Proposed cuts to the VA will limit health care access for veterans. They deserve better.
Our soldiers have endured unimaginable hardships and faced profound challenges, testing the very limits of human resilience and strength. When they arrive home, the trauma many veterans experience abroad comes with them, and the toll it takes on their mental health can be devastating without intervention. Veterans will face additional challenges if promises of massive U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs layoffs around the country and in Idaho go forward.
Our veterans deserve better.
Several Americans have protested cuts to the VA. Here in Boise at the VA campus, local community members have supported those protests, demonstrating just how important VA services are to Idaho veterans. Our communities are concerned about access to behavioral health care for our veterans and with good cause. Military veterans are 57.3% more likely to die by suicide than non-veteran U.S. adults. This stark statistic reveals the harsh reality that our service members face, particularly those living in rural areas like many veterans do in Idaho. Our state has one of the highest rates of rural military populations, and it has a higher rate of VA reliance for health care than the national average.
The Trump administration aims to cut 83,000 jobs from Veterans Affairs. The VA is tasked with caring for our veterans who return home, it provides crucial medical and behavioral health services including telehealth services for our rural vets. At the Boise VA campus alone, we may lose 300 employees, and this is a VA that already lacks staff for the vets it serves.
Veterans and active-duty military personnel face unique challenges. Reintegrating into civilian life, Adverse Childhood Experiences (or ACEs) and post-traumatic stress all can contribute to poor mental health outcomes for our nation's heroes.
Many veterans shy away from seeking help due to stigma, barriers to care created by the isolation of rural living, or a lack of access to services, but the need is real. Veterans in rural areas often feel most comfortable accessing these services through the VA, a community that knows what they have gone through, specifically telehealth options which can allow access to behavioral health professionals working from home.
Current changes by the administration have put into question these services, leaving our veterans uncertain about where they might find care in the future.
In Idaho, one of the most pressing issues connected with this uncertainty is the disproportionate suicide rates among service members. Research consistently shows that veterans, especially those living in remote, rural regions — a common way of life in Idaho — are at greater risk of suicide. A lack of accessible mental health services can prevent veterans in need from receiving vital care.
Furthermore, for patients at risk of suicide continuity of care, including consistent follow-ups with trusted health care providers is critical. Any threat to losing that continuity of care poses a significant danger, it is well known to be a key component of successful strategies to prevent suicide.
Veterans health care provided by the VA removes barriers to care associated with insurance accessibility and affordability, and in many cases has been offered with telehealth options. However, any health services required outside of the VA falls on the service members to cover. If the VA's behavioral health services are disrupted in a way that jeopardizes telehealth for rural veterans, it not only creates a crisis in continuity of care but also establishes a significant barrier to access for many low-income veterans.
For more information on the Idaho Association of Free and Charitable Clinics, go to www.idahoafcc.org.
For veterans who are unable to access mental health services through the VA, safety net options such as the Idaho free and charitable clinics are crucial. These clinics are closely monitoring the situation, hoping for continued care and support for our nation's heroes.
In the meantime, they can provide health care to any Idahoan without health insurance including our former service members. To ensure the wellbeing of our nation's heroes, we must advocate for health care and behavioral health care as a basic human need, and work to improve and protect access to these services.
Veterans and service members deserve the support and care necessary to thrive, both during and after their service.
