Minnesota Senate Budget Discussion

140 Comments on “Health and Human Services Budget”

1. Bob Smith
   Circle Pines
   January 15th, 2009 at 3:08 pm

   Cut, Cut, Cut, Cut, Cut…I am sick of the welfare queens in this state.

2. Rus Wilson
   Wyoming
   January 15th, 2009 at 3:56 pm

   I agree with Bob with regards to the Human Services budget being a great place to make cuts, but for a slightly different reason. My wife was a manager for a group home that consisted of one slightly mentally disabled woman. This woman had a 2 person staff around the clock in addition to my wife and of course those above her. The state was picking up the tap to the tune of nearly $600,000/yr for this 1 woman. I for one find this very excessive and a waste of taxpayer money. I am not so cold as to suggest that this woman be tossed out onto the street, but I am certain that there are ways to provide some care to her for far less than $600,000.

   I sincerely hope that the legislature goes through the budget on a line by line basis and tries to eliminate much of the excesses, such as this, that exist.

3. Jenna Hadley
   Saint Michael
   January 15th, 2009 at 5:39 pm

   I am a public health nurse and also a nurse at a hospital. I think if you just “cut, cut, cut” these programs without carefully thinking about what you are cutting and the long-term outcomes is going to end up more expensive for tax payors in more ways then just financially. Programs through human services are researched and known to prevent further problems for society, such as, lower jail rates, emergency room visit rates etc. There are, however, places where we could specifically cut that seem like common sense to me.
   1.) If you are not a legal US citizen you do not get medical assistance, even if you are pregnant. Many pregnant women that are not legal receive benifits for being pregnant and go to the eye doctor, dentist, etc. when they are pregnant and we pay the bill.

   2.) Make the fathers of all these children born pay the bill, along with the mother. More babies does not equal more money. You do not get to buy big screen TV’s, cell phones and expensive clothes and shoes when the state is paying to house and feed you!

   This issue makes me very upset. Myself as a woman that has went to school for over 10 years, can barely afford to think about having babies. Why is it OK for certain people to keep having children they can not afford and for us to pick up the tab? If I got to keep the money I make working, I may be able to afford to have children, but I have to pay such high taxes to pay for other people’s bad choices and pay for my own health care plus pick up the states tab. people need to learn that there are reasons that you do not choose to have babies with certain people, becasue they will not be there for you or the baby!

   3.) If people that come over here form other countries get to not pay taxes for 7 years, they do not get benifits from the state either for 7 years! Or how about making people be residents of Minnesota for a few years before we start paying them to live here? And for sure they can’t take buses us here from other states to collect “their” money (which is our money) and go back to other states to live.

   4.) People need to be able to speak English to communicate to workers about the help that they need. This is due to the fact that people from other places come to Minnesota for the great benifits and get them no problem, and then I see people who have lived here their whole lives and are turned away when they need help.

   I am not trying to sound anti-anyone else who is not Minnesotan, but these concepts seem pretty basic and common sense to me. I think I would feel better about my money that I work REALLY hard for is not handed out like candy to just anybody.

   If I were making the decisions, I guess I would think about these issues before “freezing” state, county, and city worker’s wages, people that have worked really hard to get to where they are and have jobs that a lot of them went to a lot of college to be able to have and are contributing members to this society. Most of them having generations after generations in their families that have lived and worked in Minnesota for decades.

   Food for thought I guess……….

4. Jean Balaski
   Little Falls
   January 15th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

   I would like the State to quit paying medical mileage for persons on Medical Assistance. Currently, a person can claim $.20 per mile. Quit reimbursing medical insurance premiums for persons on Medical Assistance.
   I think that there should be one health care program, like Minnesota Care, and everyone should have to pay a premium for their coverage.
   Do away with all the State programs that are not specifically mandated by the Federal Government.
   Also, I agree with all of Jenna Hadley’s suggestions. If you are not a US citizen, you get no benefits.
   Look at the states around Minnesota, have our programs comparable to theirs or not offer as many as they do. Maybe there wouldn’t be such an influx of people coming here for our inflated benefits and the many other programs Minnesota offers.

5. Lori Groby
   Red Wing
   January 15th, 2009 at 6:47 pm

   I second point number 2 in the comments by Jenna Hadley. My step-daughter has 3 children by 3 different fathers all of whom were more than capable of paying for the birth of their sons, but none did, because the taxpayers did! This is a huge area of abuse in Minnesota’s health care system. Why aren’t the father’s made to assume some financial responsibility for the children they help to create? As a nurse, I see over and over again, young woman choose not to marry as a means of getting the state to pay for the birth of their children and the health care for their children. Most often the father’s are quite capable of assuming that financial responsibility…instead the money goes to new vehicles and flat screen TVs.

6. Lori Groby
   Red Wing
   January 15th, 2009 at 6:51 pm

   I should add…I am a LPN working for the state of MN. and once again I will go without a raise this year. Let’s try cutting the waste before “punish” state workers by freezing their pay.

7. Gwen Nawrocki
   Fridley
   January 15th, 2009 at 8:00 pm

   I hope you coninue the ELDERLY WAIVER PROGRAM. My Step father ran out of Money when he was 98 years old. He lived in a Senior citizen Apartment building managed by Presparterian Homes. He was able to stay in his own apartment. A care giver Gave him his medications 3 times a day. A doctor from Health partners would visit him when it was nesessary. He ate his meals in the Dinning room with his friends. This program was managed by Health Partners. This cost the State much LESS than sending him to a nursing home. He mind was still very good and he was much happier there than if he had gone to a nursing home.
   Thank You,
   Gwen Nawrocki

8. Jeff Gambach
   Wayzata
   January 15th, 2009 at 9:38 pm

   Amen to Jenna’s comments. There is so much waste out there. Lets also pass some stringent tort reform (yes all you DFLs you may have to vote against the trial lawyers). If doctors weren’t so afraid of being sued, they would spend less on testing and testing and testing some more. If they could just practice medicine and not worry about who might sue them it would be much less expensive. Tort reform is a must!

9. Don Carter
   Anoka
   January 16th, 2009 at 5:38 pm

   The Budget is totally out of control… to much money and benefits are being shelled out to Welfare life time slackers. For gods sake…They are having babies at 12 years old–outrageous. The average minnesota taxpayer earns $25,000 per year, while the average Welfare family of four gets About $40,000… WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT PICTURE? It is unsustainable. It is out and out theft from us taxpayers and it is totally wrong!…I see them with Free room and board, cell phones, Cable TV, new cars and no work habits. They are moving here from foreign countries (ILLEGALS) and other states to sponge off of us. They are poor because they have too many expenditures. Children are an expense. NO ONE has a right to have as many children as they want an make(extort) us pay; nor do they have a right to make me pay their way!!! GET A JOB LIKE THE REST OF US. I started out with nothing and worked hard, went into the military, Paid for my own schooling, to make it. I am still working hard to stay alive. The slackers have not right to my hard earned cash. NO BENEFITS SHOULD EVER BE PAID TO ILLEGALS..PERIOD. There should also be no freebies or 7 years of no taxes for others either; they start a business and then sell it to a family member and the cycle continues of non payment of taxes to us! Stealing from one person to give to another is UnAmerican, Unconstitutional and UnPatriotic. I just saw on television two Illegal, never married, women who have multiple kids have been here 20 years and have NEVER held a job…WHAT unbridled arrogance and laziness??? Politicians may make themselves feel good by giving away our money but it is WRONG…It is our money not theirs… I can see some short term help but after that they are on their own and can’t live off of me or us. Why should I buy a house for me and a lazy lout. IT IS THEFT NO MATTER WHAT LABEL ONE PUTS ON IT…We must throw these BUMS out and take out government back. CUT CUT CUT this department to the BONE!

10. M. Johnson
    Golden Valley
    January 16th, 2009 at 10:50 pm

    Hey Rus,
    I find it extremely hard to believe that a “slightly disabled woman” would be getting anywhere near $600,000 a year for services.I have two disabled (autistic) children that we get a very small fraction of that amount to provide services for per year. The paperwork/hoop jumping is incredible to even qualify for these services. I think it is very important to be as accurate as possible with the information we post on this site. These children will be adults in the not too distant future, and if we want them to be productive adults, we need to help them as much as possible now.

11. Paul Ziman
    Golden Valley
    January 16th, 2009 at 11:22 pm

    The Radiation Section within the Department of Health can be entirely done away with as it protects nothing except the jobs of its employee’s and cannot be justified on public safety grounds. The private equipment installers and their testing equipment are already heavily regulated by Federal and State mandates and in Minnesota, all xray equipment is required to be tested and adjusted by these licensed private installers ( often the manufactures reps) every two years. It is totally unnecessary to have the State repeat the process again when it is apparent that in my experiences with the State inspectors, they lack familiarity with the machines they are supposed to be testing, are using outdated testing equipment inferior to what the private installers are using and in my case damaged my xray machine due to an incompetent inspector who burnt out the xray head and tried to evade responsibility until we successfully sued the State and won. Let the already licensed private inspectors do the job and get the State out of the inspection business for which healthcare providers are forced to pay in addition to the biannual private inspection already mandated.

12. Paul Diegnau
    Oakdale
    January 16th, 2009 at 11:58 pm

    I would have to agree with most of the comments so far including those by Jenna Hadley. It is time that this state does some serious CUTTING in this area of the budget. There is so much abuse in our welfare system and I hate the fact that Minnesota is known as the gravy state, attracting the “less fortunate” from across this great nation of ours. I am getting really tired of paying for others who are lazy, irresponsible, and make poor choices in their lives. The welfare system has a place in our system and there are people who genuinely need the help. Get rid of the freeloaders!!!

    How about we do something about illegal immigrants in our state and throughout this country. The financial drain they put on the legal residents is enormous. I have read that at the national level this problem fiscally dwarfs the cost of the war in Iraq. Now that is some serious pocket change!
    And while we are at it lets drop the sanctuary city status for the Twin Cities! What a joke.

    Tort reform would make a huge difference in our society on many levels. I fear that is a pipe dream. Such measures would require representatives with a backbone and perseverance.

13. Diane Grinde
    Anoka
    January 17th, 2009 at 11:43 am

    My son is receiving MNCare but it seems there is more than one person tracking his case. Last January on the same day he received 3 letters, one said he had been denied because he had not supplied the requested information, one requested more information another said he had been accepted. All three had the same date. Now he is renewing and he received a letter saying they needed more information and a couple days later he received a letter saying that he had not sent the reapplication so his MNcare was ending. I think one person should handle a case not 3. The system is very complicated and if I was not helping him he would have given up a long time ago. That would save the state money I suppose but I really can’t afford my son not having health insurance.

14. Roger Wittenberg
    Saint Cloud
    January 17th, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    Minnesota is only about one of seven states that still uses the county welfare system to distribute welfare assistance. Most states have move to a more centralized system using the electronic media. (Both telephone and the Internet) A system like the one which we now use for Unemployment Insurance would be effective and save millions of dollars annually. The counties would still provide for social services. Look to the State of Utah for an excellent example.

15. Bob Malecki
    Brooklyn Park
    January 17th, 2009 at 4:51 pm

    Please! Let’s think outside of the box. Let’s think about reform. Health care is not a commodity to be sold for profit by insurance companies. There is a better way to provide health care in Minnesota. Take a look at SF0118 The Minnesota Health Act. We can be smart and efficient on cost, not by denying health care, but by trimming waste, treating disease early, and coordinating our resources statewide to prevent gaps or duplication in care. Pass the Minnesota Health Act and the state of Minnesota can save 150 BILLION dollars every year.

16. Richard Mosley
    Carver
    January 17th, 2009 at 6:46 pm

    Jenna Hadley from Saint Michael stated it all.

    1) No US Citizenship = No “Free” Health Care
    2) Both Parents Pay for Medical Care of Children regardless of circumstances - Garnish wages; suspend drivers licenses; jail. There are many ways to enforce this.
    3) Immigrants - No Taxes for 7 years = No “Services” for 7 years.
    4) See #3; if the people are here 7 years; they better be able to speak English.

    ADD #5) Finally, if the state of MN truly wants to reduce medical costs; the people in the state legislature need to establish Caps on Medical Malpractice lawsuits; the impact will be lower costs for all and the best doctors in the US would flock here to MN. Forget about new Seat Belt laws and actually “Accomplish” something that would be beneficial to the taxpayers of this state.

17. Marie Failinger
    Saint Paul
    January 19th, 2009 at 9:38 am

    Some of the comments on this page miss the point–the “pie charts” show that the cost of health care, either regular or continuing is almost three-quarters of the state budget (unlike “welfare benefits,” which are only 11%)

    Excluding small groups from receiving health care would barely make a dent in that budget while creating health crises for these individuals that the state will spend much more on later. Going after “responsible parties” may be appropriate, but what if the cost of pursuing them (in terms of staff time and prosecutorial resources, etc.)exceeds the recovery to the state? What is the goal here?

    The state needs to investigate ways to bargain with health care providers for more economical reimbursement rates or pursue a more efficient way to provide the care itself. Creating a less complicated and more efficient system for payment and approval will reduce the overhead costs associated with health care.

18. Colin Lee
    Lakeville
    January 19th, 2009 at 1:50 pm

    Healthcare costs are doubling every eight years in America, much faster than the rate of inflation. In large part, increasing costs are due to increasing administrative expenses, fraud, and medical technology costs.

    Japan has the longest life expectancy, the lowest infant mortality, and some of the cheapest health care costs in the world, yet they cover everyone with lower out-of-pocket costs. Their automakers paid only $300 per car built compared with GM’s $1600 per car in medical expenses. American businesses can no longer afford to compete after the high tax imposed by our less efficient medical system.

    This year’s budget deficit forces us to consider such a single payer insurance health plan. The 2008 Colorado Blue Ribbon commission on health care found that such a system would not only cover everyone with no reduction in services, but save $1.4 billion per year in administrative expenses. Minnesota’s more expensive health system would save even more money, probably over $3 billion per year after startup expenses are paid off. Such a system would also make billing fraud easier to track and prosecute, a great cost which reaches as much as ten percent according to the GAO while all prescription drugs only cost thirteen percent.

19. Mike Patrow
    Bigfork
    January 20th, 2009 at 9:45 am

    I think MN healthcare is a good plan, used to be in it myself during a couple of lean years. However, it should be for Minnesotans only, perhaps a residency requirement of at least two or three years. I think people from neighboring states move here because of the healthcare - these states should take care of their own people rather than ship them to us.

20. Steve Beck
    Browerville
    January 21st, 2009 at 8:56 am

    Thank you Jenna Hadley for your input, you said it all and also Richard Mosley. It hurts to see US citizens trying to make it and illegals receive free medical and schooling. Our Governor has tried to work on illegal problems, but the head legislators will not hold hearings and until they have open public hearing nothing will change.

21. Donna Cresent
    Red Wing MN
    January 21st, 2009 at 3:59 pm

    It is clear by reading many of your comments that you have no clue about what someone on “cash” assistance has to do for their benefits. Daily documentation of activities… very few people actually abuse the system and the majority are off within two years. Many dislocated workers (who have worked at paying jobs their entire life) are finding their way on the welfare rolls. Health care costs need to be cut in all areas not just public health care. A family of 4 does not get close to 40,000 in cash and food each year, more like 10,500 -(federal dollars). There is also a family cap on welfare benefits. If you have more children while you are receiving benefits, they do not receive more cash.

22. Lori Pierson
    Minneapolis
    January 21st, 2009 at 5:17 pm

    The “welfare pipeline” in Minnesota needs to be stopped. I am tired of social workers in other states sending all of their welfare cases, and recent immigrants (legal and illegal) to Minnesota because we have a “system in place” to better deal with these high-needs people. We should have a law requiring that you cannot draw welfare in Minnesota unless you have lived here an entire year. Minnesota needs to start focusing on Minnesotans, and get away from this “save the world ” mentality. We simply cannot afford it anymore. Although welfare only accounts for 11% of the budget, as someone previously mentioned, this does NOT take into account the fact that people who are on welfare have much higher rates of police, ambulance, and fire calls, and also place more demands on our schools, and take advantage of free medical care. All of this adds up to more than 11%.

23. Marc Skaug
    Minneapolis
    January 21st, 2009 at 6:01 pm

    What has yet to be mentioned, or represented fairly, is the fact that a portion of the Health and Human Services Budget goes towards funding non-profit agencies that serve individuals with developmental disabilities. This funding allows these agencies to provide support to people with disabilities in their efforts to work, learn and succeed in their communities (and pursue a quality of life that has not always been a reality). These individuals are generally hard working, reliable, caring and compassionate people that unfortunately had no “choice” when it came to their disability.

