Please join Sen. Bob Casey (PA) as he addresses the Graham-Cassidy proposal and the effects on Medicaid, adults with disabilities, children with complex health needs, schools, veterans, and those who are aging. Details for joining below:
What: Conference call with Sen. Bob Casey
When: Friday, September 22, 5:45 pm–6:15 pm EDT
Call in number: 866-317-5076, no PIN or ID necessary
No RSVP necessary
Questions, contact Jack Phillips, RCPA Director, Government Affairs
Yesterday, the State Senate voted 43–7 to non-concur with the House GOP’s budget revenue plan. The vote to non-concur intensifies the three-month budget stalemate between parties. Now that the House plan was rejected, leaders will have to go back to the drawing board to see how to cobble together the necessary votes to pass a budget revenue bill. The House may decide to tinker with the Senate revenue package, contained in HB 452, which includes the following revenue:
Or the House may amend HB 453, which was what the Senate rejected last night. HB 453 contains more than $2.4 billion in funds which come mostly in the form of transfers from various state special funds that, according to the Republicans, who crafted the revenue package, have “inordinately high” account balances.
After non-concurring with the House revenue package, the Senate recessed to the call of the Senate President Pro Tem, which means, members will remain on a six-hour call, ready to return to the Capitol should there be a resolution to the budget situation on which the chamber could vote. The House will return to session on Monday, September 25 at 1:00 pm.
By Chris Comisac
Bureau Chief
Capitolwire
HARRISBURG (Sept. 20) – As warned by many, credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s downgraded Pennsylvania’s bond rating.
“The downgrade largely reflects the commonwealth’s chronic structural imbalance dating back nearly a decade, a history of late budget adoption, and our opinion that this pattern could continue,” said S&P Global Ratings credit analyst Carol Spain on Wednesday about the decision to reduce Pennsylvania’s general obligation bond rating from AA- to A+. The downgrade increases the cost of borrowing by the Commonwealth, which in turns costs taxpayers more.
Spain added the downgrade – the sixth by the three major credit rating agencies since 2012 – reflects the weakening of Pennsylvania’s liquidity position, notably the delay or non-payment of scheduled expenditures for the first time in the Commonwealth’s history.
S&P noted state Treasurer Joe Torsella and Auditor General Eugene DePasquale cited the lack of near-term prospects of a balanced budget in their decision to refuse to authorize, as has been done in past years, lending to the state’s General Fund. Without a short-term loan from the Treasury, the state’s cash flow situation this month – revenues collected later in the month, but bills to pay earlier in the month – prompted the Commonwealth to delay paying $1.167 billion to Medicaid managed care organizations and a $581 million payment to cover the state’s share of public school employee pension obligations.
“We understand that the Commonwealth plans to make payments to both the Medicaid insurers and school districts within a week of the scheduled due dates; however, in the absence of additional liquidity, and with the likely need for external borrowing, these late payments could recur,” Spain said.
And while the ongoing budget mess, and the proposals offered by both the House and Senate, are major concerns for S&P, the agency had more of a problem “from a credit perspective” with the delayed payments.
“Deficit borrowing does not exemplify strong budget management practices, but, in our view, borrowing that restores the Commonwealth’s liquidity to a position in which it can make timely payments would be preferable from a credit perspective than an accumulation of unpaid bills,” explained Spain.
Wednesday’s downgrade of Pennsylvania’s credit rating appears to be a bit of a Rorschach test, with the reactions to the downgrade depending on the ideological and policy perspectives of the state officials reading the report.
“For months, I have warned that a credit downgrade was looming. I have said repeatedly for three years that we must responsibly fund the budget with recurring revenues. My budget proposal was balanced, cut more than $2 billion in expenditures and consolidated agencies, while also fixing the deficit,” said Gov. Tom Wolf in a statement Wednesday morning.
