Fifth Time A Charm? Vulnerable User Bill Back Before Legislature

“Study after study reveals that more people would be willing to make more trips by bike or on foot if they felt they could do so without taking their lives in their hands.”  That comment at a legislative hearing by Kelly Kennedy, Executive Director of Bike Walk Connecticut, highlights the reason behind proposed legislation that would “help hold accountable careless drives who injure or kill non-motorized users of the road.”

Dubbed the “don’t hit me” bill, it is back for a fifth consecutive year at the State Capitol, endorsed by an array of 23 organizations.  In each of the past two years, it passed the Senate but was not considered by the House.  It recognizes that “vulnerable road users,” such as pedestrians, bicyclists, first responders, and highway workers need additional legal protections, and provides enhanced penalties for careless driving resulting in injury or death of a vulnerable road user.

The "Vulnerable User" bill:

• Provides for a fine of up to $1,000 for injuring or killing a vulnerable user due to careless driving; and
• Defines a vulnerable user as a pedestrian; cyclist; animal rider or driver; highway worker; farm tractor driver; user of a skateboard, roller or inline skates; user of a wheelchair or motorized chair; or blind person and his or her service animal.

The statistics behind the effort are clear:

• Careless drivers injure hundreds of people every year in Connecticut--130 pedestrians and cyclists were killed between 2010 and 2012 and approximately 1,400 pedestrians and cyclists are injured every year, according to Bike Walk Connecticut.  Between 2006 and 2012, there were more than 10,000 deaths or injuries.
• The League of American Bicyclists' top recommendation for Connecticut in its Bike Friendly State Report Card calls for Connecticut to "Adopt a vulnerable road user law that increases penalties for a motorist that injures or kills a bicyclist or pedestrian."  (CT's Bike Friendly State ranking was #18 in 2013.)

Nora Duncan, State Director of the Connecticut AARP, testified in support of the bill, noting that “an older pedestrian is 61 percent more likely to die from a crash than a younger pedestrian.”  The bill, she said, “could improve pedestrian safety by deterring negligent behavior that puts vulnerable uses at risk of injury or death.”  In a survey, 47 percent of people over age 50 in Connecticut said they felt they could not safely cross main roads close to their home.

The proposal was also supported by the State Department of Transportation, which suggested that the definition “be all encompassing to include all users such as persons on a legal non-motorized device” such as scooters and skateboards.  Transit for Connecticut, a statewide coalition of 33 business, social service, environmental, planning and civic organizations advocating the benefits of mass transit, supported a vulnerable user law indicating that “with emphasis on energy conversation and healthy lifestyles, the number of walkers and bicyclists is growing.  These residents, along with residents living in close proximity to bus stops and transit services need proper access if they want to use public transit.”

Kirsten Bechtel of the Yale School of Medicine’s Department of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, called for individuals who commit an infraction under the proposed law to “attend driver retraining and perform community service.”  In written testimony, she said that “vulnerable user laws in Oregon, Washington and Delaware include these requirements to ensure that drivers are held accountable and operate their vehicles safely in the future.”  Others, including the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, supported that idea.

Clinton resident Debbie Lundgren, in an email to the Transportation Committee, said succinctly, “pass the Vulnerable User Bill this year.  We have waited long enough!”

The  Committee is expected to consider SB 336 later this month.  If approved there, it would go on to the Senate for consideration.  A road well traveled.

Fuel Companies, Home Contractors Top List of Consumer Complaints in 2013

Complaints about home improvement contractors, the perennial front-runner among Connecticut consumers, were eclipsed in 2013 by complaints about fuel-related companies, according to the state Department of Consumer Protection (DCP).   The two categories made up nearly one-third of all consumer complaints to the department.

The agency’s annual “Top Ten” list of consumer complaints, based on  a review of more than 6,000 written consumer complaints received in 2013, saw fuel-related complaints rise to the top for the first time.   Fuel companies were the subject of 17.5 percent of consumer complaints, while home improvement contractors caused 14.5 percent of complaints fiiled during the year.

Telemarketing, retail and Internet complaints, real estate and auto dealer complaints retained their place on the list, and some business closures also led to increased complaints in some areas, officials said.  Telemarketing continued to rank third, as it has in recent years.

The state agency received a total of 6,008 written complaints in 2013, while the number of phoned-in complaints and questions numbered in the tens of thousands.  The areas included in the ten leading causes of consumer complaints accounted for nearly 60 percent of the written complaints during the year.

The Top Ten categories for consumer complaints received by DCP in 2013:

1. Fuel – gasoline, propane, oil  (17.5% of all complaints) –  The sudden closure of a home heating oil delivery company earlier last year helped to fuel a spike in consumer complaints involving fuel and fuel related categories. Gas pump “jumps,” bad or short firewood, gas pump signage and propane delivery were topics described in consumers’ complaints last year.  The agency is proposing legislation this year to further improve consumer protections under pre-paid fuel contracts.

