State lawmakers should reconsider plans to end highly successful health program
Patients have their blood pressure checked and other vitals taken at a mobile dental and medical clinic. (Photo by)
One of the most encouraging public health initiatives to come along in several years is a state Department of Health and Human Services pilot program launched in 2022 called 'Healthy Opportunities.'
The program is based on the simple premise that providing for food, transportation, housing, and other non-medical health-related needs of people enrolled in Medicaid would improve their physical health.
And you know what? It did. Program participants were healthier and ended up in hospital emergency rooms less. Indeed, when researchers compared health care costs in the 12 months before and the 12 months after enrollment in Healthy Opportunities, they found cost savings of 85 dollars per person per month.
Talk about improving health care system efficiency.
Unfortunately, neither of the recent budget bills passed by the state House and Senate would keep the program up and running and that's a big mistake.
The bottom line: Healthy Opportunities is the kind of commonsense program the state needs more of, not less. Lawmakers should find the money to keep and expand it.
For NC Newsline, I'm Rob Schofield.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
GOP Candidate Says Number of Women on Birth Control 'Concerning'
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. A Minnesota GOP Senate candidate has said that he finds the number of women on birth control "concerning" because the pills not only change female hormones but also change the kind of men women are attracted to. Adam Schwarze told Heartland Signal, a local radio show reporting predominantly in the Midwest, that birth control was making women more attracted to "beta" men as opposed to "alpha cavemen." Newsweek has contacted Schwarze via social media for comment. Why It Matters Access to birth control and reproductive rights has come into the spotlight since President Donald Trump started his second term as president, and requests for contraceptives, including long-term birth control and "morning after" pills and abortion pills, soared after his election victory. After Roe v Wade was overturned by Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices, taking the constitutional right to abortion away from American women, concerns about what the Trump administration's plans are for reproductive rights have been escalating. While the Republican base in America is comprised of a large proportion of religious groups, particularly evangelical Christians and Catholics, who oppose birth control, a 2024 Navigator Research survey found that 74 percent of Americans believed birth control should be easier to access. File photo: birth control pills. File photo: birth control pills. Serge Pouzet/Sipa via AP What To Know Schwarze also told Heartland Signal that because of the influence birth control pills are having on women and their attractions, U.S. society as a whole is becoming more "pacified." "It's actually kind of concerning because it's changing our culture and values because of birth control," he said, adding it was "fascinating but also scary." Saying that a lot of women are now using birth control, he added: "We are changing our society away from men who are alphas, providers, protectors, doers, builders for these effeminate girly boys." According to research by KFF last year, 82 percent of American women of reproductive age reported having used some form of contraception in the past 12 months. There are some studies that have indicated the birth control pill, i.e. an oral contraceptive, could influence what features women are attracted to in men, with one 2013 study finding that "initiation of pill use significantly decreased women's preferences for male facial masculinity." A 2011 study also investigated the relationship outcomes of women using the pill but stated that "we know neither whether these laboratory-measured effects are sufficient to exert real-world consequences, nor what these consequences would be." The reasons behind possible changes to attraction have been attributed to female hormone levels, however there is still limited research on the subject and more rigorous studies are needed in order to determine whether birth control changes what kind of men women are attracted to. What People Are Saying Minnesota GOP Senate candidate Adam Schwarze said during a radio interview with Heartland Signal: "There is a study that's getting popularity and more widely known that women on birth control, it actually changes your hormones and your attractions, so women who are on birth control, and this is more Democrats who are on birth control than conservatives because of some religious reasons, but it actually changes who you are attracted to and there's multiple reports on this, ... of girls who leave birth control when they want to start families or just decide to do a different method of pregnancy prevention, that they leave their partners because they are not attracted to them because birth control makes you attracted to betas." What Happens Next The Trump administration has passed an executive order to prevent federal funding of elective abortion, alongside ending "the forced use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote elective abortion," however, it is not yet clear if the administration plans to alter women's access to birth control.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Federal budget bill could strip 300K Pennsylvanians of Medicaid coverage, push rural hospitals to the brink
This story was produced by the State College regional bureau of Spotlight PA, an independent, nonpartisan newsroom dedicated to investigative and public-service journalism for Pennsylvania. Sign up for Talk of the Town, a weekly newsletter of local stories that dig deep, events, and more from north-central PA, at HARRISBURG — President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget bill could have a disastrous effect on the health of rural Pennsylvanians and the operations of the hospitals and other medical centers that care for them. The federal budget proposal, which passed the U.S. House by a one-vote margin in May, calls for nearly $800 billion in Medicaid cuts over the next decade. It also includes a new 80-hour-per-month work or service requirement for Medicaid recipients between the ages of 19 and 64 who aren't caregivers or who have disabilities. Among other changes, the bill would require verification of coverage eligibility every six months rather than annually. While supporters of the budget bill argue that it will slow spending and safeguard government programs, critics say the cuts and new requirements will create more paperwork for states and make it harder to access essential care. Opponents also argue