The Administration’s proposed budget is in part a return to policies that Americans have overwhelmingly rejected. It proposes to gut core insurance protections, end the expansion of Medicaid to low income adults, and block grant the Medicaid program, cuts amounting to over a trillion dollars over ten years. But the budget also signals new and deeply concerning policy changes including mandatory new work documentation requirements in Medicaid, and increasing the cost of health insurance premiums for low income people in the non-group market.
This advocacy agenda offers options for improving health and health care at the state level during the 2019 session. It includes state policy options to consider in 2019 regarding private insurance coverage, Medicaid, oral health coverage, health equity, prescription drugs, surprise medical bills, and health care value.
This issue brief provides a comprehensive look at the EPSDT benefit, including a plan-to-plan comparison with large scale health plans in two states and the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program (FEHBP). That comparison shows that Medicaid’s EPSDT benefit consistently offers more comprehensive coverage for children and greater financial protections for families. It is the gold standard in children’s health coverage.
On September 7, the Trump administration took another step toward eliminating basic protections for immigrant children and their families who enter the U.S. without documentation—including those legally seeking asylum, by issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking (proposed regulation) that would dismantle constitutional protections for children established by the Flores Settlement Agreement governing the detention and treatment of children in U.S. immigration custody.
For generations, community leaders have seen how valuable community health workers (CHWs), promotores, community health representatives, and the many other variations of community-based peer support workers can be. Nevertheless, decision makers often ask CHW advocates to make the business case for paying for CHW services and integrating them into care teams. To support these efforts, we worked with Katharine London and her team at the Center for Health Law and Economics of the University of Massachusetts Medical School to develop unique, interactive CHW Impact Estimator Tools.
On October 10, 2018, the Trump administration published a proposed rule in the Federal Register that would make it much harder for immigrants to obtain visas (including visas to study or work in the U.S.), extend their visas, or adjust their status to become lawful permanent residents.
Health Coverage Matters for Children: The Role of Medicaid in the Healthy Development of America's Children
Access to health care is crucial to children’s health and development. When children have health insurance, they are more likely to get the health care they need. For more than 40 percent of children in the U.S.—approximately 37 million children—Medicaid is the health insurance they rely on. Another 8.9 million children are enrolled in the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Medicaid’s sister program. The success of Medicaid and CHIP is largely responsible for the fact that 95 percent of children under 18 have some form of health coverage.
This brief highlights the value of integrating CHWs into maternal and child health care delivery to effectively address a range of health care concerns and conditions for children and families, offering examples of specific initiatives that are promising or have demonstrated impact in improving health care and health outcomes for children of color.
This week, as part of the Childhood Asthma Leadership Coalition (CALC), Families USA and other coalition members submitted comments to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expressing concern with the proposed rule, “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science,” which would limit the use of critical research in EPA decision-making. We believe this rule would have the effect of erecting barriers to science-based decisions in the regulatory process, and could remove consideration of public health studies that might otherwise improve health outcomes of children with asthma.