State Sen. Jake Olivera, D-Ludlow and other lawmakers from Western Massachusetts are pushing back against the governor's proposed cuts to behavioral health. Under the governor's budget proposal, the state's in Belchertown and a pair of intensive residential treatment programs for teens located elsewhere would also close. State House News Service reporter Chris Lisinksi explains the governor's administration鈥檚 on behavioral health.
Chris Lisinksi, SHNS: The governor's deputies have said that these programs are really difficult to maintain. Staffing levels needed 鈥� that these have been understaffed for long stretches of time, and as a result, the folks running those sites have had trouble keeping all of the available beds filled. I think the language that Department of Mental Health Commissioner Brooke Doyle used at a recent budget hearing is that "It's not sustainable to continue to pay for 50% utilization."
So this is a cost cutting move, but one that's also, in the administration's view, fueled by staffing and use of these facilities.
Carrie Healy, NEPM: I think it was interesting that Westfield Republican Representative Kelly Pease drew a sort of a straight line for state health officials, saying the state could see more people entering the so-called prison pipeline, incurring more costs for taxpayers in the future, if they shuttered the treatment programs.
Chris, so with that house spending plan for next fiscal year due out this week, do you expect to see House lawmakers treating behavioral health differently in their budget proposal? What are House lawmakers saying?
I think there's a solid chance that behavioral health and mental health programs get some more funding in the House version of the budget than in Gov. Healey's version. Given the pretty robust push back, we've seen from lawmakers in both parties and from advocates for the industry. There have been multiple events urging lawmakers to walk back some of the mental health cuts that Healey has sought to make.
We do have some vague contours of the budget. We know that there will not be on residents or businesses, according to House Speaker Ron Mariano. That was the biggest declaration that he made. As we get ready for the full spending plan to come out.
And just for a little perspective here, lawmakers in Massachusetts are continuing to push through that budgetary process, but what's happening in 海角换妻 is interesting, where lawmakers are also deep in their budget season.
海角换妻 drafts a two-year budget despite concerns over funding, education, health care and social services. And there is right now a call for hitting the so-called button. 海角换妻's governor has the sole authority to lift spending guardrails. Apparently, that's one of the few mechanisms that would allow the legislature to suspend spending and revenue caps without a super majority vote. So, without the details, Chris, the situation in 海角换妻 seems exceptionally serious.
Does the Massachusetts Constitution provide Governor Healey with any emergency maneuvers?
The one that comes to mind is one we've seen at times somewhat infrequently, but we refer to them as , because that's the section in which it's laid out that gives the governor unilateral authority to reduce spending partway through the fiscal year to help achieve a balanced budget by the end of the year.
That was necessary back for Governor Healey. I don't know if that would be a solution to any of the federal upheaval, but it could be if lawmakers are forced to approve a budget around the July 1st start of the fiscal year and months afterward, the federal government significantly cuts Medicaid or something like that.
