Connect with us

Montana

Montana's Medicaid disenrollment is even a bigger catastrophe than previously reported – Daily Montanan

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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?



Source link

Advertisement

Montana

Montana Vista residents question impacts of proposed Pecos West energy project

Published

on

Montana Vista residents question impacts of proposed Pecos West energy project


EL PASO, Texas (KFOX14/CBS4) — A proposed high-voltage transmission project in far East El Paso is raising concerns among residents in the Montana Vista area, as developers work to determine a potential route that could impact private property.

The project, known as Pecos West, is being developed by Grid United and would create a high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission line connecting El Paso to southeastern New Mexico.

According to the company, the goal is to link major parts of the U.S. electric grid, specifically the Western and Eastern interconnections, allowing electricity to move in both directions between regions. Developers say the project could strengthen energy reliability, expand access to power markets, and help prevent outages during extreme weather.

Grid United also describes Pecos West as a multi-billion-dollar infrastructure investment that could bring jobs, tax revenue, and long-term economic benefits to communities along the route.

Advertisement

However, for residents in Montana Vista, the immediate concern is not the long-term benefits, but what the project could mean for their land.

At a community meeting Saturday morning, several residents were able to voice their concern, telling KFOX14/CBS4 they feel they have not received enough information about the project’s path or timeline, especially as discussions about a preliminary route continue.

“We haven’t got anything from you,” said Armando Rodriguez, president of the Montana Vista Landowners. “Not one quote.”

Others echoed concerns about communication, calling on the company to directly notify homeowners who may be affected.

“You need to go to these houses, give people information, and say this could affect you,” one resident said.

Grid United says the project is still in the planning and development phase, and no final route has been approved.

The company says construction would only begin after securing regulatory approvals and negotiating land agreements with property owners.

Advertisement

Company representatives also emphasized that landowner participation is voluntary.

“Pecos does not have eminent domain,” said Alexis Marquez, community relations manager for the project. “If a landowner does not want it on their property, we would look at alternate routes.”

Developers say outreach will continue as planning progresses, but residents are asking for more direct communication now, especially those who believe they could be directly impacted.

The project is not expected to be completed anytime soon, with Grid United estimating that Pecos West could become operational in the mid-2030s if approved.

For now, the conversation in Montana Vista reflects a familiar tension seen in large infrastructure project, balancing long-term regional benefits with local concerns about transparency, property, and community impact.

RECOMMENDED: Circle K: Diesel mistakenly delivered into premium gas tank at El Paso Zaragoza Road store

Advertisement

Sign up to receive the top interesting stories from in and around our community once daily in your inbox.



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Montana Vista residents confront ‘Pecos West’ developers in tense meeting

Published

on

Montana Vista residents confront ‘Pecos West’ developers in tense meeting


EL PASO, Texas (KTSM) —  Following widespread neighborhood concerns first reported by KTSM 9 News on Friday, residents of the Montana Vista area came face-to-face with developers of the proposed “Pecos West” transmission line project on Saturday morning, May 9 during a community meeting held at the Montana Vista Community Center.

The multi-million dollar project, spearheaded by power grid developer Grid United, aims to build a massive transmission line connecting the El Paso area to southeastern New Mexico.

While developers tout the project as a crucial link to prevent grid bottlenecks, families living in the path of the proposed line continue to voice mounting frustration and distrust over how the land acquisition is being handled.

On Friday, Grid United released a statement to KTSM insisting their one-on-one land negotiations were conducted out of respect for private property rights. But at Saturday’s community gathering, residents and advocates made it clear they aren’t buying it.

Advertisement

“People are afraid. I’m not afraid. I’m angry,” said Armando Rodriguez, president of the Union of Montana Vista Landowners, who previously said that developers had been quietly approaching his neighbors for months with varying buyout offers.

Only about a dozen residents and advocates attended the weekend meeting, but they loudly questioned why the company spent the past year approaching landowners individually rather than addressing the community as a whole. 

During the exchange, project officials admitted they have already acquired about 50 percent of the properties in the impacted area. Grid United later clarified to KTSM that the exact number fluctuates frequently, just like the proposed route.

Community organizers argued that the company’s isolated approach leaves residents vulnerable and misinformed.

“When a company like this turns up and says, ‘We’re going to buy your property.’ We must ensure that community members understand that they have the right to say no, or that they have the right to negotiate a higher value,” said Veronica Carbajal, an organizer with the Sembrando Esperanza Coalition.

Carbajal highlighted that the lack of widespread notification and a standardized compensation formula is creating deep unease.

Advertisement

“They’ve already bought properties, but they have not established notification to every resident that will be impacted, nor have they set up a formula for compensation,” Carbajal said. “So what we can see online through the title transfers is that there is a very wide distinction between how much people are being paid. We don’t want the community to be divided. We also want people to understand that this is voluntary. They do not have to sell if they don’t want to.”

A major point of contention at Saturday’s meeting was the threat of eminent domain. Grid United explained that, as a private company, they do not possess eminent domain authority, insisting that if a landowner refuses to sell, the company will simply find an alternative route.

“At Pecos West we’re very landowner-first approach,” said Alexis Marquez, Pecos West community relations manager. “So if a landowner does not want (the transmission line) on the property, then we would find alternative routes.”

But Rodriguez remains highly skeptical that the developers would simply walk away from targeted plots.

“A corporation as big as you, a multi-million dollar corporation, I find it hard to believe that you would invest money into something this big and just walk away if the family said, ‘No, I don’t want to sell it,’” Rodriguez told officials during the meeting. “The question is: Are you really serious about what you’re saying here? Or is this just another dog and pony show?”

Advertisement

Project leaders conceded they need to adjust their efforts in engaging and informing the community, promising more meetings to come. However, residents emphasized that trust is currently broken and will only be rebuilt with concrete action.

El Paso County Commissioner Jackie Butler, who helped organize the meeting, said the County has no power to halt the proposed project, but she said she has been communicating with project officials and is trying to connect them with community advocacy organizations. 

“I learned very quickly that the County does not have any authority or permitting process to stop these kinds of projects. And so that’s when I started connecting Pecos West to community members so that they could get directly involved,” Butler said. “My questions to Pecos West have been, Why do you have to come through our community? And even if you have to build through our region, you should go around it.” 

Moving forward, the residents in attendance made it clear they do not intend to sell their property. They are demanding Grid United bring all impacted neighbors to the table as a collective before any more land is purchased.

If the project continues to move forward, construction is not expected to begin until the mid-2030s.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Montana Lottery Mega Millions, Big Sky Bonus results for May 8, 2026

Published

on


The Montana Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at May 8, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Mega Millions numbers from May 8 drawing

37-47-49-51-58, Mega Ball: 16

Check Mega Millions payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Big Sky Bonus numbers from May 8 drawing

09-14-18-20, Bonus: 16

Check Big Sky Bonus payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from May 8 drawing

14-16-21-43-51, Bonus: 03

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

Advertisement

When are the Montana Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 9 p.m. MT on Tuesday and Friday.
  • Lucky For Life: 8:38 p.m. MT daily.
  • Lotto America: 9 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Big Sky Bonus: 7:30 p.m. MT daily.
  • Powerball Double Play: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Montana Cash: 8 p.m. MT on Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Millionaire for Life: 9:15 p.m. MT daily.

Missed a draw? Peek at the past week’s winning numbers.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Great Falls Tribune editor. You can send feedback using this form.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending