Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon called on lawmakers Friday to reverse “draconian” cuts to social services programs in the Senate’s proposal for the 2016 budget. Providers in Texas County and the area also expressed alarm.
Nixon said a proposed decrease to departments that serve foster children, people with mental illnesses and seniors are unnecessary. Based on updated state revenue numbers, Nixon said there was an additional $80 million available for next year’s budget that could be used in combination with the built-in surplus in the Senate proposal to restore the money.
Officials in south-central Missouri said the cuts would have big consequences. “The issue on the table is how much money we have,” Nixon said. “The point here is that we have more resources, and so draconian cuts to legally mandated services are not necessary.”
The Senate approved a version of the budget earlier that included $130 million less than the House version to the Department of Social Services, Department of Mental Health and Department of Health and Senior Services. Lead budget writer Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, proposed lumping together most programs within those departments and slashing the total amounts.
Schaefer, who is expected to run for attorney general next year, has said he wants to rein in growth in those departments because they are consuming most of the state’s resources. He said the departments should be able to find efficiencies.
But Nixon said the proposed cuts would be “devastating.”
“These are services that rescue children from abusive homes, provide low-income seniors with healthy meals, treat Missourians with severe mental illnesses and help Missourians with developmental disabilities lead more independent lives,” Nixon said.
The main funding source for most senior citizens centers in Texas County said the cuts would affect home-delivered meals, investigations regarding elder abuse and financial exploitation, inspects for hospital, nursing homes and other facilities serving the health needs of seniors. In its statement Friday, the Missouri Association of Area Agencies on Aging said cutbacks would result in reduction in mental health services and programs that work toward nutrition, health and safety of children.
“These across-the-board cuts represent an unwarranted meat-ax approach to the budgeting process that will significantly damage core programs currently provided by the state to some of its most vulnerable citizens,” said Catherine Edwards, director the Missouri Association of Area Agencies on Aging.
Sen. Mike Cunningham, R-Rogersville, said he couldn’t support the Senate’s budget. “Another part of HB 11 I could not support was requiring managed care to go statewide. Currently, doctors and hospitals in 54 counties receive fees for Medicaid recipients through managed care, while the other counties receive it from fee-for-service,” he said. “Even though some states have seen a savings from managed care there is now a federal tax on managed care services. When Missouri first implemented managed care they saw about 1.7 percent savings. The tax to the federal government is 2.8 percent. Therefore, by requiring this new system we could be costing the state more money,”
Texas County Memorial Hospital said Monday that local communities would bear the brunt by going to the managed care system. Funds would not go to local towns through their healthcare providers.
On Friday, Ozarks Medical Center in West Plains said the cuts would be devastating to the institution. Ozarks Medical Center CEO Tom Keller says it is projected OMC would lose about $545,000 if the amendment is included in the final bill. “Expanding Medicaid managed care statewide would cost approximately $615 million, and 15 percent, or about $95 million in state and federal funds, would be diverted away from provider payments. What that means for us (OMC) is those funds won’t be returned to local communities through health provider payments. This will harm all hospitals and their communities, not just those in the expansion areas.”
Lawmakers typically allocate specific amounts to each program, but Schaefer’s proposal would allow the departments to make those decisions on most items. Some House and Senate Republicans said they were concerned about ceding that legislative authority to bureaucrats.
The proposal would be a cut of about $35 million from last year’s budget and $70 million from the actual spending in fiscal year 2014 across all three departments.
The House rejected the Senate proposal Thursday, and the budget has been sent to a conference committee to work out differences. But Republican leaders are fast-tracking it because they want to be able to use a new constitutional power that could allow them to override Nixon’s decisions to restrict money from certain programs.
“I hope when it comes out of conference, it will be something I can support and tell my constituents we passed a budget that doesn’t harm our most vulnerable citizens,” said Cunningham, whose district includes Texas County.
As of last Wednesday, the state’s general revenue was on track to grow this year by 6.1 percent, well over the 4.6 percent projection from December. That means the 3.6 percent growth rate agreed on by the governor and Legislature as the base for the 2016 budget will bring in an additional $80 million.
The Senate proposal also contains a $70 million surplus that could be directed to restoring the money, Nixon said. Using that and the updated revenue projection could mean more available money for public school districts and higher education than what is in the governor’s and House proposals.
The Senate proposal includes an increase of $84 million for basic aid to school districts and $27.6 million for higher education over last year’s budget. That is more than the House budget plan, marking another difference that lawmakers will have to resolve before sending the final budget to Nixon.