Nowhere in the DMR budget is the exercise as bleak and stark as the beleaguered Turning-22 program, which will face an actual cut next year of $3 million–a 35 percent reduction from the program’s $8.5 million in funding in the current fiscal year. The $5.5 million in the critical transition program will still support core services for those who are already in the Turning-22 program, the EOHHS official said. But he acknowledged that there will be no money for next year’s new cohort of persons who lose their special education services when they reach the age of 22.
The irony is that even the then budget-slashing Gov. Mitt Romney had only tried to cut the Turning 22 program by $2 million last year and return the program to the level-funding it had received for several years despite rising caseloads. After vigorous advocacy by advocates for the disabled, including COFAR, the Legislature last year overturned Romney’s veto of a $2 million increase for the program in the current fiscal year. And then when Romney struck again at that $2 million (as part of his total $425 million in emergency “9C” cuts), it was Governor Patrick himself who restored that funding in one of his first acts in assuming office in January. Yet now, after that exhausting battle, Patrick is proposing to cut Turning 22 by $3 million.
And let’s not forget the salary reserve fund for direct-care workers in human services. A similar battle ensued last year over Romney’s move to eliminate the $28 million line item for the reserve, which is an attempt to establish some parity in pay for those under-compensated workers in the community-based, vendor-operated system. Patrick restored that funding as well in January, and now he’s proposing to cut it by 57 percent, to $12 million.
We expressed some concerns about the administration’s approach when it was announced that Patrick had asked all agencies to plan for 5 to 10 percent reductions in their budgets next year. Once again, it seems, the welfare of deserving groups are being pitted against each other–in this case, persons with mental retardation, and others relying on human services, versus the cities and towns, which will receive a significant budgetary increase next year.
Here are some of the DMR’s other planned belt-tightening moves that will have to be made as part of the exercise to achieve budget balance:
— More than 1,400 persons with mental retardation will lose one day a week of transportation services to day programs.
— Families receiving DMR supports will be subject to a means test for the first time. This appears to follow from new regulations imposed last year by DMR, which will restrict eligibility for services in yet-to-be-defined ways.
— There will be a reduction in an estimated 55 beds in the community available to accept new clients. Given that an undetermined number of people are already waiting for community placements and that DMR is continuing to move ahead with plans to shut the state facilities, the loss of those beds can only make matters worse.
While we understand that hard choices have to be made to deal with a projected $1.2 billion gap between revenues and expenses in next year’s budget, it’s saddening, if not surprising, that the most vulnerable residents of the commonwealth are so often the ones who are asked to make the biggest sacrifices.
Finally, we are concerned that the governor’s budget proposal consolidates seven community-based DMR line items into two consolidated accounts. This makes the budget process less understandable and accessible and departs from the path toward budget transparency, recently suggested by the Massachusetts Budget Transparency Project.
I want to know if any of the cuts are going to come from the Department itself.
<
p>
I think community providers have been cut over and over. I have several programs that have been level funded since 1985. That means the department has not given us additional funding even though rent, the cost of food, and salaries have risen. We operate at minimum staffing and ask those staff who we pay very little to take care of some of the most vulnerable citizens in the Commonwealth. When I think about what we ask these staff to do I have trouble sleeping.
<
p>
My SO works for DMR, and I am filled with admiration for the hard work she does, on a payscale that demonstrates that she and her fellow workers are not in it for the money.
<
p>
I hear so many wonderful stories of the assistance that she and her colleagues provide to, as you put it, the most vulnerable members of our community.
<
p>
Of course, you will hear the same complaint (about funding) from the environmentalists re the state park system (and many other items), from educators about the lack of funding for just maintaining the status quo, let alone improving our system; the list goes on.
<
p>
We hear complaints about MA losing population (I don’t think that’s a bad thing in and of itself, but it does have a canary-in-a-coal-mine feeling to it…), and the standard response has to do with “the cost of housing…” I don’t buy it. House prices are high in MA because we have high incomes. Rental housing is scarce because it’s not a high priority for the state. But it ain’t the only reason people are leaving the state for a better life. Not by a long-shot, imho.
