Public Health Community Worries About Money as Obamacare Begins

Several federal provisions assist the neediest Americans. Now that everyone is supposed to have insurance, will they be unnecessary?

Squashed: Will certainhealth care programs be moot?  
National Journal
Catherine Hollander
See more stories about...
Catherine Hollander
Aug. 29, 2013, 10:58 a.m.

What’s the point of hav­ing pub­lic-health pro­grams for people without health in­sur­ance if every­body has health in­sur­ance?

Pub­lic-health ad­voc­ates have spent the past three years liv­ing in fear of that ques­tion: With the Af­ford­able Care Act the­or­et­ic­ally en­sur­ing that every­one is covered, law­makers might fig­ure it’s safe to gut long-stand­ing pub­lic-health pro­grams.

For a while, those fears seemed well-foun­ded.

“Even with­in months of the ini­tial pas­sage of the ACA, I had lob­by­ists for oth­er “˜good-guy’ causes call­ing and say­ing, “˜OK, when can we start think­ing of these pro­grams as off­sets or pay-fors for oth­er activ­it­ies we’d like to put for­ward in the ap­pro­pri­ations bill or as new au­thor­iz­a­tions?’ “ says Tim West­mo­re­land, a vis­it­ing pro­fess­or at Geor­getown Law who helped craft the Ry­an White Care Act of 1990, which serves low-in­come HIV pa­tients. “And I said, “˜Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.’ “

But now many in the pub­lic-health com­munity say those wor­ries have passed — or at least have been over­taken by a dif­fer­ent con­cern: that law­makers will see the need to con­tin­ue the pro­grams but slash their fund­ing any­way be­cause of the na­tion’s lar­ger budget con­cerns.

“It’s go­ing to be more a mat­ter of de­gree, the ar­gu­ment go­ing for­ward,” says Dan Hawkins, the head of policy at the Na­tion­al As­so­ci­ation of Com­munity Health Cen­ters. “There will be an ar­gu­ment about scale and size.”

That de­bate has already be­gun. And what Wash­ing­ton has giv­en with one hand, it has some­times taken away with the oth­er. Com­munity health cen­ters got an $11 bil­lion grant over five years through the 2010 ACA, $9.5 bil­lion of which was ear­marked for ex­pand­ing op­er­a­tions — only to see their reg­u­lar fund­ing cut by $600 mil­lion in fisc­al 2011, which would erase ap­prox­im­ately one-third of that budget over five years. Title X ap­pro­pri­ations for fam­ily plan­ning fell 7 per­cent in fisc­al 2010 to $294 mil­lion in 2012. Se­quest­ra­tion is likely to ex­acer­bate fund­ing prob­lems in the fu­ture.

Mean­while, com­munity health cen­ters are bra­cing for more de­mand than ever. The non­par­tis­an Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice pre­dicts that, des­pite Obama­care, 31 mil­lion non-eld­erly Amer­ic­ans will re­main un­in­sured in 2023. Those people will con­tin­ue to look to com­munity cen­ters to meet their health needs. And some of the mil­lions of people who do be­come in­sured un­der Obama­care will likely turn there, too. Those cen­ters say they will struggle to meet that double-barreled ex­pan­sion in de­mand if law­makers are giv­ing them less money, even if Medi­caid and private in­sur­ance con­tri­bu­tions rise.

Pub­lic-health of­fi­cials point to work that’s been done in Mas­sachu­setts as a pre­view of what’s likely to hap­pen to pub­lic-health pro­grams after the ACA is fully im­ple­men­ted. A 2012 study fun­ded by the Amer­ic­an Can­cer So­ci­ety looked at use of ser­vices through the breast and cer­vical can­cer pro­gram fol­low­ing the state’s pas­sage of health care re­form in 2006. The re­search­ers, us­ing Census Bur­eau data, con­cluded that even as the ACA in­creases health cov­er­age and the levels of can­cer screen­ing among wo­men, “if fu­ture num­bers of wo­men served by [the Na­tion­al Breast and Cer­vical Can­cer Early De­tec­tion Pro­gram] are com­par­able to re­cent num­bers, the pro­gram will still only be able to meet the needs of one-fifth to one-third of those eli­gible.” But Con­gress ap­proved only $185 mil­lion for the early-de­tec­tion pro­gram in fisc­al 2011 and $184 mil­lion in 2012 — just 73 per­cent and 67 per­cent, re­spect­ively, of the fund­ing set out in the law’s 2007 reau­thor­iz­a­tion.

And, of­fi­cials say, health in­sur­ance alone isn’t enough to make up the dif­fer­ence. The Cen­ters for Dis­ease Con­trol and Pre­ven­tion, which runs the early-de­tec­tion pro­gram, states on its web­site, “Even with ad­equate health in­sur­ance, many wo­men will still face sub­stan­tial bar­ri­ers to ob­tain­ing breast- and cer­vical-can­cer screen­ing, such as geo­graph­ic isol­a­tion, lim­ited health lit­er­acy or self-ef­fic­acy, lack of pro­vider re­com­mend­a­tion, in­con­veni­ent times to ac­cess ser­vices, and lan­guage bar­ri­ers.”

Pub­lic-health pro­viders also note the so-called ad­ded be­ne­fits of their pro­grams, such as coun­sel­ing and oth­er sup­port ser­vices, that aren’t in­cluded in Medi­caid or many private in­sur­ance plans.

An­oth­er big ques­tion for pub­lic-health pro­grams is what will hap­pen with state Medi­caid ex­pan­sions. In 2012, the Su­preme Court ruled that states had the choice to ex­pand their Medi­caid pro­grams with fed­er­al fund­ing or to opt out. States that take the lat­ter route — so far, 21 have done so, and five are still de­bat­ing it — are likely to have lar­ger pop­u­la­tions that rely on pub­lic-health pro­grams. Right now, the fund­ing mech­an­isms for the Ry­an White law aren’t based on how many people have cov­er­age in a par­tic­u­lar state, but those vari­ations are soon to be much more dra­mat­ic, com­plic­at­ing ques­tions of how to al­loc­ate the money Con­gress ap­pro­pri­ates.

Con­gress may want to wait and see how the ACA plays out be­fore mak­ing any longer-term de­cisions on pro­grams such as Ry­an White, which is up for reau­thor­iz­a­tion at the end of Septem­ber. Sticky battles loom ahead, but of­fi­cials are re­lieved that at least they won’t be over their pro­grams’ life or death. That’s a fight they now feel they have won.

What We're Following See More »
WEST WING REDUX
Allison Janney Takes to the Real White House Podium
9 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Carolyn Kaster/AP

STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
10 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
12 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
15 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
×