How To Access Free COBRA Coverage Through September
COBRA Continuation Coverage allows you to keep health insurance through your job after experiencing job loss or a reduction in hours. Under the American Rescue Plan, most workers who lose their employer-provided health insurance are entitled to freeCOBRA coverage, called "COBRA premium assistance," until September 30, 2021.
Eligibility
You are eligible for COBRA premium assistance if you meet ALL of the following criteria:
You lost your employer-provided insurance due to involuntary job termination or reduction in hours*
You elect to receive COBRA premium assistance**
You DO NOT have another employer health insurance available to you
You DO NOT qualify for Medicare
*If you voluntarily left a job or reduced your hours, you are not eligible for COBRA premium assistance.
**If your job was terminated (or hours reduced) before April 1, 2021, you may still qualify for COBRA premium assistance. The Georgetown University Health Policy Institute provides this example: "If someone was laid off from their job in August of 2020 but found the premiums too high to enroll at the time, he or she could come back and enroll for up to 60 days after being notified of the availability of the subsidies under the American Rescue Plan."
Accessing The Benefit
If you qualify for COBRA premium assistance, you should receive enrollment forms from your insurance provider or employer.
If you believe you are eligible but have not received a notice, you may notify your employer by filling out a request for treatment as an "Assistance Eligible Individual". Once you receive the enrollment forms, you have 60 days to elect to receive COBRA premium assistance.
This page provides an overview of the COBRA premium assistance benefit under the American Rescue Plan. We compiled this information to help clarify the benefits; however we are not COBRA experts. For more information about accessing the COBRA continuation payment, visit the Department of Labor's FAQ page; contact a benefits advisor in the Employee Benefits Security Administration by visiting askebsa.dol.gov or calling 1-866-444-3272; or visit the Georgetown University Health Policy Institute.
Share
Help spread the word about this benefit by sharing the tweet below:
Under the American Rescue Plan, most workers who lose their job-based health insurance are entitled to free COBRA coverage.
2020 Highlights: Racial Data Transparency and Addressing Disparities in COVID-19 Treatment
Key Trends
Increasing racial data transparency through improved data collection and analysis.
Improving access to health care through telehealth expansion.
Expanding Medicaid and insurance coverage to address health disparities.
Introduction
Racial disparities in health coverage, chronic health conditions, mental health, and mortality persist across the United States. Racism has led to the deeply entrenched inequality within our country’s healthcare, economic, and social systems that perpetuate these health disparities and inequities. Such inequity becomes magnified in times of national hardship, such as the unprecedented global pandemic and economic recession we are currently experiencing.
The CDC COVID Data Tracker indicates that there have been around thirty million known COVID-19 cases in the United States, and the virus has killed around 500,000 people as of the end of February 2021. Although COVID-19 does not discriminate along racial or ethnic lines, racial, ethnic, and Indigenous communities are more vulnerable to the pandemic. The compounding effect of existing inequities put Black and Brown people, communities of color, Indigenous people, and other marginalized groups at greater risk of infection and death.
For example, these communities:
Experience higher risks of developing chronic health conditions, like obesity and asthma;
Are disproportionately concentrated in employment sectors and occupations that are highly vulnerable (e.g. farmworkers, grocery workers, transit operators);
Are more likely to rely on public transit as their main form of transportation and face the risk of contracting COVID-19 in a crowded bus;
Often face challenges with accessing nutritious and healthy food;
Have limited safe, affordable housing choices and often live in overcrowded housing;
Make up a disproportionate percentage of the population in prisons, which account for many of the hot spots of COVID-19 infections;
Are more likely to experience discriminatory behavior by healthcare professionals and receive lower quality care than their white counterparts; and
Have less access to health insurance, quality medical care, or paid sick leave.
Furthermore, undocumented workers--many of whom are working in vulnerable sectors, such as food supply and retailing--are at a greater risk because they have no access to employment benefits or paid sick leave. In addition, undocumented communities have minimal access to federal support because federal COVID-19 aid was only made available to those with a social security number and those who had paid federal income taxes.
As more states release demographic data on COVID-19 cases and mortalities, it has become clear that the virus is impacting the most marginalized and vulnerable populations the hardest.
When adjusting the data for age differences in race and ethnicity groups, Black, Indigenous, Pacific Islander, and Latinx Americans all have COVID-19 death rates of triple or more the rate of white Americans. Specifically, compared to white people, the 2020 U.S. age-adjusted COVID-19 mortality rate for:
Black people is 3.6 times as high
Indigenous people is 3.4 times as high
Latinx people is 3.2 times as high
Pacific Islanders is 3.0 times as high, and
Asians is 1.3 times as high.
As APM Research Lab has reported, this indicates that many younger Americans in these racial and ethnic groups are dying of COVID-19--driving their mortality rates far above white Americans. However, in every age category, “Black people are dying from COVID at roughly the same rate as white people more than a decade older.” This data reveals the inequitable impacts of COVID-19 and highlights the racial disparities policymakers must address.
It is also important to note that not every state has published comprehensive demographic data on the racial, ethnic, and language characteristics for those affected by COVID-19. There are still many states where race and/or ethnicity is unknown for a significant share of not only confirmed cases and deaths, but also general testing results. Expanded testing has provided more insight into the spread of COVID-19 and its impacts on marginalized communities. However, there has been many barriers to equitable testing that prevent proper data collection. For example, drive-in testing sites often require a vehicle to be tested. But Black households and people of color are least likely to have access to a vehicle. Targeting testing resources, such as accessible sites, supplies, and tailored messaging, could alleviate ongoing and future health disparities due to the pandemic.
In addition, a lack of uniform reporting guidelines across the U.S, has made it difficult to estimate the pandemic’s true toll on different communities. For example, many states lump Hispanic and Latinx identities together in the racial breakdown, whereas other states do not. In addition, some lump Indigenous people into the “Other” category, preventing states from being able to identify the complete effects of the virus on the Indigenous community. Without extensive and accurate demographic data, policymakers and researchers have no way to address ongoing inequities and identify which populations need additional access to resources.
It is critical that state legislators account for existing racial disparities in health care access and take steps to promote health equity. Some state legislatures across the country are addressing racial and ethnic disparities by adopting policies that expand health coverage and promote racial data transparency. This report summarizes some of the most important state-level developments from 2020 legislative sessions.
Racial Data Transparency
State legislators are taking action to increase racial and health data transparency by:
Advocating for better data collection and reporting of comprehensive racial data;
Investing in contact tracing programs;
Putting in place a racial impact component within legislation that may affect racial and ethnic groups;
Better Data Collection And Reporting Of Racial Data
Without comprehensive race and ethnicity data, the communities most impacted by the pandemic cannot be identified. As a result, some lawmakers are pushing for a more comprehensive collection of frequently updated data not only related to COVID-19, but also for any future public health emergencies.
A. Comprehensive COVID-19-related Data Collection
Massachusetts passed a bill (MA HB 4672/Chapter 93), which requires the state’s department of public health to collect data from all boards of health and publicly report the daily total and complete aggregate numbers of those who have tested positive for COVID-19, have been hospitalized, and have died as a result of a confirmed or probable case. It also requires the department to publish a daily report on such data from each state and county correctional facility, and elder care facilities. Each daily report must allow for the identification of trends, testing, infection, hospitalization, and mortality based on demographic factors, including race and ethnicity.
New Jersey enacted legislation (NJ S 2357/Chapter 28), which requires hospitals to report to the state’s department of health demographic data, including race and ethnicity, on not only confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths, but also the number of those who are admitted for treatment, those who attempt to get treated, and those who are turned away after attempting to get tested. The data will be posted publicly, updated on a daily basis, and compiled by county and municipality. Michigan also introduced a similar bill (MI HB 5753), but it failed to pass.
New York legislators introduced a bill (NY SB 8360) that did not include as many components as Michigan’s or New Jersey’s, but would have uniquely required data related to all COVID-19 testing regardless of the result, including the number of individuals tested. In addition, the bill would have required reporting of not only general demographic information, like race and ethnicity, but also primary language, socioeconomic status or occupation, disability status, and county or city of residence. Massachusetts enacted legislation (MA HB 4672/Chapter 93) with a similar component.
In Michigan, a bill (MI HB 5753) introduced in the House would have required hospitals to collect and report to the state’s department of health comprehensive demographic data on those affected by COVID-19 or any other communicable disease and infection during a future state of emergency. Louisiana enacted a resolution (LA SR 76) with similar language.
New York legislators introduced legislation (NY SB 8360), which included a component that would have required the Department of Health to submit to specific legislative committees a preliminary report on the following: (1) description of COVID-19-associated race and ethnicity data, and (2) evidence-based response strategies for future pandemics.
Investment In Contact Tracing Programs
Contact tracing sheds light on how a disease, such as COVID-19, is spread by locating, talking, and working with people who have tested positive for the virus to identify and track people with whom they have been in close contact. Because the United States did not have a national contact tracing strategy, there has been insufficient data about how different populations are being affected by the virus. Thus, states are investing in contact tracing programs to collect more comprehensive data that accurately reflects the impacts of COVID-19 on different communities.
A. Allocation of Funds for Contact Tracing Programs
State lawmakers have worked to appropriate funds from either the CARES Act’s Coronavirus Relief Fund or their general fund for the purpose of expanding public and private initiatives for COVID-19 testing, contact tracing, and trends tracking and analysis. These funds could be used to hire contact tracers, purchase necessary equipment, and expand the contact tracing infrastructure to take appropriate public health actions. Hawaii’s legislature enacted this legislation (HI SB 75), while similar bills were introduced but failed in Minnesota (MN HF 4579) and North Carolina (NC HB 1038).
