logo
Indiana House passes Senate Medicaid bill; bill heads back to Senate for final approval

Indiana House passes Senate Medicaid bill; bill heads back to Senate for final approval

Chicago Tribune08-04-2025

The Indiana House passed the Senate Medicaid bill Tuesday, largely along party lines, and the bill will go back to the Senate for final approval because it was amended in the House.
The bill passed 66-28, with State Rep. Wendy Dant Chesser, D-Jeffersonville, breaking with Democrats to vote in favor of the bill and State Rep. Ethan Manning, R-Cass, breaking with Republicans to vote against the bill.
Senate Bill 2 – authored by Sen. Ryan Mishler, R-Mishawaka – places restrictions on Medicaid, including work requirements on an insurance program for Hoosiers with a median income and between ages 19 to 64.
The bill also gives the Office of the Secretary of Family and Social Services various requirements, including those to report specified Medicaid data to the Medicaid oversight committee. The office must also prepare and present a report to the budget committee about the enforcement of a five-year Medicaid outlook period.
If passed, the bill will also require the office to establish performance standards for hospitals that create eligibility requirements and action for when hospitals do not comply with standards.
The bill has been amended by the House Public Health Committee to remove a 500,000 cap on the Medicaid program. Last week, the House Ways and Means Committee amended the bill further to allow an Indiana resident enrolled in or attending an accredited educational program full-time to be eligible for the plan.
The House Ways and Means Committee also amended the bill further to allow the secretary of Indiana's Family and Social Services office to advertise or market participation in the Medicaid program. The office can also reimburse medical providers at the appropriate Medicaid fee schedule rate for some medical claims before the beginning of benefits.
State Rep. Brad Barrett, R-Richmond, said Senate Bill 2 'closes loopholes to stop waste in this space,' as well as tightening up the policy for preemptive eligibility, tracking improper payments, and other components.
Medicaid has been scrutinized at the federal level, Barrett said.
'Doing nothing is not acceptable in this space. We were really forced with doing something this legislative session,' Barrett said.
During second reading in the House on Monday, Democratic members presented 10 amendments to the bill, but each amendment failed.
State Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, proposed an amendment to state that the Family and Social Services secretary may not use a wait list for a Medicaid waiver to reduce total enrollment in the waiver.
State Rep. Robin Shackleford, D-Indianapolis, filed five amendments, including changing the language from $3,000 to $20,000 of lottery or gambling winnings to result in someone being kicked off the Medicaid program. Shackleford also proposed an amendment to ensure that anyone on the Medicaid program as of July 1 may not be counted in any limits to the program.
Shackleford said Tuesday that the state wasn't forced to do something with Medicaid but rather ensure that Hoosiers have health insurance.
Referencing the state's $1 billion Medicaid shortfall, Shackleford said the state made a mistake in hiring a company that couldn't accurately calculate how many Hoosiers require Medicaid.
State Rep. Maureen Bauer, D-South Bend, said there is a misconception about Medicaid recipients committing fraud, but in reality, Medicaid recipients are the victims of fraud.
'Instead of addressing the real fraud, Senate Bill 2 adds to the administrative costs that already burden our Medicaid system,' Bauer said.
State Rep. Victoria Garcia Wilburn, D-Fishers, said she disagreed with the notion that the state has to take action on Medicaid. In committee, Garcia Wilburn said legislators learned that the cost per person on Medicaid is $667 per year, which covers preventative and emergency care.
'This bill will not save our state any money. Quite frankly, it has the potential to do harm, and we'll lose billions of dollars in federal match money over the next two years,' Garcia Wilburn said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump is under water on some of his top issues — including immigration, poll shows
Trump is under water on some of his top issues — including immigration, poll shows

Yahoo

time12 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump is under water on some of his top issues — including immigration, poll shows

