Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

May 3rd, 2016:

Feds grant 15 month Medicaid waiver extension

I sure hope they keep the pressure on to expand Medicaid during this time.

It's constitutional - deal with it

It’s constitutional – deal with it

The Obama administration has agreed to temporarily keep some federal Medicaid money flowing into Texas to help hospitals treat uninsured patients, a relief to health care providers that feared losing the funds over state leaders’ refusal to provide health insurance to low-income adults.

State health officials said Monday they have struck a deal with the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to keep the program going for another 15 months, with hospital reimbursements remaining at their current level.

Those were the exact terms the Texas Health and Human Services Commission asked for last month. Agency leaders said the negotiations were a “big win for Texas.”

“We’re pleased these innovative programs will have the opportunity to continue,” Chris Traylor, the agency’s executive commissioner, said in a statement. “These programs are improving health care for Texas’ Medicaid clients and creating cost-savings for taxpayers.”

[…]

The 15-month extension also includes an additional $3.1 billion for DSRIP initiatives.

The Obama administration had previously signaled it was likely to stop footing the bill for at least some of Texas’ uncompensated care costs. Under the Affordable Care Act, the president’s signature health law, Texas was encouraged to expand its Medicaid program to cover nearly 1 million additional adults living in poverty — a move that would have given more poor patients a means to pay for care. The state’s Republican leadership hasvehemently opposed that option, criticizing Medicaid as an inefficient government program.

Federal health officials were unswayed by that argument, repeatedly telling state leaders they had no desire to use waiver funds to pay for costs that would otherwise be covered by a Medicaid expansion.

[…]

Texas health officials say they will continue negotiating a longer term extension of the funding over the next 15 months.

Those negotiations will likely be influenced by a study of the effectiveness of the uncompensated care pool, which the federal government asked Texas to commission. The Texas Health and Human Services Commission contracted with outside firms Health Management Associates and Deloitte to submit the study by the end of August. It will address questions such as how hospitals’ uncompensated care costs would be reduced under a Medicaid expansion.

If Texas and the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services do not reach an agreement at the end of the 15-month extension, in December 2017, the Obama administration said it “expects” that uncompensated care funding would be reduced after that.

“Specifically, the reduction will limit the size of the Uncompensated Care pool to the costs of uncompensated and charity care for low-income individuals who are uninsured and cannot be covered” under a Medicaid expansion, wrote Vikki Wachino, a senior federal health official, in a letter to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

Additionally, the DSRIP pool would be reduced by 25 percent in 2018 and by an additional 25 percentage points each year after that, according to federal officials.

See here, here, and here for some background, and here for a copy of the letter CMS sent to Texas. I don’t really have anything to say that I haven’t said before. Texas needs to expand Medicaid, and if the state continues to refuse to do so, the federal government should not take any steps to mitigate the consequences of that decision. It’s up to the next Legislature now. State Rep. Garnet Coleman, Trail Blazers, and the Austin Chronicle have more.

Paxton prosecutor payment lawsuit tossed again

And again I say, good.

Best mugshot ever

Best mugshot ever

The Fifth Court of Appeals has dismissed a challenge to the payments being made to three sets of special prosecutors appointed in connection with criminal charges against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Collin County taxpayer Jeffory Blackard filed a civil suit late last year challenging the $300-per-hour fees charged by the attorneys appointed to prosecute Paxton over allegations of securities violations. The suit argued that the amounts deviate from the Collin County fee schedule. After the case was dismissed in March, Blackard filed an appeal.

In its opinion issued Friday, the appellate court noted that taxpayers have limited standing to challenge the lawfulness of government acts. But that standing “does not, however, authorize a taxpayer to challenge an order in a criminal case in which he is not a party,” the opinion stated. “Because relator lacks standing to challenge the trial court’s order, we dismiss the petition.”

[…]

At a meeting earlier this week, Collin County commissioners approved payments to two other sets of attorneys.

Two attorneys were appointed to investigate a 2004 real estate deal involving Paxton. They presented their findings last month, and a grand jury voted to take no action. Their bill for legal fees and expenses totaled $50,626.

Commissioners also approved a $32,130 interim payment for legal fees and expenses for attorney David Feldman. He was appointed to represent Schaffer, Wice and DeBorde in the Blackard case.

Feldman also represents the trio in a separate case against the attorney general’s office to prevent the release of documents filed in the criminal case. The Dallas Morning News had filed a request in October for all records that prosecutors had given to Paxton’s attorneys. Paxton’s office ordered in January that the records be released. The special prosecutors filed suit against the AG’s office to prevent their release.

See here and here for the background. A copy of the court’s order is at the top link. Having come this far, I would expect Blackard to appeal to the Supreme Court, but as yet there’s no word of that. Even if that doesn’t happen, there’s still plenty of other action happening, as you can see. Ken Paxton is a terrible Attorney General, but he is a fee generator for our state’s lawyers. You have to give him credit for that. The Chron has more.

Help a brick out

From Swamplot:

AN INDIEGOGO PAGE has just been launched to crowdfund the removal and reuse of an unexpectedly large group of well-preserved 1930s bricks from thenow-under-deconstruction Yale St. bridge over White Oak Bayou. The group calling itself Friends of Houston’s Yale Bridge Bricks says the funds will be used to preserve the bricks for reuse both around the bridge and elsewhere around the city.