    There is no doubt that the current budget crisis will require creative work on the part of our legislators, cutting back on areas of waste and excess, and some sacrifices on the part of all the citizens of Minnesota. But cutting funding for the individuals for whom we have worked so hard to bring out into society (in order to share their talents and diminish long-held stereotypes)seems like a big step backwards for this great state…and a mistake.

24. Don Carter
    Anoka
    January 21st, 2009 at 7:29 pm

    Donna C clearly has to stop spouting nonsense…she cannot not add up food, clothing, health care, schooling, Housing, cash payments. I had a Neighbor in 1980 with 3 kids and she was collecting $1200 per month and lived in an apartment that cost $450/mo(12 x 1200 = $14400 + 5400 = $19800 in 1980???????) plus all of the other bennies. I have a nurse Friend who does welfare home care and some of her home care patients collect $1200 PER DAY!!! The legislture just announced today how we need to reform the high payments. One only has to travel to North or South Mpls to see …check the states figures. Welfare is BLACK HOLE OF LOST MONEY. 13,000 moved here last year just for the welfare…Wake up!

25. Joel Droba
    Savage
    January 22nd, 2009 at 9:09 pm

    There are so many great comments here that are so on target. For starters, the welfare system in MN is way out of control! Minnesota has the largest Hmong population outside of Cambodia. We have the largest Somalia population outside of Somalia. We have one of the largest Russian and Bosnian populations as well. We continue to provide almost unlimited welfare and healthcare for all these people. I work at HCMC and at times I am the ONLY English speaking person! As a safety net hospital we are required to provide medical care for everyone regardless of their ability to pay. We just lost almost $13M in state funding to cover those costs, but we still have to cover the medical costs. What does that mean? Hiring freezes. No new capital for projects to improve patient care. Do more with less. Less nurses.
    I don’t mind paying taxes to help people get back on their feet……but come on…..let’s stop the madness! The current systems don’t (or force) people to get back on their own two feet and become self-supporting.
    Stop providing free “everything” to people who are not a US Citizen (or here legally). Also, be a MN resident as well.
    In this economy, with some many people out of work and needing health care, cut those services that DON’T do anything, don’t provide a return on investment, and are excess. Use technology to improve efficiency. But don’t cut the funding to HCMC that allows us to provide the health care to those who need it and are Minnesota residents but still require us to provide the services!

26. Ted Swenson
    St. Paul
    January 23rd, 2009 at 8:16 am

    We cannot take an “across the board cuts” approach to the budget; if so, each program will continue to waste money…but just have less to waste! Look at line-by-line use of funds; like Obama said, “If it works…we’ll keep it; if not, it goes.”

27. Michele Stoen
    Zumbrota
    January 23rd, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    As someone who has worked in the past 18 years processing applications for public assistance and work in the child support system, I found that most people who make application for services really are in need of the services (elderly, disabled, socially/educationally disadvantaged, etc.). Please keep in mind that everyone is at least one paycheck away from having to ask someone for assistance due to loss of employment, sudden illness, foreclosures, bankruptcy, etc. We cannot just point fingers at people from different cultures, races, disabilites, etc. and say “They are to blame”, “They are the reason for the shortage”. The fact of the matter is that most people who live in the State of Minnesota come here because they share the same values and belief systems that Minnesotans are known for. They come here for jobs and an opportunity to improve their status in life and in their communities just as our relatives before us. We are all ultimately responsible for supporting each other for when we fail to do so, we will all suffer the consequences. The number of persons who fraudulently obtain benefits are relatively small compared to those who are legitimately receiving benefits. All pointing fingers is going to do is to stir up hatred one for the other and where hatred exists no progress will be made. All programs need to be evaluated for excess and for disparity and then balanced out. Let’s not spend our time and resources looking for blame (there is enough blame to go around) and instead spend our time and resources working together finding valid solutions. There are so many myths and fallacies that exist surrounding public assistance benefits and recipients. Our tax dollars do go toward supporting the public assistance system so that one day when each of us comes to a season of hardship that there is someone to ask for help. How many people reading this have never been in a season of hardship and never have had to be in the humbling position of asking for help? With the economic forecast coming in as bleak as it is, the last thing we need to do is to turn on each other for when we do it will most surely become the reason for collapse of our very existence. Just because someone is immigrated here does not mean that they receive public assistance. Many of the immigrants hold degrees from higher institutions and contribute to our society.

    Does this mean that I believe the system is perfect? No
    Does this mean that I believe that the system does not have areas of wastefullness? No
    Does this mean that I condone those who do take advantage of the public assistance systems through loopholes or other means? No

    I believe that the system needs to be revamped to allow for more technology where possible. This costs money and resources. I believe that our laws need to be tweaked to be more balanced. One way to do this is for our lawmakers to spend time in the counties talking to the people who use the public assistance system and to those who are on the front lines working toward implementation of the programs and applying the many laws and policies involved. This is a very complex system that continues to evolve. Each time a new law is passed, there is a domino effect on many areas in the public assistance and child support system. What looks simple in legislation is not always simple to implement. Our lawmakers, policy makers, and those in leadership need to involve the people and need to listen to the people. The People need to let them know their needs and the hardships they endure so that they can adequately represent the people when decisions are being made. Special interest groups are out there and their voices are loud. How loud are the voices of the people when they do not speak until it is too late? Be honest, be direct, be respectful and your voices will be heard. Point fingers, become bitter and hateful, rely on myths and gossip and your voices will fall by the wayside.

28. Ammar Husain
    Rosemount
    January 23rd, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    Economic Recovery Package

    I am opposed to the economic stimulus package that is being discussed in the House and in the Senate and that is pushed by this administration. This stimulus package, in its present form puts a burden on the common people and does not meet its goals.

    In order to bail-out common person on the street and to revive the economy, I feel the Federal government should do the following:

    • invest in the transportation infra-structure building activity of the nation and
    • take on the responsibility of providing human services to the population of the nation.

    The first one is important because it provides for the maintenance of the existing infra-structure like the road networks and also provides for the improvements in, say rail-road system. It also includes making use of the technological innovations like the availability of greater and speedier band-width for communication purposes. The wireless communication system of our country has slipped below many of the less advanced countries and needs vast improvement. Presently part of the transportation infra-structure development and maintenance is the responsibility of the state governments. If the federal government takes full responsibility of creating and maintaining this infra-structure then it will serve two purposes:

    • The state governments will not have to budget for transportation expenditures and consequently the state budget deficits will be reduced, and
    • The investment will create jobs and revive the economy.

    The second item mentioned here, that is, the federal government providing human services to all citizens without the involvement of the state governments, serves basically the same purposes. According to many, this is a social service and an obligation of the nation (the federal government) to provide human services to its citizens. Presently these services are being provided mostly by the state governments. The service level varies according to the capability of the individual state governments. By taking on this responsibility, the federal government will, in addition, be doing two extra services:

    • Further reducing the state budget deficits, and
    • Bailing out the most needy citizens of the nation.

    The above mentioned two items are something that both the federal government and the state legislature should consider as part of any deficit reduction or stimulus plan.

    With best wishes.

    Ammar Husain
    (651) 423 – 0381

29. Elmer Otto
    Shakopee
    January 23rd, 2009 at 3:32 pm

    January 23, 2009

    Suggestion for helping reduce the state budget shortfall

    When we hear of cutting social services, it sounds cruel and heartless. But, we are not being told about the fraud. This needs to be publicized, to get people to call their Legislators to make changes.
    Publicizing what is going on can also help stop the Legislators who are in favor of this fraud.

    1. Don’t let people from other states and countries be able to immediately get the electronic transfer EBT cards.

    2. Do not let these cards be spent in other states.

    3. Social services now use too many interpreters. They are being taken advantage of. Reduce the number of interpreters.

    From Elmer Otto
    1057 Eastview Circle, Shakopee, Mn 55379
    Phone: (952) 496-2493
    E-mail: OTOShak10@aol.com

30. michael gaynor
    minneapolis
    January 24th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

    It is very clear that state revenues are going DOWN. The first rule of economics is resources are limited. Clearly when you look at the expenditures by the state the biggest share of outgo is HEALTH AND HUMAN services. Not only is it the biggest but the fastest growing, at the same time revenues are dropping. So this area of the budget needs to be addressed. It is important not just to cut, but being smart about the resources. Each department should be able to go thru their budgets and find efficiencies. What is the productivity of each area….

31. Martha Dorow
    Saint Paul
    January 24th, 2009 at 4:35 pm

    I think Senator John Marty made a good case for the Minnesota Health Plan in today’s Star Tribune op ed page (Saturday Jan 24, 2009). It sounds like a no-brainer - give better access to health care to all Minnesotans and save a lot of money to boot! If you didn’t read the piece, here it is:

    John Marty: Efficiency inherent in state health plan

    By JOHN MARTY
    January 22, 2009

    A recent letter claimed that the proposed Minnesota Health Plan would save only 5 percent, through administrative cost reductions. That’s almost $2 billion per year. Yet the savings are even greater, because insurance company administrative expenses are only one of many savings.

    The MHP would cover all Minnesotans for all of their medical needs, including prescription drugs, dental care, nursing-home care, vision care, immunizations and preventive care, chemical-dependency treatment, mental health — truly comprehensive medical care.

    It would dramatically reduce administrative costs in every hospital and clinic. Some hospitals have dozens of employees in their billing departments, mailing bills and collecting payments from multiple health plans and thousands of patients. Under the MHP they would need only one or two people in billing.

    Savings from efficient delivery of care would be huge. For example, under the MHP, a school or public health nurse could administer flu shots to students whose parents want them, the way it was done with the polio vaccination 50 years ago. Parents wouldn’t lose an hour of work and students wouldn’t miss an hour of school going to health clinics, and we might have three or four times as many students getting a recommended immunization.

    A 24/7 nurse line and 24/7 urgent-care clinics would be available to everyone, sharply reducing costly, unnecessary emergency-room visits.

    Think of the savings in prevention from mental-health care and chemical-dependency treatment under the MHP. Our prisons are filled with people who have untreated mental illnesses and chemical-dependency problems. A major California study showed that every dollar spent on chemical-dependency treatment reduced crime and cut health-care and out-of-home placement costs by $7.

    More than a million Minnesotans lack access to dental care. Last year, there were 22,000 emergency-room visits for dental problems. Untreated tooth decay can eventually develop into a painful tooth abscess. This leads to a trip to the ER, where patients get antibiotics to stop the infection and are told to see their dentist in the morning. Because they have no dentist, the costly cycle repeats itself, with taxpayers picking up the tab. Under the MHP, everyone would have access to dental care.

    Our current system wastes billions of dollars. The MHP controls costs by cutting waste, not by denying care to patients. It replaces our dysfunctional health-care system with a logical, efficient system that gets people the medical care they need when they need it, improving health and saving lives.

    John Marty, DFL-Roseville, is chairman of the Senate Health Committee and author of the Minnesota Health Plan. He is exploring a run for governor.

32. Karen Anderson
    St. Paul
    January 25th, 2009 at 11:09 pm

    The Department of Health and the Department of Human Services are both bloated with layers of unncessary management and need to be cleaned up. Talk about sperm whales bellies–these departments have them. Look at the state Health Lab, for example, why is an Assistant Director needed there?!! Someone needs to go through these departments and eliminate the many, many unneeded management and analyst positions. Also, in the information technology units of these departments, get rid of the swarms of systems analysts, business analysts, consultants and project managers–use programmer analysts instead and reduce development costs by 50%.

    At the same time, with all of our hearts and souls, we need to protect the programs for the disabled, the poor, and the disadvantaged. I am reminded of the the words of a song we all know and love: “I have read the fiery gospel write in burnished rows of steel. As ye deal with my contemners, so with you my grace will deal.”

    We need to do what is right.

33. Heather Flueger
    St. Paul
    January 26th, 2009 at 11:27 am

    I was listening to MPR today, the discussion kept coming back to freezing wages, layoffs, unpaid leave and balancing the budget on the backs of state workers. State workers (not state management) are not paid extrodinary salaries. A public health sanitarian 1, which requires a four year scientific degree, is paid ~$15 dollars an hour. It is my recommendation that the state consolidate their buildings, and provide for telecommuting, reduce the work week/office hours to 4 ten hour days. There have been great suggestions made in this forum, I hope the legislture will take the comments seriously.

34. Ruth Fruwirth
    New Ulm
    January 26th, 2009 at 2:44 pm

    I agree wholeheartedly with Jenna Hadley and Richard Mosley and many others. If not a US citizen, you get no benefits! Minnesota is known to immigrants as MONEYSOTA!

    I have worked in a local clinic where a co-worker who was divorced with 2 children, receiving no child support, in medical records who went to the local social service just asking for some assistance with food stamps. The response she got from them was “quit your job and we can help you with more than food stamps”. She told them she had some pride and continued working at her job without any help from them.

    My husband worked with an immigrant from Mexico (unknown if legal or illegal) who told my husband he told his brother who was living in Colorado at the time, to come to Minnesota because the welfare checks were much larger.

    A friend of ours was in the checkout line at a local grocery store behind a latino who pulled out her welfare card to pay for her groceries and then went over to Customer Service and pulled out $20 to buy lottery tickets!

    Stop the abuse! We have worked hard for what we have, put our own children through college and now you want to give away free college tuition to the immigrant children and our Social Security! Enough is enough!

35. Elizabeth Lindstrom
    Mankato
    January 26th, 2009 at 3:02 pm

    As a member of UCare health coverage I greatly appreciate the low-cost health care I receive. However, I agree with a post by Diana Grinde above who spoke of the disorganization. I cannot count how many overlapping letters I have gotten from MinnesotaCare over whether my payment was late or not! I pay my bills on time, and online to save costs, yet I still get 3-4 letters a month telling me I am discontinued, reinstated, discontinued, then reinstated again. When I discuss things with UCare workers they tell me that they have 2 computer systems and often my information is not entered into both! Why are we wasting so much time and money at a time when technology is so advanced. I KNOW this work could get done in half the time and probably less employees. Let’s simplify their work, reduce mailing costs, and save the sanity of all their members!! Maybe then they could have their phone lines attended with enough people during normal hours! Just a though on some wasted money…

36. Sandra AurandBosch
    Moorhead
    January 26th, 2009 at 11:42 pm

    As a person who works with people who are chemically dependent and chronically mentally ill… it is my hope that community support programs for residential care is not eliminated. I believe that all programs need to take cuts… and if everyone cuts a percentage than programs can stay in place… without these residential programs we will go back to large institutions which are even more costly….I do think that supporting people in one home versus people in group settings is more costly to the state… Thanks for everyone’s input…

37. Steve Houfek
    Maple Grove
    January 27th, 2009 at 9:50 am

    It clearly is time for the committee members who have been in Health and Human Services to bring our housing, cash assistance, etc “The total service package” that the social workers are selling…our charitable benefit needs to be in line, or slightly less than our neighboring states of Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois. There is going to be a huge demand for services in this state as the economy worsens and these massive layoffs play out. The only way to keep solvent and provide charitable help is to cut the overall benefit to comply with our regional North Central sister States.

38. Paul Bade
    Mankato
    January 27th, 2009 at 2:33 pm

    I. Some people claim that a universal state-run single payer health care system would be more efficient. We have only to look at the problems of the limited clientele state-run single payer system to realize that isn’t necessarily so. If anything, making the socialist system universal would make things worse. If you could go into a restaurant and know that someone else would cheerfully pick up the tab no matter what you order, would you pay close attention to the cost of what you order? Why should anyone expect it to be different when somebody else pays for the health insurance?

    So the first thing to do is to level the playing field. An individual should be allowed to deduct 100% of his health care costs, including insurance, from his state income taxes. After all, staying healthy enough to work is a cost of doing business. The move in the 1960s to push everyone into an employer or government based insurance provider plan, using different deductibility rules for employers and employees, had the disastrous effect of disconnecting the consumer from the cost, so there has been little incentive for health care consumers to promote efficiency.

    II. We’ve heard much about the inefficiency at the health care provider business office, stemming in part from dealing with multiple providers. I don’t know of any other commercial enterprise that has so much trouble with this. Perhaps the state DHS should arrange meetings with hospital administration staffers, insurance claims processors and a representative group of individual consumers to design a more efficient process and set of forms.

    One idea would be for each patient in a hospital to have a flash memory device attached to his ID bracelet - every time he gets a billable event, that is recorded in the device. The patient or his representative would have the right to see the data at any reasonable time, including at entry. That way, there is an assurance that billing is done in a timely and accurate fashion, and the patient has a direct view of the cost of his care.

    III. About half of all health problems are preventable. Proper diet, adequate sleep and exercise, avoidance of tobacco and recreational drug abuse, limit alcohol intake so sobriety is retained, attention to task safety - we should all know by now what we can do to stay healthy. Welfare and state health care recipients who have substance abuse habits should be provided treatment when they go on the dole, but should be required to maintain an abuse-free lifestyle as a condition of continuing to receive full assistance. It is not right that state taxpayers should be forced to pay all additional expenses associated with tobacco-related illness!

