additional 60,000 New Hampshire residents, according to state figures reported in January. In total, Medicaid in New Hampshire costs $2.5 billion to operate each year, $1.4 billion of which comes from the federal government.
Then, in 2018, state lawmakers passed the trigger law, which dictates that if federal funding for Medicaid expansion falls below 90% of the cost of the program (though previous laws had also set triggers at different rates), the state will revoke the funding it devotes to the expansion program and eliminate it.
U.S. Sen. Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire's Democratic junior senator, described Medicaid as 'a pillar of American life,' arguing 'it helps strengthen our economy, our workforce, and the health of our people. It's indispensable to families who are trying to make ends meet.'
Before becoming senator, Hassan was New Hampshire's governor and oversaw the 2014 Medicaid expansion.
'We did it on a bipartisan basis,' she said. 'And we did it because we recognized that there were people who wanted to go to work but couldn't go to work because they had health conditions and they couldn't get health coverage, so they couldn't get better.'
She said she consistently heard from people who went on Medicaid, got healthier, and then no longer needed Medicaid because they were able to earn more when they were healthier.
U.S. Rep. Maggie Goodlander, a Democrat who represents New Hampshire's 2nd Congressional District, called Medicaid, in addition to Medicare and Social Security, 'the lifeblood of our communities.'
Still, a lot more must happen for these cuts to materialize. There appear to be major differences between the U.S. House and U.S. Senate.
U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, told reporters in the Capitol last week he won't vote to approve Medicaid cuts. He's also alluded to other differences the two chambers have.
'There's a lot of distance between where the House and the Senate are on this,' Hawley said.
President Donald Trump also said he wants to see Medicaid maintained. However, he has been perhaps even more forceful in calling for the tax cuts he and his congressional allies instituted through the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act during his first term to be extended. Many have argued doing both without raising the deficit — a nonstarter for many Republicans — would be infeasible.
'We know we're going to be in a fight to protect these mission critical programs,' Goodlander said.
Asked about whether she is concerned about Congress cutting Medicaid enough to activate New Hampshire's trigger law, Gov. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican, said 'I can't deal in hypotheticals.'
As this fight over Medicaid unfolds in Washington, Ayotte is working to scale back the cost of Medicaid in her own state. The governor is proposing state level changes to the program that would shift more financial cost to Medicaid recipients and tighten eligibility for the program in New Hampshire.
If adopted, Ayotte's new state budget, and the accompanying policy-related 'trailer bill,' would add premiums for some recipients, increase pharmacy cost-sharing, and end the already winding down continuous eligibility system.
The proposed premiums would require Medicaid recipients, with children, who earn 255% of the federal poverty level and those without children who earn between 100% and 138% of the poverty level to make a payment of up to 5% of their household income in order to receive coverage. As for the co-pays, the proposal would change the amount Medicaid recipients pay for their prescriptions from $1 or $2 to $4 per prescription (unless that exceeds 5% of household income). Finally, it would end continuous enrollment, which began during the COVID-19 pandemic and allowed people to stay on Medicaid even after they no longer met the requirements; that system has already ended, but the state needed time to disenroll recipients.
Ayotte also proposed a change meant to make the program more cost efficient. Her proposal would allow Medicaid to purchase name-brand drugs instead of generics if they were cheaper — it had previously been required to purchase generics as a cost-saving measure, but recent market developments have meant name brands are sometimes cheaper.
Ayotte predicted these changes would save the state about $27 million.
'We obviously tried to be thoughtful in how we did this,' she said, adding that they'll include a provision to allow people experiencing hardship relief from the premiums and stressing that eligibility would not change.
Ayotte defended the move by pointing out how permissive New Hampshire's eligibility requirements are comparatively.
