March 8, 2011 in Idaho

Idaho Medicaid cuts called unworkable, cruel

• Print
• Email
• Share

Betsy Russell photo

Becky Woodhead urges lawmakers not to cut the services on which she relies; she was among dozens who testified Tuesday against Idaho’s plan to slash $120 million from its Medicaid program, with services for the disabled taking big cuts.
(Full-size photo)

BOISE – Idaho’s plan to slash $120 million from its Medicaid program – including big cuts in services to the disabled – was roundly panned at a packed public hearing Tuesday, with disabled people, family members, providers and more all calling it unworkable and even cruel.

Becky Woodhead urged the House and Senate Health and Welfare committees not to pass the bill, HB 221, and cut the developmental disability services on which she relies. “It’s not right – I don’t agree to it,” she said.

Paul Tierney, father of a 14-year-old son with autism, struggled to maintain composure as he urged lawmakers not to cut services that will help his son live independently as he grows older. “Cutting Medicaid is not the answer to the budget problems of Idaho,” Tierney said. “If we can find money for a 5 percent increase for corrections, we should be able to find money … to keep them out of the correctional system.”

The House Health and Welfare Committee didn’t vote on the bill Tuesday, but plans to when it meets Thursday, although it first will seek clarification on several issues from Medicaid officials. Amendments to the bill are possible.

Two provisions that came in for the most criticism: Setting an age limit of 45 years, after which developmentally disabled people would lose access to developmental therapy and instead be moved to a state program that provides help for the aged and disabled; and booting higher-functioning developmentally disabled people off of therapy entirely. More than 1,000 disabled Idahoans stand to lose services under those two changes.

Numerous health care providers and advocates testified that the moves likely would increase costs to the state, not save millions as anticipated. People with intellectual disabilities who receive care in the community now under a waiver program must qualify for admission to an intermediate-care facility, attorney James Piotrowski told the committee, under both federal and state law. That means they’d move there if their waiver to receive the lower level of care in the community were removed.

Taryn Ivie, who said her adopted daughter’s intellectual ability will never exceed that of a 6-year-old, asked, “What will happen to my daughter when she reaches 45? We will be in our 70s. We will not be able to take care of her without help from some of the services.” She said, “I’m begging you to please look at this bill before you pass it through, and the people it will affect, and down the road what it will cost all of our taxpayers.”

The bill proposes 29 changes to Idaho’s Medicaid program, from halting mandatory rate hikes for Medicaid providers to reducing psycho-social rehabilitation services by 20 percent to slashing chiropractic services. It also calls for hospitals and nursing homes to pay millions in assessments to avoid further cuts, a move to which they’ve agreed.

Seventy-two people testified at the hearing that ran for nearly five hours Tuesday; just two of them spoke in favor of the bill.

Sen. Denton Darrington, R-Declo, told the crowd that every lawmaker on the committees has an extended family member or acquaintance with disabilities. “The only difference between you and us is we’re elected to make decisions,” he said, “and they are hard decisions to make.”

Five comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  Scoutster on March 08 at 7:05 p.m.

  The tide has turned.

  The Idaho legislators might not know it yet, but the tide has turned.

• 

  greenlibertarian on March 08 at 8:08 p.m.

  Penny-wise and pound foolish. Idiots.

  High-functioning folks with developmental disabilities are often the most reliable employees in low skill jobs, as long as there is at least some supported employment services they can access.

  Cut those services, and these folks are reduced to completely depending upon the government, at great cost, to the quality of their lives, and taxpayer dollars.

  What good is that?

• 

  misjustice on March 08 at 8:18 p.m.

  “Are there no workhouses? No prisons?”

  Oh, yeah, there are prisons; and they just got a budget INCREASE.

• 

  cryssT on March 08 at 9:21 p.m.

  “booting higher-functioning developmentally disabled people off of therapy entirely” the ability to maintain the higher level of function is due to the ongoing therapy. the constant support and encouragement from the job coach. /sigh - - i’m sure this will result in lawsuits because of ADA and i dearly hope that the ACLU (or similar law group) wins big, meantime those that can protect themselves the least (along with children and elderly) will suffer the most. expect some suicides, possibly of adult disabled and their elderly parents. yes, and these are the fine citizens of Idaho that re-elected tax cheats. they are well represented by what they truly voted for.

• 

  Idahovoter on March 09 at 8:51 a.m.

  “It also calls for hospitals and nursing homes to pay millions in assessments to avoid further cuts, a move to which they’ve agreed.”

  This is actually an accounting gimmick that does not cost the hospitals and nursing homes anything. They “assess” themselves a fee and give that to the state, which converts those private funds into state money. The state then uses this state money to qualify for the federal match and pays it all back to the same hospitals and nursing homes.

  It is a clever way to protect bigger institutions from the impact of cuts.

  States do not have the option to eliminate Medicaid funding of hospital, nursing home or intermediate care facilities for people who become eligible.