What do Democrats want? by Bert Weiss
There seems to be confusion about what Democrats want. First, Democrats come in many stripes. I write as just one. If an anthropologist in the year 3010 were to read back issues of the Conway Daily Sun, and then try to determine what democrats are all about, they might think we are all Marxist socialists who recklessly tax and spend, ignore national security, and kill babies for a hobby. Wake-up, none of these allegations are even close to reality.
First, Democrats love America, capitalist America. Furthermore, our Canadian and European friends are also capitalists, yet these governments provide guaranteed health care to their citizens. Marx and Lenin would be extremely upset at the notion that these countries were even remotely associated with their principles, as they are clearly in the capitalist camp. The cold war was a battle to see which systems would lead to more economic growth and power; cooperatives verses competition. Competition proved to be the more powerful motivator, on a national scale. Democrats believe in capitalism and competition. We live and work within this system. This does not mean that all cooperation is bad or all competition is good. As in most cases, a combination is the most effective path.
Opponents love to categorize Democrats as reckless tax and spenders. However, a simple look at history shows otherwise. In New Hampshire, the only time the budget has ended in deficit was under the leadership of John H. Sununu. During Sununu's tenure as governor, the 1983 and 1984 budgets were in deficit, resulting in significant tax increases. On issue after issue, past Republican administrations delayed spending until “later”. Well, later has become now. State infrastructure, education funding, and employee pensions, are now budget items resulting from perpetual postponement. For the past 3 years, under Democratic leadership they are being dealt with responsibly by the current legislature.
On the national level, under the leadership of George W. Bush, and a Republican led Congress, the largest deficits in history were created. Bush took us to war, but didn't bother to pay for it inside the budget. Instead of tightening our belts with a tax increase to pay for the war, we borrowed from the Chinese, expecting the next generation to pay the costs plus the interest. Two groups paid for this war – the soldiers and their families, and our future generations. Furthermore, the greatest budget deficits in the Federal budgets came under Presidents Reagan and Bush 2. President Clinton delivered a surplus.
When it comes to job creation, more jobs were created under President Clinton than under Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2 combined. According to this graph from the bureau of labor statistics http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf during Bush’s last year job losses grew every month. Then Obama came in and acted quickly to stem the losses. Once Congress responded, each month resulted in fewer job losses until we finally had a small increase. The economy is still far from healthy, but we are not in the great depression that loomed in the first days of the Obama administration. Bush instituted all the expensive bailouts, before Obama came to office.
Taxes are not the only expense that draws money from our bank accounts. During the Bush years, with Republicans in control of the Congress and Presidency, health insurance premiums doubled. These costs affect everybody with insurance, including public employees whose benefits the taxpayer covers. Thus, our property taxes are increased, in part, to pay for these insurance policy rises. In schools, students suffer because budget cuts are required to cover these costs.
Today the Democrats are trying to reform health care and the insurance industry. If we let the naysayers have their way, these costs will surely bankrupt us. The sad reality is that we now have the world’s most expensive healthcare system, but not the best one. Other countries boast longer life expectancy and lower infant mortality rates, while spending close to half the cost per person that we do. Today 65% of all healthcare dollars are already under government auspices – Medicare, Medicaid, S-Chip, and the Veterans administration. These programs operate pretty close to the bone. That leaves the other 35% where we can possibly achieve savings. Huge savings. Insurance companies are all too well aware that their cash cows are in jeopardy, so they are busy advertising a pack of lies about healthcare reform. They keep saying we can't afford reform, but what they really mean is they can't continue their profligate ways with such reform. In a country where freedom of speech includes freedom to lie, we the voters must do our due diligence to separate lies and opinions, from truth and reality.
Democrats value freedom, justice, and human rights for all, regardless of race, religion, or sexual orientation. We value the US constitution, and the Geneva Conventions of War. We were not surprised when to learn that torture is not an effective way to get reliable intelligence. People being tortured will say whatever they imagine or think will stop the torture. It turned out that the intelligence gathered this way did not lead to increased security. Again, due diligence yields a different story beyond the Bush administration claims. In the past year, we have tracked down and killed 12 of the top 20 Al Queda leaders. They are on the run, thanks to Commander–in–Chief Obama.
