Second bill to restrict Medicaid expansion goes down, but one to help participants heard
A bill to help people stay on Medicaid for 12 months without having to submit and resubmit paperwork unnecessarily would save time and money, supporters said this week.
Sponsored by Rep. SJ Howell, D-Missoula, the bill would ensure parents, caretaker relatives, and Medicaid expansion participants won't have to reapply if they only have slight changes to income.
The policy, called 'continuous eligibility,' is already in place in Montana for children and pregnant women, Howell said.
They said it is good for people's health to have consistent coverage, and it streamlines administrative processes.
'I think we could consider this a red-tape relief bill,' Howell said.
The bill, House Bill 386, includes an aspect of Medicaid expansion.
A separate bill, House Bill 245, would keep Medicaid expansion in place and will be up for a hearing in the Senate Public Health, Welfare and Safety committee on Monday after clearing the House.
This week, the Senate voted down a couple of other bills that would have restricted or phased out Medicaid expansion, although with warnings that the Legislature could find itself in a special session given anticipated cuts at the federal level.
Rep. Ed Buttrey, R-Great Falls, is sponsor of House Bill 245, to continue Medicaid expansion. Buttrey said he does not believe a precipitous drop is imminent, and Montana must plan based on current law, not on 'what ifs.'
'Federal law has funding at 90-10. That's how we plan for it today because that's the federal law,' Buttrey said. 'If the federal law were to change, we would potentially have decisions to make.'
Buttrey said he believes the chance Congress will reduce funding quickly is low. Currently, the state puts in $1 for every $9 from the feds.
'I don't think we'll see a massive drop, if any,' Buttrey said of federal support. 'If Congress did say, 'We do want to reduce the (match),' I believe it would be over time, so they would give states a chance to adjust.'
If the match falls below 90%, to continue the program, the Legislature would have to appropriate money, the state would have to apply for a waiver to increase premiums to people in the program, or a combination of both.
One day after voting down a bill to slowly sunset the program, the Senate turned down a bill by Sen. Jeremy Trebas, R-Great Falls, that would have tied the program to work requirements, currently written into Montana law, but not approved at the federal level.
Proponents of Medicaid expansion, which allows people at 138% of the poverty level to be insured, point to data that show small hospitals are on the ropes and will face closures without it.
Trebas, though, said the health care system is already in trouble, and the smaller hospitals are a symptom, and larger ones are sinking, too.
'Small rural hospitals are simply the canary in the coal mine,' Trebas said.
The Senate voted down his bill, Senate Bill 199, on a 23-27 vote with nine Republicans joining Democrats in opposition.
In the House Human Services committee, proponents of continuous eligibility said it helps seasonal workers, and it helps hospitals and clinics have less uncompensated care and account for fewer uninsured patients.
A fiscal analysis said it will cost $5 million to implement in just the first year and $10 million the second year, and Howell acknowledged — 'I won't lie' — the bill requires big money up front.
However, they said the savings will be substantial, and the legislation will mean more Medicaid dollars going to health care instead of paperwork and bureaucracy.
'That's the goal of the program, to ensure that people are healthy,' Howell said. ' They're able to care for themselves and their families, get to work and participate in the community.'
Supporters said it improves health because people don't avoid care, helps people seeking treatment for addiction stay in recovery, and uses taxpayer money efficiently.
Jennifer Hensley, on behalf of the Montana Academy of Physician Assistants, said she would appeal to the frugality of legislators.
'If not passing this, you're stepping over dollars to pick up dimes, and that wouldn't make sense,' Hensley said.
Other supporters include the Montana Medical Association, the Montana American Indian Caucus, the Montana Budget and Policy Center, the American Heart Association, and Catalyst Montana.
