State officials recently reserved $500 million, on paper, to bolster federal human service programs for roughly two months. But this emergency funding really represents the start of a much broader debate. Gov. Ned Lamont and the Democratic-controlled General Assembly now must decide whether C onnecticut should indefinitely dedicate state dollars — potentially for several years — to reverse new gaps in health care, nutrition, and energy and housing assistance created by retreating federal funding. “The need to be looking holistically, long-term, at these things is important,” House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, told the Connecticut Mirror this week. “We don’t know how dire the [federal funding] crisis will be,” said Senate President Pro Tem Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, who noted Connecticut could be dealing with a devolving federal funding situation for an array of core programs for years to come. “Are we really going to go over a cliff?” At the bottom of that potential cliff are more than 140,000 enrollees in Access Health CT, the state’s health insurance exchange, who stand to lose federal subsidies that cover all or a portion of their premium costs. The New York Times reported this week that President Donald Trump is weighing a possible extension of those benefits but hasn’t reached a decision yet. Also at risk are an estimated 36,000 immigrants, young adults, veterans and people experiencing homelessness who are at risk of losing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits between Dec. 1 and March 31 because of new work requirements and other rules changes. Both stem not from the 43-day federal government shutdown, which ran from Oct. 1 through mid-November, but rather from ongoing cutbacks ordered in July by the Republican-led Congress and Trump. Most of the federal funding cuts in that bill, particularly those centered on Medicaid, don’t take effect until 2027 or 2028. But there are others, besides nutrition assistance and health insurance subsidies, that will be felt sooner. Since federal funding for the thousands of Connecticut students who receive free and reduced price school meals is determined partly by SNAP caseloads, school districts could be facing reductions there. And to help pay for federal tax cuts also enacted as part of that omnibus July measure, the Trump administration has recommended cuts in 2026 to some forms of affordable housing assistance for many more. So, while state officials agreed to use $500 million from last fiscal year’s surplus to potentially mitigate federal cutbacks in human service programs between now and Feb. 4, when the regular 2026 General Assembly session starts, the populations at risk now still could be in jeopardy two months from now and likely long after, absent state intervention. “What’s more, excessive tariffs have made life more unaffordable — from groceries to housing to holiday gift-giving,” said Emily Byrne, executive director of Connecticut Voices for Children. “Connecticut must be vigilant and proactive so that our residents are protected.” Lamont, who has sole authority to propose disbursements from the $500 million response fund this winter, already has begun talks with legislative leaders on how to use that money. The governor, a fiscally moderate Democrat, traditionally been wary of using state funds to supplement programs normally funded by the federal government. But Lamont also said last week that “we’re going to take care of people in need.” When asked earlier this month whether he would support a state-funded SNAP benefit to protect the 36,000 recipients affected by recent federal rules changes, the governor was open but noncommittal, saying only “we’re looking at that.” He also said his administration is working with state Comptroller Sean Scanlon to develop a new option to help residents and small businesses buy affordable health insurance. The governor last week tapped Scanlon’s chief health policy aide, Josh Wojcik, to become the administration’s new budget director. But regardless of whether Lamont dedicates portions of the $500 million reserve to bolster weakened federal human service programs this winter, legislative leaders say they expect many Democratic state legislators next year will want to commit state funds on an ongoing basis toward this social safety net. “This is just not a normal situation,” Ritter said, predicting Connecticut and many other states may spend the next few years deciding what degree of federal cutbacks are intolerable. And if so, Ritter added, states also must decide how much of their own funds they can afford to spend to improve the situation. But while Lamont and top state lawmakers also say Connecticut never can afford to reverse all federal cutbacks, they also note it has more options financially than do most other states. With more than $4.3 billion in its rainy day fund, equal to 18% of the annual General Fund, Connecticut has one of the larger budget reserves in the nation. And unlike most other states, Connecticut also has a complex series of budget caps that force large annual surpluses. Surpluses here since 2017 have averaged more than $1.8 billion per year, about 8% to 9% of the General Fund. Connecticut has used those dollars to build reserves and whittle down its considerable pension debt. And if Lamont and his fellow Democrats in the General Assembly seek to bolster federal human service programs by scaling back those surpluses somewhat, they could face strong opposition from minority Republicans. GOP leaders during the federal government shutdown last month, when state aid from Washington was stalled temporarily, endorsed using $500 million from last fiscal year’s state budget surplus to prop up federal nutrition and heating assistance programs. But if Connecticut is going to launch new state spending, year after year, to replace vanishing dollars from Washington, it shouldn’t come at the expense of local efforts to pay down pension debt, Republicans say. Connecticut entered this fiscal year with $33.5 billion in unfunded pension obligations, a burden created by more than seven decades of improper savings prior to 2011, and still carries one of the highest debt levels in this category nationwide. If Connecticut is going to start providing nutrition benefits, heating assistance or health care subsidies on an ongoing basis, said state Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding, R-Brookfield, then officials here should pay for them through matching spending cuts elsewhere in the state budget. “We always need to make sure everyone is fed and everyone’s home is heated,” he said. But “it’s about prioritization.” Harding added that “it’s a very dangerous precedent to set if we basically say we as a state government are going to address every single cut that comes our way from the federal government.” ...read more read less