STARTED HERE IT'S ACTUALLY NOT
IT'S NINE O'CLOCK COULD DO A
GOOD MORNING TO EVERYONE- I'D
LIKE TO WELCOME. EVERYONE TO
THE ASSEMBLY HEALTH AND BUDGET
AND ASSEMBLY BUDGET SUB
COMMITTEE NUMBER ONE CARRYING
ON OPTIONS FOR CHANGING THE
MEDIC COW ASSET TEST. DUE TO
CONTINUED STAY AT HOME ORDER
WERE PRACTICING PHYSICAL
DISTANCE SEEN HERE IN THE IN
THE HEARING ROOM AND THROUGHOUT
THE CAPITOL BUILDING SO WE ARE
ONLY ABLE TO ALLOW A NUMBER
LIMITED NUMBER OF PEOPLE- TO
WATCH AND PARTICIPATE AT THE
HEARING IN PERSON. ALSO
REQUIRING THAT MASKS BE WORN
AND PHYSICAL DISTANCE IN BE
MAINTAINED BY ALL MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC TESTIFYING WEATHER
HERE IN THE ROOM WHERE ONE OF
OUR VIDEO CONFERENCING SITES IF
YOU DO NOT HAVE A MASK WE CAN
PROVIDE ONE FOR YOU. FOR
WITNESSES. IN THE VIDEO- A
REMOTE TESTIMONY ROOM- WE REACH
THE PUBLIC- COMMENT A SECTION
OF THE AGENDA DESTINY MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC. TO TESTIFY
EITHER IN THE STATE CAPITAL OR
IN THE WITH THE WITNESS VIDEO
RAM. PLEASE MAINTAIN SOCIAL
DISTANCING AS YOU MOVE AROUND
THE ROOM. IN ADDITION A PALACE
AND OTHER MEMBERS. OF THE
PUBLIC MAKING USE OF OUR
WITNESS VIDEO CONFERENCING
ROOMS HERE IN THE CAPITAL AND A
FEW OTHER LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT
THE STATE. THOSE WITNESSES WILL
APPEAR ON THE SCREEN SO MEMBERS
CAN WATCH THE TEST THEIR
TESTIMONY LIVE FROM OUTSIDE OF
THE HEARING ROOM. AND ALSO ASK
THEM QUESTIONS- WILL OF USE IN
A MODERATED A TELEPHONE
SERVICE- THROUGH WHICH ANY
MEMBER THE PUBLIC CAN PROVIDE
COMMENTARY. WHEN WE GET TO THAT
POINT IN THE AGENDA. ALYSSA
HAVE BEEN. A NUMBER PRIOR TO
THIS HEARING. THE CALL IN
NUMBER FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR
THIS HEARING IS. EIGHT SEVEN
SEVEN. SIX NINE TWO. EIGHT NINE
FIVE SEVEN. AND THE ACCESS CODE
IS ONE THREE ONE FIVE FOUR TWO.
ZERO TWO READ THAT AGAIN. EIGHT
SEVEN SEVEN SIX NINE TWO. EIGHT
NINE FIVE SEVEN AND THE ACCESS
CODE. IS ONE THREE ONE. FIVE
FOUR TWO ZERO TWO YOU CAN ALSO
FIND THIS NUMBER ON THE
ASSEMBLY HEALTH COMMITTEE'S
WEBSITE. AS WELL AS ON YOUR TV
SCREEN. THE OPERATOR ON THE
LINE WILL GIVE YOU INSTRUCTIONS
ON HOW TO BE PLACED IN THE
QUEUE. FOR CALLING IN PLEASE
ELIMINATE ALL BACKGROUND NOISE
THAT INCLUDES MUTING YOUR LIVE
STREAM BROADCAST AND YOUR SMART
DEVICES TO REDUCE THE SOUND
DISTORTION AND ONCE YOU WERE
PLACED IN THE QUIET Q. YOU'LL
BE ASKED TO MUTE YOURSELF UNTIL
IT'S TURNED RETURNED CALL.
YOU'RE CALLED ON TO SPEAK- HAVE
ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE MODERATOR
PHONE SERVICE YOU CAN CALL THE
COMMITTEE AT NINE ONE SIX.
THREE ONE NINE. ZERO ONE TWO
ZERO NINE SEVEN MY STAFF WILL
BE THERE TO TRY TO HELP. ALSO
TO MAKE NOTE THAT WE ARE
ACCEPTING WRITTEN PUBLIC
COMMENT THROUGH THE HEALTH
COMMITTEES PUBLIC EMAIL. AND
THAT ADDRESS IS EIGHTY H. E. A.
DOT COMMITTEE. ASSEMBLY DOT C.
A. DOT G. O. V. WHICH CAN ALSO
BE FOUND ON OUR WEBSITE WE MAY
NEED TO LIMIT HOW LONG EACH
PERSON HAS TO PROVIDE A PUBLIC
COMMENT THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PATIENCE AND SOME OF THESE-
COME. I'LL REMIND THE PUBLIC
ABOUT CALLING IN WHEN WE GET TO
THAT POINT IN THE AGENDA AGAIN.
I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO
ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS FOR
ACCOMMODATING OUR REQUEST TO
PRESENT AT THIS HEARING DURING
THE PANDEMIC. THE ASSET TEST IS
A LONG STANDING ISSUE AND
MEDICARE POLICY. WHILE MANY
GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS HAVE.
BEEN EXEMPTED FROM THE ASSET
TEST AS A RESULT OF THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. THE
REQUIREMENT REMAINS IF FOR
APPROX ME TWO MILLION MEDICARE
BENEFICIARIES. HOWEVER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT OF THE ASSET-
TEST THE MAIN ASSET TEST HAS
NOT BEEN CHANGED SINCE NINETEEN
EIGHTY NINE. AND MANY OF THE
pAND WHAT IS NOT AN ASSET HAVE
NOT BEEN REVISED. I THINK IT'S
AN ISSUE OF FAIRNESS AND WE
SHOULD BE REVISITING AS IT
RESULTS AND FINANCIAL
INSTABILITY FOR LOW INCOME
PEOPLE. FORCES THEM TO CHOOSE
BETWEEN THEIR MEDICARE COVERAGE
AND ONLY BEING ABLE TO AFFORD
HAVE. A RAINY DAY FUND. I'D
LIKE TO INVITE MY CO CHAIR DR
REGULAR MAKE A AN OPENING
STATEMENT STATEMENT IF YOU
WOULD LIKE- AND- AND I KNOW
THAT- I WAS SUPER THE ANY OTHER
MEMBER WILL. ANY OTHER MEMBER
ONCE MAKE COMMENTS WERE HAPPY
TO DO THAT AS WELL- DOCTOR
REGULAR. THANK YOU TO WITH.
THANK YOU DR ONE. I'M I'D FIRST
LIKE TO START WITH THE THANK
YOU DOCTOR WENT FOR- INVITING
US TO HOLD THIS AS A JOINT
HEARING BETWEEN HEALTH AS WELL
AS THE BUDGET SUB COMMITTEE
NUMBER ONE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
US TO HOLD THESE HEARINGS
TOGETHER FOR US TO GET TO THE
MEMBERSHIPS ATTENTION ON AN
ISSUE THAT IS SO CRITICAL AND
PIVOTAL FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS IN
TWENTY NINETEEN WE HAD THE
DISCUSSION WITHIN BUDGET
SOMEONE ABOUT MEDICAL ASSET
TESTS AND TWENTY TWENTY WE HAD
AB SIX EIGHTY THREE BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER CARDIO.
ADDRESSING THIS IN A POLICY
VEHICLE MY HOPE IS BY HAVING
THIS JOINT HEARING TOGETHER
TODAY WE CAN SPEAK WITH ONE
VOICE TO THE ADMINISTRATION
REGARDING THE IMPORTANCE OF
THIS ISSUE WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT
IN TERMS OF BOTH BUDGET AND
POLICY FOR WHY THIS IS A
NECESSARY CHANGE FOR US TO MAKE
I WOULD CONCUR THAT IF YOU
HAVEN'T MADE CHANGES TO THE
FINANCIAL THE ASSET TEST SINCE
NINETEEN EIGHTY NINE WHEN WE
HAD A- MINIMUM WAGE OF FOUR
DOLLARS AND TWENTY FIVE CENTS
IT'S HARD FOR ME TO THINK THAT
WE'RE NOT MAKING ADVANCEMENTS
SINCE THEN TO HELP THOSE WHO
ARE LOW INCOME. SPECIFICALLY
I'M CONCERNED THAT WE'RE NOT
ALLOWING THEM TO HAVE A RAINY
DAY FUND WE'RE STRUGGLING HERE
IN THE STATE DURING THIS
PANDEMIC OURSELVES AND IF IT
WERE NOT FOR THE RAINY DAY FUND
WE WOULD BE IN WORSE ECONOMIC
TIMES HAVE YET MANY OF OUR
FAMILIES HAVE TO SPEND DOWN TO
TWO THOUSAND OR THREE THOUSAND
DOLLARS BEFORE THEY THEN
QUALIFY FOR THE MEDICAL I THINK
IT'S TIME FOR US TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION ABOUT INCREASING
THAT ASSET LIMIT THAT ASSET
LIMIT AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD
TO THE CONVERSATION TODAY THANK
YOU FOR ALLOWING. US TO HAVE
THIS IS A TWENTY. THANK YOU FOR
MUCH TALKED ARAMBULA- WITH ANY
OTHER MAY. LIKE TO MAKE ANY
COME AT THIS. C. C. NINE- I AM
I SAY I HOPE HERE A LITTLE-
JUST WANT TO- THE LEE. OF
ASSEMBLY CARILLO ON THIS- SHE'S
WORKING THIS ISSUE IT'S- SHE
HAD A BILL THAT OBVIOUSLY THAT-
DOCTOR REGULAR REFERENCE LAST
YEAR- AND- I'M WHEN SHE'S HERE
I'M SURE SHE'LL HAVE SOME
COMMENTS BUT- WE'RE THANKFUL
FOR HER WORK ON THAT AND- AND
WE HOPE THAT- WE CAN CONTINUE
ARE WORKING ON THIS ISSUE
TOGETHER- AS A BODY. SO I'D
LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO
OUR FIRST SPEAKER- OUR FIRST
SPEAKER IS FELICIA Z. SHE'S AN
ATTORNEY AND FOUNDING MANAGER
PARTNER OF. ATHENA LAW FIRM IN
THE AUTHOR OF CALIFORNIA HEALTH
CARE FOUNDATION PUBLICATION
ENTITLED. UNDERSTANDING MEDIC
CAL'S ACID TEST FOR SENIORS AND
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. TO
PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE
FEDERAL AND STATE LAW ASSET
TEST REQUIREMENTS. OPTIONS FOR
STATE UNDER FEDERAL LAW AND
GUIDANCE AND WHAT OTHER STATES
HAVE DONE IN THIS AREA- MIZZI.
THANK YOU CHAIRPERSON WHAT
INTERPERSONAL ARAMBULA- WE
HIGHLY APPRECIATE THE
INVITATION TO TESTIFY TODAY. AS
I MENTIONED I'M MANAGING
PARTNER OF THE MALL WHICH IS A
BIG T. HEALTH CARE LAW FIRM
SPECIALIZING IN REPRESENTING
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS. WHAT
TODAY'S TEST MONIES GOING TO
FOCUS A LOT ON THE B. SEARCH
THAT WE DID IN- TWO THOUSAND
NINETEEN WHEN WE WERE REQUESTED
BY THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH CARE
FOUNDATION- TO DEVELOP THAT
ISSUE PAPER LOOKING AT SORT OF
THE- IMPACT OF THE ACID TEST IN
SORT OF THE MECHANICS OF THE
MASTER TEST. OFFER SCENIC MAJOR
CATEGORIES OF SENIORS AND
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AS A
PRECONDITION TO QUALIFY FOR THE
MEDICARE PROGRAM. I WANT TO
CLARIFY THAT TODAY I TESTIFIED
BASED ON MY OWN PERSONAL BEHALF
AND ON BEHALF OF. A THEME ONCE
IT'S CLIENTS OR THE CALIFORNIA
HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION. I THINK
I HAVE SOME AND I DON'T KNOW IF
ARE UP. THEY ARE THEY ARE UP SO
JUST Q. AS WHEN YOU WANT TO
TAKE ADVANCED OKAY. THANK YOU.