    IV. The concept of a round-the-clock multi-tier emergency health care system is a good one. Unless the hospital is small, it makes sense to separate the minor emergencies such as lacerations and broken wrists from the heart attacks and strokes and direct them immediately to separate departments. Those with minor, but urgent needs should not have to pay to use the high-end facilities required for life-and-death situations. Actually, we used to have that, back when doctors found it profitable to make house calls.

    This is a business decision, best left to the health care providers, but the state DHS is in a position to suggest it as a means of getting a better deal for the customers, including the taxpayers.

39. Daniel Oxborough
    New Prague
    January 27th, 2009 at 6:07 pm

    There is a great need to help taxpayers understand this budget. It covers a great number of programs and people. Not everyone being supported by the Health and Human Services budget is doing so by choice. Not everyone gets services for nothing. Families of children with disabilities and adults with disabilities do fund a portion of the programs they utilize.
    I have two children a sixteen year old “typical” kid and 12yr old daughter who is disabled. There have been a number of large changes in disability services in the past ten years. Parents of minor children with diabilities are required to pay a parental fee each month based upon family income for services. Our monthly fee is over $400.00 and we would be considered “middle income”. Another cut in benefits now requires adults with diabilities that have income well below poverty to pay clinic and prescription co-pays. Large budget cuts in waiver programs have forced families to choose between necessities for the whole family and necessary medical care for thier child with special needs.
    When people with disabilities cannot live in the community there is no choice but to care for them in institutions. Institutional care has been proven time and again to cost taxpayers double or triple what community care would cost.
    Cutting funds from this population is not the answer. It not only hurts those with disabilities it hurts the bottom line for taxpayers.

40. Nicole P
    Mpls
    January 28th, 2009 at 9:46 am

    I am very saddened by some of these posted comments.

    I do believe that the system isn’t perfect, but what is being proposed isn’t either. You can’t please all the people all the time, but a middle ground does need to be achieved. I agree with the John Marty letter posted and the posting by Michele Stoen.

    Most people are just “one paycheck away” from needing help.

    Instead of all the budget cuts being talked about, I’d like to hear what he plans in spending it on and what the individual departments plan on spending it on. $1,400 trash cans or $1,400 in education????

41. Amy Schrempp
    Minneapolis
    January 28th, 2009 at 11:58 am

    I am very concerned with Pawlenty’s proposed budget. The cuts to health care programs are staggering. Not providing MN Care to adults is a horrible decision. Many people on MN Care are working and not eligible for insurance through their employers. These people with be left with no options for health care. They will end up sick and in an emergency room. Not having access to preventative care will make them sicker and more costly to the state. How are those with chronic conditions supposed to maintain their health? On top of this, cutting dental, chiropractic and podiatry services is also ridiculous. Why are these services considered extra? I work in social services and witness the health care needs of low income Minnesotans first hand. To make cuts when what we need are spending increases is absurd. What are we going to do when so many more Minnesotans are going without care? What are we going to do if we end up in need of help and there is none available? Health care should be a right, not a privilege.

42. D. Carter
    Anoka
    January 28th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

    WE…in this state…ARE IN CRISIS!!
    I can’t believe the thinking and comments on this site. Shuffling of Revenues is not an answer…just smoke and mirrors. The over generous Tax Revenues received by the state and high fees are shrinking, taxpayers are running out of hard earned money, and jobs are drying up. Yet our government does not want to tighten their belts. They try to scare us, give themselves raises, advertise for more monies, threaten, cajole and whine about needing more of our hard earned cash. …Welfare(to both corporate and individuals) is TOO generous and it must get a hair cut i.e. Cut taxes, cut benefits, stop payments to Illegals, Stop building bike paths and bridges to nowhere, and get rid of ALL the pork! Invoke new policies to create and grow jobs. This socialistic arrogant, ignorant attitude and behavior is going to make us a banana republic!

43. doris james
    crystal
    January 28th, 2009 at 1:24 pm

    Offer free birth control so the wanted babies will burden t he state .

44. Jenny Olson
    eagan
    January 28th, 2009 at 5:01 pm

    Lets go through all the state run departments and get rid of the layers of unnecessary employees that we tax payers are forced to foot the bill for. The union wages and benefits are absurd for what they do. This would be a HUGE savings to the people in this state. There is such waste of too many people, poor training, duplication etc. Hire a good business consultant to come in and cut, cut, cut and we are off to a great start!

45. Liz Fonder
    Eden Prairie
    January 28th, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    Hello,

    Regarding cutting the public funding for famly planning and health care - it seems to me this will cost the state and all insurance participants more money in the long run, so not saving any money in the budget. Obviously, this type of budget cut affects those who cannot afford health care the most. Family planning/Planned Parenthood does not just mean abortions as many people seem to think. When I held two part time jobs and was not eligible for insurance, I went to a local Planned Parenthood clinic for my annual exams, birth control, and general health care because the services were offered on a sliding scale according to income. Without this type of option, I would have gone without health care. We all know that leads to more emergency room visits, which are very costly and those costs are passed on the the state - i.e. tax payers - and to those who do have insurance in the form of higher premiums. Everyone loses. Is it cheaper to offer birth control options to low income women or care for a pregnant woman and her child for years to come? It seems to be the easy way out to cut funding to those who have little or no voice. Let’s look at our budget like we would in a family if we needed to cut expenses. The last thing you cut is your health care because that can easily become the most expensive budget cut if anything unexpected happens. Please reconsider this budget cut and look towards other options that can better aford to wait for a sunny day.

46. Jackie Johnston
    Maple Plain
    January 28th, 2009 at 5:48 pm

    I think we should look at ways of saving money rather than just cuts in the budget. Funds that go to family planning save the state money because for every dollar spent, four dollars are saved in Medicaid. With such high unemployment and insecurity in the workforce, people should have birth control information and contraceptives available to them to prevent unplanned pregnancies.

    Another way of saving money is to investigate the medical supply industry. There is a lot of overcharging and fraud in that industry with no checks and balances. As consumers, we try to shop around for the best prices but are locked into going where our insurance says we must go even when the same products are available elsewhere at less than half the cost. The deals made between clinics, insurance companies and medical supply companies should be investigated and there should be legislation giving the consumer more choices so we can bring down the costs.

47. Amy Limmer
    St. Paul
    January 28th, 2009 at 5:57 pm

    I would like to express my concern over Gov. Pawlenty’s proposal to cut family planning funding by more than 19%. In an economy that cannot support jobs for many Minnesotans, cutting family planning funding for those in most need only results in costing taxpayers and the state more money in the long run. Without family planning funding, many of those most in need end up with unplanned pregnancies resulting in more funding needed to go into insuring and caring for low income women and children and paying for unnecessary emergency room bills for those who cannot afford preventative care (NARAL Pro-Choice America notes that for every $1 spent on the Family Planning and Special Projects program, the state saves $4). In addition, cuts to family planning funding results in more jobs lost and more people in need of insurance. Gov. Pawlenty’s proposal to cut funding will only result in costing the state more money! This is not about endorsing sex, but rather it’s about time people let go of the naive notion that if we just don’t talk about sex, people won’t have it and we will see some kind of magical decrease in unwanted pregnancies. The only thing abstinence-only education has shown, which has prevailed over the last near 8 years because of the Bush administration, is in increase in teen pregnancies for the first time in a decade.

    Further, in reading some of the postings on this site, I grow weary of the argument that immigrants (legal and illegal) are the reason why our state and country is in a healthcare crisis. Yes, there are abuses to the system (by both US citizens and immigrants–deadbeat dads sure seem to run the gambit), but all of us come from immigrant families–and no one would argue that our ancestors didn’t deserve a chance to try to make it here, too. Minnesota was established in large part on government funded homesteading thanks to the Homestead Act of 1862. How many of us would be here if the government didn’t give this “handout” to our immigrant relatives? Just because many of them were Western European (aka white) didn’t give them any more reason to be here than immigrants of today (just like today, this area already was established and well populated)–up until a couple of decades ago, many of these immigrants still spoke their mother-tongues and did not know English or preferred to speak in their native languages. Should they have been sent back to Western Europe?

    I would also like to add that I spent one year on food stamps–the process to get them was not easy and food stamps only cover food; they do not cover other basic needs like tampons, toilet paper, soap, detergent, toothpaste, MEDICINE, etc. which really add up, especially if you have a children. I am a Minnesotan, but lived in Massachusetts the year I received food stamps and collected from that state; I barely made the cutoff for food stamps on an income of about $10,000/yr, and I know MN’s cutoff is fairly close to that. I was on food stamps because I served as an AmeriCorps volunteer. I guess I didn’t deserve government help because I had just moved there? What about people who have to flee abusive partners and their only option is to go another state, perhaps to stay with a relative?

    From the postings, it sounds as though people are quite willing to site examples of “this one person I know” as justification for welfare abuses (citing a singular incidence as proof would never serve as empirical scientific evidence because it’s generally used to support something the researcher already believes is true, whether or not it actually is true), but no one really talks about the thousands of people that don’t take advantage of the system, receive government funding on a limited basis when they’re most in need, and go on to live productive lives. Cutting human services for low income people is sending the message that they’re not worth investing in for the future of Minnesota–how many of you are willing to tell that to the children in these homes? Or to the mothers whose ex-partners refuse to pay for their children?

    You cannot be a productive citizen if you cannot feed yourself, your children, pay your bills, or remain healthy. For those of you privileged enough to not have to worry about paying for yearly doctor’s visits (or your insurance pays almost entirely for it), paying for groceries, etc., I hope that rather than trying to point the finger of blame at people for being lazy (a rather tiring stereotype of people on welfare), you take a few minutes to be grateful for all of the privileges you had and continue to have that helped put you there in the first place (aka a culture that wasn’t ready to send your ancestors back to Scandinavia because they didn’t learn English right away). I am not arguing that our system is perfect–it’s not–but I couldn’t help but respond to so many unsupported statements based on one narrow perspective about how easy it is if you live on welfare. For so many people it’s a last resort (and a humiliating one, at that) and in an economy when so many of us may or may not have a job next month, I think it’s worth reminding everyone, particularly our senators and representatives, to think about what they would do if help was no longer available?

48. Pam Carlson
    Eagan
    January 28th, 2009 at 6:02 pm

    If Medical Assistance dollars are cut, Minnesota loses $1 for every $1 cut, as those funds are matched by federal dollars. That means twice the hurt for people with disabilities and others who rely on MA. My nephew relies on MA. He has Down syndrome, has a job and has worked for almost 20 years and has been recognized by his employer for being such a reliable and dedicated employee. Because of his disability, however, he won’t ever be able to work at a job that pays benefits, so MA is critical. People with disabilities really need this kind of support. Are we such a hard-hearted state that we’d turn our back?

49. Jenenne Guffey
    Dilworth
    January 28th, 2009 at 6:16 pm

    Family planning and sex-education will ultimately reduce unwanted and teen pregnancy. Please value our youth and the families that do not have access to medical coverage by supporting our Planned Parenthood Centers across MN. We need funding to continue with the efforts that are being made to educate and prepare people to be responsible and safe partners in the family building of this state. We also are ethically responsible to all people to educate on a discussion surrounding communicable diseases. This a life and death discussion on many different levels. Thank you.56529

50. Darren Meyer
    Saint Paul
    January 28th, 2009 at 7:58 pm

    I’m all for healthcare reforms, but just cutting funding and budget items isn’t the way to accomplish that. As the economy weakens, more people will find themselves without access to adequate health care. Those people will end up with disabilities later in life that the State will have to pay for then — pay now or pay later, it seems.

    Most disturbing is the plan to cut family-planning dollars, which will remove access to family-planning resources from those who need it most. Those in poorer families will have more children that the State will need to support: everyone loses, most of all those kids.

    As an aside, those folks who are suggesting cutting benefits to non-citizens don’t understand the nature of public health. If health services are denied to a non-citizens, it won’t solve the immigration issues — it’ll just mean more sick people in Minnesota, and disease will not be contained to those communities.

51. Britt Pennington
    Minneapolis
    January 28th, 2009 at 8:07 pm

    Low income women need family planning money to get the health care they need. Cutting family planning money would punish those who are already most effected by the poor economic situation. The state saves money with each dollar it spends on family planning so we need to fully fund family planning and sex education. If we cut family planning we are only going to create a bigger problem for ourselves in the long run.

52. Nicole Wood
    Blaine
    January 28th, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    I agree with those who have said we need to reform health care. To our State Senators, pass the SF0118 The Minnesota Health Act! Tax payers are already paying the bill for their own private health care and the tax dollars that go to all the uninsured who wait till they are very ill and go to the ER. If we all have health care through the state, everyone’s costs would be lowered.
    Also, do not cut family planning money. Without these services, there would be more unwanted and teen pregnancy.
    I agree wholeheartedly with Amy Limmer of St Paul that we should not cut welfare, food stamps, etc.

53. LINDSAY BYRNES
    SAINT PAUL
    January 28th, 2009 at 8:41 pm

    To the Senators,
    It is true that you face a difficult task in addressing the enormous budget deficit during this session, however please seriously consider NOT cutting funding for family planning services and sex ed as proposed by Gov. Pawlenty as it would mean disaster for many Minnesota families.
    As a physician who serves patients in many settings, I can attest to the necessity of family planning services. It would be disastrous to eliminate access of my disadvantaged patients to these services. During this recession, these women are already facing challenges to address their own budget deficits, with the consequences of not doing so resulting in loss of housing, transportation and even food on the table.Family planning, including contraceptives and sex education programs, are integral to the good health of both men and women, and is imperative for a functional, healthy family. We know that the cost of contraception is absolutely prohibitive for women who must allot their meager incomes to basic human needs. Expanding families in this environment can be disastrous. Sixty percent of women in need of family planning services would not receive them if it were not for public funding, and for every $1 spent on the Family Planning and Special Projects program, we know that the state saves $4. This means that the $2 million dollar cut Governor Pawlenty proposes will actually cost the state $8 million dollars in eventual expenses. As a physician who works often with adolescents and young adults I profoundly understand the necessity of sound sex education as and empowering tool to prevent unwanted pregnancy as well as prevention of disease. As a former resident of a state who failed to provide adolescents with sex ed, I am well versed in the personal impact on young, unprepared parents as well as the devastation of contracting HIV.
    Please continue to fund family planning services and sex education programs, it is our only effective measure for staving off the cycle of poverty and disease. It is our society’s responsibility to either provide the tools of prevention or assume the cost of care and support that failing to provide prevention will entail.

    Lindsay Byrnes, MD

54. Ed Holden
    Northfield
    January 28th, 2009 at 8:43 pm

    Health and Human services, despite occasional poor use of funds, is a good investment. Don’t cut sex ed or family planning services. Kids need solid homes and parents who can parent, rather than child-parents who are at the mercy of their own immaturity and poverty. Ed Holden (ret. teacher)

55. Thomas & Nancy Houlton
    St
    January 28th, 2009 at 8:48 pm

    When times are tough, it is not the time to beat people up by taking away basic health care and access to services. After six years of no new taxes (excepting new user fees)it is time to share the pain. We found Robert Rieches comments (today’s MPR Mid Day)today were very interesting. Especially interesting was the statistic he mentioned regarding the percentage of income taken home by the top 1% of the country. There percentage of the income has risen from 8 to 23%. this is not good for the economy.

56. Mark Sulander
    Minneapolis
    January 28th, 2009 at 10:43 pm

    Please continue funding family planning at
    current levels. It is a key program that we
    need to continue to provide to individuals and is
    is also important to all of Minnesota.

    Thanks,

    Mark Sulander

    Minneapolis 55406

57. Gary Wood
    Edina
    January 28th, 2009 at 11:31 pm

    Cutting back on family planning services is penny wise and pound foolish. The economic benefits of preventing unplanned pregnancies is empirically supported in terms of the elimination of the added costs these potential children will consume. Don’t underfund a program that has such direct economic benefits for the state and counties.

58. Bria Fleming
    Duluth
    January 29th, 2009 at 12:31 am

    Governor Pawlenty’s budget plan includes a projected 19% cut in family-planning services. This is absolutely unacceptable. Comments from people above who work in the health industry illustrate beyond a doubt that population control (or lack thereof) plays a major part in our welfare spending problems.
    What would happen if these services were cut (19% totals about $2 million in cuts over the next two years)? To repeat the research cited above, for every $1 spent in family planning MN saves $4 in averted costs. Taking away family planning to this extent would only exacerbate the problem. Taking away affordable contraception won’t be enough to make people act responsibly.
    It begins with education. We must replace the proven-ineffective and expensive abstinence-only programs championed by the Bush administration with programs that truly educate our teens and lead them to make responsible decisions. Until then, family planning will have to pick up the slack.
    If we cannot provide our youth with adequate education to plan their futures, then we have no business taking away the resources that can help them do so.

