Briefly Noted

Abstract

Last week, a sign‐on letter spearheaded by Rep. Paul Tonko (D‐New York) and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R‐Pennsylvania) picked up signatures from lawmakers calling for an additional $500 million for the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) block grant. The letter is addressed to the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education. The increase would bring the SAPT block grant to $2,358,070,000. For decades, the SAPT block grant has been below $2 billion. “Any sustainable strategy designed to address the substance use crisis in America must include a strong commitment to the SAPT block grant, particularly in the midst of the ongoing opioid epidemic,” the March 26 letter states. “The SAPT Block Grant, distributed by formula to all States and Territories, funds services that result in exceptional outcomes,” the letter continues. Last year, the House Appropriations Committee voted to provide an additional $500 million to the SAPT block grant, and reduced the SOR appropriation by the same amount, a move that was embraced by the full House, but not by the Senate. As the benefits of flexibility in terms of federal resources get more traction (see story on the Bipartisan Policy Center on p. 5, and story on the Senate hearing in ADAW, March 11), the need to increase the block grant becomes more obvious. It's not just opioids anymore, as methamphetamine and cocaine use increases. “We believe over time that transitioning opioid‐specific funding to the SAPT block grant is good public policy and the appropriate step to take,” said Rob Morrison, executive director of the National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors, when asked to comment on the sign‐on letter. “This approach ensures resources flow to the lead agency for alcohol and drug issues; provides the flexibility needed to address all substance use disorders that may exist in a particular state; and ensures federal resources contribute to a coordinated approach to planning and implementation at the state level. The House supported the beginning of a transition last year, and we see some momentum for the same step this year.”