'New Hampshire has among the highest eligibility in terms of who's covered for Medicaid in the nation,' she said. 'People aren't even eligible to get Medicaid above 255% of poverty in 26 states.'
Indeed, New Hampshire ranks sixth among U.S. states and territories for most expansive income eligibility requirements for children, as of May 2024, according to KFF. If you include only children ages 1 to 5, New Hampshire has the most expansive eligibility requirements for Medicaid of any state or territory except Washington, D.C.
'My proposal is one that, regardless of what happens in Washington, is meeting our financial needs in New Hampshire to maintain eligibility and to sustain the budget for essential services,' Ayotte said.
State House Deputy Democratic Leader Laura Telerski, a Nashua Democrat, said Ayotte's proposals 'sound like an income tax to low-income and working families just to access health care.'
Telerski noted that this 5% premium could cost a single parent with two kids making $67,000 annually about $280 a month to keep their children's health care. As for adults who make between 100% and 138% of the poverty level, Tellerski pointed out that these people make between roughly $15,500 and $22,000.
'These are extremely low-income people,' she said, 'These individuals barely have enough money to put a roof over their head or find sufficient food. And they're also going to be subjected to a 5% fee based on their income.'
Telerski argued these premiums would push eligible people off Medicaid because they can't afford premiums.
'I think it's great that we have been able to provide coverage for these families,' she said, discussing New Hampshire's expansive eligibility. 'But to take away that benefit that they have for their kids to get health care and putting a price tag on it is only gonna put kids at risk. It's only going to make working families have to make very hard choices on how they're gonna put together their monthly budgets.'
Telerski did, however, say she likes the rule change on purchasing name-brand drugs. She also acknowledged the current budget cycle 'is gonna be tough' fiscally. However, she'd rather look at limiting other programs like the education freedom accounts to find savings.
'(Ayotte) said in her budget address that her budget will protect the most vulnerable,' she said. 'Well, I see no one more vulnerable than children and extremely low-income people and people with disabilities.'
Conservatives have long criticized Medicaid expansion for being too expensive and covering too many people.
Even before Trump took office in January, the Cato Institute, an influential conservative think tank, called for the now-president to place a cap on Medicaid funding sent to each state, saying he could save the federal government $300 billion annually.
'This health program has grown explosively because the federal government subsidizes state program expansion in an uncontrolled manner,' the organization wrote.
Locally, the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy, a New Hampshire-based conservative think tank, has also decried how much Medicaid has expanded and advocated for those expansions to be halted.
'These expansions are unsustainable for both the state and federal governments,' the think tank's president Andrew Cline wrote in a 2023 blog post. 'Eventually, some level of financial discipline, however small or limited, will have to be imposed. … Any discussion of expanding Medicaid coverage or eligibility should start with the understanding that current spending levels are unsustainable.'
Among the groups that rely on Medicaid the most are people with disabilities.
Stephanie Patrick, executive director at the Disability Rights Center-NH, said cuts to Medicaid 'could be devastating' for people with disabilities in New Hampshire.
'People with disabilities rely on Medicaid for not just health care,' she said, 'but for the services they need that aren't covered by private health insurance.'
People with disabilities can use Medicaid to receive the nonmedical supports they need to live in the community, such as a direct support professional or case management.
Katie Philips, of Dover, is one of those people.
'If we lose Medicaid, it would just hurt so much,' Philips said at last week's Manchester event tearfully. 'It's just been so helpful to me to have it.'
She said Medicaid has allowed her to see her doctor even though she isn't critically ill. It's also allowed her to get medications she needs.
'And I'm able to live on my own, which I'm doing a really good job at,' she added.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