Some political issues do not divide by party, but by religion or philosophy. A woman's right to choose is one of these. There are proponents and opponents to this on both sides of the aisle. Regardless of when you believe life begins, no thinking person takes ending a pregnancy lightly. There may well be compelling reasons to decide on either side of the question. One can be pro-choice without advocating abortion. Witness Massachusetts’ newly-elected Republican Senator Scott Brown.
Democrats got a mandate to govern in New Hampshire and the USA. Governing is a challenge. Democrats are working hard to make progress on all fronts.
Bert Weiss is a custom, architectural, glass artist and Democratic activist living and working in Chatham NH, with his wife and dogs.
|
Fixing Health Care in the Midst of the Partisan Fray (Feb. 12 2010)
by: Jim Salmon
When Barack Obama won the presidency, I said to anyone who would listen, “He will disappoint us.” By that, I did not mean that he would let the country down. I meant that we the people who voted for him heaped great hopes and expectations upon his office. We wanted him to fix the economy, stop the wars, and give us an affordable universal health care plan. One year later, the economy is struggling, the wars wear on, and health care insurance reform is in trouble.
But I am not disappointed. In fact, after the State of the Union address and the follow on meeting with congressional Republicans, I am encouraged. Both were command performances by a man of keen intellect, high principles, and consummate skill. In his one-man stand in the Republican lion’s den, he showed that he had read their proposals and understood their concepts. He parried every thrust,
and when comments were demonstrably false, he called them out.
He did not go there to demonstrate his ability to think on his feet. He went there to challenge Republican senators and congressmen to do their jobs — to govern responsibly. It is evident to me that the president is willing to work with both parties to fix health care, manage the budget, and do the People’s work to put our jobs ahead of their own, as he himself has done by making hard choices on the economy and elsewhere.
A health care reform bill nearly did make it through the congressional sausage factory before Scott Brown became the 41st NO vote. The Democrats could
have rammed a bill through before Brown was seated, but correctly decided not to. Nevertheless, reform is badly needed. The House bill, for example, would:
• Ensure that no one can be denied coverage.
• Ensure that no one can be dropped if sick.
• Ensure that no one would run out of benefits if sick.
• Cover adult children under their parents’policies to age 27.
• Expand Medicaid to cover 15 million people who cannot pay for coverage.
• Reduce the size of the Prescription “donut hole” for seniors.
• Negotiate discounts on prescription drugs.
• Help low wage earners get insurance.
Most Americans favor these reforms, yet there is resistance to more government involvement in health care. Remember the quote of the year for 2009? It was this: “Keep your government hands off my Medicare!” Insurers cannot impose reforms upon themselves, but they can certainly comply with them. One insurer cannot decide to wave pre-existing conditions, for example, but as long they all have to do it, the risks to insurers are greatly mitigated.
So, if insurance companies can live with mandates, which they have done in the various states for years, and if the AMA is on board with reform, and if most people favor the concepts in the House bill, what is the problem? Simply stated, it’s Republican obstructionism. Senate Democrats could not craft
anything that would attract a single Republican vote, and so the people’s business ground to a standstill. It’s not about the deficit; the bill was revenue neutral. It was an insurgency against the democratic process. Former Clinton staffer Ira Shapiro stated on NPR, “Used to be you would have seven or eight [cloture votes] in a Congress and now you can have as many as 80 in a year. It’s a fundamental change [which is] making the Senate dysfunctional.”
The insurance industry is not going to reform itself. It is not going to cover everybody, and it is not going to contain costs. Only government can do all that. One reason Medicare costs are rising is that Medicare is subsidizing private Medicare Advantage plans. Another reason is that those plans select against the Medicare risk pool. And the main reason is that the population is growing older.
Voters are troubled by the weak economy and the burgeoning national debt. People see health care reform as an added burden for the commonwealth to bear. But done right, a good program can rein in costs without incurring additional debt. Remember somebody gets all the money we pour into health care.
While the deficit remains a formidable challenge, it is not possible to grow the economy and shrink the deficit simultaneously. When you have dug a deep hole, you have to climb out of it before you start to fill it back in.
Mr. Obama has challenged Republicans and Democrats to find solutions to the growing crisis — to rise above the partisan fray, or forever stand athwart the course of history.