2. Home improvement/New home (14.5%) – Up slightly from 2012, complaints about home improvement contractors and new home builders are common and typically involve issues such as unfinished work, improper contracts, damage to home or property, shoddy materials, non-return of deposit.  Contractors should be registered with the Department of Consumer Protection and consumer contracts should indicate that consumers have three business days to cancel the contract.

3. Telemarketing (7.6%) – This category often includes complaints about some entities not currently covered by the Do Not Call law, and includes complaints about numerous businesses flouting the Do Not Call law. Where a number can be traced to a Connecticut business, the Department enforces the Do Not Call law. However, non-traceable numbers, out of state and out of country numbers are provided to the Federal Trade Commission for enforcement. 

 4. General retail (5%) – These complaints involve bricks and mortar stores, and generally include problems with refunds, exchanges, warranties, rebates, advertising, or service.

5. Occupational trades (3.6%) – DCP investigates complaints related to the occupations that it regulates, including work performed by tradespersons such as plumbers, electricians, home inspectors, well drillers, heating and cooling contractors, and others.

 6. Real estate (3.3%) – DCP licenses and regulates real estate salespersons, brokers and appraisers, and it also responds to consumer complaints about contract errors, misleading advertising, buyer/seller agreement violations, alleged fraud, and property valuation.

7. Restaurant (2.3%) – In 2013, closures led to a spike in restaurant complaints which is not usually a major category of consumer complaints. A major wedding reception facility in the Hartford area closed, leaving brides-to-be without their deposits or a venue for their reception. Smaller restaurant closings and consumers’ subsequent loss of gift card value also contributed to a higher than normal complaint tally in 2013.

8. Internet Sales (2%) –  Problems in this category include include non-delivery of items or overcharges, companies that engage in repeat billings, unauthorized charges or ACH withdrawals, or that do not respond to “opt out” requests from consumers.

9. Auto Dealer  (1.8%) –  Issues include non-delivery of ordered vehicles, over-charges, warranties, rebates, advertising, or aggressive sales tactics.

10. Debt collection (less than 1%) –  Consumers report harassing behavior on the part of debt collectors. Sometimes consumers complain that they will not pay the debt for a service or product that doesn’t work.  Anyone who has a problem with something that they owe payments on must complain to the original seller about the problem, not to the debt collection agency, officials advised. Debt collectors are not allowed to be abusive, nor threaten any action that they cannot or will not reasonably undertake. Consumers have the right to dispute a debt in writing.

Connecticut Ranks #22 in Motor Vehicle Thefts; Rate Drops 3 Percent

Connecticut ranks #22 in the nation in motor vehicle thefts, with 238 thefts per 100,000 registered vehicles, a one-year drop of 3.3 percent, according to the most recent full-year data.

The District of Columbia had the greatest theft rate, with a total of 3,661 vehicles stolen and 322,350 registered vehicles in D.C.  That reflected a reduction in thefts of 18 percent in 2012 as compared with 2011, but still outdistanced all 50 states.

Rounding out the top 10 states with the highest rate of car thefts were California, Nevada, Washington, Maryland, Georgia, Arizona, South Carolina and Oklahoma.  Among the New England states, Rhode Island ranked #12, Massachusetts was #34, Maine was #47, New Hampshire was #49 and Vermont was #51, with 435 thefts and 606,941 registered vehicles – the lowest rate in the nation.

In Connecticut in 2012 there were 6,449 motor vehicle thefts.  The state has 2,706,459 registered vehicles.

The data was compiled by Bloomberg.com based on information from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports, and U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration.

According to data compiled by the FBI and provided by the Criminal Justice Information Services Division:

• There were an estimated 721,053 thefts of motor vehicles nationwide in 2012. The estimated rate of motor vehicle thefts was 229.7 per 100,000 inhabitants, placing Connecticut’s car theft rate  just above the national average.
• The estimated number of motor vehicle thefts increased 0.6 percent in 2012 when compared with the 2011 estimates, but declined 24.8 percent when compared to the 2008 estimates, and 42.8 percent when compared to the 2003 estimates.
• More than $4.3 billion was lost nationwide to motor vehicle thefts in 2012. The average dollar loss per stolen vehicle was $6,019.
• In 2012, of all motor vehicles stolen, 73.9 percent were automobiles.

Drive for More Electric Vehicles Continues to Gain Support, Funding in CT

The advance of electric cars continues, as does Connecticut’s encouragement of the trend.