59. Connie Walker-Pearson
    Cambridge
    January 29th, 2009 at 8:28 am

    PLEASE do not cut funding for family planning in Minnesota. That is a giant step backwards for women and our society. Most other developed countries do a better job than we do in this area; that is really short sighted and wrong headed. Preventing unplanned pregnancies has only BENEFITS: it SAVES MONEY for the individual and for taxpayers who support many public programs for families who cannot afford the children they have; OVERPOPULATION is a major threat worldwide to the environment, human health and survival, to peace between individuals and nations; family planning respects WOMEN’S RIGHTS to health and choice in childbirth which should be solely our choice in the end as long as only women can carry children; her body belongs only to herself; and lastly, for those who are anti-choice, family planning is the single most effective method among sexually active couples to PREVENT ABORTIONS.
    With all these facts, how can any intelligent person not support family planning?

60. Christine Manganaro
    Minneapolis
    January 29th, 2009 at 8:28 am

    I read through a number of comments and it is clear to me that a number of commenters have little to no knowledge about how welfare works, why people are poor, how difficult it is to get out of poverty, and what life is really like on public assistance. It is truly not this life of grotesque excess and shirked responsibility that many have suggested. (If it is, I am in the wrong line of work.) It saddens me that some Minnesotans are willing to suggest truly radical cuts to a section of the state budget, health and human SERVICES, that are truly an investment in the health of this state, regardless of the initial or former nationality of the people receiving assistance or other attributes that may be personally unsavory to some of us.

    I am healthier if the family down the street is getting health care. I am safer if my neighbors are getting their needs met.

    This idea that people using public assistance are spending their “flush” benefits primarily on flat screen TVs and other “luxuries” rather than on feeding and clothing themselves is offensive. Perhaps some people buy things like TVs. Those people are entitled to some (what are now) normal purchases in this country. This type of response to the current financial climate and state budget overall is shameful and will not produce effective results either. Cutting human services does not make people’s needs go away and it does not teach people a lesson. It simply prolongs suffering, often to children (white children are the largest demographic group on welfare, by the by), and makes it more difficult for individuals and families to get back on their feet.

    I initially came to this site to strongly recommend that the state retain substantial funding for family planning services and sex education. Especially at a time when so many people are struggling, these necessary services help individuals and families make informed decisions about how to keep themselves healthy, including controlling whether or not to have children or additional children. Thank you.

61. Bryan Ebbenga
    St. Peter
    January 29th, 2009 at 8:38 am

    Treatment Program for Persons committed SDP or PP
    Sexually Dangerous Persons and Psychopathic Personalities

    1. Work 8 hours per day at union scale, have 4 hours free time for recreation and hygiene.

    2. Treatment & Education programming 4 hours per day, work 4 hours per day and 4 hours free time.

    3. Treatment & Education 8 hours per day and 4 hours free time.

    4. 23-1, 23 hours in cell, 1 hour out for hygiene and excercise.

    90% of wages go to a Victims Fund and to Pay for Cost of Housing/Security and Treatment.

    Work is in Recyling Centers or related and when graduating from treatment be placed in community service based work.

    Housing is in buildings no better than Army Barracks, or what the average GI lives in during Basic Training, and the Food is grown on site.

    This would cost the state say $150 a day per SDP, instead of the current almost $400 per day, X about 400 Committments.

    Sincerely,

    Bryan Ebbenga

    24 Years Serving the Mentally Ill and Dangerous

    Forsenic Behavior Analyst

    St. Peter Regional Treatment Center

62. TJ Bauer
    Cold Spring
    January 29th, 2009 at 8:51 am

    Health Human Services – MAJOR CUTS

    Two-income working families are tired of paying for the free loaders.

    There should be NO benefits for non-residents or illegal immigrants. A waiting period of six months should be required before new and legal residents receive benefits.

    All benefits cannot leave the state of Mn

    Benefits for children should not be provided to parents without investigation into Dad’s/Mom’s ability to provide support. Dad’s support should be more than cash. They should be buying groceries, purchasing clothes, paying rent/house payment directly. The responsibility for the bills should not be totally on the mothers. I believe the Dads would feel a greater part of their childrens lives when they provide directly to their childrens care.

    Insuring just the children of Minnesota is not a true health-care alternative. Parents themselves must be well and working to provide for their children. When their health or job is at risk, the children suffer. Costs then become extensive for both the health care system and the parents.

    Accountability is essential in the health care system. I believe many dollars are wasted by overcharging, extra visits, and poor assessments made by clinics and hospitals.

    There is a need to eliminate some of the mandates. There are way to many.

    Stop payments and services for women who have more than one child out of wedlock.

    Minnesota needs to become a working state; not a welfare state.

63. Mike Vander Linden
    delano
    January 29th, 2009 at 11:01 am

    After reading the postings here I’m convinced of two things, our Govenor has not given enough consideration to his budget proposal and there are some outstanding ideas here.
    I think the discussions of residency and illegal aliens are not appropriate here and should take place elsewhere. We do need to protect the disabled and provide resources for rehabilitation. The alternative is long term convelesant care that is infinatly more expensive. Perhaps Sen. Marty’s plan has merit.

64. Judith Wills
    Cloquet
    January 29th, 2009 at 11:20 am

    Wow! I read all the comments and I am disillusioned. I thought that Minnesota had a values and belief system that would keep my little welfare queen safe. I think I may have been wrong.

    I came here to suggest that we make sure that any cuts made in this area would take into account any threat to life to those who cannot afford to lose benefits. Now I am not sure that some of these people would not give thanks if she died.
    In making cuts please consider if the service is vital to life.

    I would like to discribe my little welfare queen as an example: She is now 51 years old and has been disabled her entire life. She was the victim of a chemical soup runoff from farm activities in rural Minnesota. She cannot talk, walk, roll over, dress herself, feed herself (she has a feeding tube), she is diapered, entertain or do most other things for herself. She is happy most of the time and look like she is 12 years old. She has epilepsy, is developementally disabled and has severe digestive problems. She needs total care - which I provided for 45 years and why I am poor now. She now lives in foster care and her family are excellent care givers. I do not apologize for needing help for her. But it sounds like a good share of the posts here would like to see her cut.

65. Michael Tierney
    Dellwood
    January 29th, 2009 at 12:24 pm

    I read Jeff’s (from Wayzata) input on tort reform. This issue is often referred to but I have never seen any actual numbers on law suits. How many Doctors have been effected by law suits and how many of those were really gross negligence vs. nuisance suits?
    It would be helpful in all the discussions if emotion was removed and replaced with facts.

66. Tamara Wagner
    Moorhead
    January 29th, 2009 at 12:44 pm

    Please please please do not let them cut the medical care for poor people. I know two people who already have died because of Tim Pawlenty’s restrictions and cutbacks effecting the health care for the poor’s eligibility (one from cancer which could have been treated if he could have gotten insurance and one person who committed suicide because of the cutbacks on the health care for the poor, making severe restrictions on mental health services, and I know this would effect me as well. I have numerous disabilities that would kill me if I lost my insurance. There has to be something else they can do besides cut health benefits for people who need them. If they have to cut health care, maybe make a minimum yearly amount made for new cases? It is wrong to cut people who already are on the medical insurance as well. Cutbacks or not, you are dealing with real human lives, not dollar amounts. Many of us are trying to work for a better future, and if we get our health benefits cut now, it will kill all possibilities of ever getting healthy enough to get off the state medical, get a good job, and give back to society. There are a few things that may be able to be done. I see people with jobs on state health care. If they have jobs they should make them give at least minimum health care. Secondly, if you are NOT a U.S. citizen you should not get the medical care. There are other refugee programs and services for that. For people with incomes, possibly paying a little more of a premium on the medical care would not be bad (especially using things like the ER frivolously. there is no need to go to the ER for an earache at 5am!)I am on the state health care, and I would rather pay a little more, than lose everything, because as I said, I am trying to get healthy enough to finish school and get a good job with benefits. Losing my medical care now would make it so I would never be able to achieve my dreams. Not everyone is a “welfare queen” as someone said. Some people were born with problems, or no money, their parents never provided anything for them, even insurance or money for an education, and they are working hard to become something. Unfortunately when you have a disability like I do, you NEED health care to crawl out of the hole your parents dug for you and become a self-sufficient productive citizen. That is my goal and dream. I just need some help right now with staying healthy so I can.

67. Bill Berditzman
    Mankato, MN
    January 29th, 2009 at 3:13 pm

    A good place to start would be to look at the layers upon layers of un-needed middle/upper management FAT within the Dept. of Human Services & MSOP Program. At St Peter RTC for example, there are HST’s, security counselors, counselor leads and LPN’s who do the hands on work with the patients, then RN’s who do much less hands on and push more paper, other RN’s who lead the other nurses (usually from the sitting position), still other RN’s who are “in charge” of everyone below this, assistant gorup supervisors, group supervisors, assistant program supervisors, program supervisors and program directors. This all within ONE program. We havnt even talked about the nursing supervisor and assistants, program administers and the residential program services managers which add even more to the pot. Physical plant has a supervisor for each department, most of which could be combined and services integrated. There are supervisors who dont even know all the names of the people working under them, cannot schedule a simple schedule, have people below them doing all their work, and have offices removed from the areas they serve. The list could go on and on…yes, really. The savings alone in looking at all the DHS and MSOP middle/upper management FAT would be HUGE as this problem is not just in St. Peter!
    There is so much other excess that the general public doesn’t know about…like the cost of uniforms, A-team training for MSOP, ATV costing thousands that the public bought and is currently broken down from mis-use by untrained staff (even after it being brought to the supervisor/managers attention)….are not even the tip of the iceberg, but it all adds up.
    The front line staff in these programs work hard at keeping a programmatic,safe and orderly workplace… but most goes unnoticed by these managers and the general public.

68. Matthew Paymar
    Minneapolis
    January 29th, 2009 at 6:50 pm

    Universal MNCare (Single-Payer Health care) will attract Businesses to MN.

    We could dramatically jump-start the MN economy by _expanding_ MNCare to everyone. If we get rid of all income-requirements, then the huge medical bureaucracy policing the system would be dismantled.

    Healthcare would become much more efficient. And the cost to the state would be reimbursed in the ways outlined below.

    (Incidentally, people who do not want to buy MN Care can still get premium healthcare from HMO’s. Everyone still has choices.)

    Universal MNCare is good for the state’s economy:

    (1) right now businesses cannot afford to hire new employees partly due to the high employer costs of providing medical benefits,

    (2) With Universal MN Care, businesses would flock to MN because they would not have to pay for huge benefit packages for their employees. Effectively, MN would have a HUGE competitive advantage against other states.

    Eventually other states would have to create their own version of MN Care–we’ll see which system works best. In the end, the entire country will be made more globally competitive once the burden of healthcare did not fall on the shoulders of businesses,

    (3) one-third of HMO costs are due to unwieldy bureaucracy, whereas MNCare bureaucracy costs are much lower.

    (4) businesses would be more productive if people were not forced to stay in jobs they dislike just to maintain health care.

    (5) Health care bills are the #1 reason for bankruptcy,

69. Jim Clark
    Savage
    January 29th, 2009 at 7:32 pm

    Adopt the Single Payer Health Insurance Plan, which would put an end to the high costs that the State has to pay.

70. Pat Edinger
    Bloomington
    January 30th, 2009 at 11:04 am

    PLEASE FULLY FUND FAMILY PLANNING AND SEX EDUCATION!!!!!!

71. Steve Houfek
    Maple Grove
    January 30th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

    Minnesota has some extensive/expensive mandated coverage it requires of Health Insurance providers. It is time to allow a young person to purchase insurance that only covers major medical. For a non-drinker, non-drug user to purchase insurance that does not have mandated coverage for drug treatment. For a family of five to select insurance that meets their needs in a cafeteria style plan instead of the mandates for drug abuse, psych coverage, port wine stain that have caused the insurance premiums in Minnesota be some of the highest in the nation. Ending these mandates costs the State of MN nothing, increases savings to everyone who pays for insurance through work or on their own, and increases the number of families that can afford some insurance without creating another Massive Government Entity to spend money through layers of bureaucrats. Government is inherently not very good at what it does. Senators, you can claim a win when the headline reads “Local Senator triumphs for affordable healthcare”. No negative exposure. Big vote getter. Good luck!!

72. Dellan Pepple
    Willmar
    January 30th, 2009 at 1:38 pm

    There have been many good comments made on this site. Many have been laced with emotion and many backed up with good facts. I believe that the net result has to be REFORM. Both welfare and cost of medical care in Minnsota are inefficient and out of control. Unfortunatly as long as the insurance companys are paying big bucks for lobbyists not much will get done to reform health care. Legislators sit up and listen to your people. That’s why you were elected.

73. Hannah Stein
    minneapolis
    January 30th, 2009 at 5:24 pm

    I have been informed that family planning services are on the chopping block. This is less than sane. If there is anything that will save the state money in the long run (and not that long of a run, either - we’re talking 9 months from now!) it is getting free birth control to people who can’t afford it on their own.

    Studies show that every dollar we spend on family planning saves the state four dollars down the road. Cutting this is the very definition of penny-wise and pound-foolish.

74. Joe Meyer
    Rosemount
    January 31st, 2009 at 9:15 am

    Please do not cut funding to the Family Planning and Special Projects program. Low-income women in Minnesota need our help more than ever in this time of economic disaster. Family planning services can make their lives more manageable now and make it easier for them to pursue other opportunities to improve their lives in the future. Family planning makes it possible for women to help themselves and their families. Spending on family planning is not charity or a bailout; a dollar spent now on family planning saves several dollars in future social costs. Above all, spending on family planning is an investment in people: it makes better families; it makes a better Minnesota. Please do not cut funding to family planning services for low-income women in Minnesota.

75. Jonathan Stark
    St. Louis Park
    January 31st, 2009 at 12:39 pm

    I would like to encourage all in the MN Senate to fully fund family planning and sex education.

76. Sara Campbell
    Saint Paul
    January 31st, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    Please do not cut money allocated to family planning services! This money would help the most vulnerable members of society, while ending up saving the government money in the end. For every $1 the state spends on FPSP, the state SAVES $4! If the proposed $2 million is cut, the state will end up spending $8 million on things that could have been prevented. It would be irresponsible during this financial crisis to cut something to essential to the health, safety and welfare of Minnesotans. Poor women should NOT be the ones to bear the brunt of this economy.

77. Christine Carlson
    Hastings
    February 1st, 2009 at 10:32 am

    I am all for cutting budgets, but I’d rather see line by line cuts. I work with developmentally delayed adults and some need more help than others. If a person needs 3 staff to provide around the clock cares, yes, that costs money. They cannot do for themselves. Staff get paid low wages as it is and if there isn’t even the annual cost of living wage of 2%, it’s a killer. If you make 11.00 per hour, and get a 2% raise, it’s what .22 cents per hour, which equals on a 40 hour a week check an extra 8.00 a week. Then they cut the budget and people take pay cuts? So some staff get hit, kicked, punched, hair pulled, bitten etc….and get their pay cut? even the typical 2% cost of living raise isn’t enough to keep quality staff, but then you cut their salaries and they walk. Who is going to take care of the individual? Humanity and Compassion doesn’t pay the bills. I say no cutting to staff workers for group homes and nursing homes. People need cares, and others provide that. Short staffing only sets up neglect for our loved ones.

    Thanks

78. Elmer Otto
    Shakopee
    February 1st, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    February 1, 2009

    Welfare Reform, to help reduce the state budget shortfall

    Senators ——-,

    When we hear of cutting social services, it sounds cruel and heartless. But, we are not being told about the fraud and the tremendous waste. This needs to be publicized, to get people to call their Legislators to make changes. Publicizing what is going on can also help stop the Legislators who are in favor of this fraud and waste.

    1. Don’t let people from other states and countries be able to immediately get the electronic transfer EBT cards.

    2. Do not let these cards be spent in other states.

    3. Do not let these cards be spent for booze and cigarettes.

    3. Reduce the number of interpreters. Even a phone call can cost $50.00.

    From Elmer Otto
    1057 Eastview Circle, Shakopee, MN 55379
    Phone: (952) 496-2493
    E-mail: OTOShak10@aol.com

79. Amanda Richardson
    Minneapolis
    February 1st, 2009 at 10:50 pm

    Please help protect Minnesota’s women and children during this economic crisis. Women with lower incomes are impacted greatly by the current state of the economy and many would not receive the help and family planning they need if funding is cut by the proposed 19%. With a potential return as high as four times the amount spent on the program, family planning and sex education should be one of the last on the chopping block.

