National
What’s next for health care reform?
After court ruling, focus turns to state plans for Medicaid
Now that the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care reform law, advocates are pushing for additional efforts to extend coverage of the law to LGBT people and people with HIV/AIDS to the fullest extent possible.
For the most part, the next step in the process involves looking to the states to determine whether they will adopt health policies afforded to them under the law — foremost among them is the Medicaid expansion to cover all people with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level.
Although the Supreme Court ruled the majority of the health care law is constitutional, it prevented the federal government from withholding all Medicaid funds from states if they decline to take part in the Medicaid expansion. As a result, states can decide whether or not to enter the expansion without fear of losing money.
Patrick Paschall, a policy advocate at the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, said the Medicaid expansion is particularly important for LGBT people because they disproportionately live below the poverty level.
“The Medicaid expansions are going to end up being hugely important for LGBT people because it expands coverage to low-income people, and LGBT people are disproportionately low-income,” Paschall said. “We know this because of rampant employment discrimination and housing discrimination.”
A report on transgender people published earlier this year by the Task Force and the National Center for Transgender Equality, titled “Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey,” found that transgender people experience unemployment at rates twice that of the national population, and black transgender people experience it at a rate of four times as much.
Carl Schmid, deputy executive director of the AIDS Institute, said the Medicaid expansion is particularly important for people with HIV/AIDS because of 50 percent of those in care rely on that program for support and those numbers will “grow substantially” if states decide to participate.
“Those who are really poor, they’re going to be covered under Medicaid,” Schmid said. “The question is what are we expecting from the states.”
But a number of states may not take part. According to a report in The Hill newspaper, at least 15 governors have signaled they won’t participate in the Medicaid expansion now that the Supreme Court has enabled them to wiggle out of participation.
Florida Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican elected to office during the Tea Party wave in 2010, was among those saying his state wouldn’t take part in the Medicaid expansion — or other parts of the health care law that are optional to the states.
“We’re not going to implement Obamacare in Florida,” Scott said last week on Fox News. “We’re not going to expand Medicaid because we’re going to do the right thing. We’re not going to do the exchange.”
Under the health care reform law, the federal government will pay for the Medicaid expansion for the first few years. Expenses for states come up in 2017, when the federal government will pay 95 percent; That’s reduced to 94 percent in 2018 and in 2019 it goes down to 93 percent. Starting in 2010 and then on out, the federal government will pay 90 percent of the total amount.
Schmid said the bargain that was set up for states under the health care law makes the governors’ decision not to participate in the law questionable.
“Here their taxpayers are going to be paying their taxes to pay for this; this is federal funds,” Schmid said. “Their state is not going to take responsibility for covering. The hospitals? Don’t they want people to be covered? They’re going to have unconstituted care if they don’t.”
For the states that don’t participate in the Medicaid expansion, Schmid said people living there with HIV/AIDS will have to continue relying on the Ryan White Care Program, which provides funds for AIDS medications for low-income people with HIV. The program will be up for reauthorization in 2013.
As advocates push for states to adopt the Medicaid expansion, the law has several key components that already offer protections and benefits for LGBT people and people with HIV/AIDS. State and federal health insurance will be set up in the law starting in 2014.
For the first time, the law extends federal non-discrimination protection in the health care system on the basis of gender.
Paschall noted that provision is key as courts and agencies have determined that discrimination against transgender people amounts to gender discrimination.
“We know that federal agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Housing & Urban Development as well as federal courts have interpreted sex-based discrimination to include protections on the basis of gender identity and sex stereotypes,” Paschall said. “What this means is that in the context of health care, LGBT people, especially transgender people have now for the first time protections in that setting, which is hugely important.”
Earlier this year, the Department of Health & Human Services issued rules saying that no program activity in an exchange, nor a health plan, can discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The rule takes effect when exchanges open in 2014.
The administration has taken additional efforts to help the LGBT community when it comes to accessing health care. Same-sex couples can now search for health plans that cover domestic partners through the health care finder tool at healthfinder.gov. HHS has also undertaken data collection efforts to include questions about sexual orientation and gender identity in surveys like the National Health Interview Survey.
Still, advocates are looking for additional efforts from the administration — in addition to the adoption of the Medicaid expansion by the states — to ensure LGBT people are included in health care reform to the greatest extent possible.
Paschall said the Task Force wants to see data collection efforts expanded beyond the federal surveys already designated by the administration.
“Generally speaking, we would like to see sexual orientation and gender identity questions added to all federal surveys where demographic data is collected,” he said. “Our priorities include a number of federal surveys, maybe most notably the American Community Survey, which is an annual survey that collects demographic data and is considered one of the largest annual data sources on the American population.”
For people living with HIV/AIDS, Schmid said he is awaiting from the administration regulatory guidance in the next couple months on essential health benefits to cover people in the Medicaid program and federal exchanges.
“We’ll see if the coverage will be strong enough for medications and for all different other services,” Schmid said.
