The Public Health Committee green-lighted a bill Monday to study the funding and effectiveness of the community gun violence intervention and prevention programs.
But support was not unanimous.
Sen. Jeff Gordon, R- Woodstock, said he has “serious concerns” about the biases of those who would be brought into the study, based on testimonies heard by the committee at a public hearing last week.
Gordon, who was one of nine lawmakers to vote against the bill, said that he wants to see a more equal distribution of opinions and ideas in a study.
“I’m not opposed at all to this bill,” he said. “I would really like to see the bill made better, and have a much more fair and balanced makeup of people.”
The Department of Public Health also opposed the bill during the public hearing.
“While well intentioned, DPH believes the study envisioned in this bill is unnecessary at this time. As part of our ongoing work to reduce community gun violence in Connecticut, DPH believes it is essential to that mission to constantly review the effectiveness of the program,” Commissioner Manisha Juthani said in her written testimony.
She said additional funding would be duplicative.
The “biennial budget provided $750,000 annually in the General Fund to support program evaluation and technical assistance for the organizations receiving grant funding. This funding is being operationalized and will continue to allow DPH to examine the effectiveness of the program in preventing and reducing gun violence in the state,” Juthani added.
Some at the public hearing suggested a tax on ammunition could be used to fund gun violence prevention. Gordon said that is not something he favors. Funding could also come from federal ARPA money.
“I don’t think we should be adding another tax,” he said. “Connecticut is already expensive enough to live in.”
Still, committee leadership voted in favor of putting the study into motion in order to learn more about ways to combat gun violence in the state.
Rep. Cristin McCarthy Vahey, D-Fairfield, said that she is not worried about bias concerning the study, and that she wants to learn more about the different funding options.
“It’s not always easy to come up with funding options, but yet we know that this is an issue that needs to be funded – it’s an epidemic,” she said.
McCarthy Vahey, who co-chairs the committee, said that there is always bias within these conversations, but that they need to happen nonetheless.
“We always try to have balance in these discussions, and the idea behind this is to look at all the options and then discuss what would be viable and what wouldn’t,” she said.
Part of the discussion also included the plight of those who use guns to commit suicide in the state, and how gun violence prevention policy would lower the rate of those occurring.
