Highly anticipated report on first year of Medicaid expansion says Kentucky can afford it even with higher-than-expected enrollment

By Melissa Patrick
Kentucky Health News

FRANKFORT, Ky. -- Kentucky's decision to expand Medicaid under federal health reform is a better deal than previously projected and will more than pay for itself, Gov. Steve Beshear said as he unveiled a top consulting and accounting firm's study of the expansion's first year and projections for the next seven.

"For all the naysayers who claimed that expanding Medicaid was a budget-busting boondoggle, take a look at the facts. It's working, and it's literally paying off. The state is saving money, hospitals are earning more, and our people are getting healthier," Beshear said.

The report was conducted by Deloitte Consulting and the University of Louisville's Urban Studies Institute and cost $140,000, which was paid from Medicaid's administrative budget, half state funds and half federal.

Beshear said a study from Deloitte is "about as reliable as any study can be" and conclusively, with "an avalanche of facts," informs the critics that Kentucky can afford to pay for Medicaid expansion.

"Kentucky can indeed take care of its people, In fact, we can't afford not to do so," he said.

The report says that through 2021, Medicaid expansion will add 40,000 new jobs with an average annual salary of $41,000, putting $30 billion into the state's economy, and adding nearly $820 million to state and local budgets.

That, the report says, will cover the estimated cost of the matching funds that the state will have to pay for care of the newly eligible enrollees, those between 69 percent and 138 percent of the federal poverty level. The match will start at 5 percent of the cost in 2017 and rise to the law's cap of 10 percent in 2020.

For the next two budget years, from July 2016 to June 2018, the report estimates Kentucky will pay $74.4 million and $173.2 million, respectively. The report says this will be offset by $511.8 million of General Fund savings and tax revenues expected from the increased economic activity resulting from additional health care spending.

"These are conservative estimates," Beshear said, without any estimated savings from better health that he said will result from more people getting health care.

A Gallup poll released this summer said that Kentucky saw the second largest decrease of any state in its uninsured rate, dropping to 12 percent from 20 percent.

The study's projections were more favorable than those in a study by the PriceWaterhouseCoopers accounting and consulting firm, which Beshear cited when he announced in May 2013 that he would expand Medicaid. That study estimated the expansion would create 7,600 new jobs in 2014, but Beshear said the actual number was more than 12,000, including 5,400 in health care. Pricewaterhouse estimated 17,000 new jobs through 2021, well under Deloitte's forecast of more than 40,000.

Pricewaterhouse also underestimated the enrollment in Medicaid. In the first year, more than 375,000 people enrolled, about double the number that the firm estimated would enroll by 2020. That means the cost of the state's match will be higher than expected, but covered by jobs and taxes resulting from the higher enrollment.

“People can have whatever opinion they want, but they aren’t entitled to their own facts,” Beshear said. “It’s one thing just not to like [Medicaid expansion] because the president has his name on it, and if that’s the reason they want to take health care away from 500,000 Kentuckians, then that’s their opinion and people oughta know that. This report answers the questions, will it work, and yes it is working in Kentucky, and can we afford it, and yes we can."

The report is online at Governor.ky.gov. For county-by-county data, go to http://governor.ky.gov/healthierky/Documents/medicaid/Medicaid_Hospital_Report.pdf.

Sponsor of local opt-out amendment says smoking-ban bill needs it to pass; sponsor and House leaders don't care for it

By Melissa Patrick
Kentucky Health News

UPDATE: The House didn't vote on this amendment, but Sen. Jimmy Higdon, R-Lebanon, says it or something like it would give the bill a better chance of passing the Republican-controlled Senate.

FRANKFORT, Ky. – Rep. Steve Riggs of Louisville has proposed an amendment to the statewide smoking ban bill that would allow cities and counties to opt out of the ban every two years, saying he wants to improve the bill's chances of becoming law.

Riggs

“This amendment would negate a lot of concern about taking away local rights,” Riggs, a Democrat who supports the ban, said in a press release.

His Floor Amendment 9 to House Bill 145 proposes that local governments be able to opt out of the ban, but would be required to take another vote every two years to prevent the ban from taking effect in their jurisdiction.

Rep. Susan Westrom, five-year sponsor of the ban, first said she welcomes amendments because that is "how we edit our legislation," but still needed to talk to Riggs – and when asked if she thought this amendment was a good idea, she said it "goes against the intent of the bill."

"It is a little bit too late for this amendment," the Lexington Democrat said. "We have made too much progress."

House Speaker Greg Stumbo, who says he supports the bill but has clashed with Westrom about its handling, agreed. "I think if you started from day one with that as the idea," he said, "it might have been more palatable."

Stumbo and Republican Leader Jeff Hoover said the amendment would defeat the bill's purpose.

Hoover

Hoover noted, "Advocates have said for many years that we have to have a state-wide smoking ban because of the health concerns all across Kentucky."

Riggs said in an interview that the legislation hasn't had the votes for the past five years and it is time to do something different.

"If you keep swinging at the ball and missing time after time, you probably ought to change your stance," he said. "And that is what they need to do. They need to make a change to get more votes so it will pass."

