TOPEKA — Reapers policy adviser Karen Siebert questioned members of a Senate health committee on Thursday about who would benefit from proposed new restrictions on access to federal food and state-administered medical assistance. Kansas State.
The changes won’t help Kansas taxpayers, she said, who would be responsible for about $27 million in bureaucratic expenditure to implement Senate Bill 501.
The legislation also wouldn’t help low-income families already struggling to put food on the table, grocers who benefit from the $300 million in federal tax dollars pouring into the state from the tax program. supplementary nutrition aid, or pantries such as Reapers who will have to shoulder the burden of feeding Kansas’ precarious adults and their children.
“The people who run these pantries, most of whom are volunteers, many of whom are seniors, serve their communities and their neighbors tirelessly,” Siebert said during his appearance before members of the Senate Health Committee. public and welfare. “They are passionate, committed, hardworking and creative. But even they cannot take five loaves and two fish and feed 5,000 people.
Who benefits from the changes? She answered that question in written testimony that she provided to the committee.
“Apparently they’re helping an organization in Florida,” Siebert said.
It was a reference to the Opportunity Solutions project, a lobbying arm of the Foundation for Government Accountability, linked to Koch, which advocates in state houses across the country for restrictions on Medicaid and food aid, as well as unemployment assistance. In Kansas, the group also lobbied for changes to election law.
Sam Adolphsen, a visiting scholar at the Opportunity Solutions Project, was the only proponent of the bill to appear before the Senate committee.
“The bill will protect social benefits for people who are truly in need,” Adolphsen said, appearing via video from Maine. “And it will help move able-bodied Kansans from welfare to work.”
The bill would attempt to limit Medicaid health insurance to pregnant women and children. Currently, coverage is also available for families living in poverty – for a family of three, the annual income threshold is $8,751 – as well as former foster children and people in need of a treatment for breast or cervical cancer.
To receive food assistance, the bill would require participation in an employment and training program, establish a 10-day window for reporting job changes, and require extensive verification of income, residency, age, household composition, caretaker status and other information. . Currently, recipients certify that they meet these standards.
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment estimated the bill would cost the agency $2 million to implement. The Ministry of Children and Families estimated costs at $3.2 million to administer the mandatory training program, $10.4 million for staff to manage the new reporting requirements contained in the bill and $12 million for changes to computer systems and additional staff to deal with data sharing requirements. .
The costs of the new inspections required for the Kansas attorney general’s office and local law enforcement are unclear.
Adolphsen disputed the estimated costs, saying the state could find more efficient ways to implement the changes.
Sen. Pat Pettey, D-Kansas City, attempted to question the relevance of Adolphsen’s testimony. She was interrupted by committee chairman Sen. Richard Hilderbrand, R-Galena, when she asked if Adolphsen had ever been to Kansas.
“Sen. Pettey, come on,” Hilderbrand said. “Let’s not give a litmus test to every participant who talks about where they live. Let’s stick to the context of the bill.
Pettey said “it’s important to think Kansas because we’re talking about legislation that’s going to have a very negative impact on Kansas.”
Forty people testified in opposition to the legislation, and several who appeared in person disputed Adolphsen’s claims that tens of thousands of Kansans who receive benefits could work instead.
Siebert said federal rules already require food assistance recipients to work at least 20 hours a week, with limited exceptions. In Kansas, this means that 91% of “able-bodied adults” receiving benefits are already working.
John Wilson, president of Kansas Action for Children, said to qualify for food assistance in Kansas, a family of three cannot have an income greater than $28,548 and will receive $1.40 per meal per meal. person on benefits.
Sen. Beverly Gossage, R-Eudora, questioned the work ethic of people who receive benefits. Based on feedback from employers, Gossage said, some people are just filling out job applications to meet a requirement and have no intention of getting a job.
“One of the best things we can do is help them get back to work,” Gossage said. “Take them out of these programs and give them that pride. There’s a certain pride we have here in Kansas in being able to take care of you, to be self-sufficient, especially if you’re able to.
Rabbi Moti Rieber, executive director of Kansas Interfaith Action, said policies like those included in SB501 do not help lift people out of poverty. Instead, Rieber said, “they force people off lists through onerous documentation.”
“Getting people off rosters isn’t the same as helping them out,” Rieber said. “It’s just disrespectful to the struggling people in our lives to treat them as cheaters and fraudsters, and to continually have them jump through hoops to keep their eligibility low.”
Lindsie Ford of the Kansas Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence said the legislation would create a burden for women who have legitimate needs for assistance.
“I just want to point out that this bill ignores some of the fundamental realities of those living in poverty, some of the stresses that go with it,” Ford said. “Specifically, when we’re talking about young mothers and children, who are often people who come to our services, they’re often in crisis when they come to see us, and they’re dealing with really traumatic events that caused a lot of stress. »
Steven Anderson, the Medicaid Inspector General, was the only person other than Adolphsen to support the legislation.
In written testimony, Anderson said his office, which reports to the Kansas attorney general, has struggled to determine whether any welfare recipients have won a jackpot over $10,000. A provision in the bill would require the Kansas Lottery and casinos to share data with the inspector general.
