Community Legal Services Blog

Congress Must Not Cut SSI

rvallas — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:55:44 +0000

In a recent Opinion column in Politico, Tim Shriver writes that Supplemental Security Income serves as a critical lifeline for children with severe disabilities, and must be preserved.

CLS advocates have been at the forefront of national advocacy to defend SSI from significant proposed cuts, as a co-founder of the SSI Coalition for Children and Families, which includes over 80 supporting organizations from around the country.

Congress Must Not Cut SSI

Americans have been increasingly alarmed by the prevalence of bullying in our nation’s classrooms and communities — especially the bullying of children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. They’re the most bullied of all — nearly three times more likely than their nondisabled peers to be humiliated and abused.

It’s no secret why they’re more likely to be victims: They’re more vulnerable, easier to target, less likely to speak up. Now, that same vulnerability is leading this population to face another group ready to push them around: their own members of Congress.

Congress is now undertaking the unenviable task of restoring our nation to fiscal health. Amid fierce partisanship, record-setting deficits, a prolonged recession and widespread cuts to nearly every budget category, Congress is considering dramatically cutting — or even eliminating — the children’s Supplemental Security Income program.

SSI is not glamorous. But it is necessary. It’s a critical lifeline for children with severe disabilities and their families. What’s at stake in cutting it is nothing less than our core values — not to mention our nation’s commitment to providing a full quality of life to those who face the most significant challenges.

Consider Sarah, a young girl born with a rare brain disorder, lobar holoprosencephaly. This is painful and tough. It has hindered her physical and cognitive development. Sarah requires near-constant medical care, frequent trips to an array of specialists and dedicated educational support in and out of school.

Sarah’s mother, Irene, has a full-time job. But she’s not making enough to cover the additional expenses brought on by Sarah’s condition. Yet Irene is able to raise her daughter at home because we’re a country that believes in the dignity of every child.

Irene receives $500 per month from the Supplemental Security Income program — from the American people — because that’s the kind of people we believe we are. It’s that simple: We help Irene and Sarah because it’s the right thing to do.

For this child and mother, the alternative is not a good one. Without the support from SSI, Sarah would likely be institutionalized, raising the specter of haunting isolation and lifelong humiliation. Or maybe Irene would resist that painful option and try to keep her daughter at home while likely bankrupting her family.

These are not imaginary options. For decades, they were the norm — and sadly, around the world, they still are. We shouldn’t need to paint draconian pictures of brutal treatment and cruel loneliness to remind Congress that we can do better.

Even in hard economic times, Americans are a compassionate people. In a recent poll for the Global Down Syndrome Foundation, 76 percent of respondents strongly supported government programs that fund medical research for people with Down syndrome, and 83 percent strongly supported programs that provide education and training for this population. We see a similar trend in local referendums around the nation: Despite difficult economic times, Americans vote by overwhelming majorities in support of government help for those who need it most.

That value goes beyond party lines and beyond election cycles.

While changes may need to be made to sustain SSI for children with severe disabilities, politicians on the left and right must — even amid adversity — reaffirm the values most important to us as a nation. They must face this economic crisis with an eye on history, reminding Americans of the sacrifices that past generations made to build the hope of a more just and inclusive nation.

Let Congress ask us all to deepen our commitment to protecting the most vulnerable — not just to maintain but to increase the hopefulness of a society that values the dignity of every individual.

We know the most common reasons why people are bullied in school and in society. It is partly fear, partly intolerance and partly a culture that condones humiliating behavior. Whether they realize it or not, Congress has the power to keep our country free of such despicable treatment for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

In the case of the children’s SSI program, we must make sure Congress is not the newest bully of people with disabilities and their families.

Timothy Shriver is chairman and chief executive officer of the Special Olympics.

This piece originally appeared in Politico on December 14, 2011.

Please support CLS with a Gift of Justice

Kevin Peter — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 16:14:30 +0000

Marijuana’s impact on parental status more about class, race than parenting

Kevin Peter — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:48:39 +0000

The Family Advocacy Unit at Community Legal Services represents hundreds of parents in the child welfare system every year. Many of the parents we represent become involved with the child welfare system for reasons stemming from their poverty and lack of adequate support . While a number of the parents we represent struggle with serious drug addiction, all too often we see parents who are capable and loving parents labeled unfit to care for their children due to their sporadic marijuana use. As this article describes in detail, while marijuana use doesn’t usually form the basis to bring a family into the child welfare system, it can form the basis to keep a family in the child welfare system and to keep a child in foster care:

City Paper article

Staffing cuts paralyze welfare offices

michaelrfroehlich — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:19:00 +0000

This op-ed by Michael Froehlich and Julie Zaebst was originally published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on October 3, 2011.