The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) and the Connecticut Automotive Retailers Association (CARA) will recognize state automobile dealers who sell or lease the highest number of electric vehicles (EVs) between February 1 and July 31, 2014 with the first ever “Connecticut Revolutionary Dealer Award.”  One award will be presented to the dealer that sells or leases the highest number of new EVs – including plug-in hybrids – and the other will go to the dealer who sells or leases the most EVs as a percentage of total sales during the period.

The announcement this week follows by just a few months the agreement by eight states representing nearly a quarter of U.S. auto sales – including Connecticut - to promote infrastructure and take other steps to increase the number of electric- and hydrogen-fueled cars, trucks and buses on the roads. The states involved are Connecticut, California, New York, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont.

By developing standards for charging stations, expanding financial incentives to buy the cars and lowering consumer electric rates, the states hope to make the vehicles more appealing, The goal is 3.3 million non-polluting cars on the road by 2025. Zero-emission vehicles include battery-electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel-cell-electric vehicles

State Funding Leads to More Charging Stations

State officials said that Connecticut is leading the nation in developing ways to encourage residents and businesses to buy electric and other zero-emission vehicles when making transportation purchases.  Since July 2013, the state has provided $177,600 to 48 towns, businesses, and schools to build 75 electric vehicle charging stations throughout the state.  It is estimated there are already more than 164 publicly available charging stations in Connecticut, including many located at auto dealers.

The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection provides an up-to-date list of all the charging stations in Connecticut, as well as those near the state’s border in neighboring states.  Just over 50 of Connecticut’s 169 communities have at least one charging station.  Both Hartford and New Haven each have nine stations. Stamford has six, Bridgeport has one, Waterbury has none, according to the January 2014 data from DEEP.

Nationally, automakers are under pressure from the federal government to increase the average mileage of the vehicles they sell. Zero-emission vehicles are also supposed to make up at least 15% of sales by 2025. The Electric Drive Transportation Association told CNN Money said the market for electric and hybrid vehicles is growing steadily, especially as word of mouth spreads from satisfied customers.

 Electric vehicles are “a ‘win-win’ for our state because they can cut costs for motorists while improving our environment and public health,” said interim DEEP Commissioner Ronald Klee.  “Cars and trucks burning gasoline and diesel are one of the largest sources of harmful air pollution and greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.” Expanding the number of publicly available charging stations in Connecticut is critical to meeting the goals of the eight-state agreement.”

Electric cars are powered entirely by an electric motor supplied by a large battery.  Unlike traditional hybrid cars, electric cars do not have a gasoline engine; they are “fueled” by plugging into an electric charging station.  A plug-in hybrid electric vehicle has an electric motor, an internal combustion engine and a plug to connect to the electrical grid.

The Connecticut Automotive Retailers Association is a statewide trade association representing over 250 franchised new car and truck dealerships primarily engaged in the retail sale of new and used motor vehicles, both foreign and domestically produced.

Last fall, Luis Ramírez, CEO of GE Energy Industrial Solutions joined Governor Malloy in unveiling the GE Electric Vehicle (EV) Solar Carport in Plainville.  The project, one of the most expansive undertakings of its type in North America, uses GE’s new smart EV Charging Stations to charge electric vehicles.  DEEP’s stated goal, former Commissioner Dan Esty said at the time, is to provide “publicly accessible EV charging stations within a 15-minute driving radius of any location in Connecticut.”

U.S. electric car sales have more than tripled from 17,000 in 2011 to 52,000 in 2012, according to data from the DEEP. Motorists bought more than 40,000 plug-in cars in the first six months of 2013, the most recent data available.

Connecticut Talks Issues at Forums, Conferences Across State

The Connecticut legislature, now underway for 2014, is not the only place for conversation on key issues impacting Connecticut.  A range of news organizations, nonprofits, associations and community-based groups are sponsoring forums, summits and sessions to better-inform the public and bring interest and attention to specific issues.  Among them:

February 10  - Hartford’s Edgy Arts, Mark Twain House & Museum

The Hartford area attracts an array of creative people from actors to musicians, poets to painters.  What is it that so draws artists?  What to they need to flourish here?  A discussion of the creative economy, in the Capitol City.  Refreshments at 5:30; panel discussion at 6:15.  Advance articles published in The Hartford Courant; a program of Hartford Young Professionals & Entrepreneurs (HYPE), FOX Connecticut and The Hartford Courant.

February 20 - Pay-for-Success Informational Conference, Legislative Office Building

National leaders from the emerging field of Pay for Success will be speaking, with a focus on three key elements: 1) Offering high-quality preventative services; 2) Requiring rigorous measurement of results; and 3) Capturing savings or avoided costs. The 2014 Pay-for-Success (PFS) Informational Conference, 10:00-12:30 PM, will offer interested stakeholders the chance to discuss the field with leaders from around the country, while hearing about projects underway in the areas of early childhood, juvenile recidivism, health care and workforce development.  Sponsoring organizations include BlumShapiro, Connecticut Institute for the 21^st Century, Capitol Region Council of Governments, Connecticut Center for Social Innovation, Community Impact Strategies Ltd, and Connecticut Association for Human Services.