Senate Republican leaders, who like the governor have been urging a longer-range budgetary perspective, added in a combined statement: “The significance of this downgrade is something that we grasp and is part of why the Senate worked to finalize a responsible budget package in July. We agree with S&P’s concerns about the need for stability in our financial plans to address the ongoing structural deficit. We are concerned about the overall fiscal health of the Commonwealth. The perceptions of Pennsylvania and its finances are vital when attracting economic growth of small and large employers.”
Legislative Democrats were more pointed in their assessment of the situation, blaming House Republicans.
“The plan that House Republicans finally passed last week was a bad joke. It cuts vital services and doesn’t add up. It used almost every gimmick that the credit rating agencies specifically warned against. Costing Pennsylvania taxpayers millions of dollars in future costs is no joke, but that’s what House Republican obstruction has achieved,” said House Minority Leader Frank Dermody, D-Allegheny.
“Given the House Republicans’ inaction for months followed by the passage of an irresponsible plan, it is not surprising that Pennsylvania’s credit rating was downgraded. Their plan was revenue deficient and would fail to put Pennsylvania on solid financial footing,” added Senate Minority Leader Jay Costa, D-Allegheny. “After review of the House Republican plan – including the $630 million in fund transfers – S&P took decisive action to downgrade our credit rating.”
House Republicans seized on S&P’s concern regarding unpaid state bills.
“When those in charge of the checkbook – the same fiscal officers who approved the deficit spending last fiscal year – very publicly refuse to pay bills, even as bank accounts hold billions, of course our credit rating will take a hit,” the leadership of the House Republican Caucus stated in a press release.
“Pennsylvanians are paying taxes and it is very disappointing Commonwealth budget costs will increase thanks to a small group of unknown people at Standard & Poor’s who make decisions based on interviews with a governor and press releases from the state’s fiscal officers,” added the House GOP.
S&P, along with Moody’s and Fitch, are the three main credit rating agencies globally. They wield significant power in the United States, with the federal government requiring banks to use their ratings. Given that influence, the agencies, their ratings and their methods have also been faulted for a least a portion of the many financial crises in this nation and around the world during the past decade.
The House GOP noted S&P’s prior credit rating for the state was AA-, which S&P website indicates Pennsylvania had a “very strong capacity to meet financial obligations.” The new rating of A+ means the state has a “strong capacity to meet financial commitments, but somewhat susceptible to adverse economic conditions and changes in circumstances.”
Despite the various interpretations of the downgrade, state officials – to a person – said the downgrade should be a wake-up call to get serious about balancing this year’s state budget and addressing the Commonwealth’s chronic imbalance, dating back nearly a decade, between expenditures and revenues, which has been eroding the state’s ability to pay its bills without additional short-term borrowing of significant amounts of money.
In addition to lowering the rating for the state’s general obligation bonds, S&P lowered its departmental appropriation rating for Pennsylvania to A- from A, and their departmental and moral obligation rating to BBB+ from A-, with the outlook for all of the bond ratings as “stable” (compared to the prior “negative” outlook, which means a downgrade is more likely).
ALERT – Act Now to Stop Irreparable Medicaid Cuts!
Latest Available data on Graham/Cassidy
The next few days are critical!
Call Congress at (202) 224 3121 and
click here to send your Senators an email to VOTE NO.
The process by which Senate Republicans can pass an Affordable Care Act (ACA) repeal/replace bill by a simple majority budget process called reconciliation (and thus not requiring Democratic support of any kind) ends next week, at the end of September.
The Graham/Cassidy bill is now presenting a major threat to Medicaid – it replicates cuts presented in previous health proposals (using exact language from the Better Care Reconciliation Act – BCRA). According to earlier Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates, it will cut Medicaid (outside of expansion) by $175 billion between 2020-2026, and $39 billion will be cut from the Medicaid program in 2026 alone.