80. Bernice Vetsch
    St Paul
    February 2nd, 2009 at 12:36 pm

    Out of 79 commenters, eight suggested either John Marty’s Minnesota Health Plan or some other single-payer plan. I would urge the other 71 commenters to become familiar with the Marty plan (SF118/HR135) to see for themselves how we don’t have to cut cut cut in order to save money. Instead, we can save an estimated 9 percent of what we spend as a state by adopting this plan that denies health care to ABSOLUTELY NO ONE. As a couple of people pointed out, we need a healthy population, not just some who can afford health care and some who cannot and therefore get sick.

    Tim Pawlenty’s cuts could remove from access to health care 113,000 (118,000?) persons. Some of them WILL die; research shows that uninsured persons wait too long to seek help, by which time it is often too late.

81. Brad Pepin
    Edina
    February 3rd, 2009 at 10:45 pm

    Add my name to the list of commentors who support sustained funding for family planning an sex education in the budget. In an over-spent environment like we have today, the easy thing is to just start hacking away at every line item in the budget. The more thoughtful approach is to look at the sustained impact of each increase or decrease. Gov Pawlenty’s proposed 20% reduction in sex education and family planning is an example where cutting funding has an unintended ripple effect that actually INCREASES spending in the long run…that’s not smart, that’s dumb! It is estimated that for every $1 spent on the Family Planning and Special Projects program, the state saves $4. Other posts to this site rant about $$ spent on Welfare programs; it’s an easy argument to make that wisely-spent dollars in family planning today mean fewer dollars spent on other “entitlement” programs tomorrow. Please fully fund family planning and sex education programs in the MN state budget!

82. Sandi Doolittle
    Cottage Grove
    February 5th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

    As usual the first cuts are always made to the ones who can least afford them….In your graph ” continuing care” is for people who need care in a group home or facility. The people who work there are the most underpaid and dedicated people. To cut their services is a CRIME.

83. Elizabeth Carroll
    Hopkins
    February 6th, 2009 at 5:41 pm

    I do not understand why our state is going to go backwards to eliminate coverage for adults in the state programs that Minnesota was so proud of. What has happened to the 2% provider tax money that has been collected for several years to fund this coverage? I believe it has been used for other purposes which is wrong. It is time we realized that people without insurance will still get sick and will still be treated - so we will pay one way or the other. I am flabergasted by all of the comments supporting reductions in this area. I’d rather pay higher taxes than make those at the lower end of earning power lose out.

84. D. Carter
    Anoka
    February 6th, 2009 at 7:22 pm

    I listen but don’t believe the hooey….Free this… Free that…THERE IS ‘NOTHING FREE’..it costs money-lotsa money… the LAZY non responsible, UNPRODUCTIVE need to contribute to their own well being and their lifes choices…not steal it from me and the other responsible taxpayers…under the guise rights.

    I hear the same ole song ..All I want to be is stay at home mom—Horse apples. Plan for it.

    Don’t cut the sex education and Free family planning services????? They don’t avail themselves of the services now… they have children to get a free house, free food, free money and don’t want to work..they get us tuna to pay their freight????

    Low income women need family planning money to get the health care?????? They need to plan for responsible real life an get married to a “husband” not the…. state.

    Cutting family planning money would punish those who are already most effected by the poor economic situation????? They have too many debts as in “too many kids”..it costs $1 million to raise a child from birth to the end of high school.

    Condoms are cheap… THEY WORK…. if you are going to play be responsible and be prepared to carry your own water. Don’t come crying sob stories and asking someone else to bail you out of multiple debts(children) or carry your water…it is theft and dishonesty!

    I don’t like to be harsh but this coddling nonsense has to stop.

    You want a full life don’t have sex until you are ready for the booby prizes! Risky behavior begets unwanted consequences!

    Life is: CHOICES AND CONSEQUENCES!

85. Kimberly Kohler
    Rochert
    February 7th, 2009 at 6:44 am

    I am a woman, self-employed, and single. My business suffered considerable losses last year, to the point that after thirty years I may no longer be able to operate in 2009. The health care coverage I receive from the MN Care program is one of the few securities I have left.

    Now is not the time to cut health care coverage for Minnesotans. It is, however, a good time to look at the loss of small business in the state and as a consequence the decreased demand for state services associated with these small businesses. I suggest the budget committee look at streamlining offices such as IFTA, IRP, and Sales Tax, to begin with. Surely their workload will decrease considering the reduction in the number of businesses who report directly to them.

86. kathleen farber
    burnsville
    February 7th, 2009 at 9:34 am

    Cutting funding for family planning is not a good idea. Actual “welfare” makes up a small percentage of the health and human services budget. There ARE residency requirements for obtaining public assistance. You CANT buy cigerettes and “booze” with EBT cards. From the sounds of most of these comments–the people talking have had very little or no contact with anyone who was actually receiving cash assistance–the people who have written in complaining about the forms to complete for MNCare should be a clue to others–getting certified for public assistance is not easy–regardless of what your friend’d friend brother-in-law says. As a child support officer, I talk to dozens of people every day who WORK at jobs paying $10.00 per hour, have no medical benefits and use some state subsidies SO THEY CAN work–subsidies such as child cafe assistance (day care) MNCare (because their employer has no health insurance, or forces them to 32 hours per week so they dont have to provide it) and they count on me, a public employee, to collect the support from the other parent(both genders). Every day, I hear that if that child support Money doesnt come(because I did not locate the other parents employer, or was late to contact the employer, or because the other parent is actively evading me)–they will be evicted from their apartment or have to go to the food shelf. Every day I talk to mothers who are CRYING, SOBBING, because they cant meet the basic needs of their children–I work for Human Services and I help people–all of you folks who just want to destroy people’s lives should turn off the talk radio and to talk to some real human beings who are suffering–I hope it isnt too late for you and Gov Pawlenty to grow some compassion. I have been a public employee for 31 years. I worked in food stamps, Detox, Mental Health Committments, Corrections Library and Child Support–the services being provided are necessary, fraud and abuse are the EXCEPTIONs–my mantra when I go to work every day–There But By the Grace of God, GO I.

87. Darlene Robinson
    Hackensack
    February 7th, 2009 at 10:46 am

    If we had affordable health care for everyone,I think it would eliminate a lot of the other issues people have.

    The frustration comes in when those of us who have lived here all our lives and worked hard to make a living, contributed to society, and done volunteer work for many causes, now cannot afford health care while it is handed out to others. My husband has health care through his job, but my employer is a small business and does not provide it. To put me on his coverage, it would cost us $1300.00 a month. (for both of us)
    We could do that,if we wanted to go without food or heat,etc.

    I think John Marty and Matthew Paymer have some outstanding ideas. (along with many of the others) I don’t think we can continue to put bandaids on these infected wounds in our system and hope they will heal!

    I think we need a whole new system.The whole country needs to regain confidence in in our government. My hope is that you will join together and make some good decisions for Minnesota. Maybe we can be a light for the country.

88. Jeanett Pulczinski
    Greenbush
    February 7th, 2009 at 5:02 pm

    Tax imigrants and people with work visas, or send them home.No free housing, school, or medical help for illegal imigrants unless to save a life. then send them home

89. mark neid
    mendota hts.
    February 7th, 2009 at 9:38 pm

    MN CARE and other similar plans have been funded by a 2% medical services tax ( a invisible tax not shown on medical service statements). Our governor has transferred 1% of funds from this tax to the general fund and eliminated 40,000+ people from these plans. For the next budget Pawlenty wants to transfer the other 1% to general fund, and eliminate 80,000 people in need of medical coverage, claiming a surplus of funds after the first cuts.
    I feel this tax is a good & necessary tax to provide medical care for people without funds for medical services. With out medical care sick and temporarily disabled people cannot work, return to work or learn how to enter the work force.
    Funds provided by this tax should used as stated in original plan or be eliminated.
    Fees charged for services from the state are the same as a tax (compulsory payment) paid for services. Our legislators need to make changes so there is no deception in terminology.
    What is the waiting period for people entering the state of Minnesota needing human services? Should we have the same or longer wait to be eligible as other states in our region?
    When are we going to wake up!

90. Mike Gude
    St. Paul
    February 8th, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    Human services spending that supports people who have lost their jobs, provides health care, and supports people with disabilities so they can live in and contribute to their communities should be preserved. Especially when the economy is in a downturn, we need a safety net to help people who need the support. Spending on human services also boosts our economy. 75% of the funds spent on some disability programs, for example, goes to pay the wages of staff who provide care to those with disabilities. Cutting funding like this would not only jeopardize the independence and productivity of those receiving the services; it would increase unemployment, too.

    We can certainly find ways to spend money more efficiently. A greater emphasis in health care on prevention is essential. Supports for people with disabilities could be provided more efficiently if people were given more control over those supports and their funding (called “self-directed services”).

    All options for balancing the budget should be on the table. This includes revenues. With a recession, we need to be careful that any increases in revenues should be fair and not cause additional pain for those who are struggling, but there are some — especially those who have the highest incomes — who are not paying their fare share and can afford to pay more. I would also favor increasing taxes on tobacco and alcohol. While these are regressive taxes, they would help pay for state spending that addresses some of the problems that tobacco and alcohol cause — lung and heart disease, alcoholism, injuries caused by drunk drivers, fetal alcohol syndrome, among others.

91. Renee Cardarelle
    Annandale
    February 10th, 2009 at 10:31 am

    Me and my children are three of the 47 million uninsured Americans. My children were on Minnesota Care until paper work caused us to lose our coverage and paperwork continues to delay our being covered. For me, I lost my health coverage when I was laid off from my job. I now work three part time jobs, no health coverage. MN Care requires a four month waiting period before I can even apply, providing I get it. Let’s all hope I don’t end up in the hospital because it will be the tax payers who end up with that bill - I can not afford high cost emergency care.

    Unlike another participant on this blog who naively believes that the Health and Human Resources budget is about “welfare queens” I am well aware that health and human services is far more about providing for the needs of middle class Minnesotans.

    I believe our legislators have failed us and this is why we are experiencing the crisis’s we have now. By looking to the market as though it will automatically provide for the basic needs of citizens, the representatives have forgotten their responsibility.

    Health care costs are soaring. For too long citizens have been asked to meet these costs on their own with little government intervention. When health care is provided to people it comes with cumbersome bureaucracy.

    Why not a health care system that is modeled on the public education system so that at least all our children automatically get serviced. No one suggests that families who are well off should pay for public education? Why not? In fact there are many who want our taxes to go out as tax credits or vouchers to people who have money and want to put their kids in private schools. How does that make sense? It only makes sense because we value public education as a necessity to a strong America! If we don’t have educated citizens we won’t have a strong society and workforce.

    So, let us model health care on the same model we use for public education. Let’s make sure all children have health care. Let’s not tie it down with a system designed to control people. With endless paperwork and requirements. Instead let’s offer viable options and the means for people to get the health care we need.

    Study after study shows prevention works. It decreases the cost of caring for people by preventing life threatening situations. An open health care system will ensure lower costs in the long run.

92. Jason Krueger
    Sauk Rapids
    February 10th, 2009 at 9:50 pm

    The state should immediately cease fluoridating our drinking water pursuant to Statute 144.145.

    Keep in mind that infants aged 12 months and younger are advised by both the CDC and ADA to avoid ALL exposure to fluoride, including formula mixed with fluoridated tap water.

    In other words, parents are expected to learn this information on their own (no alert issued by MDH), pay for fluoride in the tap water (via the utility bill), and then pay again for fluoride-free bottled water.

    Folks, this doesn’t make sense. Adding fluoride to the water is an ill-conceived notion and forces unwilling participants to avoid the drinking water.

93. Sheila Kromer
    White Bear Lake
    February 11th, 2009 at 1:54 am

    I am all for helping people out that need help. However, with that said, the abuse needs to stop. Here are a few examples that I know of first hand.
    1) A person on medical assistance goes to the emergency room for a yeast infection. When asked why she didn’t go to the drugstore to get the over the counter medication…she replied, because that would cost me $7.00. (This person also has 2 cell phones.)
    2) Another person goes to the emergency room complaining of severe pain and thus gets pain killers. This person then goes to another hospital emergency room and does the same thing. This continues on and then this person turns around and sells the prescription drugs for cash.
    3)Another person takes someone grocery shopping and pays for it with their EBT card. Once out of the grocery store, the 2nd person gives the EBT card holder cash for the groceries at a 50% price reduction.
    4) A group of young adults are socializing and they are discussing their situations with each other. One person out of the group suggests to the others that they try to get social security benefits by claiming that they are ADD or ADHD because that is what they did and they now get a check every month and do not have to work.

    I could go on but I think you get the picture. These are all true stories. We cannot continue to enable these people to abuse the system, this is irresponsible at best. Since society helps people out when they are in tough times, why cannot these people pay society back. When my father was laid off work (when us kids were young) he had to trim trees in the parks to get any assistance. He did not mind doing this as it was a way of paying back the system that was helping him and his young family. Why cannot able-bodied people who receive assistance contribute back to the society that has helped them? If this was a requirement (for able-bodied people) then perhaps some of the abuse would stop. Also, these able-bodied people could provide services that are curently paid for by the taxpayers such as teachers aides, cleaning parks, cleaning streets, etc…..

94. Sue Erickson
    Crystal
    February 11th, 2009 at 11:00 am

    I have worked in Welfare and in Child Support Services. The people receiving these services are truly needy. Often the disabled or the aged have no one else to help them but the government assistance. These are not “welfare queens”.How wonderful that most of us have jobs and savings and homes. Many who were born in Minnesota have very low incomes. Those who are able to earn money have a small amount of their tax money go to those less fortunate. Perhaps you could think of your taxes as paying the Governor’s salary as he traveled around the country promoting John McCain. Or you could think of your taxes as paying for roads you drive on or the snow plows that spread sand and salt so you don’t wreck your expensive car. The large part of the wlfare budget is spent in nursing homes where the family of the elderly apply for Medical Assistance to pay the daily rate after they have hidden or used the patients money and assets for themselves. This is the worst type of fraud - hiding assets instead of using assets to pay for care in nursing homes. The amount of public money spent in nursing homes for care of the “formerly rich” is truly fraud and should be stopped. Let those who have savings or property use that money to save taxpayers the cost of their care.

95. Paul M
    duluth
    February 11th, 2009 at 12:14 pm

    I am a state employee For DHS. I would rather have a job than a raise. SOTP HIRING NEW EMPLOYEES!! Attrition is better than lay offs, I don’t care what the unions say.
    I LIKE WORKING!

96. Stacy A
    mpls
    February 11th, 2009 at 6:52 pm

    Ok lets get this straight.. Health and Human Services provides care to people in need such as the disabled and the elderly who contribute to their communities as best they are able, ….WELFARE ….is a different issue all together, …. so cuts in funding to this program solves nothing it only creates a finatial burden as this system runs on little already.
    The medical and health care system need to be fixed that can save all busnesses and people money but not cuts to nurcing or group homes which only hurts the people who need the help the most.

97. Brenda Frank
    Becker
    February 12th, 2009 at 11:11 pm

    As a mental health nurse, I see blatant abuses of our health care system regularly. I believe as a taxpayer I do not need to help pay for more than three chemical dependency treatments in addition to an extended hosp stay until treatment is available. I am talking about persons who are 100% chemically dependent and are not psychotic or have a mental health diagnosis. We provide three hots and a cot for the majority who have never worked, have done illegal acts, have produced children that are not supported and usually neglected, or worse, have had terrible and violent relationships, and in addition have no intention of giving up their habits. These persons prefer the hospital to jail and know enough to say the magic “s” word. Maybe if they knew after the third time the state will not pay for this nonsense and they will straighten out, be a contributor to our society instead of a huge drain.
    Also our commitment and jarvis legal process is too long. The patient suffers in a psychotic daze, is often not eating, is often paranoid and delusional, and is terribly afraid and or aggressive. It should not take a month or more for the needed medication therapy to reduce the symptoms. Our patients are in the hospital for 1-3 months and somtimes longer because of the lengthy court process. Again, the state, and the taxpayers are footing the bill.

98. Sarah Wenge
    Richfield
    February 14th, 2009 at 7:46 am

    I don’t think the need is to slash MA benefits. There are people out there who truly need the help. Unfortunately, for every one person who needs the help there are 3 others on the program who don’t really need the help. I think it needs reform. There are people on medical assistance who shouldn’t be and that needs to be looked at. If you are threatened to be kicked off because you make too much money, you shouldn’t get the option to cut down on your income to stay on the program. You’ve proved you can work, so get out there and work.