South Carolina passed a bill (SC HB 3411) that requires the Medical University of South Carolina, in consultation with other health departments and associations, to develop and deploy a statewide COVID-19 testing plan. To implement the plan, the Department of Health and Environmental Control will collaborate with hospitals and other medical stakeholders, and provide access to information on hotspots and contact tracing. The plan also emphasizes testing in rural communities and communities with a high prevalence of COVID-19 and/or with demographic characteristics consistent with risk factors for COVID-19.
B. Contact Tracing Representation
New York enacted legislation (NY AB 10447), which requires city contract tracers to be representative of the cultural and linguistic diversity of the communities they will serve. In addition, it mandates New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and the city’s health and hospitals corporations to submit an annual report on contact tracer worker diversity.
Similarly, South Carolina passed a bill (SC HB 3411), which mandates the Department of Health to identify no fewer than 1,000 contact tracers who are best suited to interact in a culturally appropriate manner and in the required languages of those disproportionately affected by COVID-19.
C. Privacy Protections
While contact tracing programs are crucial for collecting COVID-19 data and increasing racial data transparency, these programs have privacy implications that can harm immigrant communities and other marginalized groups. There have been concerns about whether or not confidential information would be misused or shared to other government agencies, such as immigration authorities and law enforcement, for reasons unrelated to the goal of tracking the spread of the virus. For example, police in Minnesota have reportedly used contact tracing data to track protestors from racial justice demonstrations. Allowing law and immigration enforcement to access and weaponize contact tracing data would disproportionately harm communities of color who are already being hit the hardest by the pandemic.
To protect these communities and encourage participation in contact tracing programs, legislators must prohibit immigration authorities and law enforcement from accessing contact tracing data. New York legislators enacted legislation (NY AB 10500/Chapter 377) that protects the data compiled by contact tracers from legal processes. In addition, it specifies that no contact tracer or contact tracing entity may provide contact tracing information to a law enforcement entity or immigration authority.
Kansas passed a similar bill (KS HB 2016/Section 16), which requires contact tracing data to be used only for the purposes of contact tracing. The data must be confidential and not disclosed, and safely and securely destroyed when no longer necessary for contact tracing. The bill also prohibits the state or any municipality, or any officer or official or agent thereof, from conducting or authorizing contact tracing, except under certain circumstances.
Racial Impact Statements Within Legislation
State lawmakers are trying to address racial disparities through the inclusion of racial impact statements in legislation. Similar to the fiscal notes often attached to legislation, a racial impact statement would analyze and address how different racial and ethnic groups will be negatively or positively impacted by proposed legislation. The analysis is used to not only inform legislators’ decisions, but also reduce, eliminate, and prevent racial discrimination and inequities. Illinois legislators introduced a bill (IL HB 4428), which would have required a racial impact statement for any legislation that has or could have a disparate impact on racial and ethnic groups.
Massachusetts and Ohio introduced a more specific set of legislation (MA HD 2789/SD 936 and OH HB 620) that would have required a racial impact and health disparities analysis for health-related initiatives and policies. Ohio’s legislation took a more progressive lead by also requiring the statements to determine whether introduced bills have a positive, negative, or neutral impact on the accomplishment of health equity in the state, health or health equity of specific populations in geographic areas, and the social determinants of health for the most vulnerable populations.
Addressing Disparities In COVID-19 Treatment And Testing
Lawmakers are seeking to address disparities by making healthcare more accessible to vulnerable communities through the expansion of telehealth, Medicaid, and insurance coverage.
Telehealth
In order to prevent the spread of COVID-19, many health care systems have begun utilizing telehealth and telemedicine technology for medical appointments. Such reliance on technology creates barriers for those who lack access to quality broadband and telephone services.
State legislators are expanding access to healthcare by:
Ensuring telehealth payment parity;
Expanding telehealth coverage for audio-only appointments; and
Waiving or lowering cost-sharing for telehealth and telemedicine.
A. Ensuring telehealth payment parity
In order to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, healthcare systems have had to adopt methods, such as telehealth, that do not rely on delivering health care services in-person. In response, state legislators have introduced payment parity bills that would require insurance plans to provide a reimbursement rate for telehealth services that is equal to, on the same basis as, or no less than the rate provided for in-person services.
Vermont enacted legislation (VT HB 742/Section 24), which includes a component on payment parity. In addition, the following states all introduced variations of this type of bill, but none were enacted:
A similar bill introduced in Washington (WA HB 2770) that would have allowed hospitals, hospital systems, telemedicine companies, and provider groups with 11 or more providers to negotiate their rate.
B. Expanding telehealth coverage for audio-only appointments
For telehealth services, some states require a provider and patient to use real-time, interactive audio and visual communication. However, such a requirement leaves patients who only have landline or audio-only phones without access to telehealth. Many of these patients are often low-income and come from marginalized communities. State lawmakers are working to increase access to healthcare for all by permitting audio-only telehealth appointments. Some have also restricted benefit and insurance plans from placing any restrictions on the electronic or technological platform used to provide these virtual services.
New Jersey legislators also enacted a different bill (NJ AB 3860/SB 2289), which waives certain regulatory requirements in order to facilitate telemedicine health services during COVID-19, including any privacy requirements that would limit the use of technological devices that are not typically used in telehealth services.
C. Waiving or lowering cost sharing for telehealth and telemedicine
State lawmakers are eliminating barriers to telehealth by waiving or lowering cost-sharing for telehealth services related to COVID-19.
New Jersey enacted a bill (NJ AB 3843), which provides coverage for telemedicine and telehealth to the same extent for any other services, except that no cost-sharing shall be imposed on the coverage.
Michigan introduced legislation (MI HB 5633) which would have required examination, diagnosis, and prescribed treatment of COVID-19 by telemedicine to not be subject to any coinsurance, copayment, application to a deductible, or limit.
Medicaid And Insurance Coverage
State legislators are working to address health inequities by proposing legislation that would:
Move more states to adopt the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion;
Expand Medicaid and insurance coverage for uninsured, undocumented, and low-income individuals; and
Waive or lower cost-sharing for COVID-19 testing and treatment.
A. Expanding Medicaid in states without Medicaid expansion
Thirty-eight states, and D.C., have expanded their Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act.
Of the 38 states, Oklahoma and Missouri passed expansion initiatives (OK State Question 802 and MO Amendment 2) that will be implemented in 2021. That leaves nearly two million people in 12 states who are ineligible for Medicaid coverage and left without access to an affordable coverage option. The COVID-19 emergency is putting intense pressure on these states to ensure greater access to quality health care for all, especially those disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. As a result, some lawmakers in these 12 states have sought to expand the eligibility requirements for their Medicaid programs.
North Carolina (NC HB 1040), South Carolina (SC HB 5476), Alabama (AL HB 447), Kansas (KS SB 252), and Florida (FL SJR 224/HJR 247) introduced bills to adopt the ACA’s Medicaid Expansion, which provides Medicaid coverage to non-elderly adults with incomes below 138 percent of the poverty line (though none of these bills passed).
North Carolina also introduced a different bill (NC HB 1038/Section 3A) that would have provided temporary, targeted Medicaid coverage to individuals with incomes up to 200%, rather than 133%, of the poverty line for COVID-related services. In addition, it would have provided Medicaid coverage for COVID-19 testing to the uninsured.
B. Expanding Medicaid and insurance coverage for uninsured individuals, low-income groups, and undocumented communities during the pandemic.
State legislators are working to address COVID-19-related health disparities by expanding insurance coverage for uninsured, low-income, and undocumented communities.
Ohio introduced legislation (OH HB 583) that would have temporarily waived certain Medicaid requirements during the pandemic and expand financial eligibility to 300% of the poverty line for children and 200% for adults. In addition, the state introduced a resolution (OH HCR 27) which demanded the Trump Administration to create a special enrollment period in the ACA marketplaces for uninsured Ohioans who may be unable to access COVID-19 testing and treatment.
Minnesota enacted an exhaustive COVID-19-related legislation (MN HF 4556/Section 11), which included a provision for Medicaid to cover the COVID-19 testing of uninsured individuals. Similarly, New York also introduced a bill (NY SB 8123/AB10494) that would have allowed any uninsured individual, regardless of immigration status, be eligible for COVID-19 testing at no cost.
Legislation in New York (NY SB 8366) would have amended the state’s social services law and increase COVID-19 health services eligibility for those who are residents of the state, have a confirmed case of COVID-19, have a household income below 200% of the FPL, and are ineligible for federal financial participation in the basic health program on the basis of immigration status.
C. Waiving or lowering cost-sharing for COVID-19 testing and treatment
Increased access to the COVID-19 testing and treatment will enable local and state public health departments to accurately track the course of the pandemic. It is also critical that people receive affordable and equitable access to health care services, especially during this time. State lawmakers are focusing on ensuring health care affordability and accessibility for those impacted by the virus by waiving or lowering cost-sharing for COVID-19-related services. These services may include, but are not limited to, diagnostic and antibody testing, physician office visits, telemedicine services, hospitalizations, antiviral drugs, and vaccines.
Louisiana and New Jersey enacted similar laws (LA SB 426 and NJ AB 3843), while variations on this type of legislation were introduced but failed to pass in Minnesota (MN HF 4416), Michigan (MI HB 5633), and Ohio (OH HB 579).
Complementary Policies
Create a Commission to study COVID-19 racial disparities and recommend actions to policymakers, community leaders, and healthcare systems that promote health equity and address the factors that leave racial, ethnic, and indigenous communities vulnerable during public health emergencies.
Increase broadband access and close the digital divide to ensure communities have access to the communication tools necessary for accessing medical care through telehealth and telemedicine appointments.
Increase pay and protections for frontline workers, and ensure these workers have access to paid sick leave. Paid sick leave allows employees to take care of themselves and/or their loved ones during the pandemic without having to sacrifice their financial and job security.
Allocate resources to communities most impacted by COVID-19 by setting up testing centers in low-income areas and within existing community networks, such as community health centers and organizations. These sites will help expand access to COVID-19 testing for those who have had limited access before.
