A day after Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem struck down an effort to expand Medicaid, attorneys for proponents of the expansion filed an appeal to the Supreme Court of Missouri.
One of those attorneys, Chuck Hatfield, tweeted that the Missouri Supreme Court has granted the joint motion for an expedited briefing and the case is scheduled for argument at 11 a.m. July 13.
That hearing will determine whether 275,000 Missourians will become newly eligible to receive health benefits under the state’s Medicaid program, referred to as Mo HealthNet.
Attorneys for the case have said they expect the case to be appealed up through the courts until it becomes before the Supreme Court.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of three plaintiffs which sought an order for the Department of Social Services to allow all who are newly eligible to enroll and receive the same coverage as current program clients beginning July 1, even though the state legislator and Missouri Gov. Mike Parson failed to include money in the state’s budget to pay for the expansion costs.
Missouri residents passed Amendment 2, a statewide initiative to expand Medicaid health coverage, in August. By lowering requirement thresholds for Medicaid beginning July 1, an additional 275,000 Missourians who struggle to make ends meet were supposed to have access to health coverage.
However, Beetem’s ruling was the latest in the state’s Medicaid saga, which began when House Republicansresisted the will of the voters by removing $1.9 billion allocated for the program’s July expansion when crafting the 2022 state budget. TheSenate then also voted against funding the program expansion.
Six days after the General Assembly presented Parson with the 2022 budget sans the expansion funding,the governor withdrew the state from its plan to expand Medicaid coverage altogether.
Protests across the state were held following the announcement.
FRA Passage
As for the funding of the current program, the Missouri Senate on Saturday passed a clean Federal Reimbursement Allowance (FRA) bill that is necessary to fund the state’s Medicaid program in a special session.
The tax is collected from hospitals, nursing homes and pharmacies and generates $1.6 billion annually. Missouri then receives an additional $3 billion in federal funds to finance the program.
It was moved to the House without the controversial amendment that classifies Plan B and certain types of IUDs as drugs that cause an abortion and make them more difficult for women on Medicaid to receive.
“This is a win for science, MO HealthNet patients, and all Missourians,” wrote Michelle Trupiano, executive director of Missouri Family Health Council, Inc., in a statement Saturday. “We applaud the senators who put people over politics tonight and ushered in a bipartisan resolution on this. The message is clear: it is not a winning strategy to use birth control – which is essential healthcare – as a bargaining chip.”
Missouri Sen. Brian Williams, D-St. Louis, wrote in his column that he believes the debate on abortifacients and Planned Parenthood should take place during the regular session so they can have “constructive conversation about these issues.”
“I am pleased that specifically listing IUDs, Plan B and contraceptives was left out of the bill, because I believe including them furthered the idea that they could induce an abortion if used in that manner, and that is simply not true,” he wrote.
The FRA renewal bill was introduced in the House on Monday morning and Williams wrote the Senate hopes to have this legislation passed and sent to the governor’s desk by Wednesday, the end of the fiscal year.
Parson called the special session because the legislature did not reauthorize the FRA (medical provider tax), as several GOP members wanted to include language in the bill that bans Medicaid coverage of certain birth control methods and blocks government funding of Planned Parenthood.
If the tax is not renewed, Parson will be forced to make drastic cuts in other areas of the budget to fund the existing program.