The situation has gotten worse. Last night, Chairman Alexander (R-TN) of the Senate HELP Committee who was leading bipartisan ACA fix efforts announced that the bipartisan deal is dead. That leaves the door wide open for Graham/Cassidy passage. Republican Senators are being told that the bill will benefit their state – that is false. This is a bill that seeks to save billions of federal dollars, not make policy improvements to health care programs.
The ACA will be replaced by block grants with likely less funding to states than they currently receive. and all of that money stops flowing completely to states in 10 years. The Medicaid program will be cut significantly and states will be expected to either pick up the bill or make tough decisions about whose lives are most at stake.
So here’s the timeline:
There are two Jewish holidays in the next two weeks that shorten the Senate session calendar. Today, Senators leave to observe Rosh Hashanah and will return Monday. They will have to pass a bill by Wednesday or Thursday because Yom Kippur (also observed by the Senate) begins at sundown next Thursday.
We will soon see a new Congressional Budget Office summary on the impact of Graham/Cassidy, and we expect the bill to be pushed hard next week to get to passage. We need three Republican Senators to oppose the bill in order for it to fail. Key Senators that could stop the bill are the same champions that ANCOR has awarded Congressional Leadership Awards to this year for defending our programs – Senator McCain (R-AZ), Senator Collins (R-ME), and Senator Murkowski (R-AK). Please make sure that if you are a constituent, or have connections in their states, that they hear from you!
IF YOU LIVE OR HAVE FRIENDS, FAMILY, OR COLLEAGUES IN STATES WITH REPUBLICAN SENATORS THEY MUST HEAR FROM US THAT THE GRAHAM/CASSIDY BILL WILL CREATE IRREPARABLE HARM TO PROGRAMS THAT PROTECT PEOPLE WITH INTELLECTUAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES!
THE NUMBERS ARE CLEAR THAT THIS IS A BAD DEAL FOR STATES! MAKE SURE YOUR REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVES IN THE HOUSE ARE RECEIVING THE SAME MESSAGE!
Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121
Limited HCBS demo (we have intel this is for fear that per capita caps will end some state HCBS programs and need demo money to survive), page 96
Yesterday, a group of state House Republicans held a press conference announcing they have found more than enough money to pay for both last year’s budget deficit and this year’s additional spending without raising any new taxes.
The more than $2.4 billion in funds would come mostly in the form of transfers from various state special funds that, according to the work group, have “inordinately high” account balances.
The state’s operating budget contains 218 such funds, most having both a balance for yearly operating expenses and a reserves balance (some also have investment fund balances as well), and the work group’s plan is to tap 41 of them. Of that total, the GOP legislators said 34 have been used in a similar fashion in the past, so precedent already exists for what they are proposing to do this budget year.
The transfers are as follows:
Agricultural Conservation Easement Purchase Fund
Proposed transfer: $27 million
Fund balance: $36.7 million
Fund purpose: Created in 1988, this fund was to be used for farmland preservation through the purchase of agricultural conservation easements.
Banking Fund
Proposed transfer: $25 million
Fund balance: $36.1 million
Fund purpose: It provides for the administration of the Department of Banking and Securities and regulation of the financial services industry and are to be used in the event of a seizure or liquidation of a financial institution, association or credit union.
Environmental Stewardship Fund
Proposed transfer: $72.7 million
Fund balance: $104.8 million
Fund purpose: This fund, which is fueled by money that comes in from landfill fees, is to provide for farmland preservation, open space protection, abandoned mine reclamation, watershed protection and restoration, water and sewer infrastructure, and improvement and conservation of state and community parks and recreational facilities.
Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund
Proposed transfer: $50 million
Fund balance: $80.4 million
Fund’s purpose: Created in 1987, this fund is to finance the cleanup and restoration of abandoned hazardous waste sites in the commonwealth.
Keystone Recreation, Park and Conservation Fund
Proposed transfer: $100 million
Fund balance: $147.6 million
Fund’s purpose: This is to provide for increased acquisitions, improvements, and expansions of state and community parks, recreation facilities, historic sites, zoos, public libraries, nature preserves and wildlife habitats.
