Schmid said he believes the cut in funding is directly connected to the Trump administration’s hostility to diversity, equity and inclusion — or DEI — programs and the administration’s aversion to organizations promoting those programs. He said the administration has voiced support for the goal of ending HIV. But can HIV be addressed in any meaningful way without working with the agencies that are working in diverse communities?
So people with serious medical maladies—osteosarcoma patients suffering severe bone weakness, for instance—will have to jump through very undefined bureaucratic hoops to “prove” they cannot work 80 hours a month, with the risk of a coverage loss if that’s denied. Even a temporary coverage gap could be serious. “They will die, they will become sick,” said Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute in Washington. “That’s why we pushed so hard for the exemption, because we know the ramifications of people losing access to health care.”
Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+ Hepatitis Policy Institute, is among the leaders of many AIDS advocacy organizations expressing strong opposition to the OMB action. Schmid said that in places like D.C. and some states, local officials will be willing to redirect the federal funds to local community-based organizations. “But other states and jurisdictions don’t have that relationship with the community-based organizations,” Schmid said. “It depends on the state,” he said, adding, “Not all states send their money to the communities that really need it most. And not all states are fast in getting money to the community-based organizations.”
Carl Schmid, the executive director of D.C.-based HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, said he, too, thought applications would soon open for grantees. He said some community groups had concerns the funding could be jeopardized because of the perception on the right that theirs is a “woke” cause. HIV prevention largely targets the people most susceptible to contracting the disease, which includes minority groups such as gay men, transgender people and the Black community. The focus on those groups conflicted with Trump’s early executive orders restricting federal funding for diversity programs and transgender care. “But those are the groups on the ground and doing the work,” Schmid said.
Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, pointed to fiscal year 2018, when
Congress specified a portion of HIV funding for health departments and a separate sum for national,
regional, local, and community organizations, as an example of an approach the organizations would
like lawmakers to take.