Minnesota is in the top half of states when linking Medicaid coverage with needs for maternal care in rural areas.
That's according to a new report from the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University.
In rural Minnesota, more than 23% of women of child-bearing age are covered by Medicaid. That's in line with the national average and 4% higher than the state's metro counties.
The University of Minnesota Professor in the School of Public Health Dr. Katy Kozhimannil is part of the broader research community looking at this issue.
She said these numbers come amid a continued decline of obstetric care in these communities.
"More than a decade into a maternal health crisis in this country," said Kozhimannil. "Fewer and fewer U.S. hospitals provide obstetrics every year with rural hospitals experiencing the greatest losses."
Researchers say this care is expensive and big Medicaid adjustments create more harm for rural providers, putting the health of mothers and babies at risk.
House Republicans are considering program reforms, including work requirements, to help pay for tax cuts.
The GOP says streamlining services keeps the program strong for vulnerable people, but the Congressional Budget Office estimates nearly 8 million people would lose coverage.
With that CBO forecast, Democrats and health advocates contend the proposed changes amount to massive cuts.
The Georgetown Center's Executive Director and Co-founder Joan Alker said the current debate over Medicaid is one of the more consequential ones she has seen in her time tracking federal policy.
"And the reality is that these cuts," said Alker, "could be extremely pernicious and dangerous for rural communities."
The report says in 2023, Medicaid covered 41% of births nationwide, but nearly half of all births in rural areas.
As for the chance of increased health risks, these researchers note that rates of infants with low-birthweight in rural counties tend to be higher than those in urban settings.
Disclosure: Georgetown University Center for Children & Families contributes to our fund for reporting on Children's Issues, Health Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Federal data show roughly 75,000 South Dakota households rely on SNAP benefits to put food on the table and hunger-fighting groups paint a troubling picture if Congress goes through with big program cuts.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, once known as food stamps, faces a possible downsizing in the budget reconciliation bill now in the Senate. It has already cleared the House. Relief organizations say cuts proposed along the way could take away enough food for more than 9 billion meals on average every year.
Lori Dykstra, CEO of Feeding South Dakota, said it would be harder for her network to pick up the slack with donations on the decline.
"At a time when resources are the lowest, need is the highest," Dykstra pointed out. "We're in this challenging space to be able to fill that gap as a food bank."
Because of economic uncertainty, she noted businesses that normally donate excess food are being careful not to overstock. Dykstra emphasized SNAP benefits give struggling households more healthy food choices during times like these. A key GOP Senator said even though legislative rules have cast doubt over some provisions, they will still seek reforms to preserve SNAP for those who need it, while saving taxpayer dollars.
The Senate version still has nearly $100 billion in proposed cuts as Republicans look to offset proposed tax cut extensions. Poverty researchers said misinformation continues to spread about the integrity of SNAP, noting payment errors are often unintentional and fraud is only a small portion of program activity.
Vince Hall, chief government relations officer for Feeding America, a nonprofit network of 200 food banks, said the current approach targets the wrong people.
"Instead of addressing fraud in a thoughtful and effective way, it's using fraud as an excuse to hurt people who are honest, hardworking; seniors, who are in their golden years; people with disabilities; active-duty military," Hall outlined. "It is harming all of those families."
Feeding America added losing access to SNAP benefits would hurt recipients in other ways, too. For example, adults who get SNAP benefits spend about $1,400 less on average per year for medical care than adults who do not. The organization worries people would have to make tougher choices, like whether to pay for health care needs or food.
Disclosure: Feeding America contributes to our fund for reporting. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
The budget reconciliation bill being considered by the U.S. Senate proposes $863 billion in Medicaid reductions over a decade, with 10.9 million Americans projected to lose coverage by 2034, according to a June 4 Congressional Budget Office report.
In Florida, where 760,000 Medicaid enrollees rely on community health centers, advocates say the cuts would destabilize preventive care and overwhelm hospitals.
Austin Helton, CEO of Brevard Health Alliance, said the cuts would dismantle primary-care access, rupturing what he called Florida's "health-care ecosystem."
"If you cut spending on Medicaid and ACA, which primarily pays for access to primary-care health services at community health centers, that access is gone," he said. "The patients are still going to need that care. They're just going to end up sicker and they're going to end up going to more costly and more complex environments like the emergency room at the hospital."
Helton said the cuts would hit hardest at health-care facilities such as those under Brevard, where 60% to 70% of patients use Medicaid or ACA plans.
While the Florida Policy Institute warns of clinic closures and reduced hours, supporters say the changes target inefficiencies, with House leaders claiming they'll reduce wasteful spending while protecting vulnerable patients.
Florida's community health centers, which serve one in eight Medicaid patients statewide, face what advocates call an impossible math problem: more patients but fewer resources.
"As the population in Florida increases, the number of our patients increase, the number of Medicaid enrollees decreases," said Jonathan Chapman, CEO of the Florida Association of Community Health Centers. "Therefore, by process of elimination, you're going to see more uninsured people on our doorstep."
The Congressional Budget Office projects Florida would lose $7.3 billion in federal Medicaid funds by 2030 under the House plan, with rural counties such as Gadsden and DeSoto facing severe strain. The bill remains stalled in the Senate, where Republicans are divided over many issues, including rural hospital protections.
Disclosure: Florida Association of Community Health Centers contributes to our fund for reporting on Health Issues, Mental Health, Poverty Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
After the Department of Government Efficiency cut AmeriCorps funding earlier this year, a federal judge last week granted a temporary halt to the cuts on behalf of a group of states that filed a lawsuit against the move. Montana is not on the list.
AmeriCorps is a national service program which has been running for three decades. In the year before the cuts, about 2,800 members, called VISTAs, served at 300 Montana host sites including food banks, schools, youth centers and more.
Rochelle Hesford, executive director of Southwest Montana Youth Partners, relied on AmeriCorps service in the group's five-year plan. But its VISTA member was on board for less than four months before funding was cut.
"We're in kind of that early critical stage where we really need to get that public support and get our name out there and build capacity for the organization," Hesford observed. "We're losing, like, a year's worth of work, I would say."
Two dozen states plus Washington, D.C., filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration arguing it did not provide sufficient notice or comment period according to law but because Montana was not a plaintiff, its AmeriCorps funding remains cut.
Groups hosting VISTA members pay about one-third of their income and AmeriCorps funding covers the rest.
Erin Switalski, senior program director for the Headwaters Foundation, which provides grants for groups across the state, said it is a big leg up for many Montana groups.
"We're a resource-scarce state in many ways, and AmeriCorps VISTAs can really come in and help organizations build new systems and find efficiencies," Switalski explained. "Losing that support is really critical."
Montana's population is one of the least dense in the country but it has the most nonprofits per capita, nearly 10 per every 1,000 residents, according to the Tax Foundation.
Switalski noted she worries cuts to AmeriCorps signal something bigger.
"It's tied to this broader trend that we're seeing in really just a gutting of civic infrastructure that helps hold our communities together in Montana," Switalski added.
Disclosure: The Headwaters Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Early Childhood Education, Housing/Homelessness, Hunger/Food/Nutrition, and Youth Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email