Jim Salmon is a former director of underwriting for Blue Cross/Blue Shield of New Jersey and holds the professional designations of Chartered Life Underwriter (CLU) and Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC). He is treasurer for the board of directors of Northern Human Services, the public health agency that serves the mental health and developmental disability needs for northern New Hampshire. He resides in Center Conway and serves as
board treasurer of the Conway Lake Conservation Association, and president of the Dolloff Cove Association.
|
Beth with CCDC vice-chair Jerry Dyer at 2009 Grover Cleveland Reception
by: Beth Funicella
I was saddened and sickened to hear the news of the horrific death by strangulation of a 100-year old nursing home patient at the hands of her 98-year old roommate this past week in Massachusetts. It happened at a nursing home that I had actually looked at in an effort to move my mother closer to my sister's home, which would have helped to shorten her almost daily trips to visit mom in her nursing "home". While they had a reputation for quality care, we couldn't stand the thought of my mom having to live in such cramped quarters. It wasn’t the kind of dignity we had in mind for our mother.
Our family was always there as strong advocates for my mother's nursing home care and had already seen that she was moved out of two other rooms where her "roommates" had been disruptive, and possibly abusive. We feared for her safety knowing that mom was meek and very weak. She was finally settled into a room with 99-year old roommate Gert with whom she developed a close and loving attachment.
Even under better circumstances, there were strains. Gert watched a lot of television and kept it on very loudly. My 83-year old mom was very accepting of her circumstances and for the first time in her life, became fascinated with watching football! She didn’t mind that the window wasn’t on her side of the room.
But the day-in, day-out strain of living together so closely even in a nice room (still not enough space to have more than a few, small personal items) with good companionship showed signs of stress. Mom was overly focused on Gert’s frequent complaints always trying to comfort her and see to her needs. It was her nature to be a caregiver, but I was concerned that Gert’s extreme agitation at times might be contrary to my mother’s needs.
Both families had a friendly relationship while visiting frequently, closely monitoring the care of our loved ones and taking our moms out regularly for some distraction. These two lovely ladies were lucky to have such families and each other to see their days come to an end. Mom died suddenly and peacefully on a Sunday morning. So grief-stricken was Gert that she stopped eating and wouldn’t sleep alone in that room. One week later, to the day, Gert passed away with her family and ours by her bedside. I was happy for the opportunity to be there for Gert since I wasn’t able to be there for my own mother’s passing.
Mom and Gert were lucky in many ways. Not so the two ladies in the tragic nursing home case. The story there involves squabbles and mini-dramas over space issues in their room. Reports say that the accused (now indicted) had been jealous and angry in the weeks before the murder allegedly telling the victim that she would get her bed by the window because she was going to outlive her. Although offered the opportunity to separate, the future victim declined. Perhaps because the two had been close friends and constant companions, she just didn’t want more change, something many deplore. Reports have also stated that the accused had a history of dementia and other “erratic behaviors”, which is not an unusual situation in any nursing home. It’s a scenario that I had envisioned when my mother was in the nursing home, so this close-to-home news was all the more germane to me. The circumstances leading to where these two unfortunate souls ended up versus my mother's journey were probably just the luck of the draw.
I'm very glad that here in Carroll County, we will have a nursing home that will be more than just adequate and will afford privacy, space and dignity for its residents. As the above cases illustrate, environment has a big impact. The private rooms that plans call for should help alleviate some of the problems that can lead to disruptive and abusive behaviors, so the chances of such a tragedy happening in our new County nursing him will be greatly diminished. Private rooms will also make the new home a more attractive alternative for private payers thereby bring in more revenues. They will also eliminate the problem of waiting for a bed to become available based on gender. The neighborhood concept will afford residents the availability of other spaces to socialize and entertain their own guests. It’s simply a win-win design and the way to a brighter future for nursing home living.
Thanks to all the people involved in making the new nursing home a soon-to-be reality in Carroll County, especially Commissioners Dorothy Solomon, Chip Albee and Dave Sorenson. It is their hard work that has brought us to this point, and though the work is far from over, I am sure they will continue to exercise due diligence in seeing this project to fruition.
Recent news that County taxes are actually going down without cutting services is an indication that these Commissioners have already applied themselves to the job of being excellent caretakers of the public trust. What a wonderful beginning for the New Year.
