Politics
New guidance affords gay couples equal access to Medicaid
Non-marriage equality states can refuse new policy for gay couples
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid has issued new post-DOMA guidance (Image public domain).
Gay married couples will now have the same eligibility opportunities for Medicaid coverage as straight couples in certain states following the Supreme Court decision against the Defense of Marriage Act, according to new guidance from the Obama administration obtained Friday by the Washington Blade.
In two separate pieces of guidance dated Sept. 27, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid outlines new policy bringing the agency in line with the ruling against DOMA. They’re published in time for enrollment into insurance exchanges and Medicaid expansion under the health care reform law starting on Tuesday.
One piece of guidance from Gary Cohen, CMS director of the Center for Consumer Information & Insurance Oversight, clarifies gay married couples will be for a spousal tax credit and cost-sharing reductions by signing up for a health insurance exchange — provided they submit a joint tax return for that year.
“In light of the Ruling, the eligibility rules with respect to premium tax credits under Code section 36B treat same-sex spouses in the same manner as opposite-sex spouses,” Cohen writes.
That policy decision has nationwide implications thanks to an Aug. 29 ruling from the Internal Revenue Service that married same-sex couples should be treated the same as opposite-sex couples for tax purposes — regardless of whether or not they reside in a state recognizing the union.
The other piece of guidance from Sept. 27, signed by CMS Director of the Center for Medicaid & CHIP Services Cindy Mann, is more complex and says DOMA is no longer a factor in determining the income-based eligibility of same-sex couples for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
“[B]ecause Section 3 of DOMA no longer controls the definition of marriage or spouse under the framework for state Medicaid and CHIP programs, DOMA is no longer a bar to states recognizing same-sex marriages in Medicaid or CHIP,” Mann writes.
Medicaid is a health insurance program jointly run by the states and government in which a person is eligible for coverage if have income up to 133 percent of the poverty line. Most individuals apply for Medicaid not on an individual basis, but on a family basis.
With DOMA out of the picture, the new policy would make a gay person more eligible for Medicaid if their spouse’s income is lower and places them lower on the poverty scale. Also, it can make a gay person less eligible if a spouse’s income is higher and the couple seems less in need.
The guidance says that state may begin factoring an applicant’s same-sex marriage into eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP “immediately,” but acknowledges some operational challenges and says it should be implemented “as soon as reasonably practicable.”
States where same-sex marriage is legal will have to adopt the new eligibility requirements, but since the Medicaid is jointly run by the states, CMS isn’t requiring non marriage-equality states to recognize same-sex marriages for the purposes of the purposes of the program. States can elect to opt out of the new policy.
“[A] state is permitted and encouraged, but not required, to recognize same-sex couples who are legally married under the law of the jurisdiction in which the marriage was celebrated as spouses for purposes of Medicaid and CHIP,” Mann writes. “States that do not recognize same-sex marriages are thus free to adopt a different marriage recognition policy for Medicaid and CHIP purposes.”
That’s similar to policy under health care reform. Because of the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare, states can opt out of participating in the Medicaid expansion under the law.
The guidance also allows states to adopt this eligibility standard for Medicaid and CHIP if the state offers civil unions or domestic partnerships that are the legal equivalent to marriage. Among these states are Colorado and Illinois.
“Consistent with this guidance, a marriage is recognized for Medicaid and CHIP purposes if (it is legally valid under applicable law,” Mann writes. “Thus, if a state or territory recognizes a civil union or domestic partnership as a marriage, that marital status is recognized under the Medicaid and CHIP programs, consistent with this guidance.”
CMS says this guidance isn’t the last word. The agency is awaiting additional guidance on non-income related eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP that hinges on yet-to-be-released guidance from the Social Security Administration in determining eligibility for Supplemental Security Income. Some Social Security spousal benefits are beginning to flow to married gay couples, but the Obama administration hasn’t finalized this post-DOMA policy yet.
“The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will issue additional guidance once the SSA announces its post-Windsor SSI marriage recognition policy,” Mann writes.
Despite the effort to bring the Medicaid into alignment with the court ruling against DOMA, the nation’s largest LGBT group is expressing discontent with the guidance and says the eligibility should extend to married gay couples nationwide.
Michael Cole-Schwartz, a spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, said the policy decisions “fall short” by allowing states to determine whether they can provide Medicaid coverage to same-sex couples.
“While it might be advantageous for some families to remain unrecognized in order to maintain eligibility for certain programs, as a general rule we oppose different standards for gay versus straight married couples,” Cole-Schwartz said. “Given that there are no impediments to the federal government adopting an across the board standard that recognizes all legally married couples in this instance, we believe that the new rules fall short of the ideal where the sexual orientation of those in a marriage is irrelevant.”