SO MOVING TO THE NEXT SLIDE. AS
YOU ALL KNOW YOU'VE BEEN. ON
THIS COMMITTEE AS THE MEDI CAL
PROGRAM PROVIDES HEALTH
COVERAGE TO LOW INCOME
INDIVIDUALS. WHEN I THINK ABOUT
ELIGIBILITY WHAT I LIKE TO
THINK ABOUT IS YOU KIND OF
CAN'T THINK ABOUT ELIGIBILITY
FOR MEDICAL WITHOUT THINKING
ABOUT HOW THE PROGRAM HAS A
FAULT. SO WHAT STRUGGLING WHAT
WHEN IT STARTED NINETEEN SIXTY
FIVE MEDICAL WAS A PROGRAM THAT
PROVIDES HEALTH SERVICES JUST
TO VERY SPECIFIC CATEGORIES OF
CATEGORICALLY NEEDY INDIVIDUALS
WHO RECEIVE CASH PAYMENTS UNDER
FEDERAL SYSTEMS PROGRAMS. FOR
THE AGED BLIND AND DISABLED AND
FOR FAMILIES WITH DEPENDENT
CHILDREN. WHEN THE SUPPLEMENTAL
SECURITY INCOME PROGRAM WAS
STARTED IN NINETEEN SEVENTY
TWO. THE PROGRAM CATA LINKED TO
MEDICAL ELIGIBILITY SO ONCE YOU
BECAME. ELIGIBLE FOR SSI YOU
BECAME ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICARE.
AND THEN OVER TIME CONGRESS HAS
CONTINUED TO ADD VARIOUS
MANDATORY AND OPTIONAL
ELIGIBILITY CATEGORIES THE
LARGEST OF ONE IS THE NEWLY
ELIGIBLE FOR THE LOW WAGE
WORKERS ARE IF EACH OF WHICH IS
DESCRIBED SEPARATELY UNDER
FEDERAL LAW IF YOU ACTUALLY
LOOK AT THE LAW YOU HAVE A VERY
VERY LONG STATUTE. AND WHAT IT
DOES IT HAS VARIOUS YOU KNOW
SUBDIVISIONS AND EVERY TIME
CONGRESS GOES IN AND AN AXE A
NEW ELIGIBILITY CALLIE GORY WE
JUST SORT OF KEEP ADDING ON-
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT UNDERSTAND
THOUGH IS THAT WHEN THEY- ADOPT
OTHER STATUTES WERE THERE
REGULATIONS THEY MAY CROSS
REFERENCE JUST ONE OR TWO OF
THOSE ELIGIBILITY CATEGORIES.
AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT
INDIVIDUAL ELIGIBILITY
CATEGORIES WE DO REALLY NEED TO
THINK OF THEM AS UNIQUE BECAUSE
THEY'RE OFTEN RULES THAT APPLY
TO ONE THAT MAY NOT APPLY TO
ALL AND SO IT IS BEST
INCREMENTAL GROWTH OF THE
PROGRAM THAT MAKES MEDICAID
POLICY AT TIMES- SOMEWHAT
OPAQUE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GET
THROUGH ALL OF IT. AND DO ALL
THE CROSSLINKING. NEXT SLIDE.
SO. AS DARK AS AS THE YOUR
PERSON WOULD MEND- HISTORICALLY
WRONG HAD TWO PEOPLE INCOME
ASSETS **** FOR THE PRO. IN THE
TWO THOUSAND TEN PASSAGE OF THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT CONGRESS
SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGE THE RULES
FOR DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR
MANY ELIGIBILITY CATEGORIES AND
IT AT ELIMINATED THE ASSET TEST
FOR THOSE SO NOW LOW INCOME
ADULTS AND FAMILIES ARE ONLY
SUBJECT TO A TASTE TEST. TO
QUALIFY FOR MEDICAID BASED ON
THEIR MODIFIED ADJUSTED GROSS
INCOME. ALSO KNOWN AS MAD JACK.
THE L. CAL FOR SENIORS AND
PEOPLE JUST WITH. ARE EXCLUDED
FROM THE MATCH I'D METHODOLOGY
AND SO THOSE CATEGORIES STILL
REMAIN SUBJECT TO THE ASSET
TESTS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO IN
THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH CARE
FOUNDATION ISSUE BRIEF WE
FOCUSED ON THE ABOVE LISTED
CATEGORIES OF SENIORS AND
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES ALL OF
THESE CATEGORIES ARE SUBJECT TO
AN ACID TEST NO WALK THROUGH
THESE REAL QUICKLY TO GIVE YOU
AN IDEA OF WHAT HOW HOW EACH OF
THOSE CATEGORIES ARE DEFINED-
THE FIRST CATEGORY LISTED ABOVE
REFLECTS THE LINKAGE I
MENTIONED BETWEEN THE
ELIGIBILITY FOR THE
SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME
PROGRAM AN ELEGY TO BILITY FROM
VICKI BENEFITS SO AS A CYPRUS.
ARE AUTOMATICALLY ELIGIBLE FOR
MEDICARE. I THIS IS A THAT
MANDATE PATH FOR SENIOR FOR
SENIORS IN PEOPLE WITH. IT IS
AVAILABLE FOR SENIORS WHO ARE
OVER SIXTY FIVE IN INDIVIDUALS
WITH DISABILITIES WHO ARE
GENERALLY RECEIVE INCOME LESS
THAN AROUND NINE HUNDRED FIFTY
DOLLARS PER MONTH FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL IN TWENTY TWENTY ONE.
THE MEDICAID ACT ALSO PROVIDES
FOR OPTIONAL CATEGORIES OF
ELIGIBILITY MEANING THAT STATES
MAY OPT TO COVER TOSE
INDIVIDUALS SOME OF THOSE ARE
LINKS BASED ON- CERTAIN
SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME.
CRITERIA SO ANOTHER CATEGORY
THERE WOULD BE INDIVIDUALS WHO
WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR SSI BUT
DON'T RECEIVE CASH EXIST
ASSISTANCE. FOR EXAMPLE IF THEY
HAVE NOT APPLIED FOR SSI
BENEFITS. A THIRD CAR MAJOR
OPTIONAL CATEGORY OF
ELIGIBILITY IS FOR SENIORS AND
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WITH
INCOME LESS THAN A 100% OF THE
FOUGHT FEDERAL POVERTY LIMIT
WHICH IS HIGHER THAN THE SSI
STANDARDS SO THIS CAPTURES MORE
OF YOUR SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES. ARE BECAUSE IT'S
THE CRITERIA IS A LIST LOOSER
THAN THE US LINKED CATEGORIES.
SO THREE OF THESE THE
CATEGORIES OF JUST DISCUSS THE
AS A SIDE. THE US I. O. AND THE
POVERTY IT SEEMS AND PEOPLE
WITH JUST. THOSE ARE ALL THOSE.
ARE ALL OF TO THREE MEDIC. NOT
WE HAVE THE MEDIC NECESSARY
OPTIONAL CATEGORY WHICH IS FOR
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE. DETERMINED
TO BE MEDICALLY NEEDY AND WHO
ARE ELIGIBLE FOR SHERIFF COST
MEDIC COW. THESE INDIVIDUALS
HAVE AN INCOME EXCEEDING A 100%
OF THE FEDERAL POVERTY LINE BUT
HAVE HIGH MEDICAL EXPENSES. SO
THEY MUST SET SPEND DOWN THEIR
INCOMES TO A THRESHOLD SET BY
MEDIC HAL AND- BEFORE THEIR
MEDICAL BENEFITS CAN. KICK IN
FOR ANY GIVEN MONTH. THIS WORKS
A BIT LIKE HOW A DEDUCTIBLE
MIGHT BE CONSIDERED WORKING IN
PRIVATE MARKETS SO IF YOU HAVE
COMMERCIAL INSURANCE YOU'RE
USED TO HAVING TO PAY YOUR
DEDUCTIBLE FOR THE YEAR BEFORE
YOUR BUDGET YOUR HEALTH INSURER
WILL START PAYING ANY BENEFITS-
EXCEPT THAT THIS WORKS IN- ON A
MONTHLY BASIS. THE MEDICALLY
NECESSARY I WOULD NEED TO GROUP
ALSO INCLUDES MOST INDIVIDUALS
CONSIDER WITHIN THE LONG TERM
CARE CATEGORY BY THE STATE SO
SOME STATES APPLY DIFFERENT
ELIGIBILITY RULES FOR THE LONG
TERM CARE FOR LONG TERM CARE
ELIGIBILITY. ESPECIALLY GIVEN
THAT MEDICAID PROGRAMS BEAR SO
MUCH BURDEN FOR PAYING FOR LONG
TERM CARE WITH AS COMPARED TO
ANY OTHER PAYER I IN THE MARKET
BUT IN ADDITION BECAUSE THE
COST LONG TERM CARE. TENDS TO
BE HIGH INTENDS TO BE SOMETHING
THAT YOU'RE A REGULAR WILL
SUSTAIN. FOR MANY PEOPLE FOR
THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. THE
LAST CATEGORY IS A LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENT THE MEDICARE SAVINGS
PROGRAM. THE M. S. P. ARE
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS
ADMINISTERED BY INDIVIDUAL
STATES. THIS PROGRAM HELPS PAY
FOR SOME OR ALL OF MEDICARE
PREMIUMS DEDUCTIBLES AND
COINSURANCE AND SO THAT'S A
LITTLE BIT OF A UNIQUE PROGRAM
COMPARED TO THE REST. NEXT
SLIDE PLEASE. SO AS ALL STAR IS
A PULMONARY POINTS- CALIFORNIA
HAS IMPLEMENTED SOME OF THE
FLEXIBILITY TO REDUCE THE
BURDEN OF THE RESOURCE LIMITS
ON INDIVIDUALS ARE FOR EXAMPLE
THEY HAVE CERTAIN EXCLUSIONS
FROM THE ASSET LIMIT AND I
EXPECT THAT ONE OF THE OTHER
SPEAKERS TODAY WILL BE ABLE TO
SHED FURTHER LIGHT ON THESE- ON
THESE EXCLUSIONS BUT IN GENERAL
DIFFERENT SENIOR PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITY CATEGORIES ARE
SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT RESOURCE
LIMITS. SO FOR THE- SSID LINKS
THAT FOR ALL OF THOSE PROGRAMS
THE RESOURCE WOMAN IS BASED ON
THE BILL AT THE RESOURCE LIMIT
THAT WOULD BE APPLIED IF YOU
ARE PLAYING FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
SECURITY INCOME SO IN THAT CASE
WE'RE LOOKING AT TWO THOUSAND
DOLLARS OF RESOURCES THAT YOUR
OLD PERMITTED TO KEEP NOT
INCLUDING THE EXCLUSIONS THAT
ARE PERMITTED UNDER STATE LAW
AND ORDER OUR CALIFORNIA
MEDICAID STATE PLAN ALSO THAT'S
TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL OR. THREE THOUSAND
DOLLARS FOR A COUPLE. THE LIMIT
FOR THE MET C. PER. WHICH IS
SUBJECT TO INCREASES BASED ON
THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.
CURRENTLY THAT LIMIT WELL TO
TWENTY TWENTY THAT LIMIT WAS
SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED
SIXTY DOLLARS FOR A AN
INDIVIDUAL. AND ELEVEN THOUSAND
EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR A
COUPLE.ALL RIGHT. NEXT SLIDE.
AS CHAIR PERSON WOULD HAD
MENTIONED THESE THE FOR
PARTICULATE FOR THE S. SOCIETY
LINKS TO A RESOURCE LIMIT THAT
LIMIT HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED FOR
INFLATION SINCE NINETEEN EIGHTY
NINE IT HAD BEEN UPDATED
SOMEWHAT REGULARLY PRIOR TO
NINETEEN EIGHTY NINE BUT IN
NINETEEN EIGHTY NINE IT'S
STARTED TO STAY FLAT SO WHAT
THIS IN THIS LIGHT COMES
DIRECTLY FROM THE CALIFORNIA
HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION ISSUE
PAPER AND WHAT IT DEMONSTRATES
IS THAT EVEN IF YOU ARE
APPLYING REGULAR ADJUSTMENTS
BASED ON THE CPI TO THOSE
LIMITS. AS OF AND THIS IS A
THROUGH TWENTY NINETEEN- AS A
TWENTY NINETEEN INSTEAD OF A
TWO THOUSAND DOLLAR LIMIT FOR
AN INDIVIDUAL YOU'D BE LOOKING
AT FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED
FIFTY SEVEN AND FOR A COUPLE
YOU'D BE GOING FROM THREE
THOUSAND DOLLARS TO ALMOST
DOUBLE THAT AT WELL OVER DOUBLE
THAT AT SIX THOUSAND TWO
HUNDRED THIRTY SIX SO THERE'S
REALLY STARK DIFFERENCE IF YOU
LOOK AT HOW MUCH INFLATION HAS
WOULD HAVE IMPACTED THESE
NUMBERS IF THEY HAD CONTINUED.
TO BE ADJUSTED. NEXT SLIDE
PLEASE. SO THE FEDERAL MEDICAID
ACT AND THERE'S A SITE THERE
ARE TWO THE PROVISION WILL JUST
CALL IT ARE TO DOES A LOT OF
STATES USE LESS RESTRICTIVE
METHODS THAN THOSE OUTLINED IN
FEDERAL LAW TO DETERMINE INCOME
AND RESOURCE ELIGIBILITY FOR
THREE MAJOR CATEGORIES IN AND
IT DOES IT ONLY UP DOES APPLY
TO CERTAIN CATEGORIES. OF
INDICATE EL ELIGIBLE- IN- BUT
AMONG THOSE THREE OF THEM ARE
FOR BELOW POVERTY SENIORS AND
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. THE
MEDICALLY NECESSARY IT NEEDY
POPULATION AND ALSO FOR M. S.