In the battle of Trump v Newsom, the president is winning the public
In the battle of Trump v Newsom, the president is winning the public

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

In the battle of Trump v Newsom, the president is winning the public

In the on-going Battle of Los Angeles, California governor Gavin Newsom may have the law on his side – but his adversary president Donald Trump has the most powerful imagery. The conflict began in Los Angeles on Friday, when mobs of protestors attacked agents of the US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), who were trying to serve warrants on specific illegal immigrants at a Home Depot and also at a clothing store. On Saturday, during a protest in front of a nearby Department of Homeland Security (DHS) office, members of the crowd lit fires and threw rocks at federal officers, who defended themselves with tear gas and non-lethal ammunition. Later that day, president Trump authorised the deployment of 2000 members of the National Guard to protect the federal ICE agents; since then 700 American Marines have been added to the federal force. Governor Newsom and other leaders of the Democratic-dominated California have claimed that Trump's actions were not needed because local and state authorities had the situation under control. And yet on Sunday, following three days of violence and arrests, the Los Angeles Police Department declared downtown Los Angeles an 'unlawful assembly' area. And on Monday the state of California sued the Trump administration, claiming that Trump 'illegally acted to federalise the National Guard,' in the words of Newsom. Typically a governor requests a president to federalise and mobilise the National Guard to deal with riots or natural disasters. For example, consider the Los Angeles riots of 1992. It was sparked by the acquittal of four white police officers who beat a black motorist named Rodney King and it led to more than fifty deaths and a billion dollars of damage; in response a Republican California governor Pete Wilson asked a Republican president George HW Bush to federalise the National Guard. Not since 1965, when president Lyndon B. Johnson sent the National Guard to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators, has a president sent troops without a governor's request. While California officials might be able to make a legal case against the Trump administration, the state and the Democratic party risk losing in the court of public opinion. Viral photographs show masked rioters waving Mexican flags in front of burning cars and debris, supporting the Trump White House's inflammatory claims about an immigrant invasion. In a shrewd public relations move, the federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has released mug shots under the heading: 'ICE Captures Worst of the Worst Illegal Alien Criminals in Los Angeles Including Murderers, Sex Offenders, and Other Violent Criminals.' The rogues' gallery contains illegal immigrants from a number of countries including Vietnam, the Philippines, and Mexico, charged with offenses including attempted rape, assault with a deadly weapon, grand theft larceny, distribution of heroin and cocaine, wilful cruelty to a child and other serious crimes. Democrats recently succeeded in reversing the allegedly unlawful deportation to El Salvador of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an illegal immigrant from El Salvador who was granted the right to remain in the US by a federal immigration judge. But on his return he was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of being an MS-13 gang member who has smuggled thousands of illegal immigrants, drugs, and firearms in the US. Democratic strategists might ask whether someone like Abrego Garcia should be the face of the Democratic party. At least, unlike some of the rioters cavorting in front of burning wreckage in LA, he does not wear a mask. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

After LA, Trump hard launches new First Amendment: Only MAGA can protest
After LA, Trump hard launches new First Amendment: Only MAGA can protest

USA Today

time39 minutes ago

  • USA Today

After LA, Trump hard launches new First Amendment: Only MAGA can protest

After LA, Trump hard launches new First Amendment: Only MAGA can protest | Opinion Rule No. 1: No protesting unless it's something Trump wants you to protest. Show Caption Hide Caption Australian journalist shot with a rubber bullet in Los Angeles Australian journalist from 9News, Lauren Tomasi, was shot with a rubber bullet while reporting from the protests in Los Angeles. President Donald Trump and his band of faux-macho nogoodniks keep poking the city of Los Angeles, hoping it will squeal and create the kind of violent theater that gives right-wing media its life force. First they sent in the National Guard to address predominantly peaceful anti-ICE protests, but the sprawling city failed to adequately burn. Now they're sending in U.S. Marines to get the job done. It's an intentional, dangerous and