Last month, Hurricane Irene roared through Philadelphia, flooding basements and knocking out power to thousands of local residents. A week later, Tropical Storm Lee caused more damage. And last week, the aftermath of the storms brought attention to a different kind of disaster – a man-made one blowing out of Harrisburg.

Low-income Pennsylvania families are eligible for a small amount of food stamps (now called Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits) to replace food lost because of a storm. Families have a limited number of days to claim these food stamps. But when families applied for those benefits at local welfare offices, they faced chaos and waits of more than three hours. Worse, they were given little information on eligibility and requirements.

In a lengthening recession, the state Department of Public Welfare is being called on to provide critical basic services to more Pennsylvanians with less staff. Since 2002, the number of workers at the department has dropped by 13 percent. At the same time, caseloads have nearly doubled, with each worker now handling an average of 472 food stamp and Medicaid cases.

Hardworking county welfare staffs can’t keep up with the growing workload. This year’s state budget included another $56 million in cuts to welfare department operations and welfare-to-work services.

Meanwhile, waits of more than two or three hours have become common at welfare offices. Phone lines are jammed, and messages often go unreturned. Several years ago, the Philadelphia office set up a customer service center to handle inquiries from clients. Today, fewer than one in five calls to the center is picked up.

In addition, the welfare office now rejects more than a third of applications for food stamps. Nearly half of the rejections are because the welfare office believes an applicant has failed to provide documentation or make an appointment. In our experience assisting welfare recipients, however, these rejections can often be attributed to documents misplaced by overwhelmed skeleton crews or to ineffectual “phone tag” between officials and applicants with busy work, child-care, and school schedules.

The system is collapsing under the weight of an increasing workload, with fewer workers to handle it and a state government oblivious to the impact.

When low-income families must spend entire days at a welfare office waiting to see a caseworker or return several times to turn in the same piece of paper, it’s time they’re not spending at work, looking for work, going to school, or tending to their children.

Continuous cuts to the Department of Public Welfare have undone essential government functions. Welfare caseworkers are doing the best they can, but, as we saw last week, they are completely overwhelmed. The greatest consequences are to those who can least afford them.

Michael Froehlich is an attorney with Community Legal Services. Julie Zaebst is policy center manager at the Greater Philadelphia Coalition Against Hunger.

CLS provides written testimony on proposed bills that affect immigrant clients

michaelrfroehlich — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:30:57 +0000

CLS attorneys recently submitted written testimony to the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee regarding a package of bills that would adversely affect many of our immigrant–and, in some cases, citizen–clients.

To read our testimony regarding bills that would affect public benefits and employment programs, click here.

To read our testimony regarding bills that prohibit agencies from offering translation or interpretation services, click here.

Congress has a role in preventing hunger

michaelrfroehlich — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:30:53 +0000

The following op-ed appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer on September 21, 2011, by Kathy Fisher, Carey Morgan, and CLS Attorney Jonathan Stein

A recent report by the Food Research and Action Center found that more than one in five Pennsylvania families with children struggle to put food on the table. Members of Congress expressed shock and indignation at the findings. Rep. Bob Brady (D., Pa.), who represents a district where nearly half the families are at risk of hunger, said the report shone a “glaring spotlight” on the hardship American children are experiencing.

As bleak as the figures were, though, the report shouldn’t have been news to anyone who’s picked up a newspaper since the start of the recession – let alone anyone representing Pennsylvania in Congress. The study merely confirmed what lawmakers should know full well: that tens of thousands of families in their districts can’t afford the food they need.

The real outrage here is that even though members of Congress pay lip service to protecting American children, they have been chipping away at the nutritional programs that keep millions of kids from going hungry every day.

The House recently voted to slash $127 billion from the nation’s most important antihunger program, the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (formerly food stamps), which according to one study helps feed one in two Americans at some point during their childhood. The House also voted to slice $733 million from the Women, Infants, and Children program, which helps more than a quarter-million Pennsylvania mothers and children afford milk, cereal, and fresh produce. These cuts would come on top of another $1 trillion in discretionary spending cuts under the recent debt-ceiling deal, which will limit the reach of other nutritional programs well into the future.

