By DAN MALLOY
“Although demand for coverage is rising, the state’s social services commissioner told legislators Tuesday that the Rell administration wants to shut down a toll-free phone line that provides information about the HUSKY health care program for low-income children and their families.”
– CT Mirror, Phone line for low-income insurance information a target of budget cuts, 2/24/10
And so began yesterday’s news piece about cutting the HUSKY Information Line, which last year “helped 725 children get their prescriptions, helped 4,500 people find a doctor who accepts HUSKY and helped expedite coverage for 1,600 people” according to the Mirror.
Why is it so difficult for the current administration to understand that investing in a quality public health system, including access to healthcare, is not only a matter of justice, but an economic necessity? Indeed, if we have learned nothing from the current national health care debate, it’s that our economy loses hundreds of billions of dollars every year because of the weakened health and shorter lifespan of the uninsured. That’s why in 2006 I introduced a formal plan to provide health insurance for every single child in Connecticut, as a first step toward universal health care for everyone in the state. And it’s why I’ve continued talking about healthcare in my conversations with citizens in Connecticut:
Plenty of evidence exists showing why cutting HUSKY programs like Info Line costs us all. In their comprehensive budget analysis released this month, CT Voices for Children said this of Governor Rell’s proposed cuts to HUSKY:
“Cuts to HUSKY are penny wise and pound foolish, particularly in this environment. Preventive care through HUSKY can help reduce costs for the entire health care system….
Experience in Connecticut and other states has shown that decreasing outreach and increasing out-of-pocket costs for families may save the state money in the short run, but the savings come as a result of keeping eligible children and parents from applying for coverage and getting needed care. In addition, these reductions in coverage are likely to shift costs to families and other parts of the health care system when people seek care from safety net providers and emergency departments. “
Balancing the budget on the backs of uninsured children is wrong, risks poorer health outcomes, and unnecessarily costs Connecticut taxpayers.
We must do better.
After watching the debate the other day I have decided to vote for Dan over Ned Lamont. My reason is that Malloy left open the possibility of increasing taxes on the super-rich while Lamont refused to do so. Funding projects like Husky and many others require increasing revenue. While there are way too many poor in this state, there are a number of people so wealthy that fairness dictates they pay more in taxes.