the changes would push struggling rural hospitals and other providers to the brink, and force them to scale back services or close entirely. More than 3 million people in Pennsylvania — 23% — are covered by Medicaid, according to data from the state Department of Human Services, which administers the program. The agency estimates that more than 300,000 would lose Medicaid coverage under the proposal. Val Arkoosh, secretary of the department, said the bill would not only hurt those losing coverage but 'all of us who would face the real-life consequences of crowded emergency departments, increases in the cost of health insurance, and the catastrophic effects on economies and health systems in rural areas.' More than 737,000 Medicaid recipients live in rural counties, where residents are typically older and more reliant on government-funded insurance programs. Such programs reimburse at lower rates compared to private insurance companies and haven't kept up with inflation. Cameron County Commissioner James Moate, a Republican, said the Medicaid reimbursement rate should have never been less than 100%. 'That's why we have struggling hospitals,' he told Spotlight PA. On average, Pennsylvania hospitals absorb a loss of 18 cents on the dollar for care provided to Medicaid patients, said Nicole Stallings, president and CEO of the Hospital and Healthsystem Association of Pennsylvania, which represents more than 230 hospitals statewide. In rural communities, the average loss is 26 cents on the dollar, she added in a May statement. 'Medicaid plays a vital role in the health of rural residents, and it is important to preserve this funding so that families can continue to access the care they need for healthier lives,' said Douglas Winner, chief financial officer for Penn Highlands Healthcare, a nonprofit system with nine hospitals in rural counties. Penn Highlands President and CEO Steve Fontaine has told lawmakers that consolidating with other health systems and expanding into new areas has helped facilities survive. This strategy, which has helped Penn Highlands diversify its patient and insurance bases, is why the system expanded into Centre County, where resident numbers are expected to grow, he told lawmakers last year. Still, the health system has shuttered services and reported operating losses over the past year. Winner said Penn Highlands is 'greatly concerned' about the proposed Medicaid cuts. 'Rural hospitals have experienced substantial cost increases for labor, drugs, and supplies,' he said in a statement. 'Coupled with decreasing volumes, inadequate reimbursement rates, and ongoing staffing shortages — recruitment and retention — we are struggling financially.' Advocates worry the cuts in the federal budget will force rural hospitals to slash services even more or close altogether. And once facilities end a service or shut down, they rarely reopen, Stallings told Spotlight PA. Community health centers could also be strained. These facilities, also known as federally qualified health centers, provide services regardless of someone's ability to pay and primarily see patients who use Medicaid and PENNIE, the state's Affordable Care Act marketplace. More uninsured people will likely lead to an increase in uncompensated care, said Eric Kiehl, director of policy and partnership for the Pennsylvania Association of Community Health Centers. And these facilities are already strapped for resources, he told Spotlight PA. A surge in demand could cause these health centers to shutter core services — such as medical, dental, or behavioral health — reduce hours, or close, Kiehl said. Pennsylvania's U.S. House delegation voted along party lines on the federal budget bill, with Republicans supporting and Democrats opposing the proposal. Medicaid spending totaled roughly $44 billion in fiscal year 2023. The federal government provided almost $28 billion of those dollars. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro has said the state won't be able to make up those dollars to support the Medicaid program. In a statement, Shapiro said he hopes 'common sense and a concern for the people of Pennsylvania' will prevail in the U.S. Senate, where Democratic U.S. Sen. John Fetterman and Republican U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick disagree on aspects of the bill. McCormick did not respond to a request for comment for this story. He has expressed support for the budget bill, which he says will reduce and slow government spending. During a Fox News forum, McCormick said he isn't advocating for taking benefits from 'vulnerable people' but is trying to ensure 'people for whom the program was designed' benefit. Fetterman called the plan 'a bad bill,' telling Spotlight PA in a statement: 'Republicans want to put more money in the pockets of the ultra-rich at the expense of hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians who will lose access to Medicaid if this disastrous bill is passed.' and help us reinvigorate local news in north-central Pennsylvania at Spotlight PA is funded by foundations and readers like you who are committed to accountability and public-service journalism that gets results. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Senate Democrats file bill to prevent ban on transgender military service
Democratic lawmakers will submit a bill in the Senate on Tuesday that would reverse the Pentagon's new ban on transgender military service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria who now face being forced out if they had not previously self-identified as transgender. The "Fit to Serve Act" would prohibit the Defense Department from banning transgender service members from serving in the military. If passed, the law would prevent the Defense Department from denying access to healthcare on the basis of gender identity, and it would also prohibit the military from forcing service members to serve in their sex assigned at birth. It would also make it illegal for the military to discriminate against service members on the basis of gender identity. MORE: Transgender US service members will be separated from military, Pentagon memo says The Defense Department's policy was required by an executive order signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office that banned transgender individuals from serving in the military. In outlining the policy in a memo issued in late February, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote that " individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service." "We recruit and train the best and bravest to protect our country -- losing highly qualified service members, who meet strict standards to join the military, makes us less safe," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who is the lead sponsor of the bill that is being filed in the Senate on Tuesday, which was first announced