wholly unnecessary provocation. And based on how Trump and other Republicans have reacted to the ongoing protests, we should all be clear on the administration's new rules for protesting in America. Rule No. 1: No protesting unless it's something Trump wants you to protest For those who engage in liberal activities like reading and 'seeing things with your own eyes and believing they're real,' it might seem odd that the man who praised Jan. 6 insurrectionists as "great patriots" and then pardoned them all has the gall to call LA protesters 'insurrectionists.' Technically, there's nothing about the California protests that would make them an insurrection, while everything about the 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, an effort to overturn a free-and-fair election, made it an actual insurrection. But that kind of fact-based thinking is now illegal, and protesters in Los Angeles and elsewhere need to understand that the First Amendment only applies to things Trump and Republicans want to hear. As border czar Tom Homan said on June 9 about the LA protesters: 'I said many times, you can protest. You get your First Amendment rights. But when you cross that line, you put hands on an ICE officer, or you destroy property or ICE says you impede law enforcement … that's a crime. And the Trump administration is not going to tolerate it.' Opinion: Trump lied about LA protests to deploy the National Guard. He wants violence. Correct. Unless you're a pro-Trump protester. In which case, breaking into a federal building, beating the snot out of police officers and destroying property is patriotic and easily pardonable. Rule No. 2: Protesters can only use American flags Video of California protesters waving flags from Mexico and other countries really upset a number of Republicans who have apparently never been in Boston on St. Patrick's Day. Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma said: 'This is an American city, and to be able to have an American city where we have people literally flying Mexican flags and saying 'you cannot arrest us' cannot be allowed.' If those protesters were waving a good old-fashioned American flag, it would be an entirely different story. But in Trump's America, flag choice matters. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called out 'left-wing radicals carrying foreign flags.' Vice President JD Vance declared on social media: 'Insurrectionists carrying foreign flags are attacking immigration enforcement officers.' MIND THE FLAGS, PEOPLE! The rule seems pretty clear. Your First Amendment right only allows you to carry an American flag, unless you are a Trump supporter during an actual insurrection, in which case you can carry a Confederate flag, replace an American flag with a Trump flag or use an American flag on a pole to beat a police officer. Opinion: Three ways the Trump-Musk feud revealed the GOP's twisted hypocrisy Rule No. 3: No spitting on or disrespecting law enforcement officers In response to some LA protesters allegedly spitting on authorities, Trump declared on social media June 9: ' 'If they spit, we will hit.' This is a statement from the President of the United States concerning the catastrophic Gavin Newscum inspired Riots going on in Los Angeles. The Insurrectionists have a tendency to spit in the face of the National Guardsmen/women, and others. These Patriots are told to accept this, it's just the way life runs. But not in the Trump Administration. IF THEY SPIT, WE WILL HIT, and I promise you they will be hit harder than they have ever been hit before. Such disrespect will not be tolerated!' Some might respond to this by saying, 'But the Jan. 6 insurrectionists whom you pardoned en masse did a lot more than just spit. They brutally attacked police officers, physically injuring more than 140 of them.' To which Trump would probably say: 'Shut up. Your First Amendment rights are hereby revoked!' Or he might say what he actually said when he pardoned hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters after he was inaugurated Jan. 20: 'These are people who actually love our country, so we thought a pardon would be appropriate.' To clarify, the people who Trump thinks love this country, demonstrated by them loving him, are allowed to express that love by defacing a federal building they broke into and viciously assaulting police officers. People who Trump thinks don't love the country, demonstrated by them exercising their First Amendment right to protest things he doesn't want them to protest, will be beaten up for spitting. Follow Trump's protesting rules, or he'll call in the troops It's clear as mud, folks. Americans across the country should feel free to get out and protest, as long as it's for the right reasons and done in a way that aligns completely with the beliefs of Republicans and the Trump administration. Anything outside of that and they'll call in the National Guard. And the Marines. And, I guess, the flag police? Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on Bluesky at @ and on Facebook at