P. AND ROWLEY'S. THE DEFINITION
OF WHAT IT MEANS TO BE LESS
RESTRICTIVE IS FAIRLY BROAD
BASICALLY MEANS THAT BY USING
THAT METHODOLOGY- MORE
INDIVIDUALS MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR
MEDICAID AND THAT THERE WILL
NOT BE OTHERS WHO BECOME
INELIGIBLE BECAUSE OF THAT
METHODOLOGY. ON AND SO IT
REALLY IS INTENDED TO BE WHAT
YOU WOULD THINK OF AS LESS
RESTRICTIVE. SO IT SEEMS HAS
PROVIDED GUIDANCE TO THE STATE-
IN AS RECENTLY AS TWO THOUSAND
FIFTEEN AND FROM WHICH SEEMS
LIKE A VERY LONG TIME AGO BUT
REALLY IN IN THE HISTORY OF
MORE TALK ABOUT MEDICAID THINGS
IT'S NOT THAT LONG AGO. I AND I
SUGGESTED TO STATES THAT THEY
MAY CONSIDER THIS FLEXIBILITY
TO APPLY LESS RESTRICTIVE ASSET
LEAD LIMITS. IN THAT LETTER CMS
NOTED THAT ADOPTION OF THESE
FLEXIBILITIES MAINLY TO A
REDUCTION OF BURDEN ON THE
BENEFICIARIES AND FOR STATE
MEDICAID AGENCIES. PROMOTE
CONTINUITY AND COVERAGE AND
CARE. GENERATED MINISTRY OF
SAVINGS BY SIMPLIFYING A MOMENT
AMONG OTHER BENEFITS. CMS HAD
FURTHER NOTED THAT ALABAMA
MISSISSIPPI AND NEW YORK HAVE
REPORTED AT LEAST SOME
ADMINISTRATIVE SAVINGS FROM
ELIMINATING ASSET TESTS AND
THAT OBVIOUSLY MAKES SENSE
BECAUSE THEN THE ELIGIBILITY
WORKERS AREN'T SPENDING TIME
CONFIRMING. HOW EXACTLY HOW
MUCH MONEY SOMEBODY MAY HAVE A
BANK ACCOUNT OR DOING FURTHER
INVESTIGATIONS. UP COMPARED TO
OTHER AREAS WHERE AT LEAST I
WORK ON SOME OF WHICH THERE CAN
BE SENSITIVITY FROM CMS- I AM
NOT SEEN IN MY RESEARCH ANY
PARTICULAR SENSITIVITIES BICMOS
AROUND UTILIZING THE
FLEXIBILITY GRANTED IN OUR TO-
TO IMPLEMENT A LESS RESTRICTIVE
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA SO IT'S
NOT. ONE OF THOSE HOT. TOPICS
THAT YOU MIGHT OTHERWISE SEE.
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO AS I
MENTIONED BEFORE CALIFORNIA HAS
EXERCISE SOME OF ITS
FLEXIBILITIES- TO APPLY LESS
RESTRICTIVE ELIGIBILITY
METHODS- AND I'M ASSUMING THAT
SOME OF THE OTHER SPEAKERS
TODAY WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON
THAT- SO. AND I APOLOGIZE WELL
ESTIMATE EMPLOYMENT LESS
RESTRICTIVE ELIGIBILITY
STANDARDS SIMPLY THREE IS THE
STATE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS
WHICH IS TYPICALLY IN OUR
REVIEW HOW WE'VE SEEN THESE-
IMPLEMENTED I UNDERSTAND FROM
MY REVIEW OF THE DH CS REPORT
WHICH WAS ISSUED LAST YEAR THAT
I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT CMS HAS
ADVISED THAT IF THE STATE SEEKS
TO APPLY DIFFERENT STANDARDS
WITHIN AN ELIGIBILITY CALGARY
FOR EXAMPLE BY DISTINGUISHING
BETWEEN THE LONG TERM CARE
MEDICALLY NEEDY AND OTHER
MEDICALLY NIGHT OF NEEDY
BENEFICIARIES THE STATE WILL
ROCK NEED TO REQUEST A WAIVER
OF CERTAIN MEDICAID ACT.
REQUIREMENTS NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
SO THIS IS A SUMMARY BASED ON
THE KAISER FAMILY FOUNDATION
ISSUE PAPER FROM TWO THOUSAND
NINETEEN ON- WHAT OTHER STATES
HAVE APPLIED LESS RESTRICTIVE
ABSENT MOMENTS ACTUALLY THAT
ISSUE PAPER GOES THROUGH AND
DISCUSSES ALL OF THE ASSET
LIMITS THAT APPLY IN YOUR.
LADIES AMONG VARIOUS. BUT IT IN
THERE THEM THAT OF A- LAST ARE
RESTRICTIVE ASSET WENT AND AS
YOU CAN SEE HERE NOT A- SO WE
ARE THEIR- ARE KNOW FOR THE SS
I. SO I. L. THERE TENS THAT
HAVE HIGH LIMITS. FOR THE BELOW
PAR US YOU WITH YOU AND PEOPLE
ARE JUST- WE'RE SEEING THAT.
ERRORS ON HAS NO ASSETS AND
STATES HAVE TO A HIGH RESOURCE
LIMITS. FOR THE MEDICALLY NEEDY
HAVE THE- STATES THAT HAVE
HIGHER. LIMITS FOR A- SANDER
FOR COUPLES. M. FOR THE M. S.
P. PER. WE HAVE A LOT THERE'S A
LOT TO BE QUITE A BIT OF LEE.
FOR THE M. S. P. PER. YOU HAVE
NINE. THAT APPLY NO WAY OUT TAG
FOR- IS AT ALL. AND THEN YOU
HAVE SOME OTHERS THAT APPLY
HIGHER ASSET TAG. MEAN HERE'S
PARTY NOTABLE BECAUSE THEY'RE
WOMEN IS AT FIFTY EIGHT
THOUSAND DOLLARS PER PERSON AND
EIGHTY SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS
PER COUPLE WHICH IS. MUCH
HIGHER THAN WHAT CALVET WHERE
CALIFORNIANS CURRENTLY. LISTED
ITS ASSETS. ARE LIMITED- SO
WHAT WE DID THEN IN ORDER TO
PREPARE THE CUT THE CALIFORNIA
HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION MCCORD
WAS LOOK A LITTLE BIT MORE AT
SOME OF THE ERROR IF SOME OF
THE STATE'S. THAT TO GET A
LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THE
SPECIFICS OF THESE POLICIES.
WITH FOCUS ON ARIZONA BECAUSE
IT HAS. A LIMITED THE ACID TEST
FOR IS BELOW POVERTY SPD
CATEGORY OR- AND ALSO FOR ITS
MSP PROGRAM. AND CMS HAD NOTED
IN ITS LETTER INTO THOUSAND
FIFTEEN THE ARIZONA HAD. ITS
HAD SEE REAL A MINUTE SAVE. AND
THEN WE'LL FOCUS ON YOUR
BECAUSE AFTER HELL NEW YORK
CASTLE HIGHEST. THE LARGEST
MEDICAL PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY.
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO IN
REVIEWING ARIZONA'S PROGRAM WE
WERE ABLE TO CONFIRM FROM THEIR
MEDICAID STATE PLAN THAT THEY
HAD ELIMINATED ASAT TEST FOR
MOST CATEGORIES FOR SENIORS AND
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WHO
ARE SSI ELIGIBLE AND MS M. S.
P. ELIGIBLE. BIG OUT
INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING LONG TERM
CARE AGAIN THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL
GIVEN THE COSTS THAT MEDICAID
PROGRAMS EXPAND ON LONG TERM
CARE BENEFITS. OF PARTICULAR
NOTE- WHEN WE WERE DOING OUR
REVIEW RESEARCH WAS THE
EVIDENCE FROM CMS THAT ARIZONA
HAD IMPLEMENTED THE CHANGE
AFTER CONTENT DUCTING AN IMPACT
STUDY WHICH FOUND THAT
ADMINISTRATORS SAVINGS WOULD
ROUGHLY EQUAL THE COST OF THE
ADDITIONAL BENEFITS OF TAT
WOULD BE. GRANTED IF THEY
ELIMINATE THOSE ASSET TESTS- I
UNDERSTAND FROM THE DH CS
REPORT THE DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN
STATE MEDICAID OFFICIALS HAVE
CONFIRMED- THAT THEY WERE THAT
ARIZONA HAD SEEN ADMINISTRATIVE
COSTS AND SAVINGS IT'S NOT
CLEAR FROM THE DH CS REPORT HOW
WHETHER OR NOT ARIZONA HAD
COMPARED THOSE SAVINGS. TO THE
INCREASED COST OF BENEFITS.
THANK SLIDE PLEASE. SO AGAIN
NEW YORK HAS THE SECOND LARGEST
PROGRAM AFTER CALIFORNIA IT'S
DETERMINE IT HAS ELIMINATED THE
ASSET TEST FOR ALL OF ITS A
MESS PAEAN ROWLEY'S AND REYES
ITS ASSET LIMITS FOR ITS AGE
BLIND AND DISABLED BELOW
POVERTY ENROLLEES INCLUDING
THOSE WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR LONG
TERM CARE TO FIFTEEN THOUSAND
SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS FOR
AN INDIVIDUAL AND TWENTY THREE
THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY
DOLLARS FOR A COUPLE. AND SO
THOSE ARE AGAIN MUCH HIGHER
THAN WHAT CALIFORNIANS
CURRENTLY APPLYING- I
UNDERSTAND FROM THE DH REPORT
THAT NEW YORK LIKE LA ARIZONA
HAS EXPERIENCED BOTH
ADMINISTRATIVE SAVINGS AND
ADDITIONAL COSTS FOR THE
ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. AND THEN
TO KNOW THE CALIFORNIA LIKE NEW
YORK. IT LIKE CALIFORNIA NEW
YORK HAS EXCLUDES CERTAIN TYPES
OF ASSETS FROM BEING COUNTED IN
THIS IS ANOTHER AREA WHERE THEY
CAN BE A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY
DONE WHERE THEY CAN. THEY
THEY'VE DECIDED TO EXCLUDE
THINGS LIKE CARS THE VALUE OF
LONG TERM CARE BENEFITS AND
OTHER THINGS FROM BEING COUNTED
AS ASSETS. SO THEN NEXT SLIDE
PLEASE. SO THEN WHAT WE
CONCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA
HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION REPORT
WAS REALLY THINKING ABOUT WHAT
WHAT WHAT WHAT WERE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAD AS
WELL HOW THE LEGISLATURE MIGHT
CONSIDER HOW TO SHAPE FUTURE
POLICY AROUND THE ASSET TEST-
AND YOU KNOW WHAT THERE'S OLD
SCALE AND ALL COMES DOWN TO HOW
ON EVERYBODY ON THESE
COMMITTEES IN THE LEGISLATURE
ENDS UP WEIGHING THESE
DIFFERENT CONSIDERATIONS BUT-
YOU KNOW ON THE ONE HAND YOU
HAVE A POTENTIAL INCREASE IN
APPLICATIONS FROM THE CHANGE
POLICY WHICH WILL THEN OF
COURSE LEAD TO IMPROVE CREASE
PROGRAM COSTS. BUT ON THE OTHER
YOU HAVE REDUCED ADMIN COSTS
WHICH YOU SEE TO HAVE CONFIRMED
BY QUITE A FEW OF THE STATES
THAT HAVE DONE THIS IN THE
PAST. YOU CAN OKAY ONE OF THE
OPTIONS WITH YOU WOULD BE ABLE
TO ACCOUNT FOR INFLATION SO IF
YOU'RE ACTUALLY JUST
IMPLEMENTING R. I. A. N.
INCREASE RATHER THAN
ELIMINATING ASSET TESTS
ALTOGETHER YOU COULD NOT LEAST.
FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE
THERE'S A REASON TO WANT TO BE
ABLE TO ACCOUNT FOR IT CAUGHT
INCREASED COST OF LIVING YEAR
AFTER YEAR. AND THEN THE LAST
IS DEAD YOU KNOW TO ALLOW
SENIORS TO CONTINUE TO HAVE A
RAINY DAY FUND. THERE'S
SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT TO
THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT YOU KNOW
THE COST OF LIVING RIGHT NOW
AND I'M TESTIFYING RIGHT NOW
I'M- ACTUALLY IN. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER KINGS DISTRICT. YOU KNOW
THE COST OF LIVING HAS GROWN SO
HIGH THAT THE IDEA OF. BEING
ABLE TO JONES HAVE TWO OR THREE
THOUSAND DOLLARS IN YOUR BANK
ACCOUNT IN TERMS OF SAVINGS IS
MEAGER. AND SO BE ABLE TO BE
ABLE TO ALLOW THERE TO BE A
RETENTION FOR RAINY DAY FUND
CAN REALLY MEAN ALL THE
DIFFERENCE IF THERE'S AN
UNEXPECTED. INCIDENT THAT
OCCURS- FOR SOMEBODY WHO A
SENIOR PERSON WITH DISABILITY
WHO HAS A MEDICAL ROLLINGSTONE.
