I was reminded of an old saying in politics while reading the new report released this week by the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO): “a billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you’re talking real money.”
Over the next 18 months we face a $20.7 billion gap in the state’s General Fund: $6.3 billion in the current budget year and a $14.4 billion gap in 2010-2011. A $21.3 billion out-year budget gap follows in 2011-2012.
Most of the current budget gap originates in the failure of some of the solutions we adopted as part of the July budget revision, including the governor’s proposed sale of the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), losing court cases relating to budget solutions, and failing to reduce prison costs. The $14.4 billion gap for 2010-2011 results from losing one-time solutions in the current budget and more realistic forecasts for next year. And, the gap grows to $21.3 billion in 2011-2012 because the temporary tax increases adopted last February will sunset – a one-cent sales tax increase and a 0.25% income tax surcharge on all income brackets.
In order to close the budget gap, the LAO recommends a four-pronged approach of early action, long-lasting solutions, assessing budget priorities, and new revenue options.
Simply cutting $20.7 billion from the budget, as some Republicans have proposed, means eliminating basic programs that literally keep Californians alive. The day the LAO’s report was issued, the governor declared he would not consider new tax revenues as part of the solution.
Consider these figures. Our 18-month $20.7 billion budget gap is more than we spend on higher education ($10.547 billion) and corrections ($8.21 billion) combined. It is over 80 percent of what we spend on all health and human services programs ($24.95 billion) and nearly 60 percent of what we spend on K-12 education ($35.04 billion).
Therefore, gravity of the budget decisions before us is extreme. And, the decisions we make now will function as a new budget baseline for years to come because our state revenues will not pick up in the mid-term. The revenue returns of a more precipitous economic recovery elude us because of what economists call a “U-shaped recession.”
Furthermore, the public is just now beginning to see the results of the cuts we made last summer—classrooms are larger, state colleges are getting more expensive, DMV offices are closing, state parks are closing, and courthouses are closed one day a month, already resulting in a severe backlog of cases. The public must be asked to weigh in on how much more it will tolerate.
Since the budget pains will be here to stay for a while, the budget decisions ahead of us must be made out in the open with significant public input. And, every solution available to us must be on the table.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Fight Continues to Save IHSS
460,000 individuals across California rely on in-home supportive services (IHSS). Sadly, some of them will face real life or death situations because of the administration’s ongoing assault on the program.
Last May, the governor proposed to help close our state’s historic budget deficit by reducing IHSS caseloads by 90%. Had we adopted it, this proposal would have returned seniors to nursing homes and institutionalized disabled individuals. Such treatment of our seniors and disabled Californians is not only inhumane and in conflict with public policy in this state for the past several decades, but it is many times more costly than in-home care. The Legislature, therefore, rejected the governor’s proposal.
In subsequent Big 5 negotiations, however, the governor demanded changes in law to address what he considered fraud in the IHSS system. As part of the final budget deal, he demanded substantial changes to the enrollment process for new IHSS providers and anti-fraud requirements, such as fingerprinting, for recipients of IHSS. At the governor’s request, these changes were to be implemented on November 1, 2009.
But the administration has severely botched implementation of these changes. Here is what we know:
• The Department of Social Services (DSS) has been giving counties – who implement the IHSS program—incomplete, incorrect and conflicting information about the new IHSS laws that took effect on November 1;
• The “final” and still incomplete guidance issued to counties detailing how to comply with the law was issued by DSS at 10:21pm on Saturday, October 31;
• Counties have not been provided the necessary materials and resources to meet the new IHSS requirements – such as background checks on in-home care workers;
• 28 counties representing 86% of the IHSS caseload indicated that they will have difficulty meeting the requirements imposed by DSS;
• Without action, IHSS providers may not be able to provide services to clients already enrolled in and eligible for IHSS; and
• Numerous seniors and disabled individuals throughout the state have been unable to obtain the IHSS services they need, at risk to their safety, their well-being, and in some cases, to their very lives.
