Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Health Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Health advocates urge caution as committee considers changes to Delaware Health Fund process
Summary
Senate Bill 296 would streamline allocation of Delaware Health Fund dollars by shifting parts of the grant process to DHSS and using a Division of Public Health request-for-proposal framework; lung, heart and cancer advocacy groups testified in respectful opposition, citing reduced public oversight and no guarantees for tobacco control funding.
Senate Bill 296, presented to the Senate Health and Social Services Committee, would standardize the process for allocating proceeds in the Delaware Health Fund (payments from the 1998 tobacco master settlement) by directing the Division of Public Health within DHSS to manage request-for-proposal procedures and evaluate initial applications before submitting recommendations to the Health Fund Advisory Council (HVAC).
Advocates from major public-health organizations testified that the current HVAC process—held publicly several times each fall—provides transparency and expertise that the bill would diminish. Alex Casper of the American Lung Association said he was "respectfully opposed" to the bill as drafted, warning that the proposal imposes no requirement that a specific amount be committed to tobacco control and cancer programs. He told the committee HVAC has historically prioritized those programs and that roughly $10,000,000 in program funding was at stake in the fiscal year grant round.
Whitney Parish Perry of the American Heart Association and Lance Kilpatrick of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network also urged preserving meaningful public engagement and minimum funding protections. Kilpatrick said the bill "effectively gives control of the Delaware Health Fund to DHSS" and argued HVAC’s deliberative process should not be curtailed.
James Berryhill of DHSS responded that DHSS supports the bill as a process reform and that it does not change the statutory list of allowable uses for the fund. Berryhill said DHSS would use Division of Public Health evaluation tools already in place, and that conversations with advocates about minimum percent allocations and reserve language are ongoing. The department also said historically it has funded core tobacco programming at about 80% and that questions about minimum percentages could be taken up with Joint Finance Committee and Office of Management and Budget.
No committee vote on SB296 was recorded at the hearing.