What happens if Congress fails to protect SNAP, WIC, and other nutritional programs? All Americans, hungry or not, will pay the price in the years to come. Growing up without enough food can devastate children physically and psychologically. Hunger threatens their health and development and robs them of the ability to reach their full potential.

Over the next few months, partisan rhetoric will no doubt continue to consume Congress as an appointed “super-committee” devises a plan to further trim the budget deficit. As a member of the committee, Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) is in a unique position to represent all Pennsylvania families and confirm the nation’s long-term commitment to its children. As a businessman and strong supporter of economic growth, he must also understand that the country will not thrive if we don’t invest in our children. Cutting federal nutrition programs will make hunger and malnutrition more common and more deeply rooted in our communities, draining our economy, stunting child development, and increasing suffering.

No matter how divisive the debate becomes, we must hold our elected officials accountable for keeping the interests of our children at the center of their decisions. If we don’t, America will soon find that a generation of undernourished kids is struggling as adults.

Kathy Fisher is family and economic security associate for Public Citizens for Children and Youth. Carey Morgan is executive director of the Greater Philadelphia Coalition Against Hunger. Jonathan Stein is general counsel for Community Legal Services.

CLS Attorney Rasheedah Phillips testifies at City Council on how proposed zoning code would affect low-income child care providers

michaelrfroehlich — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:29:37 +0000

CLS Attorney Rasheedah Phillips’ testimony begins at 13:30 in above video.

On September 14, 2011, City Council had its second session of public hearings on the proposed new Zoning Code for Philadelphia, drafted by the Zoning Code Commission with considerable input from community stakeholders.. Rasheedah Phillips of Community Legal Services, along with other advocates from the child care community, testified in support of the new zoning Code, and discussed remaining concerns that the child care community has with the new Code. The child care community, through the Child Care Law Project directed by Ms. Phillips, has submitted several recommendations to the ZCC that will make the Code more accessible to childcare providers, and many of those recommendations have made their way into the Code.

Ms. Phillips’ full testimony is available below.

Good morning Council President Verna and Members of City Council. My name isRasheedah Phillips, and I am an attorney at Community Legal Services in the Community Economic Development Unit working on the Child Care Law Project. I provide legal advice and representation to low-income nonprofit and for-profit child care providers. I also collaborate with a few nonprofit organizations that serve as resources to the child care community, such as the Southeastern Pennsylvania Early Childhood Coalition (SEPECC).

The childcare community has been an active participant in the Zoning Code Reform for the past several years. My colleagues and I have attended nearly all of the ZCC meetings, have provided input at community meetings, and have made extensive recommendations to the ZCC that would allow childcare to be a clearly defined and clearly understood part of the Code, where it has been virtually absent or largely inconsistent in previous versions of the Code. Throughout the reformation process, the ZCC has recognized the connection of fair land use regulations to the establishment of quality child care programs, has heard our concerns, and has taken the vital step of including childcare into the Code in a meaningful way. The new Code’s inclusion of childcare makes perfect sense at a time of decreased funding for education and economic development. Residents of the City must have the ability to fill these funding gaps by creating their own educational and recreational programs.

The draft Code in its present form includes clear definitions of childcare that are more consistent with state regulations, recognition of childcare programs as Public, Civic, and Institutional uses that provides “unique services that are of benefit to the public as a whole, and clarifies the use of recreation centers, schools, houses of worship, and other facilities for child care use. Many of the barriers that once stood in the way of creating childcare programs bound by zoning regulations have largely been eliminated The Code is now much more accessible and user-friendly for providers who rely on zoning to increase the economic resources in their neighborhoods and provide childcare alternatives to families. We strongly encourage the adaption of the new Code at this time.

However, despite the significant progress that the Code has made with childcare issues, there remain some inconsistencies and lingering areas of concern. I will provide just a few examples:

Make group and center daycare a Special Exception use in all zoning districts, similar to the Special Exception use status granted to religious institutions, schools, and libraries.
Eliminate the “up to 12 children” limitation for C1 properties. Many properties inPhiladelphiaare large enough to accommodate childcare for 13 or more children. In addition, state regulations include square footage requirements to ensure that a particular child care facility has appropriate measurement and use of indoor space to accommodate particular numbers of children
Permit child care in multi-family dwellings, such as duplexes, for up to three children. Often, families living in apartment complexes view their neighbors in the same complex as their community. Restricting child care as a use within multi-family dwellings denies these families the opportunity to use local, familiar, community-based child care. In addition, permitting childcare in multi-family structures will allow existing providers in multi-family settings to come forward, obtain municipal licensing, pay business taxes, and use resources to benefit children in their care.
Bring uniformity of regulation of child care options throughout the City by eliminating the Area Maps 1 and 2 carveouts which reduce the number of children a provider can care for in the areas of the City that the map covers.