On October 28, I held an Assembly Budget Committee hearing on the chaos that resulted from the incomplete and conflicting guidance provided by DSS. Counties testified that they had been unable to meet the deadlines set by legislation because of their inability to obtain guidance and resources to implement the IHSS changes. Nevertheless, DSS testified that as of November 1, it would not be paying any new providers for their services. This meant that many IHSS recipients would go without care.
I crafted emergency legislation, Senate Bill (SB) 69, to help clear up this mess. It was a simple bill, requiring DSS to convene a stakeholder process prior to implementing any changes to IHSS. It also delayed implementation of such changes until 60 days after the stakeholder process completed so that counties as well as IHSS clients and providers had time to prepare.
SB 69 required a two-thirds vote of the Legislature because it included an urgency clause so that it could take effect immediately. SB 69 easily passed the Assembly with a unanimous 68-0 vote on November 2. However, working with the administration, Senate Republicans withheld their votes and killed SB 69. I suspect the letter of opposition circulated by DSS to each Senator (enclosed below) had something to do with that. This opposition was unexpected, especially since I crafted the bill based on testimony provided by John Wagner, Director of DSS at my October hearing.
Subsequently, on November 5, I held a second hearing to determine what, if anything, the administration had done to clear up the chaos it had caused in IHSS. The administration effectively thumbed its nose at the Legislature and at the many IHSS recipients in need of services because the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Director of DSS refused to attend the hearing. I can only conclude that the governor is satisfied with the way his administration has handled these changes to IHSS.
DSS has a history of cooperating with the counties and implementing complex changes in an orderly and professional fashion, sometimes even delaying implementation past the deadline set in statute. The focus has been on getting it right and preventing lapses in service. Why DSS has departed from its stellar record is baffling. It appears that the governor intends to achieve his desired cuts to IHSS indirectly through so-called “reform.”
Until the problems plaguing IHSS are resolved, I will keep pressing every avenue available to me to find a solution. There is real suffering, pain, fear, and even death if we fail to come together and act for the common good.
Last May, the governor proposed to help close our state’s historic budget deficit by reducing IHSS caseloads by 90%. Had we adopted it, this proposal would have returned seniors to nursing homes and institutionalized disabled individuals. Such treatment of our seniors and disabled Californians is not only inhumane and in conflict with public policy in this state for the past several decades, but it is many times more costly than in-home care. The Legislature, therefore, rejected the governor’s proposal.
In subsequent Big 5 negotiations, however, the governor demanded changes in law to address what he considered fraud in the IHSS system. As part of the final budget deal, he demanded substantial changes to the enrollment process for new IHSS providers and anti-fraud requirements, such as fingerprinting, for recipients of IHSS. At the governor’s request, these changes were to be implemented on November 1, 2009.
But the administration has severely botched implementation of these changes. Here is what we know:
• The Department of Social Services (DSS) has been giving counties – who implement the IHSS program—incomplete, incorrect and conflicting information about the new IHSS laws that took effect on November 1;
• The “final” and still incomplete guidance issued to counties detailing how to comply with the law was issued by DSS at 10:21pm on Saturday, October 31;
• Counties have not been provided the necessary materials and resources to meet the new IHSS requirements – such as background checks on in-home care workers;
• 28 counties representing 86% of the IHSS caseload indicated that they will have difficulty meeting the requirements imposed by DSS;
• Without action, IHSS providers may not be able to provide services to clients already enrolled in and eligible for IHSS; and
• Numerous seniors and disabled individuals throughout the state have been unable to obtain the IHSS services they need, at risk to their safety, their well-being, and in some cases, to their very lives.
On October 28, I held an Assembly Budget Committee hearing on the chaos that resulted from the incomplete and conflicting guidance provided by DSS. Counties testified that they had been unable to meet the deadlines set by legislation because of their inability to obtain guidance and resources to implement the IHSS changes. Nevertheless, DSS testified that as of November 1, it would not be paying any new providers for their services. This meant that many IHSS recipients would go without care.
