Low-income Mainers struggling with high heating bills are likely find less aid available this year ”“ and perhaps next ”“ because more emergency aid is going to other states.
Maine’s senators and representatives, among others, have objected to a shift that resulted in a federal allocation to Maine of only $4.8 million in emergency funding ”“ 80 percent less than the $29.7 million Maine received last year.
Sen. Olympia Snowe said in a statement last week that increased emergency funding from the Low-Income Home Energy Program went to southern states because of a new formula for allocating heating assistance. The formula apparently yields a larger share of aid to populous states that have been colder than usual this year.
Maine and other northern states have traditionally received high levels of LIHEAP aid because of the pervasive cold. Those living in Maine must invest heavily to keep their homes war even in a relatively mild winter.
The new formula rightly takes unemployment into account, but it should go without saying that heating aid is especially important in a cold climate. The list of states receiving a higher emergency allocations this year includes many states where there is undoubtedly hardship, but where spending on heat does not run very high: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
According to Maine Public Broadcasting, New Hampshire, Vermont and Massachusetts also received substantially less this year. Maine Congresswoman Chellie Pingree told MPBN: “I think you’ll see a lot of protesting over the formula.”
Maine hasn’t had an especially hard winter, but economic conditions are hard for many and any decrease in assistance will be exacerbated by the lack of state resources.
Maine’s small population and routinely cold winters shouldn’t bump it to a lower spot on the list of states eligible for energy assistance. Such a ranking would lock in the present low allocation of emergency LIHEAP funds.
Snowe asked the administration for a better explanation of the new formula, and also for justification for a proposed overall $1.8 billion cut in the proposed budget. It seems a hard cut to justify in a time of relatively high energy costs, and when many people are facing hard economic times.
— Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Nick Cowenhoven at nickc@journaltribune.com or City Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