All of these suggestions would help to cut back on unnecessary appeals to the ZBA that are expensive and time-consuming to providers, and would cut back on time and resources necessary to interpret, administer, and enforce the Code.

We strongly appeal to City Council members, members of the ZCC and L&I to pay further attention to these concerns, and, after the passing the Code, to continue to work with the child care community to resolve these issues so that childcare programs can continue to thrive and fulfill their important communal function of providing safe spaces for children to learn and play while their parents go to work and school. Again, we urge you to pass the new Code and allowPhiladelphiato take a step forward for children and all the people in this city who depend upon equitable administrative processes to build and strengthen their communities.

Thank you for your time and consideration. If you have any additional questions or require more information, please feel free to contact me at:

Rasheedah Phillips, Esq.

Community Legal Services, Inc.

1424 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia PA 19124

(215) 981-3774

rphillips@clsphila.org

Stop Foreclosures – Save HEMAP Rally and Lobby Day Harrisburg Tuesday, September 27

johnmcoogan — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:59:30 +0000

Stop Foreclosures-

Save HEMAP

Rally and Lobby Day

Harrisburg

Tuesday, September 27

Rally 1 PM Capitol Rotunda

Free bus leaves Philadelphia at 8:30 AM from 16^th and JFK. Please continue reading to see how you can make your reservations….

· The Homeowners Emergency Mortgage Assistance program (HEMAP) was suspended July 1 due to state budget cuts.

· HEMAP, which has saved the homes of over 45,000 Pennsylvania families since 1984, offers low interest loans to allow homeowners to stay in their homes during temporary economic problems like unemployment, illness, etc.

· With the unemployment and foreclosure crisis continuing into its 4^th year, with no end in sight, PA needs mortgage help for our citizens. This is no time to end a successful program protecting deserving homeowners.

· Come to Harrisburg on September 27 to support the $15 million needed to keep HEMAP available to PA homeowners.

· Call 215-557-0822 to reserve a seat and check our web page at www.PASaveOurHomes.org. Please consider helping send the bus to Harrisburg by contributing to the cost of the bus.

Sponsored by the Pennsylvania Save Our Homes Coalition

CLS pushes for extension of SSI for asylees and refugees who are elderly or severely disabled

michaelrfroehlich — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 12:30:45 +0000

CLS has worked for years to ensure that asylees and refugees who are elderly or have severe disabilities that prevent them from working qualify for SSI. SSI, or Supplemental Security Income, provides subsistence benefits of $674/month. But asylees and refugees who are unable to become U.S. citizens within a certain time period lose their SSI.

In 2008, CLS worked with nationwide allies to successfully lobby the U.S. Congress to pass an extension of time so that refugees and asylees could continue to receive SSI while they applied for naturalization. Unfortunately, that legislation is set to sunset, or expire, on October 1, 2011.

Last week, however, Reps. Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) introduced a bill that would extend SSI for two more years for many asylees and refugees. CLS continues to push Congress to remove the artificial time limit for asylees and refugees to receive SSI. In the meantime, we are encouraged by this bill and are working hard to ensure that it is passed before thousands of asylees and refugees who are elderly or disabled lose their SSI at the end of September.

A press release issued by the National Immigration Law Center, a strong ally in these efforts, is below.

CONGRESSMEMBERS TAKE NEEDED STEPS TO PROTECT THOUSANDS OF ELDERLY AND DISABLED REFUGEES

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Reps. Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) have introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives to protect refugees facing termination of their disability benefits (H.R. 2763, introduced Aug. 1). Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) is leading similar efforts in the Senate. The National Immigration Law Center (NILC) applauds these members of Congress for their work on behalf of this very special population.

The 1996 welfare law established time limits to refugee eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI). These time limits were intended to provide an incentive for refugees to naturalize quickly and then maintain their eligibility for SSI as U.S. citizens. However, many refugees have difficulty achieving citizenship for the very reasons that make them eligible for SSI: advanced age, severe disability, and complex health care needs. They struggle with the new language and may be illiterate in their native tongue. Often they may not have the wherewithal to maneuver the application process.