Tennessee
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday
The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.
House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.
The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”
It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.
HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.
The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.
This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.
Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.
It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”
State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.
“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”
Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.
“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:
“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”
National
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence to take place April 10
Campaign began as student-led protests against anti-LGBTQ bullying, discrimination
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence will take place on April 10.
The annual Day of Silence began as a student-led protest in response to bullying and discrimination that LGBTQ students face. It is now a national campaign for the LGBTQ community and their allies to come together for LGBTQ youth.
It takes place annually and has multiple ways for supporters to get involved in the movement.
Glisten, originally GLSEN, champions LGBTQ issues in schools, grades K-12. Glisten’s mission is to create more inclusive and accepting environments for LGBTQ students through curriculum, supportive measures, education campaigns, and engagement, such as the Day of Silence.
There are three main ways for the community to get involved in the Day of Silence.
Glisten has a Day of Silence frame, a series of pictures used as profile photos across social media that feature individuals holding signs. The signs allow for personalization, by providing a space to put the individual’s name, followed by filling in the prompt “ … and I am ENDING the silence by…”
Participants are encouraged to post the photo on social media and use it as a profile picture. The templates can be found on Google Drive through this link.
Using #DayOfSilence and #NSCS, as well as tagging Glisten’s official Page @glistencommunity, is another way to participate in the Day of Silence.
Glisten also encourages participants to tag creators, friends, family and use a call to action in their caption, to call attention to the facts and stories behind the Day of Silence.
“Today’s administration in the U.S. wants us to stay silent, submit to their biased and hurtful conformity, and stop fighting for our right to be authentically ourselves,” said Glisten CEO Melanie Willingham-Jaggers. “We urge supporters to use their social platforms and check in with local chapters to be boots on the ground to help LGBTQ+ students feel seen, heard, supported, and less alone. By participating in the ‘Day of Silence,’ you are showing solidarity with young people as they navigate identity, safety, and belonging. Our voices matter.”
South Carolina
Man faces first S.C. ‘hate intimidation’ charge
Timothy Truett allegedly shot at gay club in Myrtle Beach on April 1
A South Carolina man remains in custody on a more than $300,000 bond after he allegedly opened fire at a Myrtle Beach nightclub on April 1, according to WMBF.
Reports say 37-year-old Timothy James Truett Jr., of Clover, S.C., was detained by the Myrtle Beach Police Department after the April 1 incident outside Pulse Ultra Club. He was later arrested and charged with possession of a weapon during a violent crime, discharging a firearm into a dwelling, discharging a firearm within city limits, malicious injury to real property valued over $5,000, and assault or intimidation due to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
At 10:57 a.m. on April 1, officers responded to a call about a possible shooting at Pulse Ultra Club, located in the 2700 block of South Kings Highway.
In an affidavit released later, the club’s owner, Ken Phillips, said he was doing paperwork that morning when he heard “five or six” gunshots. He went outside and found a window and the windshield of his SUV shattered by bullets. An SUV with blue plastic covering one window was left at the scene.
Police later reviewed footage that showed a silver vehicle stopping in the middle of the road. The video appeared to capture muzzle flashes coming from the passenger-side window.
According to the affidavit, an officer later pulled over a vehicle driven by Truett and found spent shell casings in the back seat, along with a gun.
Documents do not detail why Truett was ultimately charged under the state law covering assault or intimidation tied to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
As of April 1, records show Truett is being held in Horry County on a combined bond of more than $312,000.
WMBF spoke with Phillips after the incident and asked whether there was any prior conflict that might have led to the shooting.
“I don’t know if it’s personal, I don’t know if it’s related to being gay, I don’t know if it’s related to the bar issues,” Phillips told WMBF. “Anybody with a mindset of pulling out a weapon in broad daylight is not right.”
“My primary concern has and always will be the safety of my community and my customers,” he added. “It’s given me great concern … as to how far people will go.”
WMBF also spoke with Adam Hayes, vice chair of Myrtle Beach’s Human Rights Coalition, who was involved in pushing for the ordinance. He said that while the incident itself is troubling, it shows the policy is being put to use.
The ordinance is intended to deter “crimes that are motivated by bias or hate towards any person or persons, in whole or in part, because of the actual or perceived” identity, in the absence of a statewide hate crime law.
“It’s nice to see that something we put into policy is not just a piece of paper, that it’s actually being used,” said Hayes.
He said the shooting underscores the need for a statewide hate crime law in South Carolina and added that the incident has left the local LGBTQ community shaken.
South Carolina and Wyoming are the only two states in the U.S. without a comprehensive statewide hate crime law.
Truett remains in jail as of publication.
Trump’s war threats trigger rare 25th Amendment discussion
A Sondheim masterpiece ‘Merrily’ rolls onto Netflix
ROSENSTEIN: Vote McDuffie for mayor of D.C.
New book celebrates 1970s dance music icons
