Montana
Montana's Medicaid disenrollment is even a bigger catastrophe than previously reported – Daily Montanan
You wouldn’t believe how many different ways I tried to begin this column trying to find the perfect analogy or phrase to sum up just how badly the Gianforte administration has handled Medicaid in Montana.
Describing it as a dumpster fire, for example, would imply that a raging fire is contained in a small space. More importantly, it says nothing about the real Montanans who lives are upended by what is a political decision that has more to do with Republicans trying to out-Republican each other than it does with being earnestly concerned about fraud, the reason given for making Medicaid enrollment so severe in Montana.
Our ideologue governor has taken a system that was often cited as a model of how the Medicaid expansion could work and dismantled it, hurting Montanans who struggle, hospitals and healthcare professionals, and reneging on a financial set-up so sweet that it should make anyone with a little business acumen scratch their head.
Let’s begin with the basics: After the COVID-19 pandemic, everyone, including the federal government, knew that Medicaid rolls would need to be trimmed, and expected that many who were previously eligible would drop because they had either restarted employment or found a new job.
But Montana’s number of people dropped from the public insurance enrollment has literally been extraordinary. As it stands right now, 10% of the state’s entire population has been dropped – a sheer number that should raise eyebrows.
The Gianforte administration in its zeal to attack a successful government program that has meant better health for residents as well as more stability for our stretched rural-centered healthcare, has also thumbed their noses at a deal that costs the state just a fraction of what it could be spending. For every dime the state contributes toward Medicaid, Montana receives 90 cents from the federal government. Virtually no other state gets a deal quite this sweet, and if the Gianforte administration had half of the business acumen it touts, it would be doing everything it could to take advantage of this deal.
Who wouldn’t take a deal that guaranteed giving us nine times the money we invest?
Setting aside the most important point that seems to get lost in every Medicaid policy discussion: The effect of Medicaid expansion in Montana has meant that residents are living healthier lives because they have insurance, and Medicaid has also meant a financial lifeline to hospitals who were strapped with a growing number of uninsured and underinsured patients.
These rural healthcare facilities in Montana are often the economic backbones of smaller communities, often being the largest private employer in rural communities. What the Gianforte administration has done, with the legislature’s approval, is threaten the viability of rural healthcare in the state by booting residents off the Medicaid rolls, leaving those already strapped healthcare organizations to absorb the loss. The lawmakers decided that Montana should “redetermine” eligibility more quickly, meaning there’s more churn to Medicaid, meaning more instability for residents and the healthcare they rely upon. Look no farther than what has happened to our rural nursing homes to see the results of not funding healthcare adequately.
But don’t take my word for it, look at the statistics. Montana has been booting residents from the Medicaid roll at a clip that is around three times more than average nationally. What makes that fact even more troubling is the inconsistent, if not conflicting, reports lawmakers have gotten from the Department of Public Health and Human Services, whose answers have more closely resembled a choose-your-own-adventure book than transparency.
You may recall that as Montana started its Medicaid purge, the Biden administration placed the state on notice that it was booting residents so quickly while at the same time seeming to ignore that the state had created a situation that was nearly impossible for those same residents to talk to a live person to get help.
Keep in mind that Gianforte himself made close to a billion dollars by creating a technology company that served to create customer service call centers. So much, apparently, for running the state like a business. This should have been something that Gianforte could have solved himself.
As lawmakers from both parties expressed concern that Montana was booting too many residents too quickly off Medicaid, DPHHS director Charlie Brereton quipped that the state could actually speed up the process – a sort of veiled threat that lawmakers should step lightly.
Yet last week, when lawmakers continued to press for answers about why so many people were losing insurance, as well as other related matters, Brereton told legislators that his staff were so taxed, and spread so thin that they simply don’t have time to answer their questions – the same people who are charged with making policy decisions about this essential care.
So, I’ll ask: Which is it, Mr. Brereton? Is it that your staff could boot Montana residents even more quickly from health insurance that they need, or is it that you can’t even provide answers because your staff is so overworked?