Although there was a last minute effort to derail the project, the result is a credit to the bipartisan efforts of our County Delegation who voted 11 to three in favor of this project. Please thank them personally for their commitment and goodwill, which will afford us the opportunity to have a nursing facility that can truly be called home. Remember on voting day who supported this and who didn’t.
Congratulations and best wishes to all those who will live or work in the new Mountain View Nursing Home. We should all feel proud that Carroll County will continue to provide these vital services in a beautiful and efficient new building.
Beth Funicella is Chair of the Carroll County Democratic Committee and lives in Jackson. Please watch for an upcoming announcement of a County Summit after the first of the year
Mike is seen here Sept. 2007 leading one of our monthly meetings
|
Health Care Reform – Can We Afford It? By Michael Cauble
The current health care system costs about twice as much as health care systems in other developed countries. It is expected that health spending will be $2.5 trillion in 2009 and represent 17.6 % of the gross domestic product. By 2018, health costs are expected to reach $4.4 trillion. It is estimated that by 2019 without reform, out-of-pocket health care costs will increase by more than 35% and the cost of employer-based health insurance will double to $25,000. The cost of health care is rising faster than the rate of inflation. Health insurance costs are the fastest growing expense for employers. The excessive cost of health insurance puts our businesses at a competitive disadvantage with other countries. A study by the Urban Institute for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation estimates that without reform, 233,000 New Hampshire residents will be without health insurance in 2019 and the cost of health care in New Hampshire will increase by 78.9%.
Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, MD, MBA and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation sums-up the consequences of failing to act. “Now is the time to act, because delaying reform makes the problem worse. In just 10 years, the cost to American businesses for their workers’ health care could double. The number of uninsured Americans could reach almost 66 million. Individual and family spending on health care would jump 46 to 68 percent, with middle-class families hardest hit. The consequences would be blind to politics and felt by Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike. The only ‘universal’ thing to come from inaction would be the pain.”
What are the costs of H.R. 3962 the Affordable Health Care for America Act or the Democratic plan for health reform? The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) did an analysis of this legislation and found that over a 10-year period:
- The net cost of $894 billion for the expansion in insurance coverage
- $426 billion in savings
- $572 billion in revenue from income tax surcharge on high-income individuals and other revenues.
- The legislation would result in a net reduction in federal budget deficits of $109 billion during that period.
- The number of insured non elderly, legal residents would rise from 83% to 96%.
The House Republicans say we cannot afford to do this. The real question is “can we afford not to reform the system?” A recent study found that as the number of people with health insurance decreased, the cost of health care increased. Currently, people without health insurance lack access to preventive care, wait longer to seek treatment after becoming ill, and use the Emergency Room for routine care. If the projections of a dramatic increase in uninsured hold true and the cost estimates are correct, we cannot afford to do nothing. By providing coverage to most Americans, and encouraging preventive care, the increase in health care costs should be reduced.
The Republicans just presented their alternative health plan the week before the vote on the Democratic Plan. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) it would extend health insurance to about 3 million people by 2019 and could leave 52 million Americans without health insurance. The Republican plan does not prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. Like the Democratic bill, the Republican bill would prohibit insurance companies from imposing a limit on spending for covered benefits and prohibit canceling coverage after a person becomes ill.
Insurance companies would be regulated largely by the state in which they are based, small businesses could band together to buy insurance, and families could buy insurance outside of states where they live. It would also limit damages in medical malpractice lawsuits.
The CBO analysis of the Republican plan found that it would
- Reduce the federal deficit by $68 billion over 10 years;
- Leave the percentage of non elderly, legal residents without insurance unchanged;
- It would save $41 billion over ten years by limiting the cost related to malpractice lawsuits.
- It might decrease the premiums for healthy enrollees but increase them for less health enrollees.
The Republican plan does not increase the percentage of Americans with health insurance. The projected savings by having more of our population with access to preventive care would not be realized under their plan. There is little in their plan to slow the rapid cost of health care. Their concern is that we cannot afford providing health care for all of our citizens – the truth is that we can’t afford not to!
