Episode Information

Legislative Review
Where We Live - with John Dankosky
Aired:
04/24/2008
Share this Content

In this episode:

Connecticut's legislative session is coming to a close - and the surplus is shrinking.

 

Episode Audio

52:00 minutes (24.96 MB)
Download this Episode

Minority Leader John McKinney: Photo by George GoodrichMinority Leader John McKinney: Photo by George Goodrich
Connecticut's legislative session is coming to a close - and the debate is heating up, with news that the state surplus is shrinking....fast.

The state office of policy and Management is projecting a surplus of just $15.7 million for this fiscal year, and only $44 million for next year. In January, the surplus was projected at more thatn $260 million, so, what happened? Democratic State Senate President Don Williams, and his Republican counterpart, minority leader John McKinney will spend the last few weeks of the session debating how to make the numbers work.

Last night, though, they argued long into the night over a major non-budget reform - and the Senate passed a bill to strengthen laws for violent crimes, without the proposed "three strikes" mandatory sentencing provision.

Democratic State Senate President Don Williams: Photo by George GoodrichDemocratic State Senate President Don Williams: Photo by George Goodrich
Today, where we live, we'll talk about these legislative issues with Williams and McKinney - along with talk about environmental bills, a new health insurance plan, and the retirement announcement of House speaker Jim Amann.

To see pictures of Where We Live's in-studio guests, please go to our Flickr page.

You can contact us via email at [email protected].

Suggestions, questions or comments? Add them below!


 

email to [email protected]

On the air today the guests noted that the CT state Department of Social Services is now running the children's HUSKY health care delivery system. The reason for the takeover was stated to be freedom of information issues which could not be resolved with Anthem BC/BS. For Anthem to give up such a big contract, this issue must have been very important to Anthem and to the state. I have three questions:

1. What is the freedom of information issue(s) that led to the state dropping private sector administration of HUSKY? Can someone explain?

2. Why was administration of something as complex as healthcare given to the Department of Social Services, which has no expertise in health care delivery? Did the state try to find an alternate vendor (HMO) that knows how provide quality healthcare through the Medidaid/SCHIP programs?

3. Is there a separate mental health vendor? Professional mental health managed care operating on administrative services only (ASO) payment agreement can improve quality and save money at the same time.

Thanks
Elena Ruiz-Diaz