AZ Jim
R.I.P. With Us In Spirit Only
- Location
- SURPRISE, ARIZONA
Note who this hurts:
Missouri budget plan cuts social programs, makes major shift
kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article17613590.html
the associated press JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – The Missouri Senate plans to debate on Tuesday a budget proposal that cuts spending for seniors, people with mental illness and foster children as well as making a major policy change – it budgets lump sum amounts that state departments could allocate rather than specific amounts for each program.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Kurt Schaefer’s fiscal year 2016 budget proposal creates lump sum grants for most services within the Department of Social Services, Department of Mental Health and Department of Health and Senior Services.
It cuts $130 million in general revenue from the House proposal for most programs within those departments.
Schaefer said last week the cuts would leave the budgets of the departments higher than actual spending in fiscal year 2014. But the combined totals of the three departments would be lower than 2014 by about $69 million and below the current fiscal year ending June 30 by about $35 million, according to the Senate proposals and previous budgets.
Budget director Linda Luebbering said the proposed cuts would be magnified because departments would also get less in federal matching funds, increasing the total amount of the cuts to about $300 million. She said spending has increased because of greater need.
“The departments are serving more seniors, more people with disabilities, more people with mental illness, more foster kids,” Luebbering said. “Even if spending is up a little bit, it’s because demand for their services are up. It’s not like they’ve got extra money for fun stuff.”
The three departments administer many social welfare programs – including the Medicaid health program for the poor, cash assistance, food stamps, in-home and community services for people with disabilities and foster care for children. Together, they account for nearly half of every dollar of general revenue the state spends.
Schaefer said the unsustainable growth of these departments needs to be reined in. Departments frequently request more than they need, leading to “fluff” in their budgets, he said.
“They have a lot of money that they have built into these lines that they just don’t need,” Schaefer said. “They’re not going to tell us where to find it. It just doesn’t work that way.”
A lump sum style plan for the entire Missouri budget was last floated in 2003.
That House Republican proposal was criticized as passing the buck on spending cuts and was eventually rewritten by the Senate before it got to the governor’s desk. It reflected a similar frustration to the one expressed by Schaefer now. Then, department directors under then-Gov. Bob Holden, a Democrat, generally refused to suggest cuts as requested by House Republican leaders.
The House Budget Committee Chairman at the time was Carl Bearden, now head of conservative advocacy group United for Missouri. He said the proposal coming out of the Senate, which has previously been more bound to tradition, gives it a better shot of moving forward.
“There is a lot of frustration in the Legislature and particularly here in the budget that departments aren’t being as forthright as they should be,” Bearden said.
The three departments have spent more than 99 percent of general revenue in fiscal year 2013 and 2014.
Departments do request more authority to spend possible federal dollars, Luebbering said, but they rarely do not use any general revenue.
The largest general revenue funded programs in the Department of Social Services are child welfare programs for abused or neglected children, Medicaid and child care subsidies for low-income working parents, Department of Social Services spokeswoman Rebecca Woelfel said.
The department has seen growth in the number of abused and neglected children as well as growth in Medicaid enrollment – currently at its highest since May 2012 – Woelfel said. Higher costs have also been driven by increasing costs of drugs in the Medicaid program, which primarily serves children, the elderly, blind and individuals with disabilities.
Department of Mental Health spokeswoman Debra Walker said state psychiatric hospitals are already above occupancy. Community-based support for people with developmental disabilities, treatment for those with chronic health conditions and mental health issues and substance abuse treatment programs would also be affected by the proposed cuts, she said.
“Missouri also has growth each year in the number of individuals with developmental disabilities that go into crisis due to the death of a caregiver, a worsening medical condition or other circumstances,” she said in a written statement.
Demand for services has never been greater, according to Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Ryan Hobart. Cuts would affect home-delivered meals for seniors, health coverage for Missouri residents with HIV/AIDS and disease tracking and surveillance, Hobart said in an email.
And in Kansas where politicians tell medical doctors what procedures they cannot do.
Kansas Abortion Bill To Ban Procedure By State Workers Passes House
huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/17/kansas-abortion-bill-ku-medical-center_n_1355351.html
John Celock Become a fan john.celock@huffingtonpost.com Email Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback has said that he will sign a sweeping 69-page anti-abortion bill.
The day after a Kansas legislative committee adopted an amendment to protect accreditation of the OBGYN residency program at the University of Kansas Medical Center, the full state House adopted an amendment which could put the program back in jeopardy.
The full House of Representatives adopted an amendment to the state budget Friday evening that would prohibit state money from being used on abortions and would ban state workers from performing abortions during the workday. Opponents say the amendment will jeopardize the accreditation of KU's OBGYN residency program, where residents receive training to provide abortions.
On Thursday, a House committee meanwhile passed an amendment to the state's sweeping anti-abortion bill meant to allow for the abortion training to continue at KU. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires OBGYN programs to provide abortion training.
"Kansas citizens do not want (abortions)," state Rep. Joe Patton (R-Topeka) told HuffPost about why he sponsored the amendment.