The fundraising effort shares some organizers with Friends of the Fountain, which launched the late-February campaign to crowdfund the de-restoration and subsequent repair of the Mecom Fountain following its short-lived experiment with limestone couture. That effort raised more than $50,000 toward a $60k goal in one month; Bill Baldwin (of both Friends groups) says it the fountain’s fundraiser received over $100k in total, including offline donations. This latest round of online crowdfunding the preservation of National Register of Historic Places structures is starting the bar higher, with a goal of $100,000 shown on the fundraising page.

Here’s a fuller description from the fundraising page:

Because of the bridge’s status on the National Registry of Historic Places, the bridge was technically eligible for publicly funded relocation. After investigation by several local and national historians and engineers, it became unfortunately clear that preserving the entire bridge through relocation would be unfeasible, though the design of the new bridge would incorporate some bricks under its asphalt surface and historical elements from the balustrades and lampposts.

TxDOT originally reported that, “The condition of the bricks would not be known until the asphalt is removed before demolition starts…it is likely that the bricks would be damaged during removal of asphalt layer. The use of bricks on the new bridge would add deadload to the bridge and thus would require increasing support requirements, as well as cost of construction.”

However, once the asphalt of the bridge was removed last week, a treasure trove of beautifully intact, original brick greeted workers spanning the length of the bridge. Over 40,000 bricks dating back to at least the 1931 construction of the bridge are in prime condition to be used elsewhere and saved from the landfill. This has been astonishing discovery that opens up a world of possibilities.

Through a partnership with the Houston Parks & Recreation Department, the Houston Parks Board, the Historic Preservation Office of the Planning Department, TxDOT, the Mayor’s Office, and others, Bill Baldwin and friends are seeking to privately fund the careful removal and storage of these historic bricks.

The bricks will be used in surrounding infrastructure and beautification projects, not just in the immediate area, but in other historically significant locations throughout the city as well.

The fundraising goal for this project is $100,000. Fundraising efforts will be led by Baldwin, who recently co-chaired with Phoebe Tudor the astonishingly successful Friends of the Fountain crowdfunding campaign to restore Mecom Fountain, which raised over $100,000 including off-line donations.

This is a worthy cause, and we would love to have your support!

They’re off to a slow start. I suspect this is the kind of project that will need a few deep pockets, because I don’t think there will be enough small-dollar donations to make the cut. I don’t know what the deadline is for this, but if it’s the sort of thing that floats your boat, have at it.

Meyers’ voter ID lawsuit gets appellate hearing

I hope he gets to keep it going.

Still the only voter ID anyone should need

Still the only voter ID anyone should need

[Court of Criminal Appeals Justice Lawrence] Meyers filed his state lawsuit in October 2014, while another legal challenge to the state’s voter ID law was pending in federal court in Corpus Christi. A federal judge overturned the law, but it has remained in effect during the state’s appeals to higher courts.

Meanwhile, state and local officials in Texas tried to get Meyers’ challenge dismissed. A Dallas trial judge — former state lawmaker Dale Tillery, a Democrat — refused that request. Now those officials are asking the state’s 5th Court of Appeals in Dallas to toss it. That hearing is set for Tuesday.

Meyers is lapping this up. His challenge is the sort of technical thing you would expect from a long-time judge. He points to this sentence in the Texas Constitution (emphasis added): “In all elections by the people, the vote shall be by ballot, and the Legislature shall provide for the numbering of tickets and make such other regulations as may be necessary to detect and punish fraud and preserve the purity of the ballot box; and the Legislature shall provide by law for the registration of all voters.”

“It does not include ‘prevent,’” he says, adding that the voter ID law is “a prior restraint against your constitutional right to vote.”

As he put it in his original filing, the voter ID law forces voters to prove they are innocent before they cast their ballots rather than requiring the state to prove that someone is actually guilty of voter fraud once they have voted. Someone who doesn’t have the required identification “will be denied his right to vote and will be presumed to be guilty of voter fraud,” he wrote.

Proponents of the voter ID law say it’s no more burdensome than presenting identification in routine commercial transactions, and say the law has built-in workarounds for people who don’t have drivers’ licenses to show voting officials.

Meyers contends that the state’s effort to prevent voter fraud — he doesn’t think such fraud exists in any serious way — creates an obstacle to voting that does more harm than good. Voter fraud is already illegal, he points out, and the state can and should prosecute it whenever it occurs.

“We’re just asking that our Constitution be enforced,” he says. “Voter ID is almost identical to what the old poll tax was. … It suppresses the vote.”

In its legal filings, the state argues that Meyers doesn’t have grounds to sue because he hasn’t shown how he the voter ID law has done him any harm. Those state lawyers also contend that the law does not add to the “qualifications” of voters but is more akin to other requirements, like when the polls are open or when elections are held.

See here and here for the background. Obviously, I agree with Meyers on the merits; the questions about standing are beyond my non-lawyerly capabilities to analyze. Meyers has said that he’ll drop this lawsuit if the federal courts uphold the ruling that Texas’ voter ID law was unconstitutional. We may have some indication by July of that. In the meantime, I’m rooting for the courts to allow this challenge to keep going.