Dozens of health organizations urge Kansas governor to veto Medicaid eligibility changes
TOPEKA — Nearly 50 health organizations signed a letter urging the Kansas governor to veto a budget provision that would end continuous eligibility in the state's Medicaid program, which allows public health insurance enrollees to consistently access health care.
If allowed to become law, the budget provision would require the state to evaluate parents and caregivers who receive coverage under KanCare, as Medicaid is known in Kansas, to be evaluated every month instead of every year. Currently, eligible enrollees are covered under KanCare for an entire year once approved, regardless of any change in circumstances during that time.
The Hutchinson-based United Methodist Health Ministry Fund drafted the letter, which was delivered Tuesday to Gov. Laura Kelly with signatures from 48 organizations. David Jordan, president and CEO of the health fund, said allowing the provision to pass could mean adding between $3-4 million in costs to the state and lost health insurance coverage for low-income families.
An estimated 38,000 Kansans would be impacted by the change, the letter said.
'This change will affect the most vulnerable Kansans who live well below the poverty line,' the letter said. 'The constant dis-enrollment and re-enrollment of beneficiaries is burdensome for everyone and could prevent families from receiving the necessary care they need.'
Kansas has used continuous eligibility since 2010.
In order to qualify for KanCare, households must remain below income thresholds. A family of four, for instance, cannot exceed an annual income of roughly $11,800.
'These families already have enough challenges on their plates without the added burden of continuously reapplying for health insurance,' the letter said.
Research has shown that continuous eligibility reduces financial barriers for low-income families, improves health outcomes and gives states the ability to exercise accountability measures.
Other signers of the letter included advocacy health care providers, patient groups, foundations like United Methodist Health Ministry Fund and advocacy groups like Kansas Action for Children.
Adrienne Olejnik, vice president of Kansas Action for Children, said the organization is concerned.
'Not only is this a waste of money on administrative costs, but it would also cause health care disruptions and delays based on small changes in income,' she said.
Olejnik said the Senate Ways and Means Committee added the provision to a budget bill at the last minute. She said she hopes a veto from the governor will allow lawmakers to fully consider the weight of the change.
Kelly, whose office declined to comment for this story, has until Thursday to veto line items in the budget. The Legislature's two-day veto session also is scheduled to begin Thursday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Baseline Viral Load Shapes Immune Response in Women With HIV
TOPLINE: Most women living with HIV achieved an immunologic response after 2 years of initiating antiretroviral therapy. A higher baseline HIV viral load increased the odds of an immunologic response in women living with HIV, but this association diminished among those who acquired HIV through intravenous drug use. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a register-based cohort study to determine the prevalence and factors associated with immunologic response in women living with HIV in Sweden. They analyzed 841 women with viral suppression (mean age, 37 years; baseline CD4 T-cell count < 500 cells per μL) diagnosed with HIV after 2000. The primary outcome was an immunologic response 2 years after initiating antiretroviral therapy among those who achieved sustained viral suppression within 6 months of treatment initiation. TAKEAWAY: Among the women studied, 90% (95% CI, 0.88-0.92) achieved an immunologic response after 2 years of follow-up. Having a baseline HIV viral load of ≥ 100,000 copies/mL increased the likelihood of achieving immunologic response (adjusted odds ratio, 1.81; 95% CI, 0.96-3.41), except in women who acquired HIV through intravenous drug use. No significant associations were found between immunologic response and baseline CD4 count, antiretroviral therapy experience, or age. IN PRACTICE: 'It supports earlier studies identifying the level of baseline HIV RNA viral load as an important factor and identifies the potential varying impact that HIV acquisition mode may have on this association,' the authors wrote. 'Future studies incorporating additional sex-specific factors are essential to refine our understanding and improve tailored clinical care strategies,' they added. SOURCE: This study was led by Josefin Nilsson, Unit of Infectious Diseases and Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Huddinge, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. It was published online on June 12, 2025, in HIV Medicine. LIMITATIONS: This study included data only from women diagnosed after 2000. The small sample size decreased the model's power, thereby limiting the number of variables that could be included. Additionally, the study did not include information on female-specific factors, such as the use of hormonal treatments, which may have influenced immunologic response. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by a grant from the Swedish Doctors against AIDS Research Foundation and an unrestricted Nordic Fellowship Grant from Gilead Sciences. Some authors declared receiving lecture fees or advisory board fees from various sources, including GSK/ViiV and Gilead Sciences. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
