A report has come out that indicates because of a falloff of the revenue from California's tobacco tax, a state breast cancer screening program is in trouble, having its funding abruptly cut by Sacramento. The program includes the Harbor-UCLA Medical Foundation, which uses specially trained student doctors to read mammograms sent to them from outreach groups throughout California. The program benefits 311,000 women per year.
The federal government also contributes to the program. If the state contribution is lost, however, the $61 million from the federal government will also be lost, ultimately killing the program.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration is defending the cuts, indicating the cuts in services are a result of "unprecedented fiscal challenges." An increased demand for breast cancer screening, combined with a declining state tobacco tax revenue has forced the cuts, claim the bureaucrats in Sacramento.
This is an example of government waste, and short-sightedness. Think about it. The tobacco tax is a revenue source that not only is limited, but the same government relying on the source of revenue is also working to kill the source of revenue with an anti-smoking campaign. Less smokers means less revenue. Then, as the federal government corruptly does with programs like social security, the revenue from the tobacco tax does not stay within the realm of original intentions. Instead of the tobacco tax only being spent on cancer research, and anti-smoking education, as originally promised, Sacramento has used the tax money from smokers like a slush fund. Sacramento dips into the fund regularly for school building projects, road construction, state worker salary raises, and. . . oh yeah. . . the occasional anti-smoking awareness campaign.
The budget fiasco in Sacramento is indeed a spending problem, and not a revenue problem. While I understand that Sacramento is trying to cut wasteful spending, and any other spending they can get their hands on, to reduce the multi-billion dollar shortfall, the cuts seem like random tosses of spaghetti against the wall, with the hopes that some will stick, and prove to be successful.
Many of the programs, and the funding strategies attached to them, were shortsighted in the first place. While health advocates and Democratic legislators are decrying the cuts as shortsighted, surely they must have known that the dwindling nature of a limited revenue source would eventually force Sacramento's hand. The program was being funded by a dwindling tax source from a state government that doesn't know how to spend its money in the first place. Once the revenue source for the breast cancer screenings was depleted, where did they think the state was going to get the money to continue the program?
Meanwhile, I am sure the state legislators are enjoying their high incomes, plush offices, and Cadillac health plans.
I believe in state-funded programs that help save lives. The federal government has no Constitutional authority to be supplementing the program, however. The law of the land, also known as the U.S. Constitution, dictates that state issues must be funded by the states, and the federal government must remain separate from such activity.
The problem is, both the federal government, and the state governments, often receive revenue, and then ask themselves, "Oh, goody, how can I spend this money!"
As a result of Sacramento's inability to run its own financial business, lives will be lost because of the cuts to the breast cancer screening program. While the state throws money into bottomless pits, and while the revenue sources are drying up as smokers die or quit smoking, and businesses get the heck out of California because of unreasonable state regulations and restrictions, programs like the breast cancer screening program that saves lives suffers.
On the flip side, health clinics are reporting that fewer women are coming out to screening events. Some mammography services are actually struggling to find work for their radiologists.
While the beneficiaries of the funding were not aware the cut in funding was coming, a small cut would have been manageable. Sacramento, however, is out of touch, and does not pay attention to such things. It makes you wonder how many programs and projects are over-funded, or shouldn't be funded in the first place, and if a simple diversion of funds to other programs that are under-funded would help solve the problem.
Governments don't think that way, however. They just spend and spend and spend, because they think your taxpayer money is an unlimited well of cash they can keep sending their bucket into.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Decline in state's tobacco tax may spell end for breast cancer screening program - KPCC Public Radio
Women die as California Taxes Tobacco to Death - Cactus Thorns, The Sun Runner
Thousands of women face cuts to cancer screening - Bakersfield dot com
No comments:
Post a Comment