Jeffrey M. Haycraft of Camden is a public school teacher and the spouse of a public health employee in the Delaware Department of Health and Social Services.
I was disheartened to read the recent Opinion piece by Reps. Tim Dukes, R-Laurel, and Jeff Spiegelman, R-Clayton (“Cuts highlight need for fiscal responsibility”). Their attempt to frame the federal government’s rescission of $38 million in COVID-19 public health grants as a return to “fiscal responsibility” is not only misleading — it’s dangerously dismissive of the very real work being done in our state to protect public health and support struggling families.
Let’s start with the facts: These weren’t speculative funds. They were already allocated and integrated into state and nonprofit public health efforts; in many cases, they were already supporting boots-on-the-ground work in communities. My spouse and her colleagues at the Delaware Department of Health and Social Services aren’t “wasting taxpayer dollars.” They’re coordinating opioid response efforts, tracking influenza and addressing a multitude of concerns that affect us all — issues that haven’t magically disappeared just because we’re no longer under lockdown.
Yes, some of the grants had expiration dates. That’s true of all federal funding cycles. But pulling funds years ahead of schedule — midprogram — is not budget trimming; it’s sabotage. Programs are now scrambling to either scale back or find alternate funding to continue serving Delawareans who still need help. That’s not just poor planning from Washington — it’s a blow to the people who rely on these services and a slap in the face for public servants who may lose their employment with the loss of funding.
The piece also critiques Gov. Matt Meyer’s budget plan as a sign of “irresponsibility,” but this ignores the reality on the ground. Delaware, unlike the federal government, is required to balance its budget — and it does, year after year. The modest spending increases proposed are largely tied to inflation, long-term investments in schools and health care, and the very public programs that will need to absorb the loss of those federal dollars. This isn’t reckless expansion — it’s governing with foresight.
Budget stabilization funds exist for this exact reason — to help weather uncertain fiscal moments. Using those monies to maintain critical services without raising broad taxes is not a “blueprint for failure.” It’s responsible planning, especially in a moment when many Delaware families, educators and health workers are still shouldering pandemic aftershocks.
Reps. Dukes and Spiegelman talk about “cold math” and “difficult choices.” I see those choices every day — when students come to school shouldering the weight of problems at home. Or in 2020, when my spouse suited up in a Tyvek jumpsuit, exposing herself on the front line to a new and dangerous virus that there wasn’t much knowledge about at the time, simply because “it was her job.”
If lawmakers are serious about making responsible decisions for Delaware’s future, the answer isn’t cutting programs that protect our most vulnerable — it’s fighting to keep them funded and functioning. Maybe if there were less posturing to political bases and more actual common sense — more rolling up sleeves and less pointing fingers — we’d all be better off. But what do I know? I’m just a teacher married to a public health worker, watching elected officials play budget games with real people’s lives.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