<
p>
We need to change the dialog and start talking about how we can fund the things we want and need to do. How about a progressive income tax, for starters? How about closing corporate tax loopholes, and allowing local option taxes? Yes, folks, we need to increase the revenue side of the equation, or we can’t deal with the sad stories like this one. Shall we all pitch in a little and make this Commonwealth a better place to live?
<
p>
That’s why it’s called a budget.
<
p>
I am always interested to hear suggestions for what else should be cut instead.
road work cuts, public transit and enviro-energy improvements. I’m also always happy to suggest raising the gas tax, the cigarette tax, the alcohol tax, and expanding the bottle bill as ways to reduce the MBTA fares, reduce/eliminate the state lottery, reduce/eliminate MassPike tolls, and reduce tuition for UMass system schools.
<
p>
đŸ˜€
I’m suggesting that what we need to do is to increase the revenue stream, not to make additional cuts in expenditures to programs that are pretty universally seen as worthwhile and beneficial to the commonwealth.
Let’s cut to the chase and take measured steps to enact real universal healthcare reform. And save BILLION$ in the process!!! This requires vocal grassroots political support including a demand for major cost control reforms. Grassroots support will bring forth the needed political leadership; one would hope.
<
p>
Chapter 58 has ramped up the momentum for change so let’s ride the current but take control of the rudder and change tact. It’s long past time to move toward streamlined single payer financing which everyone knows is the smartest most rational way to secure affordable sustainable universal quality health insurance coverage. Even if we don’t fully get there in the short term there is so much room for improvement it’s beyond absurd.
<
p>
Major cost control is NOT what Charley may have been well-intended about when he linked to a purported “cost control” legislative agenda in his above comment (limited cost-control in itself isn’t bad, only when it tries to pass itself off as something more or serves to obstruct the major reforms from happening).
<
p>
What follows are a few of the major cost control steps to take ASAP(details in the State House News article, link below)
<
p>
1. Jehlen bill: require health insurers to spend 90% on health care services (what a novel idea, hc dollars spent on hc!!)
<
p>
2. Tolman bill: uniform billing
<
p>
3. Montigney bill: state bulk purchasing of pharmaceuticals
<
p>
4. various bills allowing private employers, municipalities, and individuals to opt-in to GIC, MassHealth or Commonwealth Care as coverage options.
(Kaprelian is lead sponsor of the GIC/municipalities bill)
<
p>
5. Hynes/Tolman bill: Mass. Health Care Trust for Universal HC
<
p>
The Feb. 27 legislative briefing on these major cost control reforms was extremely well-attended. As I waited in line to get in to the standing room only hearing room I chatted with someone from the AG’s office and requested they take a fresh look at our state’s health insurers being subsidized by taxpayers with their tax exempt “public charity” status.(Yes, can you believe it?!!!!!!)
<
p>
As health insurance access expands, debate picks up over rising costs
Priscilla Yeon, State House News Service, February 27, 2007
<
p>
Boston – A group of activists and legislators are pushing health care
cost control initiatives to slow double-digit inflation rates that have
been placing businesses, governments and residents under increasing
pressure.
<
p>
At an event sponsored by the organization Mass-Care, speakers today
talked about how a portion of state spending on health care, as well as
spending by private companies and residents, pays for “administrative
waste” and “price gouging.”
<
p>
Cost control proponents have been making the case that the state’s new
health insurance law won’t work, despite the best efforts of many,
unless steps are taken to curb escalating health care costs…
<
p>
If this makes sense to you or you want to learn more, please visit MassCare/About or sign on to help at MassCare.org/Sign-on. Thanks.
I suffer from occasional thread-confusion and Charley’s link was here (on another thread, his original post, near top whree it says “Cost-cutting”), not here on this thread.
<
p>
and sorry the formatting in the above SHN article excerpt is so yucky.
Are we at the fullness of time moment yet?
Do we have a critical mass of americans who have seen
enough and decided there is no ‘there, there’ in our so called economy?
<
p>
The new boss looks just like the old boss only he said he was one of us.
<
p>
It is time to restate the US Economy much like we restate the earnings of private companies that have been indicted
for earnings schemes.
<
p>
Let’s see what is behind these employemnt numbers, these productivity numbers, these tax numbers ( ie who pays who benefits?)
<
p>
It does serve any purpose to delude ourselves any longer we will only be in a worse hole if we don’t pull the plug now.