Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Connecticut Promised To Invest in Community-Based Care. Twenty-Six Years Later, We’re Still Waiting.

Opinion

Connecticut Promised To Invest in Community-Based Care. Twenty-Six Years Later, We’re Still Waiting.
Getty Images, fotostorm

The following letter is in response to "Lamont vetoed HB 5002. What could the reworked bill include?" published by the CT Mirror.

In 1999, Connecticut made a promise. As the state downsized psychiatric institutions, leaders pledged to reinvest those funds into home and community-based services. The goal was clear: honor the Olmstead decision, reduce unnecessary institutionalization, and build systems that support people where they live—with dignity, autonomy, and care.


That promise was never kept.

Today, families wait months for emergency shelter. Youth with mental health diagnoses are shuffled between fragmented systems. Police and hospitals are still the default response to what are fundamentally housing and health needs. And most critically, Black, Indigenous, People of Color with disabilities remain disproportionately impacted—overrepresented in institutional settings, underrepresented in leadership, and routinely denied access to culturally responsive care.

As former chair of the Keep the Promise (KTP) Coalition and past president of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Connecticut, I’ve spent decades working alongside families, youth, and providers who were told the money would follow the person. Instead, it vanished into bureaucratic silos and short-term fixes. The systems we were promised—trauma-informed, inclusive, and community-rooted—have become reactive, exclusionary, and retraumatizing.

This isn’t just a policy failure. It’s a moral one.

The recent federal executive order encouraging expanded civil commitment and criminalization of homelessness only deepens the crisis. Threats to Medicaid and Medicare also reverse decades of advocacy and evidence-based practice. It ignores the lived realities of those most affected. And it sends a chilling message: that institutionalization is easier than investing in people.

But we know better. We know that housing is healthcare. That culturally responsive, community-based services save lives. That youth and families thrive when systems are built around their strengths—not their diagnoses.

Connecticut must reckon with its broken promise. We need transparency about where those funds went. We need reinvestment in housing, peer support, and wraparound services. And we need to center the voices of those most impacted—especially communities of Black, Indigenous, People of Color with disabilities—in every decision moving forward.

The money was supposed to follow the person. It didn’t. It’s time to make good on that promise.

Doris Maldonado Mendez is a member of the Connecticut Mirror’s Community Editorial Board.


Read More

Trump is stuck between two realities. Neither serves the American people

image of U.S. President Donald Trump is displayed on a digital billboard in Times Square in New York on April 8, 2026.

(Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images/TNS)

Trump is stuck between two realities. Neither serves the American people

Normally, I worry that events may overtake a column. But not so with the Iran war.

I don’t worry about running afoul of a headline or Truth Social post from the president because what is said about the situation is no longer very relevant to the reality.

Keep ReadingShow less
The dome of the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., stands tall against a blue sky with the American flag waving proudly

A look at this week's congressional agenda, including House votes on Iran, Ukraine, FISA, appropriations, and key legislative priorities.

Getty Images, aire images

Legislative Preview for June 1, 2026

There will be plenty of coverage around the likely drama involved in picking up where House and Senate Republicans left off before this most recent week off. (For a recap, see our last post.) So we’re not going to go into any detail about what might happen with the reconciliation bill (originally only for two departments in the Department of Homeland Security; now enlarged with funding for the President’s ballroom project and overshadowed by the announcement of the President’s plan to pay off political allies with funds from the Department of Justice) or the FISA extension or the housing bill that’s been pingponging between chambers because you can read in sources like Politico about these marquee issue.

We will note that the Iran War resolution postponed in the House before the recess may be up for a vote this week, along with a resolution to remove US troops from Lebanon and a discharge petition (number 8) to put forward a bill authorizing support for Ukraine. Three privileged resolutions, of which one is a discharge petition (meaning it has 218 co-sponsors meaning at least a few House Republican co-sponsors), is a lot for one week. Especially when all three are expressing opposition to various administration stances and might get some House Republican votes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?
white and black quote board
Photo by Brendan Beale on Unsplash

Can Governing Survive Without Continuity?

Modern societies depend on continuity.

Electric grids are built over decades. Infrastructure systems require long investment cycles. Defense planning depends on sustained procurement and strategic consistency. Climate adaptation, energy systems, artificial intelligence governance, public health preparedness, and fiscal stability all require institutions capable of maintaining long-term priorities across multiple administrations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Supporters of President Donald Trump, February 09, 2024 in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Can Coalitions Built on Opposition Still Govern?

Political parties are supposed to do two things at once: win elections and govern. Those are not the same skill.

Winning elections requires assembling coalitions large enough to secure power. Governing requires maintaining enough internal agreement to make decisions, negotiate trade-offs, allocate resources, and sustain policy direction once power is achieved.

Keep ReadingShow less