Westrom said, "We have the votes." But House leaders told her Friday, Feb. 6, that she would need to have commitments from 55 of the 100 House members before they would bring her bill up for a vote.

"What it really says is, it takes 51 votes to pass, but we want 55 commitments because we can't trust everybody," Hoover said. "It's not about having a cushion; it's about they can't trust their own members when they say they are going to vote for something." He said Democratic leaders "should have the discipline to keep amendments, such as this one, from being filed."

Riggs said as chair of the House Local Government Committee, he is sensitive to the needs of cities and counties, and "If we give those people an option to opt out of it, we might be able to get some votes up here to pass the bill."

He said his amendment would allow the bill's advocates to get 90 to 95 percent of what they want to accomplish. "Most people consider that an A, excellent," he said. "This bill might bring in another 10 votes, because people feel if they have the option to opt out, that is liberty and freedom."

Riggs also said the idea might improve the bill's poor chances for passage in the Senate because some senators showed interest in the approach last year.

This is the right thing to do because they don't have enough votes to pass the bill in the House and the Senate," Riggs said.

He said smoke-free advocates don't want any changes to this bill and have not been willing to compromise for the past five years, and asked, "How much illness can we put at their feet because they won't change their swing?"

James Sharp of the American Cancer Society's lobbying arm, the Cancer Action Network, declined to comment.

Hoover, one of the relatively few Republicans for the bill, said he is mindful of opponents' arguments about personal property rights, but also of the "associated health risk with smoking and second hand smoke and the cost that this state is incurring in treating those folks who have diseases related to smoke and second hand smoke."

He concluded, "When I do the balancing test for me personally, I come down on the side that this is a step in the right direction to reduce health care cost and save lives."

Liberty City Council rescinds smoking ban that had passed with mayor's tie-breaking vote weeks earlier

Liberty city council members voted 5-1 to repeal a city-wide smoking ban in public buildings that was passed narrowly in November. The law was to go into effect Jan. 1, Larry Rowell reports for The Casey County News.

The ban had passed in November when Mayor Steve Sweeney cast the deciding vote because the council was split 2-2. Two council members were absent at the meeting, Rowell reports in a separate article.

A special meeting was called Dec. 17 for first reading of an ordinance to to rescind the ban and a new restaurant tax; both passed on second reading Dec. 22, but Sweeney vetoed the restaurant measure, which passed 4-2. He could not veto the smoking measure because it passed 5-1. Council Member Brian Beeler stood by his original vote for the ban, but Member Andy Lawhorn switched to oppose it.

“I stand by what I voted for,” said Lawhorn, who lost the November election for mayor to Council Member Steven Brown. “We sit here and say that second hand smoke is not harmful. I smoke. If we can actually say it's not harmful to us or other people and 'other people' being the key word, we're in denial. That's just a fact.” But he said he changed his vote because of public opinion.

“I've heard a lot of outpouring conversations from the public that's come to me that was against it. And I feel that maybe I voted my conscience and what I believe kind of before I got any feedback, good quality feedback, from the public on what they wanted,” Lawhorn said.

Several Liberty residents attended the meeting and voiced their opinions about the issue, Rowell reports. One woman whose husband died from complications of smoking said public places should be made safe, and Jelaine Harlow, a health educator from the Lake Cumberland District Health Department, said it's a public health issue, much like keeping sewage out of water supplies.

But County Attorney Tom Weddle, a smoker, objected that the ordinance would not allow him to smoke in his office after hours, when no one else is around. Councilman Doug Johnson, a non-smoker who has made two businesses smoke-free, agreed with Weddle and said to people who don't like secondhand smoke, “You should boycott that place until they yield to no smoking but we should not mandate that to the owner. If we mandate that, we can mandate anything. It’s their personal space, they own it even though it’s open to the public. It is privately owned.”

Studies have found that 65 percent of Kentuckians support banning smoking in indoor public places, but despite this support only 23 Kentucky communities have smoke-free policies that cover all workplaces and enclosed public places, according to the Smoke-Free Kentucky website. This breaks down to 32 percent of Kentuckians covered by strong local smoke-free laws.

Lexington is considering whether to add electronic cigarettes to its anti-smoking ordinance

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council will discuss whether to expand its smoking ban to include electronic cigarettes, possibly as early as Oct. 7 at the General Government Committee meeting, Beth Musgrave reports for the Lexington Herald-Leader.

Berea, Bardstown, Danville, Glasgow, Manchester and Richmond have banned included e-cigarettes in smoking bans; on Oct. 6 Versailles may do likewise. (The city is replacing a Woodford County Board of Health regulation that was ruled unconstitutional.)

Amy Barkley, chairwoman of the Smoke-Free Kentucky Coalition, told Musgrave that cities and states updating their anti-smoking ordinances to include e-cigarettes is "part of a trend," and "Lexington has always been the leader in smoke-free policy in this state."