An equally plausible answer is that the administration could start bumping off residents from Medicaid more quickly and won’t answer the lawmakers’ questions because the state is carrying out a political decision that has little to do with ensuring Montanans’ health, making a sound financial decision or worrying about the economic health or rural Montana.
Let me put it bluntly, though – in terms that would normally be hyperbole, but, in this case, are literal.
When people don’t have insurance, they suffer more and die sooner.
When rural healthcare facilities see a rise in uncompensated, uninsured patients, they close.
When lawmakers can’t get answers from their partners in government, public trust is eroded and government moves from function to dysfunction.
Maybe the Gianforte administration can help me: How is any of this an example of good government?
Montana
Montana State doctoral student awarded national research service grant for gut microbiome, arsenic research
MISSOULA — Four out of five members of Montana’s Public Service Commission were in a federal courtroom in Missoula Thursday morning, as the PSC’s former president challenges the disciplinary action taken against him earlier this year. Now, newly released documents are shedding more light on to what led up to this point.
(Watch the video for a closer look at the case.)
New documents shed light Montana PSC dispute
Commissioner Brad Molnar has sued President Jeff Welborn, Vice President Jennifer Fielder and Commissioner Annie Bukacek – the three PSC members who voted in May to require him to work remotely, after an investigation into complaints about his workplace conduct. Molnar has claimed he is being unfairly punished for constitutionally protected speech, and he asked Senior U.S District Judge Donald Molloy to allow him to return to the PSC offices.
Matthew Monforton, Molnar’s attorney, told the judge that barring Molnar from the building was limiting his ability to do his job.
“He has not been officially kicked out of office, but his voice has clearly been diminished,” said Monforton.
But Natasha Jones, an attorney representing the other three commissioners, said the findings were about behavior, not just speech, and that the PSC’s action was a reasonable response.
“These are serious concerns about a pattern of conduct that has made employees quit,” she said.
Jonathon Ambarian
On Tuesday, Molloy ordered the release of redacted versions of two full investigative reports into Molnar’s conduct – more than 100 pages of documents. Monforton had moved for the full reports to be made public, and Molloy ruled attorneys for the other PSC members hadn’t shown a compelling reason to keep the documents under seal as long as the names of people involved in the investigation were obscured.
While the names remained redacted in the investigation reports, the attorneys for Welborn, Fielder and Bukacek also filed additional documents – including a public declaration from Bukacek and from former PSC executive director Alana Lake, providing information about their allegations against Molnar.
The two reports, from an outside investigator, cover Molnar’s alleged actions over two periods: the first from February to August 2025, and the second from August to October 2025. The investigation began after the first formal complaint, filed by Bukacek in May 2025 – though the reports say employees had been bringing up concerns about Molnar’s behavior informally for several months prior.
Bukacek’s complaint claimed Molnar had repeatedly made what she called “sexualized and demeaning comments.” The examples she cited included saying the PSC should replace “Taco Tuesdays” with “Topless Tuesdays,” reminiscing about watching girls in bikinis as a teenager, and commenting about the beauty of women in areas of China who didn’t get “old and wrinkly.”
In her declaration, Bukacek also claimed Molnar had “maliciously disseminated false information” about her and “engaged in behavior that was dismissive, derisive and otherwise abusive.”
“My primary concern now is not for my safety nor my feelings, but for the rest of the staff who may not have the temperament to speak up or may feel too intimidated to speak up given concerns over job security,” Bukacek said in her declaration.
MTN News
The investigators determined Molnar had violated the PSC’s code of conduct by making comments of a sexual nature, and that it appeared his behavior had continued for some time after he was warned about it. They also found he had behaved unprofessionally and in a belittling manner toward Bukacek, though they said Bukacek herself had at times used “language that could be considered inappropriate” in emails to staff or other commissioners. Bukacek told MTN she “readily self corrected” any behaviors that were brought to her attention.
