
Potential Medicaid cuts would be ‘devastating' for Hawaii
When Amy Feeley-Austin of Kona was going through a tough time, Medicaid was a lifesaver that provided health care for her two young children.
Twelve years ago her husband died, leaving her and the children with no health insurance. It was a sudden and unexpected turn of events, and in a time of grief, she had to scramble to get health care insurance.
Thanks to Medicaid, she was able to get coverage for her two children to continue their regular doctor visits, as well as specialized services her son needed for a disability. She worked for a social services organization at the time, but the cost of employer insurance was three-quarters of her salary.
She worked her way to a higher-paying job, eventually, with employer-provided health coverage and no longer needed Medicaid after two years. She also went on to earn several advanced degrees and is now chief operating officer at Kona Community Hospital.
Looking back, Feeley-Austin, 42, will never forget how Medicaid was there when she needed it.
'This was a very real need, ' she said. 'It was a way to make sure my kids were safe and healthy while I figured out how to address this horrible, traumatizing thing, and we were able to move forward from there.'
But Medicaid is under threat, with Republicans in Congress to the program as part of a wide-ranging budget package.
Congress is targeting up to $880 billion in cuts over 10 years, according to KFF, a health policy think tank. Some possibilities include adding new work requirements for eligibility and scaling back the federal share of Medicaid costs.
Although details remain up in the air, KFF said any reduction in federal Medicaid would leave states with tough choices on how to offset reductions.
Nationally, Medicaid provides health care coverage for more than 80 million Americans.
Gov. Josh Green ran through the numbers on his whiteboard in a recent social media post, saying federal cuts to Medicaid would result in increased medical debt for residents and potentially affect Hawaii's rural hospitals.
It would mean fewer people getting their high blood pressure diagnosed or their medication for diabetes.
'A cut to Medicaid is a cut to all of our care in the country, basically, and we won't let that happen without a fight, ' said Green. 'Please know we're going to continue to work hard to make sure all our people are well cared for.'
A safety net In Hawaii, Medicaid is administered as Med-QUEST, and provides health care coverage for more than 400, 000 residents. It provides health care for 1 in 3 keiki and covers 1 in 3 births in the state.
It covers low-income children and adults, pregnant women and aged, blind and disabled people, among others, for doctor visits, inpatient hospital services, prescription drugs and more. It also provides nursing home coverage and home-based care to those who qualify.
In Hawaii, federal funds cover 73 % of the $3 billion spent annually on Medicaid.
At this time there have been no changes to Medicaid funding in Hawaii, according to the state Department of Human Services, which runs Med-QUEST.
'We continue to monitor the debate over Medicaid funding that is happening at the federal level, ' said DHS in an announcement posted to its website. 'Please be assured that no changes have been made at this time to Hawaii's Medicaid program, Med-QUEST. We encourage you to continue to access healthcare by making and keeping appointments with your health care professional and picking up any medications that are prescribed.'
Francoise Culley-Trotman, CEO of AlohaCare, is also watching developments closely.
AlohaCare is nonprofit health plan that has provided coverage for QUEST beneficiaries since its founding in 1994. It is Hawaii's second-largest Medicaid health plan, behind HMSA, with more than 70, 000 members.
Culley-Trotman said Medicaid serves as a vital safety net for individuals and families who cannot afford private health insurance or have limited access to employer-sponsored coverage.
Any cuts to Medicaid funding would be 'very devastating ' for Hawaii, she said.
'The difficulty of thriving in an expensive state itself is a challenge, ' she said. 'When you remove those resources, you're challenging the household and people's ability to take care of themselves. There's going to be disruption in caregiving.'
If access to health care is reduced, she said, the whole ecosystem of care is affected. Oftentimes, people without routine health care resort to using emergency rooms, which is costly and strains the hospital system.
AlohaCare celebrated Medicaid Awareness Month in April by collecting stories such as Feeley-Austin's, and will continue to do so until federal and state Medicaid budgets are finalized.
