newjerseynewsroom.com

Share this Twitter Myspace Digg Del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot Furl Yahoo Technorati Newsvine Facebook Export PDF Print E-mail Tags state women health million planning support override funding family weinberg care jersey budget veto stender percent critical abortions centers services

Democrats begin attempt to override Christie's veto

BY TOM HESTER SR.

NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM

UPDATED

Six Republican state senators said Tuesday they will not support an attempt to override a veto by Gov. Chris Christie that prevented the restoration of $7.5 million in the 2010-11 state budget for women's health care and family planning.

The senators, who upper house Democrats would like to see support the override effort, are Diane Allen (R-Burlington) Christopher "Kip'' Bateman (R-Somerset), Andrew Ciesla (R-Ocean), Chris Connors (R-Ocean), Sean Kean (R-Monmouth), and Robert Singer (R-Ocean).

The Senate needs 27 votes for an override while the Assembly needs 54.

In a statement issued by the senators they declared, "Protecting women's health is a vital priority for all of us. Contained in this year's budget are critical investments in early cancer detection programs including mammograms. Over $20 million is dedicated to serve low-income women and children with chronic diseases, birth defects and special health care needs such as Cystic Fibrosis; childhood lead poisoning screening and environmental inspections of homes with suspected lead hazards; prenatal care; fetal alcohol syndrome; and hemophilia treatments. These critical investments were a major part of our collective decision to support the budget.

"Initially, we supported S-2139, which rededicates $7.5 million from the state Employees' Prescription Drug Program toward further women's health initiatives. However, upon further review by the state treasurer, it is now clear that this transfer would place the state prescription fund into a $5.6 million deficit and risk access to needed medicines for women and children.

"Therefore, if Senator President Sweeney calls for a veto override of S-2139, we will vote to support maintaining a balanced budget and ensure there is continued access to prescription medicines for families."

While the governor and legislators argue over the funding issue, Republican are also leering of a backlash among their supporters to providing money for family planning.

Assemblywoman Mila M. Jasey (D-Essex) said Republican opposition to women's health care shows a "blatant disregard for sound public policy that threatens to cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in the months ahead.''

Jasey said she was especially disappointed to see the Republican senators who previously supported the legislation announce they will oppose any bid to override the veto.

"I've seen many hot New Jersey summers, but I've never seen as many flip-flops as I just saw by the Republicans," Jasey said. "It's appalling and these legislators should be ashamed of themselves. I hope they enjoy their summer with their taxpayer-funded health care that they can use to detect and treat illnesses and stay healthy, because thousands of women will be denied access to vital health services as a result of this veto."

The statement was released after Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) and Assemblywoman Linda Stender (D-Union), proponents for women's health in the Legislature called on their Republican colleagues in both houses to join with Democrats in supporting what they describe as a critical vote to override Christie's veto of the bill that would provide $7.5 million for 59 women's health and family planning centers throughout the state.

"There is no longer the time or room for legislators who support this bill in theory, but fear political consequences, to sit back and hope someone else will shepherd this funding through," Weinberg said. She is chairwoman of the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee and a prime sponsor of the legislation. "We need to corral every vote possible to ensure that the health of low income women throughout this state is not a casualty of political ideologies."

"The gravity of the situation necessitates that some of our colleagues move outside of their comfort zone now," Stender said. She is also a prime sponsor of the legislation. "On the philosophical side of the equation, opponents cannot ignore the sad fact that eliminating these funds will actually increase abortions. On the practical side of the equation, the cost savings and services provided are also far too great to be ignored."

Weinberg and Stender said they have sent a letter to every legislator asking for their support in the weeks ahead, placing a particular emphasis on Republicans whose votes are needed in order to obtain the super majority necessary to override the governor's veto.

At stake, the lawmakers noted, are the more than 136,000 patients who were served by family planning centers in New Jersey last year.

They said the centers help prevent 40,000 pregnancies, 19,000 abortions and save the state more than $150 million, but they also provide extensive services that include: birth control; routine gynecological exams; prenatal care; screenings for high blood pressure, anemia, diabetes, sexually transmitted infections, and breast and cervical cancer; as well as critical education and outreach.

Weinberg and Stender also stressed that the legislation they have sponsored specifically includes a provision that bars public dollars from being used to fund abortions.

The legislators argue the Washington DC-based Guttmacher Institute maintains that without family planning funding to support contraceptives, New Jersey will actually see an increase in abortions due to an explosion in unplanned pregnancies.

The Guttmacher Institute estimates that by providing publicly-funded contraceptive services, New Jersey saved $156 million in state and federal Medicaid dollars in 2008, costs it would have incurred on pre- and postnatal care, delivery, and infant care. By allocating $7.5 million in funding to the program - less than one-tenth of one percent of the total budget - New Jersey would save an estimated $4 for every dollar spent.

Weinberg and Stender also noted that they have written a provision into the bill which would require the state to apply for a 90 percent match in federal dollars, funding New Jersey is presently eligible for which would save an additional $90 million over the next five years.

"New census data released last week shows that New Jersey ranks 29th in the nation in the percentage of uninsured women under age 65 (15.1 percent). When broken down to women under age 65 who are at or below 250 percent of the poverty level, the state's rank drops to 44th. These are the very people being served by family planning centers, further underscoring the need to reinstate this funding," said Weinberg.