New York families recently received some long-awaited good news with the announcement that restrictive nursing-home visitation policies were finally being adjusted. Nursing-home visits had been banned since March because of the pandemic. Since then, some residents’ friends and loved ones were unable to visit because of strict visitation rules that went into effect over the summer.

For weeks, the Assembly Minority Conference has advocated for a more fair and compassionate policy. New York state’s COVID-19 rate has significantly dropped and precautions in place have proven effective in curbing the spread of the virus. There was no rational explanation for some facilities to allow visitation while others were forced to remain apart from their loved ones. Even visitations at state prisons had resumed weeks before families could see their loved ones in a nursing home.

Under the state’s new, relaxed policy, nursing-home visitation can resume if a facility is deemed COVID-free for 14 days, half of the previous 28-day rule that made it nearly impossible for families to see loved ones in nursing homes. While the updated guidance will only allow eligible visitation in about 500 of the state’s 613 nursing homes, interaction, daily visits, and communication are extremely important for both the residents and their families.

The emotional toll the pandemic has had on residents has been enormous. For many, the lengthy absence of companionship was extremely stressful and upsetting. We listened to families advocating on behalf of their close friends and relatives. Our conference repeatedly pressed the Cuomo administration to rethink its policy and devise a better plan — one that keeps residents safe while also addressing critical mental-health needs associated with the lack of visitation.   

The Assembly Minority Conference is absolutely dedicated to ensuring all New Yorkers can take care of their loved ones as we emerge from this public-health crisis. Yes, health and safety are critical, but so are the emotional and mental-health needs of nursing-home residents, their families, and all those in professional care. 

I am extremely pleased the governor and Department of Health (DOH) have reversed course on this issue. However, there is still much more work to be done in order to get our state and its residents back on the most-beneficial path. Too many of the governor’s policies have been rooted in rhetoric and impulse rather than reason. Too much of his overall pandemic response has mirrored the nursing-home visitation policies — long after the state managed to tamp down the spread of the virus, uncompromising policies harmful to small businesses and consumers alike remain in place. Simply put, it is long-past time the traditional authorities given to the state legislature are restored, and end the governor’s expanded emergency powers.

Make no mistake — this nursing-home decision was a step in the right direction, but we must continue to work together to find ways to protect the interests of every New Yorker. With visitation now allowed, the governor and DOH must now address the exact number of nursing-home deaths. The repeated requests, both formal and informal, cannot continue to be ignored. Anything shy of that is a disservice to the people we have been elected to represent.      

William (Will) A. Barclay, Republican, is the New York Assembly Minority Leader and represents the 120th New York Assembly District, which encompasses most of Oswego County, including the cities of Oswego and Fulton, as well as the town of Lysander in Onondaga County and town of Ellisburg in Jefferson County. Contact Barclay at barclaw@assembly.state.ny.us 

I was talking to a friend not long ago who was pretty down on politics in all its forms. “I actually find real enjoyment in politics,” I told him. He asked if I was nuts. 

 No, I said, there’s a lot of pleasure — even joy — to be found in participating. Case in point: getting the chance to listen to gifted speakers. 

 For many years, I was fortunate to have a seat on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, which gave me a chance to observe some of the best orators in the nation. 

 For instance, there was Hale Boggs from Louisiana, the outstanding Democratic leader who tragically disappeared on a plane flight in Alaska in 1972. He was, in many ways, like an actor — he spoke with complete confidence, enjoyed commanding a crowd, and reveled in the performance; you could listen and relax in the knowledge that you were in the hands of a master.

 I also remember Carl Albert, from Oklahoma, who was House Speaker in the 1970s. He never referred to notes; he always appeared to be speaking extemporaneously — though I sometimes thought he must have practiced a great deal. One of his great gifts was that he had an impressive grasp of many different pieces of legislation, and so could speak knowledgeably and cogently on any of them.

 John Lewis, the Georgia Congressman and civil-rights icon, had a marvelous, booming voice. People couldn’t help themselves — when he took the floor, they stopped whatever they were doing to listen. He had a gift for elevating any particular issue to a higher plane that called on people to remember the best in their nation and in themselves, which may be why, whenever he came into the House well to speak, young staff members would gather in the back of the chamber to listen to him. 

Republican John Anderson of Illinois took a different approach. He wasn’t so much an orator as a debater, a politician of high intelligence who enjoyed the intellectual challenge of politics. As a result, he was a superb debater, with a great fondness for the verbal give and take as he faced off against an ideological opponent. He mastered every subject he took on and defended his positions with wit and verve. 

 So did John McCormack from Massachusetts, who was House Speaker during the 1960s. Very quick on the draw, he would turn to his adversary in debate and say something like, “I hold the gentleman in minimum high regard,” to the amusement of everyone around. McCormack, too, loved being in the fray — he would readily relinquish the Speaker’s chair so he could go down to the floor and throw himself into verbal combat. 

 Edith Green, from Oregon, had been a schoolteacher and then a lobbyist for the state education association before coming to Congress, and she carried those skills with her to the House. In a sense, she made the House her classroom, and when she had the mic, she was engaging but firm as she battled to advance women’s issues and social reform. 

 Mo Udall of Arizona took a different approach. He always spoke with humor and tried to make his listeners see the lighter side of things. Udall believed you should have a good time while you participated in serious subjects; he had a memorable ability to come up with just the right anecdote to illustrate the points he wanted to make. He made you want to listen because it was so enjoyable to do so.

 Despite their different approaches, these people — and other great speakers — were articulate, spoke fluidly, and clearly, and showed great confidence and ease. They obviously enjoyed it. They were people who strove to make themselves understood, without showing the effort involved. 

 So, while oratory may come in different packages, the chance to watch great communicators at work gives you a better sense of who they are, why they have succeeded, and why our multi-faceted political system is so interesting, engaging, and important.        

Lee Hamilton, 89, is a senior advisor for the Indiana University (IU) Center on Representative Government, distinguished scholar at IU Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies, and professor of practice at the IU O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs. Hamilton, a Democrat, was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years (1965-1999), representing a district in south central Indiana.