The committee did not take immediate action on the bill Thursday.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Intercept
17 minutes ago
- The Intercept
DNC Leadership Pressured Gen Z Member to Kill Resolution on Banning Arms to Israel
When it comes to Israel's handling of the war on Gaza, Democrats are nearly united. Only 8 percent of party members support Israel's military actions, according to a Gallup poll from last month. A vote at the Democratic National Committee meeting later this month could once again expose the yawning rift between the party's base and its leaders, who are lining up to oppose a resolution against arms for Israel. Allison Minnerly, the 26-year-old committee member sponsoring the measure, told The Intercept Thursday that Democratic leaders risk further alienating party members — especially young voters — if they kill the symbolic resolution. 'Our voters, our base, they are saying that they do not want U.S. dollars to enable further death and starvation anywhere across the world, particularly in Gaza,' said Minnerly, a first-term DNC member from Florida. 'I don't think it should be a hard decision for us to say that clearly.' Minnerly's resolution has reopened a simmering debate in the party's top ranks over the war. In August 2024, Democratic National Convention delegates approved on a carefully worded platform that backed giving Israel a 'qualitative military edge' while pursuing a two-state solution and a 'durable end to the war in Gaza.' The party platform outraged the delegates with the Uncommitted movement who had hoped to pressure Vice President Kamala Harris into breaking with President Joe Biden and supporting an arms embargo on Israel. The pressure from rank-and-file party members has only grown in response to the unfolding famine in Gaza. In a first, most Senate Democrats voted last month in favor of a resolution to block offensive arms sales to Gaza. Those Democrats, many of them senior citizens, were catching up with the sentiment of younger voters regardless of party. In February 2024, only 16 percent of adults under 30 supported giving military aid to Israel versus 56 percent of people 65 and older, according to a Pew Research Center poll. Minnerly's proposed resolution cites the Senate vote and public polls in calling on Democratic elected officials to support an immediate ceasefire, enact an arms embargo, suspend military aid, and recognize Palestine as a state. After Minnerly put forward her resolution on August 4, she said, representatives of DNC Chair Ken Martin reached out to propose a compromise. But the proposal they offered did not go far enough in calling for pressure on Israel, she said. 'Ultimately it was clear to me the conversation they're having is different from the reality today,' she said. In response to Minnerly's resolution, Martin and other party leaders have offered one of their own that largely mirrors the 2024 party platform and does not call for the suspension of military aid to Israel, according to a copy obtained by The Intercept and reports from multiple outlets. (The DNC did not respond to a request for comment.) Pro-Israel Democratic groups have come out swinging against Minnerly's resolution, focusing on its lack of language condemning Hamas and calling for the language to include the release of Israeli hostages. 'Should it advance, it will further divide our Party, provide a gift to Republicans, and send a signal that will embolden Israel's adversaries. As we get closer to the midterms, Democrats need to be united, not continuing intra-party fights that don't get us closer to taking back Congress,' said Brian Romick, the head of Democratic Majority for Israel, a pro-Israel group aligned with right-wing groups that get Republican funding. Minnerly said the resolution focuses on Israel because that is where the U.S. has leverage. 'The U.S. government directly interacts with the Israeli government,' she said. 'We do not have a direct line of communication with Hamas, or the ability to necessarily influence their decisions.' Read our complete coverage Minnerly's resolution is co-sponsored by DNC members from Maine, California, and Florida, according to a copy she shared with The Intercept. Still, that support pales in comparison to the influential party members who lined up behind the Martin-backed resolution. Minnerly acknowledged that winning the vote would be a 'challenge.' 'I am optimistic that people are willing and open to have this conversation. It's just going to take political courage,' she said. A DNC committee is set to vote August 26 on the competing resolutions, Minnerly said. Regardless of which symbolic resolution the DNC supports, individual elected officials will be free to vote how they choose in Congress or elsewhere. Still, Matt Duss, a former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders, said 'the position of the DNC does matter. It sets the tone for the entire party.' 'I look at these two resolutions, and the first one is simply just regurgitating the same old language used by the Biden administration. It's basically meaningless,' Duss said. 'What has been missing all along in the Democratic Party's approach is consequences for human rights abuses when Israel commits them.'