Federal officials insist the new policy is extended in the maximum possibly way because, unlike in other cases where the Department of Health & Human Services has extended standards and benefits to same-sex married couples in non-marriage equality states, there is a special federal-state relationship in Medicaid with the states administering this program.
Politics
After Biden signs TikTok ban its CEO vows federal court battle
“Rest assured, we aren’t going anywhere,” CEO said
President Joe Biden signed an appropriations bill into law on Wednesday that provides multi-billion dollar funding and military aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan after months of delay and Congressional infighting.
A separate bill Biden signed within the aid package contained a bipartisan provision that will ban the popular social media app TikTok from the United States if its Chinese parent company ByteDance does not sell off the American subsidiary.
Reacting, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew said Wednesday that the Culver City, Calif.-based company would go to court to try to remain online in the U.S.
In a video posted on the company’s social media accounts, Chew denounced the potential ban: “Make no mistake, this is a ban, a ban of TikTok and a ban on you and your voice,” Chew said. “Rest assured, we aren’t going anywhere. We are confident and we will keep fighting for your rights in the courts. The facts and the constitution are on our side, and we expect to prevail,” he added.
Our response to the TikTok Ban Bill in the US: https://t.co/LpoE67sxHo
— TikTokComms (@TikTokComms) April 24, 2024
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre adamantly denied during a press briefing on Wednesday that the bill constitutes a ban, reiterating the administration’s hope that TikTok will be purchased by a third-party buyer and referencing media reports about the many firms that are interested.
Chew has repeatedly testified in both the House and Senate regarding ByteDance’s ability to mine personal data of its 170 million plus American subscribers, maintaining that user data is secure and not shared with either ByteDance nor agencies of the Chinese government. The testimony failed to assuage lawmakers’ doubts.
In an email, the former chair of the House Intelligence Committee, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who doesn’t support a blanket ban of the app, told the Washington Blade:
“As the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, I have long worked to safeguard Americans’ freedoms and security both at home and abroad. The Chinese Communist Party’s ability to exploit private user data and to manipulate public opinion through TikTok present serious national security concerns. For that reason, I believe that divestiture presents the best option to preserve access to the platform, while ameliorating these risks. I do not support a ban on TikTok while there are other less restrictive means available, and this legislation will give the administration the leverage and authority to require divestiture.”
A spokesperson for U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) told the Blade: “Senator Padilla believes we can support speech and creativity while also protecting data privacy and security. TikTok’s relationship to the Chinese Communist Party poses significant data privacy concerns. He will continue working with the Biden-Harris administration and his colleagues in Congress to safeguard Americans’ data privacy and foster continued innovation.”
The law, which gives ByteDance 270 days to divest TikTok’s U.S. assets, expires with a January 19, 2025 deadline for a sale. The date is one day before Biden’s term is set to expire, although he could extend the deadline by three months if he determines ByteDance is making progress or the transaction faces uncertainty in a federal court.
Former President Donald Trump’s executive order in 2020, which sought to ban TikTok and Chinese-owned WeChat, a unit of Beijing-based Tencent, in the U.S., was blocked by federal courts.
TikTok has previously fought efforts to ban its widely popular app by the state of Montana last year, in a case that saw a federal judge in Helena block that state ban, citing free-speech grounds.
The South China Morning Post reported this week that the four-year battle over TikTok is a significant front in a war over the internet and technology between Washington and Beijing. Last week, Apple said China had ordered it to remove Meta Platforms’s WhatsApp and Threads from its App Store in China over Chinese national security concerns.
A spokesperson for the ACLU told the Blade in a statement that “banning or requiring divestiture of TikTok would set an alarming global precedent for excessive government control over social media platforms.”
LGBTQ TikToker users are alarmed, fearing that a ban will represent the disruption of networks of support and activism. However, queer social media influencers who operate on multiple platforms expressed some doubts as to long term impact.
Los Angeles Blade contributor Chris Stanley told the Blade:
“It might affect us slightly, because TikTok is so easy to go viral on. Which obviously means more brand deals, etc. However they also suppress and shadow ban LGBTQ creators frequently. But we will definitely be focusing our energy more on other platforms with this uncertainty going forward. Lucky for us, we aren’t one trick ponies and have multiple other platforms built.”
Brooklyn, N.Y.,-based gay social media creator and influencer Artem Bezrukavenko told the Blade:
“For smart creators it won’t because they have multiple platforms. For people who put all their livelihood yes. Like people who do livestreams,” he said adding: “Personally I’m happy it gets banned or American company will own it so they will be less homophobic to us.”