Idaho Capital Sun is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Idaho Capital Sun maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Christina Lords for questions: info@idahocapitalsun.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
42 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Serious liver disease is up among heavy drinkers, even without more drinking
Serious liver disease is becoming more common among Americans who drink heavily, according to a new study from Keck Medicine of USC. It's not that more people are partying with alcohol. And it's not that the drinkers are having more drinks. It's that more of the people who drink regularly are becoming sick. Over the last two decades, the share of heavy drinkers who have advanced liver scarring jumped from 1.8% to 4.3%. For women, more than 1.5 drinks per night, on average, is considered heavy drinking. For men, it's 2 drinks. 'The fact that the risk not only increased but that it more than doubled — almost tripled — is really astonishing,' said Dr. Brian P. Lee, a liver transplant specialist at Keck Medicine of USC and lead author on the study. It was published in the journal Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology on Wednesday. Lee said he thinks patients might dramatically change their thinking and behavior if they had this information. The increase in illness was seen especially in women, older people and those with conditions like obesity or diabetes. Three USC researchers analyzed national health data from more than 44,000 adults surveyed between 1999 and 2020 in a well-known national heath study known as NHANES. Of those, 2,474 were heavy drinkers according to the definition of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism — 20 grams of alcohol per day for women and 30 grams for men, roughly the equivalent of 1.5 and 2 drinks. They found a more than twofold increase over the two decades in significant liver fibrosis, a condition where healthy liver tissue is replaced by stiff, fibrous tissue — like a sponge hardening into leather. If left unchecked, this can eventually lead to liver failure or cancer. By comparison, non-heavy drinkers saw a much smaller increase, from 0.8% to 1.4% over the same period. This rise in liver damage is especially troubling because many people don't realize anything is wrong until the disease is advanced. 'Liver disease is silent,' Lee said. 'Most people won't, even if they have [advanced liver scarring], have any symptoms at all.' Drinking patterns did not change much over the study period. But the health profiles of heavy drinkers did. Rates of metabolic syndrome — a cluster of conditions including obesity, diabetes, and high blood pressure — increased from 26% of people, to nearly 38%. Demographics shifted too: heavy drinkers became more likely to be women, people over the age of 45, and those living in poverty. 'We're showing with this study that the picture of the American drinker is changing dramatically,' Lee said. 'You have more women who are drinking heavily, more ethnic minorities who are drinking heavily, and these are groups that are known to have a higher sensitivity to alcohol in causing liver damage.' Other factors may also be at play, said Dr. Sammy Saab, medical director of the Pfleger Liver Institute at UCLA, who was not involved in the study. People could be consuming different types of drinks, or at different times. 'Have we moved away from beer, wine, to hard cocktails? Have we moved away from drinking with food, where the food absorbs some of the alcohol you consume, versus drinking without food where alcohol is better absorbed?' Saab asked. Then there are cultural changes, he said. 'In the old days, if you drank, you'd still have to drive home, but now we've got Uber, we have Lyft,' he said, which may remove some deterrents to heavy drinking. The current definition of heavy drinking in the U.S. may actually be too lenient, Lee said, especially compared to evolving global standards. Canada, for example, now advises no more than two drinks per week to minimize health risks. 'In the U.S. right now, we consider heavy drinking to be eight drinks or more per week for women and 15 or more for men — but that's quite high,' he said. 'We've shown in prior studies that you can develop liver disease at lower quantities than the U.S. threshold.' The study's findings highlight the need to rethink long-held assumptions about alcohol-related liver disease, and Lee hopes it can be used to develop more effective screening methods for early detection. The paper raises a lot of good questions, Saab said, serving as a call to action for researchers and clinicians to better understand this increase in alcohol-associated liver disease — and how to stop it.
