Connect with us

Colorado

What comes next for Colorado’s health insurance programs for immigrants?

Published

on

What comes next for Colorado’s health insurance programs for immigrants?


During Joe Biden’s presidential administration, Colorado took bold steps to expand health coverage to immigrants living in the state, regardless of their legal status.

Tens of thousands of people took advantage of those programs to gain coverage for themselves or their children. The hope of supporters is that this will lower the uninsured rate in Colorado since immigration status can be a major barrier to obtaining health coverage. Providing access to coverage for primary and preventive care could also reduce the amount the state spends paying for emergency care for uninsured noncitizens who have a health crisis.

But now, the long-term fate of those programs is unclear — and not just because of potential threats from Donald Trump’s administration. While an executive order issued Wednesday could affect one of the programs, state budget woes could also have an impact.

So what might come next for these programs? Here are some answers.

Advertisement

What are these programs?

The coverage expansions largely come through two programs.

One is called OmniSalud, and it connects people with private health insurance. Many immigrants are not eligible for federal insurance subsidies offered to people who buy coverage on their own. OmniSalud addresses that by offering state-funded subsidies to people not eligible for federal subsidies.

The program works in conjunction with the state’s insurance exchange, Connect for Health Colorado, but it does not use the exchange’s platform. Instead, Colorado created an entirely new exchange called Colorado Connect to handle the sign-ups.

For 2025, more than 13,000 people signed up for coverage through Colorado Connect, including 12,000 who signed up to receive subsidized coverage through OmniSalud. (Because of funding limitations, OmniSalud enrollment is capped, but people can still buy unsubsidized coverage.)

The website for OmniSalud, Colorado’s program that provides health. insurance subsidies to people regardless of immigration status, on Feb. 20, 2025. (John Ingold, The Colorado Sun)

The second program is called Cover All Coloradans, and it rolled out only at the start of the year. The program allows children and pregnant women to receive Medicaid coverage regardless of their immigration status.

Advertisement

That program has now enrolled more than 11,000 people.

Colorado is among a handful of mostly Democratic-controlled states that offer coverage to children regardless of immigration status. But many states, including several run by Republicans, have extended federal programs to cover pregnant women.

Do these programs share immigration information with the federal government?

The answer here is complicated — mostly no but sometimes yes.

Colorado law generally prohibits state agencies from asking about immigration status or from sharing identifying information for the purposes of immigration enforcement.

For OmniSalud, the use of a separate enrollment platform means the data is stored separately from the state’s main insurance exchange and is not shared with the federal government. The OmniSalud application does not ask about immigration status, said Kevin Patterson, the CEO of Connect for Health Colorado.

Advertisement

For Cover All Coloradans, the application is the same as what is used for anyone else applying for Medicaid. That application does ask about immigration status.

Attendees gather in the West lawn during a rally in protest of mass deportations Wednesday, Feb. 5, 2025, at the Colorado State Capitol. (Alyte Katilius, Special to The Colorado Sun)

But Colorado doesn’t always pass that information on to the federal government. The portion of the program for kids is entirely state-funded, so there is no federal match of funds for those enrollees.

“If there is not a match for an individual, their information will not be shared,” Marc Williams, a spokesperson for the state Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, wrote in an email. The department administers Medicaid in the state as well as the Cover All Coloradans program.

But the state does for now receive matching funds from the federal government to help pay for the care for pregnant people regardless of immigration status as well as for another program that covers emergency services. In that case, personal information, including immigration status, would be shared with the federal Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is also known as CMS.

“Historically, CMS has used the information only for the purpose of determining eligibility,” Williams wrote.

Does the latest Trump executive order end Cover All Coloradans?

On Wednesday, Trump issued an executive order attempting to end federal benefits for people living in the country without documentation, as well as to crack down on so-called sanctuary policies at the local level.

Advertisement

“My Administration will uphold the rule of law, defend against the waste of hard-earned taxpayer resources, and protect benefits for American citizens in need, including individuals with disabilities and veterans,” Trump stated in the order.

How this will impact Medicaid programs nationally and in Colorado, though, is unclear.

The federal money that helps pay for coverage for pregnant people on Cover All Coloradans comes through a Medicaid companion program called the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP. States can choose to participate in CHIP’s From-Conception-to-End-of-Pregnancy Option. So far, 23 states have done so, including Republican-controlled states such as Texas and Tennessee.

