NH CARES Issues for the Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund
NEW FUTURES
- 3/23/09
Bureau of Drug and
Alcohol Abuse Services HB1 Page:
Page 1669, Class 102, Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund
|
Page |
Class |
FY 09
Auth |
FY 10
Gov |
FY 10
Maint |
FY 11
Gov |
FY 11
Maint |
|
1669 |
102 |
5,667,000 |
2,833,000 |
5,667,000 |
2,800,000 |
5,667,000 |
Through the Governor’s
Commission, the Alcohol Fund provides funding for more than forty (40) cost
effective and community-based alcohol and other drug treatment and prevention
programs across the state. In FY 2009,
the Alcohol Fund was funded at $5.6 M, which amount was subsequently reduced by
27% to $4.078 M through an executive order.
The Governor’s budget reduces the funding for the Alcohol Fund by
another 30% to $2.833 M (FY 2010) and $2.8 M (2011). As a result, all community-based programs funded by the State
have been notified of contract reductions between 9 and 14 percent, which will
result in significant service and program reductions and staff layoffs.
A. Add $1.2 M in each year of the 2010/2011 biennium
to funding for the Governor’s Commission/Alcohol Fund on Page 1669, Class 102
making the total appropriation:
·
$4.033 M in FY 2010
·
$4.0 M in FY 2011
B. Restore a revised version of the footnote, included
in both the FY 2006/2007 and FY 2008/2009 budgets, that was apparently
inadvertently omitted in the current budget process. The footnote, text for which is provided below, ensures that the
Alcohol Fund is nonlapsing and that authority for its funds rests with the
Governor’s Commission.
The appropriation in class 102 to the Governor’s Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention, Intervention, and Treatment is to fund the Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund. This appropriation shall not lapse or be used for any other purpose, be considered for budget reductions required of the Department of Health and Human Services or be subject to RSA 9: 16 – b.
C. Consider amending HB 2, Section 33 (which in its
current form suspends RSA 176: 16, II, which contains the funding formula for
the Alcohol Fund that links funding for alcohol and drug treatment and
prevention to the gross profits from the sale of liquor) with language that
would reinstate the implementation of the formula, reduce the percentage of
gross liquor profits dedicated to the Fund from 5% to 3.5%, and restore the
direct link between the benefit to the state from the sale of alcohol and its
responsibility to fund treatment and prevention services.
Tricia Lucas, New Futures
Policy Director (tlucas@new-futures.org,
225-9540
1. Scope of the alcohol and drug problem in New Hampshire. Data
suggests that over 100,000 New Hampshire residents abuse or are dependent on
drugs or alcohol. National surveys
suggest that only ten percent of the current treatment need is being met.
2. Current research conclusively establishes that:
A.
Addiction is a
treatable, chronic, relapsing brain disease.
B.
Treatment for alcohol
and other drug disorders is as effective as treatment for other chronic medical
conditions such as diabetes and hypertension.
C.
Treatment is cost
effective. Every dollar invested in
substance abuse treatment yields seven dollars in economic benefits to
society.
D.
Prevention programs
have been shown to save between two and eight dollars for every dollar
invested.
3. Budget Priorities. The Governor’s budget
includes an additional $50 M in revenue from increased state sales of
alcohol. To promote a significant
increase in the sale of alcohol while substantially reducing funding for
alcohol and other drug treatment and prevention is terrible public policy.
Additional
Supporting Information
A.
The House has been
the leader on providing adequate funding for alcohol and other drug treatment
and prevention, ensuring the full funding of the Alcohol Fund in the FY 2009
budget.
B.
Were the existing
formula for the Alcohol Fund to be applied, the annual amount provided would be
in excess of $7.6 M.
C.
The request for level
funding in FY 2010/2011 is fair and appropriate given the unmet need for
treatment and the disproportionately large reductions already made in these
critical services.