McConnell, KY has too much to lose if Medicaid is cut. We won't 'get over it.'
The stakes are far too high for such a dismissive response about proposed cuts to Medicaid. The Congressional Budget Office estimates these changes could leave nearly 11 million Americans uninsured by 2034. These aren't abstract budget decisions. This legislation will have dire consequences for families, communities, and the providers that serve them.
Kentucky has more hospitals at risk of closure than any other state, according to the Sheps Center for Health Service Research at the University of North Carolina. With proposed Medicaid reductions threatening up to $1.3 billion in lost federal funding, as many as 35 hospitals could close, many of them in regions that are already underserved. That kind of loss isn't just a health-care crisis; it's an economic one. According to the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, these cuts could result in 12,100 fewer jobs and $98 million less in state tax revenue, with ripple effects on education, infrastructure and public safety.
Medicaid expansion has been one of the most impactful health policy decisions in our state's history, with Kentucky's uninsured rate falling from 14.5% in 2013 to 5.6% in 2023. This coverage has meant improved access to cancer treatment, preventive care, lifesaving medications, and mental health and addiction recovery services. It's helped stabilize rural hospitals, improve health outcomes, decrease racial disparities in coverage, and reduce medical debt.
Now, all of that is at risk. And for what?
Opinion: McConnell wants KY coal miners to 'get over' Medicaid cuts closing their hospitals
Medicaid cuts in Kentucky will hit kids, elderly and people with disabilities
Proponents claim these cuts target waste, fraud and abuse. However, the legislation does nothing to rein in drug prices, stop corporate price gouging or address the administrative inefficiencies that drive up costs. Instead, it strips care away from people with the least resources while giving tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans and the largest corporations.
Medicaid is vital in Kentucky. It covers roughly a third of the state's population, including:
68% of nursing home residents
46% of Kentucky children
51% of working-age adult Kentuckians living with disabilities
Medicaid also plays a critical role in our fight against addiction. Kentucky has one of the highest drug overdose death rates in the country, and Medicaid is the largest payer of substance use disorder treatment. Cutting Medicaid would mean fewer detox beds, less access to counseling and longer waits for recovery services at a time when families can't afford to wait.
Beyond Medicaid, other provisions in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' threaten to destabilize the ACA Marketplace, where 24 million Americans, many of them self-employed or small business owners, purchase coverage. Failing to extend enhanced subsidies could cause an additional 4 million Americans to become uninsured, leading to higher premiums and reduced benefits for those who remain.
Letters: McConnell got caught telling a truth he didn't want us to know about
Cutting Medicaid services for Planned Parenthood, other providers is alarming
As an OBGYN who spent her clinical career promoting gynecologic health, I am dismayed by the bill's intent to prohibit Medicaid funding for nonprofit essential community providers, such as Planned Parenthood clinics, for 10 years. I am further alarmed by the Supreme Court's ruling that will allow states to withhold Medicaid funding from Planned Parenthood. This money pays for contraception and screening services, such as pap smears, for primarily low-income patients. It almost never funds abortion; it simply helps those who do not desire or cannot afford to have children avoid unplanned pregnancies, keeps people from getting cancer, and helps people to be healthy so that they can be productive members of society.
Bills such as this 'save' money by denying care. Going without medication, heart surgery or cancer treatment costs payers less. Is that the answer? I say NO. Health care is not a luxury. It is a human right. Legislation that makes health care more expensive or difficult to access is morally and ethically wrong. It says that those in power determine who gets care and who doesn't, who lives and who dies.
Kentuckians don't need to 'get over it.' We need to demand a system that protects every one of us, before more hospitals close and more lives are lost.
Agree or disagree? Submit a letter to the editor.
Susan G. Bornstein, MD, MPH, is an OBGYN by training. She became so frustrated with the challenges that many of her patients faced with cost and access to care that she returned to school for a master's degree in public health. In 2021, she founded The Asclepius Initiative, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Learn more at AsclepiusInitiative.org.