As the coronavirus situation continues to unfold, we’re compiling resources here to help you navigate the many challenges this presents to your community. We know that crises like these have disproportionate impacts on vulnerable and low-income communities and want to make sure we stand up for those most at risk. As legislators, you are uniquely positioned to find solutions that mitigate the harm for at-risk medical populations (people with chronic health conditions, people with disabilities, the elderly), hourly workers, the millions of Americans without access to health care or paid sick days, and everyone who is one health emergency away from financial ruin.
The resources we've linked to below can help you use your platform to provide clear, scientifically-based information to the public and advocate for better policies.
If you have actions or new policies that are happening in your states, please share them so we can provide them to other legislators across the country. Please email helpdesk@stateinnovation.org.
Race and the Virus: Bias, Data, Testing, and Impact
The spread of COVID-19 took longer to reach rural America, however, once it did, it highlighted some basic infrastructure needs that are lacking for rural residents. During COVID-19, rural people have faced many of the same challenges as urban residents, yet have struggled to access adequate information, medical services, food and medicine due to an erosion of public investment in rural infrastructure.
In addition to the risks to individuals’ physical health, the COVID-19 pandemic affects every health care system in the United States (medical, public health, insurance) and each of their corresponding workforces. State legislatures have a responsibility and opportunity to ensure that these systems are operating effectively and equitably for the health of all people.
The Covid pandemic has had devastating impacts on every single worker and every aspect of our economy, particularly women and Black, Brown, and Indigenous workers. Too many are grappling with how to pay for the basic necessities they need to survive and many are being forced to decide between going back to a job that may be unsafe or protecting their health. Fortunately, legislators and partners can implement innovative solutions that will make our workforce and our local economies safer and stronger.
Our nation is in the midst of a housing crisis, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Under our nation’s system of racial capitalism, housing serves more as a financial asset or investment than a basic human right. The current system disproportionately harms working-class, Black, Indigenous, and communities of color (BIPOC)—leaving them out of both asset building opportunities and housing protections. Evictions already place a disproportionate harm on Black women and their families, who are almost four times as likely to be evicted as households led by white men. Housing stability has always been a civil rights issue that directly descends from our nation’s history of segregation and racist housing practices.
The 2020 Census is still on and it is more important than ever to get out the count and encourage communities to self-respond. SiX’s Census Get Out the Count Toolkit for State Legislators has everything you need to promote the census digitally with your constituents during the pandemic and is being updated regularly. Here’s the most important message the all legislators should be lifting up:
“Responding to the census has never been easier. You can fill out the form from the comfort of your home—online, over the phone, or by mail—all without having to meet a census taker in person.”
On April 13, the Bureau announced major operational changes for the 2020 count. All field data collection activities have been suspended until June 1, and the enumeration period has been extended until October 31, 2020. That means households will now have until the end of October to self-respond to the census, though legislators should still encourage communities to participate as soon as possible.
Voting & Elections
COVID-19 poses an incredible threat to voter access and participation in our elections and requires a multi-pronged, well-funded solution. To meet this challenge, states must rapidly ensure that voting systems are safe, resilient, and flexible. Democracy advocates across the country are uniting behind the below areas of reform to protect our democracy during the pandemic:
Expanded voter registration, including online registration, same-day registration, and automatic registration;
Expanded mail voting, including pre-paid postage and fair and consistent ballot verification and cure processes;
Expanded early voting and in-person voting opportunities;
Reforms to polling station locations, setups, and sanitation protocols (following CDC guidelines); and
Robust public education.
For a detailed overview of these policy recommendations see the following resources from SiX’s national partners:
COVID-19 poses specific threats to reproductive health care access and needs; further, some states have taken advantage of the crisis to play politics and restrict abortion care access. But research shows that even in the midst of COVID—and despite disinformation spread by the anti-choice opposition—people continue to oppose restricting access to reproductive freedom.
The Department of Education and the White House are pressuring schools to open in the fall but are providing little to no guidance for doing so safely, threatening to withhold funding for states or districts who do not comply. While the pressure to reopen schools in the fall grows, so does the number of coronavirus cases, leaving school districts and states scrambling to keep up with a quickly changing situation. States will have to consider how to keep all students, teachers, faculty and support staff safe—not just those in wealthy communities—through budget considerations, remote learning options, financial aid, school meals, testing and tracing, and more.
Covid-19 demonstrated that the corporate food supply chain is one crisis away from failing, which puts communities at risk of being food insecure and could cause barriers for local farmers working to address the food needs of their community. In order to ensure that communities are resilient in their ability to access food during a crisis, legislators should work to ensure that there is a sound regional and/or local alternative food supply chain with a plan to get food to those who need it while also ensuring that food and farm workers are adequately protected in their workplaces.
Undocumented Immigrants make up a disproportionate share of frontline workers and are especially concentrated in high-risk industries such as food production, health care, and transportation. However, these same immigrant workers have been excluded from any economic relief included in the CARES Act and are unable to access unemployment insurance. To compound this devastating situation, Trump’s immigration enforcement machine continues to target undocumented residents and separate families at astounding rates, which has led to extreme health risks within immigration detention centers across the United States.
The spread of COVID-19 took longer to reach rural America, however, once it did, it highlighted some basic infrastructure needs that are lacking for rural residents. During COVID-19, rural people have faced many of the same challenges as urban residents, yet have struggled to access adequate information, medical services, food and medicine due to an erosion of public investment in rural infrastructure.
State legislatures are on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic, trying to do their best to protect and provide vital social services to their constituents. While some states are passing inclusive policies to stabilize our local economies, others are using the pandemic as an opportunity to pass harmful policies that will have devastating impacts on our communities. Additionally, some policies are intended to support struggling families but are having unintended consequences.
COVID-19 poses specific threats to reproductive health care access and needs; further, some states have taken advantage of the crisis to play politics and restrict abortion care access. But research shows that even in the midst of COVID—and despite disinformation spread by the anti-choice opposition—people continue to oppose restricting access to reproductive freedom.
Always work with your state’s reproductive rights, health, and justice coalition - contact us for support if needed!
Resources:
Communicating about Reproductive Freedom During COVID Attacks on reproductive freedom have not disappeared during the coronavirus pandemic. In fact, politicians in some states are using the pandemic to try to ban or restrict access to abortion in new ways. But research shows that even in the midst of COVID—and despite disinformation spread by the opposition—people continue to support reproductive freedom. Click here for messaging guidance.
Actions State Legislators Can Consider to Protect Reproductive Health Care From removing existing barriers to abortion care to expanding tele-health services, state lawmakers can facilitate easier access to reproductive health care that reflects our current realities. And any COVID-19 response should be viewed through the lenses of racial and gender justice.
COVID-19’s Impact on Accessing Reproductive Health Care and Maternal Health To help make the case, consult the most recent data and research on how reproductive and maternal health care are being impacted by COVID-19.
Abortion as Essential Care during COVID-19 Abortion was under attack as Governors around the U.S. saw an opportunity to capitalize on a crisis to ban abortion care. These resources make it clear that abortion is critical, timely care, and that a global health pandemic and economic crisis are the exact wrong reasons to limit access to abortion care.
Communications and messaging guides for abortion care and COVID-19
State-specific research and support
To convene or facilitate a briefing or strategy session with your legislative colleagues and state coalition partners
COVID Resources: Health Care
In addition to the risks to individuals’ physical health, the COVID-19 pandemic affects every health care system in the United States (medical, public health, insurance) and each of their corresponding workforces. State legislatures have a responsibility and opportunity to ensure that these systems are operating effectively and equitably for the health of all people.
Resources:
Health Data
CDC guidance on COVID-19 symptoms and protection are updated regularly (Spanish version)
Kaiser Family Foundation keeps an up-to-date tracker of state data (cases, deaths, and tests)
The American Public Health Association hosts a series of evidence-based webinars on the science behind COVID-19 for the benefit of policymakers, public health/health care officials, and the general public
Select from several health care policy categories in NCSL’s state actions database for summaries of state legislation on COVID-19 (both bill content and legislative progress)
Testing and Tracing
Guidance for state governors on COVID-19 testing capacity and strategies for consideration from the National Governors Association
State examples: South Carolina developed a testing plan that emphasizes testing in rural and under-resourced minority communities, urban areas, and congregate living areas
Minnesota passed a comprehensive health care bill to support front-line workers and their work environments
The Federation of State Medical Boards keeps up-to-date lists of the states that have waived in-state licensure requirements, modified CME requirements, and expedited licenses for retired physicians and medical schools in several states have expedited graduation to get new providers out into the workforce
This comprehensive COVID-19 resource page from Community Catalyst includes policy options and messaging tools, including general and state-specific social media graphics
10 State Poll: Americans Support Bold Policy Solutions
Intense support for commonsense election reforms and solutions to create economic security
A recent poll surveying voters in Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, Florida, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Tennessee, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas commissioned by the State Innovation Exchange (SiX) and conducted by TargetSmart, shows voters support policies to ensure accessible elections and a desire for more state investment to ensure people are economically secure.
DEMOCRACY
Voters Support Steps to Ensure Safe and Accessible Elections
Voters in the ten states overwhelmingly believe that the state government has a role to play in safely and fairly administering elections (91%). States strongly support policies to ensure the election is safe and accessible for all eligible voters:
Open additional polling locations to reduce crowds and lines (86%);
Lengthen the window for early voting and allow voters to cast ballots in person up through the day before Election Day (82%);
Allow any registered voter to vote by mail (76%); and
Mail all registered voters applications to vote-by-mail (62%).
Voters Are Concerned About USPS and Having Their Vote Counted
The politicization of Vote by Mail and the partisan attacks on the United States Postal Service have eroded faith in the ability to have mail-in ballots count. The poll shows that half of all voters are concerned that the mail system in their state cannot be relied upon to get vote-by-mail ballots to election officials in time to be counted in the election. This concern is higher among Black voters (60%) and Latinx voters (53%).
