The Truth About Budget Extenders

By Mike Connery on 04/27/2010 @ 12:18 PM

Tags: Democrats, Republicans, Budget, John DeFrancisco, SD-50, John Flanagan, SD-2, Martin Golden, SD-22, Kemp Hannon, SD-6, Owen Johnson, SD-4, William Larkin, SD-39, Tom Libous, SD-52, Carl Marcellino, SD-5, George Maziarz, SD-62, Michael Nozzolio, SD-54, Michael Ranzenhofer, SD-61, James Seward, SD-51, Dean Skelos, SD-9, Dale Volker, SD-59, Joe Griffo, SD-47, George Winner, SD-53, Catharine Young, SD-57

Yesterday the Democratic Majority Conference passed another round of budget extenders. The extenders are receiving the lion's share of media attention this morning, so it's worth taking some time to know what exactly is included in the extender, and why Republicans who vote against the extenders are not only hypocritical, but also working against the interests of the public, who rely on the jobs and services the extenders provide.

First, a look at what, exactly, the extender's fund:

• $2.57 billion mandated payments to schools for General Aid Payments not associated with the Executive’s delays of school aid payments.
• $2.5 billion for local providers of the Medical Assistance Program including:
  • $1.45 billion for payments to Medicaid providers including:
  • $900 million for medical services provided by State facilities operated by OMH, OMRDD and OASAS.
  • $311 million for nursing home services.
  • $261 million for managed care services.
  • $234 million for long term care services.
  • $172 million for hospital inpatient services.
  • $137 million for pharmacy services
  • $67 million for non-institutional and other spending.
  • $30 million for outpatient and emergency room services
  • $29 million for clinical services
  • $12 million for transportation services
  • $7 million for dental services
• $105.4 million for indigent care funding to providers.
• $38 million in Health Care Reform Act funding to offset Medicaid costs.
• $22.7 million for Supplemental Medical Insurance, including Medicare part B premiums, physician services, outpatient services, medical equipment, supplies and other health service.
• $202 million for Unemployment Insurance Benefits.
• $162 million for state employees including troopers, guardsmen, corrections officers, nurses and social service workers who care for our veterans, homeless, and disabled.
• $15.77 million for the Social Security Contribution Fund.
• $80 million for capital contracts for transportation agencies funded through ARRA (continues the appropriation authority enacted in the first three emergency spending bills for transportation projects to make payments on the Federal share of liabilities incurred for ARRA capital infrastructure projects) including:
  • $40 million for contracts approved prior to April 1, 2010 where payments must be made during the period from April 1, 2010 to May 2, 2010.
  • $40 million for contracts approved in the period from April 1, 2010 to May 2, 2010 where payments must be made during the same period.
• $40 million for transportation capital construction projects that are 100% federally funded and do not have any State share of funding. The appropriation applies only to construction contracts approved prior to April 1, 2010 to allow payment of liabilities incurred through May 2, 2010 excluding liabilities funded by ARRA.
• $10 million for emergency health and safety projects to ensure the safety of citizens across the state isn’t put in jeopardy by needless delays to capital improvements.

As is readily apparent, these are all vital services that New Yorkers rely upon, and represent thousands of jobs that are putting food on the table and a roof over the heads of New York families. Those who support this extender are supporting our troopers, guardsmen, corrections officers, nurses, and social service workers who care for our veterans, the homeless, and mentally disabled.

Which leads me to my next topic. Seventeen Republicans voted against the extender: DeFrancisco, Flanagan, Golden, Hannon, O. Johnson, Larkin, Libous, Marcellino, Maziarz, Nozzolio, Ranzenhofer, Seward, Skelos, Volker, Griffo, Winner and Young. Many of these Republicans have been in office for a decade or more. They had no problem voting for budget extenders when they controlled the chamber.

• 2008: 9 days late/ 2 extenders
• 2004: 133 days late/ 12 extenders
• 2003: 42 days late/ 5 extenders
• 2002: 42 days late/ 8 extenders
• 2001: 125 days late/ 12 extenders
• 2000: 39 days late/ 3 extenders
• 1999: 126 days late/ 19 extenders
• 1998: 14 days late/ 4 extenders
• 1997: 126 days late/ 10 extenders
• 1996: 104 days late/ 14 extenders
• 1995: 68 days late/ 10 extenders

Plainly, Republican opposition to the budget extenders isn't about taking a principled stand. It's about showboating for voters and shirking tough decisions. It's playing politics with people's lives and jobs. New Yorkers deserve more.

Comments

Leave a Comment

Email*

First Name*

Last Name

Title

Comment*

?

You Type	You See
*italics*	italics
**bold**	bold
[ask google](http://google.com)	ask google
+ item 1 + item 2 + item 3	item 1 item 2 item 3
> a really cool quote from a nice person	a really cool quote from a nice person

Comment

* Required information

Comment Preview