THAT THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER
CONSIDERATION. FOR THE
LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER. IN TO
THE OFFICE THAT I. OR NUMBER
ONE. THE COMPLETELY. OF AN
ASSET TEST. THE INCREASE OF
ACID TEST AND- THE INCLUDE
EXCLUDE MORE THING FROM SB
TREATED AS- UP FOR AS- SOON.
PROPOSED AN ASSEMBLY BILL. SIX
EIGHTY. AT CREASED S. LIMIT TO
THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR AN IN. AND
FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS EACH
ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD MEMBER.
ARE THESE PROPOSALS THE
PROPOSAL ANYWAY AND THE BOTH
SOME LEGAL SIX EIGHTY THREE AND
THAT THE PROPOSED HERE OF EIGHT
TEN DOT DOLLAR. HOUSE LIMIT FOR
IN FIVE DOLLAR FOR DISH HEALTH
MEMBERS THAT SEEMS TO BE THERE
IN THAT PUT TO PUT CAL. AS AN
OUT COME TO OTHER. ARE FOR
EXAMPLE FIRST AND KEEP DON'T
ABILITY WITH- IN UNDER THE
FEDERAL LINE A SOUTH CAROLINA
HAS LIMITS OF SEVENTY FIVE
SIXTY FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AND
MORE THAN THOUSAND THREE FORTY
FOR A COUPLE. IN ARIZONA PLACE
NO LIMITS AT ALL. FOR MEDICALLY
NOT NEEDED. I WAS APPLIED
SIMILAR TO OF TEN DAHLE DOLLAR
IN TWO EIGHT. FOR EITHER AN
INDIVIDUAL OR COUPLE THE NEW
YORK AS I JUST MENTIONED
APPLIES A HIGHER LIMIT OF
FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. SEVEN
HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL AND TWENTY THREE
THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY
FOR A COUPLE. FOR MEDICARE'S A
SAVINGS PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY AS
I MENTIONED EARLIER MANY STATES
APPLY NO LIMITS IMENA MINNESOTA
HAVE HIGHER LIMITS THAN WHAT IS
BEING CONSIDERED BY CALIFORNIA-
AND SO. AGAIN THAT IS AN AREA
WHERE WE WOULD BE WELL WITHIN
THE PRACTICE OF OTHER STATES IF
WE CONSIDERED A PROPOSAL WITH A
TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR ASSET LIMIT
FOR AN INDIVIDUAL. AND FIVE
THOUSAND FOR ADDITIONAL
HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS. THEN THE
LAST QUESTION- REALLY THAT THE
LEGISLATURE WOULD TO CONSPIRACY
TO CONSIDER AND PROBABLY GOES
HAND IN HAND WITH DISSIDENT
CITING HOW TO SHAPE THE ASSET
TEST IN THE FUTURE. IS WHETHER
WHICH ELIGIBILITY CATEGORIES ON
THE LEGISLATION WANTS TO
PROCEED AND MAKE THOSE CHANGES
FOR AND WHETHER TO EXCLUDE
INDIVIDUALS WITHIN ELIGIBILITY
CRAP CATEGORIES IN THE MOST
OBVIOUS PLACE THERE IS WHETHER
TO EXCLUDE INDIVIDUALS WHO
RECEIVE LONG TERM CARE
BENEFITS. OFF FROM THE ACID
TEST IN THAT IS REALLY MOSTLY A
FINANCIAL QUESTION OF HOW MUCH
MORE OF BENEFITS WOULD NEED TO
BE GRANTED IN ORDER TO IT TO
INCLUDE THOSE INDIVIDUALS. NEXT
SLIDE PLEASE. SO THAT CONCLUDES
MY REMARKS- OPEN TO ANY
QUESTIONS THAT THERE MIGHT BE.
THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH I
KNOW WE HAVE SOME SOME OTHER
MEMBERS WHO HAVE COME IN AND
THEY THEY'RE GOING TO- I'D LIKE
TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO
SAY A FEW WORDS IF AND THEN
WE'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS IF
THAT'S IF THAT'S OKAY WITH YOU
WITH CAN YOU STICK WITH SO
LONGER MISSY. OF COURSE OKAY.
SO ASSEMBLY MEMBER CARILLO YOU
HAVE ANY OPENING COMMENTS HERE.
I THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND-
ASSISTING ON OKAY YES. AND
THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE
MEDICAL ASSETS TEST PIECE OF
LEGISLATION FOR THE PAST FEW
YEARS NOW AND EACH TIME IT IT
STOPS AND DOES NOT MOVE FORWARD
BECAUSE OF COST. BUT NOW MORE
THAN EVER IT IS VERY CLEAR-
ESPECIALLY DURING THE PANDEMIC
THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE ARE WORKING ON LEGISLATION
THAT IMPACTS OUR MOST
VULNERABLE COMMUNITIES AND THAT
IF YOU ARE IF YOU'VE DONE
EVERYTHING. FOR THE MOST PART
CORRECTLY IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE
YOU BOUGHT A HOME YOU'RE
WAITING TO RETIRE YOU WANT TO
BE ABLE TO BUILD INDIVIDUAL
FAMILY WEALTH YOU SHOULD NOT BE
PENALIZED BASED ON ANTIQUATED
LAWS THAT ACTUALLY MAKE IT
HARDER FOR YOU TO RECEIVE
HEALTH CARE- AND YOU KNOW BE
ABLE TO- HAVE TO SWITCH YOUR
YOUR HOME TO SOMEONE ELSE YOU
HAVE TO LIQUIDATE ALL YOUR ALL
OF YOUR SAVINGS. THAT'S NOT THE
KIND OF CALIFORNIA THAT WE WANT
TO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
ARE CREATING POLICIES AND
UPDATING POLICIES AT THE END OF
THE DAY- ENSURE THAT MORE
PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO GET ACCESS
TO HEALTH CARE AND THE MEDICAL
ASSETS TEST THIS. IS ANTIQUATED
IT IS A POLICY THAT NO LONGER
WORKS IT ACTUALLY NEVER HAS AND
CALIFORNIA CAN'T BE BEHIND
OTHER STATES ACROSS THE NATION
IN TERMS OF HOW WE TAKE CARE OF
OUR OF THE OF THE FORTY MILLION
PEOPLE THAT CALL CALIFORNIA
HOME SO THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR
FOR THIS FOR CONVENING- CHEN
ARAMBULA AS WELL FOR SOME- YOUR
BUDGETS COMMITTEE TERMS OF HOW
DO WE MANAGE THIS. HOW DO WE
MOVE FORWARD ESPECIALLY DURING
A GLOBAL PANDEMIC. WHERE WE
WANT PEOPLE TO STAY HOME. AND
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
KNOW WE HAVE A- AGUILAR. MISS
PER GRAMS TANG WENT TO YOU HAVE
A- OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR. THIS MEETING TODAY- I.
WITH ASSEMBLY MEMBER. YOU KNOW
MY GOAL LIKE WHAT OTHER
LESTER'S. ACETATE BEEN FOR THE-
THING IN THE SAFE NET FOR OUR
C. AND PER. WITH THE- WHAT ARE
THE OTHER TWO CONSEQUENCES OF
WHAT OTHER COST SAVINGS I THINK
THROUGH THERE. AND I THINK WE
NEED TO- STATE FARM. DOLLAR
AMOUNT FOR THESE F. TAXES WE
DID. SO AGAIN. THANK YOU FOR
BECAUSE- THIS I'M FORWARD TO
FIVE LEARNING TODAY. YOU. AND
NOW DO WE HAVE AN SPECIFIC.
MISSY MISTER ZERO DID YOU I SEE
HERE DO YOU HAVE ANY. YOU'D
LIKE TO SAY TO POINT. OKAY
THANK YOU. ANY SPECIFIC FROM.
MISTER DOCTOR. I YOU- FIRST OFF
I HEARING ANOTHER ONE WHO CAN
REALLY GET INTO THE DETAILS
UNTIL ONE TO DO A PRE- WHAT YOU
ADDED I WANT TO GET BETTER IF I
COULD ABOUT ARIZONA WHICH IS
CONDUCT IN IMPACT. THEY WERE
ANALYZED BEFORE US WE SEE THAT
THE- TOTAL COST OF THE PROGRAM
PURSES THE ELIMINATION OF THE
ASSET VERIFICATION THE SAVINGS
ARE NOT ROUGHLY EQUAL AND SO
I'M WONDERING A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THIS IMPACT STUDY. DID
THEY HAVE- WHAT TYPE OF
INFORMATION THAT THEY PROVIDE
FROM THIS IMPACT STUDY WOULD BE
A BENEFIT FOR CALIFORNIA TO
HAVE AN IMPACT STUDY WOULD IT
BETTER ALLOW US TO UNDERSTAND
THE REAL COST. THAT COULD BE
SAVED. THANK YOU DR ARAMBULA
WHAT I THINK OCCURRED IN
ARIZONA IS PRIOR TO
IMPLEMENTING THEY HAD PERFORMED
IN IMPACTS STUDY. ON WHAT I
SUSPECT A IN AND THAT IMPACT
STUDY DID SHOW THAT THEY HAD
ANTICIPATED THE SAVINGS TO
EXCEED THE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS.
ARE ONE THING THAT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT NOTED NOTE AND THIS
IS ALSO NOTED I THINK IN THE
DHS REPORT IS THEY DID EXCLUDE
THEIR LONG TERM CARE
BENEFICIARIES AND THAT'S AN
AREA WHERE YOU I THINK YOU'RE
GOING TO SEE A LOT MORE COST-
IT OF ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. IF
THEY'RE ELIGIBLE- WHAT I EXPECT
HAPPENED AND I THINK THE FOLKS
AT THE DEPARTMENT WHO ACTUALLY
SPOKE TO THE ARIZONA STATE
MEDICAID OFFICIALS CAN CONFIRM.
IS MY SUSPICION IS THAT THEY
ACTUALLY DID SEE BEN AND I DID
SEE A MINISTRY OF COST SAVINGS.