Voters Want State Government to Remove Racial Barriers to Voting
Nearly 7-in-10 voters across the target states also indicate that they believe state government should play an active role in acknowledging and addressing systemic racism (68%). Accordingly, two-thirds of voters across these target states believe their state government should reduce barriers that prevent Black people from voting (65%).
HEALTH AND THE ECONOMY
Voters Concerned about Health and Safety, Want Protections and Investment
By a three-to-one margin, voters want their state government to invest in residents to ensure they are safe, healthy, and economically secure (60%) rather than lowering taxes and cutting funds to services like education, infrastructure, and unemployment insurance (19%). Voters also believe the state government should address economic barriers faced by Black Americans (57%).
A majority of voters side with workplace safety requirements (55%) over liability protections for corporations (26%).
Respondents support expanding unemployment insurance and other economic policies
Nearly three in five voters support extending the length of time that workers can receive expanded unemployment benefits. Support for this policy is particularly high among Black voters (84%) and voters under 50 (67%). Voters also strongly supported policies that would provide immediate pocketbook relief for many, including:
Providing low-interest loans to small businesses to help them make it through the crisis (93%);
Banning surprise medical bills (89%);
Extending the grace period for people to pay health insurance bills before their coverage can be canceled (88%);
Limiting what drug companies can charge for prescription drugs (87%);
Offering people the option to buy into the same public health insurance plans that are available to state employees if they want to (87%);
Creating an insurance plan to provide paid family and medical leave for employees (80%); and
Requiring workplaces to provide paid sick days to their employees (79%).
As State Legislature Goes Into Special Session, New Poll Shows Nevadans Support Action on Threats Created by COVID Crisis
Strong support for bold policy solutions to help working families and ensure the safety and accessibility of elections
As the Nevada state legislature is set to begin a special session to address COVID-19 related issues, a recent poll commissioned by the State Innovation Exchange (SiX) shows Nevada voters hold deep concerns over the risk that COVID-19 poses to their health, the impact on the economy and the election and they support bold policy action.
Voters Support Steps to Ensure Safe and Accessible Elections
Nevada voters overwhelmingly believe that the state government has a role to play in safely and fairly administering elections (89%). The majority of Nevadans report that they will vote either early in person (39%) or vote by mail (34%). However one-in-five believe that they will go to the polls (22% on Election Day).
Whether or not they are choosing to vote in person or by-mail, voters supported policies to ensure the election is safe and accessible for all eligible voters:
Open additional polling locations to reduce crowds and lines (92%);
Lengthen the window for early voting and allow voters to cast ballots in person up through the day before Election Day (87%);
Allow any registered Nevada voter to vote by mail (74%); and
Mail all registered voters applications to vote-by-mail (61%).
"Nevadans want this legislature to take action to ensure all eligible voters have the opportunity to vote and aren’t forced to choose between their health and their vote," said Stacey Shinn, Nevada State Director for SiX.
The Role of Government in Issues Facing Nevada
When asked if the state government should play a role in some of the issues facing working families, voters overwhelmingly supported government engagement in:
Safely and fairly administering elections (89%);
Ensuring equal access to high-quality K-12 education (85%);
Ensuring struggling families and children have access to food (84%);
Stopping the spread of the coronavirus (82%);
Equal pay for equal work (78%); and
Ensuring access to affordable health care (77%).
Voters Concerned about COVID Impact and Strongly Support Bold Economic Policies
By a three-to-one margin, voters believe Nevada state government should invest more in its residents to ensure they are safe, healthy, and economically secure (58%) rather than state government keeping taxes low and cutting funds to key services like education, infrastructure and unemployment insurance (23%).
Nevada has been hard hit by the pandemic with over half of respondents reporting that they have been laid off or had their hours cut (52%). Nevadans report they are concerned about the people losing work and income due to the virus (89%), small businesses and restaurants closing down permanently (89%) and people of Nevada unable to afford their rent or mortgage (81%).
Given the current crisis, Nevadans support policies that will address the economic hardships being faced by many and make life easier for working families:
Providing low-interest loans to small businesses to help them make it through the crisis (94%);
Offering people in Nevada the option to buy into the same public health insurance plans that are available to state employees if they want to (90%);
Limiting what drug companies can charge for prescription drugs (86%);
Extending the grace period for people to pay health insurance bills before their coverage can be canceled (86%);
Creating an insurance plan to provide paid family and medical leave for employees (79%); and
Requiring workplaces to provide paid sick days to their employees (77%).
“These results show how hard hit Nevada has been by this pandemic. People all across this state are hurting and they strongly support bold policy action by this legislature,” said Shinn.
After a decade of implementation, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has made health insurance and health care more available and affordable for tens of millions of people — many of whom will rely heavily on its provisions to deal with the public health crisis brought on by COVID-19. In fact, some states have begun to reopen their health insurance exchanges to increase coverage during the coronavirus outbreak.
No matter what we look like, where we live, or what’s in our wallets, this pandemic reminds us that at our core, we are all just human. As our nation and our communities struggle to respond to this national emergency, we are reminded how important health care is to our long-term success. Our own health depends on the health of the person next to us, and the person next to them. Ensuring others can access care is how we take care of ourselves.
Over the last four years, the ACA has been challenged by the Trump Administration. When Congress did not overturn the legislation, the Administration simply refused to implement key parts of the law, weakened it through executive order, and sought to challenge it through the courts. Even in the midst of this crisis, Trump said that he is still trying to overturn the ACA, suing in court to take health care coverage away from tens of millions of Americans at a time when they need it most. If successful, this lawsuit would take coverage away from 20 million Americans and end protections for 130 million people with preexisting conditions. The uncertainty and misinformation continue to create dangerous confusion that divides us at this critical time.
State legislators across the country have taken action to protect and defend the health of their communities. They have joined together to implement proven solutions so that whether white, Black, Latino, or Asian, native or newcomer, everyone can get the care they need.
This memo outlines the attacks on the ACA, policy solutions at the state level, key messages, and additional resources for legislators.
Trump Administration Attacks on the ACA
The Trump Administration, with a Republican Congress, took actions to destabilize the ACA by increasing the risk of adverse selection; two examples of this include effectively ending the individual mandate by setting it at $0 and expanding short-term limited-duration (STLD) plans from a stopgap insurance to a cheaper and less regulated alternative to an ACA plan.
The table below from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities highlights some of the actions the Administration has taken to undermine the health care law.
wpDataTable with provided ID not found!
State Legislation to Defend the ACA
Through work with state and national health advocacy partners, legislators have led the way to protect key ACA components so that everyone can stay covered. The following are examples of relevant legislation.
Annual or Lifetime Limits: States stopped insurers from re-imposing lifetime limits on benefits, which before the ACA forced many insurance holders to choose between bankruptcy and gettingthe care they needed.
New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington passed legislation to prohibit a health insurer from imposing annual or lifetime limits on essential health benefits or total benefits.
Preexisting Conditions: At least 14 states have taken steps to ensure health insurance providers cannot deny coverage to individuals with preexisting conditions.
Delaware, Maine, Vermont, and Washington have enacted legislation to prohibit preexisting condition provisions in health insurance policies and to guarantee issue and availability of coverage.
Regulation of Non-ACA-Compliant Plans: States must regulate more than just the plans in their ACA marketplace, as non-ACA compliant-plans increase the risk of adverse selection and create a loophole for insurers to get around state ACA protections. Regulation of short-term limited-duration (STLD) plans have been loosened at the federal level, and it is up to the states to provide strong regulations.
California prohibits health insurers from offering STLD plans in the state.
Hawaii does not allow STLD plans to be issued to anyone who was eligible to purchase a plan during open enrollment on the ACA marketplace.
Maryland limits STLD plans to no more than three months and does not allow them to be extended or renewed.
Expanded Premium Subsidies: States have enacted legislationto expand the low-income population eligible to receive premiumassistance subsidies.
Massachusetts and Vermont subsidize individuals with incomes up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL).
Washington subsidizes individuals up to 500 percent of the FPL.
California provides about 25% of their advanceable premium assistance for individuals between 200 and 400 percent of the FPL and 75% allocated to individuals between 400 and 600 percent of the FPL.
Cost Sharing: State legislation limits cost sharing, which includes deductibles, copayments, andother non-premium related expenses.
Maine, New Jersey, and Vermont have forced insurers to comply with cost sharing limits to the ACA dollar amounts on a fixed date.
Washington applied a total dollar cap — $8,200 for self- only coverage and $16,400 for coverage that includes more than one individual — all indexed to the state’s average increase in per-person premiums.
Essential Health Benefits: States can ensure essential health benefitsremain covered.
Maine, New Jersey, and Washington enacted legislation to protect emergency care, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance abuse treatment, prescription drugs, preventative care and wellness programs, and more.
State Individual Mandate: Reinstating the individual mandate at the state level can provide an incentive for young and generally healthy individuals to remain in an individual insurance pool and lower premiumsby preventing adverse selection.
Marketplace Competition: A handful of states either require certain insurers to participate or tie insurer eligibility for participation in public health plans (e.g., Medicaid, CHIP, and plans for public employees) to participation in the state’s ACA marketplace.
Massachusetts, which as a state has one of the highest ACA insurer participationnumbers, requires health insurance carriers with 5,000 or more enrolled individuals (including dependents) to “annually to file a plan with the connector for its consideration, which meets the requirements for the connector seal of approval.”
Anti-Discrimination: In 2019, the Trump Administration took steps to significantly weaken anti discrimination provisions within Section 1557 of the ACA. This would negatively impact LGBTQ rights (with potentially the greatest impact to transgender individuals), women’s reproductive rights, and language access for individuals with limited English proficiency.
Hawaii, along with 21 other states, already has transgender protections codified into state law, so health insurance policies cannot discriminate based on actual or perceived gender identity.
