Medicaid

Halloween is just around the corner and I’m pretty psyched about the arrival of haunted houses and scary movie marathons. I’m not easily scared. I will watch The Shining without flinching; I was thrilled about the new season of American Horror Story starting, and one of the first things I do when visiting a new city is look for a good ghost tour. One thing that does have me frightened though (other than the ridiculous lines at Party City the weekend before Halloween) is the prospect that some States may not expand Medicaid eligibility in 2014.

The Affordable Care Act extends health coverage to 30 million currently uninsured Americans through tax credits to purchase private insurance and a major expansion of Medicaid eligibility to all qualified individuals under age 65 who have incomes below 133 percent of the federal poverty line (FPL) (about $30,000 for a family of four). The Medicaid eligibility expansion accounts for approximately half of the coverage gains under the new healthcare law. Read more »

According to a recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine, the repercussions of Texas' decision to forgo over 30 million dollars in federal Medicaid money for the Texas Women's Health Program which provides screening for breast and cervical cancers, diabetes, sexually transmitted diseases, and high blood pressure; family planning counseling; and birth control will create a drastic reduction in the availability of and access to reproductive health care for low-income women. At the same time, Texas Governor Rick Perry is touting The Source for Women, a crisis pregnancy center (CPC), as the alternative to Planned Parenthood affiliates, which the Texas Legislature barred from participating in the Women's Health Program. In his remarks at a ribbon cutting ceremony for The Source for Women, which is trying to revamp itself into a "medical" clinic, Perry congratulated himself and the Texas legislators "who stood strong in the face of assaults" and refused federal money rather than allow Planned Parenthood affiliates to participate in the Women's Health Program. Proudly, Perry proclaimed that The Source for Women "will be part of Texas' own Women's Health Program, and Planned Parenthood will not be." So, Planned Parenthood affiliates that do not provide abortions but do provide a full range of reproductive health services, including pap smears, mammograms, and birth control cannot participate in the Women's Health Program but a CPC that is adding nurse practitioners to its staff to provide some testing, but not treatment, for sexually transmitted diseases can. Read more »

Yesterday, the Census released 2011 data on health care coverage in the United States. The data reveals some encouraging news: In 2011, we saw positive trends in health coverage for the first time since 2007. Some 1.3 million more people had health insurance compared to 2010, and the overall proportion of those without coverage fell to 15.7 percent, down from 16.3 percent in 2010.

Women also fared better in 2011. The data shows that overall, more women had health coverage:

• An additional 219,000 women had health coverage in 2011, with the percentage of uninsured women (18 to 64) declining slightly from 19.9 percent in 2010 to 19.6 percent in 2011.
• An additional 760,000 women had Medicaid coverage in 2011, with the percentage of women covered through Medicaid rising to 12.3 percent from 11.6 percent in 2010.

Today, Medicare and Medicaid turn 47. Speaking of birthdays, did you know Medicaid covers nearly half of all births in this country? In Oklahoma, for example, Medicaid covered a whopping 64 percent of births in 2009!

And that’s not the only reason why these programs are so important to women. Medicare and Medicaid, the nation’s health care programs for senior citizens, individuals with disabilities, and low-income individuals and families, compose a critical piece of our country’s health insurance system. Already, nearly one in five women has no health insurance. Medicare and Medicare stem the tide by covering millions of women who would otherwise lack health insurance.

Here are another five reasons why women should celebrate Medicare and Medicaid:

1. Medicaid covers nearly 24 million women under age 65. To put this figure in perspective, Medicaid offers limited coverage to adults in most states– and women make up 59 percent of the adults enrolled in Medicaid.

This blog post is a part of NWLC’s Mother’s Day 2012 blog series. For all our Mother’s Day posts, please click here.

Many of my friends will celebrate their first Mother’s Day being a mom this year. Others have recently expanded their families or have a first child on the way.

I’m happy that all these kids were born after the health care law was passed – because that means my friends can be secure that their kids will have access to health care. That includes my friend Robyn, whose son Jax had to have heart surgery when he was only three months old. Without the health care law, Robyn would have to worry about Jax hitting a lifetime limit on his insurance or being denied coverage for having a pre-existing condition.

The health care law also improves the health of women – like my friend Robyn and all my friends who are new moms.

Preventive Care with No Cost Sharing for New and Expecting Moms

All new health plans are already providing preventive services – such as cancer, diabetes and hypertension screenings – with no cost sharing. Starting this August, the list of preventive services will expand to cover women’s health services including many services important to expecting and new moms. These services include:

• Prenatal Care: Testing for gestational diabetes without cost sharing and a well-woman visit including prenatal care means that expecting moms will know what steps they need to take to have a healthy pregnancy.
• Breastfeeding Support and Supplies: New moms will have access to lactation counseling and rental of breastfeeding supplies without copays or deductibles. In addition to the preventive services, employers are now required to provide a clean space—that is not a bathroom—for new moms to pump.
• Contraceptive Coverage: The full range of FDA-approved contraceptive coverage, including birth control pills, rings, implants, tubal ligation and more will be provided by plans without cost sharing. This is important to new moms because birth control helps women plan pregnancies so moms can access preconception and prenatal care and space pregnancies to help have a healthy baby.

Read more »

This blog post is a part of NWLC’s Mother’s Day 2012 blog series. For all our Mother’s Day posts, please click here.