Newsweek
43 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Texas Removes 1.8 Million People From Health Care Plan
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Almost 1.8 million Americans have been disenrolled from Medicaid health coverage in Texas in the last two years, according to data by KFF, a nonprofit health policy research and news organization. These Americans have lost their health insurance as part of the unwinding process happening nationwide after Medicaid coverage was expanded following the COVID pandemic. A spokesperson for the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) told Newsweek it is "committed to ensuring that those qualified for benefits receive them," and worked closely with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) "throughout the public health emergency and the Medicaid unwind process." "Federal guidance required HHSC to redetermine eligibility for 6 million Medicaid clients over the course of 12 months," they added. "Redetermining eligibility within federal requirements was a massive undertaking. Throughout the unwind, HHSC met with our federal partners on a regular basis to ensure that we followed federal guidance, and we will continue to collaborate with CMS to provide eligible Texans with benefits." Why It Matters The unwinding process has resulted in significant drops in Medicaid enrollment across the U.S. in recent years. While some of those disenrolled from Medicaid may still have had access to other forms of health insurance through their employment, those left without insurance could be in a vulnerable position. Higher rates of uninsured populations in states have been associated with negative impacts on health outcomes and medical costs. File photo: doctors treat a child in a hospital. File photo: doctors treat a child in a hospital. Gerald Herbert/AP What To Know During the pandemic, some states expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) while some Americans may have being encouraged to enroll for health coverage given the spread of the virus, causing nationwide enrollment levels to increase. Federal rules then meant states had to keep most Medicaid enrollees on the program even if their eligibility status changed, a requirement which expired in March 2023, allowing states to resume removing individuals from the program. Medicaid enrollment has since steadily declined, driven by both eligibility losses and procedural disenrollments. In Texas, there were 5,922,450 covered by Medicaid in March 2023, but by March 2025, that number was 4,164,694, KFF data shows. This marks a change of almost 1.8 million, a rate of decline faster than in Florida, California and New York. The number of people with Medicaid coverage is now just lower than February 2020 levels, a difference of 1 percent. Reasons for Texas' steeper drop in Medicaid enrollment could be because of the fact it, combined with Florida, New York and California, made up a significant proportion of Medicaid enrollment before the unwinding, Timothy McBride, a professor of public health at Washington University in St. Louis, told Newsweek. All four states together accounted for 36 percent of Medicaid enrollment and subsequently accounted for 31 percent of the drop in the unwinding period between 2020 and 2025, he added. This is in part because the states have large populations, but also because they have some of lowest percentages of health insurance coverage by employers or private plans, McBride said. This is due to "higher poverty rates, especially in Florida and Texas, fewer good jobs that offer health insurance, and a higher percentage of nonwhite persons, especially in Florida, Texas, and California," he said. "If they do not have private coverage they seek Medicaid," he added. For those that were able to gain health insurance through private coverage once being rolled off Medicaid, there is little concern. However, those that may remain uninsured as a result of the unwinding process "I am worried about," McBride said. "The negative outcomes could be delays in seeking needed medical care leading to worse outcomes, lack of prevention, which is especially problematic if they have chronic conditions, bad mental health and financial outcomes, and higher medical debt since they have to pay for more out of pocket," he added. What People Are Saying Timothy D. McBride, professor of public health at Washington University in St. Louis, told Newsweek: "Part of the drop is people who maintained Medicaid coverage on paper because they got it at some point during the pandemic but remained there through the PHE. Yet some may have moved along and obtained other coverage, so really were not needing the Medicaid anyway. The group we are concerned about is those who have become uninsured or who lost the coverage for procedural reasons. It appears from some work that maybe 30 percent or so of those who lost coverage may be uninsured. And a lot of people—around that number lost coverage for procedural reasons, many of them children." Laura Dague, a professor of health policy at Texas A&M University, told Newsweek: "How impactful the decreases in enrollment will be in terms of individual health depend on how aware people were of their ongoing coverage and how often they used it, and there is not much empirical evidence on this topic at the moment. A much bigger issue for Texas in my opinion will be the upcoming projected decreases in Marketplace enrollment due to decreasing subsidies; Texas has had major growth in that market in the last few years as subsidies increased." What Happens Next As the unwinding continues, more reductions in enrollment are expected in the state, and across the country. With millions already having lost health coverage, concerns remain about access to care for low-income individuals and families.