February 24 -  The Knowledge Economy; Connecticut Conference of Independent Colleges, CT Mirror, Quinnipiac University

Connecticut is home to almost 50 colleges and universities and has created an industry in surrounding towns and cities. What is expected as we continue into the 21st Century? Join the Connecticut Conference of Independent Colleges and The Connecticut Mirror in the lively discussion, "The Knowledge Economy," on Monday, Feb. 24 , from 7-9 p.m., in the auditorium at the Quinnipiac University Frank H. Netter MD School of Medicine. This event is free and open to the public. No registration is necessary.  Panelists include Sal Filardi - Vice President, Facilities & Capital Planning, Quinnipiac University; Rich Jacob - Vice President for Federal and State Relations, Yale University; Todd Andrews - Vice President for Economic & Strategic Development, Goodwin College and Jeff Seemann - Vice President for Research, UCONN.

February 26 - Vital Voices in Entrepreneurship, Goodwin College

A special speaker series focused on the first-hand perspectives of leaders making a mark in business and the community. The next event at Goodwin College's Community Room on February 26 will feature Stew Leonard, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of the unique, family-owned and operated farm fresh stores, Stew Leonard's. The keynote address will commence at 6:00 p.m., preceded by a networking reception at 5:00 p.m. with wine, beer and hors d'oeuvres.

February 28 – Retrofitting Our Towns:  Can We Add Density, Affordability and Walk-ability to Help Municipalities Survive…And Thrive?  The Lyceum, Hartford

Can suburbs and smaller towns reshape and respond to the demographic, economic and lifestyle pressures of the 21^st Century?  One of the nation’s leading experts – Lynn Richards of the EPA Office of Smart Growth – assesses four Connecticut municipalities and offers lessons for all the others.  Program 9:00-111:00 AM.  Sponsored by the Connecticut Main Street Center, Partnership for Strong Communities and the American Planning Association - Connecticut.

March  7  - An Honest Look at Mental Illness, Connecticut Forum, The Bushnell

The Connecticut Forum presents a conversation about perceptions, realities, and what it’s like to work and live with the stigma of mental illness.  Panelists include journalist and mental health advocate Andrew Solomon, Dr. Hank Schwartz, Chief of Psychiatry at Hartford’s Institute of Living, former NBA player Royce White and bipolar disorder authority Dr. Kay Redfield Jamison.   Founded in 1992, The Connecticut Forum is a one-of-a-kind 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization serving Connecticut and beyond with live, unscripted panel discussions among renowned experts and celebrities, and community outreach programs including the award-winning Connecticut Youth Forum.

March 14 – Hartford Business Journal Municipal Collaboration Summit, Goodwin College

An opportunity to learn about the benefits of collaboration which save money and leverage the purchases and agreements for towns.  The event will highlight people that are already implementing positive changes.   Panel discussions, workshops and Q&A with key leaders and a panel of experts.

March 26 - Student Debt and Financial Aid: What (if anything) can we do?, Southern Connecticut State University

Sponsored by the Center for Higher Education Retention Excellence, 9AM-3PM, at Southern Connecticut State University, featuring Sandy Baum, Research Professor of Education at the George Washington School of Education and Human Development and Senior Fellow at the Urban Institute, and  panel of Connecticut financial aid directors (representing a public university, community college and private college) and a student panel.  Registration now available; limit 75 attendees.

Health Risks of Flame-Retardant Chemicals Require Policy Changes in CT, Nation, Report Says

The 2014 session of the Connecticut General Assembly is expected to include consideration of legislation designed to protect the public from potential health risks of flame retardant chemicals that are present in many consumer products.  Such a proposal, currently being developed, comes following a report from North Haven-based Environment and Human Health Inc. (EHHI), an organization of physicians and public health professionals, that calls on state and federal governments to institute new policies to protect the public from flame-retardant exposures that the researchers say “pose health risks to fetuses, infants, children and the human population as a whole.”

The comprehensive 107-page report, “Flame Retardants: The Case for Policy Change,” closely examines the health risks that flame-retardants pose to the general population and recommends sweeping policy changes to protect the public.

"It has become clear that flame-retardants are proving to be a health risk to both the human population and the environment,” said Nancy Alderman, president of Environment and Human health, Inc. “It is time for flame-retardants to be removed from all low fire-risk situations and products. As well, a certification program should be established where manufacturers certify the absence of flame-retardants, just as organic food programs certify the absence of pesticides.”