Oregon passed a law in 2019 to add broad anti-discrimination language to their insurance code in order to prevent discrimination based on actual or perceived race, color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, or disability.
Rating Factors: States have acted to make sure insurance companies cannot raise premium rates based on gender, health status, or occupation/industry.
Delaware and Maine have passed laws to regulate permissible rating factors.
Messaging
As our nation and our communities struggle to respond the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear that our own health depends on the health of the person next to us, and the person next to them.
As we celebrate the tenth anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, which expanded care to millions of Americans, we need leaders who will step up to make sure that everyone white, Black, Latino, or Asian, native or newcomer — has access to care.
In the midst of the COVID-19 crisis, the Trump Administration continues attempts to overturn the health care law. The lies, confusion, and misinformation from President Trump are dangerous.
Now is the time for leaders in state legislatures to unite across differences and make policy choices that help everyday people — not the richest 1% and a handful of corporations.
We must ensure that everyone has access to affordable, quality care by creating a health care system that works for everyone — no exceptions.
Surprise medical billing refers to when a consumer is unaware that health care services will be charged at out-of-network rates, whether by their insurer or by the out-of-network provider. For example, if a patient receives emergency care at an out-of-network hospital or care from an out-of network provider at an in-network hospital, they could receive a surprise medical bill.
As we face the first global pandemic of the 21st Century, our nation confronts a health care system that is not prepared to deal with an infectious disease at this scale. One of the many challenges we face will be patients who delay or defer care because they are unsure if their visit to a testing facility, urgent care center or emergency room will result in a surprise bill, not covered by their insurance.
These bills can be astronomical and show up despite the consumer's best efforts to obtain covered medical care. During the coronavirus outbreak and subsequent economic downturn, the last thing anyone needs is a surprise medical bill for thousands of dollars. Find out how you can protect your state from surprise medical bills here.
North Carolinians Supported Economic Reform Even Before the COVID-19 Crisis
A recent poll commissioned by the State Innovation Exchange (SiX) shows North Carolina voters held deep concerns over pocketbook economic issues and support for progressive policy solutions even before the full impact of COVID-19 was felt. The poll showed that North Carolinians believe that the government should play a constructive role in people’s economic lives.
The Role of Government in the Top Issues Facing North Carolina
When asked if the state government should play a role in some of the top issues facing working families, voters overwhelmingly supported government engagement. Voters’ top priorities include:
Access to K-12 public education (86%);
Equal pay for equal work regardless of race (84%);
Access to healthcare for those struggling to make ends meet (80%);
Access to food for those struggling to make ends meet (79%); and
Affordable healthcare (77%).
Voters Support Action on Economic Policies
North Carolinians believe that a job should allow workers to earn a wage to support a family (82%), provide a steady consistent income (81%) and allow access to affordable health insurance (78%). North Carolinians overwhelmingly support these policies that help working families:
Create a paid family and medical leave insurance program, funded through shared contributions between employers and employees (85%); and
Require all North Carolina employers to provide a minimum amount of earned, paid sick days for workers (88%).
These results showed that even before the economic dislocation from the current crisis, North Carolinians wanted economic policies to make life easier for families. Now more than ever, those policies are vitally important.
Click hereto see the poll memo and here for the presentation.
April Update
In late April, SiX tested the same issues again to see whether the COVID-19 crisis has changed support for those policies. These recent results show that NC voters continue to strongly support progressive policies. The vast majority of voters believe that the government should have a role in enacting progressive policy changes that would provide economic fairness, more access to affordable health care, and investments in public education. More information here.
Coronavirus Response: Resources for State Legislators
As the coronavirus situation continues to unfold, we’re compiling resources here to help you navigate the many challenges this presents to your community. We will use this space to share policy, communication, and organizing resources that you can use to respond to the health, economic, and social impacts this is having on your communities.
We know that crises like these have disproportionate impacts on vulnerable and low-income communities and want to make sure we stand up for those most at risk. As legislators, you are uniquely positioned to find solutions that mitigate the harm for at-risk medical populations (people with chronic health conditions, people with disabilities, the elderly), hourly workers, the millions of Americans without access to health care or paid sick days, and everyone who is one health emergency away from financial ruin.
The resources below can help you use your platform to provide clear, scientifically-based information to the public and advocate for better policies.
If you have actions or new policies that are happening in your states, please share them so we can provide them to other legislators across the country. Please email helpdesk@stateinnovation.org.
The Kaiser Family Foundation has a website with updated information on the number of cases and deaths, as well as state-by-state policy action and data
U.S. Digital Response: As COVID-19 overwhelms the data, digital, and operational capacities of government, U.S. Digital Response connects states with highly qualified technical support (request assistance here).
At extraordinary moments like today, state legislatures must adopt methods of flexible, remote governance while prioritizing transparency and public access. Read SiX’s blog post, Legislating in a Pandemic: Transparent & Remote Governance, for examples of rule/statutory changes and executive orders that have enabled states to adapt and govern amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. This resource will be updated periodically as states try new methods and lessons are learned.
See SiX’s webinar on Legislating in a Pandemic feat. U.S. Representative Katie Porter (CA-45), Demand Progress, and POPVOX.
Workers who have an unanticipated family care responsibility, including childcare responsibilities due to school closures, or those who are forced to care for loved ones who become ill.
Workers who are sick, quarantined, or immunocompromised and who do not have access to paid family and medical leave or are laid off.
First responders in the public health community who become ill or are quarantined due to exposure to COVID-19.
Coronavirus Federal Legislation that Aids Workers: Two major laws passed in March 2020 to support workers affected by the COVID-19 public health emergency. The first mandated paid sick days and paid family leave in some COVID-19 related situations; the second mandates significant unemployment benefits for workers.
Eliminate the exemption for large employers and ensuring that nonprofits can be reimbursed for emergency benefits—and enact forward-looking provisions to ensure that these critical benefits are available to everyone outside of the circumstances of a public health emergency
Examples of States’ Paid Leave Legislation in response to COVID-19
Offer at least 24 hours of paid sick leave per year (Kentucky)
Require employers to provide up to 40-56 hours of paid sick leave per year (New York)
Provide law enforcement officers sick leave for absences due to COVID-19 (New York)
Create a grant program to provide paid leave to quarantined contract workers (Ohio House and Senate)
Provides isolated or quarantined state employees with shared leave (Washington)
Expand the definition of a qualifying “serious health condition” to include workers and their families’ self-quarantining after exposure to a communicable disease (New Jersey)
Make COVID-19 related leave eligible for unpaid family and medical leave and allow an employer to use accrued vacation time or other time off to get paid (California)
Additional Resources
Twelve states already require paid sick leave; see here for more information.
And a list of the 18 paid sick time laws that explicitly cover time off due to closure of a place of business or school due to a public health emergency.
A running list of state actions can be found here.
Eviction Lab’s COVID-19 Housing Policy Scorecard outlines a number of protective measures states have taken to prevent eviction and homelessness and protect renters during the pandemic including eviction initiations, court processes, enforcement of eviction orders, short-term supports, and tenancy preservation measures.
States are using the following tools to address evictions:
Executive orders or Emergency orders
Court orders
Legislation
Policy options:
Cancel rent: Beyond Recovery is calling for immediate state and federal cancellation of rent, mortgage, and utility payments. Individual states have also put forward letters to the governor to suspend rent payments.
National Women’s Law Center is pushing a nationwide halt to utility shutoffs and evictions to ensure people do not experience homelessness because of the economic havoc and advocating for the bipartisan “Eviction Crisis Act” to help ensure families can access emergency help.
Examples of State Responses
Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) directed water, electric, and natural gas utilities to not only suspend utility shut offs, but additionally make reasonable attempts to reconnect service to an occupied dwelling that has been disconnected.
CA Executive Order authorizes local governments to halt evictions related to the pandemic, slow foreclosures and protect against utility shutoffs.
The 2020 Census is still on and it is more important than ever to get out the count and encourage communities to self-respond. SiX’s Census Get Out the Count Toolkit for State Legislators has everything you need to promote the census digitally with your constituents during the pandemic and is being updated regularly. Here’s the most important message the all legislators should be lifting up:
“Responding to the census has never been easier. You can fill out the form from the comfort of your home—online, over the phone, or by mail—all without having to meet a census taker in person.”
On April 13, the Bureau announced major operational changes for the 2020 count. All field data collection activities have been suspended until June 1, and the enumeration period has been extended until October 31, 2020. That means households will now have until the end of October to self-respond to the census, though legislators should still encourage communities to participate as soon as possible.
Voting & Elections
COVID-19 poses an incredible threat to voter access and participation in our elections and requires a multi-pronged, well-funded solution. To meet this challenge, states must rapidly ensure that voting systems are safe, resilient, and flexible. Democracy advocates across the country are uniting behind the below areas of reform to protect our democracy during the pandemic:
Expanded voter registration, including online registration, same-day registration, and automatic registration;
Expanded mail voting, including pre-paid postage and fair and consistent ballot verification and cure processes;
Expanded early voting and in-person voting opportunities;
Reforms to polling station locations, setups, and sanitation protocols (following CDC guidelines); and
Robust public education.
For a detailed overview of these policy recommendations see the following resources from SiX’s national partners:
In this urgent global health pandemic, anti-abortion lawmakers are once again playing politics with people's lives and health, and there are very real reproductive health impacts and needs this moment presents. Here are actions state lawmakers should consider in coordination with their state coalitions and reproductive health care providers.
NIRH works with state and local advocates across the country to advance reproductive freedom and protect abortion access and have curated strategies here for advocates to consider to ensure that abortion care remains secure and accessible during these very challenging times.
The Massachusetts Bureau of Health Care Safety and Quality issued a memo clarifying that abortion care is not considered “nonessential,” ensuring it is exempt from the ban on procedures that should be canceled or postponed.
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s executive order makes clear that pregnancy-related care and procedures should continue as needed.