The investigation also found a violation in connection with a complaint from a PSC staff member, who said he “felt bullied” by Molnar when the commissioner sent an email complaining about his team not being “people with competence.”
However, much of the first report and the entire second report was focused on conduct after the initial complaints, when Molnar was accused of retaliating against people who participated in the investigation. Lake said in her declaration that she saw “an immediate and significant change in his behavior toward staff involved in the process.” She claimed he said he would use an attorney and private investigator to go after people who filed complaints, and she accused him of publicly criticizing her in interviews and removing her job responsibilities because of her handling of the investigation.
Lake said Molnar’s actions led to “declining morale within the agency,” undermined staff members’ ability to do their jobs and damaged her reputation. She said that led her to resign as executive director.
“I believe no employee should be forced to choose between reporting misconduct and protecting their career, reputation, or personal well-being,” she said in her declaration.
Lake has since become Helena city manager.
Jonathon Ambarian
The report said there was evidence to show Molnar had retaliated, including by “making disparaging statements about investigation participants” including Lake, by sending an email warning he could file complaints of his own against people involved, and by taking other actions investigators said could dissuade employees from reporting behavior in the future.
Monforton said during Thursday’s hearing that the initial comments Bukacek complained about were jokes Molnar had admitted were inappropriate, that he regretted saying them, and that he hasn’t made any similar comments in about a year. But he argued the vast majority of the findings against Molnar were about retaliation – and that those were primarily based on speech that the other commissioners don’t have the right to interfere with.
Monforton said it’s unreasonable to punish Molnar for what he said in the July news conference where he announced he was under investigation, in interviews with the media or in commission meetings. He said Molnar’s conduct doesn’t rise to the level of actual retaliation.
“This is an elected official, engaging in speech in his forum,” Monforton said.
He said Molnar may have made harsh comments toward staff, but that he had the right to raise objections about the way the agency does business.
Jonathon Ambarian
Monforton also argued the retaliation claims no longer justify keeping Molnar out of the office, since Welborn, Fielder and Bukacek voted to remove him as president in October and he no longer has the authority he’s accused of misusing. He said there haven’t been further complaints about his behavior since that time.
“We’re not asking for the moon and stars, we’re asking for the status quo as it existed for the last seven months,” he said.
Jones said there is enough evidence to show Molnar would have been punished regardless of whether any protected speech was excluded.
“This is not about a couple of jokes,” she said.
Jones said Molnar made maliciously false statements about people like Lake, and that type of statement isn’t covered by free speech protections.
She also said Molnar’s exclusion from the PSC offices is temporary, and that the PSC will reconsider whether to let him return if he apologizes for his actions, accepts the agency’s code of conduct and undergoes training.
Molloy indicated he saw indications that there was “acrimony” on both sides of the situation, and said he was skeptical it would be resolved easily.
“It would be nice if instead of juvenile behavior, there was professional behavior,” he said.
However, the judge said there was an avenue for Molnar to pursue if he wanted to reach a resolution.
Molloy took no immediate action Thursday. He told the parties he would rule as quickly as he could.
-
Rhode Island4 minutes agoRhode Island to phase out sale of rat poisons under new law
-
South-Carolina7 minutes agoTexas A&M baseball lands LHP Logan Prisco from South Carolina
-
South Dakota12 minutes ago
SD Lottery Mega Millions, Millionaire for Life winning numbers for June 19, 2026
-
Tennessee19 minutes agoTennessee baseball adds pitcher Ricky Ojeda, UC Irvine transfer
-
Texas22 minutes agoFans erupt as U.S. wins in World Cup and North Texas builds buzz
-
Utah27 minutes agoUnited States is flying at men’s World Cup, and Utah soccer fans are taking note
-
Vermont34 minutes agoVt. communities work to clean up after EF-1 tornadoes strike
-
Washington37 minutes agoIMPD adds third public safety camera along Washington St in three months
