Last Tuesday, the Massachusetts Human Services Coalition (MHSC) released its annual line-by-line analysis of the state’s $9 billion budget for health, social, and human services, otherwise known as " The " People’s Budget. " In its latest incarnation, " The People’s Budget " for fiscal year (FY) 2003 details hundreds of millions of dollars in devastating cuts to every state agency in the Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS) and the Executive Office of Elder Affairs (EOEA). Now in its 22nd edition, the dense, factoid-rich document has become a must-read among advocates and legislators who care about how Massachusetts pays for human services — and, as such, helps our neediest citizens. Earlier this week, the Phoenix caught up with Steve Collins, who heads the MHSC and edits " The People’s Budget, " to discuss some of its finer points.

Q: What stands out most about this year’s " People’s Budget " ?

A: This year, it’s been especially difficult to analyze the state budget because it’s been such a constantly moving target. The " 9C " emergency cuts that [former] governor Jane Swift and Governor Mitt Romney made thus far in FY ’03 have complicated our analysis. In this report, our concern was to assess the damage done from two years of budget-cutting. We’ve seen reduced funding for programs in the original budgets, and then four rounds of 9C cuts that slashed spending even further. In this latest round, Romney cut the Health and Human Services budget by $34 million overall and the Elder Affairs budget by $10 million. We’re trying to show that these cuts have a real impact on real people. They’re lowering the quality of life for everyone.

Q: So how do these grueling budget cuts translate in the actual EOHHS line items?

A: The devil is in the details. For example, the Department of Public Health budget has been especially hard hit. There seems to be this mindset on Beacon Hill that prevention, education, and screening programs aren’t direct services and can be cut even further than other human services. In the individual line items, family-planning services have been eliminated in the FY ’03 budget. This was $1 million in funding that helped reach 60,000 low-income women who’re uninsured. Eighty percent of them are teenagers; 40 percent are minorities. Our Healthy Start program for neonatal care has been cut 22 percent. That means that 1100 low-income, uninsured pregnant women will not receive prenatal care, as well as referral services. The Family Health program was cut 18 percent. Over 650 high-risk pregnant women, infants, and children will lose services. Substance-abuse programs absorbed another $5.73 million in cuts this fiscal year. And community health centers were cut by 18.8 percent, which trims their month-load capacity by about 2500 individuals. These are real cuts affecting real people, and that’s just a few line items from the Department of Public Health budget.

Q: So are there other line items in the EOHHS budget that have simply disappeared?

A: There’s any number of things. There’s the direct-care workers salary reserve account, which had held up to $28 million in the 1990s to help find and retain direct-care workers at human-services agencies. That was eliminated in the FY ’03 budget. Now these people who’re making less than $20,000 per year won’t see even a three- or five-cent raise. We’ve eliminated $11.7 million for the rent-arrears program at the Department of Transitional Assistance. It helped working families to avoid homelessness by getting one-time assistance of up to $3000 to pay back rent and overdue utility bills. Now, we’re putting working families at greater risk of homelessness. Not only that, but we’ve also tightened the eligibility standards for emergency shelter. So we’ve made it more likely that families will become homeless and less likely that they’ll be able to get shelter.

Q: What’s the overall message that people should take away from " The People’s Budget " ?

A: We have to set some priorities, and we have to look at the revenue side of the equation. We’ve already cut more than $1 billion out of health and human services in this two-year period. We really cannot cut any more. Governor Romney talked about how his latest round of budget cuts was just " pennies on the dollar. " Well, if we talk about increasing the income tax from its current rate of 5.3 percent to 5.6 percent, we’re talking about less than one penny on the dollar on folks’ tax bills — three-tenths of a penny. These programs help determine the quality of life for everyone in the state. They directly benefit over 1.2 million residents. So, again, we need to set priorities and decide just what are core services and the core role of government.

Q: What lessons should the Romney administration learn from this effort?

A: We’re fearful just what its learning curve is here. Obviously, Romney and his administration have a very curious definition as to what constitutes a core service. Last Friday, the governor indicated that we can get rid of the Prescription Advantage program that benefits over 80,000 elders and persons with disabilities. He said, " Well, we just created that program two years ago so it’s not a core service. " We hope that the Romney administration would take a closer look at our report, realize the damage already done by these human-services cuts, and find ways to avoid having to cut any more.

The newly released " People’s Budget " is available from the MHSC for $40 an issue. Those who would like to request a copy can call the MHSC at (617) 482-6119 or visit its Web site, CutNoMore.org, which summarizes the report.