THERE PROBABLY WASN'T QUITE
EQUAL SO IT'S PROBABLY THAT THE
COST SAVINGS WERE NOT QUITE AS
MUCH AS THE OF MINE THE
POTENTIAL BENEFITS BUT I WOULD
DEFER TO THE FOLKS AT DHS WHO
SPOKE DIRECTLY. TO THE ARIZONA
STATE MEDICAID OFFICIALS. IF I
COULD I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW ON
ONE FINAL POINT WHICH IS. YOUR
STATEMENT WAS THE INCREASED
COST COMES FROM INCREASED
APPLICANTS WHO ARE ON THE
MEDICAL PROGRAM. I'M TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND SCOPE FOR EACH OF
THE OPTIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED
TO US AND IT SEEMS THAT THE
ELIMINATION OF THE ASSET TEST
AT LEAST FROM THE DATA WE HAVE
IN FRONT OF US. IS A TOTAL OF
SEVENTEEN THOUSAND EIGHT
HUNDRED INDIVIDUALS IS THAT
CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I'VE SEEN
IN THE DHS REPORT AGAIN I DON'T
WORK FOR THE DEPARTMENT SO I
CAN'T CONFIRM THOSE NUMBERS BUT
THEY DO SEEM LIKE THEY- BEGIN
AND I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING
TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT FOR A LOT
OF THESE INDIVIDUALS. THEY
WOULD EVENTUALLY SPEND DOWN TO
QUALIFY FOR MEDICAID. AND SO
IT'S A QUESTION OF WHEN THEY
BECOME ELIGIBLE RATHER RATHER
THAN WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD
EVER BECOME ELIGIBLE SO IT'S A
TIMING ISSUE. AND IF THEY DON'T
HAVE TO SPEND DOWN THEN THEY'D
BE ABLE TO RETAIN SOME OF THOSE
ASSETS. AND ACHIEVE ELIGIBILITY
EARLIER BUT THEN THEY WOULD
STILL BE RECEIVING BENEFITS THE
WAY THEY WENT LATER ON DOWN THE
LINE. FINAL QUESTION IF I COULD
IS- THE ADMINISTRATION HAS
PREDICTED. CASELOAD GROWTH ONE
POINT SIX MILLION INDIVIDUALS
OVER WHERE WE CURRENTLY ARE
TODAY. IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THE-
COST COULD BE INCLUDED INTO THE
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ALREADY
CALCULATED INTO THE
ADMINISTRATION'S. MEDIC CAL
GOAL. AND US WHAT WE'RE
ACTUALLY SEEING OR THE SAVINGS
FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST
OVERALL IN THIS BUDGET YEAR. SO
MY UNDERSTANDING AND I WAS
LOOKING AT THE DEPARTMENTS
PREDICTIONS AS TO AT THE GROWTH
OF THE PROGRAM A COUPLE MONTHS
AGO FOR SOME OTHER WORK THAT I
WAS DOING- ON FIGURING OUT WHAT
THE F. MAP WAS GOING TO LOOK
LIKE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
A LOT OF THAT IS INTENDED IF
THAT IS ANTICIPATED TO COME
FROM SOME OF THE NEWLY ELIGIBLE
INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY HAVE LOST
THEIR JOBS AND THEREFORE. HAVE
LOST EMPLOYER BASED INSURANCE I
THINK THAT'S LIKELY LARGELY
GOING TO BE COMING FROM OTHER
CATEGORIES OF ELIGIBLE
INDIVIDUALS WE'RE HERE WORKING
BECAUSE THOSE NEWLY ELIGIBLE
APPLICANTS WOULD BE A LOT OF
THAT SUBJECT BOUNCE BACK AND
NOT TO AN ASSET TEST WE'RE HERE
WE'RE LOOKING AT SENIORS AND
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND SO
I THINK. THE LIKELIHOOD THAT
WE'RE SEEING THE SAME IMPACT
THEIR SOME OF THEM THAT ARE
GOING TO HAVE INCREASED
EXPENSES DUE TO THE SHUT DOWN
BECAUSE OF HOW MUCH HAS
AFFECTED OUR ECONOMY AS A
WHOLE- BUT- YOU KNOW BASED ON
WHAT I LOOKED AT A COUPLE
MONTHS AGO I ON'T KNOW THAT
THAT WOULD THOSE WOULD BE THE
SAME INDIVIDUALS. I WON MY COMP
THERE BUT SIMPLY BELIEVE THAT
THEN BECOME A DISCUSS FOR A AS
A LEAD. WHEN OR NOT THE INCLUDE
IN THE- SENSE WE DID NOT SEE
THOSE PROTECTIONS MATERIALIZE
IN THE LAST YEAR I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR US TO. PRIORITIZE
OUR VALUES AS WELL SO WE JUST
ENCOURAGE THE CONTINUED
CONVERSATION. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH DOCTOR REGULAR AND I THINK
THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT POINT
THE PROJECTED- GROWTH IN THE
PROGRAM DIDN'T HAPPEN AND I
THINK THAT'S THAT THAT IS THAT
IS THAT IS SIGNIFICANT- YOU
MENTIONED LIKE. LIKE IN ARIZONA
HE SAID THAT THERE'S AN
EXCLUSION FOR LONG TERM CARE
BENEFITS CORRECT IS THAT. I
THINK THAT'S ON YOUR CHART.
THAT'S CORRECT SO THAT THE
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ELIGIBLE
FOR LONG TERM CARE BENEFITS ARE
EX. ARE EXCLUDED FROM EXCLUSION
FROM A SET TEST SO THEY ARE
SUBJECT TO AN ASSET TEST STILL-
AND AS I MENTIONED YOU KNOW
MEDIC CAL PAID FOR I THINK IT
WAS THE LAST TIME I CHECKED WAS
WHEN LIKE 90% OF THE LONG TERM
CARE IN THE STATE. RIGHT AND SO
THAT'S WHERE THERE'S- IS LONG
TERM SYSTEM COST HIGH. BE
YOU'RE PAYING RATE. AND THEN IS
IT'S WON'T BECAUSE FOR MOST OF
THE INDIVIDUAL WERE TALKING
ABOUT LONG TERM LONG TERM CARE.
AND SO THERE WERE PAYING FOR
THE THAT SERVICE UNTIL YOU KNOW.
THE END OF THEIR LIVES. THE
YOU. AND I WOULD AGREE I WENT
AS- AGREE STRONGLY WITH THE-
DOCTOR AND YOU LIE THIS I THINK
THIS A STATE. OF OUR FOR. ARE
QUITE FOR. AND I DO WONDER YOU
KNOW AS AS PEOPLE ARE HOT
ALLOWED TO HAVE LESS AND LESS.
OF A RAINY DAY FUND WHAT THAT
DOES TO THEIR OVERALL QUALITY
OF LIFE. AND WHAT DOES THAT
COST US IN THE LONG RUN WHEN
SOMEBODY YOU KNOW MAKES A
DECISION BECAUSE THEY YOU KNOW
MAYBE THEY CAN'T BUY WASHER.
AND THEY AND THEY HAVE TO WALK
YOU KNOW TO A LAUNDROMAT OR
WHAT IF YOU KNOW WHAT IF THEY
HAVE THEIR EATING. LESS HEALTHY
FOODS AND THEN THAT THEY END UP
BEING. HAVING MORE- NEEDS YOU
KNOW AS FAR AS HEALTH CARE
NEEDS AND SO. IT YOU KNOW. I
SAY THIS ALL THE TIME AND
SOMETIMES I FEEL LIKE WE'RE
REALLY PENNY WISE AND POUND
FOOLISH HERE- BECAUSE WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT A QUALITY OF LIFE
AND- AND IT IS. ALSO DIFFICLT
I THINK TO- PUT A PUT A NUMBER
OR GET A HANDLE ON. ON WHAT-
THE EFFECTS OF LEAVING THIS
POLICY IN PLACE IS- BUT IT
CAN'T BE POSITIVE FOR THOSE
PEOPLE WHO WHO ARE WHO ARE
STUCK HERE AND- IT'S HARD
ENOUGH TO BE POOR- THESE DAYS-
IT'S EVEN HARDER TO- HE TOLD
YOU GOTTA SPEND DOWN AND BE
POORER. AND CAN'T TAKE CARE OF
SOME OF YOUR REALLY BASIC NEEDS
SO- SO I- WELL THANK YOU VERY
MUCH THAT WAS MORE STATEMENT-
MR TANG. THE CHAIR BY COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THANK
YOU DOCTOR WOULD- AND THINGS A
DOCTORATE BLOW A JUST TO FOLLOW
UP ON DR ARAMBULA QUESTION THE
ONE POINT SIX MILLION PERCENT
ESTIMATE. CAN YOU US SOME
DISPENSED ON WHAT YOU'VE
OBSERVED- IN OTHER STATES HOW
HOW LONG YOU THINK IT WOULD
TAKE TO AND ROLL ONE POINT SIX
MILLION. PEOPLE IT SEEMS LIKE
IT WOULD TAKE- TAKE QUITE A
WHILE POTENTIAL. CHAIRPERSON
SORRY ASSEMBLY MEMBER CAN'T WAS
THAT A QUESTION FOR AND- FORMER
CHAIRPERSON ARAMBULA. IF YOU
DID WOULD TAKE A TIME YES NO
AND APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY.
THE IT WOULD TAKE A TIME IN
PART OF THE IS YOU PRIOR TO
PANDA MY- WAS THAT THERE WAS
ALREADY DELAYS IN ELIGIBILITY
WITH ALL OF THEIR- BE
DETERMINATIONS THAT ARE
REQUIRED UNDER THE ACA SOME OF
THAT HAD TAKEN QUITE SOME TIME
THERE WAS SOME LITIGATION ABOUT
IT- THAT WAS- DETERMINED I
THINK OF THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME
COURT LEVEL- JUST LAST YEAR. IS
THERE HAVE BEEN DELAYS- AND A
BIG PART OF THOSE DELAYS IS
FIGURING OUT ALL THE THINGS YOU
NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO CONFIRM
ELIGIBILITY AND MY
UNDERSTANDING IS A SIGNIFICANT
PART OF THAT IS DETERMINING THE
ASSETS. WHO THANK YOU MISSY AND
THEN ON IN TERMS OF THE ASSET
TEST IS THE ONLY REASON TO HAVE
AN ACID TEST JUST TO. KEEP
COSTS LOWER WERE THERE ANY
OTHER REASON. TO HAVE AN ASSET
TEST. WELL I THINK YOU HAVE THE
SIDE THIS YOU HAVE IN. WHO HAVE
NO INCOME. AND MAY HAVE ON THE
DOLLAR AND SAVE AND THAT THAT I
THINK IN THEIR SOME. CONCERN
ESPECIALLY IF YOU LOOK AT THE
ORIGINS OF THE PROGRAM IT WAS
REALLY INTENDED TO ONLY COVER
THOSE WHO WERE SORT OF THE
NEEDIEST MODE. ALL WITHIN OUR
POPULATIONS I THINK THE PROGRAM
HAS EVOLVED A LOT SINCE. ON
NUMBER ONE YOU DON'T SEE I
DOUBT YOU'RE SEEING
MILLIONAIRES APPLIED FOR MEDIC
CAL. BUT BEYOND THAT I THINK
THAT- YOU KNOW THE PROGRAM HAS
EVOLVED TO BECOME SORT OF A
BROADER SAFETY NET IN AND- YOU
KNOW THE YOU'VE SEEN THE POLICY
CHANGE. FOR THE FAMILIES AND
FOR THE CHILDLESS ADULTS AND TO
MOVE TO A MATCH I STANDARD AND
SO WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT
IS INCOME AND WE'RE NOT LOOKING
AT ASSETS. IT'S ONLY FOR THE
SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES THAT WE'RE SORT OF
STILL LIFE WITH THIS RELIC OF
THE RECORDS OF THE PROGRAM. IN
IN THE BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCE
WITH OTHER STATES AS OTHER
STATES HAVE LIFTED THAT ASSET
TASK NUMBER OR GOTTEN RID OF.
THE ASSET TEST HAVE YOU SEEN
THEM. A SIGNIFICANT SPIKE IN.
ENROLLMENT BECAUSE- FROM THE
REPORTS THAT I REVIEW IT LIKE
THERE'S- A- NUMBER. BY IT HAS
BEEN CRUSHING AMOUNT OF ROOM
ANYTHING WHAT WE SEE IN THE DH
CS REPORTED IT SIMILAR. THERE
WOULD AS WE THAT THERE WOULD A
MY NUMBER OF IN THE- WHO WOULD
BE. ELLA BUT A LOT OF THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WOULD HAVE BECOME
ELIGIBLE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER
RIGHT I THINK I THINK THAT'S
YOUR POINT REALLY WELL TAKEN
WHICH IS. THAT WE KNOW- YOU
KNOW WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE
LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN
POVERTY IN CALIFORNIA. AND-
USING YOUR ARBITRARY A
DIFFERENT LOOK VERY THAT LEGAL
WAYS TO DETERMINE WHO THEY ARE
JUST MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT
FOR THEM TO GET THE ENTITLEMENT
THAT WE'VE TRYING TO. GET THEM
THE HELP THAT THEY NEED SO. ON
D. YOU KNOW IF YOU WERE
ADVISING US- HOW I GUESS HOW WE
KNOW WHAT KIND OF TEST WOULD
YOU HAVE WOULD YOU JUST
RECOMMEND GETTING RID OF THE
ASSET TEST AND TYRA. LET ME
SPEAK FIRST TO THE FIRST POINT
YOU MADE IS THAT I DO THINK
THAT THE WITH THE ASSET TYPES
THERE'S A CHILLING EFFECT. AND
SO THERE MAY BE INDIVIDUALS WHO
ARE ELIGIBLE BUT WHO ARE AFRAID
TO APPLY TO BE IN BECAUSE THEY
ARE AFRAID THAT YOU KNOW MAYBE
THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND EXACTLY
HOW THE RULES WERE THE RULES
ARE VERY COMPLICATED. AND SO
THEY THINK THAT THEY MAY NOT BE
ELIGIBLE EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE
SO I THINK THAT'S NUMBER ONE IS
THAT YOU HAVE INDIVIDUALS.
COULD QUALIFY EVEN UNDER OUR
CURRENT RULES THE BECAUSE OF
THIS THAT OF THIS FEAR OR WITH
THIS CONCERN OF OPENING THE
BOOKS EVERYBODY THAT THEY DON'T
WANT TO APPLY AND I THINK. THAT
IS A GROUP OF FOLKS WHERE BEING
ABLE TO MODIFY HOW WE HANDLE
THINGS. WE'D ENCOURAGE THEM TO
GET THE HELP THAT'S AVAILABLE
TO THEM SO THAT'S THAT'S THE
FIRST POINT. THE SECOND I KNOW
THAT THERE ARE A FEW DIFFERENT
AREAS THAT ARE BEING LOOKED AT-
I THINK THAT IN TERMS OF.