The Hill
7 hours ago
- The Hill
We can't win the fight to end HIV if we cut funding and access to medication
The fight to end HIV in our lifetimes just received a game-changing innovation. In June, the FDA approved Yeztugo (lenacapavir), a groundbreaking HIV prevention treatment that requires just two injections per year — and scored 99 percent effectiveness in trials. This monumental scientific breakthrough is poised to transform the lives of people who have found it hard to keep up with daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis, providing an option that fits better into their everyday lives. But as exciting as this development is, it could be undermined by the Trump administration's proposal to cut nearly $1 billion from federal HIV prevention programs. Innovations like lenacapavir could be a key tool to ending the epidemic, but only if we have the resources and policy to deliver it directly to those who need them most. Although lenacapavir's efficacy is groundbreaking, access remains another story. With a price tag hovering around $28,000 a year, this medication risks being out of reach for the very communities who need it most. We're still waiting to see how programs managed by Gilead Sciences, which developed the treatments, and the broader insurance markets will step up. And it's not just the cost of the drug itself. It's the labs, the provider visits, the follow-ups — each one a potential roadblock for someone trying to stay safe. Federal leadership is essential to ensuring this new HIV prevention tool reaches the communities who need it most. This includes updating clinical guidelines, funding support services and supporting the infrastructure that makes access possible. Unfortunately, the Trump administration and the Republican majorities in Congress are putting access to lifesaving innovations at risk. The administration's attacks on HIV prevention, including its proposals to eliminate the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's HIV budget and efforts to dismantle public health systems, threaten progress. The Republican budget reconciliation bill that President Trump signed over the July 4 weekend includes deep cuts to Medicaid — the largest payer for HIV care in the U.S. Without strong federal investment and coordination, expanding access to new tools and ending the HIV epidemic is at serious risk. Despite the real strides we have made in HIV prevention, those of us in the lesbian, gay, and transgender community — especially non-white Southerners in rural areas or navigating poverty — know that not every prevention strategy reaches us, works for us, or is built with us in mind. Our realities demand options that reflect the full truth of who we are and how we live. Lenacapavir offers real, powerful hope, but let's be clear: Science alone won't save us. What will make the difference is equitable and intentional policies that center our communities and a public health infrastructure that doesn't leave us behind. These numbers don't shift on their own. Yes, we have made progress over time. But the hard truth is that Black Americans still account for 43 percent of all new HIV diagnoses in the U.S., despite being just 13 percent of the population. The data is even more stark for Black transgender women: 44 percent are living with HIV, and their lifetime risk remains unacceptably high. And we cannot ignore the geography of this epidemic. The South accounts for 52 percent of all new HIV diagnoses in the U.S. That's not a coincidence — it is the result of systemic failures: limited access to healthcare, persistent stigma, lack of comprehensive sex education and the absence of strong non-discrimination protections. These barriers don't just prevent care — they trap people in cycles where prevention tools are out of reach. Among gay and bisexual Black men, the risk of contracting HIV is still 50 percent over a lifetime. Prevention tools like pre-exposure prophylaxis and lenacapavir hold promise, but they only matter if people can actually access them, without fear, shame or coercion. Ending this epidemic means creating environments where people are safe to make informed choices about their own health. The fight to end the HIV epidemic is not just about what happens in labs — it's about how we make these innovations real for our communities. Science is doing its part. Now is the time to urge Congress to reject any cuts to CDC HIV prevention efforts and to fully fund the HIV response. We have the tools to end this epidemic, but not if we dismantle the very systems our communities rely on to survive. The promise of lenacapavir, and the hope it represents, is too great to let fall through the cracks of policy neglect. The question is, will we make the choice to ensure that this breakthrough reaches all of us? Science has given us the tools. Now, we must ensure that everyone has the opportunity to use them.
