6 ms·

US administration revokes $11B in funding for addiction, mental health care

61 points by 6stringmerc 2y ago

derbOac 2y ago
Kinda undermines the arguments about fentanyl from Canada (as if those were believable to begin with).
- rqtwteye 2y ago
  It was never believable.
- almosthere 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - meroes 2y ago
    Doesn’t the show My 600 lb Life show many serious food addictions being broken by expert medical care, which is not free?
    - almosthere 2y ago
      Those people will break an addiction for fame. When the show is over, they'll be back to eating.
      - meroes 2y ago
        So you believe these people can break their addiction, and that medical science has no way to leverage that chink in the armor?
        almosthere 2y ago
        The carrot, which is massive fame, is not present when it's just a psychologist.
    - nh23423fefe 2y ago
      Doesn't the show demonstrate lots of people who don't lose weight and lie about their intake?
  - lugvruzzle 2y ago
    What do you mean by 'addictions are not breakable with money'? Are you saying that medical intervention and healthcare are not effective for people suffering addiction?
    - nh23423fefe 2y ago
      Why do people relapse so often if medical intervention works? A doctor can set 1000 broken legs. Can they cure 1000 addicts?
      - lugvruzzle 2y ago
        well the goal of treating addiction is generally not to 'cure' it but to 'manage' it. If you can come up with a way of systematically helping populations of people manage their addictions without using money, I am all ears.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      Do you know it works? I’d be curious to know your prior—do you think medical interventions for behavioral problems typically work? We know, for example, that medical interventions to address obesity typically don’t work (without surgery). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8427732/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8427732/
      - xnx 2y ago
        > We know, for example, that medical interventions to address obesity typically don’t work (without surgery). This seems like a wild example to use given the runway success of GLP-1 drugs
        rayiner 2y ago
        Sorry, I’m old and sometimes forget GLP-1 drugs exist now. But that’s kind of my point—those drugs seem like magic because medical interventions for obesity control were so extremely ineffective until just a couple of years ago. We don’t have anything akin to GLP-1 drugs for opiate addiction, or alcohol addiction, etc.
  - xracy 2y ago
    "very wealthy NGO owners." Can you name a very wealth NGO owner that's not working with this administration. Or describe what you see as a problematic NGO? It's wild to me that people think NGO owners might be a problem when the richest man in the world is working with this administration to slash this budget arbitrarily. But I guess "deflect, deny, depose".
- lazyant 2y ago
  And the fentanyl "from Canada" story is because there was a seizure up north in the US and was attributed to come from Canada (but may as well be going the other way) and amount was like 0.1% of total apprehensions. Most of the illegal guns in Canada come from the US though.
- orionsbelt 2y ago
  Why? I can understand the argument that this administration is wrong and will make things worse, but I don't think they are inconsistent arguments. The right seems to be of the view that a policy closer to Singapore is smarter than that of, say, San Francisco. In other words, increase penalties/enforcement of drug importation and treat drug dealers harshly, instead of spending lots of money on services for drug users, which arguably just leads to enabling them to continue to lead the life of a drug addict. From my perspective, there's pros and cons to both approaches, but it's not unreasonable to look at a place like San Francisco and come away with the view that some of this funding is making things worse, not better, even for the addicts themselves.
rayiner 2y ago
> Trump administration announced abrupt cancellation and revocation of roughly $11.4 billion in COVID-era funding for grants linked to addiction, mental health and other programs. The federal budget jumped from $4.4 trillion in 2019 to $6.7 trillion in 2022. These were emergency programs passed when economies were shut down, threatening state governments. We can’t treat these emergency measures as permanent.
- stonogo 2y ago
  Why not? That's how we handled baggage fees after the 2008 recession. And the TSA and PATRIOT act after 9/11. And the Selective Service after World War II. And federal electrical production and the minimum wage after the Great Depression. And federal deposit insurance after the Great Depression. And the Federal Reserve after the panic of 1907.
rqtwteye 2y ago
I am all for efficiency and questioning what and how things are done. But this is just too heavy handed. I think DOGE is really not about efficiency but about reduction at any cost.
- xnx 2y ago
  > but about reduction at any cost. Destruction at any cost
- dyauspitr 2y ago
  It’s not reduction, it’s killing checks and balances.
- chneu 2y ago
  DOGE is about revenge. All of this is about sending a very clear message to certain people. The message is that intellectualism is under attack. Anyone going against what Trump and Co want is an enemy. That's it. It isn't complicated. When you view Trump this way his actions make much more sense.
bko 2y ago
I think too many people equate spending money to doing good, and everything is measured against today's prior projected spending levels. To put this in context: FY 2012: The SAMHSA budget authority was $3,386,903,000 FY 2024: The President's Budget Request was $10.8 billion, an increase of $3.3 billion from the 2023 Enacted level. That's about 9% increase every year. These programs didn't always exist and they have grown considerably over time while addiction and mental health have both gotten considerably worse during that period. I think it's worth re-evaluating to see if these programs are doing anything.
- EA-3167 2y ago
  Your premise here seems to be that these programs are somehow meant to "solve" addiction, when in reality they're mostly critically underfunded, understaffed, attempts to paper over multiple sucking chest wounds. The opioid crisis created a LOT of addicts, the rise of fentanyl is killing a lot of people, and combined with the mental health problems you tend to find in and around addict populations, this is a genuinely huge problem. Without a suitable mental health infrastructure, all you have left are the prisons, streets, and programs like this. I agree that this is an inefficient way to address the problem and that a major re-evaluation is required, but probably in quite the opposite way you mean it.
  - MollyGodiva 2y ago
    No. The government's war on drugs created the opioid crisis.
    - unsnap_biceps 2y ago
      I don't think it created it, but it exasperated it to extreme levels.
    - EA-3167 2y ago
      I'm pretty sure that the Sackler family and Oxy did that.
- derbOac 2y ago
explain 2y ago
Interesting that NPR tries to brand the funding as if its for addiction and mental health care all throughout the article. For comparison, here's what CNN says: "These funds were largely used for Covid-19 testing, Covid-19 vaccination and Covid-19 global projects, according to HHS, including for community health workers focused on populations most at risk from Covid-19." And here's what the Trump administration says: "The COVID-19 pandemic is over, and HHS will no longer waste billions of taxpayer dollars responding to a non-existent pandemic that Americans moved on from years ago"
- lern_too_spel 2y ago
  This reporter is just incorrect, coming up with an incorrect story based on an incorrect Substack post. The Trump administration quote you pasted is in this article.
aaron695 2y ago
[dead]
toddwolf79 2y ago
Yes, a lot of these funds were initially allocated for COVID-related needs, but they were later redirected to address mental health, addiction, and homelessness — areas that are chronically underfunded and where demand has surged. I work closely with organizations providing these services, and none of them have the resources needed to fully meet the growing community needs. Despite that, they work tirelessly, and the impact of their work is immense. To put this into perspective: • These proposed cuts represent just 0.5% of the HHS budget ($11B out of $1.7T), yet they target some of our most critical safety net programs. • Cutting these services is incredibly risky — not just from a human impact perspective, but also economically. • Addiction and mental health crises drive massive costs to our already overloaded healthcare system. Without these programs, downstream costs to hospitals, law enforcement, and public health will skyrocket. • Criminal justice and public safety costs will increase. Untreated mental illness and substance use are strongly correlated with higher rates of incarceration, emergency interventions, and violent incidents, including mass shootings, where mental health is often a factor. These cuts may save dollars now, but they will almost certainly cost us far more down the road. And the human impact will be immeasurable.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