ADMINISTRATIVE IT. DIFFICULTY
IN IANS. I IMPLEMENTING
ADDITIONAL EXEMPTIONS TO THE
ASSET TEST PROBABLY DOESN'T GET
YOU THAT MUCH I MEAN YOU WILL
HAVE MORE INDIVIDUALS WHO
BECOME ELIGIBLE BUT YOU'RE
STILL GOING TO BE NEEDING TO GO
THROUGH ALL OF THEIR- STUFF. I
OLDER INFORMATION IN ORDER TO
DETERMINE ELIGIBILITY-
INCREASING THE ASSET TEST
ESPECIALLY FOR WE'RE LOOKING AT
YOU KNOW SORT OF WHAT MAIN HAS
DONE OR NEW YORK IS DONE. THEN
YOU'RE LOOKING. AT CERTAIN.
MAKING THE RULES A LOT MORE. SO
THAT THERE CAN BE A RAINY DAY
FUN YOU CREATE A- FOR THE TOO.
OVER TO. BASED ON SORT OF
INFLATION. AND THE CERTAINLY
MAKES IT A MORE HE- POLICY
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO. AGAIN
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET AS MUCH
IN TERMS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
SAVINGS THE ONLY PLACE WHERE
CAN YOU GET RID SIGNIFICANT
ADMINISTRATIVE SAVINGS. IS
WHERE YOU GET RID OF THE ACID
TEST ALL ELIMINATED ALTOGETHER.
ALL IN THE AREA WHERE I SEE
THAT THAT'S PROBABLY THE
EASIEST IS FOR THE MEDICARE
SAVINGS PROGRAM. AND FOR A LOT
OF THESE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE
ASSETS ASKING. A LOT OF THEM
ARE IN THE M. S. P. PROGRAMS
BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE THE WORK
THEY'VE DONE THEIR FORTY
QUARTERS OF POOR THING. A
THEY'VE GOTTEN ALL OF THEIR-
THEY QUALIFY FOR MEDICARE
BENEFITS AND SO FOR THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WHAT THEY'RE DOING
IS WE'RE LOOKING AT JUST
SUPPLEMENTING THE MEDICARE
PROGRAM. SO THAT'S AN EASY
PLACE WHERE WE CAN GET A
NOMINATION OF THE ASSET TEST.
WITHOUT IT I AND I THINK IT
WOULDN'T HAVE NEARLY AS MUCH IT
WOULD PROVIDE THE
ADMINISTRATIVE SAVINGS. BUT
PROBABLY MARTIN MORE MODEST-
COST IN TERMS BENEFITS WHAT THE
WHOLE POINT ABOUT HAVING
INSURANCE IS TO INCREASE THE
POOL SO OBVIOUSLY THE MORE
PEOPLE YOU HAVE IN THE
INSURANCE POOL THE CHEAPER THE
COST FOR THE ENTIRE- INSURANCE
SO IT SEEMS THATBASED ON YOUR
EXPERIENCE EVEN IF WE GOT RID
OF THE ASSET TEST AND EVEN IF.
PEOPLE SLOWLY- WERE ABLE TO
COME ONTO THE MEDICAID ROLLS
WHICH ACTUALLY WOULD BE A GOAL
OF OURS. WE WOULDN'T
NECESSARILY SEE. A COMPLETE-
YOU A ONE FOR ONE ADDITION OF
COSTS THAT AN THAT THERE WOULD
BE SOME COST SAVINGS AND
OBVIOUSLY THIS ADMINISTRATIVE
SAVINGS SO WE ACTUALLY DON'T.
EXACTLY KNOW HOW MUCH IT WOULD
COST AND- OBVIOUSLY- AND LAST
YEAR IN BUDGET SUB COMMITTEE WE
HAD WE HAD SOME PRETTY
SIGNIFICANT DISAGREEMENTS WITH
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE OVER.
THERE ARE YOU KNOW PRETTY
INFLATED COST ESTIMATES SINCE I
THINK THIS. I THINK THIS
HEARING SEX EXTREMELY HELPFUL
TO REALLY. ON SORT OF IDENTIFY.
SOME OF THOSE ISSUES AND WE
REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR-
THOUGHTFULNESS AND ANALYSIS
THANK YOU. THANK YOU WHAT IF I
MIGHT THAT REMINDS ME OF
SOMETHING THAT TROOPERS WOULD
MENTION IS THAT YOU KNOW. FOR
THIS POPULATION THERE'S ALSO
THERE'S THE INSURANCE ASPECT
THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED AND- IN
TERMS OF THE WHOLE MEDICAL
POPULATION SENIOR SOME PEOPLE
DISABILITIES DO TEND TO HAVE
HIGHER COSTS BECAUSE OF YOU
KNOW. OF THAT THEIR DEMOGRAPHIC
THAT BEING SAID- FOR THIS
POPULATION IF THEY WERE BECOME
TO BECOME ELIGIBLE FOR EARLIER.
THEY MAY BE ABLE TO. HAVE
ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL OF
PREVENTIVE SERVICES IN THE END
I WAS THINKING ABOUT YOU KNOW
RIGHT NOW OF WHETHER OR NOT
THEY MAY HAVE RAINY DAY FUND
MIGHT IMPACT WHETHER OR NOT
WHAT KINDS OF MASKS THEY CAN
BUY. WHICH WOULD REALLY BE
SOMETHING THAT PROTECTS THE
THEIR HEALTH IN THE FUTURE WELL
WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT ALL IS
THE IMPACT OF BEING ABLE TO
HAVE YOUR RECORD NEED TO
PREVENTIVE CARE THIS ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT MEDICARE DOES
REQUIRE OF THE MANAGED CARE
PLANS. IS TO PROVIDE
COORDINATED CARE FOR
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ELDERLY OR
WITH DISABILITIES AND THEY
WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO THAT SO
THEY WOULD HAVE. ANNUAL
CHECKUPS AND THEY WOULD BE ABLE
TO GET YOU KNOW THEIR IF THE IF
THEY HAVE DIABETES TO BE ABLE
TO GET THAT UNDER CONTROL SO
THAT FROM THE LONG RUN. WE
MIGHT BE LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL
SAVINGS FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE
BUT THOSE. ARE VERY DIFFICULT
TO QUANTIFY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH I'M THAT THEY'RE UGLY THEY
ARE PRIMARY DIFFICULT TO
QUANTIFY IT BUT I THINK THE
REAL. AND I THINK THEY'RE
IMPORTANT. AND I THINK IT'S A
STATEMENT OF OUR VALUES HERE
SO- BUT- THANK YOU SO MUCH I
REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME
WITH US TODAY. AND WE ARE GOING
TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO OUR
SECOND TO A SECOND PRESENTER-
THANK THANKS VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS- KATHY
CENTER LING WHO IS NEARLY AT
THE NEW LEAGUES OUR NAMED
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
COUNTY WELFARE DIRECTORS
ASSOCIATION. ACETYLENE HAS MANY
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE. KELLY SHE
SAID FROM THE OTHER PART OF
THIS- AND SHE'LL DISCUSS THE ON
THE GROUND IMPLEMENTATION OF
ASSET TEST REQUIREMENTS DURING
THE MEDICARE ELIGIBILITY.
DETERMINATION RICK- PROCESS SO-
MISS CENTER DOING. GREAT THANK
YOU CHAIRMAN WHAT AND CHAIRMAN
ARAMBULA AND MEMBERS CAN YOU
HEAR ME OK YES. ALL RIGHT GREAT
THANK YOU. HI HERE I AM NICE TO
SEE EVERYONE- IT'S BEEN A WHILE
I THINK SINCE WE HAD A HEARING
TOGETHER SO THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR INVITING YOU TO PARTICIPATE
TODAY AND PROVIDE SOME COUNTY
PERSPECTIVE IN SOME INFORMATION
ON HOW THE ASSET TEST IS
ADMINISTERED. BY THE COUNTY
HUMAN SERVICES AGENCIES WHO OF
COURSE DO THE ACTUAL INITIAL
AND ONGOING ELIGIBILITY FOR
MEDICAL. A COUPLE OF
OVERARCHING AND BASIL LITTLE
BIT ON OF THE COME. THAT WAS
JUST WITH THE SPEAK. ZERO BDA
CHEN HAS. MODIFY AND UPDATING
OUTRIGHT ELIMINATE THAT HALF
TEST WHEREVER. WE DID SUPPORT
SB SIX EIGHTY THREE BY FAMILY
MEMBER CARILLO VERY NICE TO SEE
YOU HERE TODAY. WOMAN MENTIONED
THEN THE BRIEFING PAPER IS ALSO
NOTED BY THE TEARS IN YOUR
OPENING REMARKS. THERE'S SOME
IMPORTANT THINGS TO RMEMBER BY
ATHLETES AND HOW CAL STRUCTURE.
IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THAT MANY
TODAY AS YOU HEARD FROM THE
PRIOR SPEAKER. POST AFFORDABLE
CARE ACT BUT THOSE WERE MOST
EFFECTIVE AFFECTED ARE HIGHLY
VULNERABLE PEOPLE OVER SIXTY
FIVE PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
IN PARTICULAR. THE MAJOR
CATEGORIES THAT WERE SHIFTED
OUT OF THE ASSET TEST
REQUIREMENTS BY THE ACA WERE
THE PARENTS OF CHILDREN.
REMEMBER CHILDREN LARGELY COULD
NOT HAVE ASKED THAT PASSED BY
THE TIME WE IMPLEMENTED THE
ACA- AND THERE ARE STILL THE
LARGEST GROUP OF ENROLLEES IN
THE PROGRAM. AS WELL AS ADULTS
WITHOUT CHILDREN IN WITHOUT
DISABILITIES WHO PREVIOUSLY DID
NOT QUALIFY AT ALL FOR MEDIC
CAL- AND NOW. ARE IN THE
OPTIONAL EXPANSION GROUP. SO M.
IF WE WERE TO. THE LIMIT ARE
AND JUSTIN ALL TYPES PROPERTY
OR ASSETS. OR OUTRIGHT
ELIMINATE THE TEST FOR THOSE
WHO WE- ANY PERSON APPLYING AS
NOTED BY MIZZI STILL NEED TO
MEET THE INCOME TAX. WE'RE
GOING OF WHATEVER. THEY MAY
RETAIN. AT THIS TIME I DID WANT
TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT WE DID
GET TO ONE HUNDRED AND 38% OF
THE FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL THAT
WAS AN EXPANSION- REALLY
CHAMPION BY THE LEGISLATURE
AGREED TO BY THE
ADMINISTRATION. AND AS A
REMINDER FOR TWENTY TWENTY ONE
THAT MEANS THE HOUSEHOLD OF ONE
PERSON. FOR THEIR INCOME CAN
HAVE UP TO SEVENTEEN THOUSAND
SIX HUNDRED AND NINE DOLLARS SO
THAT'S WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW
FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR AGED BLIND
AND DISABLED INDIVIDUALS WHO
ARE IN THAT'S NOT MATCH AYE.
CATEGORY AYE I WILL SAY AS AN
ASIDE I THINK THE PERSON WHO
HAS A MILLION DOLLARS IN
SAVINGS. AND NO INCOME AND ALSO
NO EXISTING HEALTH COVERAGE AND
WANTS TO GET THEIR HEALTHCARE
THROUGH MEDICARE ALL IS A BIT
OF A UNICORN. SO I DO THINK
THAT EXTREME SORT OF EXAMPLE OF
WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN IF THE ASSET
TESTS WERE ELIMINATED. ISRAELI
NOT A COMMON OCCURRENCE OF AN
OCCURRENCE AT ALL AND SO
DISCUSS AN ACID TEST PERHAPS
MORE IN ITS MERITS AND WITH
THE- DISCUSSION AS YOU WERE
NOTING- MISTER- BOTH OF THE
CHAIRS- AS WELL AS- ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CHIANG- AND THINKING
ABOUT SORT OF OUR VALUES AND
WHAT IT MEANS TO ELIMINATE THE
ASSET TEST. AND ALLOW MORE
INDIVIDUALS INTO HEALTH
COVERAGE WITHOUT THAT TASK.
SEEMS TO BE A REALLY. GOOD
FOCUS FOR THE CONVERSATION.
THAT STAFF IMPACT INCLINE
IMPACT THE HALF TEST FOR THOSE
THAT IT DOES STILL APPLY TO ITS-
FACETS. OF A DEAL INVOLVED IN.
WORK ON THE- OF OUR STAFF. TO
CHASE PAPER. ENTERCOM CLIENTS
MORE OPTIMAL TO TIMES. THAT
HAVE TO CONFUSING. IT NEEDS TO
BE X. TO MY APPLICANTS AND RISK.
BE THEY'VE NOT BEEN SUBBED TO
IT- IF FOR EXAMPLE THOSE WHO BE.
PREVIOUSLY ELIGIBLE THE MATCH I
RULES AND HAVE NOW LOST THAT
COVERAGE WE DO LOOK TO SEE IF
THEY MAY BE ELIGIBLE UNDER NON
MATCH AYE. AND THAT ENTAILS AS
I'LL GET INTO IN THE SECOND.