The report examines the history of flame-retardants and demonstrates the enormous scope of the problem, noting that flame-retardants “are now ubiquitous in our environment.”  The history of flame-retardant use in the United States is a story of substituting one dangerous flame-retardant for another, the report outlines. The country lived through decades when asbestos was used as a fire-retardant. Then when asbestos was proven too dangerous to be used, the country moved over to PCBs, and five decades later, when PCBs were deemed too dangerous for use, the country moved on to chlorinated and brominated flame-retardants.

The report points out that “the labeling of flame-retardant chemicals in consumer products is NOT required by Congress, EPA, FDA or the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  It is therefore impossible for consumers to avoid flame-retardants in their purchases.”  Sources of exposure cited in the report include carpets, mattresses, children’s and baby products, furniture, and electronics. 

In the 1970s, a flame-retardant called "Tris" was added to children's sleepwear. Tris was later found not only to be carcinogenic but also capable of being absorbed through the skin. Tris was finally banned in children's sleepwear in 1977, according to the report.  Tris is still used in many other infant products, such as crib mattresses, changing tables, nap mats, and infant car seats, the report indicated.

"Tris was, and remains, carcinogenic," said Dr. D. Barry Boyd, oncologist at Greenwich Hospital and Affiliate Member of the Yale Cancer Center.  There is ample evidence concerning the health risks from Tris to conclude that it should be removed from all infant products."

John Wargo, Ph.D., first author of the report and the Tweedy-Ordway Professor of Environmental Health and Political Science at Yale University, said, "Flame-retardants are not required to undergo health and environmental testing, and they are not required to be labeled on the products that contain them. Because exposures to flame-retardants carry health risks, they should only be used when the risk of fire outweighs the risk from flame-retardant exposures. When risk from fire is high, such as in airplanes, then the use of flame-retardants is warranted; when the risk from fire is low, flame-retardants should not be used."

Recent toxicological studies demonstrate that flame-retardants pose the greatest risk to the normal growth and development of fetuses, infants and children. "Manufacturers should start labeling their products so that consumers can understand when flame-retardants have been added," said Dr. Andrea Asnes, associate professor of pediatrics at the Yale School of Medicine.

Environment and Human Health, Inc. (EHHI) is a non-profit organization composed of physicians, public health professionals and policy experts, dedicated to protecting human health from environmental harms. EHHI does not receive any funds from businesses or corporations.   The organization’s mission is “to conduct research to identify environmental harms affecting human populations, promote public education concerning the relationships between the environment and human health, and promote policies in all sectors that ensure the protection of human and environmental health with fairness and timeliness.

By promoting effective communication of environmental health risks to those exposed and to responsible public and private officials, EHHI hopes to empower individuals and groups to take control over the quality of their environment and be more protective of themselves and their families.  The report was issued in November 2013.  Among the recommendations :

• States should pass laws that protect their citizens from flame-retardant exposures.  Industry will always work to pre-empt states’ legal authority to set safety standards that are more stringent than those adopted by the federal government. States should have the right to protect their citizens when the federal government fails to do so.
• States should restrict flame-retardants in infant and toddler products.  Recent toxicological studies show that flame-retardants pose the greatest risk to the normal growth and development of fetuses, infants and children. Infants and small children’s body weight is so low that their exposures to flame retardants, in relation to their body weight, is simply too great. The health risks that all infants and children are experiencing, due to the federal law mandating that flame retardants be in many of their products, far outweigh the risk of fire.
• States should require that products containing flame-retardants be labeled.  Any product containing a flame-retardant should be labeled as such. Labels should include which flame-retardant has been used.
• States should promote fire-prevention programs.  States should invigorate their fire prevention programs. Promotion of fire prevention is the most effective, least expensive, least environmentally damaging priority our nation could pursue to reduce loss of health, life and property from fires. States should promote low-cost and highly effective early warning technologies. Smoke alarms save lives. They should be available to all, regardless of income status.
• States should offer opportunities to recycle electronic products.  Foam that contains flame-retardants remains a problem for landfills. State and local governments have primary responsibility for managing the disposal of solid and hazardous wastes. Most solid wastes in Connecticut are disposed of via incineration, but some are still placed in landfills. The broad failure to effectively recycle electronics, building materials, auto plastics and foam means that most products containing flame-retardants are released to the environment at the end of their life-cycle.

State Mental Health Budgets, Cut During Recession, Increase After Newtown Tragedy, Report Finds

State mental health budgets were gutted during the recession, according to a report issued by the National Alliance on Mental Health (NAMI), and are only now beginning to return to previous levels in most states, even as mental health needs are becoming better known and growing.

“With reductions totaling $4.35 billion from FY2009 to FY2012, public mental health systems struggled to meet rising demand with diminishing resources,” the report indicated. Then, the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown on December 14, 2012 provided “a major impetus for lawmakers to propose legislation which would impact children and adults living with mental illness,” the 63-page report indicated.