President Donald Trump is under water on some of his most favorable issues — immigration and the economy — according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday. The poll shows Trump's approval rating at 38 percent among registered voters, a three point drop from April. He's also losing support on subjects that were crucial to his November victory. On immigration — an issue that the president hammered on the campaign trail — Trump's approval rating dropped five points from April, to 43 percent. His already low approval rating on the economy did not budge, remaining at 40 percent. The results show a majority of voters, 54 percent, disapprove of Trump's handling of the issue. The poll surveyed 1,265 self-identified registered voters from June 5-9, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percent. The results come as Trump's approval has been steadily picking up since it dropped significantly in April, according to RealClearPolitics' polling average. The negative polling did not stop at the president himself. A majority of the voters polled also had objections to his premier piece of legislation, the 'big, beautiful bill' making its way through Congress. Fifty-three percent of the voters polled did not support the legislation. Divided among party lines, 67 percent of Republicans supported, while 89 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of independents opposed it. On Medicaid funding, an issue that has become Democratic messaging priority, 47 percent of those surveyed thought funding should increase, while 40 percent think it should stay about the same, and just 10 percent think federal funding should decrease. The bill as passed by the House is estimated to end Medicaid coverage for millions of people. Quinnipiac also asked voters what they think of billionaire Elon Musk, and his approval rating is crashing among Republicans following his very public breakup with Trump. Among Republicans, 62 percent had a favorable view of Musk, a 16 point drop from April. But while Trump's approval languishes, it's not clear Democrats will be able to take advantage of it. A vast majority of voters — 70 percent — disapprove of the way Democrats in Congress are doing their jobs, while 20 percent approved. That's 12 points lower than how voters viewed Republicans in the survey.

How Trump's ‘big beautiful bill' could wreck Utah's groundbreaking AI laws
How Trump's ‘big beautiful bill' could wreck Utah's groundbreaking AI laws

Yahoo

time13 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

How Trump's ‘big beautiful bill' could wreck Utah's groundbreaking AI laws

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget package could derail the state's groundbreaking artificial intelligence laws unless it is changed. The 1,000-page bill that passed the House last month includes a 10-year prohibition on AI regulations. An updated Senate version removed the all-out ban but conditioned $500 million in AI infrastructure grants on states pausing enforcement of AI laws. Behind these provisions is a desire by some lawmakers to prevent a nationwide patchwork of AI regulations that hampers innovation amid competition with China. But Cox, and Utah's top tech policymakers, said the approach taken by Trump's bill interferes with the state's right to react to rapidly evolving technologies. 'Our hope is that the last version of this bill that passes, whatever that looks like, will allow for the smart type of regulation that we're doing in Utah, and prevent the bad kind of regulation that would stop AI from reaching its fullest potential,' Cox said Tuesday during a monthly PBS broadcast. Utah has been recognized around the world for having the 'first and smartest of the AI regulations that have been proposed,' according to Cox. These policies include bills that create a state-run AI policy lab, clarify consumer protection liability for AI and require AI disclosures in industries like finance and mental health. The governor said that multiple members of the U.S. House have told his team that they were not aware of the AI moratorium when they voted on the bill. Members of the White House and Senate have also said that they don't want the 'BBB bill' to eliminate Utah's law, Cox said. 'AI companies actually support what we're doing because they recognize that this is the right way to do AI regulation as opposed to just piecemeal,' Cox said. Cox agreed that 'a hodgepodge' of AI laws around the country would cause the U.S. to 'fall behind and we would lose this global race that is happening right now.' But he said a moratorium on AI policy shouldn't come at the expense of Utah's novel approach which doesn't actually tell AI companies how they can develop their models. Utah Rep. Doug Fiefia, R-Herriman, said the problem goes beyond counterproductive policy. It targets the foundation of states rights that has allowed Utah to lead out on so many issues, according to Fiefia, a freshman lawmaker who previously worked at Google. 'States are laboratories for innovation when it comes to policy, and I believe that the federal government should not overreach on this process and allow it to work,' Fiefia said. 'We will not give over our control because the federal government believes that it's the right thing to do to win this race.' On Tuesday, Utah House legislative leadership, and 62 state senators and representatives, sent a letter authored by Fiefia to Utah's congressional delegation arguing that the moratorium hindered 'Utah's nationally recognized efforts to strike the right balance between innovation and consumer protection.' Not only would the moratorium harm state efforts to legislate guardrails, it would also hurt businesses that are using AI responsibly by allowing their competitors to engage in unethical behavior, according to Fiefia. States have shown they are more nimble than the federal government when they need to adapt to change, Fiefia said. And this is the approach Fiefia believes Utah has demonstrated in opening up legal pathways for innovation while updating the law for the threats posed by AI. 'Just because we want to move fast in this global arms race of AI doesn't mean we can't do so with a seat belt,' Fiefia said. 'I believe that we can both win this AI race, but also doing it in a thoughtful and meaningful way.' The AI moratorium faces procedural hurdles in addition to ideological pushback. Utah Sen. Kirk Cullimore, R-Sandy, pointed out that reconciliation bills are meant only to amend the annual budget and not make substantive policy shifts. Some senators have alleged that the AI moratorium does not comply with the 'Byrd Rule,' a procedural requirement that prohibits 'nonbudgetary' additions during the budget 'reconciliation' process. Cullimore, who was the sponsor behind most of Utah's AI legislation, was in Washington, D.C., last week, speaking with members of the House Commerce Committee, which oversaw the inclusion of the AI moratorium provisions. The intentions behind the moratorium, Cullimore said, were to prevent states from implementing what are called 'foundational regulations' that restrict the kind of technology AI companies can develop. Utah's laws do not do this, according to Cullimore, who also signed Fiefia's letter, but they would still be sidelined by the 'big beautiful bill' even if the moratorium is replaced by the conditioned federal funding. 'I think the drafting of the moratorium was so broad that it potentially encompassed all of that stuff,' he said. 'So I hope that that we can refine the text a little bit, and then if they want to put those conditions in on foundational regulation, I think that'd be appropriate.'