Rewire News provides updates on governors and other state officials' decisions on whether abortion care is an “essential” health-care service here.
Medical and Research Resources
The American Medical Association (AMA) published a statement against government interference in the provision of essential reproductive health care during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, along with seven other reproductive health organizations, issued a statement deeming abortion as an essential service. Read more.
Abortion Care Network, National Abortion Federation, Nurses for Sexual and Reproductive Health, Physicians for Reproductive Health, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America released a statement on the essential nature of reproductive healthcare.
The Texas Policy Evaluation Project published a research brief on the projected impact of the state’s executive order (declaring abortion care ‘non-essential’) on patient access to care in the state.
Education
Resources for teachers:
The Education Commission of the States’ resource page on state policy responses offers information on remote learning, assessments, instructional time, special education, nutrition and homelessness, teachers, early learning and post secondary education.
Financial support for school employees, administrators and teachers throughout the full school year despite school closures. See Minnesota House and Senate, Washington, Mississippi and Pennsylvania.
Ensure the schools that close in response to COVID-19 will not be financially penalized in the apportionment of state aid. See California and New York.
Support non-traditional public schools, such as those that serve students with disabilities, the deaf, or the blind as in New York
The $2 trillion stimulus package included $9.5 billion dollars for agricultural producers impacted by coronavirus, including producers of specialty crops, producers that supply local food systems, including farmers markets, restaurants, and schools, and livestock producers, including dairy producers. You can read a summary compiled by the National Farmers Union here. Here is an analysis from the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.
The United States Senate Committee on Finance has a breakdown on their website of the rural healthcare resources in the recent Stimulus package. You can read it here.
National Rural Health Association Covid-19 Communications Toolkit Sign up to access social media templates, news releases, radio scripts and CDC facts to get critical information out to rural constituents.
Rural Broadband:This small internet company in rural Oregon is working to set up hotspots around the state. Contact them and they may be able to help problem-solve broadband in your rural district.
Categorize Farmers Markets as Essential Services- Multiple officials have addressed this at a state level and categorized farmers’ markets with grocery stores, finding that they are essential services and can continue functioning: California , Connecticut Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Resources for Farmers in Your District
Here is some guidance from Oregon State University’s Small Farm Program for producers who sell farm direct during this outbreak. Purdue released guidance as well and here are some additional resources from USDA.
As farm-direct farmers are forced to find new marketing opportunities, here are some resources to support them:
Farmers are struggling all across the US for a variety of reasons. The added stress of COVID-19 might be more than folks can handle. Farm Aid provides a Farmers Resource Network and there is a hotline ( 1-800-FARM-AID /1-800-327-6243) for farmers in crisis. Further, National Farmers Union has a Farm Stress Training to help support farmers in crisis.
Ensure that farmers and ranchers are included in any aid to businesses for revenue lost due to the crisis; invest in community-based emergency efforts to buy food from local farmers and get it to those in need, expand access to credit and offer debt flexibility at the state level to ensure that farmers are able to plant, grow and harvest the food we need this year.
National Immigration Law Center (NILC) has an update on access to health care for immigrants and their families.
The American Immigration Council (AIC) blog covers topics including the CARES Act, the vital role of health care workers from the immigrant community, the impact of the virus on asylum policy, and more.
United Farm Workers (UFW) and others’ statement on a range of concerns for farmworkers amid COVID-19, including immigration and migration.
Tahirih Justice Center’s issue brief explains the impact of COVID-19 on immigrant survivors of gender based violence and how loss of employment, isolation and violence in the home and continued ICE operations and detentions, among other factors, amplify their risk.
NELP has an updated fact sheet on immigrant workers’ eligibility for unemployment insurance.
The New School is hosting a webinar exploring Why Immigrant Workers Are Especially Vulnerable To COVID-19
State Resources
Alabama immigrant rights groups identify the state's role in ensuring the statewide information hotline is accessible in different languages to provide critical information about COVID-19 and health resources.
New York Immigration Coalition has a list of measures that the federal government, New York state, and New York City can take to ensure that immigrant communities stay safe and healthy.
Massachusetts Immigration and Refugee Advocacy Coalition has compiled immigration policy and enforcement updates for the state.
MD/VA/DC: CAIR Coalition calling for “ICE and EOIR immediately allow legal service providers to remotely access and represent individuals in all detention centers where persons are held in ICE custody and in all courts that remain open during this national emergency.”
Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition has a list of education and policy actions for state elected officials.
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA) has a list of requests for the federal government, California state legislature, and Los Angeles County.
Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA) has launched the People’s Bailout, a platform of proposals to deal with COVID-19 and the projected economic aftermath.
Immigrant communities in Washington can use resource list for immigrant communities from OneAmerica for resources related to Covid and the ensuing crisis.
In Wisconsin, Voces de la Fronteraa has compiled list of resources for immigrant communities both in Wisconsin and nationally.
PLAN Nevada has compiled list of resources for vulnerable communities in Nevada.
Vermont adopted a resolution that urges the Fed Gov’t to refrain from arresting or detaining any individual based on immigration status in health care settings and suspension of the implementation of public charge
Colorado to offer emergency child care to eligible workers and pay “enhanced rate” to child care providers
Ohio to open “temporary pandemic child care centers,” in response to requests from several hospitals.
Allow essential workers to enroll in the state’s Child Care Assistance Program like Illinois or expand eligibility to all essential workers like in Minnesota and Vermont.
Policy Memo from Center for American Progress has state examples and data.
Minnesota has legislation to curb price gouging laws during a state of emergency.
West Virginia passed a law to prohibit price increases of more than 10% on a wide range of consumer products.
Some states have price gouging legislation limited to a single type of product or service, such as the price of prescription drugs in bills from New Hampshire, New York, Minnesota and Rhode Island; the price of medical supplies in New York; the price of gasoline in Maryland; and the price of hotels and lodging in Michigan.
Criminal Justice
The Prison Policy Initiative has recommendations here.
Advocacy for releasing juveniles from detention here.
The Brennan Center has compiled “policy and advocacy responses detailing how different levels of the criminal justice system are responding to this public health crisis. This includes ways in which law enforcement, prosecutors, criminal courts, corrections agencies, and immigration agencies can better safeguard their communities and the broader public during this pandemic.”
Bills in New Jersey and Ohio would require that every business interruption insurance policy include the coronavirus pandemic in its list of covered perils.
New Jersey legislation would provide grants during the emergency to small and medium-sized business and not-for-profit organizations.
Public Education and targeted support for LGTBQ and AAPI & indigenous communities
A resolution in Utah was passed that expresses solidarity and support for the Chinese people’s efforts to contain the virus and reiterates that the CDC advised to “ not to panic about the coronavirus and has warned against stereotyping people of Asian descent.”
Broadband Access
A New Jersey bill would urge the FCC to take temporary measures to make broadband accessible to those affected by the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Quarantined Individuals
A bill in the Minnesota House and Senate would provide a range of protections for a quarantined individual, including reasonable at home work accommodations, a stay of civil court actions, a waiver of negative credit reporting, and a waiver of federally guaranteed student loan obligations during a period of isolation or quarantine.
Miscellaneous
State budget line item to cover raises for healthcare professionals
Messaging and Connecting with Constituents during Social Distancing
Messaging
Race Class Narrative National COVID-19 Messaging Document: In moments of crisis, new narratives, new policies and new social behaviors are established. In addition to acting with urgency around immediate needs, we must address the rhetoric that will undermine our long-term shared goals. Our message should be rooted in the values of interdependence, mutual solidarity, shared purpose and collective action. Use this messaging guidetoinform all your communications. See Race Class Narrative Action for more.
The AFL-CIO is coordinating with government health organizations and professional experts to share timely and factual information here. Also, see this flyer about the virus and priorities for action to support workers.
The SEIU healthcare division has developed a series of key messages for local leaders to use when responding to media inquiries or when developing content regarding COVID-19, including points on:
Preventing the spread of the virus;
Keeping working people healthy; and
Why it's past time for health care and paid sick time for all.
Connecting with Constituents
Here are some ideas and examples to help you connect with your constituents remotely:
Connect with your constituents in a way that is personal to you (IL example) and keep your previously planned events, just change the location (IL example).
Check out the Public Rights Project’s Digital Outreach Playbook for guidance on the best practices to reach vulnerable populations.
Reach out if we can help you plan or execute any of these ideas.
On the $12 billion in funding for HUD programs: NLIHC
To maintain secure elections, advocates had requested $4 billion in funding to expand vote by mail, absentee voting, and crucial elections protections to ensure states can carry out fair elections this year. The bill allocates just $400 million.
Family Values @ Work: Coronavirus Federal Legislation that Aids Workers: Two major laws passed in March 2020 to support workers affected by the COVID-19 public health emergency. The first mandated paid sick days and paid family leave in some COVID-19 related situations; the second mandates significant unemployment benefits for workers.
Elected officials in numerous states --including West Virginia, Alaska, Texas, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, Iowa and Indiana-- have taken steps to restrict abortions under the pretense of preserving medical supplies and hospital beds, claiming abortions are not “nonessential” procedures that can delayed till the end of the epidemic and most abortions do not take place in hospitals. See the Reproductive Health Care section on this page for more.
Reopening Too Soon?
Elected officials in Pennsylvania, Minnsota, Michigan, Idaho, and Florida have pushed back against stay-at-home orders, non-essential work bans, and school closures. The premature calls for returning to ‘business as usual’ threaten the safety and lives of communities.
Also check out the CAP tracker on how states and localities are enforcing stay-at-home orders
Limits to Voting Expansions
As states grapple with how to prepare their electoral systems to handle the pandemic’s unique challenges, legislators across the country have pushed for reforms (mail-in-ballots, absentee voting, deadline extensions, etc.) as a safe, secure, and accessible way for voters to participate without risking their health. However, opposition to such expansions, in states like Minnesota, Arizona, and Wisconsin, jeopardize citizens’ abilities to safely vote. See the Democracy and Voting section on this page for more.