The sudden concern by the Republicans about the national deficit continues to amaze us. A major issue in the 2000 presidential campaign was what to do with the budget surplus resulting from the Clinton Presidency. The FY 2000 budget (President Clinton’s final budget) shows a surplus of $230 billion. During the eight years of President Bush, the deficit grew rapidly and by FY 2009 (President Bush’s final budget) the deficit was $500 billion. Those deficits resulted from tax cuts for the wealthy and an ill-conceived war in Iraq. This same Republican Party is now concerned that we cannot afford to provide health care coverage to our citizens.
Michael Cauble, MPA
Mike Cauble is Chair of the Effingham Democratic Committee and Past Chair of the Carroll County Democratic Committee. A veteran of the Viet Nam war, Mike has 35 years experience working in the health care system including: planning and health policy with hospital medical staffs and managed care organizations and public health emergency planning. Not one to sit back idly in semi-retirement, he worked as a registration clerk at Memorial Hospital where he learned first hand how the system hurts the uninsured, and subsequently, all Americans.
|
|
At Carroll County meeting in support of Health Care Reform
Dist 2
Rep. Bob Bridgham, Dist 1 Rep Ed Butler, Jim Salmon and Mike Cauble
|
By: Carroll County Democrat Jim Salmon
on The Economic Case for Single Payer Health Care
Also published in Conway Daily Sun on October 14 2009
If we set aside the hysteria about death panels and communist takeovers, the principal objection to health care reform is cost. Senator Baucus’s health care plan as proposed will cost $850 billion over the next 10 years. Yet the U.S. already spends twice as much per capita on health care as Canada does, even though Canada has a similar economy and culture and covers everybody. Canadians enjoy lower infant mortality rates than we do and have longer life expectancies. It is a clear case of government efficiency trumping free market waste.
How can this be? Why is it that large insurance companies, who must compete vigorously on price and performance for their customers, are less efficient and more expensive than a government-run bureaucracy?
We have right here in America the definitive case study in which a government plan competes head-to-head with the free market insurance industry, and that, of course, is Medicare vs. the various Medicare Advantage plans. Even
though Medicare Advantage plans pit private health maintenance organizations, with their restrictive networks of doctors and hospitals, against Medicare, with its full choice of health care providers, the Advantage plans always
lose. The only way these plans can stay in business is with a 14 percent government subsidy paid by Medicare to the insurance companies.
Most of us think that Medicare wins because it dictates below market reimbursements to the health care providers, but where I worked, at New Jersey Blue Cross/Blue Shield, we often negotiated reimbursement rates within our
networks that were comparable to Medicare. Furthermore, the Advantage plans can get large discounts on drugs — an option denied to Medicare by Congress.
Why then, are Blue Cross and the few remaining national health insurers so expensive? Ironically it is the very competitive environment in which they operate that drives up costs.
Forty years ago Blue Cross/Blue Shield plans had virtual monopolies in some jurisdictions. They enjoyed 50 percent provider discounts and a mere 5 percent administrative overhead. Back then an individual could buy insurance for $50 a month out of which the Blues kept $2.50 to run the company.
Eventually, commercial carriers found ways to gain market share by building their own networks and restricting access to providers. Faced with competition, the Blues began to emulate the commercial carriers, and their operating expenses skyrocketed. Health care now costs upwards of $500 per month, and Blue Cross/ Blue Shield of New Jersey takes $100 of that to run itself. That’s a 4,000 percent increase in administrative charges.
Here is a partial list of the types of expenses Blue Cross and all private insurance companies incur:
• Underwriting. As long as there is competition, insurers must underwrite each risk or take a loss. Sales operations and broker commissions.
• Actuarial analysis for every conceivable benefi t confi guration.
• Computer systems capable of adjudicating every conceivable benefit configuration.
• Claims adjudication personnel trained on all plans and systems.
• Clinical staff. A recent Wall Street opinion column that supported the current health care system stated that one large insurer — Wellpoint, which owns the New Hampshire Blue Cross plan — employs 4,000 clinicians!
• Premium taxes are paid to each jurisdiction in which the company does business. These taxes support the insurance departments of the various states.
• Regulatory compliance costs in multiple jurisdictions.
• Pooling charges.
• Risk charges.
• Profit.
• Adverse Selection losses.
This last item poses the greatest potential risk to any public option that would compete with private insurance companies. Whereas Medicare incurs almost none of these costs, a public option would have to take many of them on or risk failure.