SENDING THEM A BUNCH MORE PAPER
AND SAYING PLEASE THESE OUT AND
SEND ALL THE VERY. AND THAT CAN
BE VERY CONFUSING TO THEM. SO
WE DO HAVE A SITUATION AS
YOU'LL SEE I THINK IN THE
BRIEFING PAPER. AND IT'S A
GERMAN NAME ALL OF FROM THE HVS
WILL NOTE. WHERE PEOPLE GET
THIS. AND THEN THEY JUST NEVER
EVEN RESPOND. AND SO THEY DON'T
REALLY GET THE CHANCE TO
COMPLETE THAT THE SORT OF IDEA
FAILING TO PROVIDE THE
INFORMATION THAT IS NEEDED AND-
WE MAKE THEM- I'M- INELIGIBLE
OR POTENTIALLY. MOVE THEM INTO
THE COVER CALIFORNIA BASED
COVERAGE WHERE THEY MAY HAVE A
COST THAT IS GREATER THAN THEY
WOULD HAVE. IF WE COULD HAVE
DONE THAT ASSET CLASS WITH THEM
AND FOUND THEM ELIGIBLE. ON AN.
ONGOING BASIS- THERE IS ALSO A
TWO EFFECT. FOR THE WHO MAKE.
OF EITHER IN THE FIRST PLACE OR-
IF THEY ARE FOR EXAMPLE MOVING.
MATCH I. COVER ON ARTS. IN
ORDER TO SEE IF YOU'RE STILL
ELIGIBLE HERE'S SOME PAPERWORK
THAT YOU NEED TO FILL OUT AND
WE NEED TO GET THESE- YOU KNOW
DIFFERENT VERIFICATION. THERE
ARE PEOPLE WHO MAY NOT EVEN
APPLY OR WHO MAY JUST IGNORE
ALL THE PAPERWORK. AND
THEREFORE MISS OUT ON THIS
COVERAGE THAT THEY COULD IN
FACT BE ELIGIBLE FOR IF ONLY WE
WERE TEN PART PROVIDE THAT. SO
IN ADDITION TO THE LIMITS BEING
LOW. AND IT APPLYING TO A LOT
OF TYPES OF PROPERTY- SUCH AS
JEWELRY BURIAL PLOTS TRUSTS AND
THINGS LIKE THAT. YOU ALSO CAN
SEE A SITUATION WHERE SOMEONE
WHO MAY BE ELIGIBLE THIS
DOESN'T EVEN BOTHER. AND SO I
THINK YOU SORT OF HAVE TO
GROUPS TO THINK ABOUT. THOSE
WHO GET TOLD DURING THE PROCESS
THAT THEY'RE NOT ELIGIBLE AS.
WELL AS THOSE WHO JUST NEVER
EVEN START. WELL IF WOMEN
NEEDED- AS DISCUSSED I THINK IN
THE PREVIOUS. COOPER THERE'S
NOT A HUGE AMOUNT OF IN MINUTES.
STATE THAT WHEN REALLY BE
ACHIEVED IN THE SENSE OF. YOU
KNOW WE CAN JUST CUT THE COUNTY
STAFF. WHAT WE DO SEE IS THAT
COUNTIES ALWAYS HAVE MORE WORK
ON THEIR PLATE THEN THEY COULD
DO IN ANY GIVEN DAY. SOMEONE'S
PHONE CALL DOESN'T GET RETURNED
ON THAT SAME DAY. AND
INTERCOUNTY TRANSFER MAY NOT BE
INITIATED ON THE DAY IN WHICH
IS NEEDED. THERE ARE ODD.
COVERAGE ARE THINGS THAT WE
NEED TO TAKE CARE OF ALERTS
FROM THE MEDICAL SYSTEM THAT WE
NEED TO PROCESS. DEPRIVE MAJOR
PEOPLE. MISS OUT ON COVERAGE.
NOTHING DO WITH THE- BECAUSE WE
CAN GET TO THEM ON THE SAME DAY
SO WE WOULD BE. TO MORE. EASILY
GET TO THOSE THINGS ANSWER THE
PHONE MORE TIMELY CALL BACK THE
NEXT PERSON MORE QUICKLY. IF WE
DO NOT HAVE TO CHASE THE PAPER
FROM INDIVIDUALS. AND EXPLAIN
TO THEM. WHAT THESE DIFFERENT
REQUIREMENTS ARE. SO HOW WE CAN
PASS THE TEST IS FOR THE APPLE-
THE BEING. WHO ARE ARE FOUND
IMPLY AND THERE FOUND TO BE AN
ISLAND. FOR THE MATCH I BASED
COVERAGE IS THE AFFORD CARE ACT
COVERAGE. THAT IS BASED ON YOUR
TAX FILING. AND NOT AN AFFECT
THAT. AT THEIR PHONE IN OUR-
FOR. DATE COULD THAT BE TO A-
TO THE INCOME BEING OVER THE
LIMIT. OR A REASON. THEY- ARE
STILL A COUPLE A PATH. IF IT.
THROUGH THE COVER TELL. PATHWAY
IS WORK VERY MANY PEOPLE APPLY.
THEY GO THROUGH THAT. IT WILL.
SEND REFERRAL. TO THE- ELIGIBLE
STAFF. THAT COULD HAPPEN IF IS
A CERTAIN. CHECKED APPLE. ARE
AS- HIRE SOMEONE IN MY
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS. OR A
CONDITION THAT MAY ME I'LL-
UNDER THESE. MATCH I PROBE.
ALSO THERE'S A BOX OF THAT
APPLE. THAT THEY CAN CHECK THAT.
PLEASE RETURN MY- FOR ALL
MEDICAL PROGRAMS. THAT'S KINDA
NEARLY AND WE LOOK AT PAPER
APPLE. THERE'S THIS ONE CENTER
HAS BEEN OF CHECKS OUT BOX. THE
CAN WILL RECEIVE THEIR APPLE.
OF COURSE. TO BE ABLE TO FOLLOW
UP WITH THAT AND SO OUT OF THE-
AND SO- THAT ME TELL HER SO.
BACK THE COUNTY SINCE THE FACT.
PASS LIKE MENTIONED THE- IT'S
GOT FORMS. THAT TAG. AND I AM
FOR. CERTAIN TYPES OF ASSETS TO
BE LET'S OUT. AND THEN THE IN-
IS TOLD THAT. ARE NEED FOR
CERTAIN ITEMS EXAM. ON ANYBODY
ACCOUNT- ACCOUNT STATEMENT
NEEDED A RECENT ACCOUNT STATE.
SO WE CAN SEE HOW OF THE
ACCOUNT SO IT GOES FROM THERE
AND I CAN ANSWER MY QUESTIONS
ABOUT THAT IF THERE ARE. THAT
THOSE. I'M BEING THERE ARE I.
DO TOOK A QUICK REMINDER THERE
ARE NON I. FOR WHICH I TEST IS
REQUIRED. THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT
MORE SPECIAL. IN JUST THE MORE.
CALL AGE WONDERS. TYPE OF CAR-
THEY DO HAVE VERY SPECIFIC
CONDITION SUCH AS SOME WITH
FRESH OR CERVICAL CANCER. SOME
WITH YOUR BOOKING. THESE ARE
SMALL PROGRAM. AND THEY'RE MORE
SPUR. SO I THINK BOTH. YOU KNOW
ON THE FLOOR PROBE- AND THEY
INDIVIDUAL AFFECTED DOESN'T
SENSE FOR FROM OF THE COPPER.
TO THE OTHER REASON THAT
SOMEONE WOULD GET- IN. AND WORK.
TO FILL OUT THERE- IN. WITH IS
IF THEY HAVE. BEEN RE. MY I
THINK COVERAGE. AND FOR WHAT
REASON THEY'RE NOT LONGER L.
THIS MY FIGHT DUE TO IN. THERE
INCOME HAS GONE UP AND BEFORE-
THIS CAN. THEM FROM THE PROGRAM
THE COUNTY IS REQUIRED TO SEND
THEM INFORMATION ABOUT MY MATCH
ON THAT ACCOUNT. AND SAY WE MAY
BE ABLE TO FIND YOU ELIGIBLE IF
YOU HAVE ONE OF THE SITUATIONS
AND THAT LISTS OUT THE MOST
COMMON NOT MATCH I RELATED
SITUATIONS THAT ASKS FOR THAT
ADDITIONAL FOLLOW UP. SO THE
FORM SOMEBODY GETS AND THEY'RE
COMING IN BRAND NEW IS AN
APPLICATION. OR IF THERE
CHANGING FROM MAGIC COVERAGE
INTO POTENTIALLY NON MAGIC OR
THEN GOING TO GO TO COVER
CALIFORNIA. FOR THAT COVERAGE
THEY ARE THEY ARE ACTUALLY
DIFFERENT. SO THERE'S MULTIPLE
FORMS THAT COUNTIES YEARS
DEPENDING ON THE CIRCUMSTANCE
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE SAME
THAT THEY STILL ASK FOR PEOPLE
TO FILL OUT ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION. FOR US TO BE ABLE
TO DETERMINE IF THEY'RE
ELIGIBLE UNDER THESE NON. MATCH
AYE BATES CORPORATE. ON A FEW
DEATHS COM- BEFORE I UP AND IF
THERE'S ANY QUESTION. THAT
SACRAMENTO AND I THINK THIS THE
MENTION REALLY AND THAT. CAN BE
THE TO UNDERSTAND AND WORK A OF
FOLLOW UP AND BACK AND FORTH
BETWEEN THE- ALA. WERE AND THE
CALL. AND ALL THAT PAPER THERE
IS A LOT OF IT AND THEN. IF YOU
HAVE THE TYPE OF THAT AND THEN
THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE
TO PROVE IT FOR THE MOST PART
NOT JUST. PEOPLE'S FOR A HERE
WE PAPER BACK UP. WHAT THEY SAY
ARE THE DOCKING THAT THEY BACK
TO US. ON IT COULD BE CONFUSING-
AND- WHEN WE WERE WITH OF THE
COUNTY PRIOR TO. THIS HEARING
TO GET SOME REAL THINGS. HOW
DEAL WITH TRUSTS EXAMPLE OF
SOMEONE HAS A TRACK ISLAND
TRUST LIKE. MY AND I GOT MAYOR
WE GOT A WILL FOR KIDS PUT
ACROSS TOGETHER- IF REALLY HARD.
FOR AN OLD. WORKER AND- THE
TRIAL CAN IS AN ASSET WHAT WHAT
IF. THEY CAN. CHANGE IT IN SOME.
AND THE IT'S TO EXPLAIN THAT I
IN A SO OF INSTRUCTIONS TO
COUNTIES LIKE IN ALL COUNTY. OR
APPLE MANUAL THERE ARE. THEY
JUST NEED TO REALLY WORK
THROUGH. IN EVEN THOUGH THOSE
ARE CALM. SITUATION REVIEW
APPLY. WHEN WE RUN INTO LIKE
THAT IT DOES TAKE YOU MORE WERE.
TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE NEXT
WITHOUT. THIS IS WHAT THE IN
THE IS WHAT. THERE ARE FORMS
THAT THAT ASK QUESTIONS
DIFFERENTLY ENACTED BE CAN BE.
FOR TWO OF THEM CALM. USED FORM
THAT ASK FOR THAT. ABOUT ONE
SAYS. TELL US ABOUT ANY. YOU
OWN. THE OTHER. HELLO THANK YOU
OR OLD WORN. ONE VEHICLE. AND
THAT IF THERE IS YOU. ACT GET
HAVE A CAR AND MEDICARE. AND
IT'S ONLY IF YOU HAVE A- CARS
TO BE START TO THE- LOOK AT
THEIR BACK. IN KIND OF WHAT
PURPOSE IS AND WHAT THEY'RE
USED FOR. AND SO WE'RE GET.
DIFFERENT AND- BACK FROM PEOPLE.
ON FOR AND STYLE. THAT NOT BE
CONFUSED FOR PEOPLE AS WELL FAR
WERE. WHO HAVE TO REMEMBER KIND
OF WERE THEY'RE BEING TOLD AND
HOW TO. WITH AND THAT THAT
PASSED. AND THEN WHAT IMPORTANT
THING TO KNOW IS- AS I NOTED
WHEN. TRYING FIGURE OUT OF
THEIR- TO BEGIN. OR IF ME THE
MATCH I PRO AND GOING. COULD
NON MAGIC WORK HELLO. FOR THE
END. WALKING AS LONG WERE WORK
WITH THEM. SAY THEY SENT PART
OF THE IN FOR. BACK SOME OF THE
VERY. BASED ON THE TO GET MORE.
BEFORE ALLOW FROM. DIFFERENT
SUCH. I DON'T HAVE THAT NOW BUT
I. FOR IT THINGS LIKE THAT WE
ACTUALLY CAN GO AND FORTH FOR
QUITE SOME TIME. THE THAT IN
THE END. IS THAT AS LONG AS WE
ARE WORKING. WE NOT GOING TO.