I crafted emergency legislation, Senate Bill (SB) 69, to help clear up this mess. It was a simple bill, requiring DSS to convene a stakeholder process prior to implementing any changes to IHSS. It also delayed implementation of such changes until 60 days after the stakeholder process completed so that counties as well as IHSS clients and providers had time to prepare.
SB 69 required a two-thirds vote of the Legislature because it included an urgency clause so that it could take effect immediately. SB 69 easily passed the Assembly with a unanimous 68-0 vote on November 2. However, working with the administration, Senate Republicans withheld their votes and killed SB 69. I suspect the letter of opposition circulated by DSS to each Senator (enclosed below) had something to do with that. This opposition was unexpected, especially since I crafted the bill based on testimony provided by John Wagner, Director of DSS at my October hearing.
Subsequently, on November 5, I held a second hearing to determine what, if anything, the administration had done to clear up the chaos it had caused in IHSS. The administration effectively thumbed its nose at the Legislature and at the many IHSS recipients in need of services because the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Director of DSS refused to attend the hearing. I can only conclude that the governor is satisfied with the way his administration has handled these changes to IHSS.
DSS has a history of cooperating with the counties and implementing complex changes in an orderly and professional fashion, sometimes even delaying implementation past the deadline set in statute. The focus has been on getting it right and preventing lapses in service. Why DSS has departed from its stellar record is baffling. It appears that the governor intends to achieve his desired cuts to IHSS indirectly through so-called “reform.”
Until the problems plaguing IHSS are resolved, I will keep pressing every avenue available to me to find a solution. There is real suffering, pain, fear, and even death if we fail to come together and act for the common good.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Water Bond Makes Bad Budget Worse
On November 4th, the State Legislature passed an $11 billion water bond. This action has been widely described as an historic achievement. Unfortunately, this is true for all the wrong reasons.
This bond was crafted behind closed doors, never received a public vetting, and was passed on the fly in the middle of the night by legislators who lacked an adequate analysis of it. It brings our debt burden to historic new levels. And, for the first time, it requires the public to finance half the cost of new dams and reservoirs benefiting private interests.
By passing this bond, the Legislature is flirting with financial disaster. Already, the state is unable to pay for services demanded by Californians. We’ve just gone through three horrific state budgets to close a $60 billion gap. And, more troubles lay ahead. We face an $8 billion gap next year and a $15 billion gap after that. Servicing the debt on an $11 billion water bond will make our bad budget situation worse.
For more information, check out my remarks during the debate about the water bond on the Assembly Floor.
This bond was crafted behind closed doors, never received a public vetting, and was passed on the fly in the middle of the night by legislators who lacked an adequate analysis of it. It brings our debt burden to historic new levels. And, for the first time, it requires the public to finance half the cost of new dams and reservoirs benefiting private interests.
By passing this bond, the Legislature is flirting with financial disaster. Already, the state is unable to pay for services demanded by Californians. We’ve just gone through three horrific state budgets to close a $60 billion gap. And, more troubles lay ahead. We face an $8 billion gap next year and a $15 billion gap after that. Servicing the debt on an $11 billion water bond will make our bad budget situation worse.
For more information, check out my remarks during the debate about the water bond on the Assembly Floor.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
IHSS "Reform" Disaster
On October 28th the Assembly Budget Committee convened an oversight hearing on the Schwarzenegger Administration’s botched implementation of its own proposals to reduce fraud the governor claims is in the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Program.
IHSS provides medical, nursing, and day to day living assistance to 460,000 elderly and disabled in their own homes. It has proven itself a less expensive and more effective alternative to nursing home care while enabling individuals to live with dignity in their community. Please watch the video to see how this program is needlessly under threat. That’s why I am pushing through emergency legislation to prevent the imminent collapse of the IHSS program.
IHSS provides medical, nursing, and day to day living assistance to 460,000 elderly and disabled in their own homes. It has proven itself a less expensive and more effective alternative to nursing home care while enabling individuals to live with dignity in their community. Please watch the video to see how this program is needlessly under threat. That’s why I am pushing through emergency legislation to prevent the imminent collapse of the IHSS program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)