For much of my career, health care costs were rising at an annual rate of 7 percent to 8 percent, yet insurance companies routinely added twice that much to their pricing for even their best customers. This so called “trend factor” includes many things - aging, provider price increases, greater utilization of services, technological
improvements, new drugs, and new therapies. But a big part of it is for the selection dynamics that occur over time. The people in any insurance risk pool aren’t the same exact mix from one year to the next. They come and
go based on self assessment of need vs. cost. The Baucus plan doesn’t have a public option, but some of its other features will drive costs up, such as: guaranteed contracts without regard to pre-existing conditions, non-cancellation provisions, and member-run co-ops. Such co-ops would be rife with adverse selection as people
move in and out of the insured workforce. In fact in most states, including New Hampshire, the group insurance statutes specifi cally outlaw Multiple Employer Welfare Associations, or MEWA’s as they are called, because they can and have bankrupted many insurance companies over the years.
The bottom line is this: Like national defense and public safety, public health is a natural monopoly. There is a compelling reason why such services reside in the public sector – it is simply the most efficient and cost effective solution. We Americans pay an enormous penalty for our health care system’s inefficiencies. Just the difference in administrative costs between public and private sectors would save $2.2 trillion over 10 years. Only a single payer plan can access the extra hundreds of billions of dollars that Americans waist each year in an inefficient private system that leaves one in six of us unprotected. The other main objection to a single payer plan is “choice.” But which would you rather choose — your insurance company or your doctor?
Jim Salmon is a retired director of underwriting for Blue Cross/Blue Shield of New Jersey and holds the professional designations of Chartered Life Underwriter (CLU) and Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC). He is treasurer for the board of directors of Northern Human Services, the public health agency that serves the mental health and developmental disability needs for northern New Hampshire. Salmon resides in Center Conway and serves as board treasurer of the Conway Lake Conservation Association, and president of the Dolloff Cove Association.
Written by District 1 Representative Tom Buco, The Carroll County Democrats' second column was published yesterday in the Conway Daily Sun. It gives an excellent, detailed account of the State budget process that is presently taking place in Concord and shows how the Democratic majority has been working diligently to draft a responsible, balanced budget. The article also describes how the Republican minority has tried to derail the process with their typical "red herring" approach.
Published side-by-side in the Conway Daily Sun with the Republicans' column, it clearly shows the difference between the two parties. Our writer, who is working on the budget first hand as a member of the House Finance Committee, presented facts, figures and plans. Their writer further exemplifies how the GOP is not only the "Party of NO" but of no ideas or solutions for the serious problems that our state is facing.
For those who don't read the Conway Sun please find Toms article below:
Representative Tom Buco, D-Conway
Facts and Fiction About Proposed Budgets
The state budget is a two year budget for state fiscal years 2010 and 2011. The Governor proposes a budget, the House makes changes and sends the budget on to the Senate. The Senate is currently working on the budget. Many changes will be made and a committee of conference will thrash out the differences between the House and Senate versions right up to the June 30 deadline. It comes down to a matter of priorities. What are the core functions of government, and what are the services the people demand of government and are willing to pay for?
Due to the condition of the national economy, state revenues are way down. Business tax revenues are down 20%. Real Estate Transfer Tax revenues are down 38%. The number of returns for the Interest and Dividends tax are down by 29%. Even the Meals and Rooms tax revenues are off by 8%.
Due to these economic conditions the House made deep cuts in department budgets. The House budget cut $1.15 million from the Dept. of Justice. This reduction will force the Attorney General to cut seven attorneys from her department. The House cut $10.5 million from the Dept. of Corrections. The commissioner has said these cuts will “devastate” the department and prevent it from performing it’s duty. The House cut $30.5 million out of the Dept. of Information Technology. DoIT serves every state department, and the commissioner claims these cuts will cause technology breakdowns in every government function. The House budget also requires the Dept. of Health and Human Services to cut $28 million from salaries and benefits, approximately 10% of department personnel.
On the positive side, the House budget fully funds educational adequacy. This will result in a 15% increase or $392,438 in the FY 2010 education grant to Conway for a total grant of $2,932,022. Bartlett receives $46,964. Jackson receives $82,313. (NH Center for Public Policy Studies). The House budget restores the Meals and Rooms revenue to cities and towns. Conway receives $388,397, Bartlett $123,289, and Jackson $36,848. (NH Municipal Assoc.). The House included $8 million in general funds for services to people on the Developmental Disabilities Waitlist. This is match money for $8 million in federal funds for a total of $16 million to help our most vulnerable citizens. The House restored money for Senior Volunteers, Foster Grandparents, and RSVP, programs which provide assistance to seniors and school children.
