Mississippi Today

Q&A: Why Arkansas could be a model for Mississippi Medicaid expansion

Published

12 months ago

April 11, 2024

As leaders from the House and Senate will soon begin meeting to find common ground on their dueling Medicaid expansion proposals, some people have pointed to Arkansas as a model that could prove successful in Mississippi.

Arkansas, a red state that shares many demographic similarities with Mississippi, implemented its expansion plan, now called Arkansas Health and Opportunity for Me (ARHOME), in 2014. The program provides health coverage to about 250,000 Arkansans. It has cut the state’s uninsured rate in half, and it has helped struggling hospitals stay open.

The expansion program in Arkansas has been so successful that it’s been renewed each year since 2014 by a supermajority of the state’s Republican-controlled legislature.

Mississippi Today invited Dr. Joe Thompson, who was Arkansas’ surgeon general under Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee and Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe, to explain how Arkansas’ expansion program has worked. Thompson now serves as president and CEO of the Arkansas Center for Health Improvement.

Mississippi Today: Arkansas implemented a pretty unique Medicaid expansion model. How does your state’s program work?

Dr. Joe Thompson: Instead of enrolling uninsured people in the state-run Medicaid program, Arkansas obtained permission from the federal government to use federal Medicaid funds for “premium assistance” — an historically available but rarely used strategy by states. Arkansas purchases private health insurance plans offered on the health insurance marketplace to provide adult Arkansans earning up to 138% of the federal poverty level insurance coverage — with 90% of the costs coming from the federal government.

Newly covered individuals effectively get private coverage and the healthcare access they need; providers get paid commercial insurance rates far higher than Medicaid rates; and insurers benefit because the state is a large, guaranteed purchaser in an otherwise risky individual insurance market.

Governors and legislators have made changes to the program over the years, including a work requirement that was implemented in 2018 and blocked by a federal judge the following year, but the basic structure has remained the same.

MT: How has the program impacted Arkansas?

Thompson: For starters, it cut our adult uninsured rate, which had been among the highest in the nation, by half. Newly insured Arkansans gained access to treatment for chronic conditions that had gone untreated for years, as well as preventive care that allowed them to avoid other health problems and associated costs.

The newly insured also became able to pay for hospital visits, reducing uncompensated care costs at Arkansas hospitals by more than half. Since 2012, no rural Arkansas hospital has closed without being reopened or replaced, while 59 rural hospitals have closed in the six states surrounding Arkansas, including five hospitals in Mississippi.

MT: Some Mississippians are concerned about being able to afford the state match to draw down federal dollars. How has that gone in Arkansas?

Thompson: The federal government pays 90% of expansion costs, but even so, opponents of Medicaid expansion warned that Arkansas’ obligation to pay the remaining 10% would break the budget. In 2016, however, a consultant hired by the Republican legislative leadership analyzed the economic impact of Medicaid expansion and found it would have a net positive impact of $757 million on the state budget between 2017 and 2021 through reduced state expenditures and increased tax revenues.

It’s important to note that the residents of Mississippi and the other holdout states have not been spared from paying for Medicaid expansion. They have been helping to fund it for over a decade through their federal tax dollars, but the money has been flowing into states like Arkansas and Louisiana instead of benefiting the working poor, hospitals, and economies of their home states.

MT: There’s been some concern expressed about how expansion would affect insurers in Mississippi. How has the Arkansas model addressed similar concerns there?

Thompson: Some benefits Arkansas has received from Medicaid expansion are tied to unique aspects of the state’s program. Medicaid expansion is a huge decision for states — they can focus on the expansion decision alone or, as Arkansas did, use expansion to shape both the private and public health insurance systems.

Prior to our expansion, insurance carriers could cherry-pick the counties in which they would offer coverage. Arkansas now requires insurers participating in the exchange to offer coverage statewide, creating competition and consumer choice in all areas of the state. Arkansas also enrolled people deemed “medically frail” in traditional Medicaid, creating an expansion population that was relatively young, healthy and low-risk for insurers to cover. In 2014, average marketplace premiums in Arkansas were among the highest in the region, but since 2017 they have been lower than in any of the surrounding states, including Mississippi.

