FY 2016 budget – RI Future

Language on abortion nestled into the 2016 Rhode Island State Budget dealing with HealthSource RI may have far reaching consequences for workers whose employers may want to claim a religious exemption from covering the procedure. As reported on RI Future yesterday, Governor Gina Raimondo inserted an 11th hour amendment into the budget that goes far beyond what Federal law mandates as regards abortion access under the Affordable Care Act. Several local organizations have now spoken out about the Governor’s actions.

James Rhodes, director of public policy & government relations at Planned Parenthood Southern New England, said, in a statement,

Planned Parenthood was surprised to see these proposals in the Governor’s budget when it was unveiled last week, and we were not consulted about the new policies contained in this article. Additionally, since there was never a hearing on this language, we have not been able to get clear guidance on the intent of these policies.

“Specifically, there is a fundamental question on which the budget article the House Finance Committee passed on Tuesday night is silent: ‘How does a small employer, whether a religious organization or not, claim a religious exemption from covering abortion?’ Do they have a form to fill out to submit to the Office of Health Insurance Commissioner to declare their objection in order to get a new plan variation from an insurer? Is there any requirement to notify insured employees that their insurance does not cover this service, which is standard coverage in the small group market?

“Fundamentally, Planned Parenthood believes that employers should not be making health decisions around abortion coverage or contraception for their employees. Rhode Island has an opportunity to protect employees by including specific language that would require, at a minimum, notification, to the Insurance Commissioner and employees, that the insurance an employer is offering does not include the full range of reproductive health options, including abortion.”

Steve Brown, executive director of the RI ACLU, also expressed concerns, saying in a statement,

We are extremely disappointed in the Governor’s introduction of polarizing abortion language into the health exchange budget article. Protecting access to abortion is an essential component of comprehensive health coverage, but Article 18 undermines that access.

“It is worth emphasizing that the federal health care law already imposes significant restrictions on abortion access through health care exchanges. The additional burdens that passage of this budget article could impose, particularly on unwitting employees, is deeply troubling.”

As a candidate, Raimondo was happy to accept campaign money from the pro-choice PAC Emily’s List and to accept the endorsement of Planned Parenthood Votes!. Raimondo once said that “women are ‘smart enough’ to make their own health care decisions without interference from government or their employer,” according to a ProJo piece by Katherine Gregg.

Laws that allow employers to make unilateral decisions about a worker’s reproductive healthcare options cut against candidate Raimondo’s claim.

Sam Bell, executive director of the Progressive Democrats of Rhode Island, said in a statement,

For folks who criticized me during the campaign season for saying that Raimondo would be less than fully committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose, this is what I was talking about.

“Restricting insurance coverage of reproductive healthcare is one of the most dangerous ways to erode a woman’s right to choose. The fact of the matter is that wealthier women will always have access to abortions. They can go to another state and pay for the procedure out of pocket. They may have the procedure delayed. They may face institutionalized shaming. But with enough money, they will always have access, no matter how restrictive Rhode Island’s laws get.

“That’s why this new policy is so damaging. It will force lower-income women to choose between carrying a child they don’t want and financial ruin.”

President Obama released his 141 page ‘policy and wish list” when he unveiled his politically ambitious FY 2016 budget on Feb 2, not having to worry about running for president in the upcoming 2016 presidential election cycle.

Yes, even inside the Washington Beltway a picture is truly worth a thousand words. Gone is the budget’s plain blue cover replaced by a black and white photo of the Tappan Zee Bridge in New York, an image that projects one of the President’s spending priorities of rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure to create jobs and improve the transportation system.

The $4 trillion presidential budget, a political campaign document outlaying his policies and priorities, would cancel automatic sequestration cuts to domestic and military programs over a 10 year period. According to the New York Times, Obama’s budget proposal would add $6 trillion to the national debt, and the single-year deficit would rise to $687 billion by 2025.

Obama’s FY 2016 budget puts more funding into education, rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure, increased defense spending, along with providing tax relief for America’s middle class while increasing the taxes for corporate America and the wealthy. Political insiders say that Obama’s budget, one that gives to the middle class and assesses higher taxes from corporate America and the wealthy, sets the issues to be surely debated in the upcoming presidential election. .