    I work in healthcare. I work in an ER that also has Urgent Care. We see people all the time that come in with something that can be seen in Urgent Care an hour before/after Urgent Care is open. When you advise them that they can be seen in the Urgent Care if they wait, they say that they’ll just be seen in the ER. It’s funny how when you look at their insurance, they have medical assistance. If they would wait for Urgent Care, they could be seen for a fraction of the cost in a fraction of the time, but they don’t have to pay a cent, so what do they care? I think that the state needs to put guidelines on what people are seen for. You go to he emergency room for EMERGENCIES. You take ambulances in EMERGENCIES - not because you don’t have a ride. For the people who think ER doctors are primary care doctors - they are NOT primary care doctors!! GO TO THE CLINICS!!!! When you take 6 pregnancy tests at home that come out positive, you don’t need an ER doctor to tell you that you are pregnant! GO TO THE CLINIC! While I agree with insuring uninsured children, if you can’t provide for your children, STOP HAVING BABIES!!

    You want your budget balanced?? OVERHAUL AND REFORM MEDICAL ASSISTANCE!!!!

99. Maria De Soto
    Dawson
    February 14th, 2009 at 10:03 pm

    Would like to add my 2 cents. I am a disabled mother of 4 small children which 2 of them are also disabled. We need services. Where would we be with out services like PCA and other sevices. My 5yr old son wouldn’t be able to attendent school or be in public setting. Maybe we should cut the pay for people who make high pay for there jobs. Also stop letting all the illegal aliens get our benefit when they have full time jobs and new cars and trucks. Stop giving bail out money to big businesses and banks that use the money for vacations and private jets , ect. We the people who are really disabled should be able to get the help we need by putting the money to programs to help us like PCA and other programs. Some of us are really unabled to work and need the MA program and other benfits to live. Also stop making us pay for Frankin and Colemen to be in court to decide who really won.

100. Ruth Schmidt
     Austin
     February 15th, 2009 at 3:12 pm

     1. My opinion is to stop all state funded public assistance to undocumented (illegal) persons. They come here to gain health care coverage. I work in a human services agency and they will tell us that is why they are here. from pregnant woman to emergency care (dialysis, appendixes, cancer, etc.)and all state funded.
     2. Undocumented Woman/men with citizen children (see #1) receive mfip (tanf)for the children. These parents are not required to go to work, nor do they have a 60-month limit, BUT the citizen parents do. How fair is that?
     3. The requiremnt that we have to provider interpreters as it amounts to a large cost to counties that have a large population of undocmented persons.
     4. Trust funds that are excluded for persons with disabilities. Senior citizens that require long term care have to devoid themselves of assets. Why aren’t these trust funds made available to pay for care of the disabled. I know of just one individual sitting on 1/2 million dollar trust fund that is using $60,000.00 per year in medical assistance to provide care. When that person dies, his inheritors receive the trust funds. How fair is this?
     5. From what you save with the above you could provide medical care( MinnesotaCare and/or General Assistance Medical care) to single persons and or married couple without minor children some work for minimum wage or are on unemployment, but the standard for those household are so low, that a lot don’t qualify. They are the ones who are out there paying in taxes.
     Thank you for allowing us to voice our opinion, lets hope I get the chance to see some or all of these addressed.
     I don’t mean to sound heartless, but I think it is time to right the wrongs of public assistance laws.

101. Molly Olson
     Little Canada
     February 16th, 2009 at 3:59 pm

     Budget Deficit Solution: Title IV-D Eligibility Standards. Save $100 million a year.

     Save $100 million by clarifying and implementing eligibility standards and means testing before someone can qualify for Title IV-D services. Congress created this program for two classes of people: 1) those on welfare (cost recovery) and 2) former welfare recipients at risk of falling on welfare and eligible for Title IV-A welfare benefits if they don’t get their child support (cost avoidance). This is a legitimate use of the program and should be maintained.

     HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM: MN currently has NO ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS AND NO MEANS TESTING for TItle IV-D services. None, at all. Anyone and everyone who applies is getting these government subsidized services. In fact, some judges are ordering these welfare services for non-needy families simply because the government will pay. The program is taking self-sufficient people and making them dependent on government, contrary to the purpose of welfare. Over 60% of the current MN case load does not qualify according to the limitations established by Congress. This is waste fraud and abuse of taxpayer money.

     The MN DHS will claim they “have to” do this. The DHS will also do whatever they can and say whatever they need to protect their programs. Their “spin” can be very misleading to the legislature. This is a well accepted fact.

     THE GAO has determined the program is out of compliance.
     The MN Legislative auditor found that MN has the 2nd most expensive program and lacks costs effectiveness.

     We have a DFL author in the House for a bill to enforce Title IV-D eligibility standards that would preserve the services for those Congress intended, and remove all others who can and are able to handle their support issues privately in family court, without the subsidy by government. This would mean that the government would no longer be a private collection agency for anyone, but would restrict IV-D cases to those where there was a public pecuinary interest.

     This would be a huge savings to the budget ($100 million a year), and a long term savings, not just a one time fix. High ranking MN Senators have gone on record saying nothing is off limits. This too should be considered and supported by the MN Senate.

     Tough economic times require creative and fiscally responsible solutions.

     I have 9 years of expertise in this area. I have an enormous amount of research to back up this idea. I am happy to share all the details. Please contact me directly for more information.

102. Grant Odegard
     Duluth
     February 17th, 2009 at 2:23 pm

     Minnesota has a reputation for being a welfare magnet state. Our benefits do seem to be more generous than the few states for which I could find benefit data. If Minnesota is in fact drawing people from other states due to our higher benefits including housing, medical care welfare payments etc. we need to change to become more in line with at least our neighboring states.

103. Elizabeth Sawyer
     St. Paul
     February 17th, 2009 at 3:20 pm

     It is crucial that the budget not be balanced on the backs of those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Services for persons with disabilities have been cut in the past, placing great burden on families who care for them. Listen to the disability community as represented by organizations such as ARC,CCD(Minnesota Consortium for citizens with disabilities), and Self-Advocates Minnesota. Members of these organizations have creative ideas for expanding self-directed services, thus saving the state money, increasing independence for those with disabilities, fostering wage earning potential and creating tax-paying citizens.

     I am advocating on behalf of those who go before me. I am a parent of a 3 year old with Down Syndrome. My greatest hope is that he will have an excellent education and grow up to be an independent tax paying citizen. Parents cannot accomplish this all on their own. We need that state’s help with special education and supportive services. It takes constant vigilance and effort to care for a person with disabilities, advocate for him and follow through on educational goals. I speak for the thousands of parents who are too exhausted, busy or unable to speak up for their loved one with an intellectual or developmental disability.

104. Judy Anderson
     Shoreview
     February 18th, 2009 at 11:58 am

     As an RN in acute health care, I see many abuses.

     Two recent examples:
     A patient, recently arrived from Alabama with undiagnosed diabetes was admitted with ketoacidosis, resulting in renal failure. He required dialysis and was hospitalized for many days after requiring acute hospitalization while awaiting a source of payment for ongoing dialysis. No insurance.
     Another patient, recently moved here from Chicago, with a large cardiac history, was hospitalized with chest pain. Due to his cardiac condition, he required placement of a cardiac pacemaker/defibrillator, and further investigation as to whether or not he would be a candidate for a heart transplant. You guessed it. No job. No insurance.

     What makes us such a magnet for free health care? I recently heard that Chicago social workers provide bus tickets to MN since we have such good health care available. Perhaps this indicates a need for a national health care system.

     On the other hand, ask any ER nurse how many MA patients take an ambulance to the ER for MINOR complaints that could be seen in any urgent care. Then they expect to be provided with a voucher for a free taxi ride home! WE are paying for this abuse. Perhaps we should adopt a copay system. Expecting a $10-$20 copayment may well reduce this abuse.

     My own son (disabled), working full-time in WS, is a single father, earning below minimum wage. He receives assistance for his developmentally-delayed son, for which I am grateful. Truly, there is a need for assistance. I cannot dispute this. But we must stop the abuse, stop attracting people with medical needs from moving to MN for the ‘benefits’ that they can receive here.

105. Matt Samelian
     Mendota Heights
     February 18th, 2009 at 1:07 pm

     Someone here posted that welfare accounts for 11% of the budget? I hope you clarify that its 11% of the Health and Human Services budget, not the overall budget. Its more like 3.9% of the overall budget. Also for those clamoring for cuts in medical assistance, I would argue we should be smarter and more efficient with our delivery of medical assistance and programs but to cut them would have an adverse affect on the rest of us through increased premiums. We already know that ensuring we have as many people as possible covered is one way to keep costs down for everyone. lets be smart here and not just spread anti-assistnace rhetoric. Also I find it hard to believe people from other countries more here because of our “world famous” welfare system. I think its more likely they know people here and have established communities.

106. Brian Gronquist
     Andover
     February 18th, 2009 at 2:10 pm

     Social services is a black hole. There is hardly any accountability and the system is “ripe” with fraud and mis- management. This whole program should be revamped top to bottom. I have friends and relatives working at the County Hospital and other service areas and they are astounded by what they see. Money paid out and services given to those that can afford it and to those that do not deserve it.
     Your average person struggles to provide services to their own families and yet their taxes pay for those services for others. Plus think about the high paid administrators that
     mis-manage this whole program(s).
     Welfare is still a way of life and not a safety net as it should be. This budget needs to be opened further and details on “continuing care” and “basic care” really are and what gets put in that portion of the budget

107. Deb Liberty
     Cottage Grove
     February 18th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

     Minnesota tax dollars SHOULD provide for CITIZENS OF MINNESOTA.

     If a person has never paid taxes or holds citizenship here,
     where is our obligation?
     During these times of hardship, let’s take care of our own.

108. Senator Linda Berglin
     Minneapolis
     February 19th, 2009 at 1:45 pm

     Thank you all for the constructive comments you have left on this site. I have seen quite a few concerns regarding people’s experiences with MNCare and the administrative inefficiencies of the program. In response to this, I have introduced a bill, SF 825, which will require the Department of Human Services to assign each MNCare applicant to only one application coordinator.

     It is my hope that this bill will help to cut down on the amount of time it takes to process an application, save administrative costs and improve people’s access to medical care.

     Also, any suggestions to cut costs in the health and human services budget are greatly appreciated. If you are a provider or a regular citizen, please share these ideas with me.

     Thank you!

     Senator Linda Berglin, Chair
     Health and Human Services Budget Division
     District 61

109. D. Carter
     Anoka
     February 19th, 2009 at 3:31 pm

     I see too many people who write on this site have drank the Corrupt Liberal Cool Aid.
     The ‘Womb to Tomb’ welfare entitlement mentality is asolutely disgusting and immoral.
     But, I see no morals demostrated here.
     I see the mentality that we owe you just because you WANT IT OR BELIEVE YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO IT–you don’t….No one owes you people anything–EARN IT, SAVE for it; PLAN for it, like the rest of us who DID. Believing that you can Take it from us or getting a corrupt politician to do it for you is…THEFT or if you don’t understand the word… STEALING!!!!
     Soon…productives are going to revolt and are going to cut off money to the crooked unproductives.
     As far as I’m concerned it can’t happen soon enough!!!

110. Sanda Oslin
     Sturgeon Lake
     February 20th, 2009 at 5:17 pm

     1. I think we could save some money if there would be a careful look at how sex offenders began being committed since 1999. There was more careful attention paid and only the worst of the worst were committed before. Then all of a sudden committments skyrocketed. They began committing offender straight out of juvenile programs without giving them a chance to re-enter society, to see if they had modified their behaviors. It is very expensive to lock sex offenders up in a treatment program. I agree that some need to be committed for intensive treatment, but not all of those committed really should have been, many didn’t/don’t fit the original committment criteria.
     The governor got caught trying to let offenders out of the treatment program and encourage corrections to release as many sex offenders as they could upon sentences served, that led to Rodriguez being released and Drew Sjodin’d rape and murder. Then, they became committment happy and really went overboard with committments.
     Be more careful about who is getting committed and why and you may see significant savings, screen those sex offenders whose corrections sentences are ending more carefully, so you aren’t casting such a wide net.

     2. How about going back to RTC based treatment facilities for the mentally ill and the developmentally disabled. Many have been put into group homes and they really don’t fit, they would do better in a setting other than a group home situation and this would be less expensive, just as a private home is more expensive than an apartment for a family, a treatment center is cheaper for treatment patients.

     One size fits all is failing and proving to be very expensive. Has anyone revisited the costs of treatment centers vs privatized group homes lately?

     I know some will say all folks need to be mainstreamed, but many aren’t ammenable to it and whoever decided dormitory style living is not normal? College kids, boarding schools and the military utilize this type of living arrangement and it is normal, who defines what normalized living is?

111. Harmony Karnes
     Hopkins
     February 20th, 2009 at 10:38 pm

     I hear how others are so concerned about cut backs in so many other areas but health care for the elderly and disabled should not be cut back. I woke up one morning and kept on fainting I was 24. I was diagnosed with a rare medical illness and have been put in places from nursing homes to state medical group homes. I have seen the misuse of money from state employees not all but some of them use the state/clients money to do everything from buying their groceries on the state credit cards for their families at home to sleeping on the job to abusing clients to using the state vehicle/gas to run around to get their errands done that are not work related to taking home the clients property so they have stuff they need at home. I have made complaint after complaint but the worst thing the state/union does is give them two days without pay or be forced to work in another medical group home. I have had documented complaints and have been told basically that there is nothing that the state can do unless people in the supervising agencies catch this. I now am 28 and have negotiated with the state to let me live on my own with help from PCA’s. I was trying to save the state the outrageous amount of money they were paying for this. If the state cuts back PCA money and hours I may be forced to go back to a home so that my health is not at risk. I used to work, pay taxes, do charity work until boom my life changed at age 24. I have had medications denied to me because of cut backs in health care. I have had treatments denied to me because of cut backs. This could happen to any of us and what are they to do but rely on state insurance to be denied money. I still am a human and we all need help in our lives let alone when we have a sudden medical problem. I think without state employee’s that misuse the money for their clients or use the misuse state credit cards that we could save the state at least a million a year. I have earned money, saved money, and attempted to plan for a situation like my sudden disability and it offends me deeply that we should be denied health care. Since 6th grade I spent money helping others and spent time volunteering to the people who needed help. Why should these people like me be denied health care that could get us back to being “productive members of society”? Why should I be grouped with the people that are users of the state? I am human with a severe medical disability and should not be denied health care. I did everything that I could before I got sick maybe if I got to age 50 before getting sick I could be living off the money I saved but no one can plan to come down with a rare autonomic/heart condition. People offend us when we are put into groups that misuse state insurance for those with severe medical issues. I am human with a severe medical disability and should not be denied health care, neither should others that are like me.

112. Leland Magnuson
     Sandstone
     February 23rd, 2009 at 9:01 pm

     Comments regarding the State of Minnesota’s budget

     First and foremost, there are no quick easy answers to the financial situation of our state. However, we must recognize some basic, common, too often misunderstood facts and principles. Not intending to assign any priorities, some controlling factors are;
     A. There can be no sacred cows.
     B. We cannot lose anything we presently do not have.
     C. This is not a Democrat or Republican, urban or rural problem.
     D. It is a statewide problem which includes every aspect of our society including each and every one of us, regardless of age, race sex, religious or political conviction.
     E. We must clearly differentiate and clearly define what we are saying when we use the terms, “cut and cuts”, and “reduced increases”.
     F. It will require sacrifice and acceptance of responsibility by each and every one of us to learn to live within our means. This applies to our personal lives as well as in the exercising our responsibilities at work, in government or industry, and, if you will, at play.

     For discussion purposes, let’s start with a wage freeze at the 1 January 2009 level. This is primarily for all state and local government workers. Review paid time off and fringe benefits. Reduce overtime by rescheduling when and where possible. Look for duplication of efforts not only within an organization or agency but by more than one agency and or organization. For example, presently the DNR, EPA, PCA, BWSR, SWCD’s, all have jurisdiction and/or functional responsibilities pertaining to wetlands within the state of Minnesota, along with the overall responsibilities of the Army Corps of Engineers. Restrict expansions of objectives and project to areas that can be financed with cost savings resulting from improved management and oversight techniques. Initiate cost savings programs that reward employees with financial bonuses for their cost saving ideas. Cap salaries once a freeze is lifted. For those receiving clothing assistance, utilize the cost savings by taking advantage of the various thrift shops and Good Will stores. Review the authorized types of foods allowed to be purchased with food stamps, removing such foods as Lobster, fresh salmon, alcoholic beverages etc.