Machinery and Equipment Loan Fund
Proposed transfer: $49 million
Fund balance: $59.5 million
Fund’s purpose: Created in 1988, this fund is to provide low-interest financing for machinery and equipment for Pennsylvania businesses to facilitate their growth, competitiveness, and value-added capacity.
Multimodal Transportation Fund
Proposed transfer: $120 million
Fund balance: $189.8 million
Fund’s purpose: Created in 2013, this is to provide for additional funding for passenger rail, rail freight, ports and waterways, aviation, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, roads and bridges and other modes of transportation.
911 Fund
Proposed transfer: $40 million
Fund balance: $74 million
Fund’s purpose: Created in 2015, this fund, fueled by a surcharge on cell phone bills, is to support a statewide integrated 911 plan.
PA Infrastructure Bank Fund
Proposed transfer: $30 million
Fund balance: $52.9 million
Fund’s purpose: Established in 1997, this fund is to make loans to or enter into leases with qualified borrowers to finance the costs of transportation projects and rail freight infrastructure.
Public Transportation Trust Fund
Proposed transfer: $357 million
Fund balance: $477.8 million
Fund’s purpose: Created in 2007, this is to provide dedicated funding for public transportation to cover public transit agencies’ operating costs, capital and asset improvements, and programs of statewide significance.
Racing Fund
Proposed transfer: $27 million
Fund balance: $36.2 million
Fund’s purpose: This fund is to be used for the regulation of horse and harness racing.
Recycling Fund
Proposed transfer: $75 million
Fund balance: $89.5 million
Fund’s purpose: Created in 1988, this fund, fueled by a fee on waste disposed at landfills or recycling centers, is for recycling and planning grants, market and waste minimization studies, and public information and education activities.
Small Business First Fund
Proposed transfer: $25 million
Fund balance: $27.5 million
Fund’s purpose: This provides low-interest loans for small businesses of 100 employees or less for such projects as land and building acquisition and construction, machinery and equipment purchases, working capital, compliance with environmental regulations and municipal or commercial recycling.
Underground Storage Tank Indemnification Fund
Proposed transfer: $100 million
Fund balance: $224.7 million*
Fund’s purpose: Created in 1989, this fund is to provide claim payments to owners and operators of underground storage tanks who incur liability for taking corrective action or bodily injury or property damage caused by a release from underground storage tanks.
*Rep. Dan Moul said this was the year-end balance on June 30, 2017.
Volunteer Companies Loan Fund
Proposed transfer: $25 million
Fund balance: $49.3 million
Fund’s purpose: This fund provides loans for acquisition and replacement of volunteer fire, ambulance, and rescue company equipment and facilities.
Pennsylvania Professional Liability Joint Underwriting Association
The plan proposes to take $200 million from this fund that was created by state law to offer medical malpractice insurance of last resort for doctors and medical facilities.
Budgetary reserve
The plan proposes to eliminate $189.4 million that was included in the enacted 2017/18 state budget that was put in reserve by Gov. Tom Wolf to ease the state’s cash flow problem while waiting on a completed revenue package.
Among the items that would be impacted by cutting out this funding altogether are the $5 million for Capitol Complex fire protection that is paid to the City of Harrisburg; $4 million for the mobile science van program; and more than $1.1 million for mental health services, along with 65 other budget lines that would get trimmed.
Unspent money from past years
The plan includes using $400 million in money that was appropriated in past years but went unspent.
Managed Care Organization Assessment Increase
The plan proposes to use the increase in the annual monetary assessment on managed care organizations that went into effect on July 1 to generate $100 million to help fully fund the state budget.
Redirecting tax dollars to general fund from restricted accounts
The plan calls for diverting $100 million of tax money that is carved out for special funds and redirect to help bring the state’s general fund into balance.
VW Settlement
The plan calls for using the $30.4 million that Pennsylvania received from a settlement of a multi-state lawsuit against Volkswagen over the company’s diesel emissions-cheating scandal.
