[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6326796,"mediaKeyId","2323686-3096f0a4ac21c556c1c6c2190eb25c1b","parentId",2323686,"title","Health committee refers bill to restrict MinnesotaCare eligibility for residents without lawful status","audioSeconds",4003,"startMs",64530,"endMs",4067660,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2323686-3096f0a4ac21c556c1c6c2190eb25c1b&start=64&end=4067","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2323686-3096f0a4ac21c556c1c6c2190eb25c1b/thumbnail_64530.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6326796/Minnesota/Health-committee-refers-bill-to-restrict-MinnesotaCare-eligibility-for-residents-without-lawful-status","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6326796-4a193c5ba8056c4c12df35266dfe5fe1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771145678&Signature=f5sEX4LNkdAHRBSEXUSj6Wk5~zfqrVinGuKCOLkBGUa3I1CdJamz-EdwnNPJAMCrrW~LA6UrLcgPYBvBYpualwGj5zbqZ10I3iv00s7t5xTTTF9ASv3vUQxsgr97XelhotNFfeABxf4lqxfPBZfM0f8obc8UzsY032mAVo6hQvJNthrxRMmZ5-OcIdfdSszjHCPW87TZgfS8PLDwkbEfyyOKqS2bKJshosOcaHis1~Th5jmzpng4DdengE5-USeFuW5tmVcswVbAnODpUViA4EgNuS-xAOaqhVA266HFB7vH38sbZyJzHvayTUU~lpTrhskY9ik2kMoVfjfKqmT9MA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","MNHouseInfo","date","2025-02-17T00:00:00Z","article","ST. PAUL, Minn. — The House Health Finance and Policy Committee on Feb. 17 voted along party lines to refer House File 10, a measure that would remove MinnesotaCare eligibility for people who are not lawfully present in the United States, to the Committee on State Government Finance and Policy.

Rep. Isaac Schultz, the bill's sponsor, told the committee Minnesota is confronting a projected $5 billion budget shortfall and said the measure targets program eligibility to reduce spending. \"We simply do not have time to waste in addressing and tackling this challenge,\" Schultz said, arguing that tightening eligibility for MinnesotaCare could cut \"a projected $100,000,000 plus in spending in the next biennium.\" He also said the change would prevent what he described as attracting people without lawful status to the program.

Supporters of the bill and witnesses for the author emphasized fiscal concerns and fraud risks. Michael (Matt) Deaton of the Center for the American Experiment warned committee members that the Healthcare Access Fund is a limited resource and said an attestation-based eligibility process creates fraud risks: \"Anybody by attestation can qualify for this program,\" he said. A staff fiscal summary presented to the committee estimated the specific change tied to section 3 (which tracks back to language in 2023’s House File 96) would yield an estimated reduction to MinnesotaCare and the Healthcare Access Fund of about $99,138,000.

The bill drew sustained opposition from hospitals, health plans, clinicians and immigrant advocates who said removing coverage would increase uncompensated emergency care, worsen health disparities and could harm rural providers. Dan Andreesen of the Minnesota Council of Health Plans said the council is \"respectfully opposed\" to removing MinnesotaCare access for undocumented residents, arguing that coverage reduces uncompensated care and improves public health. Mary Krenke of the Minnesota Hospital Association said hospitals are legally required under EMTALA to stabilize emergency patients and reported that charity care rose from about $353 million in 2022 to about $460 million in 2023; she urged caution before cutting program eligibility.

Clinicians and community witnesses described patient and public-health consequences. Dr. Amy Gilbert, a family physician, said cutting coverage would make it harder for people to get routine care and shift costs to emergency departments: \"When people can't see a doctor, hospital emergency rooms bear the burden of uncompensated care.\" Ursula Poularuth, a registered nurse, told the panel there are roughly \"81,000 immigrants without status living in Minnesota\" and urged members to \"vote for humanity and compassion\" by opposing the bill.

State officials told the committee they do not yet have enrollment counts for the newly expanded benefit. Elise Bailey, budget director at the Department of Human Services, said the program expansion took effect Jan. 1 and \"we don't have numbers, today, on how many have enrolled in the benefit.\" Deputy Commissioner Wendy Underwood of the Minnesota Department of Health said public-health programs could be affected broadly and noted the department's work spans activities such as private-well testing and lead abatement.

During committee questions, members probed fiscal and operational impacts, including whether removing people from MinnesotaCare would lower premiums for citizens or instead shift costs to hospitals and other payers. Rep. Schultz reiterated his priority to reduce spending for Minnesota taxpayers; opponents and some committee members warned of consequences to rural hospitals and emergency care access.

After debate Representative Nadeau moved to refer House File 10 to the Committee on State Government Finance and Policy. The committee legislative assistant conducted a roll call; the motion carried with 11 ayes and 10 nays and the bill was formally referred.