A Look at Aging Priorities

In a Feb. 3 blog post, Nora Super, executive director of the upcoming White House Conference on Aging, details how the recently released budget proposal will “ensure that older Americans enjoy not only longer but healthier lives.”

As to retirement security, Super notes that the Obama Administration strongly opposes any legislative measures that would privatize the nation’s Social Security program, or slash benefits for future generations or reduce basic benefits to current beneficiaries. Super says that half the nation’s workforce, that’s about 78 million, does not have a retirement savings plan at work. “Fewer than 10 percent of those without plans at work contribute to a plan of their own. The President’s FY 2016 Budget expands retirement opportunities for all Americans to help families save and give them better choices to reach a secure retirement,” she says.

According to Super, Obama’s Budget proposal supports healthy aging by strengthening the Medicare program by “aligning payments with the costs of providing care, along with encouraging health care providers to deliver better care and better outcomes for their patients, and improving access to care for beneficiaries.”

To put the brakes to rising prescription drug costs, Super notes that the President’s Budget proposes to close the Medicare Part D donut hole for brand drugs by 2017, rather than 2020, by increasing discounts from the pharmaceutical industry. The Budget proposal also gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services new authority to negotiate with drug manufacturers on prices for high cost drugs and biologics covered under the Part D program.

Linking nutrition to healthy aging, Super says that Obama’s Budget provides “over $874 million for Nutrition Services programs, a $60 million increase over the 2015 enacted level, allowing States to provide 208 million meals to over 2 million older Americans nation-wide, helping to halt the decline in service levels for the first time since 2010.” Also, Obama’s budget ratchets up funding for supportive housing for very low-income elderly households, including frail elderly, to give these individuals access to human services, she adds. .

Protecting older persons from elder abuse, neglect and financial exploitation, Super blogs that the President’s budget proposal includes $25 million in discretionary resources for Elder Justice Act programs authorized under the Affordable Care Act. “Funding will “improve detection and reporting of elder abuse; grants to States to pilot a new reporting system; and funding to support a coordinated Federal research portfolio to better understand and prevent the abuse and exploitation of vulnerable adults,” she says.

Here’s Super’s take on the Obama budgetary blueprint: “Taken together, these and other initiatives in the Budget will help to change the aging landscape in America to reflect new realities and new opportunities for older Americans, and they will support the dignity, independence, and quality of life of older Americans at a time when we’re seeing a huge surge in the number of older adults.”

In a released statement, AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond gives thumbs to the president’s efforts to “lower the cost of prescription drugs, promote better care, reward improved outcomes and make health care programs more efficient and less wasteful.” She also expresses her nonprofit group’s support for the President’s budgetary priorities to “create opportunities for the middle class” and his goal “to make saving for retirement easier.”

But, LeaMond expresses concerns that higher premiums, deductibles and copays might shift costs to older Americans. “As the federal deficit continues shrinking, we must find responsible solutions for strengthening critical programs and improving the retirement and overall economic security of current and future generations. We must also look for savings throughout the entire health care system, as the rising cost of health care threatens people of all ages,” she says.

In his statement, President/CEO Max Richtman, of the Washington, DC-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, agrees with LeaMond’s concerns of higher premiums, deductible’s and co pays, too. “While some tout increasing means testing in Medicare as a way to insure ‘rich’ seniors pay their share, the truth is, the middle-class will take this hit as well,” he predicts.

Political pundits say that Obama’s 2016 budget was dead-on arrival at Capitol Hill the day it was released at the beginning of February. In the shadow of the upcoming 50th Anniversary of Medicare, Medicaid, and the Older Americans Act, as well as the 80th Anniversary of Social Security, GOP leadership in both chambers of Congress must work with the Democratic President to hammer out a bipartisan compromise. Putting budgetary proposals that strengthens the nation’s programs and services for older Americans on the chopping block for purely political reasons is not acceptable, especially to a nation that opposes political gridlock.

Herb Weiss, LRI ’12, is a Pawtucket-based writer covering aging, health care and medical issues. He can be reached at hweissri@aol.com.

Tag: FY 2016 budget

Raimondo’s budget addition allows employers vast discretion on abortion coverage for workers