Nearly 60 million Americans experience a mental health condition every year, according to the organization. Regardless of race, age, religion or economic status, mental illness impacts the lives of at least one in four adults and one in 10 children across the United States.

NAMI is the nation’s largest grassroots mental health organization.  NAMI advocates for access to services, treatment, supports and research and is steadfast in its commitment to raise awareness and build a community for hope for all of those in need.

“Realizing the risks of failure to provide adequate public mental health services, governors and legislatures in many states began the process of restoring state mental health budgets,” according to the report, “Trends, Themes & Best Practices in State Mental Health Legislation.”

The report concludes that “Dramatic changes in American healthcare finance and delivery systems combine with an improving economy and a growing array of best practices to provide a window of opportunity in the next few years to transform the mental health system and integrate care across systems.”

In addition, NAMI recommends that “advocates and policy makers should continue the work of building the mental health system of the future, one in which mental illness is identified as it emerges and an array of proven, cost-effective services are available as needed to provide children, youth and adults with the mental health care they need to stabilize, recover and live healthy lives.”

Looking ahead to the 2014 state legislative sessions, NAMI issued a series of recommendations including:

• Actively engage in outreach and enrollment
• Increase integrated care
• Increase the mental health workforce capacity
• Identify mental illness and intervene early
• Build the bridge from Medicaid to private health coverage
• Increase access to supported employment services
• Increase housing with supportive services
• Increase justice system diversion strategies
• Comply with mental health parity
• Expand Medicaid

Most states either increased or maintained state mental health authority budgets at current levels during 2013 legislative sessions. Of special note, the report indicated, is Texas which allocated a $259 million increase over the previous biennial budget, the largest mental health budget improvement in the state’s history. South Carolina reversed previous cuts to its mental health budget while Illinois restored $32 million that had been cut in 2011 due to an administrative error. In California, an additional $143 million was allocated to create crisis and triage positions throughout the state.

The report stated that “A tipping point on the heels of several recent mass shootings, the Newtown tragedy shaped the debate about the lack of access to mental health services and the barriers that many families and individuals face in light of the nation’s fragmented and grossly inadequate mental health system.”

After the Newtown tragedy NAMI advocated for policies supporting early identification and intervention, training for school personnel, families and the public, mental health services in schools and increased access to care.

The report highlights actions by states in 2013 in areas including mental health system monitoring, early identification and mental health screening, services for transitional youth, school mental health training and services, mental health facilities and suicide prevention.  Also included are elements of state legislation in law enforcement areas such as juvenile justice, incarceration and the courts.  A final section looks at stigma reduction efforts in the states.

Mental illnesses are medical conditions that disrupt a person's thinking, feeling, mood, ability to relate to others and daily functioning. Mental illnesses are medical conditions that often result in a diminished capacity for coping with the ordinary demands of life.  Serious mental illnesses include major depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), panic disorder, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and borderline personality disorder.

Connecticut resident Marilyn Ricci, a past president of NAMI Connecticut, serves on the national NAMI Board of Directors, and is on the board of NAMI Farmington Valley in Connecticut, which she helped found in 2004.  Kevin Sullivan, a former Connecticut Lieutenant Governor currently serving as Commissioner of Revenue Services, is a past Board member of the organization. The state legislative report was issued on October 28, 2013.

CT Spending on Tobacco Prevention Goes Up in Smoke; E-Cigarettes Raise New Public Concerns

Fifteen years after the landmark state tobacco settlement in which Connecticut played a key role, the state now ranks 34th in the nation – down from 23rd a year ago - in funding programs to prevent youth from smoking and help smokers quit, according to a national report by a coalition of public health organizations.

In the current fiscal year, Connecticut is spending s $3 million on tobacco prevention and cessation programs, which is 6.8 percent of the $43.9 million recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Other key findings for Connecticut include:

• Connecticut this year will collect $466.1 million in revenue from the 1998 tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes, but will spend just 0.6 percent of it on tobacco prevention programs. This means Connecticut is spending less than a penny of every dollar in tobacco revenue to fight tobacco use.
• Connecticut has cut funding for tobacco prevention programs in half, from $6 million last year to the current $3 million; from 13.7 percent of the CDC recommended spending level down to 6.8 percent.
• The tobacco companies spend $78.1 million a year to market their products in Connecticut. This is 26 times what the state spends on tobacco prevention.

The annual report on states' funding of tobacco prevention programs, titled "A Broken Promise to Our Children: The 1998 State Tobacco Settlement 15 Years Later," was released by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Lung Association, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights.