Patton said that he does not know if the ban would actually threaten the accreditation of the residency program, noting that KU officials have declined two invitations to testify before the House Federal and State Affairs Committee, which is considering the anti-abortion bill.
In 1998, Kansas lawmakers prohibited abortions from being performed on state property. A KU Medical Center spokeswoman told HuffPost earlier this month that no abortions are performed at KU, which is considered state property. Under state law, the medical center's doctors and nurses are employed by private foundations, but the residents are considered state employees. Patton said he believes the medical center has been skirting state law to provide abortion services.
"The public policy should be that a state agency should not be involved in this practice. Since 1998, they have thumbed their noses at public policy in Kansas," he said Saturday morning.
Rep. Sean Gatewood (D-Topeka), who is leading opposition to the anti-abortion bill, said that legislators have been meeting with KU officials privately to craft a procedure to protect the residency program. He said the amendment adopted by the committee Thursday would exempt KU residents from the worker ban and allow the training to continue. He said the amendment did include a one-year sunset clause, which would give legislators the opportunity to review the residency program annually. The amendment and full bill were passed by the committee on Thursday.
"I don't get it; it seems reckless to me," Gatewood told HuffPost about the budget amendment.
The anti-abortion bill includes a provision that permits doctors to withhold from a mother any information that could possibly cause her to seek an abortion; it also prevents a medical malpractice suit from being filed should the woman and child subsequently have health issues, but does allow a wrongful death suit to be filed in the event of the mother's death. The bill also includes the end of a series of tax deductions relating to abortion. Opponents have said that bill will also impose a sales tax on abortions in the state, including those sought by rape victims. The committee on Thursday removed language that required a woman to listen to the fetal heartbeat, but have kept language that requires doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer.
Earlier this week, the New Hampshire House of Representatives also adopted a bill that would instruct doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer. The theory that abortion causes breast cancer has been rebuked by the World Health Organization, the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, who have all said the research is faulty.
Gatewood said state Senate leaders have signaled they will likely not consider the anti-abortion bill, saying that it is too late in the legislative session to take up such a complex bill. The House had used a parliamentary maneuver when adopting the bill in committee to attempt to expedite Senate consideration. Gov. Sam Brownback (R) has told HuffPost that he will sign the bill.
The full budget is likely to be adopted by the House on Monday, where legislative rules would prohibit an attempt to remove the abortion language, according to Gatewood. The budget is subject to legislative negotiations before being sent to Brownback. It has not been determined if the abortion amendment will remain in the final bill.
Patton said he remains committed to seeing the adoption of the abortion ban, saying that if the medical center leaders will not speak publicly on the bill, they are trying to promote abortion.
"This should not be discussed in the closet, but out in the open," Patton said.
Missouri budget plan cuts social programs, makes major shift
kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article17613590.htmlthe associated press JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – The Missouri Senate plans to debate on Tuesday a budget proposal that cuts spending for seniors, people with mental illness and foster children as well as making a major policy change – it budgets lump sum amounts that state departments could allocate rather than specific amounts for each program.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Kurt Schaefer’s fiscal year 2016 budget proposal creates lump sum grants for most services within the Department of Social Services, Department of Mental Health and Department of Health and Senior Services.
It cuts $130 million in general revenue from the House proposal for most programs within those departments.
Schaefer said last week the cuts would leave the budgets of the departments higher than actual spending in fiscal year 2014. But the combined totals of the three departments would be lower than 2014 by about $69 million and below the current fiscal year ending June 30 by about $35 million, according to the Senate proposals and previous budgets.
Budget director Linda Luebbering said the proposed cuts would be magnified because departments would also get less in federal matching funds, increasing the total amount of the cuts to about $300 million. She said spending has increased because of greater need.
“The departments are serving more seniors, more people with disabilities, more people with mental illness, more foster kids,” Luebbering said. “Even if spending is up a little bit, it’s because demand for their services are up. It’s not like they’ve got extra money for fun stuff.”
The three departments administer many social welfare programs – including the Medicaid health program for the poor, cash assistance, food stamps, in-home and community services for people with disabilities and foster care for children. Together, they account for nearly half of every dollar of general revenue the state spends.
Schaefer said the unsustainable growth of these departments needs to be reined in. Departments frequently request more than they need, leading to “fluff” in their budgets, he said.
“They have a lot of money that they have built into these lines that they just don’t need,” Schaefer said. “They’re not going to tell us where to find it. It just doesn’t work that way.”
A lump sum style plan for the entire Missouri budget was last floated in 2003.
That House Republican proposal was criticized as passing the buck on spending cuts and was eventually rewritten by the Senate before it got to the governor’s desk. It reflected a similar frustration to the one expressed by Schaefer now. Then, department directors under then-Gov. Bob Holden, a Democrat, generally refused to suggest cuts as requested by House Republican leaders.
The House Budget Committee Chairman at the time was Carl Bearden, now head of conservative advocacy group United for Missouri. He said the proposal coming out of the Senate, which has previously been more bound to tradition, gives it a better shot of moving forward.
“There is a lot of frustration in the Legislature and particularly here in the budget that departments aren’t being as forthright as they should be,” Bearden said.
The three departments have spent more than 99 percent of general revenue in fiscal year 2013 and 2014.
