By Alice Ollstein | June 14, 2018 6:00
am
Attorneys for Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin (R)
will tell a federal court this Friday that that the governor plans to take his
ball and go home if he can’t get his way on Medicaid work requirements,
premiums, and other restrictions. Bevin, who campaigned on ending the Medicaid
expansion but backed down from
that threatonce elected, is now arguing that he will scrap the
state’s Medicaid expansion if the controversial new rules are struck down by
federal courts.
Kentucky was the first state in the nation to
win permission from the Trump administration to impose the new Medicaid rules,
which are expected to throw nearly 100,000
Kentuckians off the program. With at least a dozen other states
looking to adopt their own Medicaid work requirements, the outcome of the case
could determine the future of the program not only in Kentucky but across the
country.
Kentucky and the Trump administration are
jointly fighting a
lawsuit from a dozen-plus Kentucky residents who fear the work
requirements and other hurdles will strip them of their Medicaid coverage. The
plaintiffs are arguing, among other points, that the new rules do not further
Congress’ original intent for Medicaid — to provide affordable health care to
low-income people.
Kentucky’s waiver will allow the state to deny
coverage to any non-disabled adult who cannot prove they are working at least
20 hours per week. The state also will be able to charge low-income
Medicaid recipients health care premiums, eliminate full coverage of dental
care, vision services, and over-the-counter medications for many adults, end
retroactive Medicaid coverage, and implement a six-month lockout period for
people who fail to re-enroll in time or report a change in income.
In the state’s legal filings, Kentucky
responds that the challengers don’t have legal standing because they can’t
prove they will be harmed by the new rules, which are set to go into effect in
July. The state additionally says the lawsuit should be thrown out because
Bevin’s promise to scrap the Medicaid expansion entirely if he loses in court
means that the challengers’ claims are not “redressable” — essentially, they’re
screwed and will lose their Medicaid coverage no matter which way the court
comes down.
“Governor Bevin has made it unmistakably clear
that Kentucky will withdraw from expanded Medicaid if this case ultimately
succeeds in invaliding Kentucky HEALTH,” the state’s reply brief states. “In
fact, he has given that conclusion the force of law.”
That “force of law” is an executive order Bevin
signed in January that would trigger the termination of Kentucky’s Medicaid
expansion within six months if the work requirements waiver is blocked by
courts and all appeals are exhausted, meaning that about half a million people
would lose their health coverage.
“No matter how much Plaintiffs want expanded
Medicaid and no matter how hard they work to keep it, that ultimate decision is
not up to them,” the state’s legal brief asserts bluntly. “That decision is
Kentucky’s to make.”
In their own legal briefs leading up to
Friday’s oral arguments, the Kentuckians challenging the waiver push back with
three main counterpoints. First, they say Bevin may not be able to completely
kill the expansion even if he wants to.
“It’s not like he can just snap his fingers
and the expansion is done,” said Leonardo Cuello, the director of health policy
at the National Health Law Program, one of the organizations representing the
plaintiffs in court. “In fact, there are serious questions as to whether he can
legally undo the expansion.”
Cuello told TPM that their attorneys also plan
to implore the judge not to endorse Bevin’s hostage-taking tactic, arguing that
doing so would be “rewarding bad threats.”
“If you were to allow Kentucky to get away
with this argument, you’d be saying that anytime someone can come up with a
threat worse than the harm the plaintiff is identifying, they can strip away
someone’s standing,” he explained. “That sends the message that any government
official could avoid lawsuits by saying, ‘If you grant this challenge, we’ll do
this other thing that’s even worse.'”
Finally, the plaintiffs counter Kentucky with
a somewhat wonky argument based on a past federal case involving housing
subsidies. They say that even if the court takes Bevin’s “Medicaid waiver or
nothing” threat into account, that should not prevent the court from protecting
the plaintiffs from a clearly imminent danger.
“All we need to show is that the waiver is a
clear step on the path to injury, and that removing it is necessary to removing
the threat of injury,” Cuello said. “Our plaintiff’s claims are redressable,
because striking down the waiver would be removing an absolute barrier to them,
even if it doesn’t prevent other barriers down the line.”
The arguments over Kentucky’s waiver come as
many other states move to implement their own restrictive Medicaid
rules. Some, including
Michigan, have included a provision similar to Kentucky’s, where any
outside threat to the work requirements would trigger the abolition of the
entire Medicaid expansion.
Cuello told TPM that those states should think
twice before crafting such a set-up, calling it “an irresponsible game of
chicken.”
“It’s out of your control whether the
Department of Health and Human Services approves the waiver and whether courts
strike it down,” he said. “It’d be like saying you’ll terminate the Medicaid
expansion if the stock market in Japan dips below a certain threshold.”
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/ky-gov-threatens-to-strip-medicaid-from-500000-if-court-strikes-work-rules?utm_campaign=AIS%20Health%20Daily&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=63777170&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_sgZGMC80bWrblSOeR8WbQ0IZsVygigXQhzlshGdHN0KkbHaBIoxf2k-q9GJUQB1SXObGENdIjHRRsyWvqHvaytKJkrg&_hsmi=63777170
No comments:
Post a Comment