She expects to know more this fall, when final decisions are made. But the uncertainty from not knowing the details is also extremely stressful, she said.
Hospital strain All of Hawaii's hospitals would be affected by Medicaid cuts, as all care for Medicaid patients, according to Hilton Raethel, president and CEO of the Healthcare Association of Hawaii.
A reduction in Medicare reimbursements would increase the financial burden for hospitals, many of which are already struggling.
'Our hospitals already operate on very, very narrow margins, ' said Raethel. 'It's a very challenging health care environment, and labor costs are going up.'
Additionally, Medicaid covers about 60 % of patients at skilled nursing facilities in Hawaii and is the single largest payer for long-term care in the state.
Raethel said he expects the state Legislature to address federal cuts during a special session in November and that by then Hawaii should know how much and where the cuts will be.
For now it's a waiting game.
'The state has been very careful to put aside some dollars so if they do need to close some of these gaps, they have the ability to do that in the short term, ' he said, 'but they still have limited ability depending on how draconian these cuts might be.'
There also would be other cuts to address, including cuts to education.
Hawaii's congressional delegation is aware of the pending threats, and advocating for their fellow Congress members, including Republicans, to think about the devastating impact to their states.
U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono condemned the impending cuts to a critical program such as Medicaid, warning that it could affect thousands of residents in Hawaii.
'President Trump and Republicans are working to cut over $800 billion in Medicaid funding, which would impact hundreds of thousands of people in Hawaii, ' said Hiro no in a statement. 'As costs continue to rise for working families, Republicans are jeopardizing health care access for millions of Americans in order to pay for trillions in tax cuts for their billionaire buddies. Medicaid is an essential resource that helps rural communities, people with disabilities, keiki, and kupuna access health care, and I will do everything in my power to protect this crucial program.'
U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz recently met with The Queen's Medical Center to discuss growing demands for its emergency department and the potential impact of Med-QUEST cuts. A significant share of Queen's patients are Med-QUEST recipients, he said.
AlohaCare's Culley-Trotman said part of her campaign is to battle the misconception that Medicaid recipients are lazy or unwilling to work.
Nationally, nearly two-thirds of adult Medicaid enrollees work either part or full time, according to KFF, while the rest are students, caregivers, disabled or ill.
AlohaCare's Culley-Trotman said about 60 % of adults on Med-QUEST in Hawaii have a job, and in some cases multiple jobs. Some have jobs without consistent hours, which leaves them unqualified for health insurance coverage.
Feeley-Austin says both her children are doing well now, with one about to graduate from high school and the other attending college—and she is grateful Medicaid was there when she needed it.
'It's very humbling, ' she said. 'I keep going back to there's this concept, especially with everything happening at a national level, that people can just do it themselves. That's not always what happens.'
Sometimes there are sudden job losses, she said, or accidents that result in disabilities and serious illnesses—and Medicaid is a safety net, especially for children.
Based on an earlier analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Hawaii would have to raise taxes or cut other parts of its budget by an estimated $3 billion over 10 years to maintain Med-QUEST, including the Medicaid expansion to low-income adults.
'Cutting Medicaid by taking away coverage and shifting costs to states will have long-term and expensive repercussions, including worse health outcomes, greater costs to hospital systems, and straining state and local economies, ' said the center. 'Cutting Medicaid is ill-advised and should be rejected.'
The cuts would be the most severe, the center said, to states like Hawaii that have expanded Medicaid to low-income adults.
MEDICAID IN HAWAII—Medicaid is administered as Med-QUEST in Hawaii as a joint federal-state program.—Provides health insurance for more than 400, 000 Hawaii residents.—Covers 1 in 6 adults ages 19-64, and 1 in 3 keiki in Hawaii.—Covers 1 in 3 births in Hawaii, and 4 in 7 nursing home residents.—Hawaii is among 41 states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act.—Hawaii spends about $3 billion annually on Med-icaid (federal share, 73 %; state share, 27 %). Most of it, 88 %, goes to managed care.—Med-QUEST health plans are offered by managed-care organizations AlohaCare, HMSA, Kaiser Permanente, Ohana Health Plan, UnitedHealthcare Community Plan.—The Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, implemented in 2000 in Hawaii, is part of the Med-icaid program.
