Vote YES on Amendment I.
by Lt. Governor Tony Venhuizen; Sen. Casey Crabtree, Madison; and Rep. Will Mortenson, Ft. Pierre
Amendment I is about making sure that South Dakotans get to make their own decisions about how to spend state money. It would NOT automatically end Medicaid expansion. It would let South Dakotans make that decision.
In 2022, voters approved Medicaid expansion. The state has honored that vote, and today about 30,000 South Dakotans receive coverage through the program.
A major reason voters supported expansion was a promise from the federal government: Washington would pay 90% of the cost, while South Dakota would pay 10%. Amendment I says that as long as Washington keeps that promise, nothing changes.
But what if Washington changes the deal? Think about any service you buy at a set price. If the company raises the price, you get to decide whether the service is still worth the cost. South Dakota deserves the same choice.
For every 10% of Medicaid expansion costs shifted from Washington to South Dakota, our state would have to find about $36 million more each year. That could mean higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. Our state has many important needs. We fund schools, law enforcement, nursing homes, and services for people with disabilities. Medicaid expansion for able-bodied, working-age adults should not have a guaranteed place at the front of the line if Washington stops paying its promised share.
Amendment I does not prevent South Dakota from continuing Medicaid expansion. It simply ends the constitutional requirement if federal funding falls below 90%. Legislators and voters could then decide whether expansion is still worth the new cost. Our state has participated in Medicaid programs for more than fifty years, without having it in the constitution.
South Dakotans made the decision to expand Medicaid. If Washington changes the deal, South Dakotans should make the next decision too.
Haha… so if federal funding pays for only 88 percent of Medicaid expansion, we will take a pass? What an idiotic idea.
If Tony Venhuizen wants to pay off 88 percent of your mortgage, are you going to tell him to get lost? I didn’t think so.
Well said. “In 2022, voters approved Medicaid expansion. The state has honored that vote…” So why is this on the ballot again? They are using “tHe FeDEraL GumbMeNt DoeSN’t kEeP its PRomiSes” argument just to take another crack at this because they don’t want to honor the voter’s wishes. No one in power in S.D. actually wants to respect the voters wishes other than when it pertains to their own selves being elected.
“Amendment I does not prevent South Dakota from continuing Medicaid expansion. It simply ends the constitutional requirement if federal funding falls below 90%. Legislators and voters could then decide whether expansion is still worth the new cost.”
Fair to assume that if the share is cut to 88%, there wouldn’t be much support to get out. The article talks specifically about the risk of much larger cuts.
Aren’t you forgetting something?
It’s legislative opposition that forced Medicaid expansion to a public vote in the first place. Please forgive me for being… a wee bit skeptical… that those same guys would come to the rescue.
What happened to Mortenson?
elk its so idiotic 12 other states have trigger laws to deal with it if the federal funding drops below 90%
But don’t worry. The state can always offset the cost of Medicaid with cuts to education. Given the leftist bent of educational professionals, they probably all voted for Medicaid expansion so they won’t mind taking pay cuts to cover it
You mean that Republicans in other states are doing this too? Really?
Of course you would cut education first. But here’s a thought… maybe South Dakota’s governor shouldn’t be wasting millions on pet projects like a gun range or silly ads trying to lure people to move here. You know – before cutting essential education and healthcare programs.
The Lt. Governor continuing his quest to punish poor people for being poor.
the best anti-poverty program is a job. A job is not a punishment.
Getting up, getting dressed and going to work every day is a habit which is hard to establish and easy to break
Many years ago, I was working at the meat packing plant. and Clinton’s welfare-to-work had gone into effect, and one of the trainers said the state job service had told her that it was taking, on average, THREE jobs before a welfare mom got the hang of going to work every day.
I encountered that later, supervising former housewives. They were not welfare moms, they were what are called “displaced homemakers.” They were housewives who suddenly had to rejoin the workforce. These women really struggled to get their shit together.
There are statistics which have shown that the longer a person has been unemployed, the more unemployable they become. It doesn’t matter if the job is picking corn or picking up trash, it’s a job, and that requires that every day they get up, get dressed, and go to work.
That is not punitive, it’s helpful.
BS. The best anti-poverty program is a proper education. Our education funding has been decreasing and it is showing.
Rest assured here in South Dakota we have Freedom under control! The will of the people expressed by ballot measures must be nullified!
Two years ago, the voters agreed to modify this amendment to allow a work requirement. So that’s the will of the people too.
The 2022 question was: Do you want Medicaid expansion when Washington pays 90%?
Amendment I asks: What should happen if Washington stops paying 90%?
Those are different questions.
This isn’t about not honoring the will of the people. This is about the pro-expansion crowd being worried that they might not like what the people have to say.
Now that’s rich.
Pierre Republicans have tried raising the threshold for ballot measures to 60 percent, on top of all of their other shenanigans. Who is “worried that they might not like what the people have to say”?
Hint: That would be YOU.
Then why does your party keep trying to change ballot measure requitements to become more onerous?
You: “Listen to the people!”
State: “No, not like that.”
*requirements
Tony can jump into the Missouri and float on down to become Iowa’s resident ogre.
Why would an able bodied working age adult need medicaid?
In case they have a medical condition that will hamper there life and well being
Testify!
We have the current Majority Leader, a member of Senate Appropriations, and a higher-than-typically ranked House member in DC with a President of the same party.
What’s the current risk of Medicaid expansion funding mix being changed?
Very little to 0%, if these guys would actually work for their state’s voters instead of pandering to their masters in DC.
The irony is rich there, isn’t it? This isn’t about South Dakotans getting to decide the bill. It’s to give these cowards cover so they and their friends can line up votes to kill off Medicaid expansion and “prove” that the federal government can’t keep its promises.
Because they know what it’s like to work for peanuts and need this kind of coverage.
All of this effort for a portion of the Medicaid population already subjected to work requirements and comprising less than 10% of the entire Medicaid budget at the state level.
Guys, try honesty for a change and tell the voters you want to repeal something they passed with a significant margin. And maybe, just maybe, if this were an actual risk, do your damn jobs and fight for South Dakota so it doesn’t go to our budget.
The nerve of this group is astounding.
Wasn’t it just a few days ago that Mike Rounds and John Thune were proposing eliminating the estate tax? That measure could give a trillionaire like Elon Musk and his heirs a $300 BILLION dollar tax cut. Not million… billion! For them alone. All the while they are bumping millions of Americans from insurance coverage.
Now, our Pierre friends want to join national politicians and take away medical coverage for the poor and middle class. The savings for the state would be dwarfed by the cost to patients. These guys come up with one idea after another to make Medicaid benefits more difficult to obtain.
Are Republicans becoming the party of the rich? Well, they sure are doing their best to look that way.
Becoming? They most certainly are the part of the rich, at least in the SD state legislature.
I’m old enough to remember when our elected officials despised constitutional amendments because they’re so hard to undo. Now here they are promoting them to get the change(s) they want.
I asked Google:
for 2027 state budget for Medicaid: $1.5 billion total, for 13-14% of the population, 138,000-141,000 people
For education: $994.7 million for 179,442 total students, k-12 and public tech schools universities.
The math makes my head hurt.
They’ll just have to cut the education budget to pay for Medicaid
my head hurt so I asked google to do the math and Medicaid costs $10,714 per enrollee and education costs $5528 per student
Priorities