Faith Leaders Applaud Kasich Budget, Medicaid Expansion

Listen to the Story

Leaders of several faiths gathered in the Ohio Statehouse Tuesday to endorse Gov. John kasich's budget, which includes an expansion of Ohio's Medicaid program.(Photo: Jo Ingles, Ohio Public Radio)
Leaders of several faiths gathered in the Ohio Statehouse Tuesday to endorse Gov. John kasich's budget, which includes an expansion of Ohio's Medicaid program.(Photo: Jo Ingles, Ohio Public Radio)

Governor John Kasich’s plan to expand Medicaid as part of the new two year state budget is being praised by some major church leaders throughout Ohio, including many who disagree on other social issues.

Reverend Tim Ehrens of the First Congregational Church in Columbus usually backs Democratic causes like tougher regulations on payday loans and better work and pay for low-income Ohioans. Republican Governor John Kasich’s plan to expand Medicaid strikes a chord with Rev. Ehrens, and he’s not the only faith leader who thinks it’s a good idea.

The Ohio Catholic Conference, along with leaders of Jewish, Methodist, Episcopalian and other faiths are also urging lawmakers to support the part of the Governor’s budget that includes expanding Medicaid.

Ahrens uses the story of Moses parting the Red Sea to urge lawmakers to buy into the plan to give 600 thousand more Ohioans access to healthcare through Medicaid.

We have to be all in. It’s not going to happen if we just stand here on the edge. We’ve got to go all in. We have to bury ourselves in the water and go all of the way to the other side. Because if this doesn’t happen, we have walked away from our greatest opportunity for freedom and liberation for 600,000 Ohioans.

Reverend Richard Burnett of Trinity Episcopal Church in Columbus says expansion of Medicaid will help low income Ohioans. It’s a program he says that has personally affected his life.

“My Mother died at the age of 88 after spending three years at a very fine nursing facility here in this city…that was paid for and supported by Medicaid. My Mother, I believe, calls me to speak today and if you will, she calls you. It would be unreasonable not to support my mother.”

Bishop Gregory Palmer of the West Ohio Conference of the United Methodist Church appeals to an even higher power. He uses a scripture from Psalms to make the point of why Medicaid should be expanded.

Psalm 146 speaks of a God who executes justice for the oppressed, gives food to the hungry, the Lord sets the prisoners free and the Lord opens the eyes of the blind. Providing the care needed to maintain health, prevent disease and restore health after injury or illness is a responsibility that each person owes all others and government owes to all….a responsibility government ignores at its own peril.

Maurice Thompson, an attorney with the conservative 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, doesn’t agree with Bishop Palmer’s assessment of the scripture.

That is no version of Christianity that could possibly be real. God’s plan is indeed for us to take care of the poor.

“But it’s to do it voluntarily through charity,” Thompson says. “It’s not to do it by holding a gun to the heads of our neighbors and taxing them and then acting though you are somehow charitable because you take money out of your neighbor’s pocket and give it to charity. That’s the opposite of charity. That looks more like highway robbery.”

Thompson says there are two good reasons why Medicaid should not be expanded in Ohio.

“This is a chance for Ohio not to increase federal spending and Ohioans are federal taxpayers that are eventually going to have to pay those bills.

“And two, Medicaid expansion dramatically drives up the costs of private health insurance because when the government pays for Medicaid, they underpay and the only way providers of health care make up that loss is on the backs of those who purchase their health insurance privately or through private health insurance.”

Thompson has warned lawmakers who back the Medicaid expansion that they might face a primary opponent over that vote. And if that happens, Thompson says his group will provide help to those challengers. But Governor Kasich’s Medicaid Director, Gregg Moody, is urging lawmakers to be brave on this issue.

“Often what I hear underlying the concern is fear. ‘Can we pay for it? Will my decision result in a primary?’ But we can’t act out of fear.”

Moody and the faith leaders who are pushing the Medicaid expansion plan hope lawmakers will take a leap of faith instead and back Kasich’s plan.

Comments
  • http://www.facebook.com/nathanruggles Nathan Ruggles

    Mr. Thompson in the article is absolutely wrong in his comment on the impact of proposed Medicaid expansion on private insurance.

    His charge that it would drive up private insurance costs does not make sense. On the contrary, it is the current situation without the expansion that drives up private insurance costs.

    The patients we are talking about do not have insurance coverage because they make too little to afford private coverage, their employer doesn’t provide it, and they make too much money to qualify for Medicaid. As a result, at present either (a) they receive charity care — and too often expensive emergency room care — that is not being paid for by the patient but rather are costs that are taken on by providers and passed on to those with insurance; (b) they are billed directly for their care, and may or may not be able to pay (right away), so again the cost is passed on (at least in part or for a period) while the patient often struggles with tremendous debt obligations or bankruptcy, or; (c) they don’t receive any care, the costs of which to them and society are incredible.

    Medicaid expansion would not only insure that providers would receive payment for services, but that payment would be at the least be guaranteed and relatively timely and for a assured amount — unlikely the current situation with these patients. This is in addition to the fact that patients would be more likely to actually receive the care that they need, which is not only better for them, but for the costs of the system because it would less likely be more expensive emergency room care or delayed care. It’s a win-win.

    While it may be true that Medicaid generally may pay less than some private insurers for the same care — which could mean that the difference between the payment and the actual cost could be passed on — this is less an argument against Medicaid (since the alternative isn’t being paid more but rather being paid nothing or very little), but rather an argument to fund Medicaid properly so it reimburses providers fully.

    Mr. Thompson is either ignorant or being disingenuous in his statement.