Arkansas’ decision to provide private health coverage has also been advantageous for enrollees. Private coverage does not carry the stigma of Medicaid, and because payment rates are higher for commercially insured patients than for Medicaid patients, Medicaid expansion enrollees in Arkansas have been less likely to encounter barriers to care than traditional Medicaid enrollees.

MT: How many people are actually enrolled in Arkansas, and should Mississippians worry about costs if more people enroll as time goes on?

Thompson: Some opponents of Medicaid expansion have accused Arkansas’ program of out-of-control growth, pointing out that enrollment was projected at the program’s inception to be about 250,000 but grew to more than 340,000 in 2022. In fact, enrollment only reached that level because of a now-defunct rule that required states to keep people continuously enrolled in Medicaid programs during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Arkansas resumed eligibility checks for Medicaid programs last April, and by the end of 2023, total enrollment in ARHOME was just under 252,000 — very close to original projections.

Medicaid expansion’s slow journey toward nationwide adoption is reminiscent of the original federal-state Medicaid partnership, which was enacted by Congress in 1965 but not adopted by every state until 1982, when the last holdout, Arizona, came on board. Change can be hard, but polls show that voters, including Mississippi voters, favor Medicaid expansion. It’s no wonder that the number of holdout states keeps dwindling.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Up Next

‘So medieval’: Man with mental illness jailed for 20 days without charges

Don't Miss

Marshall County’s only ER to close this month after mix-up with federal government

Mississippi Today

Early voting proposal killed on last day of Mississippi legislative session

Published

16 hours ago

April 3, 2025

Staff Editor

mississippitoday.org – @MSTODAYnews – 2025-04-03 13:02:00

by Taylor Vance, Mississippi Today
April 3, 2025

Mississippi will remain one of only three states without no-excuse early voting or no-excuse absentee voting.

Senate leaders, on the last day of their regular 2025 session, decided not to send a bill to Gov. Tate Reeves that would have expanded pre-Election Day voting options. The governor has been vocally opposed to early voting in Mississippi, and would likely have vetoed the measure.

The House and Senate this week overwhelmingly voted for legislation that established a watered-down version of early voting. The proposal would have required voters to go to a circuit clerk’s office and verify their identity with a photo ID.

The proposal also listed broad excuses that would have allowed many voters an opportunity to cast early ballots.

The measure passed the House unanimously and the Senate approved it 42-7. However, Sen. Jeff Tate, a Republican from Meridian who strongly opposes early voting, held the bill on a procedural motion.

Senate Elections Chairman Jeremy England chose not to dispose of Tate’s motion on Thursday morning, the last day the Senate was in session. This killed the bill and prevented it from going to the governor.

England, a Republican from Vancleave, told reporters he decided to kill the legislation because he believed some of its language needed tweaking.

The other reality is that Republican Gov. Tate Reeves strongly opposes early voting proposals and even attacked England on social media for advancing the proposal out of the Senate chamber.

England said he received word “through some sources” that Reeves would veto the measure.

“I’m not done working on it, though,” England said.

Although Mississippi does not have no-excuse early voting or no-excuse absentee voting, it does have absentee voting.

To vote by absentee, a voter must meet one of around a dozen legal excuses, such as temporarily living outside of their county or being over 65. Mississippi law doesn’t allow people to vote by absentee purely out of convenience or choice.

Several conservative states, such as Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Florida, have an in-person early voting system. The Republican National Committee in 2023 urged Republican voters to cast an early ballot in states that have early voting procedures.

Yet some Republican leaders in Mississippi have ardently opposed early voting legislation over concerns that it undermines election security.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Mississippi Today

Mississippi Legislature approves DEI ban after heated debate

Published

2 days ago

April 2, 2025

Staff Editor

mississippitoday.org – @MSTODAYnews – 2025-04-02 16:34:00

by Michael Goldberg, Mississippi Today
April 2, 2025

Mississippi lawmakers have reached an agreement to ban diversity, equity and inclusion programs and a list of “divisive concepts” from public schools across the state education system, following the lead of numerous other Republican-controlled states and President Donald Trump’s administration.