This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: McConnell's Medicaid dismissal will save money, not Kentucky | Opinion
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
This can be a ‘big, beautiful' win for Americans with disabilities
The One Big, Beautiful Bill Act's Medicaid reforms will not affect community-based programs for people with disabilities; instead, they address ineligible recipients, administrative fraud and able-bodied adults who choose not to work. But more must be done to strengthen incentives for people with disabilities to move to, remain in, and thrive within their communities. As an advocate who has fought for services to emancipate people with disabilities from institutional warehousing for nearly half a century, I can, without equivocation, write that large congregate care is less effective and significantly more expensive than any home- or community-based living arrangement. Funding can and should be allocated in a more humanitarian and utilitarian way when it comes to community programs. When President Ronald Reagan signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, the federal government recognized home- and community-based care as an alternative to costly institutions. Although the idea was to save money, the bill gave rise to the unexpected benefit of incentivizing states with innovative leadership to shift towards managing services rather than simply paying claims. This sea-change enabled states such as New Jersey and New York to close institutions and move people back into their communities. In addition, these reforms caused a multitude of lawsuits against institutional abuse, which enabled a more expeditious shift for community placements and allowed the disabled to thrive in small homes. I worked in New Jersey when it had several more institutions than it does now. In 1981, there were almost 9,000 people living in institutions. Today, there remain approximately 3,000 people living in the five remaining institutions and private nursing homes at a cost of nearly $450,000 per person per year in the state. Over the last few years, I have visited state-run institutions in Corpus Christi, El Paso, and Dallas, which house thousands of people with disabilities who could work and live in their communities. Most of the funding in Texas is used to house people in institutions, which can cost nearly half a million dollars per person each year. In comparison, a person receiving community services, such as host homes, costs Medicaid only about $54,000 per year. Deinstitutionalization is slowing in Texas, and in recent years, the number of people who have moved from institutions into the community has declined significantly. Unfortunately, without incentives to close institutions, local legislators are intent on keeping them open to protect what is often the largest employer in their districts. It's a tough decision, but it requires the political will to do the right thing. Stop keeping our most vulnerable in institutions, and allow them to live in their own communities and have better lives. Community-based programs that support parents in providing in-home care offer invaluable opportunities for people with disabilities to stay connected to the places they call home. We now need the federal government to work with states and providers and ensure quality care is given to our most vulnerable. We have made steps in this direction, but President Trump has a unique opportunity to lead the charge in ensuring our family, friends and neighbors aren't shut in institutions but rather allowed to receive the care they need and the opportunity for lives in the communities they live in. I am encouraged that Trump and Congress accomplished this legislation, and I hope to help them as they reform outdated methods of care for people with disabilities. Robert Stack is the founder, president, and CEO of Community Options, Inc., a national non-profit organization that develops housing and employment for 6,000 people with disabilities across 12 states. Stack has been a national leader in the continuing struggle to improve the lives of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Trump ‘really likes' TikTok— but admin warns Chinese ownership not acceptable as dead deadline looms
President Trump likes TikTok but the Chinese-owned short video app, used by some 170 million Americans, has to move to US ownership, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick said on Sunday. 'The President really likes TikTok, and he said it over and over again, because, you know, it was a good way to communicate with young people,' Lutnick said in an interview on Fox News Sunday with Shannon Bream. 'But let's face it, you can't have the Chinese have an app on 100 million American phones, that is just not okay. So, it's got to move to American ownership, it's got to move to American technology, American algorithms,' he said. 'I know the President is positive towards TikTok, if it can move into American hands.' Advertisement 3 Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Sunday that President Trump likes TikTok because 'it was a good way to communicate with young people.: FOX NEWS Lutnick's comments follow his warning last week that TikTok will have to stop operating in the U.S. if China does not approve a deal for the app. He told CNBC on Thursday that US must control the algorithm that makes the social media platform work. Advertisement TikTok parent ByteDance has a Sept. 17 deadline to divest the platform's US assets. Last month, President Trump extended by 90 days to Sept. 17, a deadline for China-based ByteDance to divest the US assets of TikTok. Trump's action took place despite a 2024 law that mandated a sale or shutdown by Jan. 19 of this year if there had not been significant progress. 