Which side on Medicare?

To the editor:

Former City Comptroller Scott Stringer has an exploratory committee to consider a possible mayoral run. An email I received from “Team Stringer” asking for a donation, also stated that “Scott Stringer has spent his entire career standing up to special interests and looking out for New York’s most vulnerable.”

As a retiree, I feel that he must take an unambiguous position on the most vulnerable (elderly and disabled) retired city workers being forced into a flawed Medicare Advantage plan. When Stringer wore either his comptroller’s or candidate’s hat last time around, the silence was deafening.

An exception: On May 5, 2021 he was interviewed on WNYC’s “Brian Lehrer Show.” Asked about his stance. Mr. Stringer replied, “I have great questions about it…. I'll be able to say something more soon.” Alas, he then went dark and remained quiet, despite the court hearings, demonstrations and public debate.

In stark contrast, Brad Lander, his successor, had the courage and insight to express reservations about Medicare Advantage, including “allegations of fraud, abuse, overbilling, and denials of medically necessary care.”

The central questions are that if he is elected mayor, would Stringer discontinue active litigation brought against retirees? Would he endorse a City Council bill that would preserve promised health benefits?

A blurb on the Stringer NYC website states: “As he explores a campaign for Mayor in 2025, Scott will be meeting with New Yorkers from every section of our City, and he invites you to join that conversation.”

He should meet with Marianne Pizzitola, the president of the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees and other stakeholders, and not be misled by Municipal Labor Committee misinformation or the clarion call of heath-care industry lobbyists.

We need to know which side he is on. 

Harry Weiner