Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medicaid Copays topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Health & Welfare members warn proposed Medicaid copay hike would burden low‑income patients
Summary
Committee members criticized an administration plan to raise Medicaid prescription copays from $1/$3 to $4/$8, saying it would deter low‑income patients from filling prescriptions, strain small pharmacies and yield modest net state savings while shifting federal match dollars.
The Vermont Senate Committee on Health & Welfare spent a portion of its meeting reviewing an administration proposal to raise Medicaid prescription drug copays and debating the effects on patients and pharmacies.
The chair opened the discussion by framing the committee’s priorities around prevention and primary care and asking members to weigh in on the copay plan. A committee member summarized the proposal as raising generic drug copays from $1 to $4 and brand or higher‑tier copays from $3 to $8.
“That may not sound like much, but these are very low‑income people,” the committee member said, arguing higher copays can stop patients at the pharmacy counter and result in missed medications. The member estimated the change would bring in about $1.1 million in gross receipts, with an estimated $461,000 impact on the state general fund once federal matching is accounted for; roughly $369,000 of the change would be reflected through the federal match.
Members said the consequences extend beyond simple math. Several described common scenarios in which patients with multiple prescriptions skip filling some medications because the cumulative out‑of‑pocket cost is unaffordable, or where pharmacies end up absorbing the cost to avoid interrupting care. One member, describing prior work as a community social worker, recounted paying out of pocket at a pharmacy so a patient could get a necessary prescription.
Committee members also warned about downstream costs if patients skip medications and later need more expensive emergency care. “When people don’t get the care that they need … they get sicker and they go up to the ED,” a member said, urging the panel to think holistically about prevention and continuity of treatment.
Several senators questioned whether pursuing the modest state savings justified the policy tradeoffs of higher patient cost‑sharing. “We’re increasing costs for our poorest residents and in effect sending money back to the federal government,” one member said.
The committee did not take a vote on the copay proposal during the session. The chair asked members to review testimony from the prior week, including fiscal analyses and public comments, and to return with recommended priorities for the committee’s budget guidance rather than immediately altering core items in the governor’s budget.
Next steps: staff were asked to clean up and distribute testimony materials and fiscal numbers so members can consider the copay proposal alongside broader priorities at the committee’s next meeting.
