Proposed Montana Medicaid work requirements: aka 'screw anyone in need'

[muriel_volestrangler]

Via Wonkette:

In 2016, Montana expanded its Medicaid program under the Health and Economic
Livelihood Partnership (HELP) Act. Legislators are considering a bill, the Medicaid Reform and
Integrity Act (MeRIA), to impose work requirements (“community engagement”) and terminate
Medicaid insurance coverage if beneficiaries work less than 20 hours a week for three or more
months. This analysis is based on a draft of the bill dated February 5, 2019.

Work requirements could cause between 26,000 and 36,000 low-income adults to lose
Medicaid coverage (30% to 41% of the 87,000 beneficiaries aged 19 to 59 years old). Analyses of
Census data show that among those most likely to be terminated:

• One-quarter (26%) are parents of minor children.
• One-quarter (23%) have a dependent with a disability.
• One-quarter (26%) are in school.
• More than a third (37%) have seasonal employment and work six or more months of
the year, but not enough to meet the requirements all year.
• One-sixth (17%) lack internet access, reducing their ability to report their work hours
or exemptions.
• More than a third (37%) live in more rural areas of Montana. Because there may be
fewer job opportunities in rural areas, rural Montanans may experience greater losses.
• One-ninth (11%), or more than 3,000 adults, are Native Americans.

https://mthcf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Potential-Effects-of-Work-Requirements-in-Montana%E2%80%99s-Medicaid-Program-Ku-Brantley-2-13-19.pdf

[area51]

1. Our barbaric country needs to go to

single-payer/comprehensive Medicare for All now.

[SWBTATTReg]

2. Disgusting. I can understand weeding out those who clearly are not disabled but the dangers of ...

this type of legislation means that eventually some or a lot of very disabled and unable to work persons and/or families (taking care of disabled members of families etc.) will lose this coverage. Horrible.

Where's the 'do no harm' clause in any legislation? Where's the caring and Christian spirit in thy fellow human beings? Where's the body of evidence that great harm is being done to the state of Montana and its voters by NOT enacting this piece of legislation?

Obviously, it is easier to pass laws of this type in republican-controlled houses of legislation than relying on the administrators or the voters of Montana who decide who gets the benefits versa those who don't get the benefits. I'd be curious as if there were any studies done on fraud that was done in order to get these benefits (which would be one reason why they would pass something like this I am guessing).

26k-36k out of a population of roughly 1 million people would be negatively impacted. This is roughly 3% of the population (using an average of 31k people impacted).