CT News Junkie | Changes To Medicaid Tough Medicine For Lawmakers To Swallow

Social Networks We Use

Connecticut Network

Categories

Our Partners

Changes To Medicaid Tough Medicine For Lawmakers To Swallow

by | Jul 24, 2012 6:11pm
() Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Town News, Hartford, Health Care

Christine Stuart photo

Ben Barnes and DSS Commissioner Roderick Bremby

After an all-day public hearing and a closed-door caucus, lawmakers on the Appropriations and Human Services Committees decided they needed more time to make a decision regarding a federal waiver application that would limit eligibility for low-income adults on the state’s Medicaid program.

The budget language adopted by the General Assembly in June assumed the state would save $50 million next year and $100 million by 2014 by imposing a first-of-its-kind $10,000 asset test on childless adults enrolled in the program.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration proposed the waiver because it was concerned about skyrocketing enrollment and, more specifically, about the number of college-age children in the program. According to the Department of Social Services, there are 20,354 enrollees under the age of 26 in the program. The new asset test would apply to the families of these children, ages 19 to 26, and it would likely kick many of them off the program.

About 5,089 enrollees under the age of 26 would lose coverage as a result of the proposed changes.

“This reflects the governor’s and my own personal belief that we should be focusing benefits on those who need it the most,” Office of Policy and Management Secretary Ben Barnes told the committees Tuesday.

Attorney Sheldon Toubman testified that the governor has said he’s committed to saving the safety net, but this proposal would cut 15,000 to 20,000 from Medicaid and encourage homelessness among young adults.

“The argument that this is unsustainable is ridiculous,” Toubman said.

Under the federal Affordable Care Act, the state will receive 100 percent reimbursement for the program in 2014.

The administration has maintained that those who can afford to be purchasing their insurance in the private market should be doing so. Barnes said they would even help people find insurance if they want it once they lose coverage because of these changes.

Barnes said there‘s no guarantee that these individuals will opt to purchase their own insurance.

Toubman was furious over a statement by Department of Social Services Commissioner Roderick Bremby in a letter to Rep. Peter Tercyak, in which he essentially admits that DSS has no idea how many of these people have access to private insurance.

Bremby’s letter to Tercyak estimates about 16,585 enrollees would lose coverage as of Oct. 2012, if the $10,000 asset test is applied. One of those would be Thomas Cooper, 21, of Hartford.

Cooper told the committee’s he’s doesn’t have a job, but if his mother’s assets were counted toward his eligibility he would lose access to his medications and wouldn’t be able to get the bariatric surgery he needs. He said his mother would be unable to help him purchase private health insurance.

Toubman explained the $10,000 asset test and said the amount it’s set at isn’t as big of a problem as the inability of DSS to process the re-determinations and applications in a timely manner so that people who qualify don’t accidentally get kicked off their insurance.

About 35 people, clients and advocates, showed up Tuesday to testify about the bureaucratic nightmare they endure in order to continue receiving services.

Click here to read about last week’s rally against DSS.

Toubman said that while they can’t admit it, even the Department of Social Services believes this is a bad idea.

Attached to Toubman’s testimony was a March 29 email from Marc Shok at DSS explaining that “processing tens of thousands of applications in about 60 days with the current staffing” does not strike him as “plausible.”

Shok testified along with Bremby on Tuesday. He told lawmakers they would offer a hardship clause with the application that would allow children ages 19 to 26 to qualify for the low-income adult program if it would force their parents to spend more than 10 percent of their income on private health insurance.

But Toubman said it’s ridiculous to even think anyone in this low-income population has $10,000 in assets, which means it’s unlikely the state would save the money even if the federal waiver was approved.

“They estimate 10.5 percent of the population has assets over $10,000,” Toubman said. “They’re assuming most of the savings are coming from people who are disqualified because of the asset limit. It’s fantasy. It’s not going to happen.”

Lawmakers wrestled with the DSS they knew under Republican governors and the new commissioner appointed by Malloy, a Democrat.

“Commissioner Bremby is like the little kid at the dyke,” Rep. Toni Walker, D-New Haven, who co-chairs the Appropriations Committee, said. “He fixes one thing, then pop there’s another.”

Walker said the committee, which declined to take a vote on the waiver Tuesday, wanted not to believe progress was being made at the agency, but Bremby demonstrated otherwise.

“He’s listening to what our issues are,” Walker said. “I give him credit and we want him to be successful because this is our health care delivery for the poorest people.”

Walker didn’t promise the two committees would come back and vote on the waiver application, but she said the conversation would continue.

It was difficult to get lawmakers to the Capitol for the public hearing Tuesday, but Walker said she would be content as long as members have their questions answered.

If they fail to vote on the application by Aug. 18 it will automatically be submitted to the Centers For Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |

Comments

(4) Archived Comments

posted by: GoatBoyPHD | July 24, 2012  8:01pm

GoatBoyPHD

One policy to heal them all!.

So far all that Obamacare has done is to enshrine policy discrimination that insults those above the Medicaid cutoff and sector sector workers.

Remember the election year buzz words ‘public option’  and ‘single payer’. Look at these clowns enshrine their interest group and advocacy group policies and codify policy discrimination into law.

It started with the State Workers and it won’t be complete until workers just over the Medicaid cutline and earning up to 60,000 a year in private industry are getting a raw deal no sane person would accept.

One Policy to Heal Them All! I got it. Impossible, but you will micromanage the insurance industry and dictate reimbursement rates to the delivery system—basically by pulling the rates out of your butt further corrupting the medical records and billing systems as rampant cost-shifting occurs to get the billing ‘profitable’
once again.

posted by: JusticeCT | July 25, 2012  12:32pm

This is NUTS!  There are a lot more than 5000 19-25 year olds in CT who don’t get insurance at work, don’t have parents with insurance, and can’t afford to pay outrageous insurance rates on their own.  Malloy wants them to have NO insurance? So it will be less likely that serious illnesses gets caught before they wind up in the emergency room or intensive care?  The Gov pays homage to federal health reform every chance he gets, but his actions speak louder—more people uninsured means more clogged ERs and more bankrupt hospitals.

posted by: redlady | July 25, 2012  4:33pm

This line: “Under the federal Affordable Care Act, the state will receive 100 percent reimbursement for the program in 2014.” makes you want to go get the duct tape. 
What happens when the feds run out of our money?  Why is the $15Trillion debt being ignored? Is CT able to look ahead and prepare for the day there is no funds coming back to us?  It sure doesn’t look like it.

posted by: lkulmann | July 26, 2012  8:52am

This is NOT okay….  Where is the logic? WHERE IS IT! If this makes sense, someone help me to understand…PLEASE!
Ages 19-26yrs is probably the healthiest for most. Chances are young adults will use it for preventive medical and dental only. The responsible response SHOULD be ‘it is better to be safe than sorry’ or ‘an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure’...
CT DSS says lets hire more State employees…huh?
How about NOT hiring more and just FIX the computer or just buy a NEW one!
This is outrageous and irresponsible decision-making on the part of CT DSS. Listen, how about this. Just hand the keys over to the federal government temporarily, just to tidy up the mess you’ve made…clean house. Then start fresh, hmmm?? C’mon Rod…do the right thing. This is escalating into a crisis situation. No more food, no more healthcare, no sustained job growth… This meets the crisis criteria, no?