Surprise Medical Billing Research Brief
Surprise medical billing refers to when a consumer is unaware that health care services will be charged at out-of-network rates, whether by their insurer or by the out-of-network provider. For example, if a patient receives emergency care at an out-of-network hospital or care from an out-of-network provider at an in-network hospital, they could receive a surprise medical bill.
As we face the first global pandemic of the 21st Century, our nation confronts a health care system that is not prepared to deal with an infectious disease at this scale. One of the many challenges we face will be patients who delay or defer care because they are unsure if their visit to a testing facility, urgent care center or emergency room will result in a surprise bill, not covered by their insurance.
57% of patients have experienced a surprise medical bill
2018 University of Chicago survey
Surprise medical bills have two main components, according to a 2019 Health System Tracker brief from Peterson Center on Healthcare and the Kaiser Family Foundation:
The higher amount a patient owes due to the difference in cost-sharing levels between in-network and out-of-network services. “For example, a preferred provider health plan (PPO) might require a patient to pay 20% of allowed charges for in-network services and 40% of allowed charges for out-of-network services. In an HMO or other closed-network plan, the out-of-network service might not be covered at all.”
An additional amount the physician or other provider may bill the patient directly, which is known as “balance billing.” “Typically, health plans negotiate discounted charges with network providers and require them to accept the negotiated fee as payment-in-full. Network providers are prohibited from billing plan enrollees the difference (or balance) between the allowed charg and the full charge. Out-of-network providers, however, have no such contractual obligation. As a result, patients can be liable for the balance bill in addition to any applicable out-of-network cost sharing.”
The problem is widespread: A 2018 University of Chicago survey found that 57% of respondents had experienced a surprise medical bill. Additionally, this survey found that 86% of all respondents blamed health insurance companies and 82% blamed hospitals for surprise medical bills. A large study published in 2020 that looked at over 347,000 surgical patients found that over 20% had incurred out-of-network charges.
The problem has serious consequences, especially for communities of color: Almost half of respondents in a Commonwealth Fund survey said that they could not cover an unexpected medical bill of $1,000 within 30 days. And this can have a disproportionate impact on marginalized communities, with Black (63%) and Hispanic (59%) respondents reporting higher inability to cover such a bill compared to Non-Hispanic White respondents (40%). This issue also impacts the overall cost of employer-sponsored insurance plans, according to a December 2019 article in Health Affairs.
Fighting Back Against Anti-Transgender Legislation in the States
The bad news: Across the country, there's been a rise in hateful legislation that attacks the basic dignity and humanity of transgender youth.
The good news: These bills have already been stopped in states including South Dakota and Florida, and there are resources to help in every state!
The bottom line? Transgender young people know who they are and all of the data shows that when they are affirmed in their gender they have comparable outcomes to their peers. By contrast, when denied treatment and affirmation, transgender people experience high rates of suicidality and negative health outcomes. These bills are based on false and/or deliberately misleading notions of health care for transgender youth and on fear of trans inclusion in public life.
Please reach out if you would like support defeating these bills in your state.
Anti Trans Bill in the States: A Conversation
Jessie Ulibarri, SiX Co-Executive Director teamed up with Chase Strangio from the ACLU, Katrina Karkazis from Yale University and Florida State Rep. Carlos Smith for a conversation about these bills. Watch or listen below.
Audio: Anti Trans Bill in the States: A Conversation
Inspiration from South Dakota and Florida
Check out this video of FL Rep. Carlos Guillermo Smith taking down the false claim that care for transgender youth is experimental or unproven:
As with any issue, stories are the most powerful messengers. If you have five minutes, check out this story from 17-year-old Quinncy Parke, one of the many heroes who helped stop South Dakota's #HB1057, which sought to ban transition-related care like puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy for trans minors.
Health Care Messaging Strategy Briefing for Colorado Legislators
Application for Interested Legislators
Join SiX for a strategy meeting on Tuesday, February 18th, from 11:00-12:00 at the Colorado State Capitol. SiX is excited to bring nationally renowned pollster Celinda Lake to Denver to support legislators on health care messaging. Celinda will present national-level health care research and work with legislators on adapting her findings to a Colorado audience. This is an open invitation to state legislators to participate – all state legislators are welcome to apply. SiX encourages applicants to apply based on their belief and support for policies that ensure economic security for working families, an open and accessible democracy, affordable and accessible health care, and safe schools and communities. Given that there are limited spaces in this training, we will prioritize applicants with a demonstrated commitment to these issues and highly encourage diverse candidates to apply.
New Maine Focus Group Results Show Support for Progressive Ideas from the Legislature
Recently concluded focus groups built on polling conducted last year and reveal Mainers strongly support many of the policies the state legislature has recently passed or considered with residents most supportive of legislation to make prescription drugs more affordable, ones that will hold pharmaceutical companies accountable for the opioid crisis, and establishing more protections for workers.
As the 2019 legislative session came to a close, SiX commissioned Lincoln Park Strategies to conduct a poll to gauge voters’ feelings on the progress of the legislative session. To build on that knowledge, SiX commissioned focus groups of Mainers prior to the 2020 legislative session to gauge swing residents’ feelings about the state’s future and their views on the legislative leadership’s policy agenda. One thing is clear: Mainers are looking for solutions to their everyday problems and largely support the progressive ideas the legislature has passed and considered.
Mainers are most worried about issues around healthcare, especially access to quality and affordable care, the cost of prescription drugs, and opioid abuse.
Voters are also very worried about job opportunities in the state, the cost of higher education, property taxes, income tax fairness, access to quality education, and climate change.
Action on Health Care Affordability Is a Top Priority for Coloradans
Voters Support Health Care Reforms and Tax Savings for Working Families
A recent poll conducted by Strategies 360 for the State Innovation Exchange (SiX) shows that voters strongly support progressive solutions to make health care more affordable and put more money in the pockets of working people.
Health Care
The skyrocketing cost of health care and prescription drugs remains a top issue for Colorado residents. The findings highlight that progressive policy solutions like limiting hospital profit margins, increasing competition in the health care market, and capping prescription drug costs would make a real difference for Colorado families.
Economic Issues
Voters continue to support measures that expand tax savings for low- and middle-income families. There is robust support for the state to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit, which would provide desperately needed economic relief for families making less than $75,000 per year.
For the polling on health care and economic issues, see results here. For analysis on the health care results see here.
Survey Methodology: Strategies 360 conducted a survey of 600 registered voters in Colorado from January 2-5, 2020. Interviews were conducted on landlines and cell phones. The margin of error for a survey of 600 interviews is ±4.0% at the 95% confidence level; error is higher among subgroups.
For Second Year in a Row, Health Care Tops the List of Issues Floridians Want the State Legislature to Act Upon
A recent poll commissioned by the State Innovation Exchange (SiX) shows Floridians are concerned about health care and other pocketbook economic issues. Polling demonstrates strong support for progressive policy solutions to these challenges facing Florida families.
Voters Support Action on Health Care
Florida voters prioritize action on health care with a focus on affordability. On a scale of 1 to 100, voters supported policies to:
Eliminate surprise medical billing for non-emergency services by ensuring patients are told beforehand of the cost of any non-emergency service: 72
Ban gifts from drug companies to doctors for prescribing certain medications: 68
Make it illegal in Florida for big pharmaceutical companies to pay generic drug makers to delay creating and selling less expensive, generic equivalents of their brand-name medications: 72
Voters Want Action on Pocketbook Economic Policies
Floridians reject trickle down economics and strongly support progressive policies that put money back in the pockets of working people.
Raising the minimum wage to $15/hour: 67% support
Raising the Earned Income Tax Credit: 65% support
Expanding overtime protections for salaried workers: 81% support
The State Innovation Exchange commissioned TargetSmart to complete the research. The survey was conducted in December 2019 with 892 respondents.
Health care costs, support for working people top concerns in new Michigan poll
Voters support health care reforms and progressive economic initiatives
A recent poll conducted by Lincoln Park Strategies for SiX shows that economic concerns around the skyrocketing cost of health care and prescription drugs remain key issues for Michigan residents. It highlights that progressive policy solutions like addressing the abuses of drug companies, capping copays, and demanding more transparency are priorities for voters and would make a real difference for Michigan families.
Voters continue to support working people when it comes to measures that expand eligibility for overtime protections, prevent wage theft and payroll fraud, and create a student bill of rights for higher education loan borrowers. They also favor corporations paying their fair share of taxes, particularly as the state continues to grapple with finding enough revenue to invest in priorities like roads and schools.
Residents want action to improve election security
The survey also explored attitudes around the status of election security, openness to further voting reforms, and census participation. Michigan residents value more secure election systems and expect state lawmakers to address it. A majority of respondents supports taking the reforms approved by voters last year a step further by automatically mailing a ballot to all voters. A plurality are also interested in using the new online option for participating in the census next year.
For the polling on health care and economic issues, see more results here and analysis here. For the polling analysis on election security and the census, see here.
Survey Methodology
1,200 total interviews among registered voters were conducted from November 7-18, 2019
Interviews were conducted online, and over the phone (both landline and cell phones)
Results were weighted to ensure proportional response.
The margin of error for overall results is ±2.8% at the 95% confidence level. This number is higher for subgroups.
Mainers Concerned About Economy and Health Care, Support the Recent Actions Taken in the 2019 Legislative Session
A recent poll commissioned by the State Innovation Exchange (SiX) shows Mainers are concerned about pocketbook economic issues, the affordability of health care, and education. Mainers also support recent state legislative actions to address these issues and the direction Maine is going after the 2019 legislative session.
Legislators took significant steps in the 2019 session to address the concerns of Mainers and this polling demonstrates ongoing support for progressive policy solutions to the problems facing the state.
