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

NRF Moves to Defend Utah’s Fair Map Against Gerrymandering Lawsuit

USA Election Collage With The State Map Of Utah.

Getty Images

NRF Moves to Defend Utah’s Fair Map Against Gerrymandering Lawsuit

On Wednesday, February 11, the National Redistricting Foundation (NRF) asked a federal court to join a newly filed lawsuit to protect Utah’s new, fair congressional map and defend our system of checks and balances.

The NRF is a non‑profit foundation whose mission is to dismantle unfair electoral maps and create a redistricting system grounded in democratic values. By helping to create more just and representative electoral districts across the country, the organization aims to restore the public’s faith in a true representative democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Constitutional Provision We Ignored for 150 Years

Voter registration in Wisconsin

Michael Newman

A Constitutional Provision We Ignored for 150 Years

Imagine there was a way to discourage states from passing photo voter ID laws, restricting early voting, purging voter registration rolls, or otherwise suppressing voter turnout. What if any state that did so risked losing seats in the House of Representatives?

Surprisingly, this is not merely an idle fantasy of voting rights activists, but an actual plan envisioned in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 – but never enforced.

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pier C Park waterfront walkway and in the background the One World Trade Center on the left and the Erie-Lackawanna Railroad and Ferry Terminal Clock Tower on the right

View of the Pier C Park waterfront walkway and in the background the One World Trade Center on the left and the Erie-Lackawanna Railroad and Ferry Terminal Clock Tower on the right

Getty Images, Philippe Debled

The City Where Traffic Fatalities Vanished

A U.S. city of 60,000 people would typically see around six to eight traffic fatalities every year. But Hoboken, New Jersey? They haven’t had a single fatal crash for nine years — since January 17, 2017, to be exact.

Campaigns for seatbelts, lower speed limits and sober driving have brought national death tolls from car crashes down from a peak in the first half of the 20th century. However, many still assume some traffic deaths as an unavoidable cost of car culture.

Keep ReadingShow less