Time Magazine
43 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Trump's Medicaid Cuts Put People with Disabilities at Risk
Today marks the 35th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This landmark legislation, which enshrined in federal statute civil rights for people living with disabilities, has transformed countless lives. It opened the world up to an entire population who, until that point, were more often than not excluded and isolated from society. It codified a legal pathway for equality and inclusion by dismantling longstanding barriers that prevented people with disabilities from having the opportunity to pursue employment, live independently, access transportation and public spaces, and so much more. The ADA affirmed the fundamental right of every American to participate fully in society, and is foundational to ensuring that those with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) have equal opportunities to thrive and live with autonomy. Yet, as we celebrate the ADA's enduring legacy this year, the future for people with disabilities looks less certain. The ADA's vision is not self-sustaining. Its promise is fulfilled through an ecosystem of vital support services, many of which rely on Medicaid funding. For millions of Americans living with disabilities, Medicaid is a lifeline that provides access to essential home- and community-based services (HCBS). These services include the most basic activities of daily living like bathing, dressing, eating, and more, as well as the residential programs, employment supports, and assistive technologies that allow people with I/DD to live with dignity in their own homes and communities. These services are at the heart of the ADA and crucial to making inclusion a reality. Following the passage of President Donald Trump's tax bill, which will cut aproximately $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next several years, these support systems are in jeopardy. This attack on Medicaid threatens to unravel decades of progress toward equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities, as access to these services will undoubtedly become more limited. Read More: The Big Budget Bill Could Make Your ER a Mess Cuts to Medicaid could mean fewer available care services, longer waiting lists for critical support, and potentially the loss of the very assistance that allows those with I/DD to live independent and fulfilling lives. Imagine losing the career coach who helps you get ready for work and makes it possible to maintain steady employment, or the direct support professional (DSP) who helps you bathe and brush your teeth, or the transportation service that connects you to your community. These cuts translate into a forced retreat from independence, pushing individuals back into isolation and dependency, often in hospitals or costly, state-run institutions, directly contradicting the ADA's core tenets. The ripple effect extends to the dedicated community providers who are the backbone of the HCBS ecosystem. These organizations operate on thin margins, relying heavily, or solely, on Medicaid to fund their services. Cuts of this size may fall heavily on providers, who are already in crisis because of long-term underinvestment in community-based services, leaving them struggling to offer their DSPs competitive wages and benefits due to stagnant and insufficient reimbursement rates. Ultimately, these cuts could lead to reduced capacity, staff layoffs, and even the closure of programs. The national shortage of DSPs is also expected to worsen. To pay wages, providers rely on Medicaid reimbursements from their states; if states are rendered unable to increase reimbursement rates, providers will lose the DSPs they employ to better-paying opportunities in other hourly wage industries such as fast food and retail. This monumental blow to Medicaid funding will make it even harder to find and retain the individuals who provide day-to-day care. Troublingly, these DSPs, whose work is both physically and emotionally demanding, often rely on Medicaid themselves due to insufficient wages. When providers are forced to scale back programs or shutter entirely, the entire HCBS infrastructure weakens, leaving countless individuals without the support they need. The strain is then placed on the families of people with I/DD, potentially forcing some to leave their own jobs to provide care for their loved ones. For the many individuals with I/DD who don't have family or existing networks of support, access to care may be lost completely. Read More: The GOP Budget Takes From the Poor and Gives to the Rich The true scale of the impact remains to be seen, but there is no doubt that it will be nothing short of devastating. A nearly $1 trillion cut to Medicaid is not just a budgetary change. It will harm people with disabilities and the progress we have made since the passage of the ADA. Decades of advocacy, innovation, and hard-won victories for equality and inclusion are at risk of being rolled back. As we honor the ADA this year, we must recommit to its vision by unequivocally protecting the very funding that makes true community living and inclusion a reality for all. We cannot allow the fundamental rights and opportunities of people with disabilities to be undermined. Solutions must be found, advocates must fight back, and state leaders need to find ways to preserve funding for these vital services. Access to care is not a luxury, it is a necessity that is integral to upholding the rights of those with disabilities.