In response to the recently introduced legislation, Ellen Battistelli, a NILC policy analyst, said: “Each year, thousands of individuals flee persecution in their home country and are promised safety and opportunity in the United States. Most of these refugees adjust to their new communities and achieve economic independence. A small number are elderly and disabled. These refugees are unable to work and are without sufficient support from friends or family to meet their basic expenses. They may suffer from isolation, poverty, and chronic health and emotional problems. For many, their only protection from hunger and homelessness is their eligibility for the modest SSI stipend, also available to elderly and disabled citizens.

“In 2008, President Bush signed bipartisan legislation extending the time limit. This law, unanimously approved by Congress, is set to expire on September 30, 2011. It is essential that Congress act quickly to ensure that these vulnerable refugees receive the protection and support promised in our invitation to move to this country.”

The text of the bill is available from http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php. The bill number is H.R. 2763.

CLS advocates for fair Health Insurance Exchange

michaelrfroehlich — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:30:16 +0000

On August 11, CLS Staff Attorney Kristen Dama provided the following testimony at a forum convened by the Pennsylvania Insurance Department regarding how to best implement Health Insurance Exchanges in Pennsylvania.

Community Legal Services (CLS) thanks Commissioner Michael F. Consedine and the Pennsylvania Insurance Department for hosting public forums to permit stakeholders to present ideas on the establishment of a Health Insurance Exchange in Pennsylvania.

For more than forty years, CLS has helped thousands of low-income Philadelphians with legal problems by providing them with advice and representation in non-criminal cases, advocating for their legal rights, and conducting community education to inform them about the laws that affect their lives. CLS also engages in legislative and administrative advocacy on behalf of its clients. CLS’s Public Benefits Unit works to ensure that low-income Philadelphians have access to public health insurance and other benefits.

In recent months, CLS has been happy to work with the Pennsylvania Health Access Network, a statewide coalition of organizations working to protect high quality health insurance coverage and to expand coverage to the uninsured, to develop a Joint Position Statement for Implementing a Health Insurance Exchange. The Position Statement outlines recommendations for establishing a Pennsylvania-run Exchange that functions as a marketplace for affordable, accessible coverage for individuals and families. Rather than reiterate the principles contained therein, we simply note our endorsement of the Position Statement and urge Pennsylvania to incorporate its principles if and when it establishes a state-run Exchange.

CLS believes that implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) creates an unprecedented opportunity to provide comprehensive health insurance coverage to low-income Pennsylvanians while, at the same time, addressing historical, systemic barriers to public health insurance access. To that end, we focus our comments on how a Pennsylvaniarun-Exchange would be able to function best in concert with Medicaid and other public health insurance programs.[i]

Ensure that Enrollment Processes Benefit Public Health Insurance Applicants:The ACA contemplates that a state’s Health Insurance Exchange will provide a way for individuals and families to learn more about and apply for both private health insurance programs, with or without subsidies, and public health insurance programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The Exchange will screen health insurance consumers for all programs and steer them to the program or programs for which they are eligible. Public health insurance applicants will comprise a sizable portion of the Exchange’s users: by one estimate, Pennsylvania’s Medicaid program is expected to grow by 685,000 newly eligible recipients beginning in 2014. If the ACA’s vision of “one-stop shopping” is to be realized for allhealth insurance consumers, Pennsylvania must ensure that a state-run Exchange works as seamlessly for public health insurance consumers as it does for private consumers.To fulfill the Exchange’s promise as an entry point for public health insurance consumers, we urge Pennsylvania to:

