No coverage for 70,000 Montana's worst legislative blunder

Generally, we should be grateful that the current Montana legislative session has come to an end for two years — unless we have a special session on some specific issue, such as health care. In general, the lawmakers managed to do some things right. They managed to close their session early, a positive move, and they managed to balance the state budget, which they are obligated by law to do. Most positive is their fix of state retirement programs (if it works), long overdue from past legislative gatherings.

What they failed to do fills a much larger notebook. They failed to appropriate adequate money for roads and highways across the state. They failed to adequately fund higher education for the Montana University System.They failed to come up with adequate raises for state employee's salaries.

But by far the biggest failure of the current Legislature is their malevolent refusal to fund adequate health assistance for roughly 70,000 Montana citizens.

This failure to act in a reasonable manner with respect to many of our fellow state citizen's health care needs is not only short-sighted. It amounts to an action of pure immorality.

Most grievous of all the fact that the money to pay for this expanded medical care is already appropriated by the federal government. It would not cost the state additional money for two years, in other words, until the next state legislative session.

Bill Thackersay

Even then, state costs would amount to only up to 10 percent while Federal costs — for money already appropriated — would come up to about 90 percent. None of this federal money will be saved for national taxpayers — or Montana taxpayers — by the failure of our Montana Legislature to act.

This federal money intended for Montana Medicaid costs and partly collected from Montana taxpayers will simply be spent for Medicaid health costs in other states.

Strangest of all is that some of the most conservative and right wing states, especially across the south, have welcomed the federal money to aid their citizens who can't otherwise afford adequate health care.

Even in the tea party dominated state of Arkansas, the state was able to prepare a compromise with federal authorities to accept additional Medicaid money for its citizens. The Republican-controlled Legislature of Arkansas has accepted a compromise proposed by the Democratic governor to use the new federal health dollars to help eligible private citizens buy personal private insurance.

A reasonable compromise, you would think. But not for Montana.

Even Tom Jacobson, the state representative from Great Falls whose vote ditched additional Medicaid for Montana, has said, "The failure of the Legislature to pass the bipartisan Medicaid compromise was one of the biggest disappointments of the session."

Jacobson's careless and foolish vote sent the proposal to accept federal Medicaid money to a Republican House committee, where it "languished and died."

Jacobson is quoted as saying further: "It's tough that Montana has 70,000 people in the state who would have been helped by that bill."

Possible revival of the Medicaid funding matter could occur if the state has a special referendum on the issue — and it's passed by Montana voters — or the governor calls a special legislative session to reconsider the matter. Presently, the governor has not made such a move.

At the legislative hearings by the House Human Services Committee on March 25 and the Senate Public Health, Welfare and Safety Committee on March 27 concerning the Medicaid issue, one observer notes with dismay that "people who traveled from across the state were refused the opportunity to tell their real life, human face, heart wrenching stories." They were shut down and refused recognition by the Republican Committee Chairmen as a "rude" exercise of sheer power — a blatant refusal to listen to the state's voters.

Following the actions of the two committees, some state lawmakers pointed to federal health exchanges as an alternative to expanding Medicaid in the state, but that attempt to create state health exchanges has been repeatedly considered not a good alternative by the state Legislature. Legislators, of course enjoy fully funded state medical insurance for themselves, which they deny to thousands of their fellow citizens.

Who pays the biggest price for this failure of the state Legislature to pass such legitimate health legislation? Not only many individual families who remain one step ahead of bankruptcy if they face a large medical crisis by just one member of the family but also state hospitals and state taxpayers as well.

Hospital emergency rooms, the most expensive center for medical care, remains the sorry alternative for state residents facing a health crisis. Hospitals will lose money as well as citizens.

Montana taxpayers pay federal taxes, which finance the United States health care expansion in general, but they receive no benefit in return. The benefit from the Montana tax money goes to other states and taxpayers.

In addition, Montanans must pay the additional burden put on health care in this state as well.

The tea partiers in the state should feel proud of themselves. It's not tea they threw into the ocean harbor in Montana. It's Montana citizens and taxpayers — and especially those in the state denied adequate health care.

(Bill Thackeray is a retired Montana State University-Northern professor. He lives in Havre.)