White House rips 'shameful' LA riots as Trump steps in where Newsom, Bass failed, Leavitt says
White House rips 'shameful' LA riots as Trump steps in where Newsom, Bass failed, Leavitt says

Yahoo

time13 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

White House rips 'shameful' LA riots as Trump steps in where Newsom, Bass failed, Leavitt says

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt condemned the protest and riots in Los Angeles as "shameful" on Wednesday, blasting California officials for failing to reign in "left-wing radicals." Leavitt made the comments as soon as she took the podium at a Wednesday press briefing. She emphasized President Donald Trump's efforts to quash the "mob rule" seen in the city while accusing California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass of failing to serve their constituents. "They didn't have the courage to do the right thing and protect law-abiding Californians from rioters," Leavitt said of the officials. "That's why President Trump deployed the National Guard and mobilized Marines to end the chaos and restore law and order." "The mob violence is being stomped out. The criminals responsible will be swiftly brought to justice, and the Trump administration's operations to arrest illegal aliens are continuing unabated," she added. Watch: Dem, Media Outlets Insist La Anti-ice Riots Are 'Peaceful' Despite Violence, Injured Cops Leavitt went on to field questions from reporters about the "specific criteria" that Trump used to federalize California's National Guard. Read On The Fox News App CNN White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins argued members of the military would not be able to conduct arrests unless Trump invoked the Insurrection Act. "As you know, the president federalized the national guard under U.S. Code 10," Leavitt responded. The Politics Of Trump's Move To Quell Anti-ice Unrest In Los Angeles Appear To Put Democrats On Defense Trump deployed 2,000 National Guardsman to Los Angeles this week, as well as 700 U.S. Marines. Trump suggested earlier this week that he would be willing to arrest Newsom if his administration obstructs ICE operations amid riots in Los Angeles. "He's daring Tom Homan to come and arrest him. Should he do it?" Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy asked. Newsom Say Los Angeles Rioters Will Be Prosecuted, Slams Trump For 'Traumatizing Our Communities' "I would do it if I were Tom," Trump responded. "I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity. But I do think it would be a great thing. He's done a terrible job. I like Gavin Newsom. He's a nice guy, but he's grossly incompetent. Everybody knows." Trump has also been vocal about his belief that many of the rioters and protesters in Los Angeles are professional agitators rather than real protesters. "The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators. They're insurrectionists. They're bad people. They should be in jail," Trump said. Newsom swiftly responded to Trump's comments in a post on social article source: White House rips 'shameful' LA riots as Trump steps in where Newsom, Bass failed, Leavitt says

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store