According to HHS, nine states are responsible for 60 percent of children’s coverage losses between March and September.
According to HHS, nine states are responsible for 60 percent of children’s coverage losses between March and September.
HHS wants states with the highest rates of children dropped from Medicaid to use certain federal rules that make it easier to get families back on coverage.
In letters sent Monday to the governors of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Dakota and Texas, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra urged the states to take up more of options CMS has offered to ensure coverage. The options include allowing states to use enrollee information they have to auto-renew coverage.
HHS also issued new guidance for states Monday, including an option to give kids an additional 12 months to get on the rolls. That option is available through 2024, CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure told reporters.
Becerra also asked the states to remove barriers to Children’s Health Insurance Program enrollment for children no longer eligible for Medicaid, reduce call center times for families and expand their Medicaid programs if they haven’t already.
How about every citizen gets single payer funded health care like all of the other civilized countries. You can think of the children and the adults all at once. Radical thought
The problem is that the US basically has 50 mini-countries who are all allowed to make their own rules. In fact those rules often take precedent over the federal rules. As long as the financial transactions all take place in the same state, the federal government is very limited about how it can regulate those transactions.
In fact those rules often take precedent over the federal rules.
I generally agree with your comment, except for this part. When federal law conflicts with state law, federal law typically takes precedence and preempts the state law, thanks to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This federal preemption also applies to intrastate laws. The key nuance is determining whether a federal law and a state law are actually in conflict for preemption to apply.
It also takes the feds having a desire to enforce. See all the new legal marijauana states. Like in Oregon dispensaries are all cash because the feds could seize bank accounts
totally explains why i cant smoke a joint. "states rights" my asshole..
it wouldnt take all the states cooperation to enact a federal single payer system, it would just take congress to actually care about human beings more than the stock market.
health insurance profits only exist at the expense of human suffering.
I mean, I can literally walk two minutes down the street and buy a pre-rolled joint to smoke in front of the NYPD if I wanted to, so this isn't the strongest argument.