61 points by 6stringmerc 2y ago

derbOac 2y ago

Kinda undermines the arguments about fentanyl from Canada (as if those were believable to begin with).

rqtwteye 2y ago
It was never believable.
almosthere 2y ago
[flagged]
- meroes 2y ago
  Doesn’t the show My 600 lb Life show many serious food addictions being broken by expert medical care, which is not free?
  - almosthere 2y ago
    Those people will break an addiction for fame. When the show is over, they'll be back to eating.
    - meroes 2y ago
      So you believe these people can break their addiction, and that medical science has no way to leverage that chink in the armor?
      - almosthere 2y ago
        The carrot, which is massive fame, is not present when it's just a psychologist.
  - nh23423fefe 2y ago
    Doesn't the show demonstrate lots of people who don't lose weight and lie about their intake?
- lugvruzzle 2y ago
  What do you mean by 'addictions are not breakable with money'? Are you saying that medical intervention and healthcare are not effective for people suffering addiction?
  - nh23423fefe 2y ago
    Why do people relapse so often if medical intervention works? A doctor can set 1000 broken legs. Can they cure 1000 addicts?
    - lugvruzzle 2y ago
      well the goal of treating addiction is generally not to 'cure' it but to 'manage' it. If you can come up with a way of systematically helping populations of people manage their addictions without using money, I am all ears.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    Do you know it works? I’d be curious to know your prior—do you think medical interventions for behavioral problems typically work? We know, for example, that medical interventions to address obesity typically don’t work (without surgery). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8427732/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8427732/
    - xnx 2y ago
      > We know, for example, that medical interventions to address obesity typically don’t work (without surgery). This seems like a wild example to use given the runway success of GLP-1 drugs
      - rayiner 2y ago
        Sorry, I’m old and sometimes forget GLP-1 drugs exist now. But that’s kind of my point—those drugs seem like magic because medical interventions for obesity control were so extremely ineffective until just a couple of years ago. We don’t have anything akin to GLP-1 drugs for opiate addiction, or alcohol addiction, etc.
- xracy 2y ago
  "very wealthy NGO owners." Can you name a very wealth NGO owner that's not working with this administration. Or describe what you see as a problematic NGO? It's wild to me that people think NGO owners might be a problem when the richest man in the world is working with this administration to slash this budget arbitrarily. But I guess "deflect, deny, depose".
lazyant 2y ago
And the fentanyl "from Canada" story is because there was a seizure up north in the US and was attributed to come from Canada (but may as well be going the other way) and amount was like 0.1% of total apprehensions. Most of the illegal guns in Canada come from the US though.
orionsbelt 2y ago
Why? I can understand the argument that this administration is wrong and will make things worse, but I don't think they are inconsistent arguments. The right seems to be of the view that a policy closer to Singapore is smarter than that of, say, San Francisco. In other words, increase penalties/enforcement of drug importation and treat drug dealers harshly, instead of spending lots of money on services for drug users, which arguably just leads to enabling them to continue to lead the life of a drug addict. From my perspective, there's pros and cons to both approaches, but it's not unreasonable to look at a place like San Francisco and come away with the view that some of this funding is making things worse, not better, even for the addicts themselves.