But e-cigarettes have changed the terms of smoking-ban debates. Tony Florence, co-owner of 723 Vapor Store in Lexington, which sells e-cigarettes, told Musgrave, "It's ludicrous to try to ban something that is trying to help people kick a horrible habit," Florence said. "The way that I look at it, if you are anti e-cigarette then you are really pro-lung cancer."

Gorton, who is a registered nurse, told Musgrave that she supported an amendment to the smoking ordinance because the Fayette County Board of Health recommended it. Gorton also noted that the state now bans all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, on most state properties and that Rupp Arena and the attached Lexington Convention Center do likewise.

Supporters of e-cigarette ordinances say the devices are not effective in helping people stop smoking and "not much is known about the effects of electronic cigarettes," Musgrave reports. Barkley also told Musgrave that because e-cigarettes look like real cigarettes it "undermines the enforceability of smoking ordinances."

The Food and Drug Administration does not regulate e-cigarettes. Smoke-free advocates, including Barkley say that "until the FDA regulates e-cigarettes, it's best to include them in smoking bans," Musgrave writes.

But Florence told Musgrave that "the federal government hasn't acted on e-cigarettes for a reason: The research is not conclusive."

Health-board smoking bans that Supreme Court struck down are still being obeyed: 'Everybody loves it,' advocate says

By Melissa Patrick
Kentucky Health News

Three counties in Kentucky with unenforceable smoking bans continue to be smoke-free by the people’s choice.

Clark, Madison and Woodford counties have smoking bans that can’t be enforced because they are regulations of county health boards, which the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled in June do not have the power to ban smoking in public places. But officials in each county reported that most of the establishments in these counties continue to be smoke-free by choice.

“We are finding, in general, public spaces and restaurants are still complying with regulations as if it is still enforceable,” said Christie Green, public-information officer for the Madison County Health Department. “It seems as if the general public prefers this.”

In Versailles, the city council “hadn’t heard from one single tax-payer who is opposed to it,” recently resigned city council member Sonny Jones said in an interview before his resignation.

Scott Lockard, director of public health in Clark County, said likewise. “The community has remained smoke free. The public has demanded this, ” he said, and as far as he was aware “No businesses have gone backward in this.”

That doesn’t surprise Ellen Hahn, director for the Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy and the state’s leading smoking-ban advocate. “When communities go smoke free, everybody loves it,” she said.

The anti-smoking regulations can’t be enforced, advocates said. “If enforced, a lawsuit might result,” Lockard said. “We have no active enforcement right now in Clark County.”

The court ruled in a case from Bullitt County, where a local judge had blocked enforcement.

Each of the other counties is handling the issue somewhat differently.

Woodford County, out of “respect for the cities” of Midway and Versailles, will let them determine whether they want to reinstate their previously enacted smoking bans before the county fiscal court makes a decision for the unincorporated area of the county, County Attorney Alan George said, “because the bulk of the affected business is in the city.”

Midway passed a new anti-smoking ordinance Aug. 18 and Versailles plans to hold its first reading on one Sept. 2.

Madison County plans second reading and passage of its smoking ordinance for Sept. 9. Berea is scheduled to do likewise Sept. 2.

Clark County has “no forward actions” or “no ordinance drafted” at this time, Lockard said. Asked if officials are waiting on the Nov. 4 election to move forward, he said that “no one had come out and said the election will play a role,” but he noted that the Winchester mayor and the county judge-executive have opponents.

The Supreme Court ruling was a great disappointment to smoke-free advocates. Betsy Janes, coordinator for Smoke Free Kentucky, said several health boards had been ready to implement smoke-free regulations, but were waiting on the Supreme Court. These plans obviously have had to change.

“It was a major blow, but the good thing is that it is very clear who has the authority to do this now,” Janes said. “Fifty-five percent of Kentuckians want to be smoke free. We are losing 1000 Kentuckians a year to second hand smoke,” based on research that has determined its effects.

While Hahn said the decision was a “step backwards for Kentucky,” she also said her center is “busier than ever” working with fiscal courts to create smoke-free laws on the local level. She said there are 35 city or county ordinances in effect, covering 31 percent of Kentuckians.

The Kentucky Chamber of Commerce supports statewide smoking ban, which has never come to a vote in either chamber of the legislature.

“Twenty-four other states have statewide smoke-free laws and we want to not be the last to join them,” said Ashli Watts, the chamber’s public-affairs manager.

While Clark County is not pursuing a smoke-free ordinance now, the health department is actively educating the public about the benefits of such laws and plans to be a strong advocate to get something passed, Lockard said.

“We are finding overwhelming positive response to smoke-free,” he said. “The Board of Health and health department will work in any way possible to get a law on the books.”

Lockard also voiced his hope that school boards will pass smoke-free policies in schools, which he said should be attainable because no legislation is needed.

“There are 174 school districts in Kentucky and less than 40 of them have smoke-free policies on their campuses,” Lockard said. “If we could have all schools smoke-free, that would have a major impact on our communities.”

Lockard reflected on what Tom Frieden, director of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in his recent visit to Kentucky, that the most important changes Kentuckians need to make to improve their health are to stop smoking, decrease secondhand smoke exposure, and to exercise.