Mainers Support Action on Economic Concerns
On a scale of 1 to 10, voters supported legislative action to:
Establish more protections for workers including fairness in overtime pay and scheduling, and preventing wage theft: 7.53
Require paid sick days: 7.42
Expand broadband to rural communities: 7.27
Fund housing bonds for the construction of new affordable housing units for low income seniors: 7.19
Create a state insurance fund to ensure that all employees can take medical or family leave: 6.92
Reduce the gender wage gap: 6.89
Voters Support Action on Health Care
Maine voters prioritize action on health care with a focus on affordability and addressing the opioid epidemic. On a scale of 1 to 10, voters supported legislative action to:
Make prescription drugs more affordable: 8.2
Hold pharma companies accountable for the opioid crisis: 7.75
Create a board to set price limits on drugs: 7.35
Mainers Support Action on Education
Maine voters are concerned about the affordability of higher education and support action to increase access to early childhood education. On a scale of 1 to 10, voters supported legislative action to:
Provide student debt forgiveness for any Mainer who lives and works in Maine for at least five years after they graduate from college: 6.99
Make community college free for all Maine residents who maintain a C average or better while they attend school: 6.88
Ensure every school district offers public preschool: 6.82
Click here to see the poll memo and here for a presentation on full results.
###
The State Innovation Exchange commissioned Lincoln Park Strategies to complete the research. The survey was conducted June 14 to June 20 with 600 respondents and has a margin of error ± 4 percent at the 95% confidence interval.
Progressives Fight for Sunrise Agenda in Stormy Legislative Session
Progressive legislators and partners kicked off the 2019 legislative session with a bold Sunrise Agenda focused on the economy, affordable health care, education, the environment and a welcoming Florida.
But during the legislative session, conservatives, who control both chambers, refused to debate the priorities that Floridians identify as critical—like affordable healthcare and housing—and instead fought for priorities that rig the rules for the wealthy and big businesses and protect their own power. The legislative session showed how out of step conservatives are with the will of the people. The contrast between conservatives and progressives couldn’t be more clear.
Our Economy
Instead of focusing on helping Floridians make ends meet, conservatives passed legislation to ban Florida cities from requiring big developers to build any affordable housing as part of new construction. This just further lines the pockets of big businesses and the wealthy, while exacerbating the challenge in creating affordable housing in our cities and surrounding areas.
Progressive Representatives Jacquet and Joseph with Senators Rodriguez, Cruz and Stewart advanced legislation that would help improve the lives of all Floridians. The legislation which would address equal pay, paid family leave and an increase to the minimum wage was introduced but never heard in committee, debated or voted upon.
Our Health Care
Floridians are deeply concerned about the cost and accessibility of health care and prescription drugs. Instead of addressing these issues, conservatives sought to limit women’s access to health care and the right to choose by sponsoring a six-week abortion ban, a 20-week abortion ban and a parental consent law, which was voted out of the House.
Progressive Representative Cindy Polo and Senator Taddeo proposed expanding Medicaid to Floridians under 65 who are at or below 138% of the federal poverty line. This would provide health coverage to an estimated 850,000 hard-working Floridians currently lacking coverage—like single-moms working hard to support their families and adults working multiple jobs but still not making enough money to make ends meet. Conservatives shut down the proposal, refusing to even hear it in committee.
Our Students
Strengthening the public education system that supports 90% of Florida students is a priority for all progressive legislators. Instead of taking steps to improve public education, address the root cause of gun violence in schools and ensure Florida is able to stay competitive and keep great teachers, conservatives prioritized arming teachers and funding vouchers and charter schools in an effort to privatize our public education.
Progressive Representative Margaret Good filed a bill that would address the critical teacher shortage. Her legislation, which had bipartisan support in the Senate, would have allowed retired educators to immediately fill substitute teacher positions helping to fill some of the 2,000 teacher vacancies across the 67 counties. The conservatives shut down this legislation and it was never heard in committee.
Our Environment
The red tide and the other impacts of climate change have taken a toll on our health, our communities and our economy. The short- and long-term economic and health impacts have Floridians along the Gulf Coast struggling. The conservative-controlled legislature took no significant action to help address these challenges.
Progressive Representatives Diamond, Eskamani and Good with Senator Rodriguez filed legislation to help us understand and address these critical issues that will shape our economy and health into the future. Progressives advanced legislation to create a climate change research program, develop a renewable energy plan and address water quality and a decrease in the use of herbicides that created the red tide. All these bills were introduced, but never heard in committee.
Our People
After the 2018 election, Florida again received national attention for our difficulty in making sure that every eligible voter’s ballot was counted. Instead of taking steps to modernize and secure the process for all eligible voters, conservatives made unnecessary changes to the rules for vote-by-mail—which is used by many Florida voters to avoid long lines at the polls. They also took steps to obstruct the will of the people by placing exorbitant fees and other requirements on those formerly incarcerated before they are allowed to vote. This after the progressive community worked to bring the Constitutional amendment restoring these rights to a vote—which was supported by 65% of the people in November 2018.
Finally, conservatives changed the process by which signatures are gathered by everyday Floridians to amend the state constitution. Over the last decade this process has been used by the voters to address some of Florida’s most pressing issues—from pocketbook issues to who has the right to vote—because conservative lawmakers refuse to enact the policies that reflect the will of the majority of Floridians.
While the 2019 legislative session saw little progress on issues to help everyday Floridians, progressive partners and legislators will continue to work with constituents and colleagues to build on the groundwork laid in 2019 to advance the priorities in the Sunrise Agenda.
Progressive Victories in the Maryland Legislature
During this year’s legislative session, progressive Maryland
state lawmakers secured victories on policies to put more money in the pockets
of working people, lower the cost of health care, care for our environment, improve
access to early and higher education, strengthen our democracy and more.
Highlights of legislation passed by the General Assembly include:
A $15 Minimum Wage!
Sponsored by Sen. McCray and Del. Fennell, this became law March 28 when the legislature overrode the governor’s veto. The law will raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025 (and 2026 for businesses with fewer than 15 employees).
A first-in-the-nation Prescription Drug Affordability Board!
Authored by Sen. Klausmeier and Del. Peña-Melnyk, this bill will create a Prescription Drug Affordability Board that will have the authority to establish maximum costs to be paid by state and local governments for certain high-cost medications.
A Styrofoam Ban!
Sen. Kagan and Del. Lierman sponsored this Styrofoam Ban, making Maryland the first state in the nation to do so. Passed with bipartisan support, this legislation will help Maryland reach its goal of diverting 85% of waste by reduction, reuse, and recycling by 2040.
The Clean Energy Jobs Act!
In a major environmental achievement, Sen. Feldman and Del. Lisanti passed the Clean Energy Jobs Act. This legislation requires utilities to buy a certain percentage of electricity each year from renewable sources, taking it from the current target of 25% by 2020 to 50% by 2030.
The Maryland Health Insurance Option!
Another first-in-the-nation bill passed by Maryland! Sen. Feldman and Del. Peña-Melnyk sponsored this bill establishing the Maryland Health Insurance Option designed to facilitate insurance coverage through a check box on Maryland Tax Returns. The bill is expected to lead to tens of thousands of Marylanders signing up for health insurance, which will expand the pool of people who are insured and bring down premium costs for other enrollees.
The Maryland Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit
Sen. King and Del. Kelly passed this important bill to increase funding for the Maryland Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, which will benefit approximately 110,000 Marylanders who are currently struggling to pay for adequate child care.
Election Day Voter Registration!
Maryland voters approved Election Day registration last year and it will now be implemented under this bill authored by Sen. Pinsky and Del. Reznik. It is expected to increase Maryland voter turnout between 3% and 7%.
Equal Pay!
Del. Pam Queen passed the Equal Pay Remedies and Enforcement Act which requires an employer to pay a civil penalty for violating the Equal Pay for Equal Work Law.
Oversight of For-Profit Colleges
This first-in-the-nation bill protects
students by combating the emerging trend of for-profit colleges becoming
non-profit entities to evade regulations. This was sponsored by Sen. Pinsky and
Del. Hettleman.
Guest Commentary: #GetCoveredNow and Help Get the Word Out
By: Emily Barson, Get America Covered
The deadline to sign up for health insurance is December 15 in most states—just a month away. With new deadlines and a lot of misinformation out there, we need your help to get the word out about open enrollment. Take Action!
This year, the federal government is not interested in getting that word out, so we started Get America Covered to fill in that gap - to help people get covered and stay covered.
The biggest challenge we’re facing this Open Enrollment period is that people don’t know that it’s time to sign up or think that coverage is too expensive and out of reach for them.
That’s where all of us can help. If we are going to cut through the confusion and get the facts out, we need your help. Everyone can help spread the word about a few key facts about Open Enrollment:
The Open Enrollment period for health coverage is shorter this year - the deadline for enrolling is December 15 in most states. Even people who have coverage need to return to healthcare.gov by the deadline and shop around to see if they can find a better deal for their 2018 coverage.
The good news is that, thanks to financial assistance, most consumers can find cheaper plans this year - in fact, 8 out of 10 people can find plans for less than $75 per month and most can find plans for less than $50. There are a lot of states and counties where there are zero dollar plans available for both individuals and couples.
Free help is available. If you have questions about signing up or want to talk through your options with a trained professional, free help is just a call or click away. Call 1-800-318-2596 or visit http://localhelp.healthcare.gov.
We need your help to spread the word.
Can you use your social media and email lists to share enrollment information? Can you mobilize your community to form a street team and spread the word about Open Enrollment in your community?
Open Enrollment is just half the time as in previous years, so we need to make sure people know it’s time to #GetCovered! Download our Open Enrollment toolkit and Best Practices for State Officials now.
Emily Barson is a former Obama Administration official at the Department of Health and Human Services who helped lead outreach efforts around the Affordable Care Act and is now leading outreach efforts at Get America Covered.