rayiner 2y ago

> Trump administration announced abrupt cancellation and revocation of roughly $11.4 billion in COVID-era funding for grants linked to addiction, mental health and other programs. The federal budget jumped from $4.4 trillion in 2019 to $6.7 trillion in 2022. These were emergency programs passed when economies were shut down, threatening state governments. We can’t treat these emergency measures as permanent.

stonogo 2y ago
Why not? That's how we handled baggage fees after the 2008 recession. And the TSA and PATRIOT act after 9/11. And the Selective Service after World War II. And federal electrical production and the minimum wage after the Great Depression. And federal deposit insurance after the Great Depression. And the Federal Reserve after the panic of 1907.

rqtwteye 2y ago

I am all for efficiency and questioning what and how things are done. But this is just too heavy handed. I think DOGE is really not about efficiency but about reduction at any cost.

xnx 2y ago
> but about reduction at any cost. Destruction at any cost
dyauspitr 2y ago
It’s not reduction, it’s killing checks and balances.
chneu 2y ago
DOGE is about revenge. All of this is about sending a very clear message to certain people. The message is that intellectualism is under attack. Anyone going against what Trump and Co want is an enemy. That's it. It isn't complicated. When you view Trump this way his actions make much more sense.

bko 2y ago

I think too many people equate spending money to doing good, and everything is measured against today's prior projected spending levels. To put this in context: FY 2012: The SAMHSA budget authority was $3,386,903,000 FY 2024: The President's Budget Request was $10.8 billion, an increase of $3.3 billion from the 2023 Enacted level. That's about 9% increase every year. These programs didn't always exist and they have grown considerably over time while addiction and mental health have both gotten considerably worse during that period. I think it's worth re-evaluating to see if these programs are doing anything.

EA-3167 2y ago
Your premise here seems to be that these programs are somehow meant to "solve" addiction, when in reality they're mostly critically underfunded, understaffed, attempts to paper over multiple sucking chest wounds. The opioid crisis created a LOT of addicts, the rise of fentanyl is killing a lot of people, and combined with the mental health problems you tend to find in and around addict populations, this is a genuinely huge problem. Without a suitable mental health infrastructure, all you have left are the prisons, streets, and programs like this. I agree that this is an inefficient way to address the problem and that a major re-evaluation is required, but probably in quite the opposite way you mean it.
- MollyGodiva 2y ago
  No. The government's war on drugs created the opioid crisis.
  - unsnap_biceps 2y ago
    I don't think it created it, but it exasperated it to extreme levels.
  - EA-3167 2y ago
    I'm pretty sure that the Sackler family and Oxy did that.
derbOac 2y ago

explain 2y ago

Interesting that NPR tries to brand the funding as if its for addiction and mental health care all throughout the article. For comparison, here's what CNN says: "These funds were largely used for Covid-19 testing, Covid-19 vaccination and Covid-19 global projects, according to HHS, including for community health workers focused on populations most at risk from Covid-19." And here's what the Trump administration says: "The COVID-19 pandemic is over, and HHS will no longer waste billions of taxpayer dollars responding to a non-existent pandemic that Americans moved on from years ago"

lern_too_spel 2y ago
This reporter is just incorrect, coming up with an incorrect story based on an incorrect Substack post. The Trump administration quote you pasted is in this article.

aaron695 2y ago

[dead]

toddwolf79 2y ago

Yes, a lot of these funds were initially allocated for COVID-related needs, but they were later redirected to address mental health, addiction, and homelessness — areas that are chronically underfunded and where demand has surged. I work closely with organizations providing these services, and none of them have the resources needed to fully meet the growing community needs. Despite that, they work tirelessly, and the impact of their work is immense. To put this into perspective: • These proposed cuts represent just 0.5% of the HHS budget ($11B out of $1.7T), yet they target some of our most critical safety net programs. • Cutting these services is incredibly risky — not just from a human impact perspective, but also economically. • Addiction and mental health crises drive massive costs to our already overloaded healthcare system. Without these programs, downstream costs to hospitals, law enforcement, and public health will skyrocket. • Criminal justice and public safety costs will increase. Untreated mental illness and substance use are strongly correlated with higher rates of incarceration, emergency interventions, and violent incidents, including mass shootings, where mental health is often a factor. These cuts may save dollars now, but they will almost certainly cost us far more down the road. And the human impact will be immeasurable.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]