Yankton Daily Press & Dakotan, Yankton, Jan. 15
Medicaid and a work requirement
During his State of the State address last week, South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard proposed making a change to Medicaid, seeking to install a work requirement for some recipients of the program.
On the surface, it sounds like an acceptable idea, as presented. But more definition is needed to see what lurks in the details.
It’s important to note that Daugaard’s pilot program proposal is not unique. South Dakota is one of just several states seeking permission from the Trump administration to impose such a requirement on the program. The administration is, in fact, promoting the placement of a work requirement on the Medicaid program, according to The Hill newspaper.
Last November, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma told state Medicaid coordinators: “Believing that community engagement requirements do not support or promote the objectives of Medicaid is a tragic example of the soft bigotry of low expectations consistently espoused by the (Obama) administration. Those days are over.”
However, that broad statement overlooks some of the real-life specifics of the Medicaid program, which, in South Dakota, helps children, pregnant women, individuals with disabilities and low-income patients.
The statement also feeds the long-held generalization embraced by some people that many of those receiving some form of low-income assistance are basically living off the government dole instead of working.
However, a lot of low-income people who receive Medicaid are already working but aren’t able to make ends meet or afford basic health care, which Medicaid helps provide. Nationally in 2016, about 43 million adults received Medicaid help, and about 67 percent of them had either full-time or part-time (or both) jobs, according to the Bloomberg News website. Only about 3 percent were neither working nor even looking for work.
Daugaard’s proposal is apparently aimed at a specific “subset” of the low-income category. He said it would apply only to “(v)ery low-income, able-bodied parents who aren’t already working or caring for a child under 1. That’s approximately 4,500 individuals.” Last year, the average monthly enrollment of people on Medicaid in South Dakota was about 120,000.
However, in national terms, there’s a fear among those suspicious of the proposal that giving the states the option to impose work requirements is a means of further undercutting the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. Echoing those fears, an editorial on the Bloomberg website noted that the work requirement plan “cannot be used as a tool to minimize insurance coverage. In a country where 8.8 percent of the population still lacks health insurance, the goal should be to expand coverage, not shrink it.”
If handled properly, the work requirement for Medicaid proposed by Daugaard - and pushed by the White House - may impact only a small segment of recipients. If this move becomes something more than that - which, unfortunately, could be vaguely implied by Verma’s blunt remarks - then the idea may be little more than subterfuge for something else.
This effort, both in South Dakota and across the country, must be monitored closely.
___
The Daily Republic, Mitchell, Jan. 18
Slow and steady with Northwoods League
The idea of bringing the Northwoods League to Mitchell was exciting.
And, of course, it’s still possible.
But considering league officials waited until the last minute to decide its fate in Mitchell, along with the fact there are still significant concerns about local facility usage, we’re not ready for an expansion here in 2018.
Why rush it?
The league and city could partner in the future, as there’s a three-year option agreement that allows the Northwoods League to field a team for up to 40 games per year at Drake Field at our Cadwell Park Sports Complex.
But it needs to happen at the right time.
Too often, we’ve seen sports startups come and go in Mitchell, most of which fail miserably. Take, for example, the Dakota Magic.
Who?
The Dakota Magic, formed in 2016, was a flash-in-the-pan semi-professional basketball team that played its games at the Corn Palace. Despite reasonably priced tickets and some Magic players with local ties, there wasn’t much support from the Mitchell community.
And that’s what we fear could have happened with the Northwoods League, if it’s not done right.
We’re excited about the possibility of top-tier college athletes playing in our city. Wouldn’t it be exciting to see an up-and-coming pitcher who has a great chance at the Major Leagues take the mound at Drake Field?
While we love what the amateur baseball tournament brings to Mitchell, when it comes typically two out of every three years, there have been some notable names who’ve played Northwoods League ball, such as Boston Red Sox pitcher Chris Sale and 2016 World Series MVP Ben Zobrist of the Chicago Cubs.
The biggest question that remains and needs to be addressed is facility usage. We’re not convinced that the Northwoods League would be a great partner with Mitchell’s youth baseball squads in sharing Drake Field. Most of Mitchell’s teener games are played on Drake.
We realize 2018 may have been a good trial year for the Northwoods League to hit Mitchell, considering the state amateur baseball tournament is being held in Sioux Falls this year.
But, we think, this allows city officials and the Northwoods League to further problem solve how to schedule games, both during tournament time and through the course of the summer.
It’s slow and steady with this one, we say. Let’s make sure we have the major kinks worked out before the Northwoods League arrives, rather than trying to work through them over the summer.
We’d hate to see another situation like the demise of the Dakota Magic happen for what otherwise could be a great opportunity for Mitchell.
___
Rapid City Journal, Rapid City, Jan. 18
City needs to expand its sidewalk requirements
It hasn’t exactly been smooth sailing since the Rapid City Council approved an ordinance in 2016 requiring new buildings to have sidewalks, which one normally wouldn’t expect to be controversial. Yet, time and time again a developer or business owner has sought a variance to avoid complying with the city ordinance.
The council, meanwhile, has rejected them after hearing the same arguments over and over again - namely that the property is located in an industrial part of town and far away from any foot traffic.
The most recent appeal was heard Tuesday night. BCD Investments sought the variance for a heating and air conditioning shop being built on Galt Court in northeast Rapid City. The developer’s arguments have some merit. In a written request to the city, it was pointed out that other businesses in the area don’t have sidewalks and foot traffic is non-existent at this time. So, why bother with it? The council voted 8-1 to reject the variance request.
Nonetheless, it led to a discussion about what to do with businesses built before 2016 when variances were handed out like candy at Halloween.
The city’s new ordinance is creating an inequity of sorts as a patchwork of sidewalks emerges in certain areas while the city marches forward with a plan to make Rapid City more pedestrian-friendly, urbane, welcoming and generally safer.
In the case of the Galt Court property, Alderwomen Lisa Modrick and Amanda Scott acknowledged the reoccurring theme of “a sidewalk to nowhere on both ends” in the variance requests.
The question that seems to be emerging is should the city remain committed to its 2016 ordinance requiring new buildings and those that expand to build sidewalks or acquiesce to the drumbeat of variance requests from businesses willing to invest in the community?
Fortunately, the City Council is standing its ground. Sidewalks are an essential part of an investment in a community. They help beautify it and make it safer and more convenient for all residents.
The next step should be for the city to require or encourage existing businesses to build sidewalks. It isn’t fair that some businesses have to build and maintain sidewalks while others don’t. Even homeowners are required to maintain or replace deteriorating sidewalks at their own expense.
As Rapid City grows, areas now considered rural will someday likely see more businesses, homes and maybe even schools. It is good policy for the city to address the issue now rather than later when it will become more expensive and likely complicated.
It would be a big step in the right direction for a city that seeks to be more inviting to economic development efforts.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.