Tapping the PA Liquor Control Board for more money
The plan also would require an additional $25 million transfer from the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board from wine and spirit sales, for a total of $210 million.
Imposing a sales tax on online marketplace
The plan proposes to recover more state sales tax from online purchases to generate $31.7 million. The Senate-passed tax and borrowing plan to balance the budget also included this as a revenue generator.
Cutting tax credits
The plan calls for cutting in half funding available for most state tax credit programs but leaves the popular Educational Improvement and Opportunity Scholarship tax credit programs untouched. This is expected to free up $28.3 million.
The PA House is scheduled to reconvene next Monday, September 11, and during the session week the House as a whole will determine whether there’s enough support within their own caucus to pass the work group’s proposal. House Democrats and the Governor’s office do not support the work group’s plan.
As more information becomes available, RCPA will keep members informed. In the meantime, if you have questions, please contact Jack Phillips, RCPA Director, Government Affairs.
*Information contained in this info sourced from a Pennlive.com article – Here’s a breakdown of ‘taxpayers’ budget’ and how it avoids a major tax increase or borrowing money, posted on September 05, 2017, at 06:20 pm | Updated September 06, 2017 at 06:18 am and a Capitolwire news story written by Capitolwire Staff Writers Robert Swift and Carley Mossbrook.
The Federal Department of Labor (DOL) is seeking comments from the public concerning the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) overtime exemptions regulations. As you may recall, the Obama Administration wanted to increase the overtime threshold from $23,660 to $47,476. At the time, RCPA submitted comments to the Department of Labor objecting to the increase. RCPA also presented testimony in front of the Pennsylvania State Senate regarding the impact that the DOL’s Overtime Exemption Rule would have on health and human service providers in Pennsylvania.
Before the rule took effect, a federal judge issued an injunction halting the FLSA rule. The judge granted the injunction because the FLSA rule “exceeded its delegated authority and ignored Congress’ intent such that it supplants the duties test.” (The duties test refers to one of the conditions that determines which workers are exempt from overtime rules.)
You may submit comments on the Federal Register’s website. Questions, contact Jack Phillips, RCPA Director of Government Affairs.
Today, the Senate sent a package of five code bills back to the State House for their approval. Highlights of the codes bills are below:
Fiscal Code (House Bill 453)
The fiscal code directs how revenue is to be spent and contains local earmarks.
The fiscal code bill will:
Additionally, the fiscal code directs spending for a host of community projects identified only as an unnamed education program or health care institution in a county or city with a specific population classification.
Human Services Code (House Bill 59)
The Senate Rules Committee removed a few of its Republican-crafted provisions, though most were left intact. The provisions removed from HB 59 include:
The Senate left a provision in HB 59 that could potentially establish employment requirements for certain Medicaid recipients. The bill doesn’t inherently impose a work requirement on able-bodied Medicaid recipients, it would instead instruct the state’s Department of Human Services to seek waivers from the federal government to do so.
Administrative Code (House Bill 118)
The Administrative Code was the place where everyone was expecting the merger of the agencies to appear; however, the Administrative Code bill did not contain such language. Although the mergers are currently missing from the bill, there’s still plenty of time for them to be added.
The bill also:
Public School Code (House Bill 178)
House Bill 178, approved by the Senate Rules Committee on Wednesday night, doesn’t include any reference to additional funding for the EITC, which could be a sticking point for the House Republican Caucus, which strongly favors additional dollars for the program.
Unlike the House’s bill, the Senate’s version also provides schools with the option to conduct security drills in lieu of fire drills and applies a new truancy law implemented last year to nonpublic schools beginning in the 2018-19 school year.