The referral begins a process that will send the measure through additional committees where its fiscal and policy implications will be further vetted.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Health Finance and Policy Committee 2/17/25","oneSentenceSummary","The House Health Finance and Policy Committee on Feb. 17 voted 11-10 to refer House File 10, which would remove MinnesotaCare eligibility for people not lawfully present, to the Committee on State Government Finance and Policy.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MN, Minnesota","taxId",77817,"location","Minnesota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6326791,"Committee sends bill to block public-option waiver to Commerce committee after wide testimony",1873,4096500,5969660,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2323686-3096f0a4ac21c556c1c6c2190eb25c1b&start=4096&end=5969","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2323686-3096f0a4ac21c556c1c6c2190eb25c1b/thumbnail_4096500.jpg","/articles/6326791/Minnesota/Committee-sends-bill-to-block-public-option-waiver-to-Commerce-committee-after-wide-testimony","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6326791-f9fe785849f259478e95873e9ca6430e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771145678&Signature=Hiz~GYJ6kgAdRRZIcTXp24ZT~y6xr8DLrz7SwxQDcAcYXblA3rqOsMuFrmd-m7hKsp4FQubMhrC4QmIkq6KOT4ilIK1aXlEzwzlAgmynNCb-GQGtGusIXlg4gLogl2XAjXwCDNVz5XSj1xZ2pYavO7F-Y4dfrIYeiVKLnNWKl2ZZ0sHljTZ1h8j5OTrFhzjFQs-fUggiRrz0JMuBpY7~pztmhvKBldhNLpukx2t7J8-~bFNWMyj61HTFyuX5Z3VUOyGl0AU~WPVptgDhmzHLw35OwdCpHPRH5PPxFhSyx1G-V1aa1a2n3jb5wVlT3ZEffq63G01Y~MWuSIi~tuB-hA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","ST. PAUL, Minn. — The House Health Finance and Policy Committee on Feb. 17 re-referred House File 27 to the Committee on Commerce, Finance and Policy after testimony that split along familiar lines over a proposed MinnesotaCare public option.

Rep. Josh Backer, sponsor of House File 27, said the bill would instruct state agencies to stop work on designing and seeking a federal waiver to implement a public-option model and would cancel a $21 million appropriation tied to the waiver effort. \"What this bill does is it makes it very clear to the department that they are to discontinue any work on advancing a public option,\" Backer told the committee.

Business groups, hospitals and some provider organizations testified in favor of the measure, arguing the waiver and an expanded MinnesotaCare public option could undercut provider payments, destabilize existing insurance markets and endanger financially stressed rural and critical-access hospitals. Dan Andreesen of the Minnesota Council of Health Plans said Minnesota is not ready for a public option because of unanswered questions about enrollment, provider reimbursement and the interaction with the reinsurance program. Mary Krenke of the Minnesota Hospital Association testified that MinnesotaCare was designed for low-income residents and warned that expanding access without income limits could reduce provider reimbursement and raise losses for hospitals.

The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and other employer groups said commercial reimbursement rates are substantially higher than MinnesotaCare payments and that shifting a large number of lives to a lower-paying public plan could force providers to scale back services or shift costs to privately insured patients.

Speakers opposing House File 27 said the public option is a potential path to lower costs and greater access. Farmers, small-business owners and people who have relied on MinnesotaCare described affordability problems in the individual market. Cindy Vanderpoel, a Minnesota farmer who testified remotely, said MinnesotaCare \"probably saved our family farm\" after a 2022 cancer diagnosis and asked lawmakers not to discard the waiver authority.

Union and provider witnesses also urged lawmakers to keep options open to lower premiums and improve coverage. SEIU Healthcare Minnesota & Iowa and other labor representatives said blocking the waiver would remove one potential tool for addressing unaffordable premiums and high out-of-pocket costs for workers and families.

Committee members debated the merits and timing of the waiver work and whether the state should instead prioritize reinsurance and other market-stabilizing actions. Representative Lee Beerman urged keeping the waiver option while further study occurs; Representative Backer and supporters said the state should not expend additional resources on a plan that could harm providers and destabilize markets.

Backer moved to re-refer House File 27 to the Committee on Commerce, Finance and Policy. The committee voted by voice to re-refer the bill; the motion passed and the measure will move to that committee for further consideration.","House File 27, carried by Rep. Backer, would bar state work toward a MinnesotaCare \"public option\" waiver and rescind an appropriation; the Health Finance and Policy Committee voted to re-refer the bill to Commerce, Finance and Policy after two-minute testimony slots from insurers, hospitals, employers and patient advocates.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Health committee refers bill to restrict MinnesotaCare eligibility for residents without lawful status

Committee sends bill to block public-option waiver to Commerce committee after wide testimony