House and Senate lawmakers approved a compromise bill in votes on Tuesday and Wednesday. It will likely head to Republican Gov. Tate Reeves for his signature after it clears a procedural motion.

The agreement between the Republican-dominated chambers followed hours of heated debate in which Democrats, almost all of whom are Black, excoriated the legislation as a setback in the long struggle to make Mississippi a fairer place for minorities. They also said the bill could bog universities down with costly legal fights and erode academic freedom.

Democratic Rep. Bryant Clark, who seldom addresses the entire House chamber from the podium during debates, rose to speak out against the bill on Tuesday. He is the son of the late Robert Clark, the first Black Mississippian elected to the state Legislature since the 1800s and the first Black Mississippian to serve as speaker pro tempore and preside over the House chamber since Reconstruction.

“We are better than this, and all of you know that we don’t need this with Mississippi history,” Clark said. “We should be the ones that say, ‘listen, we may be from Mississippi, we may have a dark past, but you know what, we’re going to be the first to stand up this time and say there is nothing wrong with DEI.'”

Legislative Republicans argued that the measure — which will apply to all public schools from the K-12 level through universities — will elevate merit in education and remove a list of so-called “divisive concepts” from academic settings. More broadly, conservative critics of DEI say the programs divide people into categories of victims and oppressors and infuse left-wing ideology into campus life.

“We are a diverse state. Nowhere in here are we trying to wipe that out,” said Republican Sen. Tyler McCaughn, one of the bill’s authors. “We’re just trying to change the focus back to that of excellence.”

The House and Senate initially passed proposals that differed in who they would impact, what activities they would regulate and how they aim to reshape the inner workings of the state’s education system. Some House leaders wanted the bill to be “semi-vague” in its language and wanted to create a process for withholding state funds based on complaints that almost anyone could lodge. The Senate wanted to pair a DEI ban with a task force to study inefficiencies in the higher education system, a provision the upper chamber later agreed to scrap.

The concepts that will be rooted out from curricula include the idea that gender identity can be a “subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality.” The move reflects another effort to align with the Trump administration, which has declared via executive order that there are only two sexes.

The House and Senate disagreed on how to enforce the measure but ultimately settled on an agreement that would empower students, parents of minor students, faculty members and contractors to sue schools for violating the law.

People could only sue after they go through an internal campus review process and a 25-day period when schools could fix the alleged violation. Republican Rep. Joey Hood, one of the House negotiators, said that was a compromise between the chambers. The House wanted to make it possible for almost anyone to file lawsuits over the DEI ban, while Senate negotiators initially bristled at the idea of fast-tracking internal campus disputes to the legal system.

The House ultimately held firm in its position to create a private cause of action, or the right to sue, but it agreed to give schools the ability to conduct an investigative process and potentially resolve the alleged violation before letting people sue in chancery courts.

“You have to go through the administrative process,” said Republican Sen. Nicole Boyd, one of the bill’s lead authors. “Because the whole idea is that, if there is a violation, the school needs to cure the violation. That’s what the purpose is. It’s not to create litigation, it’s to cure violations.”

If people disagree with the findings from that process, they could also ask the attorney general’s office to sue on their behalf.

Under the new law, Mississippi could withhold state funds from schools that don’t comply. Schools would be required to compile reports on all complaints filed in response to the new law.

Trump promised in his 2024 campaign to eliminate DEI in the federal government. One of the first executive orders he signed did that. Some Mississippi lawmakers introduced bills in the 2024 session to restrict DEI, but the proposals never made it out of committee. With the national headwinds at their backs and several other laws in Republican-led states to use as models, Mississippi lawmakers made plans to introduce anti-DEI legislation.

The policy debate also unfolded amid the early stages of a potential Republican primary matchup in the 2027 governor’s race between State Auditor Shad White and Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann. White, who has been one of the state’s loudest advocates for banning DEI, had branded Hosemann in the months before the 2025 session “DEI Delbert,” claiming the Senate leader has stood in the way of DEI restrictions passing the Legislature.

