An Open Letter to the ANA Membership

  

Dear Member:

As you are probably aware by now, the ANA Board of Directors recently made the decision to uphold the 2019 Membership Assembly (MA) vote that rescinded the 1985 Presidential Endorsement Process and replaced it with a Presidential Engagement Policy. Whether to uphold the will of ANA’s highest governing body, which voted overwhelmingly to end the endorsement process, or endorse a presidential candidate in this year’s election, was one of the most important and toughest decisions this board has made.

We did not take this responsibility lightly. Each of us read every communication sent to us and as a group, we relitigated the debate that occurred at the 2019 Membership Assembly regarding the pros and cons of each option. I trust that you can appreciate the anguish that each board member experienced in making a decision. As an elected leader, could you ignore the will of the majority who, after debating this issue for two years, has already spoken through their vote at Membership Assembly, or send a message that ignores that result even if legally permitted to do so? I believe that you would agree that to undertake such a move sends a message that the ANA board ignores the ANA member governing body.

In making this decision, board members had the tough responsibility of detaching from their personal political views and experiences to act in the best interest of the association. ANA represents the interests of 4.2 million registered nurses with diverse political views. As a board, we could not ignore this fact given we are in the middle of one, if not the most, divisive election in history. The decision of the board, like that of the Membership Assembly, was evidence-based, and it underscored our belief in the critical thinking of each registered nurse.  

As a professional organization, ANA does not have a vote in national, state or local elections – but individually, you and I do. ANA’s Presidential Engagement Policy encourages each nurse to not only get out and vote – but to get other nurses and nurse advocates out to the polls as well. As ANA’s president, I know ANA benefits through its work with members of both parties to promote the profession before Congress and with the administration. As a Black man, who has spoken out against racism and the current political temperament fomenting hate and divisiveness, I pledge to personally get out the vote for the candidate that I believe will best represent my own values and priorities for a safe, equitable, just and compassionate country. 

I urge you to vote, engage and campaign for the candidates, from those running for president, down the ballot to members of Congress and state and local offices, who most align with your own political views – informed by your personal values and experiences and your professional responsibilities, guided by the Code of Ethics for Nurses.  This November and beyond, we must always fight for what is right for nurses, our patients and the public.

Sincerely yours,

Ernest J. Grant, PhD, RN, FAAN

President

American Nurses Association

How You Can Engage In The Election and The State of the Race

  

We are hitting a frenetic stretch in the presidential primary campaign with ‘Super Tuesday’ this week.  This day officially begins the onslaught of state elections, continuing debates and campaign ads flooding the airwaves. It can be quite easy for nurses to feel overwhelmed with the daily presidential election coverage.

Senator Bernie Sanders has emerged as the Democratic frontrunner with victories in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada. Vice President Joe Biden hopes to gain momentum following his victory in South Carolina and a second-place result in Nevada. Mayor Mike Bloomberg is a wild card ahead of ‘Super Tuesday’ and has been spending hundreds of millions of dollars on paid advertising since entering the race.

Senator Bernie Sanders spoke about nurses in last week’s debate in South Carolina. Sanders referenced nurses when speaking about his debt forgiveness proposals, an issue that continues to plague young nurses across the country.

We will know more about the race following Tuesday’s results, though we expect they won’t be fully reported for a few days. It is still somewhat early in the primary race, but after ‘Super Tuesday,’ it will no longer be early, and we can expect some candidates to suspend their campaigns.

To that end, nearly six months ago the American Nurses Association (ANA) launched nursesvote.org to cut through the noise and ensure nurses and nurse advocates had the information they needed to cast their vote and make their voices heard in 2020.

Nursesvote.org is a one-stop shop on everything nurse advocates need surrounding the presidential election. Our “How to Get Involved” toolkit is a comprehensive guide on everything from phone banking to information on volunteering at your local polling precinct. We encourage all visitors to download the toolkit regardless of which candidate they might support. As the Democratic field continues to shrink, we encourage you to check back with our candidate page so you can learn where every candidate stands on issues impacting nurses, their patients and the nursing profession. Our voting ‘Action Center’ will also enable you to check if your voter registration is up-to-date, find the location of your polling place and even how you can vote early in certain states.