Hamilton Spectator
11 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
These are the common dangers Toronto ER doctors say kids should avoid: ‘The risk is simply not worth it'
A bike ride to the local pool. A perfectly executed plunge off the diving board. An evening spent in the backyard, locked in competition with the kids next door to see who boasts the best trampoline tricks. A day in the life of a child is all about balancing recreation and risk. And while many activities, like unsupervised swimming, are likely to already be on the minds of parents, others may come as a surprise. The Star spoke to some of Toronto's pediatric emergency medicine physicians about some of the fun but dangerous activities they advise against. Here are some of the biggest hazards to avoid to ensure kids stay safe. Pools and natural bodies of water, like lakes or oceans, are rife with risk, said Dr. Steve Lin, interim chief at St. Michael's Hospital Department of Medicine. 'Particularly ones that have no adult or lifeguard supervision,' Lin said in an interview. 'Those are always going to be an issue over and over.' Children must always wear certified lifejackets, said Dr. Natasha Collia, an emergency room doctor at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children. 'Not one of those ones that just goes around the neck — and no floaties around the arms, because those won't keep your child's head above water,' Collia said in an interview. Slips and trips, whether on the pool deck, beach or shore, also pose risk of head and neck injuries when playing near water. Kids clamber over an empty lifeguard station at Marie Curtis Park, near Lake Shore Boulevard and Brown's Line. 'Biking in general but more so biking without a helmet,' Lin said. While Ontario law requires anyone under 18 to don a helmet while biking, Lin said he still sees a significant number of head injuries sustained by kids riding without one. Parachute Canada, a Toronto-based non-profit aimed at reducing preventable injury, estimates brain injuries as the number one cause of serious injury and death for children on bicycles. Four of five brain injuries could be avoided by a properly fitted helmet, it says. Riders should avoid the roads and stick to bike lanes where possible, said Lin. 'That's another really big one.' There are few things Collia recommends against altogether, but trampolines are one of them. Most parents don't realize the dangers that come with the spring-loaded devices. According to Parachute, an average of more than 1,200 Canadians under 17 suffer injuries on backyard trampolines and at trampoline parks every year. 'The risk is simply not worth it,' she said. 'It really is one of those pieces of equipment that leads to any kind of injury. We're talking head, neck and extremities.' If parents opt to allow their children on the trampoline, Collia insists it should not be set up near any structures that they could bump into. Having more than one person jumping at the same time is also ill-advised. Collia said she often sees parents allowing their children on toboggans or sleds unprotected. 'I watch these kids go down a hill without a helmet and it's just like, 'what are you thinking?' ' she said. Even with a helmet, high speeds and a lack of control make toboggans and sleds a dangerous choice. 'We've seen an increase in kids getting creative — doing things like going down head first, belly down,' she said. 'Now your head's the first thing that's going to hit, or, if your belly is on the ground, you're considering chest and abdominal injuries.' Electric scooters may be prohibited in Toronto — and provincially for anyone under the age of 16 — but a growing number of kids are still using them to get around. Over the past five years, data from Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children shows a steady increase in the number of youth reporting to the emergency room following e-scooter crashes. Head injuries are some of the most common sustained by e-bike and e-scooter riders, said Collia, but they're not the only risk. 'I've had a scooter impaled into someone's chest,' she said. 'Or kids go over the handlebars and they get injuries to the abdomen, where they have bleeds due to spleen or liver injuries.' Collia recommends parents keep their young kids off ATVs as well, regardless of helmet use. 'Kids' bodies are just not built for things like this — I hate to say it, but they just fly.' Over the past five years, Torontohas seen a steady increase in the number of patients reporting While parents may already be aware that things like swimming pose risks to their children, Collia has a number of lesser-known activities that are dangerous for children. Inflatable bouncy castles, for example. Last year, Collia said she treated multiple children in the emergency room after an inflatable castle deflated and collapsed on a kids' birthday party. 'I don't even know why they exist,' Collia said. 'These things tip, they deflate, they collapse. 'Imagine, if that whole thing was on top of a child, how easy it will be for them to get trapped,' she added. Lawn mowers are another. The household device can be especially dangerous if you have multiple kids, Collia said. 'If an older one is using the equipment or learning how to use the equipment, it's very easy for a younger child to just get in the way or climb on it.' And maybe the least recognized? Shopping carts, said Collia. Oftentimes, people don't realize how unstable the carts are. 'All it takes is for them to reach or bend over the side and either the whole cart flips over or they fall out,' she said. 'Those are the big ones that I think parents need to really think about that they might not always.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
