| For months, Mike Carey pointed to the creation of a (woefully underfunded) “rural health fund” as an excuse for voting for Medicaid cuts that left 11 rural hospitals across Ohio listed as ‘at-risk,’ including Fayette County Memorial Hospital in Carey’s district.
According to new analysis, the federal funding coming to Ohio is “one of the lowest in the nation based on rural population size.” The report directly contradicts Carey’s recent claim that House Republicans “are delivering for rural health providers” and called the award ‘HUGE news’ for the state.
New reporting makes clear that Carey failed to keep his promises – and Ohio patients, hospitals, and taxpayers are going to pay the price.
DCCC Spokesperson Riya Vashi:
“Mike Carey is making clear to voters that he’s either ineffective, a liar, or both. Ohioans deserve a leader in Washington who will fight for them – not a coward who guts their health care to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.”
Ohio Capital Journal: Federal funds for rural health on the way to Ohio, but not enough to offset cuts, advocates say
- An award of $202 million has been announced for Ohio to combat hospital closures and a lack of access to health care in rural areas. The funding was welcomed by state leaders and advocates alike, but the funds are seen as a temporary fix to a problem made worse by federal cuts.
- In Ohio, the Medicaid cuts from the federal spending bill amount to a loss of $33 billion over the next decade, according to an analysis by the health policy organization KFF.
- Republican state Rep. Kellie Deeter, co-chair of the Ohio House Rural Hospital Caucus, said Ohio’s award is “consistent with the proposal submitted by the state, so this announcement largely reflects what was anticipated.”
- “However, it is still not enough to offset broader federal cuts and therefore will not meaningfully help our rural hospitals,” Deeter said.
- Democratic state Rep. Anita Somani had a similar critique, saying the funding was appreciated, but was “equivalent to treating a severed artery with a bandage.”
- “These funds will not stop the bleeding caused by other federal cuts, and any attempt to imply otherwise is misleading,” Somani said.
- Rural health was struggling before the newest federal budget bill was signed into law last July, but Medicaid cuts and new rules in that budget had hospitals bracing for even more challenges and the potential for closures.
- But only a small part of the funding states receive from the rural health fund – no more than 15% — can be used for direct payments to facilities like hospitals and clinics, according to an analysis by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
- The rules for how the money can be used “could substantially limit how states are able to allocate awarded funding,” the foundation analysis stated.
- Plus, the fund is meant to offset funding cuts to rural health, but it doesn’t match the rate at which the country’s rural hospitals and clinics are losing funding because of the federal budget bill.
- “The fund doesn’t offset the cuts (to Medicaid funding and rural communities),” the foundation stated. “$50 billion (nationwide) for rural health is modest compared to the $137 billion in cuts to rural communities and nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid funding cuts.
|