last month. "By prohibiting this discrimination on the basis of gender identity, this legislation will help to ensure transgender individuals who are qualified to serve may do so" said Sen. Marie Hirono, D-Hawaii, one of the bill's co-sponsors. Under the Pentagon's new policy, transgender service members had until June 6 to self-identify and begin the process of voluntary separation. With the passing of that deadline, the Pentagon has begun a process of involuntary separation of service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria, which is defined as "psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one's sex assigned at birth and one's gender identity." Ahead of that deadline, the Pentagon said more than 1,000 service members had self-identified as having been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. It is unclear whether that number increased ahead of the deadline or how officials had reached that estimate. National Guard and Reserve service members have until July 7 to self-identify for voluntary separation. MORE: Transgender service members say they face 'heartbreaking' decision amid Trump ban: Leave military or get kicked out The Pentagon's new ban went into effect in early May shortly after the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration could enforce the ban on transgender people in the military while legal challenges to the ban proceed in lower courts. Navy Cmdr. Emily Shilling, who is a lead plaintiff in one of the legal challenges, told ABC News that she has chosen to voluntarily separate. "Yes I am 'volunteering' to retire but I do want to make it clear that myself and most others I have spoken to in SPARTA feel it is under duress," said Shilling who is the president of Sparta Pride, an organization advocating for 2,400 transgender people in the military. "For me, it's the only way I believe I can continue to uphold my oath," said Shilling. "I'm stepping away from active duty service, but not service to my country. My fight is only beginning." Defense officials have said that as of last December, about 4,240 current active-duty, Guard and Reserve service members had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. There are more than 2.1 million military service members serving on active-duty, Guard and the Reserves. Advocacy groups have put the actual number of transgender service members as being much higher, at around 15,000. Since 2014, the total number of diagnoses for gender dysphoria among service members was 5,773, with 1,000 of those having gone through gender-affirming surgery, according to a defense official. The total costs for treatments, hormones and surgeries during that time frame was $52 million, said the official. With the end of the voluntary separation period, transgender service members now face what could be a lengthy process that could end with their separation from military service. The process will begin with military commanders being told to identify people in their units who have a diagnosis or history of gender dysphoria or exhibit symptoms consistent with gender dysphoria. Once they have done that, a referral to an annual health checkup will be initiated, beginning what could be a lengthy process that could lead to their removal from the military. Pentagon officials have said those evaluations will be conducted during regularly scheduled annual physicals meaning it could be months before they take place. The Pentagon incentivized service members with gender dysphoria to voluntarily separate ahead of the June 6 deadline by offering benefit payment packages that would be more than double what would be received if they were to separate involuntarily. Those who voluntarily separated would not have to risk paying back the recruitment or retention bonuses they may have earned during their military service. The Democratic senators argue that instead of improving military readiness the implementation of the ban will have the opposite effect. "This ban undermines our military readiness and national security by removing thousands of talented, experienced service members and signaling to potential recruits that the military does not respect them, their colleagues, their family, or their friends simply because of who they are," said a description of the Fit to Serve Act. "It also wastes billions of taxpayer dollars invested in training these troops to become leaders to keep all of us safe." The bill is co-sponsored in the Senate by Warren, Hirono, Tammy Duckworth (Illinois), Kirsten Gillibrand (New York), Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin), Ed Markey (Massachusetts), Ron Wyden (Oregon), Jeff Merkley (Oregon),John Fetterman (Pennsylvania), Chris Van Hollen (Maryland), Bernie Sanders (Vermont), Andy Kim (New Jersey), and Cory Booker (New Jersey). Congressmen Adam Smith (Washington) Mark Takano (California), Chrissy Houlahan (Pennsylvania), Sara Jacobs (California), and Eric Sorensen (Illinois) are sponsoring the legislation in the House of Representatives. "By prohibiting this discrimination on the basis of gender identity, this legislation will help to ensure transgender individuals who are qualified to serve may do so," Hirono said. It remains to be seen how much bipartisan support the legislation could gain and whether it will be able to clear Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House. "If you are willing to risk your life for our country and you can do the job, it shouldn't matter if you are gay, straight, transgender, Black, white or anything else," said Duckworth who added that the ban "is disruptive to our military, hurts readiness and not only does nothing to strengthen our national security -- it actively makes things worse." "The Fit to Serve Act is a declaration that we will not stand by while our courageous troops are under political assault. Transgender service members meet the same rigorous standards, deploy worldwide, put in the same hard work and demonstrate the same dedication as any of their colleagues" said Jennifer Pike Bailey, Government Affairs Director of the Human Rights Campaign, one of the advocacy groups supporting the legislation. "President Trump and Secretary Hegseth are taking away their jobs, cutting off their health care benefits, and disregarding the immense sacrifices these service members and their families have made. It's a slap in the face to all who serve and puts our military readiness at risk," she added. "At a time when the United States faces growing threats around the world, banning them from the All-Volunteer Force will make Americans less safe," said Luke Schleusener, CEO of Out in National Security. "This legislation underscores that the fight to honor the service of thousands of transgender Americans in uniform -- and to strengthen America's national security -- is far from over." ABC's Deena Zaru contributed to this report.