Tax Code Bill (House Bill 542)
The Senate approved a Tax Code bill containing $571 million in new or increased taxes, along with borrowing $1.3 billion. Those funds, along with a $200 million transfer of funds and $200 million from a gambling bill that has yet to be resolved, are directed at closing a $2.2 billion deficit projected for Fiscal Year 2017-18, $1.5 billion of which was rolled over from the recently completed 2016-17 fiscal year.
The proposed taxes include:
The bills above are now headed back to the House for their approval. It is yet to be determined if the House will return prior to their next scheduled Session date of Monday, September 11.
Questions contact Jack Phillips, RCPA Director of Government Affairs.
RCPA, along with three other statewide associations, have joined together by drafting a letter to State Senators urging them to oppose House Bill 59 (HB 59). HB 59 negatively impacts Medicaid eligibility and benefits for consumers, specifically limiting the ability of health and human service providers to offer services to the Commonwealth’s most vulnerable population. Consumers and health and human service providers are concerned that HB 59 is on a fast track to passage.
The bill’s language to limit eligibility and access to Medicaid benefits was inserted during budget negotiations without public debate or hearings. After the bill was amended and voted out of committee, it was sent directly to the House in its entirety for an up or down vote. Ultimately, HB 59 passed the House largely along party lines without any votes from Democrats, and fifteen (15) Republicans voted against it. From a good governance perspective this is simply astounding. On process alone, HB 59 should be rejected; therefore, we urge RCPA members to contact their State Senators and ask them to oppose HB 59.
Questions, contact Jack Phillips.
By Carley Mossbrook
Staff Writer
Capitolwire
HARRISBURG (July 11) – A passionate debate of a Human Services code bill on Tuesday saw a bipartisan effort to oppose Republican-crafted provisions that would potentially impose work requirements on certain medical assistance recipients and charge some families with disabled children Medicaid premiums.
“I rise in opposition to House Bill 59, which will throw a wrench into the operations of public healthcare in this state and fundamentally threaten care for hundreds of thousands of people across the Commonwealth,” said Rep. Dan Frankel, D-Allegheny.
Others called the bill “offensive,” “harmful” and “cruel.”
But despite concerns from both sides of the aisle, the House of Representatives narrowly approved the bill with a vote of 102-91. No Democrats supported the legislation.
It will now move to the Senate for concurrence.
House Majority Leader Dave Reed, R-Indiana, said the provisions put into the bill on Monday evening were “98-percent agreed” to by the Senate.
However, it’s unclear if the bill, if approved by the Senate in the coming days (or weeks,) would be signed into law by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, who has concerns about the Medicaid changes included in the code bill.
The chamber also debated public school and administrative code bills, but delayed a vote on them until the Senate acts on other code bills, including a Fiscal Code bill, said Reed.
It’s unclear if a Tax Code bill will be in the mix.
The House recessed Tuesday evening and plan to return in a week, said Steve Miskin, spokesman for Reed.
HB59 House floor comments
Opponents of the bill mostly focused on the provisions that would potentially establish a premium on disabled children and their families who receive Medical Assistance and have an annual income that exceeds 1000 percent of the federal poverty level.
“I don’t think many of us truly realize just how damaging this legislation can be to families who find themselves in huge financial jeopardy to no fault of their own,” said Rep. Schlossberg, D-Lehigh, who said the changes would raise premiums for 61,000 families in the state.
“The vast majority of families who would be affected by this bill face real and significant financial pain. In many cases, their budgets are already stretched well beyond the breaking point,” he continued.
Based on the federal poverty level, only families with an annual income of more than $246,000 would be required to pay the premium, which the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Dan Moul, said would total $50 monthly.
Moul said Pennsylvania is the only state in the country that doesn’t factor in a family’s income when determining eligibility for Medicaid.
He and others said the expected premium cost is reasonable for those families and will preserve human services funding for those making less.
Rep. Kristen Phillips-Hill, R-York added: “This measure will help ensure that we protect this benefit for the most-needy and the most-vulnerable residents of Pennsylvania.”
Opponents also took issue with a provision that could potentially establish employment requirements for certain Medicaid recipients.
