HARRISBURG, Pa. – The health-care bill unveiled by Senate Republicans on Thursday would be even worse for Pennsylvania than the House version, according to a new report.

Research from the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center and Pennsylvania Health Access Network says cuts to Medicaid under the House version of the American Health Care Act would cost the Commonwealth $3.4 billion a year in federal funding.

According to Patrick Keenan, policy director at the Pennsylvania Health Access Network, and the report's co-author, a provision of the Senate bill championed by Pennsylvania junior Senator Pat Toomey would cost the state even more.

"Pennsylvania by 2025, under the new Senate language, would lose $29.1 billion, or an average of $4.8 billion per year," he says.

The Senate bill has been dubbed the "Better Care Reconciliation Act," or BCRA. Republicans say their plans will give states more flexibility in deciding how to spend Medicaid dollars.

But Keenan notes that with fewer Medicaid dollars to spend, the choices the state would face would boil down to how many people would lose their Medicaid coverage altogether.

"Pennsylvania's Medicaid program would lose roughly 419,000 to 612,000 individuals," he notes. "It really depends on the cuts that the state needs to make."

He adds that 75 percent of those enrolled in Pennsylvania's Medicaid program are children, seniors and people with disabilities.

Pennsylvania already faces an almost $3-billion budget deficit. Keenan says the Senate bill would double that, putting the state in desperate financial straits.

"That's why these cuts would really have to be immediate and would really have to be severe, because of the ways in which Sen. Toomey has pushed for deeper cuts to the Medicaid program," Keenan explains.

No Democrats are expected to vote for the Senate health care bill, and several Republican senators have said they cannot support it as written, making passage uncertain.


get more stories like this via email

Until the pandemic, telehealth and telemedicine were still outliers in health care but they have gone mainstream, especially benefiting underserved and rural New Mexico communities.

Heather Dimeris, director of the Office for the Advancement of Telehealth at the Health Resources and Services Administration, the primary federal agency tasked with improving access to health care services for people who are uninsured, isolated or medically vulnerable, said a national conference being held today will bring public- and private-sector leaders together to discuss topics related to best practices.

"Telehealth licensure, agreements between states to help practitioners practice across state lines, as well as access to broadband," Dimeris outlined. "This is free and virtual and it's open for the public."

Dimeris explained government data show patients who get telehealth services have the same, and in some cases better, outcomes as in-person visits.

Dimeris noted underserved communities often see benefits and improvements in their quality of life through behavioral-health services via telehealth. And those who qualify can leverage the federal Lifeline program, a free government phone service through the Federal Communications Commission.

"Internet is really a foundation of good telehealth services and we can do audio-only appointments, or appointments over the phone, but it's always nice to at least have the video chat," Dimeris pointed out. "That connectivity can be really hard in remote areas of New Mexico."

She added expanding virtual visits could cut down lengthy waitlists for urgent appointments. And she acknowledged many people seeking mental health services prefer to talk with a doctor in order to bypass stigma sometimes experienced with office visits in small communities.

A new analysis from Washington state shows passing an initiative making a long-term care benefit program optional could cost taxpayers millions.

Initiative 2124 would make optional the WA Cares program, in which workers contribute a little more than 0.5% of their paychecks for access to long-term care benefits. The Office of Financial Management estimates passage of the initiative would cost the state between $12 million and $31 million within three years.

Kristin Hyde, press secretary for the group No on 2124, said other analyses have found even greater consequences.

"This initiative would effectively actually end the program, it would shutter it, it would bankrupt the program," Hyde contended. "By 2027, in effect benefits would not be able to be paid out for the nearly 4 million workers who have been vesting in the program."

Supporters of the initiative, including Rep. Jim Walsh, R-Aberdeen, said the program provides little practical effect and people should have choice on whether to contribute to the program. Under the program, Washingtonians will have access to up to $36,500 in benefits from the WA Cares Fund starting in 2026.

Hyde noted the program can be used to pay home aides, for instance, which could help more than 800,000 family caregivers in the state. She added many caregivers are women who sometimes have to choose between work and taking care of family members.

"Long-term care is not covered by regular health insurance and it's also not covered by Medicare," Hyde pointed out. "It's this gap and so we're really in a rock and a hard place here. We don't have anywhere to turn."

Hyde explained it is why state lawmakers approved the WA Cares Fund. She stressed the benefits are flexible and available for use on expenses like home modifications as well.


get more stories like this via email

Kentucky has made some changes to expand access to free transportation for people who need help getting to medical, dental and mental health appointments, picking up prescriptions and more.

Medicaid's nonemergency medical transportation benefit will now include individuals who own a working vehicle but cannot drive due to a medical condition.

Emily Beauregard, executive director of Kentucky Voices for Health, noted it also applies when using the vehicle conflicts with another household member's need to drive to work, school or their own health care appointment.

"It's going to mean that a lot more Medicaid members will be able to schedule these appointments, make it to the doctor, and not have to schedule everything around when a car or a ride is available to them," Beauregard explained.

If the vehicle is unusable or is unsafe, Medicaid members will need a note from a clinician, employer, school, mechanic, or transportation authority stating the vehicle isn't operable. Nearly 60% of Kentucky Medicaid beneficiaries report lack of reliable and affordable transportation as a barrier to receiving health care services, according to data from the University of Kentucky.

Amber Sparks, a Corbin resident, said she relied on nonemergency medical transportation when her son experienced a mental health crisis requiring hospitalization. She recalled not until she needed nonemergency medical transportation did she realize it was available.

"Another instance that I had to deal with it is that my dad was diabetic, and he wasn't homebound, but he did need daily care and daily back-and-forth to appointments," Sparks recounted.

Beauregard outlined how Kentuckians can find out if they quality for transportation assistance.

"They can call the regional broker in their area," Beauregard pointed out. "If they don't have a car in their name -- or if there is a car, but it's in use for work or for school by another adult in the household -- they should be able to get approved for nonemergency medical transportation."

She added rides can be scheduled with those regional brokers by appointment, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., or Saturday from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m., at least three business days before their trip. A list of brokers is online at kyloop.org or by calling Kentucky Medicaid at 800-635-2570. For medical emergencies, call 911.