     I realize I am not giving any specific area to focus on. I do not feel a realistic attempt to resolve the financial status of the state of Minnesota can be accomplished by focusing on any one specific area. Nor can any specific area be omitted from review.
     I thank you for the opportunity to express my opinion in this very important matter for everyone in our great state of Minnesota

     Sincerely;

     Leland Magnuson
     41935 Duxbury Road
     Sandstone MN 55072
     Phone 320 245 2868

113. sheila hall
     farmington
     February 24th, 2009 at 5:05 pm

     February 24th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
     The state of Minnesota should enact a requirement similar to former Mayor Guiliani’s in New York - welfare recipients should be required to either be looking for work 5 hours a week (which isn’t much), be actively employed or prove that they cannot possibly work in order to receive welfare money. There are many who take advantage of the welfare system and this would be a deterrent to this type of activity. Why should hard working Minnesotans pay for someone’s life when they could very well do it for themselves? It is well known that many flock to Minnesota for the generous welfare system. How about some accountability from the welfare recipients?

114. Clayton Shepard
     Coon Rapids
     February 26th, 2009 at 3:04 pm

     • The budget reductions proposed for dentistry in the Governor’s budget strike at the core of oral health care for many Minnesotans.
     • At a time when an increasing number of people are not able to afford care, the programs which bring oral health care to many Minnesotans are proposed for elimination or reduction, and this will only increase the problem of access to dental care for the underserved.
     • And, if the proposed cuts are not restored, the overall cost of care will certainly increase, not decrease.
     • There are four major areas of concern for the oral health care of low income Minnesotans.

     • First, the elimination of dental care for non-pregnant adults will force many people into emergency rooms to take care of their oral pain.
     o Emergency rooms will not be able to handle the workload.
     o Medical costs will increase substantially.
     o And, emergency rooms are not able to address oral health care, meaning that there will be extremely wasteful spending and inefficiencies in those hospital ER’s.
     o Emergency rooms cannot provide dental care. All that they are able to do is to prescribe antibiotics and pain medication. This does not address at all the dental disease that has driven the individual to the ER.

     • Second, elimination of the Critical Access Dental Provider program will make dental care much less accessible.
     o Many dentists and dental offices have been able to treat a substantial number of patients despite the unrealistic financing of the MHCP programs because of the Critical Access Dental Provider Program.
     o However, dental offices will no longer be able treat anywhere near the number of public program patients that they have without the Critical Access Dental Program.
     o The percentage of public program patients who are able to access care has held constant for many years because of this program, and this is despite the fact that there is a substantially larger numbers of public program patients to be seen.
     o Without the Critical Access Dental Provider Program, the number of public program patients seeing a dentist each year will drop from the current rate of 44% (compared to about 65% of the general public) to a substantially lesser percentage.

     • Third, the 3% reduction of dental service reimbursement rates will hit access to dental care hard.
     o Reimbursement rates for dental care are already amongst the lowest in the country.
     o The MA fee schedule currently only pays about one-third of an average dental fee, and this is in the face of the fact that two-thirds of a dental office fee schedule is required to cover overhead costs.
     o Thus, the losses experienced by dental offices when they see public program patients will only be exacerbated, making access to dental care even more problematic.
     o The unrealistic financing structure for dentistry under the public programs is the primary cause of the dental access problem, and it will only worsen by imposing a ratable reduction.

     • Fourth, elimination of the Health Care Access Fund is universally opposed by dentists.
     o Dentists pay about $35 million per year in provider taxes and believe that these taxes should be dedicated to health care, as originally intended.
     o Eliminating the Health Care Access Fund will reduce accountability for the use of these funds.
     o The Minnesota Dental Association adamantly opposes the use of provider tax monies for General Fund budget balancing purposes.

115. Gail Hessing
     Burnsville
     February 26th, 2009 at 4:21 pm

     In attending the Towh Hall meeting in Burnsville last evening, I can well understand the tremendous pressure that is continually being put upon you by those in the healthcare industry. Both those using the services as well as those administering the services have a “not in my backyard” attitude when it comes any budget cuts, instead are seeking MORE money than previously given them! Not one had the timerity to admit that the entire system needs more oversight, not more money! It is something even, I, never having utilized state services, know must be done before money is given to them! Budget cuts are absolutely needed, but with them should be benchmarks and quality controls

116. K Fox
     Apple Valle
     February 27th, 2009 at 8:21 am

     I was at the south metro discussion on the Feb 25th. As a small business owner I have to consider moving my company to South Dakota as an option in order stay competitive in this global business environment.
     What I heard was more of the same don’t cut our handouts and please give us more money. The problem it was from state and local government agencies and employees. The last time I look they do not add anything to the states GDP. They do not produce tax revenue they deplete from the general revenue.
     This state needs to cut spending across the board.
     Eliminate spending that doesn’t benefit 100% of the state population equally.
     Cut taxes to small business so we can compete and grow. That creates jobs and income for both of us.
     Reduce social services to a lower rate than all of the other states within a 500 mile radius. Welfare does not draw the best and the brightest to this state’s work force, unless you include those individuals that have learnt how to scam the system. Stop paying welfare using debit cards it is the worst idea I have ever heard of.
     Raise the rates for purchasing MNcare coverage; do not compete with company offer health care plans. We want to provide coverage but the state giving it away and we have to pass those costs off to our customers. This is another reason to move to a more friendly business environment.
     Don’t accept any federal funding that come with strings attached that would require the state of MN to support future expenditures, it is not worth it.
     Main message; Cut spending, cut taxes, eliminate all spending programs that do not support all Minnesotans equally.

117. Dan Hieserich
     Breckenridge
     February 28th, 2009 at 8:54 pm

     I would agree with all above who say that cuts and reforms to healthcare are needed. My son recieves services from the state and we are very appreciative of them. We pay a monthly premium for those services that is based on income and costs of services used the previous year. I believe that is fair.
     Should anyone who is not a citizen recieve the free or for fee services? No Way. We can no longer afford to be the provider for all who may come our way. Minnesota nice is breaking our back!!
     Having called the state office for MNCare and received letters from them it is obvious it has turned into a paper work nightmare. I would hazard a guess that there is no one individual at the state level who could tell you how the system works. It would be fun to build some example cases and submit them to the staff and see how many different responses you get. You know, like they do every year for tax returns.
     Yes, a single payer plan, caps on legal claims, a lean management, encourage healthy habits including regular visits to providers, no access for non residents and access to only those who have no other options.
     As far as General Assistance goes, I am sure it does more good than the cases of abuse we hear of. Tell me one system out there that does not have its abusers. As long as the benefits accurately reflect the costs that the average Minnesotan bears in their daily life than I would be alright with that. When someone on assistance lives better than me at my expense then I get upset. Again, only citizens should bet benefits and there must be a demonstrated effort to eventually move off the program unless we wish to create a life long dependant, entitlement culture.

118. Craig Brooks
     Winona
     March 1st, 2009 at 4:28 am

     Take the private insurance companies out of the public medical programs. The experiment at privatizing the programs has failed. It is time to quit funneling money, at the expense of medical care for the poor, into the hands of these corporations and their high paid execs. It is time to remove the middleman. Combine all those programs with one for ALL public employees in the state (at all levels) under one single plan with one single payment source and you will have power to control cost. Use the income tax system to determine eligibility and you can reduce the overhead at the State and County level. Create one place to bill and you reduce overhead at the vendor level. Take the insurance company out and you reduce overhead at that level. Retrain the displaced workers to actually work providing direct care to patients and you will have a better system.

119. kate burke
     st louis park
     March 2nd, 2009 at 3:14 pm

     The budget is a moral document. My morals state that every human being has value and therefore deserves to be treated with dignity. That means food. That means shelter. That means basic health care. People’s worth is not based upon how much they contribute to the economy, where they were born, or even where they lived yesterday. Funds spent in H&HS are not expenses - they are investments. Investments in low income housing prevent costs of jail; investments in health care (especially preventative) prevent costs of ER visits; and the list goes on. For a moment stop looking at total dollars spent and start looking at dollars (and human dignity) saved. Use this metric to calculate department efficiencies and use that as a basis for choosing where our investment dollars should be spent. Start by looking at a vision of what MN should be and how we treat people in MN, then determine what programs are needed and how they should be most efficiently run, then determine the funds necessary to do it, and lastly find the money to accomplish it.

     Specifically, support Sen. Marty’s Health Care plan. Increase availability of low income housing. Thru taxes on specific goods make prices of goods more reflective of the true cradle to grave costs, including the costs external to manufacturer but born by society (for example, assign a cost to provide health care for smoking related diseases and include it in the price of cigarettes, assign a cost to clean up air/water/soil to goods produced by companies that generate pollution, assign a cost to dispose of disposable items, etc).

     Many of the comments on this site remind me of watching 2 year olds horde toys. When my son decides to hold all of his cars so his friend can’t play with them nobody has any fun. I must not horde my tax dollars just because I have the ability to “earn” my own way; rather I have the responsibility to share my good fortune. Maybe we can all have some fun.

120. Ann Skytta
     St Louis Park
     March 4th, 2009 at 12:53 pm

     I have a great concern regarding the governor’s proposal to cut all dental benefits from adults on MA. I do not work in the dental field, but I do work in emergency rooms. Adults on MA mean seniors and the disabled, i.e. mentally retarded, mentally ill and severely physically disable. They have no other way to pay for their dental than through MA. They will not be able to have preventive dental care or have a cavity filled. Dental pain is not something you can ignor and it will go away as a cold. These cavities will mostly become visits to the emergency room to take care of toothaches and absess teeth. This will be billed to the taxpayer because these people will have emergency room benefits. This will greatly increase the cost of MA and emergency rooms are very expensive. This is very short sighted. These costs will start adding up before Pawlenty leaves office.

121. Rosy Grams
     Janesville
     March 5th, 2009 at 9:48 am

     I would like to recommend some changes in the way tha social workers are required to operate when in the field of developmental disabilities. Since a federal court settlement between litigants and the states in the 1970’s, counties will no longer do courtesy case management for each other. This is due to the threat of lawsuits by advocatea and others. A county does not want to have to defend itself in a lawsuit for someone they are doing courtesy services for. As a result, social workers who serve these consumers drive all over Minnesota to see their consumers. This is an expensive system that costs travel dollars and also costs work time because the social worker is spending so much seat time in a car. The social workers don’t like the system, but have no choice. I would suggest that simular to Tort Reform for medical claims, that the state take on the liability for lawsuits in these matters. Also these services need to be regionalized, perhaps by using old RTCs for offices or by designating counties with significant populations of consumers as regional service providers. Because of significant federal regulation and US Supreme Court decisions,there would still be a need to put social workers in cars to see their consumers, but the length of the trips and the time lost to travel could be minimized. Then the social worker would have time for a larger case load, saving the expense of new hires.

     I agree with some of the posts that state operated services seem to have numerous layers of staffing for which the counties have to pay. I know that about one third of the cost of the MITH program is due to Central Office DHS staff being billed into the costs of a program located hundreds of miles away. I think this needs to be investigated by the State Auditor.

     In addition to State budgets, county budgets are strained by billing from State facilities. This is one of the ways the state balances its budget. It currently costs the counties $34.80 per day out of the county human service budget for each sex offender who has been committed to MSOP. The counties have no say about this as the Attorney General’s office commits these people. Since when does keeping a person “incarcerated” in a state facility become the county human service budgets responsibility? No one has graduated out of this program, so the bill keeps growing. I would suggest that these persons be tranferred to some facility under the dept. of corrections, as obviously a “treatment” program has not helped. There needs to be statuatory changes to facilitate this. But right now,these persons are robbing counties of the ability to help others or to reduce county property taxes.

122. William BRONN
     Maplewood
     March 5th, 2009 at 12:44 pm

     After attending a governor’s budget/citizens’ input meeting in White Bear Lake, an old article in the Minnesota Journal from the Citizens League (Vol. 22, Number 3 of March 29, 2005) reoccurred to me as a real solution to our budget problems and recession. Everyone, Dem and Rep alike, is talking JOBS. It’s the big fear being used to intimidate everyone into submission to one or the other’s philosophical position. The real answer is to promote jobs/business by drastically reducing business income tax [MN is about 8th in the country]. This will help all businesses, including small business to which we give only lip-service when it comes to significant relief or support. [See the archives for the above article at http://www.citizensleague.org
     Secondly, for a fairer tax system, switch to a flat-rate tax system for personal income taxes. [See the same article for its argumentation.] As compared to our present system, the wealthy would begin to pay their fair share. Even if these two changes don’t handle all our deficit problems, they should be enacted for the state’s financial health [Remember: about 20 yrs ago 3M Co. moved a major part of its research facilities to Austin, TX because of such high taxes on business. South Dakota is much closer.] and fairness.

123. Cynthia Nash
     Willmar
     March 7th, 2009 at 10:30 am

     I also agree with Jenna Hadley. She has some very good points.
     I am tired of the abuse in our welfare system and medical assistance. A short while ago I used to work in a bakery where people would pay for BIRTHDAY CAKES, WEDDING CAKES, and QUINCEANERA CAKES (a cake for a young Hispanic girl when she turns 15 and “comes out”), with an EBT card. I know this because I had to escort them to the cashier where they would pay for part of the cake and make arrangements to come back the next month to pay more on it when they got more money on their card. These cakes cost hundreds of dollars and this happens on a regular basis. The birthday cakes would also be over-the-top and cost around $50.00 How is that a necessity?

124. Chris Bell
     Roseville
     March 8th, 2009 at 3:46 pm

     People who want to slash the human services budget live in denial that they could become disabled at any moment and that if they live long enough they probably will acquire serious functional limitations. Our retirement and other investment dollars have been decimated by this recession. Except for the very rich, the rest of us likely will need state support sometime in our lives. We are not immortal, stuff happens an we inevitably decline as we get into our 80s and beyond. Unless you have lots of money and a good long-term care insurance, you should not scoff at the important services the state provides for people with disabilities and seniors. Raising revenue through a significant increase in income tax for the upper tax brackets and an extension of the sales tax to services not already taxed should be accomplished before any further reduction to funding for critical human services occurs. Additional revenue should be applied to DHS programs receiving a 50% match in federal dollars in order the leverage the impact of the new taxes. The Governor should not be permitted to redirect tax dollars raised for human services programs until they are fully funded. If our elected representatives are not willing to increase taxes, then a referendum to increase taxes should be enacted to leave the matter up to the voters at the next general election.

125. Ken Rodgers
     Minneapolis
     March 8th, 2009 at 5:49 pm

     It is so obvious to me as I read through comments from people who talk about cutting and eliminating wasteful “welfare” spending; free-loaders; welfare “queens”, you have not even read the budget information given here on this web site. If you would have bothered to read, you would have read how much of the overall budget is spent on “welfare” expenses… **LESS THAN ONE PERCENT!! Note the last paragraph below:
     (This info is taken from descriptions of charts located elsewhere on this web site) In the pie charts below, “continuing care” refers to state and federal money going to pay for elderly and people with disabilities (both children and adults) in nursing facilities and group homes, or receiving in-home care (such as nursing or personal care) through programs known as “waivered services.” “Basic health care” refers to physician, hospital and clinic visits and other outpatient care provided to the elderly, people with disabilities and low income families and children who qualify for public programs. Some very low income single adults qualify for limited basic health care.

     **Welfare programs are a small portion of the “Children and Economic Assistance” pie slice. Two percent of the Health and Human Services budget goes for welfare programs (MN Family Investment Program and General Assistance); this represents less than 1% of the total state budget.

     As you can see above, cutting our welfare expenses won’t save anything more than one percent of our overall budget in health care services! It is clear to me, we must take a good look at how we are spending our entire dollars for TOTAL health care, including welfare. This can, and must be done better and more efficiently. When, and only when, every individual is covered through medical insurance equally, we will continue to have extremely and costly health care costs that affect everyone! We must reform our current system. I suggest our legislators begin by looking at solutions that will reform our Minnesota health coverage system, once and for all. When everyone is covered by insurance, then and only then, will the costly emergency room expenses be controlled as their won’t be any! Imagine that! If everyone is covered for all basic medical care, no one will “get stuck” with any outrageous expenses.

     It is time for the legislature to stand up to our esteemed Governor and not settle for simply cutting more individuals from being covered from coverage… that will only cost us much more than we are currently paying! That is what we have elected you to do; now just do it!

126. Allyson Hayward
     Minneapolis
     March 9th, 2009 at 3:34 pm

     The suggestion, made repeatedly above, that we somehow “help” people be responsible for themselves by cutting State benefits makes as much sense as any employer telling employees that, to be “helped” to be more responsible, the employee must find and pay for all his/her own health care, pensions, etc. In fact, if you’d like to be one of those lucky souls “helped” to learn personal responsibility, all you need to do is lose your job.

     Decreasing spending for HHS is very short-sighted and will make things much harder in the end. Declaring that a tax increase is out of bounds doesn’t make any sense in this economy either. Our neighbors are really hurting. Jesus didn’t condemn people to go hungry because, whether due to irresponsibility or just bad luck, they didn’t bring food with them. He asked everyone to share. At times like this, it makes sense to share through paying more taxes.

