Health Equity
Medicaid Enrollment Touches 39% of the Residents of The District of Columbia; DC’s 70/30 FMAP is Vital for the Maintenance of Health & Human Services
A reduction in the District’s FMAP would not lead to long-term government savings and would have a ripple effect throughout the entire health system in the DMV, crippling access to care for not only Medicaid beneficiaries but also all those who live, work, and visit the District of Columbia, including members of Congress and their staffs.
.png?sfvrsn=9ac2d21b_0 "What Medicaid Cuts Actually Cost")
Why does DC receive an Enhanced FMAP Rate?
The DC FMAP rate of 70% established by the Revitalization Act resulted from bipartisan analysis, discussion, and negotiation by Congressional leadership aiming to balance fairness with the District’s restricted ability to generate revenue. Congress recognized that the District of Columbia faces unique financial challenges due to its non-state status and the significant amount of federally-owned land within its boundaries. The District is unable to tax non-residents’ earnings, so these workers pay no taxes to support the infrastructure and services, such as roads, public safety and emergency services that they benefit from in the District. The District is also unable to tax up to 40% of the real property within its borders due to statutory restrictions.
Why are we concerned about DC's FMAP now?
Members of Congress have proposed reducing the DC FMAP to the statutory minimum for all other states, which is currently 50% (but could be reduced even more). Such a change would impact every physician and every practice, regardless of type, location, and payers contracted. Even practices who take no insurance will not be able to send patients for specialist care, hospital admissions, or other types of care.
What can MSDC members do?
- If you know a member of Congress or staffer, reach out to them and share how DC cuts will hurt your patients.
- Share your relationships and outreach with hay@msdc.org so we can help coordinate advocacy efforts.
- Email hay@msdc.org if you would like to be paired with a physician member of Congress office and trained by MSDC staff on how to reach out.
Resources
- DC FMAP cut fact sheet
- California Medical Association fact sheet on Medicaid cuts
- MSDC and healthcare association letter to Congress arguing against DC FMAP changes.
- MSDC original story on Medicaid changes.
News, Statements, and Testimony on Health Equity Issues
U.S. Vaccines Safe, Say 20 Years of Data
An Israeli study published yesterday in the Annals of Internal Medicine shows that U.S. vaccines are safe.
"Our study shows that even if a potential vaccine has a rare or long-term side effect that isn't discovered in clinical trials, the surveillance program is in place to identify those issues as soon as possible," said the study's lead author, Dr. Daniel Shepshelovich, vice head of internal medicine at Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, according to NBC News.
Researchers used data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS database) to analyze the safety of vaccines. Looking at reported data between 1995 and 2015, researchers found that most vaccines were safe and even post-vaccine approval issues were quickly identified by drug surveillance. The study's authors go so far to say that vaccines are actually safer than other medicines and medical devices.
The study comes as surveys show widespread distrust about a potential novel coronavirus vaccine. An AP-NORC poll in late May showed only half of Americans would get a COVID-19 vaccine. A recent Yahoo News poll showed 28% of those polled believed the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation planned to distribute a vaccine to implant microchips into the population. This is also on top of a vocal minority of the population trying to incorrectly blame vaccines for a variety of medical ailments.
Leave a comment