The report comes as evidence increases that tobacco prevention and cessation programs work to reduce smoking, save lives and save money. Florida, which has a well-funded, sustained tobacco prevention program, reduced its high school smoking rate to just 8.6 percent in 2013, far below the national rate.  One study found that during the first 10 years of its tobacco prevention program, Washington state saved more than $5 in tobacco-related hospitalization costs for every $1 spent on the program.

In Connecticut, 15.9 percent of high school students smoke, and 2,900 more kids become regular smokers each year, the organizations in the coalition pointed out. Tobacco annually claims 4,700 lives and costs the state $1.6 billion in health care bills, officials said.

"Connecticut once again is one of the most disappointing states when it comes to protecting kids from tobacco and needs to increase its investment in tobacco prevention," said Matthew L. Myers, President of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. "Tobacco prevention is a smart investment that saves lives and saves money by reducing tobacco-related health care costs. States are being truly penny-wise and pound-foolish when they shortchange tobacco prevention programs."

In 1997, when the settlement was announced, then-Attorney General Richard Blumenthal - a key negotiator in the tobacco settlement talks – described the accord as “a sweeping public health initiative to protect children from the lure of tobacco, save lives, and reimburse states for billions of taxpayer dollars spent on tobacco-related illnesses.”

The national report assesses whether the states have kept their promise to use a significant portion of their settlement funds – estimated to total $246 billion over the first 25 years – to fight tobacco use.  The states also collect billions more each year from tobacco taxes. Tobacco use is the number one cause of preventable death in the U.S., killing more than 400,000 people and costing $96 billion in health care bills each year.  Nationally, about 18 percent of adults and 18.1 percent of high school students smoke.

The report reveals that most states are failing to adequately fund tobacco prevention and cessation programs. Key national findings of the report include:

The states this year will collect $25 billion from the tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes, but will spend just 1.9 percent of it – $481.2 million – on tobacco prevention programs. This means the states are spending less than two cents of every dollar in tobacco revenue to fight tobacco use.

States are falling woefully short of the CDC's recommended funding levels for tobacco prevention programs.  Altogether, the states have budgeted just 13 percent of the $3.7 billion the CDC recommends. Only two states – Alaska and North Dakota – currently fund tobacco prevention programs at the CDC-recommended level.

Public Expresses Concern Over E-Cigarettes

Within days of the report on tobacco prevention efforts, a national survey reflected public concerns about a new and increasingly popular alternative to traditional cigarettes, called e-cigarettes.  Adults nationwide are concerned about the use of e-cigarettes by children and teens, with 44 percent indicating worries that the devices will encourage kids to use tobacco products, according to a new poll from the University of Michigan.

According to the latest University of Michigan Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health, nearly half of parents are concerned their child will try e-cigarettes, which are battery-operated devices that look like cigarettes but don't burn tobacco.  E-cigarettes have replaceable cartridges of liquid containing nicotine, which is inhaled as a vapor along with flavors like chocolate, fruit, candy or even tobacco.

"This poll shows high levels of concern about e-cigarettes and the possibility that kids who try them could start smoking tobacco," says Matthew M. Davis, M.D., M.A.P.P., director of the C.S. Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health.

In the poll, which was administered in November 2013 to 2,124 adults age 18 and over, arguments were presented both for and against e-cigarettes.  Then adults were asked for their opinions about the devices and possible regulations and laws.

Advocates of e-cigarettes say they are a healthier alternative to tobacco smoking and argue it may help smokers to quit.  Critics counter that e-cigarettes may have health risks and may encourage people and kids or teens to smoke tobacco. Currently, e-cigarettes are not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Twenty-six states have regulations prohibiting sale to minors; Michigan's legislature currently has bills pending that prohibit those sales.

In the poll, 86% of adults said they have heard of e-cigarettes, while only 13% have ever tried one. Among parents, 48 percent said they are very or somewhat concerned that their children will try e-cigarettes.  Meanwhile, 65% of adults think e-cigarettes should have health warnings like tobacco cigarettes and nicotine products.

Adults also expressed widespread support for new laws regarding e-cigarettes: 88% think manufacturers should be required to test e-cigarettes for safety and 86% favor prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes to minors. 71% of adults support restricting the marketing of e-cigarettes on social networking sites.

"E-cigarettes are a relatively new product, with little information about safety or long-term health effects. However, the public is clearly aware of the devices and concerned about their impact, according to this month's poll results," says Davis, who is professor of pediatrics and internal medicine at the U-M Medical School and professor of public policy at U-M's Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy. "In 2010, the poll also asked about e-cigarettes and at that time only one-third of adults had heard of the product. In this poll, that number jumped to 86 percent."

Earlier this year, CT by the Numbers reported that state Attorney General George Jepson and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal were among those calling for regulation of e-cigarettes.

