Wu: One of top priorities is hiring a Mass-and-Cass chief

Seems we had ourselves a bit of a skirmish kicking them out?

And I seem to also recall that it ended rather badly for the Czar.

Perhaps we need less royalty and militarism, more common sense? This sounds like a job for a maven.

has always been to achieve title of Drug Czar.

Czar is an informal title for government positions that coordinate different agencies in some general area of policy. Because such positions have broad influence while having limited formal power, giving them a whimsical nickname after an exotic kind of foreign monarch must have seemed like a good idea at the time. But we don't actually have a drug czar, we have a Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Similarly, this position seems like you could probably call it the Mass and Cass Czar if you want, but that's not going to be the title on their business card.

You sound like you know nothing but talking points. Congratulations! Talking point noted!

The reality is that complicated problems need people who can coordinate all the moving pieces into moving the same direction and behaving in ways that solve the problem. This isn't just a housing problem, a policing problem, a drug rehab problem, or a mental health issues problem - all of these different services need to come together, set a coordinated policy, and be held accountable for holding up their end of the safety net.

Here is an excellent example of how complicated problems are best solved through coordination across jurisdictions. Sorry if it is too complicated for you to understand: https://jeannegeigercrisiscenter.org/domestic-violence-homicide-prevention/

would be your first step, genius?

What's going to be different about this position? We're in a unique time in that we have multiple health crises potentially on a collision course this winter. Resources are stretched thin as it is, and it's pretty clear that service providers, and the general public, is exhausted by the lack of decisive action up until now. We've been circling this drain for years, and approaching decades when you conceptualize mass and cass within the context of wider opioid crisis, and even still, the process of deinstitutionalization.

We haven't had adequate services to facilitate treatment and shelter for decades. In many ways, the detox system is a lottery. Is there a bed? Is there a follow-up placement bed? Is the person able to go right now? The number of snags that can prevent someone who is willing and able to attend treatment is numerous. I spent a month in 2008 waiting for my insurance to be reactivated because I was homeless and hadn't submitted the recertification letter as I'd never gotten. I found my friend dead from an overdose on October 3rd 2008, and had to wait for November 4th (as it was a tuesday, which meant I would leave detox on a Monday, which meant I could go on to a further treatment program as many of them didn't have the ability to do an intake on a saturday or sunday). So many variables exist which cause the system to operate short of where we'd like it to be.

In the 50s, we closed hospitals and discharged to the street, but our country was wealthy and our cities were far less dense. Homelessness was increasingly visible, but generally didn't interfere with the voting public's life by and large. Services have never been adequate to provide care for the deinstitutionalized population, and others who'd end up in similar situations. We played catch up through the 80s and 90s, amending prior legislation to allow mental health treatment for people in Medicare/Medicaid well after we started eliminating treatment beds.

As a society, we have to face that the moral failing, as easy as it may be to blame the individual, is collectively ours. We stigmatize addiction and we try to "do more while spending less". It's a model that is tried and true in the public health world, something every legislator loves to utilize to shine up budgets that ultimately leave less money going into services.

Is there waste in the system? Absolutely. At the same time, we've begun to get a better handle on that waste. Mass Health has spent the last 5 years establishing coordinated care that seeks to reduce wasteful or unnecessary use. High utilizers of services are followed by care managers and medical navigation investments are reducing costs. It's not perfect, but it's the foundation of care systems that could be more responsible with our tax dollars.

Getting back to the initial sentiment - how does adding another person to this help us navigate all of that stuff?

It really depends on who the person is, and whether they're able to navigate an awful landscape of hateful politics and sanctimony that has been too toxic to actually build consensus. There are legal, medical, financial, social, and human factors at play here, and at the end of the day, we need to build something that has a significant impact, or else it will continue to fester, eroding the public's trust even further, and increasing the risk that folks across the city, state, and nation, are exposed to as they are further marginalized.

We need to address this or it will rot us from within. Look at what it's doing already. We need to invest resources and work to make some significant changes to our current care systems. This could quite possibly be an existential threat to our society, and if that's something that you're cool with, just consider that the pathway to that end is littered with the suffering of our communities.

duplicate post removed

Many are certainly from Massachusetts.

I'd be interested in seeing some data on the subject.

This is still America, where free movement throughout the country is permitted. You can be from where ever, but you can also move to where ever.

Appointing a chief means that you don’t have any ideas and are hoping someone else will figure it out.

I don't know how to do every single thing I'm expected to do, do you?

I'm sure they will end up in some dept., might as well be the Mass and Cass director.

You should learn about how canvassing actually works. The large majority is done by volunteers who have day jobs and are not seeking any position should their candidate be elected.