The Health and Human Services Committee introduced two bills during a Feb. 9 hearing that would require the state Department of Health and Human Services to seek amendments or waivers to Nebraska\u2019s Medicaid state plans regarding emergency room visits and family planning services.<\/p>\n
Lincoln Sen. Kathy Campbell, chairperson of the committee, said the proposals are an attempt to address the state\u2019s looming budget deficit.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe came up with some ideas that had not been put on the table by other folks, but that we might want to take a look at,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Under LB540, HHS would be required to submit a state plan amendment or waiver to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), no later than July 1, 2011, to provide medical assistance for family planning services to individuals with a family earned income at or below 185 percent of the federal poverty level.<\/p>\n
Kay Oestmann, president of the Public Health Association of Nebraska, testified in support of the bill.<\/p>\n
The state match for family planning services is 10 percent, Oestmann said, with federal funds covering 90 percent of the cost. Furthermore, she said, several states that have expanded family planning services in ways similar to the proposal have saved more than $15 million per year.<\/p>\n
\u201cLB540 provides an opportunity for improvement in access to women\u2019s health care services at a demonstrated cost savings to the state,\u201d Oestmann said.<\/p>\n
Laura Urbanec, executive director of the Central Health Center in Grand Island, also testified in support, saying the bill\u2019s fiscal note projects a savings of approximately $5.5 million in general funds per year.<\/p>\n
\u201cNo other Medicaid program has a higher federal match,\u201d Urbanec said. \u201cMedicaid family planning waivers have proven to be successful.\u201d<\/p>\n
Greg Schleppenbach of the Nebraska Catholic Conference testified in opposition to LB540.<\/p>\n
The bill\u2019s cost saving potential is overstated by proponents, he said, and is based on a \u201cquestionable\u201d study which assumes that greater access to contraception leads to a decrease in unplanned pregnancies and abortions.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s pure speculation,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
In addition, Schleppenbach said, Nebraska would have to spend tax dollars to implement the measure\u2019s provisions, which is counter to the bill\u2019s stated intent.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis bill will cost the state more than $100,000 in this biennium,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n