127. Brian Johnson
     Minnetrista
     March 17th, 2009 at 11:17 am

     I’m from Park Rapids, MN and hope to return there when I can afford to move back… That whole area was known for its’ beautiful resorts back in the day and the resorts were beautiful because of the clean water and sand beaches, etc.
     Now most of the resorts have been taxed out of existence as if they were huge R-1 Family tracts with 1,000’s of feet of lakeshore. It seems to me that Minnesota should do more to keep our resort business viable since it’s the only thing that can’t be moved to China. I think MN should consider a special real estate tax status for Operating Resorts that would cut them some slack so they don’t have to sell of all of the overtaxed lakeshore to meet their obligations to MN.
     Park Rapids has gone from an area of 100’s of beautiful small resorts to an area of Blue Hairs that buy up the cabins from the resorts for retirement. Northern MN should remarket themselves as Resort Country once again…
     Brian Johnson

128. judi bryant
     cannon falls
     March 28th, 2009 at 9:05 am

     Having worked in group homes and mental health services. I would like to say there are other reasons to reform the reimbursement mechanisms in human services.

     Currently I have seen group home owners buy new houses and property and then completely pay them off with what they bill for client services. Whenever there is such easy money to be made(once you understand the paperwork hoops)greedy unethical people are attracted to the area like moths to flame.

     Please ask yourself what happens when greedy sociopaths are put in control of vulnerable people. I have seen it, please imagine what their lives are like.

     The reimbursement system makes it hard for honest people and relatively easy for motivated unstable unethical people to get taxpayer funds. We need to revamp it completely for that reason alone.

129. Elaine Leonard
     Golden Valley
     March 30th, 2009 at 6:18 pm

     I realize that the legislature needs to prioritize the budget this year. However, I would like that the cuts be minimized in the healthcare area so that our most vulnerable citizens do not have to suffer.

     For example, I heard from the Minnesota Hospital Association that the governor is thinking of changing the General Assistance program benefits emphasizing physician care vs. hospital care. Most of the recipients of general assistance are in such poor health that changing the care model would result in more and more of these citizens not seeking care at all. Therefore, this change would have dire consequences for this population.

     I would like to see the emphasis on medical homes and the increase in the minimum wage. Medical homes would allow providers to follow patients more effectively and efficiently. Increasing the minimum wage
     would attract more qualified and motivated employees, especially nursing assistants, to stay in the health care field. Both would improve health care for Minnesotans.

     Expanding the False Claims Act in Minnesota to the Medicaid program is a great idea. If we could recover more monies because of fraud in Minnesota’s Medicaid program, that would help somewhat with the budget deficit.

     I have heard of many proposals for univeral health coverage in the state of Minnesota. I would like to see us work with the federal government to obtain a basic benefits package for all Minnesotans. I realize that the short term costs would be significant, but in the long term, a universal plan will save us money.

130. Marc Bourdeaux
     Lakeville
     March 31st, 2009 at 1:49 pm

     How can anyone make a detailed budget when the numbers may be incorrect or there is corruption?

     Audit report details fraud, mismanagement among state agencies
     Posted 4:36 pm, March 27th, 2009 by Betsy Sundquist, Staff Writer, Saint Paul Legal Ledger Capitol Report
     • Gov. Tim Pawlenty
     • Minnesota government

     http://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ @ Look at the reports your -self PLEASE PLEASE !!!!!!!
     A new report from the Minnesota legislative auditor’s office details a “troubling lack of financial oversight” among nine state agencies, state Rep. Ryan Winkler, DFL-Golden Valley, said Friday.
     Winkler said poor internal controls within Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s administration have led to “widespread fraud and mismanagement” in handling state and federal money and have cost taxpayers millions in lost or unaccounted for revenues.
     The federal compliance audits detail problems in all nine agencies: the Department of Education (five findings), the Department of Employment and Economic Development (seven findings), the Office of Enterprise Technology (one finding), the Department of Finance (two findings), the Department of Health (six findings), the Department of Human Services (10 findings), the Department of Natural Resources (six findings), the Department of Public Safety (five findings) and the Department of Transportation (one finding).
     Each agency was cited for poor oversight and mismanagement of state and federal funds. The report consistently points to a lack of compliance with federal audit requirements, and what Winkler called a “troubling trail” of undocumented, unanswered questions as to where and how state resources are spent.
     Winkler said the report leads to questions about whether $9.1 billion in federal stimulus money can be managed “responsibly without immediate, significant reform.”
     “You need more than a website and a prayer to manage the state’s business,” Winkler said.
     “Minnesotans expect better, responsible government. When billions of federal dollars are coming to Minnesota to rebuild our infrastructure and kick-start Minnesota’s economy, we need to make certain every dime is well-spent and accounted for.”
     Based on a host of negative auditor’s findings over the last several months, Winkler said he is skeptical about Pawlenty’s current system for distributing federal recovery funds in Minnesota. Pawlenty appointed Finance Commissioner Tom Hanson as the sole overseer of all stimulus money coming into the state, and Winkler is concerned that handling a $36 billion budget, a $6.4 billion budget deficit and more than $9 billion in federal funds may be too much for just one person.
     Hanson too is skeptical of his agency’s ability to manage the project. Having eliminated all internal auditors at the Department of Finance because of a 30 percent budget cut over the last seven years, Hanson’s agency is understaffed and underprepared to properly handle incoming federal recovery funds.
     “We are faced with an unprecedented challenge of spending a lot of federal money quickly,” Hanson said in an interview this week. “And I think as we go forward we will need some additional financial assistance with our agency in order to meet the federal reporting requirements.”
     Winkler is calling for a comprehensive restructuring of how federal recovery funds are accounted for and delivered in the state.
     He said other states have established stronger, more accountable systems to ensure that federal money is well-spent in their efforts for economic recovery. A comprehensive list of those systems in comparison to Minnesota can be found on the National Conference of State Legislatures website.

131. Gay Urness
     St. Louis Park
     March 31st, 2009 at 4:05 pm

     My son was born with Cerebral Palsy. Those of us with normal skills can adjust to change and get by with less. The disabled start with less and have fewer skills to use to adjust. My son wishes he were “normal” but he is not. Please do not vote to make his life tougher than it already is.

132. Lisa Selly
     prior lake
     April 1st, 2009 at 9:34 am

     I feel we need to make some changes for our special needs people. First we need to catch the companies that are frauding the system. This would mean hire more people to go out in the field and catch these types of people. Also we need to make our people have a bigger co-pay when going to the dr. and the dentisit. It should not be free. I work in this field and if my client wants to call the amblance to go to the dr. he can becouse he dose not pay for it. He has done this 6 times this year. What is that costing us tax payers? Also fraud cost this state a ton of money…Stop these companies from commiting fraud. Also I will take a pay cutt if the Gov gets his way. Why should I have to take a pay cutt when I already get paid very little? I go into the office and there must be 15 people shuffeling papers can we not get rid of some of these people or pay them less? I have 3 supervisiors and not once in three months has one checked in on me. Why do we need that many lead people? We have become way to top heavy in this country. Way to many people at the top. Dose not make any sense at all. I have seen a group home who has 3 very high fuctioning clients and 1 that is not. They have two staff at all times. When they take 2 to ball the other two are left at home alone and both staff will go to the fuction. This drives me crazy. We are paying for this. Even if two of the clients go home they will have two staff hired at all times dose it make sense to have two staff for two clients? Not really….Just some thoughts from someone who works in this field…

133. Kari Fletcher
     Mankato
     April 5th, 2009 at 4:57 pm

     My husband and I adopted two children from the MN foster care system. Both of these children were prenatally exposed to alcohol and other drugs and both have FASD (Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders).

     Most people with FASD will have IQs that are slightly higher than what qualifies them for DD services through the county but their brain impairment significantly affects their decision making, impulse control, executive functioning, etc… and causes them to need constant supervision and structure.

     Both of our children currently qualify for a few hours each day with a personal care attendant. This has allowed us to continue to care for our children at home and it has kept our family intact. The statistics regarding FASD are scary (http://www.come-over.to/FAS/fasconf.htm ) and most people with FASD end up in jail cells, residential facilities or treatment centers at some point. These outcomes are far more expensive to the state than the PCA funds that are currently allowed us.

     We want good outcomes for our kids. We wanted them raised in a family, not a system. We want to keep them in our home. But we can’t do this alone.

     Please cut waste and fraud from programs like PCA but do not pull these services out from under families whose children have fairly “invisible disabilities” like FASD. These services are our lifeline right now.

134. Jan Vittera
     Shakopee
     April 8th, 2009 at 9:57 am

     To Whom It May Concern,

     As you may know, Governor Pawlenty’s budget proposal would slash health and human services by $1.4 billion, cutting or even eliminating many essential programs that disabled people rely on every day. One essential program in danger of being underfunded is the PCA (Personal Care Assistant) program.

     Minnesota’s PCA program provides in-home services to people of all ages and all types of disabilities to live more independently in the community. The PCA program was developed as an alternative to institutionalization and provides more compassionate and cost effective care.The program is structured to keep people with disabilities in their homes with their families. A personal care assistant goes into the client’s home and helps with non-medical activities of daily living and provides hands-on assistance for whatever the client needs. The families are still housing, feeding, clothing, loving and caring for their disabled family member most of the time.

     Thousands of Minnesota families use the PCA program everyday and it is an essential component to the overall care of many disabled people on Medical Assistance. These are people that have physical and or mental challenges and are often poverty stricken as well. A little bit of basic help in their homes can go a long way towards keeping families together and helping people with special needs.

     The State of Minnesota pays $16.24 per hour to agencies to provide PCA care. The State pays no extra holiday pay, no overtime and no medical/dental to the Personal Care Assistants. Out of this $16.24, a PCA agency must pay wages, matching F.I.C.A taxes, workers comp (high rates for this job field), unemployment tax and any employee benefits. Most PCA agencies cannot afford to offer health care to their employees. Also from this $16.24 must be squeezed administration costs; office space, computers, fax machines and other business machines, office supplies and insurances. They also need office personnel to handle human resources, client relations, payroll, accounts receivable, accounts payable, record keeping, etc. A diligent, tightly-run company can pay care givers $9.75 to $12.00 per hour.

     We ask that you contact your legislators and urge them to vote conscientiously and to keep all options open for balancing the budget. Cutting essential programs for disabled people is morally wrong and it goes against Minnesota’s proud history of caring for people in need.The most vulnerable segment of our society needs to be cared for. This is our responsibility. Adequate home care is the least expensive and most compassionate way to accomplish this.

     Sincerely,

     My Brothers’ Keeper Office Staff
     Shakopee, MN

135. Mark LeBlanc
     St Louis Park
     April 9th, 2009 at 11:17 am

     I am concerned about whether the state is taking an equitable stance on Health Care in the budget deliberations. It is imperative during these tough economic times, we make sure that the Health Care needs of our citizens is forefront.

136. Elaine Leonard
     Golden Valley
     April 17th, 2009 at 9:20 am

     I am writing to express my concerns over the $1.4 billion cuts to
     Health and Human Services Spending in the Governor’s budget. As an
     employee of one of the largest health care companies in Minnesota, these proposed cuts will hurt our
     organization’s ability to deliver high quality health care services.

     For example, our hospital system has nearly 200,000 inpatient and
     outpatient visits from individuals covered by state programs such as
     Medical Assistance and MinnesotaCare. By cutting these programs, these
     patients will go without health care. Thus, these cuts will have a
     negative impact on the patients that we serve.

     Our organization has proudly served our community for more than 100 years. We
     are not in a financial position, however, to sustain more cuts.
     Luckily, our department has not had layoffs, but could in the future if
     these drastic changes are made to the state Health and Human Services
     budget. However, many of our hospitals have already faced cutbacks due
     to the economy. Across the board, we instituted wage freezes for
     this year to improve its financial position. Hopefully, both the
     layoffs and the wage freezes will help us so we don’t have to take any
     further actions.

     Senators, please vote against the governor’s budget proposals for health and
     human services so that our health care organization and its patients can depend upon a
     strong healthcare system.

137. Pat Billo
     Eden Valley
     April 25th, 2009 at 6:58 am

     Well, since our Senators will probably not read this, because they obviously don’t care. (I’ve written many letters and always get a “Thank you for writing” reply. Anyway, here goes. If people get food stamps, only generic foods should apply. They shouldn’t be able to buy steaks (yes, I’ve seen this happen). Do drug testing, just like a job. If they take drugs, too bad. Take care of their kids, but not them. (We do anyway, with free breakfast and lunch at school and free health care). I’m tired of paying for people who won’t work, and know how to scam the system. Enough is enough! The taxes will drive my family out of this state, because we won’t be able to afford it. Hey, maybe the senators and congressmen could take a cut in pay or benefits?

138. Andy Hentges
     Lakeville
     April 25th, 2009 at 10:41 am

     I haven’t read all posted comments at this time, so I appologize if I repeat something already discussed.

     This issue has been discussed time and time again, but should be seriously considered.
     I believe former Gov. Ventura somewhat touched on the issue of welfare, but received harsh criticism for his stance. I will probably get the same type of response as he did, but isn’t it time we began the burdensome task of evaluating the necessity of so many people receiving welfare and what is the long-term plan to wean off people and place them back into the workforce once again?

     I’m tired, as many others can attest, of paying for others to stay at home and collect a check from the state. In my profession, I have many contacts with those invested in this program and see the abuse of the funds. Plasma televisions, laptop computers, Xbox’s, and other luxuries many working class people couldn’t afford, but instead decide to buy groceries and provisions. Apparently people regard many of the listed items as “necessities” and not items of luxury.

     I am not so naïve to ignore the people who truly need a boost from the state to put their lives back on track, but for those who choose to not go back to work or find a trade for which they can contribute to community they preside is very exasperating.

     In a time when budgets are stretched and government must make adjustments to survive the financial problems we face, shouldn’t we all be a little upset when we know there are many able bodied people who decide they do not want to work and continue to collect checks on our behalf?

     This is a topic debatable on many levels, but is something worth looking at and re-evaluating. I think a clear plan on where our welfare program is going and what we can do to trim spending by weaning those off who are able to learn a new trade or go to school to gain an education allowing them to work.

139. Melissa Winger
     Eagan
     May 1st, 2009 at 8:14 pm

     Anyone of us is not immune from being disabled in an accident or having a child or grandchild born with a disability. In a tragic event like this imagine that our government was not going to provide services to help you with medical care or help daily living because of some of the comments written here. What would you do?
     Please think of others in this state who are not as fortunate because of no fault of their own.
     I have a son with a complex genetic disorder and is severly impaired intellecually and medically fragile who is on Medicaid and we pay a parental fee to be on medicaid.
     In this country we are supposed to take care of our most vulnerable.
     Please tell me we still have care and compassion for families and children truly in need.

140. John O'Neil
     Brooklyn Park
     May 15th, 2009 at 6:22 pm

     It can no longer be business as usual at the State Capital.
     In the past Minnesota has been known as one of the “Nicest” states in the Union. We have welcomed many refugees with open arms and have really worked to blend them into our society. While we have worked to welcome the refugees, we have lost sight of our States problems. Minnesota has created an environment of comfort for every AMERICAN Loser it can collect. I ask you, why I should pay taxes to support people that are very satisfied just living off the government. Isn’t it about time Minnesota puts some requirements on all the welfare addicts we have?
     1.Random drug and alcohol testing to receive welfare. Flunk the test and you lose your benefits.
     2. No more children. Don’t reward pregnancy with more money.
     3. All out of state people will have a 1 year waiting period. After which they will not receive any benefit greater than the state they have come from.
     4. Residency must be proven via rent receipts forms from land lords.
     Please, try to remember you, the Minnesota Legislature, are helping “vagrants” on my and other working Minnesotans backs. What is the motivation for me to continue to work my butt off so you continue to waste my tax dollars on people that have made a career out of living off the government?
     Another consideration you may want to consider - America is a Melting Pot. We are Americans first. I will never down play heritage but we need to emphasis -WE ARE AMERICANS FIRST.
     In the United States aliens, legal or not do not have the right to vote. Aliens should never receive a standard driver’s license. Issue an Alien drivers ID in lieu of a standard drivers license or ID card.
     We are not being mean, we are being realistic. Times are hard and if making life easy through government programs causes monetary stress to the actual tax payers of Minnesota, it is your duty to assist the Minnesota Tax Payer.
     I’m not in agreement of “no new taxes” but let’s police the budget for all the welfare fat that we have created first. I firmly believe that if the 4 suggestions above were followed the budget deficit would become very manageable. With out the unnecessary Burdon you seem to want to place on the Minnesota Tax payer.

Leave a Comment