Federal Medicaid dollars can also be used to help pay for emergency care for people in the country illegally. Every state has some form of such an emergency Medicaid program.

The executive order doesn’t spell out which programs are affected. Instead, it says that the head of each federal agency must “identify all federally funded programs administered by the agency that currently permit illegal aliens to obtain any cash or non-cash public benefit, and, consistent with applicable law, take all appropriate actions to align such programs with the purposes of this order.”

Advertisement

Williams, the Colorado Medicaid spokesperson, wrote in an email that state officials are evaluating the order.

“Like other executive orders, this order directs action by federal agencies and we’re awaiting guidance from CMS,” he wrote.

In this March 12, 2008, photo, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents patrol for undocumented immigrants in Utah County Jail in Spanish Fork, Utah. ICE has received three proposals for a new detention facility for its operations in Salt Lake City, but none of the proposals would be built in Utah. (Francisco Kjolseth/The Salt Lake Tribune via AP)

Could the feds use health information to target immigrants who are undocumented?

Experts The Colorado Sun consulted said it may be technically possible but it’s not necessarily likely.

Immigration authorities trying to get Colorado agencies to cough up enrollee information would enter a legal morass.

“Federal law doesn’t require that state agencies or private companies share information with immigration officials,” César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández, a law professor at Ohio State University (previously at the University of Denver), who specializes in immigration enforcement law, wrote in an email.

“A federal law bars Colorado from refusing to share information about a person’s citizenship or immigration status with (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), but that law only applies to information that the state already possesses and Colorado law has barred state officials from asking for this information since 2022.”

Advertisement

García Hernández said, while it’s possible that immigration authorities could obtain a court subpoena or search warrant requiring the state to hand over enrollee information, it would be unusual.

“ICE rarely does that,” he wrote.

What about information shared with federal Medicaid officials?

Historically, the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has had a policy against using health information for enforcement purposes.

Matthew Lopez, an attorney and the director of state advocacy for the National Immigration Law Center, said the federal Medicaid agency “has pretty strong restrictions on how Medicaid information can be shared.” 

“We’re pretty confident that the way that it’s carried out now is consistent with federal laws regarding privacy within the Medicaid program,” Lopez said.

Advertisement

That doesn’t mean the Trump administration won’t try to change those protections, but Lopez said he hasn’t heard of anything so far suggesting it will. Still, he said, he understands why immigrants and immigrant-rights groups are nervous.

“This exists in the context of everything else that’s happening,” he said. “This is an administration whose immigration actions are designed to sow chaos and fear.”

Will the programs survive?

OmniSalud and Cover All Coloradans face uncertain futures, but for different reasons.

OmniSalud is funded out of something called the Colorado Health Insurance Affordability Enterprise, which gets its money from a fee on health insurers, as well as from a large, annual federal grant. (Colorado is still waiting on its promised grant from the feds for 2025 to arrive.)

Colorado Insurance Commissioner Michael Conway said the state amended the “terms and conditions” section of its federal grant in the waning days of the Biden administration to make clear that OmniSalud is not funded by the federal money.

Advertisement

“We obviously knew there would be a concern related to the incoming Trump administration,” Conway said. “It just made sense to take that issue off the table.”

But, with potential changes to health insurance funding at the federal level, Colorado could see smaller grant amounts in the coming years. The federal authorization for the grant is also due to expire during the Trump administration, making it unclear whether it will be renewed. If those federal funds were to go away, Colorado’s health insurance enterprise wouldn’t be able to pay for all the programs it currently supports.

The Joint Budget Committee meets at the Colorado Capitol complex in Denver on Monday, Jan. 6, 2025. (Jesse Paul, The Colorado Sun)

Cover All Coloradans, meanwhile, faces more challenges. If it survives the Trump administration orders, it could still be a victim of the current state budget crisis. Members of the legislature’s Joint Budget Committee have looked at possibly axing the program, which is expected to cost around $30 million in the coming fiscal year, as a way to close the state’s roughly $1 billion budget shortfall.

Supporters of the program have argued against ending it, though, saying that the program will ultimately save the state money by providing lower-cost preventive care up front and avoiding more costly emergency care down the road.

“The impact of capping or pausing this program,” state Medicaid director Adela Flores-Brennan told the JBC last month, “is that we will further strain the safety net.”

