Opponents misrepresent Medicaid expansion, costs

In recent action in the House Health and Welfare Committee, District 1 Representative Cornel Rasor voted aye to send the Medicaid expansion conditions bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation. The motion passed 8-7. The committee had a detailed discussion of the bill and listened to many people testify. Of the people who signed up to testify there were 115 nays and two or 20 ayes (my notes are garbled). Of the people who sent written comments there were 150 nays and six ayes. Two of the testifiers I heard in favor of the bill were affiliated with the-of-state funded Idaho Freedom Foundation.

Though the outcome ignored by far the majority of people who testified, I thought the discussion was productive. There is a lot of room for compromise on Medicaid Expansion — two Democrats on the committee were joined by five Republicans in voting nay, possibly because the bill contains and trigger that would do away with Medicaid Expansion if the bill's requirements aren't me by this summer. Requirements include getting a waiver from the federal government, something that I'm guessing will take longer than that. The bill should be rewritten.

The one-vote margin could have gone the other way if our representative had voted nay. District 1 approved Medicaid expansion in 2018 and there is no sign that that sentiment has changed. Please contact Rep. Rasor and tell him what you think.

Here is how Representative Rasor characterizes Medicaid expansion. He writes: "There has been much misunderstanding surrounding Medicaid expansion in general. If, for example you have a disabled son who qualifies for Medicaid, you are likely not even on the expansion plan but rather you are on the Basic Plan. Think of it like this: Basic Medicaid, kids and parents; coordinated Medicaid, seniors; enhanced Medicaid, disabled; expansion, childless able-bodied adults under 55 years old."

This misrepresents Medicaid expansion.

We are opposed to bills like H138 trying to limit Medicaid. Too many of us know of people like my two friends whose lives were saved by Medicaid expansion, both valued contributors to our community and the economy of Sandpoint. And to us personally. One is a business owner and a mother who did not qualify for Medicaid before the expansion. Medicaid expansion does not cover only childless able-bodied adults under 55. And existing Medicaid did not cover my friend.

Besides the myriad economic reasons to stop laws like these they are also cruel and unnecessary. Even crueler because they are supported too many Idahoans who are misinformed by their own representatives and senators voting along partisan lines rather than trying to understand a much-needed complicated program.

Thank you to those who sent letters and testified. We are making a difference with Republicans who are willing to listen.

Bill H138 tries to limit Medicaid expansion and even do away with it. Too many of us know of people like my two friends.

Besides the myriad economic reasons to stop bills like these, they are supported by representatives who misinform their constituents and there are too many votes along partisan lines rather than trying to understand a proven successful, but complicated, program. There are ways to lower costs without destroying it.

NANCY GERTH

Sagle