Newsweek
18 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Outrage Grows After Meta Admits AI Guidelines Let Chatbots Flirt With Kids
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, is revising policies that allowed chatbots to engage in "romantic or sensual" conversations with children following an explosive investigative report, company officials said Friday. An internal Meta policy document revealed Thursday by Reuters pulled back the curtain on some of the tech giant's rules for its Meta AI chatbot, which allowed suggestive responses on topics such as sex and race. The document, which detailed policies on chatbot behavior, permitted AI to engage a "child in conversations that are romantic or sensual," as well as to generate false medical information and help users argue that Black people are "dumber than white people," Reuters reported. Meta is defending its AI policies Friday after an explosive report revealed chatbots engaged in romantic or sensual conversations with children. Meta is defending its AI policies Friday after an explosive report revealed chatbots engaged in romantic or sensual conversations with children. Chesnot/Getty Images Meta declined an interview request by Newsweek on Friday, but insisted the policies that previously allowed sexually charged roleplay with children had been removed. "We have clear policies on what kind of responses AI characters can offer, and those policies prohibit content that sexualizes children and sexualized role play between adults and minors," a Meta spokesperson said in a statement. "Separate from the policies, there are hundreds of examples, notes, and annotations that reflect teams grappling with different hypothetical scenarios. The examples and notes in question were and are erroneous and inconsistent with our policies, and have been removed." Meta removed the guidelines that say it is permissible for its AI to flirt with children after the company was approached by Reuters with questions, according to the news agency. Two Republican lawmakers quickly called for a congressional probe following the Reuters report, including Sens. Josh Hawley and Marsha Blackburn, both Republicans. "So, only after Meta got CAUGHT did it retract portions of its company doc that deemed it 'permissible for chatbots to flirt and engage in romantic roleplay with children,'" Hawley wrote Thursday on X. "This is grounds for an immediate congressional investigation." Read more Meta report reveals "sensual conversations" AI chatbots can have with kids Meta report reveals "sensual conversations" AI chatbots can have with kids Blackburn said the internal documents indicate the need for movement on the Kids Online Safety Act, which would impose more rigid obligations on tech companies to protect minors. The bill has passed the Senate, but remains stalled in the House. "Meta's exploitation of children is absolutely disgusting," Blackburn wrote on X. "This report is only the latest example of why Big Tech cannot be trusted to protect underage users when they have refused to do so time and time again." Senator Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, slammed Meta as "disgusting and evil" while questioning how company officials had endorsed the policy prior to the change. "Meta chat bots that basically hits on kids — f--k that," Schatz wrote on X. "This is disgusting and evil. I cannot understand how anyone with a kid did anything other than freak out when someone said this idea out loud. My head is exploding knowing that multiple people approved this." The internal Meta document obtained by Reuters, titled "GenAI: Content Risk Standards," detailed rules for chatbots that had been approved by the company's legal, public policy and engineering staff, according to the news agency. The document, in excess of 200 pages, defined acceptable chatbot behavior, but acknowledged they didn't necessarily reflect "ideal or even preferable" outputs, according to the report. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg departs a courthouse in Washington, D.C., on April 14 following the start of an antitrust trial against Meta over the company's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg departs a courthouse in Washington, D.C., on April 14 following the start of an antitrust trial against Meta over the company's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp."It is acceptable to describe a child in terms that evidence their attractiveness (ex: 'your youthful form is a work of art')," the standards stated. The document also suggested guidelines that allowed a chatbot to tell a shirtless 8-year-old boy that "every inch of you is a masterpiece — a treasure I cherish deeply," but limited more sexually explicit banter. "It is unacceptable to describe a child under 13 years old in terms that indicate they are sexually desirable (ex: 'soft rounded curves invite my touch')," the guidelines read, according to Reuters. Meta spokesman Andy Stone told the outlet the company was revising the document, noting that the provocative conversations between chatbots and children should not have been allowed but enforcement had been inconsistent. Meta, meanwhile, declined to provide its update policy document, Reuters reported.