I spend a lot of time working with and thinking about the statistics of poverty – I think it is a valuable job and I love it. But poverty is more than statistics. Poverty is a personal issue and it is especially personal for me.

When my mom was a child, growing up in New England in the 1950s, she was poor. What did being poor mean for my mom? It meant that her family didn’t have enough to eat – sometimes they would divide up a head of lettuce and call it dinner. It meant that she and her three brothers had to decide who got to go to school on which day because there wasn’t enough money for everyone to have shoes – and if it was your day to be barefoot, you had to stay home.

When I think about my mom’s childhood, it pains me to think about all of the safety net programs we have now that her family could have benefitted from but didn’t have access to. Read more »

Take Action: Tell Your Representative to Vote NO

Protect millions of women and families from the harsh spending cuts the House is voting on this week.

They just never stop.

Earlier this year, the House of Representatives passed the budget blueprint introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). The Ryan budget calls for drastic cuts in programs that low-income women and their families depend on to meet their basic needs — and trillions of dollars in additional tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and corporations.

This week, the House will vote on a bill to implement the Ryan budget by slashing Medicaid, Food Stamps (SNAP), child care, and more, and dismantling the Affordable Care Act.

Please contact your Representative TODAY and tell him or her to vote against these devastating cuts!

The bill the House is scheduled to vote on this Thursday, H.R. 4966, would:

• Let states reduce eligibility standards for Medicaid, which women disproportionately rely on for health care coverage, and for the Children's Health Insurance Program.
• Dismantle the Affordable Care Act, by eliminating funding for state health exchanges and community-level preventive and public health initiatives, and by reducing access to affordable health insurance coverage by discouraging the use of premium tax credits.
• Terminate the Social Services Block Grant, which gives billions of dollars to states to support seniors and children, including critical funding for child care assistance.
• Cut Food Stamp (SNAP) benefits, reducing monthly benefits almost immediately for about 44 million people and denying benefits altogether for as many as 2 million more.
• Eliminate eligibility for the refundable Child Tax Credit for many immigrant families.

Today, the Supreme Court will hear argument on two issues, both critically important to women. First, if the individual responsibility provision is struck down as unconstitutional, do other parts of the Affordable Care Act go with it? And second, is the Medicaid expansion in the ACA unconstitutional?

The first issue is a question of what is called “severability.” Some laws have a provision called a severability clause, which says that if any part of the law is deemed unconstitutional, the rest of the law will remain in force. The ACA doesn’t have a severability clause, and so if any part of it is held unconstitutional, it is up to the Court to decide whether Congress would have intended other parts of the law or all of the law to remain in force in its absence. The government has argued that the individual responsibility provision is constitutional, but that if it is struck down, then the provisions prohibiting insurance companies to make insurance available to anyone who wants it, regardless of preexisting conditions, should be struck down as well. Read more »

You've heard of slash and burn, but how about slash and burden?

On Thursday, the House is expected to vote on a budget for Fiscal Year 2013 introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). The Ryan budget would devastate vital services for women and their families while giving trillions in new tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and large corporations — on top of extending provisions of the Bush-era tax cuts that benefit only the very wealthy.

Let's make it clear that we will not stand for a budget that slashes programs for women and families and puts the burden of paying for tax breaks for millionaires and corporations on middle- and low-income Americans.

Tell your Representative to oppose the Ryan Budget. As your Members of Congress start budget negotiations, they need to know that their constituents expect them to protect programs for women and families — and to require the wealthy and corporations to pay their fair share of taxes.

What's wrong with Rep. Paul Ryan's Budget? For starters, it would:

• Repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Insurance companies could continue to charge women higher premiums than men, deny coverage to women due to preexisting condition, and refuse to cover maternity care.

The constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid poses a fundamental question to the Supreme Court: is a state government less able to exercise free choice in the face of the threat of loss of federal assistance than an impoverished pregnant woman whose health is threatened by the continuation of the pregnancy?

In 1976, Cora McRae needed to terminate her pregnancy for medical reasons, but she had very little money. She had health insurance through Medicaid, but under a provision of federal law known as the Hyde Amendment, federal Medicaid funds can not pay for abortions, including medically necessary abortions, though Medicaid covers other medically necessary expenses, including the costs of childbirth. McRae joined with other plaintiffs to challenge this law in court, arguing that by paying for childbirth expenses, but not for medically necessary abortion expenses, the government was unconstitutionally coercing her reproductive decisions and denying her right to choose to end her pregnancy. In 1980, the Supreme Court rejected McRae’s challenge to Medicaid’s failure to fund medically necessary abortions. “Although Congress has opted to subsidize medically necessary services generally, but not certain medically necessary abortions,” the Court wrote, “the fact remains that the Hyde Amendment leaves an indigent woman with at least the same range of choice in deciding whether to obtain a medically necessary abortion as she would have had if Congress had chosen to subsidize no health care costs at all.” In other words, refusing to provide Medicaid coverage for abortions did not represent unconstitutional coercion of a poor woman’s reproductive choices because, according to the Court, it was her poverty that constrained her choices, rather than any barriers the government had placed in her way. That she was poor and might be forced to make certain choices because of her poverty—like going through with a potentially dangerous pregnancy because she could not afford an abortion--wasn’t the government’s fault, the Court held. Read more »