“We have to be very, very careful with this population. They’re our most vulnerable,” said Rep. Gene DiGirolamo, R-Bucks, of recipients who are mostly disabled children, severely disabled adults, chronically ill persons and those in nursing homes.
“I don’t see what people in that population are able to work. We’re going to put another level of bureaucracy and paperwork on top of what they’re already going through,” he added.
Numerous disability rights and community provider groups oppose the proposed requirements, he said.
Supporters say the provision would only impact able-bodied Medicaid recipients.
“No change is going to occur to the people who are excluded currently. The intent of this welfare reform is to break the generational recurrence of dependence,” said Rep. Eric Nelson, R-Westmoreland. “It’s to be able to create an opportunity where a person either has to work 20 hours a week or they have to take a class or they have to volunteer.”
“It is incumbent upon this body to help those who can’t help themselves and also we share a responsibility to help those who can help themselves realize they can do so,” Nelson added. “Requiring an individual to have to volunteer their time is not a big ask. Encouraging someone to work 20 hours a week is also not a big ask.”
The Human Service code bill doesn’t inherently establish the Medicaid premium or work requirement provisions, it would simply instruct the state’s Department of Human Services to seek waivers from the federal government to do so.
Ultimately, GOP lawmakers said the changes made in the code bill are needed as human services costs continue to rise and state revenues remain stagnant.
“I keep hearing about the devastating impact to our most vulnerable, but the Human Services budget is growing at a rate of 6 (percent) to 7 percent a year while our revenues are only growing at an average rate of 3 percent,” said Rep. Dawn Keefer, R-Cumberland. “What about the devastation our Commonwealth and the most vulnerable will experience when our Commonwealth is bankrupt.”
Reed said Monday the provisions within the Human Service Code would “provide a couple hundred million dollars in savings, depending on the waivers that are submitted to the federal government and what the federal government tends to approve.”
He explained many of the changes “are a re-enactment of welfare reforms that were actually put into place during the [Bill] Clinton administration [at the federal level] and the [Tom] Ridge administration [at the state level] that fell by the wayside during the [Ed] Rendell administration.”
“With our entitlement spending being one of the major cost drivers in the state right now, until we’re able to bring that under control, we’re going to continue to have billion-dollar deficits year after year,” Reed continued. “This is a movement to continue to try to address that issue in the long-term as well as the short-term.”
He reiterated similar statements Tuesday following the chamber’s floor vote.
The gubernatorial response to HB59
Wolf hasn’t indicated whether he would sign or veto the legislation, however, J.J. Abbott, his press secretary, offered a scathing statement from the governor in an email Tuesday.
“Governor Wolf strongly opposes these backdoor changes that could have widespread and potentially life-changing effects on the health and well-being of millions of Pennsylvanians. Seniors, people with disabilities and low-income working families don’t need their lives to be made even more difficult by politicians in Harrisburg,” wrote Abbott.
“Beyond the substance of these changes, the process flies in the face of good government and these changes would cost millions of taxpayer dollars just to implement. There was no input from stakeholders or families that would be affected and no formal fiscal analysis,” he added.
“Medicaid is not a handout – it is a lifeline. We need to support these families, not create more hoops for them to jump through,” he concluded.
———————————————————————————
Questions, contact Jack Phillips.
Today, the House will vote on HB 59, the Welfare Code bill. In the bill there are many provisions that would have a negative impact on the families that our members serve. RCPA staff has been in contact with House members and have written a letter to legislators explaining why we oppose HB 59.
Once the House votes on the bill today, it will immediately go to the Senate Rules Committee. If the Senate Rules Committee votes it out of committee favorably, HB 59 will go to the Senate floor for a final vote.
RCPA implores providers to contact their legislators and tell them to oppose HB 59. Members can use RCPA’s letter opposing HB59 for talking points. Questions, contact Jack Phillips, RCPA Director of Government Affairs.
Prev