During the first Senate floor debate over the chamber’s DEI legislation during this year’s legislative session, Hosemann seemed to be conscious of these political attacks. He walked over to staff members and asked how many people were watching the debate live on YouTube.

As the DEI debate cleared one of its final hurdles Wednesday afternoon, the House and Senate remained at loggerheads over the state budget amid Republican infighting. It appeared likely the Legislature would end its session Wednesday or Thursday without passing a $7 billion budget to fund state agencies, potentially threatening a government shutdown.

“It is my understanding that we don’t have a budget and will likely leave here without a budget. But this piece of legislation …which I don’t think remedies any of Mississippi’s issues, this has become one of the top priorities that we had to get done,” said Democratic Sen. Rod Hickman. “I just want to say, if we put that much work into everything else we did, Mississippi might be a much better place.”

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Mississippi Today

House gives Senate 5 p.m. deadline to come to table, or legislative session ends with no state budget

Published

2 days ago

April 2, 2025

Staff Editor

mississippitoday.org – @MSTODAYnews – 2025-04-02 16:13:00

by Taylor Vance, Mississippi Today
April 2, 2025

The House on Wednesday attempted one final time to revive negotiations between it and the Senate over passing a state budget.

Otherwise, the two Republican-led chambers will likely end their session without funding government services for the next fiscal year and potentially jeopardize state agencies.

The House on Wednesday unanimously passed a measure to extend the legislative session and revive budget bills that had died on legislative deadlines last weekend.

House Speaker Jason White said he did not have any prior commitment that the Senate would agree to the proposal, but he wanted to extend one last offer to pass the budget. White, a Republican from West, said if he did not hear from the Senate by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, his chamber would end its regular session.

“The ball is in their court,” White said of the Senate. “Every indication has been that they would not agree to extend the deadlines for purposes of doing the budget. I don’t know why that is. We did it last year, and we’ve done it most years.”

But it did not appear likely Wednesday afternoon that the Senate would comply.

The Mississippi Legislature has not left Jackson without setting at least most of the state budget since 2009, when then Gov. Haley Barbour had to force them back to set one to avoid a government shutdown.

The House measure to extend the session is now before the Senate for consideration. To pass, it would require a two-thirds majority vote of senators. But that might prove impossible. Numerous senators on both sides of the aisle vowed to vote against extending the current session, and Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann who oversees the chamber said such an extension likely couldn’t pass.

Senate leadership seemed surprised at the news that the House passed the resolution to negotiate a budget, and several senators earlier on Wednesday made passing references to ending the session without passing a budget.

“We’ll look at it after it passes the full House,” Senate President Pro Tempore Dean Kirby said.

The House and Senate, each having a Republican supermajority, have fought over many issues since the legislative session began early January.

But the battle over a tax overhaul plan, including elimination of the state individual income tax, appeared to cause a major rift. Lawmakers did pass a tax overhaul, which the governor has signed into law, but Senate leaders cried foul over how it passed, with the House seizing on typos in the Senate’s proposal that accidentally resembled the House’s more aggressive elimination plan.

The Senate had urged caution in eliminating the income tax, and had economic growth triggers that would have likely phased in the elimination over many years. But the typos essentially negated the triggers, and the House and governor ran with it.

The two chambers have also recently fought over the budget. White said he communicated directly with Senate leaders that the House would stand firm on not passing a budget late in the session.

But Senate leaders said they had trouble getting the House to meet with them to haggle out the final budget.

On the normally scheduled “conference weekend” with a deadline to agree to a budget last Saturday, the House did not show, taking the weekend off. This angered Hosemann and the Senate. All the budget bills died, requiring a vote to extend the session, or the governor forcing them into a special session.

If the Legislature ends its regular session without adopting a budget, the only option to fund state agencies before their budgets expire on June 30 is for Gov. Tate Reeves to call lawmakers back into a special session later.

“There really isn’t any other option (than the governor calling a special session),” Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann previously said.

If Reeves calls a special session, he gets to set the Legislature’s agenda. A special session call gives an otherwise constitutionally weak Mississippi governor more power over the Legislature.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.