John Tracy, right, explains to Head Start employee Linda Farr, left, and Andria and Joria Benjamin that Sen. Leahy is a strong supporter of Head Start. Photo by Josh Larkin.
Chris Louras, the mayor of Rutland, told lawmakers on Wednesday that the state can’t afford to bend the curve of health care costs. At this point, he said, the only way to move forward is to “blow up” the existing system. Louras made the remarks in testimony to the House Health Care Committee.
Louras, who served in the House in 2005-2006 said Rutland’s health care costs are so high that he has been forced to “draw down the staff,” in order to keep the budget in a range that is “tenable to taxpayers.”
“The largest piece of the budget we can’t control is health care,” Louras said.
The city pays about $2.5 million in costs related to health insurance for employees, and about $7 million overall in payroll, Louras said.
Over the last five years, the city has shifted from full health care benefits for its 150 workers, to negotiated contributions toward a high deductible health insurance plan (employees contribute 20 percent of the cost). That move saved the city about $200,000, Louras said, and “kicked the can down the road.”
“Four to five years from now is going to be here real quick, and frankly something needs to be done,” Louras said. A family plan under the union contract now costs about $22,000 a year.
A payroll tax would be preferable, he said.
Louras, who is a Republican, doesn’t see this as a partisan party issue. He has taken a political risk to supporting H.202, says decoupling health care from employment is crucial, but he said it’s going to require sacrifices.
A handful of Head Start workers, mothers and their children strolled in to Sen. Patrick Leahy’s Montpelier office on Wednesday to voice opposition to proposed federal budget cuts that will impact Head Start programs around the state.
Seven Head Start and three Early Head Start programs operate in Vermont providing developmental, educational and social services to low-income children and their families. With funding for Community Block Grants slated to be cut under President Obama’s $3.73 trillion budget, approximately 330 Vermont children will lose access to Head Start programs and 121 Head Start staff are expected to lose their jobs across the state.
“Head Start helps families make goals,” East Montpelier resident Jenn Neddo told John Tracy, Sen. Leahy’s state director on Wednesday. As her three boys tumbled around the small conference room in Leahy’s State Street offices, Neddo explained how having access to Head Start has helped her children succeed and her contact with the program’s staff has given her the support and guidance she’s needed to progress personally. “One of my goals has been to get into college, and I have. I’ve made the dean’s and president’s list at CCV.”
The messages wouldn’t fall on deaf ears, Tracy said, stating that the mothers and staff were “preaching to the choir.”
“Sen. Leahy has been a firm supporter (of Head Start), and he will continue to be,” Tracy said. “Leahy and the Vermont delegation get it, and they’ll work to reach out to the delegations from other states.”
Holding 13-month-old Joria in her arms, Andria Benjamin of Eden explained how Head Start is an important resource for struggling families and a means for Joria to get a jump on early learning and development. Moreover, Benjamin said, the Head Start programs in her area have provided opportunities that have benefited her whole family, such as CPR courses and dental hygiene information sessions.
Those programs, said Linda Farr, are typical offerings in the three Head Start programs she oversees. Farr, an Area Team Manager in Lamoille County, said the assistance she’d received from Head Start years ago set her life on track and the programs must be preserved so others can benefit as well.
“I came back to Vermont with two kids and two suitcases in my hands and I enrolled my kids in Head Start. And it was those Head Start workers who convinced me to go back to college,” Farr said. “If the cuts happen, those programs could go away.”
In a statement, Leahy said he adamantly opposed the cuts.
“Slashing cuts like these are punitive, not prudent,” Leahy said. “The House bill would yank Head Start from 336 Vermont children and their families, and it would eliminate child care for 486 more. At a time when getting people back to work should be a top priority, this would make it that much more difficult for struggling Vermonters to find and keep jobs.
“A budget is about choices and priorities, and targeting the most vulnerable members of our communities this way reflects anything but family values, American values or common sense.”
Permalink |
The mayor is right- the payroll tax Dr. Hsiao recommended would mean most towns and school districts, who currently pay 22% to 25% of payroll costs for health insurance, would have those costs cut in half, even if they paid the employee portion as well. And that doesn’t include copays and deductibles.
Preventive care and restructuring health organizations to intensively treat chronic conditions may even moderate the ongoing escalation of costs.
Permalink |
And I bet that a hefty portion of that money that towns and schools pay for health insurance, paid for by taxpayers, goes to out of state companies that are robbing us. Imagine how many potholes towns could fix if they were not having to cope with 20-30% raises in health care premiums every year.
Permalink |
Have ALL Vermonters in the single-payer system. It would create the greatest savings.
A single payer system must include all people on a government payroll; state, county and town.
That way all Vermonters have a choice of standard plans and the same services.
That would be democracy and fairness. All treated equally before the law.
It would be the lowest cost way to go, least complex and the easiest to administer, AND create the greatest savings. That is the way it is done in Europe. I lived there for 28 years. The college professor, the electrician, the grocery clerk, the government worker, etc., all have the a choice of standard plans and services.
No big host of people would be required to administer it.
Medicaid and Medicare have the lowest percent of administrative costs per dollar of benefit; much lower than HMOs where top managements have multimillion dollar salaries.