AlohaCare invites residents to share their stories following Medicaid Awareness Month in April at alohacare.org (share story at ).
Sources : KFF, Med-QUEST
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. Used 'Disinformation' to Defend Change to Vaccine Schedule, Expert Says: Reports
The Department of Health and Human Services sent Congress a document that cited disputed studies and misrepresented other findings, according to NPR and KFF Health News The document was written in support of Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s decision to change federal COVID vaccine recommendations for healthy kids and pregnant women 'This is RFK Jr.'s playbook,' said Sean O'Leary, chair of the Committee on Infectious Diseases for the American Academy of PediatricsThe Department of Health and Human Services sent Congress a document to support Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s decision to change federal vaccine recommendations that cited unpublished or disputed studies and misrepresented other findings, according to NPR and KFF Health News. In late May, Kennedy, who has a history of vaccine skepticism, announced on X that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) removed the COVID vaccine from the recommended immunization schedule for healthy children and pregnant women, while touting President Trump's Make America Healthy Again agenda. "It is so far out of left field that I find it insulting to our members of Congress that they would actually give them something like this. Congress members are relying on these agencies to provide them with valid information, and it's just not there," Dr. Mark Turrentine, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Baylor College of Medicine, told KFF Health News, the outlet that obtained the FAQ document. The outlet also reported that the document suggests a link between heart conditions like myocarditis or pericarditis and the COVID vaccine, but updated research suggests that connection has decreased with newer vaccine procedures. The document also left out multiple other peer-reviewed studies that show the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis is greater after getting sick with COVID for both vaccinated and non-vaccinated people than the risk of the same complications after vaccination alone, per KFF Health News. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. "There is no distortion of the studies in this document. The underlying data speaks for itself, and it raises legitimate safety concerns. HHS will not ignore that evidence or downplay it. We will follow the data and the science," a HHS spokesperson told KFF Health News. 'This is RFK Jr.'s playbook,' Sean O'Leary, chair of the Committee on Infectious Diseases for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told KFF Health News. 'Either cherry-pick from good science or take junk science to support his premise — this has been his playbook for 20 years.' Read the original article on People


Boston Globe
27 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
A member of RFK Jr.'s MAHA movement and a public health expert met on Zoom. Here's what happened next.
The conversations are the brainchild of Brinda Adhikari, a journalist and former television producer who grew increasingly concerned about Americans' mistrust of institutions after Donald Trump's reelection. 'These are two groups that talk a lot about each other,' said Adhikari, who has worked for ABC News and the podcast 'The Problem with Jon Stewart.' 'I just don't see a lot of spaces where they talk to each other or with each other.' The conversations are captured on Adhikari's weekly podcast, ' Advertisement Despite the high stakes, the goal wasn't to change anyone's mind, said Adhikari, who lives in Brooklyn. She hoped both sides would discover shared concerns and better understand their opponents' perspectives. Those common worries included the risks of corporate influence in science and medicine, the possible harms Medicaid cuts could cause, and the safety of Americans' food. 'I didn't expect the areas of agreement would be so obvious that we would actually find spaces to work together almost immediately,' said Megan Ranney, dean of the Yale School of Public Health, who participated in the conversations. Advertisement Though 'We really came into this feeling ostracized,' said Elizabeth Frost, a panelist who led Kennedy's Ohio presidential campaign operation. 'What really surprised me is a lot of people in public health feel the same way.' The two groups, five MAHA representatives and the same number of public health experts, met twice in May. A third conversation involved a few of the same panelists, plus MAHA representatives from Georgia. Some meetings took on the tenor of estranged family members working to heal rifts. MAHA is grounded in a deep skepticism of establishment medicine. Many gravitated toward the movement after feeling let down by doctors they had trusted. Public health experts derive their knowledge from establishment medicine: They rely on hard-won data and the scientific method for their conclusions. One side feels ignored or dismissed. The other is frustrated and dismayed by how little sway scientific evidence and expertise hold with some MAHA adherents. Advertisement 'Scientists try their best to be open-minded, and ... we push and test each other to make sure that we're coming up with new ideas and using the best methods possible and getting as close to truth as we can,' Ranney said during the podcast. She then asked Frost, 'What would help folks to feel like science was being done with and for them?' 