A sign on an ambulance. (Photo David dewitt, Ohio Capital Journal.)
Congress has allocated $ 50 billion to rural hospitals and medical service providers to dispel concerns about billions more in historical federal cuts for health care, which President Donald Trump signed the law on Independence Day.
But is this bandage huge enough to save fighting rural hospitals?
“I have more questions than answers,” said Alan Morgan, General Director of the National Health Association National Health Association, Non -Profit Policy Group. “Nobody has these answers yet.”
Morgan noticed that novel money for health in rural areas that will be spent in five years are much smaller than $ 155 billion on reducing expenditure on rural expenses Medicaid over 10 years, like estimated By KFF, the NON -PROFIT of health policy and research.
Experts, hospital leaders and legislators on both sides of the transition are afraid that the signed provisions of Trump will be especially in hospitals and clinics in the intestines that see a huge share of patients insured by Medicaid, public health insurance in a federal state for low -income people. The novel law reduces over $ 1 trillion from Medicaid over the next 10 years to support pay for tax reductions, which disproportionately bring opulent benefits.
The United States try to protect hospitals with GOP Medicaid Cuts
The allowance worth $ 50 billion was the effort of republican leaders in Congress to win the voices of colleagues from their party, who initially supported such steep cuts in Medicaid and other health services.
A rural program in the US Senate he helped Secure the voice Alaska Moderate Republican Senator Lis Murkowski, who expressed concern about the influence of the law on healthcare in her condition. ABOUT 1 in 3 Alaskan They are insured by Medicaid.
Jared Kosin, president and general director of Alaska Hospital & Healthcare Association, said that he was deeply frustrated with the patron by the novel Medicaid law, which in his opinion overcome indefinite damage to Alaskans. He said that the Republicans bypassed potential solutions, simply throwing money into the program.
“It’s frustrating in the public sphere, when such decisions are made quick and, to be honest, carelessly,” he said.
“The consequences will fall on us, not them.”
More than half of the laws for financing in rural areas are focused in 12 states According to KFF: Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Michigan, Michigan, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, North Carolina, North Carolina, North Karolina, North Carolina, North Carolina, North Carolina, North Karolina, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, Karolina North, North Karolina, North Karolina Karolina, North Carolina, North Carolina, Karolina, North Karolina, Karolina, North Karolina, Karolina, North Carolina, North Karolina.
Some Gop Legislators In Congress he heralded a rural program of $ 50 billion as a victory in healthcare. But it is still not clear which hospitals, clinics and other suppliers will receive money and how much.
How it works
The health transformation program in rural areas will be $ 10 billion a year from the 2026 to 2030 financial years.
States must apply for their financing by the end of this year, presenting a detailed plan how it will be used.
The law defines certain ways in which countries can apply money in accordance with analysis Legislation from the Bilateral Policy Center:
- Payments to rural hospitals to support them maintain the necessary services, such as ambulance care or work and delivery.
- Recruitment and training of rural doctors, nurses and other healthcare employees.
- Strengthening of paramedics such as ambulances and EMT.
- Using novel technologies, including teeth.
- Ensuring the treatment of opioids and mental health services.
- Improving the preventive care and chronic disease.
Half of $ 10 billion each year will be distributed evenly in all states that have submitted the application. The second half can be distributed by the administrator of the Federal Medicare & Medicaid Services centers – currently Dr. Mehmet OZ – at their own discretion, based on rural population and rural areas.
Although the program does not replace the amount in which countries will probably lose, Morgan said that this is still an opportunity to think about how rural health care is financed. He would like to see how you have flexibility in how they are able to apply funds, and hopes that they focus on maintaining the health of rural communities through preventive care, while helping hospitals to keep the door open.
“If it is done correctly, it can really change the future country of country America,” said Morgan. “However, this is a difficult question.”
The most complex blow
Kentucky can bring the greatest hit as a result of reducing the novel law in the financing of rural Medicaid, losing estimates $ 12 billion in 10 yearsAccording to KFF analysis.
Tracking the status of Medicaid patients may be complex for the states
The Medicaid State Department is still waiting for additional federal guidelines to understand how this will affect the state program, Kendra Steele, spokeswoman for the Kentucky for Health and Family Services cabinet, said Stateline in a statement.
“Over 1.4 million Kentucki are based on Medicaid – including half of all children in our state, seniors and more sensitive populations – and the adoption of regulations at the federal level will have a serious impact on these people, rural health care and hospitals and local economies,” she wrote.
Even in the case of a novel state program throughout the country, they will have to re -assess their budgets in the featherlight of cuts, said Hemi TWARSON, executive director of the National Academy for State Health Policy, an impartial group that supports you in developing healthcare policies.
“Each region is slightly different and there is no approach to one size,” she said. “The ownership of the hospital is different [as well as] Types of services that are crucial for the community in which they are located. They must think about new ways of providing these services in a context with fewer resources. “
ABOUT 44% of rural hospitals operate in redAccording to KFF analysis, Rand Hospital data, a higher share than 35% of hospitals in urban areas.
“WSI in the heart”
Before adopting the Act, OZ tried to serene the Republicans from the American house that their districts could get money from the program, even if they were not particularly rural, a politician Reported at the beginning of this month.
(*50*)
We are all in a country heart when it comes to money.
– Alan Morgan, CEO National Rural Health Association
Republican Republican Republican Republicanie Rob Bresnahan he said Money would start sailing to his district at the beginning of next year, telling the leader Wilkes-Barre Times at the beginning of this month, that he met with Trump, Oz and others to secure the commitment that hospitals in his district can access the fund. It represents the north-east corner of Pennsylvania, which includes suburban and rural areas, as well as the cities of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre.
Although the legislation includes guidelines that qualify as “rural”, Morgan from the National Rural Health Association, expects the crazy end to legislators and suppliers suppliers to obtain rural status for funds.
“It will be a huge problem – determining who is rural,” said Morgan. “We’re all in a country heart when it comes to money.”
Stateline reporter Anna Claire Vollers can be achieved at avollers@stateline.org.
You enable our work.
