WEEKLY LEGISLATIVE REPORT - January 23, 2009
Governor's budget proposals raise concerns
One week after Gov. Perdue announced his state budget proposals to members of the General Assembly, several of his initiatives are raising concern and opposition:
Education funding cuts. In the past six years, cuts in Quality Basic Education funding have totaled around $1.6 billion, forcing local school systems to make up the difference by eliminating teaching positions and important academic programs, raising property taxes, or both. Gov. Perdue's proposed budget amendment for the remainder of fiscal year 2009 whacks another $185.8 million in QBE funding (including $50 million that the legislature restored in the original budget), and his fiscal year 2010 plan includes a $275.3 million cut to QBE.
If these cuts are not reversed by the legislature, the state will have reduced its obligation to provide funding to local public schools by more than $2 billion over an eight-year period, while our education system remains near the bottom of all national rankings. Public school teachers will go without a salary increase in the governor's new budget (along with all state employees), and they will have to pay more for their health insurance coverage.
Everyone understands these are tough economic times, and all state agencies are being asked to sacrifice funding to help balance the budget. But where public education is concerned, this seems to be less of a one-time emergency and more of a sustained assault under this administration.
School nurse elimination. Under the governor's amended budget proposal for FY 2009, school nurses would become a thing of the past. The recommendations submitted by the Governor last week cut $30 million in state funds which would eliminate the school nurse program. This is a very dangerous proposal because of the growing number of working families without health insurance. Some of those parents depend on school nurses to keep their children safe and healthy while they are in school.
If children don't receive the care they need their medical issues could escalate. It's a short sighted approach that will eventually cost our state additional funds and more importantly, diminish our children's ability to do the job they go to school to accomplish - learning. Removing school nurses is extremely short- sighted. There are numerous health issues that arise during the school day that require the management of a trained professional.
There are also legal questions that may arise, regardless of safeguards designed to protect the school. The liability on untrained school employees administering health care could easily become an issue. Teachers in Georgia schools now are not allowed to administer medications. Nurses in our schools give out over 5 million doses per year. There are approximately 15 million annual visits to the office or school health room for illness, medication and injury in Georgia. Children cannot learn when they are sick, and teachers can't teach when they are running a health clinic.
Hospital provider tax. One of the most talked- about budget proposals of the governor's would implement a new 1.6 percent provider fee on the revenues of hospitals and health insurance plans. Admitting this is a "tough option," the governor said his plan would raise a projected $372 million, which would fill a $208 million Medicaid funding deficit as well as provide a revenue source for Georgia's trauma care network. A small part of the funding would come from higher fines on speeding motorists.
While the governor's plan would clearly benefit hospitals with trauma services and higher numbers of Medicaid patients, there is great concern over the effect of the new fee on smaller hospitals in rural areas around the state. Many of these facilities are already strapped for cash, and this is the worst possible time for them to take another financial hit. Some in the health care industry have recommended alternatives to the provider fee, including a tax increase on tobacco products, a $10 annual fee on car tags or simply waiting on an anticipated $300 million in increased federal funding for Medicaid.
There is no doubt about the importance of our state dealing with the health care system's financial challenges and the need for a reliable, sustainable funding source for trauma care. But whether a new provider fee on hospitals, insurers and their consumers is the right path to take will be the source of much debate in the coming weeks.