Provide clear, consumer-friendly information on public health insurance programs and program rules alongside similar private health insurance information.
Establish a common application for all health insurance programs, as envisioned by the ACA’s “no wrong door” policy.
Allow applicants for health insurance programs to apply for a broad range of public benefits at the same time, including Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly food stamp) and Low-Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEAP) benefits, by building onPennsylvania’s groundbreaking COMPASS online application system.
Ensure that an online application system will allow applicants to scan and upload required documents.
Ensure that applicants who lack access to the internet or who have limited computer literacy may apply for public health insurance programs in person or by telephone or mail.
Ensure that the application process for public health insurance programs, as well as all communications to health insurance consumers, meets the needs of consumers with disabilities, low levels of literacy, and limited English proficiency, consistent with federal law.
Seek permission from the federal government to streamline Medicaid eligibility rules by relying on sampling to determine how many Medicaid applicants are newly eligible, and by eliminating asset tests and adopting the Modified Adjusted Gross Income System for all Medicaid applicants.
Capture the minimum amount of information to make eligibility determinations by relying on data sharing across Pennsylvania agencies and with the federal government to verify income and citizenship and immigration status.
Draw from existing public health insurance program data (for example, from the CHIP and SelectPlan for Women programs) to enroll newly eligible populations in Medicaid using the “Express Lane Eligibility” authority granted by federal law.
Ensure that the Pennsylvania agencies tasked with overseeing eligibility determinations (currently, the Department of Public Welfare for Medicaid and the Insurance Department for CHIP) have appropriate staffing and infrastructure to process applications, seek documentation to the extent required, and manage inquiries and appeals from applicants or recipients.
Ensure that families with members who are enrolled in different public and/or private health plans may align their coverage and reapplication dates and otherwise coordinate their coverage.
Streamline reapplications using state-of-the-art prepopulated electronic and/or paper reapplication forms.

Incorporate Stakeholders with Medicaid Expertise

Pennsylvania has a sizable population of public health insurance recipients: as of June 2011, more than 2.3 million Pennsylvanians were enrolled in Medicaid, and another 200,000 children were enrolled in CHIP. To meet the needs of these recipients, a broad range of community health providers, social service agencies, legal and policy organizations, and recipients themselves have developed in-depth, historical knowledge ofPennsylvania’s public health insurance programs. In addition to working closely with the State Medicaid Director, we encouragePennsylvaniato incorporate the voices of these community-based experts during the planning for and operation of a state-run Health Insurance Exchange, as contemplated by the ACA and proposed federal regulations.

Specifically, we encourage Pennsylvania to:

Ensure that the Exchange Board includes the State Medicaid Director or his designee, as well as other members with in-depth knowledge ofPennsylvania’s public health insurance programs.
Convene an advisory committee to the Exchange Board to ensure that community-based experts and other stakeholders with knowledge of public health insurance programs have formal, regularly-scheduled opportunities to share their expertise while the Board plans for and operates the Exchange.
Maintain ongoing communication and coordination with community-based experts, irrespective of their membership on the advisory committee, to ensure that Board considers and incorporates their perspectives as it plans for and operates the Exchange.

Provide Comprehensive Consumer Assistance and Navigation

Pennsylvania’s Medicaid system is an extraordinarily complex network of myriad eligibility categories, each with its own rules and requirements. CLS knows firsthand that many eligible recipients would not otherwise qualify for Medicaid without assistance from a legal representative or social service provider. While we are optimistic that the ACA will eventually simplify the Medicaid system, we anticipate that its initial implementation will prove to be confusing and frustrating for public health insurance applicants, particularly for those applicants who have not previously applied for or qualified for Medicaid, or who face barriers like physical or mental disabilities, low levels of literacy, or limited English proficiency.

The ACA requires state-run Health Insurance Exchanges to fund Navigators that will provide health insurance consumers with fair and impartial information about their health insurance options, and to facilitate their enrollment in health insurance programs. While the ACA does not expressly require Navigators to provide consumers with assistance in applying for public health insurance programs, we implorePennsylvaniato task Navigators with this role, and to take additional steps to ensure that consumers are able to seek public health insurance successfully.

In particular, we urge Pennsylvania to:

Require Navigators to provide public health insurance consumers with comprehensive information and enrollment assistance, consistent with the assistance that they provide to private consumers.
Fund an independent consumer assistance program comprised of community-based experts statewide that have in-depth, historical knowledge of public health insurance programs and close ties to the diverse communities in which they work.
Appoint consumer ombudsperson, within an existing state agency, who is staffed adequately, reachable via a free public hotline, and tasked with fielding and addressing concerns and complaints from public health insurance consumers and their advocates.
Conduct an education and outreach campaign to underserved communities that uses Pennsylvania’s Cover All Kids campaign as a template and relies on new (social networking) and old (print, radio, and television) media and contacts with community- and faith-based organizations and schools.

Kristen’s full testimony is available here.

[i] Our comments echo those of Medicaid advocates in other states. See, for example, comments provided by Medicaid Matters New York, available at http://www.healthcarereform.ny.gov/timeline/2011-05-16_albany/docs/lara_kassel_medicaid_matters_ny.pdf.