Percentage of Drivers Age 85 and Older: Connecticut Leads USA

Connecticut has more than double the percentage of licensed drivers age 85 and older than any other state in the nation, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

In the Land of Steady Habits, 5.1 percent of all drivers – a total of 152,233 people – were age 85 or older, ranking Connecticut at the top of the state-by-state ranking.  The second place state, Maine, had 2.34 percent of its licensed drivers in that demographic.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reports that 29 states and the District of Columbia have additional license renewal procedures for older drivers, often age 65 or 70 and older.  In Connecticut, people 65 and older may choose a 2-year or 6-year renewal cycle. A personal appearance at renewal generally is required. Upon a showing of hardship, people 65 and older may renew by mail. There are no additional requirements for older drivers, according to the Insurance Institute.

Bloomberg ranked the U.S. states and the District of Columbia on the percentage of licensed drivers ages 85 and older, using data from the Federal Highway Administration.  (The data was for 2011, the most recent year available.)

The Age 85+ Rankings (percent of licensed drivers)

1.  Connecticut        5.10%
2. Maine                   2.34%
3.  Alabama              2.23%
4. Vermont              2.22%
5.  Minnesota          2.11%
6. New York            2.09%
7. Nebraska             2.02%
8.   South Dakota     1.99%
9.  Florida                  1.98%
10. Pennsylvania     1.98%

Rhode Island ranked #11, New Jersey was #15, Massachusetts was #17 and New Hampshire was #28 among states in our region.

Although they only account for about 9 percent of the population, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration statistics show senior drivers account for 14 percent of all traffic fatalities and 17 percent of all pedestrian fatalities, ABC News reported last year.

The network cited a report by Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety that found the rate of deaths involving drivers 75 to 84 is about three per million miles driven – on par with teen drivers. Once they pass age 85, vehicular fatality rates jump to nearly four times that of teens.  The Insurance Institute reports that the increased fatal crash risk among older drivers is largely due to their increased susceptibility to injury, particularly chest injuries, and medical complications, rather than an increased tendency to get into crashes.

An Institute study of a Florida vision test requirement for drivers 80 and older found that 80 percent of those eligible to renew their licenses attempted to do so, and 7 percent of them were denied renewal because they failed the vision test. Of those who did not seek renewal, about half said they thought they would fail the vision test.

Newtown High School Students Win International Public Health Education Contest

Each year, about 3.5 million children die before their 5th birthday due to preventable diseases, mainly diarrhea and acute respiratory diseases.   According to survey data from the Global School-based Student Health Survey, over 15 percent of schoolchildren in some countries say they rarely or never wash their hands before eating.

Those facts spurred a group of Newtown High School student to action.  They participated in the World Health Organization’s Touching Lives School Talent International Contest.  The one-minute educational video they produced was selected by a jury of international experts as the winning entry in the middle/high school age category (age 10-16) and was the only United States-based entry to win its category.

The Newtown Public Health class submitted the video at the start of the school year, and it was selected this fall among the winners in various age categories.  Their video now appears on the website of the Pan American Health Organization, and has begun to appear on other public health websites, including the Connecticut Public Health Association.  It was designed, written and produced in the opening weeks of school, just prior to  the mid-September entry deadline.

Experts point out that “just rinsing your hands is not washing.” In order for hands to be clean, soap and water must be used, for at least 20 seconds. Handwashing with soap is the most effective and inexpensive way to prevent diarrheal and acute respiratory infections. Together, they are responsible for the majority of all child deaths, officials report.

Turning handwashing with soap before eating and after using the toilet into an ingrained habit could save more lives than any single vaccine or medical intervention, cutting deaths from diarrhea by almost half and deaths from acute respiratory infections by one-quarter, experts predict.  They also point out that a vast change in handwashing behavior is critical to meeting the Millennium Development Goal of reducing deaths among children under the age of five by two-thirds by 2015.

The educational video is preceded with the words “A Message from Newtown High School’s Public Health Class” filling the screen. It then begins with a male student gently singing over a strumming guitar, reminding viewers of the importance of hand-washing in rhyming lyrics, including urging viewers to “always think, 20 seconds at the sink.”  The video then features a variety of voices repeating “20 seconds” in nearly a dozen world languages.  It concludes by suggesting “don’t be part of the problem, be part of the solution.”

The video was edited by Amylee Anyoha.  Students in the Newtown High Public Health Class included Jess Amante, Maddie Erhardt, Enea Musaka, Sarah Craig, Kelly O’Connell, Chris Beaurline, Sydney Allen, Gabby Durkin, Tim Krapf, Amanda Paige, Taylor Strolli and Heather McKeown.

In the 2013 #TouchingLives School Talent International Contest, students could work individually or in a group, and all the countries in the Americas, were eligible and encouraged to develop songs, videos, illustrations, written compositions or any other expression of art promoting hand washing. The contest was, according to organizers, “about giving your personal touch to change the world.”