3 President Trump has set a Sept. 17 deadline for Chinese firm ByteDance to divest TikTok's US assets. Getty Images 'China can have a little piece or ByteDance, the current owner, can keep a little piece. But basically, Americans will have control. Americans will own the technology, and Americans will control the algorithm,' Lutnick said. Advertisement 'If that deal gets approved, by the Chinese, then that deal will happen,' he added. 'If they don't approve it, then TikTok is going to go dark, and those decisions are coming very soon.' 3 A deal that was in the works this spring that would spin off TikTok's US operations into a new US-based firm stalled. Chidori_B – A deal had been in the works this spring that would spin off TikTok's US operations into a new US-based firm, majority-owned and operated by US investors. This stalled after China indicated it would not approve it following Trump's announcements of steep tariffs on Chinese goods. Trump has three times granted reprieves from federal enforcement of the law that mandated the sale or shutdown of TikTok that was supposed to take effect in January.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Medicaid changes will hurt family caregivers, experts warn
Medicaid cuts under President Trump's sweeping tax and spending package will harm family caregivers, experts warn, by reducing access to health care for themselves and the people they care for, which could then lead to more caregiving responsibilities. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the package will reduce Medicaid spending by roughly $911 billion over the next 10 years and increase the number of uninsured Americans by up to 10 million. Some of those who could lose coverage are among the 8 million — or 13 percent — of family caregivers in the United States who receive their health insurance coverage through Medicaid, according to the National Alliance of Caregiving. 'We are very concerned of the impact of the just finalized Medicaid cuts on the community of family caregivers,' Jason Resendez, president and CEO of the alliance, said during a call with reporters earlier this week. Medicaid recipients will be subject to more frequent eligibility checks, in part, due to revised work requirements for the joint state and federal program. Now, adults between the ages of 19 and 64 will need to work or participate in community service activities for at least 80 hours a month to be eligible for health care coverage under Medicaid. There are some exceptions for parents with dependents as well as for those deemed 'medically frail' or who are pregnant or postpartum, according to the health care policy nonprofit KFF. Many caregivers cannot work outside the home because of the intense care their family members need, or can only work limited hours, which can make fulfilling Medicaid work requirements difficult to impossible. This was the case for Lisa Tschudi, host of caregiving podcast 'Love Doesn't Pay the Bills,' who stayed home full time to take care of her daughter who has ataxic cerebral palsy and epilepsy. 'We really did not have other options,' she said. 'I, many times, tried to line up some non-me care for her during the workday and a job for myself, and I never really got my start in a paid job in that way.' Her daughter's epilepsy was poorly controlled for years as a child and teen, which required her to travel for frequent doctors' appointments on top of taking care of her younger daughter. 'It was a lot to manage,' she said. Work requirements might force some family caregivers to look for outside help, if that is an option, which represents a new expense and, potentially, a new challenge to navigate. 'Even if you can find outside providers to come in … families often find that they are not reliable,' said Elizabeth Edwards, senior attorney at the National Health Law Program. 'Some of that inconsistency of how people show up as providers can mean it's very hard to hold a job.' Family caregivers also already spend huge amounts of time navigating numerous bureaucratic hurdles, and new work requirements will add to the paperwork they have to fill out to prove they are eligible for health care under Medicaid. This extra administrative work also increases the likelihood of errors occurring in the eligibility system, which could delay coverage or prevent some from being enrolled altogether, according to Edwards. That is what happened to many Medicaid recipients in Arkansas and Georgia when the two states implemented work requirements in 2018 and 2023, respectively. More than 18,000 people in Arkansas lost Medicaid coverage over the 10-month period the state rolled out work requirements without increasing employment, according to a KFF analysis. Georgia still has one of the highest uninsured rates in the country at 12 percent, according to the Commonwealth Fund. 'We anticipate [them] not just being faced with these eligibility issues, but family caregivers losing Medicaid coverage because of these additional hurdles that they'll be forced to traverse,' Resendez said. About 11 million family caregivers in the U.S. receive payment for the care they provide, according to Resendez. Those payments primarily come through home and community-based services and consumer-directed programs at the state level. But those programs will likely start to lose funding as states are forced to decide what to fund with fewer Medicaid dollars, experts told The Hill. 'When states have less money and are forced to make decisions, home and community-based services are the first optional benefits to get cut,' Resendez said. Tschudi, as well as her husband and second daughter, are all paid family caregivers under a home and community-based service their home state of Oregon's Medicaid program provides. Without that program, her family would likely have to go back to unpaid caregiving, which would not be financially possible at this time. 'I don't wish it on anyone,' Tschudi said about the struggles that come with unpaid caregiving. 'I really think you leave families in an impossible situation when you don't pay for caregiving.'
