Priorities
By David
Dayen
This piece is part of our Trump’s Beautiful Disaster series about the consequences of the mammoth budget law, one year later. You can see all stories in this series here.
Yesterday was the 61st anniversary of the signing of
Medicare and Medicaid, a promise by the government to at least care for the
oldest and most vulnerable people in our society. Today is the deadline for
public comment on a rule that could force severely ill patients with cancer,
HIV, and other ailments to get out of their hospital beds and go to work if
they want the government to keep that promise.
The new rule, which was spurred by cuts to Medicaid in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) but was not required in the text, adds a layer of bureaucracy for “medically frail” individuals who got a statutory exemption from the law’s new work requirements for health coverage.
Medical frailty has long been a concept in
Medicaid, giving patients suffering from serious conditions the ability to
access coverage. But the administration’s interim final rule published last
month said that not only would individuals have to exhibit one of the medically
frail conditions, but their condition would have to “significantly impair”
their ability to work.
“That’s not an existing standard, and there’s no data source
for that information,” said Jennifer Wagner with the Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities (CBPP). This means that states, which are partners in
Medicaid, will have to establish an entire regime for verifying “significant
impairment” on the fly, and justify it to a federal government that is quick to
say that anything resembling expansion of assistance to the poor is actually
fraud. “There’s language in the [rule] that says ‘we will hold states
accountable’ if they don’t follow this unclear definition precisely,” Wagner
said.
So people with serious medical maladies—osteosarcoma
patients suffering severe bone weakness, for instance—will have to jump through
very undefined bureaucratic hoops to “prove” they cannot work 80 hours a month,
with the risk of a coverage loss if that’s denied. Even a temporary coverage
gap could be serious. “They will die, they will become sick,” said Carl Schmid,
executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute in Washington. “That’s
why we pushed so hard for the exemption, because we know the ramifications of
people losing access to health care.”
Schmid cited estimates that
145,000 Americans living with HIV could be affected by the change. About 40
percent of all Americans with HIV rely on Medicaid, according to Schmid.


.webp)








.jpeg)