Departments do request more authority to spend possible federal dollars, Luebbering said, but they rarely do not use any general revenue.
The largest general revenue funded programs in the Department of Social Services are child welfare programs for abused or neglected children, Medicaid and child care subsidies for low-income working parents, Department of Social Services spokeswoman Rebecca Woelfel said.
The department has seen growth in the number of abused and neglected children as well as growth in Medicaid enrollment – currently at its highest since May 2012 – Woelfel said. Higher costs have also been driven by increasing costs of drugs in the Medicaid program, which primarily serves children, the elderly, blind and individuals with disabilities.
Department of Mental Health spokeswoman Debra Walker said state psychiatric hospitals are already above occupancy. Community-based support for people with developmental disabilities, treatment for those with chronic health conditions and mental health issues and substance abuse treatment programs would also be affected by the proposed cuts, she said.
“Missouri also has growth each year in the number of individuals with developmental disabilities that go into crisis due to the death of a caregiver, a worsening medical condition or other circumstances,” she said in a written statement.
Demand for services has never been greater, according to Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Ryan Hobart. Cuts would affect home-delivered meals for seniors, health coverage for Missouri residents with HIV/AIDS and disease tracking and surveillance, Hobart said in an email.
And in Kansas where politicians tell medical doctors what procedures they cannot do.
Kansas Abortion Bill To Ban Procedure By State Workers Passes House
huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/17/kansas-abortion-bill-ku-medical-center_n_1355351.htmlJohn Celock Become a fan john.celock@huffingtonpost.com Email Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback has said that he will sign a sweeping 69-page anti-abortion bill.
The day after a Kansas legislative committee adopted an amendment to protect accreditation of the OBGYN residency program at the University of Kansas Medical Center, the full state House adopted an amendment which could put the program back in jeopardy.
The full House of Representatives adopted an amendment to the state budget Friday evening that would prohibit state money from being used on abortions and would ban state workers from performing abortions during the workday. Opponents say the amendment will jeopardize the accreditation of KU's OBGYN residency program, where residents receive training to provide abortions.
On Thursday, a House committee meanwhile passed an amendment to the state's sweeping anti-abortion bill meant to allow for the abortion training to continue at KU. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires OBGYN programs to provide abortion training.
"Kansas citizens do not want (abortions)," state Rep. Joe Patton (R-Topeka) told HuffPost about why he sponsored the amendment.
Patton said that he does not know if the ban would actually threaten the accreditation of the residency program, noting that KU officials have declined two invitations to testify before the House Federal and State Affairs Committee, which is considering the anti-abortion bill.
In 1998, Kansas lawmakers prohibited abortions from being performed on state property. A KU Medical Center spokeswoman told HuffPost earlier this month that no abortions are performed at KU, which is considered state property. Under state law, the medical center's doctors and nurses are employed by private foundations, but the residents are considered state employees. Patton said he believes the medical center has been skirting state law to provide abortion services.
"The public policy should be that a state agency should not be involved in this practice. Since 1998, they have thumbed their noses at public policy in Kansas," he said Saturday morning.
Rep. Sean Gatewood (D-Topeka), who is leading opposition to the anti-abortion bill, said that legislators have been meeting with KU officials privately to craft a procedure to protect the residency program. He said the amendment adopted by the committee Thursday would exempt KU residents from the worker ban and allow the training to continue. He said the amendment did include a one-year sunset clause, which would give legislators the opportunity to review the residency program annually. The amendment and full bill were passed by the committee on Thursday.
"I don't get it; it seems reckless to me," Gatewood told HuffPost about the budget amendment.
The anti-abortion bill includes a provision that permits doctors to withhold from a mother any information that could possibly cause her to seek an abortion; it also prevents a medical malpractice suit from being filed should the woman and child subsequently have health issues, but does allow a wrongful death suit to be filed in the event of the mother's death. The bill also includes the end of a series of tax deductions relating to abortion. Opponents have said that bill will also impose a sales tax on abortions in the state, including those sought by rape victims. The committee on Thursday removed language that required a woman to listen to the fetal heartbeat, but have kept language that requires doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer.
Earlier this week, the New Hampshire House of Representatives also adopted a bill that would instruct doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer. The theory that abortion causes breast cancer has been rebuked by the World Health Organization, the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, who have all said the research is faulty.
Gatewood said state Senate leaders have signaled they will likely not consider the anti-abortion bill, saying that it is too late in the legislative session to take up such a complex bill. The House had used a parliamentary maneuver when adopting the bill in committee to attempt to expedite Senate consideration. Gov. Sam Brownback (R) has told HuffPost that he will sign the bill.
The full budget is likely to be adopted by the House on Monday, where legislative rules would prohibit an attempt to remove the abortion language, according to Gatewood. The budget is subject to legislative negotiations before being sent to Brownback. It has not been determined if the abortion amendment will remain in the final bill.
Patton said he remains committed to seeing the adoption of the abortion ban, saying that if the medical center leaders will not speak publicly on the bill, they are trying to promote abortion.
"This should not be discussed in the closet, but out in the open," Patton said.