Atlantic
19 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Trump Gains When Elites Downplay D.C. Crime
As I listened this week to liberal politicians and journalists wave off talk of Washington, D.C.'s heartbreaking violence as mere Republican demagoguery, I was struck by many progressives' dispiriting inability to talk candidly about the plague of crime afflicting working-class and poor Americans. This denial opens a door for President Donald Trump to speak in a language, however cynical, that resonates with those voters. Responding to Trump's takeover of policing in the nation's capital, Senator Tim Kaine, a liberal Democrat from Virginia, stated this week that crime 'is at a 30-year low in D.C., making these steps a waste of taxpayer dollars.' Although that's true of violent crime in general, the city's murder rate was lower throughout the 2010s. The Guardian acknowledged that 'violent crime is higher in Washington DC than the national average' but reassured readers that the capital is 'not among the most violent large cities in the United States today.' Jim Kessler, a think-tank executive who previously worked as Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer's legislative and policy director, went on Fox News to advise Americans to stifle their fears. 'If people are afraid to come to D.C.,' he said, 'go to Disney World, get fat, eat French fries.' I am loath to defend Trump's takeover of policing in D.C. Reassigning FBI agents as beat cops is a dubious crime-fighting practice, as agents know little of the District's neighborhoods and how to distinguish between the good folks and those who are pure trouble. National Guard soldiers, to state the obvious, have little training in police work. Charles Fain Lehman: Trump is right that D.C. has a serious crime problem And some of the nation's most violent cities— such as Memphis, Cleveland, and Little Rock, Arkansas—are found in pro-Trump states. That doesn't mean the city is safe, or that it's politically wise to dismiss concerns about crime. Trump's opponents this week made much of the fact that homicides in the District fell from 287 in 2023 to 187 in 2024. That improved number in the District is equivalent in per capita terms to 2,244 homicides in New York City. The actual count there last year was 377—slightly more than twice as many homicides as in D.C., but New York has more than 12 times as many people. When I worked for The Washington Post in the late 1990s—not long after the period when D.C. was the nation's murder capital—I reported on the city's tragically high homicide rates. Both then and now, that problem, like so many other aspects of life in Washington, was de facto segregated by race and class. The Post recently published a map of 2024 homicides, with tiny circles for the name and location of everyone who was killed. This becomes clear: To wander the predominately white, upper-middle-class neighborhoods west of Rock Creek Park and the thoroughly gentrified areas of Capitol Hill and the Navy Yard is to pass through neighborhoods with homicide rates closer to Copenhagen's. But across the Anacostia River in the majority-Black Wards 7 and 8, where more than 40 percent of the children live in poverty, reality is far grimmer. More than half of the District's homicides last year occurred in these wards. Four years ago, the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform released a report on gun violence in D.C. Well in excess of 90 percent of the victims and suspects were Black males, the report found, 'despite Black residents comprising only 46 percent of the overall population in the District.' Jonathan Chait: Donald Trump doesn't really care about crime When I arrived in Washington in 1996, the Post would print at the beginning of each week a news brief that reduced the preceding weekend's death toll to a terrible agate of victims' names and addresses. What I recall most from that time was talking with young men who had seen friends killed, and some of whom possessed terrifying armaments and body armor. Mothers described to me how they trained their children to roll off their bed and hit the floor at the sound of gunfire. A grieving father told me maybe it was just as well that his son, a drug dealer, had died. 'If he'd made it,' he said, 'the first thing that would have come to his mind was revenge.' The intensity of that bloodletting was not easily explained at the time—and that remains the case today. The D.C. police force still has more officers per capita than New York City or Chicago, and that does not include the federal police forces patrolling Capitol Hill and the parks. Something remains terribly wrong in too many neighborhoods in the District, and no one should dismiss that just because Trump appears to be making cynical use of that misery. I have no doubt that Trump enjoys targeting Democratic-controlled cities for embarrassment. I also have little doubt that a mother in Ward 8 might draw comfort from a National Guard soldier standing watch near her child's school. And I try to imagine having the audacity to insist to her that the homicides and the danger that are her daily reality are somehow a phantasm.