Readers sound off on the Trump/Musk rift, anti-ICE protests and Diddy's abuse
Readers sound off on the Trump/Musk rift, anti-ICE protests and Diddy's abuse

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Readers sound off on the Trump/Musk rift, anti-ICE protests and Diddy's abuse

Dartmouth, Mass.: Being the richest man in the world does not appear sufficiently ego-gratifying for Elon Musk. Observing his recent involvement with the Trump administration, with his destructive actions leading the DOGE crusade to disrupt or destroy American governance, one wonders what his motivation is. Is it financial gain, media attention or a quest for power? Or is it a grand plan conceived by a man with a deep psychological disorder? Musk's recent severe criticism of President Trump's legislative agenda is perhaps the first salvo in his plan to save America from the conflagration he ignited and helped enlarge. Is the grand scheme to now be the white knight who comes to the rescue and douses the flames, thereby becoming the hero who saved America? The legislative and judicial branches of government have either enabled, been enriched by or ignored the destruction occurring to American democracy. Musk can now assume the role of hero by utilizing his enormous resources to defeat Trump's agenda by threatening to 'out-primary' any Republican legislators who continue to support the president. Trump has certainly provided a roadmap by imposing or threatening tariffs, or defunding and then dowsing the flames with a change of course, thus appearing as though he's coming to the rescue of America. Musk has far more personal resources and grasp of political strategy than Trump, and may have greater aspirations as he interjects himself into the politics of Brazil, Germany and the United States. Betty Ussach Glendale: From the ancient text 'The Art of War' by Sun Tzu, it is said, 'All war is based on deception.' The same applies to the accusations of division now viewed as front-page news regarding Trump versus Musk. Such antics create a storyline that hurts people. Also stated in the book: 'There's no instance of a nation benefiting from prolonged warfare.' Our country is experiencing a period of adjustment whereby deception has been made to separate us. The lesson from the book stipulates, 'There are times when you have to forgive your enemies and love them as your own.' Hatred never ends if people embrace only what makes them comfortable. Jonathan Kiddrane Brooklyn: Let me get this straight. TACO man sits on his hands when his criminal cultists storm the Capitol, but he unleashes the National Guard on peaceful protesters? When is this madness going to end? Don't tell me America is not in the midst of a constitutional crisis. June Lowe Staatsburg, N.Y.: Trump deploys the National Guard for individuals who are protesting in Los Angeles. Rioters attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6 and the National Guard was not deployed, then the rioters were pardoned. What's wrong with this picture? I really hope no one tries to explain this to me, because it's obvious that this so-called president has no idea how to run this joke of a country that the United States has become. Glenn Marowitz Manhattan: Joe Biden thought he needed woke approval to be reelected. Woke devotees created sanctuary cities and no immigrants could be deported. That and no bail for repeat criminals was the end for Biden and the Dems. They would not allow the bad apples to be vetted and deported. Trump had a royal straight flush in this game of hold 'em. An inexperienced Vice President Kamala Harris only added to the pot. Trump got elected and decided to deport everyone. All those righteous people are now thrown in with the criminals. These uprisings in California are just the beginning. We will soon see violent terrorist operations carried out secretly. People like AOC and City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams are responsible. Fascist Trump is smiling and licking his lips as if he just had a jelly donut. There are no strong Dems to counteract him. We are in big trouble. Michael Malewich Avon-by-the-Sea, N.J.: There were a few letters in yesterday's edition questioning why ICE agents cover their faces. Simple answer: Same reason the protesters do — to avoid discovery. Protesters want to evade arrest and prosecution. ICE agents want to protect their families and selves from retaliation. The liberal justice system would most likely free the criminals while ICE agents face physical retaliation. Robert Stiloski Bronx: Where is the outcry from the left demanding that protesters remove their masks? More importantly, where is their condemnation of the violence and destruction taking place? Those who take part in destructive mobs should be held accountable and required to pay for any damages caused. Even a simple act of assault or resistance against a federal officer can carry up to a year in jail. Enforcing the law consistently is essential to stopping this wave of violence. Al D'Angelo Smithtown, L.I.: Voicer Katherine Raymond agrees with democratic-socialist ideas such as taxing the rich but, like almost all liberals, 'the rich' are anyone making more than her. She shows her hand by questioning how anyone can think a household income of $1 million qualifies as rich. Is she kidding or is this a misprint? Andrew Ross Bronx: As a 48-year Belmont/Little Italy resident, community advocate and 37-year NYC Board of Education/Department of Education educator and parent, it has become abundantly clear that neither Rafael Moure-Punnett, the rest of Bronx Community Board 6, The Belmont BID or, as of yet, any of our local politicians have shown a genuine or active interest in the safety and wellbeing of the children, teenagers or families in our neighborhood in regard to the completely unchecked speeding that has been going on for more than a decade one block from our local elementary, middle and high schools. Despite the Department of Transportation claiming to have done a study in this area, one of their representatives would not provide the time or date they did so, yet insisted that their conclusion had been there was no need for a traffic light on the corner of this highly dangerous intersection. Jeff Vargon Peekskill, N.Y.: To Voicer John Weiss: Wrong you are! On page 24 in Friday's Daily News, there was an article on the 81st anniversary of that momentous day ('WWII vets are still toast of Normandy even 81 years later,' June 6)! I guess it appeared in my paper and no one else's. Steven Bevacqua Pleasantville, N.Y.: To Voicer Nick Smith: My letter wasn't saying that criticism of Israel is always antisemitic, it was more about why Israel is the only country heavily criticized for fighting terrorism. Every year, when Yom Haatzmaut, which is known as Israeli Independence Day, and the Salute to Israel Parade come up, I always hear a bunch of anti-Israel fanatics calling it Nakba Day as an insult. Had the Arabs just accepted the UN Partition Plan back in 1947 rather than attack the Jews that day, there wouldn't be such issues now. As for me living where I do, it was because my father had a major job transfer when I was an infant that brought my family here. If you really believe in giving land back to indigenous groups, then give your property to the Native American tribe that originally lived there. Tal Barzilai Staten Island: So far, everything I have read or seen about Sean 'Diddy' Combs shows that he is rich, controlling and a bully. No matter what, people's lives have been ruined. I hope he can't buy his way out of this. Thomas Bell Bronx: To Voicer Stephanie Revander: You do not disagree with what I said, but how I said it. I could have made my point and saved four words by leaving out 'run-of-the-mill.' In retrospect, I should have stated that while some rapists can be reformed, that does not include those who brutally beat and/or choke their victims unconscious. They should serve life. Richard Warren

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store