Some of the latest developments on nursesvote.org include the development of a “#NursesVote Social Media Corner.” Here we celebrate and highlight nurse advocates engaging in elections by posting their pictures and sharing them on our RNAction Facebook and Twitter. The fastest way to get featured here is to post a picture of yourself engaging in #NurseAdvocacy while using the #NursesVote hashtag. If you wish to inquire about our popular ‘Registered Nurse, Registered Voter’ buttons, please feel free to email us at rnaction@ana.org.

Now is the time, more than ever, that nurses need to engage, have a seat at the table and make their voices heard, regardless of where they are from or who they support.

Medicaid Healthy Adult Opportunity – or Block Grants by Another Name

  

On Thursday, January 30, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Seema Verma, introduced the Healthy Adult Opportunity (HAO) proposal, which would allow states the flexibility to essentially create block grant programs for certain adult Medicaid beneficiaries, primarily the Medicaid expansion population, through the Medicaid 1115 demonstration waiver process.

Initial HAO demonstration models would initially last for five years and would be financed annually either through a per capita model or a total expenses model. Per capita and total expenses models’ funding levels would be calculated together by CMS and a respective state by using a trendline based on historical expenditures and within the bounds of the projected rate of medical spending inflation. The administration has touted the HAO proposal as a way to provide states with greater flexibility to operate their Medicaid programs while reining in state and federal Medicaid spending. However, health policy experts have expressed concerns over how this proposal might impact beneficiary eligibility and coverage levels.

HAO demonstration models could include adults eligible for Medicaid through Medicaid expansion (individuals with income up to 138% of the Federal Poverty Level) and other adults under age 65 who are eligible for Medicaid on the basis of something other than a disability – including low-income parents and pregnant women covered under state options and other populations covered under other 1115 demonstration models. States that implement a HAO model would be required to apply certain beneficiary protections for individuals with HIV and those with behavioral health conditions (including opioid use disorders), particularly when it comes to the availability of drugs used to treat or prevent these conditions.

States implementing a HAO model could also include conditions on eligibility. Such conditions include work requirements (or community engagement requirements) and premium and co-payment requirements (not to exceed 5 percent of annual household income). States could also eliminate retroactive coverage or hospital presumptive eligibility provisions for beneficiaries covered under the HAO model. While states could technically set an income limit and asset tests under a HAO model for beneficiaries currently covered under Medicaid expansion, these would forfeit the ability to receive the enhanced federal matching for this population (permanently set at 90%).

The CMS proposal also requires states to report a suite of 25 quality metrics (taken from the CMS Adult Core Set) to CMS, including flu vaccinations, screening for depression and follow-up care, controlling for high blood pressure, and comprehensive diabetes care. States would also be required to report quarterly to CMS on a set of metrics related to enrollment, retention, and access to care, including the number of providers actively enrolled and seeing patients, retention of beneficiaries at renewal, and complaints regarding difficulty in accessing timely services. Requiring states to report these metrics would allow CMS to address concerns over access to care in a timely manner.

It is currently unclear what impacts the HAO proposal will have on Medicaid coverage. Past experiences in other block grant programs and implemented work requirements, however, do not indicate positive results. Since the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program was converted to a block grant in the 1990s, Congress has held funding flat, despite inflation and growing need, which has resulted in reduced benefits and fewer beneficiaries without necessarily transitioning beneficiaries out of poverty. Furthermore, Arkansas’ implementation of controversial Medicaid work requirements resulted in 18,000 beneficiaries losing Medicaid coverage in the last six months of 2018. On the other hand, the HAO proposal could entice some states that have not already done so to provide coverage to the Medicaid expansion population, while it is unlikely that many (if any) of the states that have already implemented Medicaid expansion would opt-in to a HAO model.

Financial sustainability is critical in a program as large as Medicaid; however, it is equally critical that that sustainability does not come at the expense of beneficiary access to care. ANA’s principles for health system transformation state that the U.S. health system must ensure universal access to a standard package of essential health care services for all citizens and residents, and registered nurses stand at the front line of that care.

While ANA supports the protections included in this proposal for individuals with HIV and behavioral health conditions, it is essential that CMS and the states ensure that no citizen or resident loses access to comprehensive healthcare services. In states where Medicaid leaders pursue HAO waivers, nurse advocates have an opportunity to engage in stakeholder and official comment processes. Policymakers should consider nurses’ perspectives on specific proposals and program designs for a given state. Key areas to address include access choice of provider, healthcare workforce issues, and accountability for healthcare quality.