'There was a lot of outrage for having any questions about the way that the COVID pandemic was handled,' Frost responded. 'People on the MAHA side of it felt very demonized and very othered, that they weren't allowed to be a part of the conversation.' The MAHA movement coalesced around Kennedy's presidential campaign last year, though it adopted its name only after he suspended his campaign for president and endorsedTrump and his Make American Great Again movement. MAHA emphasizes personal choice in health, with a focus on addressing chronic illness, food quality, and distrust of the pharmaceutical industry. It also is associated with opposing longstanding, and well-proven, public health cornerstones, including the importance of widespread vaccination and water fluoridation to improve dental health. It's proven to have surprising appeal to members of both political parties, drawing liberals, MAGA Republicans, and independents, said Frost. As a result, members' beliefs are highly heterodox. Antivax sentiments are far from uniform, and dissatisfaction with overall policies in the Trump administration isn't unusual. Mark Harris, another Ohio MAHA leader, described himself as an independent thinker. He disapproves of proposed deep cuts to Medicaid and was among the first in his friend group to recognize how serious COVID would be. He did take the COVID-19 vaccine, he said. Advertisement 'I do believe in herd immunity,' he said in an interview. 'I believe in vaccines being very helpful in achieving that.' He emphasized during one of the podcasts, though, that the word vaccine implies permanent protection against an illness, and seems like a misnomer when applied to the COVID shots. COVID shots reliably offer long-term protection against serious illness and death but don't keep the virus entirely at bay over more than a few months. 'I completely agree with you,' said Paul Offit, one of the nation's most prominent vaccine experts and a member of the Food and Drug Administration's Vaccine Advisory Committee. 'Very early we should have made that very clear what the vaccine can and can't do.' The two sides also generally agree on why so many Americans have lost faith in the medical establishment. Access is expensive and difficult. Insurance coverage can appear arbitrary and confusing. Interactions with physicians are often through overcrowded emergency departments or with harried primary care physicians with barely the time to spend 10 minutes with a patient. Public health officials are not often visible, trusted figures in a community until an emergency arrives, leaving them with limited credibility, noted Craig Spencer, associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University. Many public health officials wish scientific evidence spoke for itself, particularly when it comes to the power of vaccines. Polio is virtually unheard of in the United States. Measles was eliminated in this country before lower vaccination rates allowed it to resurface. The absence of these illnesses makes it hard for people who didn't live before widespread inoculation to fully believe in the value of vaccines, Spencer said, and data alone can't compete with a powerful messenger. Advertisement People like Kennedy have stepped in to fill that communication gap. Many of his ideas aren't supported by science, Spencer said, but his ability to command an audience is enviable. 'They've done such an incredible job just being out there,' he said of MAHA leaders and influencers. 'Even if they're saying some things, a lot of things that I wouldn't agree with, they're out there and that is instilling trust." During the podcast, Frost described how angry she was that people with COVID had been denied ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Offit responded with a layman's explanation of the evidence that the drugs aren't effective against the virus and, in the case of hydroxychloroquine, may do harm. Yet in the interview Frost didn't sound especially convinced, saying she gives the most weight to what her physician recommends. That wasn't evidence of the podcast's failure, Adhikari said. 'That you're going to sit down with someone whom you've never met and act as though you could say something to them within a two hour conversation that will completely change something that is a deep-rooted value for them, it's just not reasonable,' she said. 'What I am trying to do is to build the bridge, to trust each other enough to even be at the same table.' Jason Laughlin can be reached at


Axios
31 minutes ago
- Axios
NIH chief sidesteps controversy while other officials court it
National Institutes of Health director Jay Bhattacharya didn't aggressively push back and defend Trump administration budget cuts and grant freezes when senators grilled him last week about plans for his agency. An $18 billion cut in the 2026 NIH budget request was just a starting point for negotiations, he said. Why it matters: The hearing showed how the former Stanford professor is trying to deflect controversy over the administration's health agenda while others on President Trump's health team under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have leaned into their roles as disruptors. That's raising questions about who has the final say over the government's biomedical research hub. Bhattacharya is "in a difficult position with limited influence," Capital Alpha Partners analyst Rob Smith wrote in a note on Friday. "RFK appears to be running the show at the subagencies he oversees as HHS Secretary. It's our understanding that very little happens without his input." What they're saying: An HHS spokesperson told Axios that NIH and Bhattacharya are fully committed to advancing research, improving health outcomes and supporting scientific discovery. Constructive criticism pushes this innovation forward, they said. The big picture: NIH is the largest public payer of biomedical research in the world. It funds academic research and develops and funds much of the science behind products that drug companies eventually commercialize. The Trump budget's plan to cut its funding 40% next year could kneecap pharma and the biotech industry. State of play: Bhattacharya tried to find a middle ground during the Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, taking credit for fighting what he called "politicized science" while telling lawmakers he didn't accept the job to terminate grants. "This is my first time through this budget fight, and so I'm still learning, but I'll tell you what I understand is that this — the budget — is a collaborative effort between Congress and the administration," Bhattacharya said. "We have tremendous health needs that we have to address. It's only excellent research that's going to solve those problems," he said. His written testimony didn't mention the cuts, instead laying out the administration's policy priorities for NIH and the funding they are requesting. Zoom in: It's true that the budget proposal is just the first step in a negotiation process, and Congress gets the final say on funding levels. But Bhattacharya's decision not to explicitly defend the budget cuts shows that his role remains cryptic on a health team that's eagerly pushing boundaries. Kennedy defended the cuts strongly when he appeared in front of the same panel last month. "All the money that we've been pouring into these programs for years has not resulted in better health for Americans. ... We won't solve this problem by throwing more money at it. We must spend smarter," Kennedy said. The intrigue: Bhattacharya was sworn in as NIH director in April — just as mass layoffs at the agency ordered by Kennedy and DOGE went into effect. He quickly sent an all-hands letter to staff expressing gratitude for their work and pledging to implement changes "humanely." Bhattacharya has set up an appeals process to review grants that were terminated through keyword searches and other aggressive efforts to root out DEI initiatives. NIH was one of the first agencies to tell employees they didn't have to answer Elon Musk's "five things" weekly emails, and Bhattacharya reportedly called the task silly in an address to NIH staff. But the frozen grants and budget request haven't earned him much of a grace period with Congress. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said last week the proposed budget cuts would "delay or stop effective treatments and cures from being developed for diseases like cancer, Alzheimer's, Type 1 diabetes — I could go on and on." "A President's budget is not a 'negotiation with Congress,' it's a statement of priorities and values," Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the ranking member of the committee's subpanel on health, told Axios in a statement. Reality check: Bhattacharya is no stranger to controversy. During the pandemic, he was disparaged by the medical establishment for co-authoring the Great Barrington Declaration, a petition arguing for COVID to spread among young, healthy people to reach herd immunity faster. He's been receptive to the idea that NIH-funded research in China led directly to the spread of COVID, and he's cast doubt on the merits of gender-affirming medical care for kids. "I think Dr. Bhattacharya wants NIH to continue to set the pace for medical progress, but what matters is whether he acts on intention and stops the dismantling of American-led research," Ellie Dehoney, senior vice president of policy and advocacy at Research!America, told Axios in an email. What we're watching: Bhattacharya is demurring, and there's bipartisan interest in keeping NIH well-funded. Congress in the near term is likely to maintain the status quo through stopgap spending measures.