As the Omicron variant surges in Pennsylvania and affects people’s health and economic security, a new assistance program aims to help residents of the Commonwealth pay their water bills.
This week, Pennsylvania launched the Low Income Household Water Assistance Program, a federally funded service to help households struggling to pay their water bills on time. The state received $43.2 million through the American Rescue Plan for the program.
Meg Snead, acting secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, said access to clean drinking water and wastewater services is key to helping families live healthy lives.
“This program is for those who have past due water bills, had their service terminated or received a notice that their service will be terminated in the next 60 days,” she said. “Grants are issued directly to water-service providers, and families must meet income requirements.”
More information is available online at dhs.pa.gov/waterhelp. People can also visit a DHS county assistance office for support in person. Households can receive one grant of up to $2,500 for their water bills, and one grant of the same amount for wastewater services.
Gladys Brown Dutrieuille, who chairs the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, said consumers also should be having direct conversations with their utility providers to determine what assistance they might be eligible for to ensure essential services stay on.
“We know that there are households across the state facing the uncertainty and the stress of worrying about their utility bills,” she said, “including some who’ve never had to experience these problems before.”
Residents also may be eligible for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, to help pay gas and electric bills.
get more stories like this via email
A coalition working to expand Medicaid in South Dakota this week announced petitions have been approved to get the question onto the fall ballot – and new polling suggests registered voters around the state are likely to vote “yes.”
In the new AARP poll, eight in 10 South Dakotans age 50 and older say they support the idea. Overall, 65% of respondents said they’re likely to back that up with a “yes” vote. AARP South Dakota diector Erik Gaikowski said support is found among people of all political leanings, and added that they don’t want to see federal tax dollars keep going to states that already have expanded — “$1.3 billion in tax dollars that we want to bring back to South Dakota to expand Medicaid, rather than going to a New York, a California or North Dakota.”
Incentives for expansion were first offered under the Affordable Care Act, with the federal government covering most of the costs. Twelve states have yet to expand their Medicaid programs. Cost concerns about what states could have to pay are common in these debates, but supporters say that money is already spent in other ways, including for uncompensated health care.
In South Dakota, some state lawmakers are pushing to raise the approval threshold for ballot questions. Even if they succeed, Gaikowski said he feels the poll results show that wouldn’t be a major obstacle. He added that Medicaid expansion would come at a critical time for health-care systems.
“We know that 14 rural health-care systems are in danger of closing in South Dakota,” he said. “By passing Medicaid expansion, those those rural healthcare systems are likely not going to close.”
The closure warning comes from a national group that monitors the status of rural health systems. AARP said the poll was conducted last fall, and reached 1,000 registered voters across the state. The coalition behind the ballot initiative says an expansion would provide health coverage to 40,000 more South Dakotans, and the federal government would cover 90% of expansion costs.
Disclosure: AARP South Dakota contributes to our fund for reporting on Health Issues, Senior Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Brown University researchers found in Connecticut’s efforts to combat climate change, electric and gas utilities spent the most on climate and energy lobbying at the Capitol.
Between 2013 and 2020, utilities spent $24 million, much more than renewable energy firms or environmental groups. Testimony opposing environmental legislation was mostly made by utilities, along with heating oil and alternative fuel companies and business associations.
Galen Hall, researcher in the Climate and Development Lab at Brown University and the report’s co-author, said in testimony, however, they are not arguing against the existence of climate change.
“Certain industry groups will show up in the largest numbers once their direct interest is at stake,” Hall reported. “For instance, heating oil and alternative fuel sellers showed up to testify against carbon pricing in large numbers and then not so much for the other kinds of legislation.”
Over an eight-year period, only 16% of climate and energy bills introduced in Connecticut became law. Brown’s Climate and Development Lab conducted similar research in Rhode Island and Massachusetts.
The report also offered recommendations to move the needle on addressing climate change within the state Legislature.
Trevor Culhane, also a researcher at Brown and co-author of the report, said it is important for lawmakers to evaluate the political influence utilities have in Connecticut.
“We know that utilities, their rates are set by the public,” Culhane observed. “They have guaranteed public monopolies. But they use the profits from those rates, in many instances, to block or oppose climate legislation. So adjusting their political power and influence in the state is something that we see is really important.”
Nearly 92% of written testimony in the state analyzed in the report was in support of climate legislation, with testifiers speaking favorably on banning fracking waste, encouraging electric vehicles, and limiting new natural-gas infrastructure.
get more stories like this via email
Missouri ranks 34th in the nation for broadband coverage and speed, with more than 330,000 residents lacking broadband access, but now, agencies hope federal funds coming into the state will help.
Missouri is set to receive at least $100 million to build out broadband from the bipartisan infrastructure law.
Paul Eisenstein, director for strategy and performance for the Missouri Department of Economic Development, said so much is being done online since the pandemic began, including work, school, telemedicine, public hearings and so on, it is important to ensure technical assistance is available.
“On the adoption side, this is really around digital literacy and making sure that Missourians have the skills to really connect to our digital economy,” Eisenstein asserted.
The infrastructure funding added to the $400 million dollars Gov. Mike Parson had already planned to use from the American Rescue Plan for broadband buildout. More than a quarter of Missouri residents will also be eligible for a program helping low-income households pay for service.
According to Pew Research Center, just over 70% of people living in rural areas have a broadband connection at home, and white adults are more likely to have access, and to own a home desktop or laptop computer.
Eisenstein argued it is especially important to get funding to underserved areas of the state.
“You also may see some efforts around cell phone towers, especially in areas where maybe fiber to the home isn’t an option,” Eisenstein outlined. “There might be an opportunity to build or to retrofit cell towers on public lands so that no matter where you are, where you work or where you live, you have access to high-quality internet.”
The U.S. ranks 27th in the world for access to high-speed internet, according to the consulting firm Kepios, and ‘speedtest.net’ ranks the U.S. 14th in the world for the speed of mobile and broadband connections.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