Advertisement

Type of Story: News

Based on facts, either observed and verified directly by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.



Source link

Colorado

GUEST COLUMN: Principles for Guiding River Water Negotiations – Calexico Chronicle

Published

on

GUEST COLUMN: Principles for Guiding River Water Negotiations – Calexico Chronicle


Next week is the annual gathering of “water buffaloes” in Las Vegas. It’s the Colorado River Water Users Association convention. About 1700 people will attend, but probably around 100 of them are the key people—the government regulators, tribal leaders, and the directors and managers of the contracting agencies that receive Colorado River water.

Anyone who is paying attention knows that we are in critical times on the river. Temporary agreements on how to distribute water during times of shortage are expiring. Negotiators have been talking for several years but haven’t been able to agree on anything concrete.

I’m just an observer, but I’ve been observing fairly closely. Within the limits on how much information I can get as an outsider, I’d like to propose some principles or guidelines that I think are important for the negotiation process.

See also

Advertisement
  1. When Hoover Dam was proposed, the main debate was over whether the federal government or private concerns would operate it. Because the federal option prevailed, water is delivered free to contractors. Colorado River water contractors do not pay the actual cost of water being delivered to them. It is subsidized by the U.S. government. As a public resource, Colorado River water should not be seen as a commodity.
  2. The Lower Basin states of Arizona, California, and Nevada should accept that the Upper Basin states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming are at the mercy of Mother Nature for much of their annual water supply. While the 1922 Colorado River Compact allocates them 7.5 million acre-feet annually, in wet years, they have been able to use a maximum of 4.7 maf. During the long, ongoing drought, their annual use has been 3.5 maf. They shouldn’t have to make more cuts.
  3. However, neither should the Upper Basin states be able to develop their full allocation. It should be capped at a feasible number, perhaps 4.2 maf. As compensation, Upper Basin agencies and farmers can invest available federal funds in projects to use water more efficiently and to reuse it so that they can develop more water.
  4. Despite the drought, we know there will be some wet years. To compensate the Lower Basin states for taking all the cuts in dry years, the Upper Basin should release more water beyond the Compact commitments during wet years. This means that Lake Mead and Lower Basin reservoirs would benefit from wet years and Lake Powell would not. In short, the Lower Basin takes cuts in dry years; the Upper Basin takes cuts in wet years.
  5. Evaporation losses (water for the angels) can be better managed by keeping more of the Lower Basin’s water in Upper Basin reservoirs instead of in Lake Mead, where the warmer weather means higher evaporation losses. New agreements should include provisions to move that water in the Lower Basin account down to Lake Mead quickly. Timing is of the essence.
  6. In the Lower Basin states, shortages should be shared along the same lines as specified in the 2007 Interim Guidelines, with California being last to take cuts as Lake Mead water level drops.
  7. On the home front, IID policy makers should make a long-term plan to re-set water rates in accord with original water district policy. Because IID is a public, non-profit utility, water rates were set so that farmers paid only the cost to deliver water. Farmers currently pay $20 per acre foot, but the actual cost of delivering water is $60 per acre foot. That subsidy of $60 million comes from the water transfer revenues.
  8. The SDCWA transfer revenues now pay farmers $430 per acre-foot of conserved water, mostly for drip or sprinkler systems. Akin to a grant program, this very successful program generated almost 200,000 acre-feet of conserved water last year. Like any grant program, it should be regularly audited for effectiveness.
  9. Some of those transfer revenues should be invested in innovative cropping patterns, advanced technologies, and marketing to help the farming community adapt to a changing world. The IID should use its resources to help all farmers be more successful, not just a select group.
  10. Currently, federal subsidies pay farmers not to use water via the Deficit Irrigation Program. We can lobby for those subsidies to continue, but we should plan for when they dry up. Any arrangement that rewards farmers but penalizes farm services such as seed, fertilizer, pesticide, land leveling, equipment, and other work should be avoided.
  11. Though the IID has considerable funding from the QSA water transfers, it may need to consider issuing general obligation bonds as it did in its foundational days for larger water efficiency projects such as more local storage or a water treatment plant to re-use ag drain water.

Much progress has been made in using water more efficiently, especially in the Lower Basin states, but there’s a lot more water to be saved, and I believe collectively that we can do it.





Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Colorado mother says Lakewood crash killed son, left 2 of her children critically injured as driver is arrested

Published

on

Colorado mother says Lakewood crash killed son, left 2 of her children critically injured as driver is arrested


A mother is grieving after a crash in the Denver metro area last weekend left her son brain-dead and two of her other children fighting for their lives.

Lakewood police say 22-year-old Andrew Logan Miller has been arrested in connection with the crash, which happened Dec. 6 around 7:30 p.m. near Kipling Parkway and West 6th Avenue.

Police say Miller was driving an SUV southbound on Kipling Parkway at a high rate of speed when it collided with a bus carrying a wrestling team from Central High School, which is located in Grand Junction in Mesa County.

Sixteen people were taken to hospitals.

Advertisement

Among the injured were three siblings who were riding inside the SUV.

On Friday, their mother, Suleyma Gonzalez, identified them as Julio Gonzalez, 18, Analelly Gonzalez, 17, and Christopher Gonzalez, 14.

Analelly and Christopher remain in critical condition. Julio will never wake up.

“I didn’t want to believe it, until they had to do the second testing where they didn’t find blood going through his brain,” she said. “My other two are in comas.”

Gonzalez said doctors ultimately declared Julio brain-dead.

Advertisement

She describes her children as disciplined students and ROTC members with plans for the future.

“Two of my kids were going to graduate this year,” she said. “No drugs. No alcohol. They were good kids.”

CBS Colorado’s Tori Mason, right, interviews Suleyma Gonzalez.

CBS

Advertisement


Gonzalez confirmed that Miller, who was driving the SUV at the time of the crash, was her daughter’s boyfriend.

“I know he loved my daughter,” she said. “I don’t think he did this on purpose or intentionally. It was an accident.”

Police say the investigation is ongoing, but believe speed played a major role in the crash.

Miller was arrested Wednesday night and is facing multiple charges, including:

• Vehicular assault (7 counts)
• Speeding 40 mph or more over the limit
• Reckless driving
• Child abuse (2 counts)
• Reckless endangerment

Advertisement

“My kids know when you get in somebody’s car, there’s always a risk. Always,” she said.

Julio’s organs will be donated. He’s on life support, while the hospital searches for matches.

“He wanted to give to the world,” she said. “Now that I can’t get him back, we want to give life to somebody else.”

family-photo.jpg

Suleyma Gonzalez with her family  

Suleyma Gonzalez

Advertisement


Miller is currently being held in the Denver County Jail and is awaiting transfer to the Jefferson County Jail. His bond and court appearance have not yet been announced.

Lakewood police say the investigation remains active.

Gonzalez, a single mother of five, says her focus now is on her surviving children and getting clarity.

“I just want answers.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

DOJ sues Colorado Secretary of State for failure to release state voter information

Published

on

DOJ sues Colorado Secretary of State for failure to release state voter information


DENVER, Colo. (KKTV) – The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division announced Thursday a lawsuit against the Colorado Secretary of State for failure to produce state voter information.

Secretary of State Jena Griswold claims the DOJ sent a “broad” request for the voter registration rolls on May 12.

Griswold says her office complied with the request and “shared the publicly available data consistent with applicable law.” However, the lawsuit against Griswold says that her office did not respond to the letter.

Griswold sent a letter in November signed by several Secretaries of State to the DOJ and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) requesting clarification on how the data would be used, but she claims neither replied to the questions in the letter.

Advertisement

The lawsuit goes on to allege that DOJ attorney Eric Neff followed up by emailing Secretary Griswold on Dec. 1, requesting Colorado’s Statewide Voter Registration list.

Griswold said this request asked the office to share unredacted voter data, including a voter’s full name, date of birth, residential address, and complete state driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number.

Griswold responded by email on Dec. 3, stating, “We received your request. We will not be producing unredacted voter files or signing the MOU,” the complaint alleges.

The lawsuit cites the Civil Rights Act, which gives the United States Attorney General the power to demand the production, inspection, and analysis of the statewide voter registration lists.

The DOJ is requesting a judge to declare that Griswold violated the Civil Rights Act and to order her to provide the current electronic copy of Colorado’s statewide voter registration list.

Advertisement

Griswold’s office released the following statement:

The DOJ released the following statement regarding the lawsuit:



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending