According to HHS, nine states are responsible for 60 percent of children’s coverage losses between March and September.
HHS wants states with the highest rates of children dropped from Medicaid to use certain federal rules that make it easier to get families back on coverage.
In letters sent Monday to the governors of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Dakota and Texas, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra urged the states to take up more of options CMS has offered to ensure coverage. The options include allowing states to use enrollee information they have to auto-renew coverage.
HHS also issued new guidance for states Monday, including an option to give kids an additional 12 months to get on the rolls. That option is available through 2024, CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure told reporters.
Becerra also asked the states to remove barriers to Children’s Health Insurance Program enrollment for children no longer eligible for Medicaid, reduce call center times for families and expand their Medicaid programs if they haven’t already.
You’d think the states that endanger a woman’s life to birth a baby, would want to keep those babies alive after they are born but here we are. I’d say I’d love to hear a Pro-Life perspective on this but in reality I actually give zero fucks what the people who got us in this mess think.
“Pro-life” is the biggest lie ever. They’re death cultists who just want more blood to spill for their imaginary blood god.
Forced-birthers
I suspect they think thoughts and prayers will save the drowning child…
Same crowd that burn the witches that say thou shall not kill.
It’s becoming time to fight fire with fire.
How about every citizen gets single payer funded health care like all of the other civilized countries. You can think of the children and the adults all at once. Radical thought
deleted by creator
In fact those rules often take precedent over the federal rules.
I generally agree with your comment, except for this part. When federal law conflicts with state law, federal law typically takes precedence and preempts the state law, thanks to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This federal preemption also applies to intrastate laws. The key nuance is determining whether a federal law and a state law are actually in conflict for preemption to apply.
It also takes the feds having a desire to enforce. See all the new legal marijauana states. Like in Oregon dispensaries are all cash because the feds could seize bank accounts
deleted by creator
TIL Germany is not a civilized country, by virtue of having a multi-payer system.
Well if they’re paying out of pocket for healtchare instead of with taxes, they aren’t civilized.
Multi-payer systems are also found in the Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium, and Austria, by the way. Notorious hellscapes, the lot of them.
Good old think of the children. See they want you to just think of them and not protect and better their lives. Can’t do that it costs money.
Thoughts and prayers for the children
Hard to protect a child from the gays if the kid is dead.
Is it though? A dead kid is less likely to be abused than a live one. If you look at it that way, republicans are just doing their best to solve children’s problems 🤢🤮
This is why I hate Biden. All he does is beg his enemies to be merciful. He won’t play for keeps.
I don’t hate Biden for this. His hands are completely tied because of federalism and the separation of powers.
What I hate is that his hands are tied because of those things and it’s hurting kids. It’s a shitty system of government that seems designed to prevent progress. Which I guess I should expect from something written by slavers.
His hands aren’t tied, he just refuses to use any of the tools available to him.
For example, he could withhold federal funding from states that refuse to comply.
Can he do that? I thought Congress controlled the purse.
Trump had no problem withholding federal funds from things he didn’t like.
Sure, he might lose the fight if he tries, but there’s a gulf between “try and fail” vs “beg”
Why not ask him to personally murder a Republican governor? After all, your guy Trump would do it…
… there’s a huge gulf between “withhold federal funds” and “murder political opponents” 🙄
Based on historical events, that will just allow them to make further cuts to programs that support the poor and minorities because “we can’t afford these programs”. Cutting funding as a threat to conservatives who don’t want to spend government money on the less fortunate is counterproductive.
Conservatives are re-directing and outright pocketing federal funds wherever possible. They employ privately held interests and invent money-hiding bureaucratic schemes to provide bullshit services.
I live in Texas where this has been the case for decades. State services here are effectively non-existent because of it, yet we receive quite a bit of federal funds. Where does it all go? Into our governor’s friends’ pockets (and thus to him as well).
If the feds want services to actually reach red state residents, they will need to exclude the state entirely from the process. Period.
A conservative politician is simply not capable of making a choice that benefits others. Conservatives will never permit their state social support systems to function effectively, as long as they have any say in it.
They could make further cuts right now, no need to wait for Biden to give them justification. Why do you think they don’t
They do make cuts already, it just gives them even more of an excuse. That is why it is counterproductive, more fuel for the dumpster fire with zero possible upside.
They don’t need an excuse. They could just do it.
Why don’t they? I have a theory, what’s yours?
They are cutting those programs.
What is your theory for why they are not doing the thing they are already doing?
Letting poor people die of lack of medical care is not the merciful strategy you think it is.
Biden is letting poor people die due to Republican policies, because he doesn’t want to play for keeps.