TikTok’s LGBTQ following has generally positive experiences although there have been widely reported instances of users, notably transgender users, seemingly targeted by the platform’s algorithms and having their accounts banned or repeatedly suspended.
Of greater concern is the staggering rise in anti-LGBTQ violence and threats on the platform prompting LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD, in its annual Social Media Safety Index, to give TikTok a failing score on LGBTQ safety.
Additional reporting by Christopher Kane
Politics
Smithsonian staff concerned about future of LGBTQ programming amid GOP scrutiny
Secretary Lonnie Bunch says ‘LGBTQ+ content is welcome’
Staff at the Smithsonian Institution are concerned about the future of LGBTQ programming as several events featuring a drag performer were cancelled or postponed following scrutiny by House Republicans, according to emails reviewed by the Washington Post.
In December, Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III appeared before a hearing led by GOP members of the Committee on House Administration, who flagged concerns about the Smithsonian’s involvement in “the Left’s indoctrination of our children.”
Under questioning from U.S. Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.), Bunch said he was “surprised” to learn the Smithsonian had hosted six drag events over the past three years, telling the lawmakers “It’s not appropriate to expose children” to these performances.
Collaborations with drag artist Pattie Gonia in December, January, and March were subsequently postponed or cancelled, the Post reported on Saturday, adding that a Smithsonian spokesperson blamed “budgetary constraints and other resource issues” and the museums are still developing programming for Pride month in June.
“I, along with all senior leaders, take seriously the concerns expressed by staff and will continue to do so,” Bunch said in a statement to the paper. “As we have reiterated, LGBTQ+ content is welcome at the Smithsonian.”
The secretary sent an email on Friday expressing plans to meet with leaders of the Smithsonian Pride Alliance, one of the two groups that detailed their concerns to him following December’s hearing.
Bunch told the Pride Alliance in January that with his response to Bice’s question, his intention was to “immediately stress that the Smithsonian does not expose children to inappropriate content.”
“A hearing setting does not give you ample time to expand,” he said, adding that with more time he would have spoken “more broadly about the merits and goals of our programming and content development and how we equip parents to make choices about what content their children experience.”
Politics
Survey finds support for Biden among LGBTQ adults persists despite misgivings
Data for Progress previewed the results exclusively with the Blade
A new survey by Data for Progress found LGBTQ adults overwhelmingly favor President Joe Biden and Democrats over his 2024 rival former President Donald Trump and Republicans, but responses to other questions may signal potential headwinds for Biden’s reelection campaign.
The organization shared the findings of its poll, which included 873 respondents from across the country including an oversample of transgender adults, exclusively with the Washington Blade on Thursday.
Despite the clear margin of support for the president, with only 22 percent of respondents reporting that they have a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of Trump, answers were more mixed when it came to assessments of Biden’s performance over the past four years and his party’s record of protecting queer and trans Americans.
Forty-five percent of respondents said the Biden-Harris administration has performed better than they expected, while 47 percent said the administration’s record has been worse than they anticipated. A greater margin of trans adults in the survey — 52 vs. 37 percent — said their expectations were not met.
Seventy precent of all LGBTQ respondents and 81 percent of those who identify as trans said the Democratic Party should be doing more for queer and trans folks, while just 24 percent of all survey participants and 17 percent of trans participants agreed the party is already doing enough.
With respect to the issues respondents care about the most when deciding between the candidates on their ballots, LGBTQ issues were second only to the economy, eclipsing other considerations like abortion and threats to democracy.
These answers may reflect heightened fear and anxiety among LGBTQ adults as a consequence of the dramatic uptick over the past few years in rhetorical, legislative, and violent bias-motivated attacks against the community, especially targeting queer and trans folks.
The survey found that while LGBTQ adults are highly motivated to vote in November, there are signs of ennui. For example, enthusiasm was substantially lower among those aged 18 to 24 and 25 to 39 compared with adults 40 and older. And a plurality of younger LGBTQ respondents said they believe that neither of the country’s two major political parties care about them.
PHOTOS: Gay Day at the Zoo
PHOTOS: Taste of Point
Miyares joins efforts to fight Title IX changes
US Census Bureau testing survey on LGBTQ households
What property should I purchase if I’m not sure how long I’ll be in D.C.?
Judy Shepard to receive Presidential Medal of Freedom
Pride journey: Las Vegas
United Methodist Church removes 40-year ban on gay clergy
University students have a right to protest