The biggest item to affect the Conway School District and the sending towns is School Building Aid. In past years, the state has paid this aid out of general funds. Since we are so short of revenue, Governor Lynch proposed to issue bonds to cover this aid, his rationale being that these are capital projects. However, the Public Works Committee, which writes the capital budget, rejected this proposal. At the deadline to send a balanced operating budget to the Senate, there was no time to find $83 million, so school building aid was not included. I can report that I am keeping a constant vigil on the Senate work sessions and lobbying every senator on the critical importance of including school building aid in this budget. Please recall that in the 2005 session I actively and successfully lobbied for Senate Bill 38 which resulted in an additional $10.8 million of school building aid for our high school/middle school project. I have no intention of watching that money be swept away and I understand the significance of a $1.7 million per year hole in our town budget.
I guarantee you I will not support a final budget that does not include school building aid.
On the other side of the aisle, the Republican minority proposed an alternate budget. They are peddling their message in simple sound bytes. They promise to restore all revenue sharing, impose no tax increases, and cut spending. It sounds great and it sells, but let’s see how it works. Their plan relies on taking a chainsaw to the budget by cutting 13% in general funds in 2010 and 14% in 2011 for a total of $324.2 million. Here are three examples of how they give with one hand and take back with the other. They promise to restore revenue sharing to cities and towns, but then they cut the Treasury Dept. by $23 million. Well, the total general funds for operations for the Dept. of the Treasury are only $1 million per year. So the only place to cut $23 million is to take back the revenue sharing! They also propose to cut general funds from the Dept. of Education by $29 million. The general fund budget for salaries and benefits for the department is $5.4 million per year. Even if we cut all the personnel in the department we could not come up with $29 million. So where will it come from ? Seventy percent of the general fund budget for D.O.E. is a category called “Other State Aid” of which 73% of that, or $32 million, is Catastrophic Aid which covers Special Education. Special Ed funding is a constant complaint of school boards around the state. How can they consider cutting Catastrophic Aid to school districts? And here is the big one. The Dept. of Health and Human Services is required to cut $197 million. The consequences of that cut to our most vulnerable citizens would be drastic. The two largest lines in the H.H.S. budget, Developmental Services and Provider Payments, would be cut by $65 million in general funds, which are a match for federal funds, resulting in a total cut to those two lines alone of $130 million. That is just irresponsible.
The minority can propose a budget they know has no chance of passing, but will be a useful weapon in next year’s election campaigns. However, as the majority party, the Democrats must ultimately pass a responsible, balanced budget and that is what we are working to do.
Representative Tom Buco, D-Conway
|
 
CCDC Feb. Meeting was held on Monday February 23,2009 at Decades Steakhouse (second floor) on Seavey Street in N. Conway.
Dinner was at 5:30 pm followed by a meeting with speakers at 7 pm.
Donations will be given to aid Starting Point who works locally to curb domestic violence in our County.
Don Ekberg lead a group of former County Chairs including Paul Henley, Dorothy Solomon, Mike Cauble and 2008-10 chair Beth Funicella presenting an historic look at the growth of the Democratic Party in Carroll County from 1960's through the present.
This program was interesting and informative along with bits of humor.
Carroll County Democratic Committee Chair Beth Funicella gives a donation to Starting Point Executive Director Suzette Indelicato while State Representatives Tom Buco and Ed Butler look on. The donation was collected at the recent monthly meeting of the Democratic group held in February at Decades in North Conway. Ms. Indelicato spent time with the three, and photographer David Robinson, explaining the breadth of services to victims of domestic violence, sexual violence and stalking provided by Starting Point and the increase in public awareness that has resulted from recent events.
The Carroll County OBAMA INAUGURAL BALL - was at The Brass Heart Inn
January 20th, 2009
(thanks Don Harte and family!)
 
 
Thank you to Bob and Janet Bridgham
for submitting these pictures
What a beautiful place to have a party for well over 100 on a blustery night in January.
|
