[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 43 (Thursday, March 10, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1111-S1112]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  STATE OPIOID RESPONSE GRANT FUNDING

  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, the State Opioid Response grant program 
has been critically important to communities that have been affected by 
the ongoing opioid epidemic.
  Rates of substance use disorders have grown exponentially, 
particularly during the pandemic, taking lives across the country, and 
opioids are the main driver of drug overdose deaths. Congress developed 
the State Opioid Response grant program to enhance our response to the 
opioid epidemic. As a result of this funding, States have been able to 
expand access to lifesaving prevention, treatment, and recovery 
services to frontline communities
  I know this funding has been important to Vermont in addressing the 
opioid crisis, and I ask the senior Senator from Washington if this has 
been her experience with the program as well.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I would like to thank the Senator from 
Vermont, who has been such a leader in addressing the substance use 
disorder crisis and who I have been proud to work with on this issue. 
The Senator is correct. The State Opioid Response funding has been 
important to all States, particularly those hardest hit by drug 
overdose deaths.
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I would like to ask the junior Senator 
from New Hampshire about her experience with this program.
  Ms. HASSAN. Madam President, I would also like to thank my friend, 
the Senator from Vermont, who has been a champion for helping address 
substance use disorders in New England and around the country. I agree 
that this program has provided essential support to States and 
communities across the country.
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I would like to ask, given this context, 
if the Senator from New Hampshire agrees that both the House and the 
Senate have made clear that funding cliffs for this program will hamper 
States' ability to effectively address the opioid epidemic?
  Ms. HASSAN. Madam President, I do. The fiscal year 2021 joint 
explanatory statement accompanying the omnibus appropriations bill 
directed the Secretary to avoid significant funding cliffs between 
States with similar opioid mortality rates. For fiscal year 2022, the 
joint explanatory statement ``notes that large swings in funding 
between grant cycles can pose a significant challenge for States 
seeking to maintain programs that were instrumental in reducing drug 
overdose fatalities'' and directs the Assistant Secretary to award 
funds in a manner that avoids funding cliffs.
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I thank the Senator for clearly laying 
out the Senate's intent for the ongoing administration of this 
program--I agree. I would like to ask the Senator from Washington if 
she agrees as well?

[[Page S1112]]

  

  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I do. Funding cliffs undermine efforts 
to address the opioid crisis. Without consistent and reliable funding, 
States cannot invest in or maintain programs that will reduce drug 
overdose fatalities. Dramatic cuts can lead to the cancellation of 
programs, firing of staff, and denial of care.
  The Department of Health and Human Services and the Substance Abuse 
and Mental Health Services Administration should prevent significant 
reductions in a State's SOR allocation in a single year. In other 
words, funding should be allocated in a way that does not result in 
unusually large funding reductions between years.
  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I thank the senior Senator from 
Washington, and I echo the call for HHS and SAMHSA to prevent 
significant funding cliffs.
  The State Opioid Response grant program must facilitate the ongoing 
work States are performing to preserve communities and save lives. Now 
is not the time to be cutting funding from communities that are just 
barely beginning to heal from the opioid epidemic.
  Madam President, I would like to thank the Senators from Washington 
and New Hampshire for coming to the floor to discuss this important 
program.

                          ____________________