CALL OFF THEIR MANAGER BASED
COVERAGE WE'RE GONNA WAIT. AND
SEE PROCESS THROUGH AND FIGURE
OUT. WHAT ARE THEY ACTUALLY
ALLOWED FOR GO FORWARD WE'RE
ALSO NOT GOING TO DENY THAT
APPLICATION AS LONG AS WERE
ENGAGED WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE
OUT WHAT'S REALLY YOU KNOW THE
SITUATION. BUT IT CAN TAKE SOME
TIME IT'S SUPPOSED TO TAKE
AROUND THIRTY TO FORTY FIVE
DAYS. DEPENDING ON THE.
CIRCUMSTANCE THEY CAN EVEN TAKE
LONGER THAN THAT. WITH THAT
SORT OF OLD PEOPLE IN LIMBO
WHILE GOING BACK AND FORTH THAT
WAY. ON AND FINALLY- WE TALK A
LITTLE BIT- IN THE PRIOR. ABOUT
TERM. AND I DO THINK THAT THE
RULES FROM TERM CARE CAN IT'S-
CAN. ESPECIALLY BE AS NINA.
PEOPLE CAN- DOWN THEIR ASSETS
THOSE YOU CAN ARM TAP INTO YOUR
BANKING. YOU CAN GIVE SOME OF
IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THE
AN EXTRA CAR THAT. I ALLOW- IF
I WASN'T FOR MED ALL I GIVE
THAT CARD MY SISTER OR COULD UM
YOU KNOW. LET AT AND AT A LOT
MAYBE TO GET IT OF MY ASSETS SO
I THINK. WELL THE IS A WAY YOU.
IF YOU'RE NOT. GOING TO BE
GOING IN LONG TERM CARE IF YOU
ARE. POTENTIALLY A LONG TERM
CARE RECIPIENT AND THAT IS- FOR
THE NEXT THIRTY MONTHS THAT'S
THREE ZERO THIRTY MONTHS WE
WILL LOOK BACK AND SEE. DID YOU
DO ANY OF THAT DID YOU GIVE
AWAY SOMETHING DID YOU SELL OR
GIVE AWAY PROPERTY OR HOUSE OR
SOMETHING FOR LESS THAN IT'S
REALLY VALUE THAT. AND IF
THAT'S THE CASE THEN WE HAVE TO
DO SOME CALCULATIONS AND IT
COULD MAKE SOMEONE INELIGIBLE
FOR LONG TERM CARE FOR A PERIOD
OF UP TO THIRTY MONTHS AND IT'S
BASED ON. HOW MUCH I GIVE AWAY
AND HOW MUCH DOES THE- I CARE
COST AND WE DO MATH TO FIGURE
OUT HOW MANY MONTHS YOU'RE
LOCKED OUT- I AGREE THAT LONG
TERM CARE THOUGH IS SO PRICEY
AND EXPENSIVE. THAT IT IS
DIFFICULT TO DO THINK ABOUT- I
GETTING TO A POINT IN A LOT OF.
WHERE COST WOULD. BE I.
SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD WANT
TO BEAR TOOK. A THE TAG THE
THIRD. INCREASE AT A MINIMUM
FROM WAY WE'VE BEEN FOR THE-
SEVERAL BACK- KNOWING THAT IF
YOU JUST THINK THE PRINCE. WE
BEAT. WHERE WE ARE NOW- IS
SOMETHING THAT. CAN SUMMARY. WE
HAVE GREATLY SIMPLIFIED ACCOUNT
FOR. MANY MANY OF OUR OUR- AND
RECIPIENTS. THE AC REQUIRES OF
THIS AND HOW. HAD ALREADY GONE
FURTHER IN SOME RESPECTS. THAT
WAS REQUIRED BY THE LAW. BUT
THERE ARE KEY GROUPS FOR WHICH
THE PROCESS WASN'T SIMPLIFIED
EITHER AS MUCH OR AT ALL. AND
THEY FOR THE GROUPS ARE TALKING
ABOUT TODAY. AND THERE'S NOT A
TREMENDOUS SAVINGS IN THE BANK
ON FRIDAY I. ADMINISTRATIVE YOU
KNOW REDUCE THE OF THE NEED TO
DO THESE TASKS. BUT THERE'S A
HUGE POTENTIAL. AS EVERYONE. I
IN THE PRIOR COMMERCE. FROM
KEEPING PEOPLE. MADE THEIR
COTTON OF CARE. AND PROVIDING
PREVENTATIVE SERVICES AND JUST
OVERALL GENERAL COMMUNITY
HEALTH WHICH IS A REASON TO DO
SOMETHING EVEN IF THERE'S NOT A
DIRECT SAVINGS OFF AND MANY YOU
KNOW POLICY CONSIDERATIONS.
POLICY WONK SPEAK RIGHT DOCTOR
ON THE LEFT. I THINK THE STATE
IS ALSO I JUST WANT TO GIVE
THEM A SHOUT OUT THAT THEY'VE
DONE A LOT OF WORK ON ALONG
WITH PROVIDERS. AND COUNTIES
AND- OF ADVOCATES FOR
RECIPIENTS AND THE MOST RECENT
ELEVEN FIFTEEN DIVERSE. TRYING
TO REALLY EXPLORE AND TEST OUT
WAYS TO CARE FOR QUORUM CARE.
FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ELDER
HAVE DISABILITIES OR OTHER
CHRONIC CONDITIONS TO THINK
ABOUT HOW TO OVERALL LOWER THE
COSTS BUT IMPROVE HEALTH AT THE
SAME TIME FOR THEM. AND I
THINK- MORE ABOUT IS IN
DISCUSSION AND CAL AIM SO I
THINK THE CONVERSATION SO THEY-
ARE A BIT LINKED IN THAT WAY.
ON EVEN THOUGH THE ASSET TEST
IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING AT THE
VERY FRONT END IS THE
GATEKEEPER KIND OF THING.
VERSUS PROVIDING THE SERVICES
ON THE BACK AND THEY ARE STILL
VERY HAND IN HAND BUT THINKING
ABOUT IT THAT WAY I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT. WITHOUT ALL I'D BE
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
THAT THE MAN MAY HAVE. THANK
YOU VERY- ARE QUESTIONS OF THIS
SENTIMENT. MISTER CHANG. JUST
ONE QUICK I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU'RE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT DH
CS THAT PART OF THIS. ALL SORRY
SIR- I. THE KEY. POINTS AND
ALSO OF THE REAR TERM WHAT'S IN
THE- WILL YOU SEE OF THE- THE-
PAST THE- COST ESTIMATES.
ESPECIALLY ROOM. OPTION ONE OF
THE AYE TEST FOR YOU LOOKS LIKE
IT'S A- THIS MADE- INCREASING
GENERAL FUND ABOUT HOW AND FIVE
DOLLARS ANNUALLY. I'M I THINK
IT'S AN EXCELLENT WE'RE NOT
ABLE TO PULL DOWN THE SAME DATA
SO WE CAN RECREATE AND REALLY-
YOU KNOW SORT OF READ IT MATH.
I DO THINK THAT IT'S CALL TO
THINK ABOUT IT IN THE TWO BY WE
WERE LIKE YOUR TALKING ABOUT
MISSY THE PERSON ALSO YOU COME
IN. AT OUR FOUNDER. THERE'S-%
PEOPLE COME IN TODAY AND ARE-
pTO PROVIDE AND SO THEY SORT OF
GO AWAY THEY ARE NOT ELIGIBLE I
GOT MORE AND SPEND- I DO THINK
THERE MIGHT BE SOME. INTEREST
AT THE THROUGH WHO NEVER GET TO
THAT POINT AT ALL I'M
ESPECIALLY THOSE AS NEW OUTLOOK
WHO. MAY BE ON EVEN AFTER BEING
A- FOR ITS BY THREE OR BY
ADVOCATE THEY SAY NO I'M NOT
GOING TO BE ELIGIBLE THAT I
THINK WE HAVE THAT PROBABLY.
THROUGHOUT OUR SYSTEM- AND IT
FRANKLY MAY SPEAK TO SOME OF
THE REASONS WHY WE'RE NOT
SEEING AS MANY CASES OF MEN
DURING THE PAN. BUT CERTAIN
THIS SORT OF SPECTER OF THIS TO
THEIR IF THEY HAVING A SYSTEM
FROM THE COUNTY TO COMPLETE
THAT INFORMATION COULD BE A BIT
OF A CHILLING EFFECT AS WELL SO-
I THINK THEY- ON THE NUMBERS
COULD. BE GREATER IF YOU TAKE
THAT GROUP INTO AN ACCOUNT SO
I'M LIKE I SAID I'M NOT ABLE TO
RUN A DATA AND- ON MY OWN TO
THINK ABOUT HOW THAT MIGHT
CHECK OUT. DO YOU HAVE A CELL
OF WHO THE BEST PEOPLE TO GIVE
US. YOU KNOW ANOTHER OPINION ON
THIS NUMBER. WELL I KNOW THAT
WE WORKED PRETTY CLOSELY WITH
THE LEGISLATURE ANALYST'S
OFFICE ON A LOT OF THE OF THE
STUDY SO NOT TO MORE WORK FOR
THEM SO I KNOW THAT IS ACTUALLY
THEIR JOB IT MAY BE A PLACE TO
THINK OF. LOOKING AT THE
DIFFERENT THAT BOTH BE SUBJECT
TO THE ASSET TEST NOW I KIND OF
WHAT HAVE TO AS THEY GO THROUGH
THAT PROCESS AND TO THINK ABOUT.
HOW MIGHT WE ARE IN- WHAT THE
SHOWING UP AS TO HAVE MODEL NOW
IS THAT A GROUP OR SMALLER I
THERE'S AN ASSUMPTION AND IF
NOT ABOUT IF THE- THAT IF
SOMEONE WERE NEEDS HEALTH
COVERAGE AND SOME WHO HAS A THE-
SOMEONE WHO IS AS SENIOR WHO
HAS FOR AND THERE'S- MAJOR. PUT
YOU KNOW HOW TO PUT THEMSELVES
TO THAT PROCESS BECAUSE THEY
REALLY NEED THAT. AND IT MIGHT
BE A GROUP THEN YOU MIGHT GET
WITH OTHER OF TO LIKE THIS- BUT
I SAW THINK IT DOES WORK BEAR
KIND OF LOOKING AND- THANK YOU
TO YOU YEAH I THINK WE HEARD
FROM THE C. THAT. SOMETIMES IS
REALLY FOR THE PEOPLE ARE
REALLY MORE IS NOT A MATTER IF
IT'S JUST MATTER OF RIGHT SO I
THINK WE'RE TRYING TO GET A
SAID OF REALLY. WHAT IS THE
REAL THE IT IS COSTS BECAUSE IF
THERE TO BE ON THE AS POINT
THEY'RE GOING TO ON THE RULES
OF SOME POINT- IT'S- THE PEOPLE
THAT. YOU KNOW WE MAY BE MISSED
BUT COULD BE COSTING US QUITE
BIT BECAUSE- THEY'RE GOING TO
THE ROOM THAN GOING TO- PRIMARY
SO AGAIN AGAIN WHAT WE'LL TALK
DALY ALL. I THINK THAT THAT'S
WHAT YOU'RE- AS A MEMBER OF THE-
THERE. THERE'S TO BE A GROUP OF
P. WHO J. IN. THERE'S ALWAYS
PEOPLE WHO DO KNOW THE COVER.
THERE TO BE. WITH AND THEY KIND
OF AND THAT'S- UTILIZED.
ARMORED ROOM OR OTHER- REALLY
HIGH AND- WHEN IF WE- HAVE BEEN.
THEM AND IF. BARRIER OF THE
ASSET TO BEING IN THE- OR
CERTAINLY. IF CONSIDER. OF THE
WE END. THAT OR DO WE ADD TO
THE TYPE OF CASH. THAT ARE
EXACT AS MOST. THE WHAT ABOUT I
THINK. OF THEM THINGS. WITHOUT
OUTRIGHT LIMITING IT- THAT
THOSE COULD GET MORE PEOPLE OF
AND FOR. GET THEM THAT COVER
EARLY. AND THAT'S KIND OF THING
THAT I. WE WERE TO DAMAGE.
THROUGH LIKE WHOLE PERFECT. IN
THE PRIOR ELEVEN. WE THAT NOW
AND TELL. THERE WERE. AT HAVE
EVEN THEM. CARE PLANS TO ON A
LARGER. IN THAT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU JEFF QUESTION. MMHM
OKAY I JUST A COUPLE THINGS
FIRST OFF YOU I KNOW THAT YOU
EARLY ON TALK TO- THE FACT THAT
THIS OF THE SAVING- IN IT FROM
AT THE COUNTY IS TO JUST YOU
KNOW THEY THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO
A THAT DO THE PAPERWORK BUT
THAT THAT INCREASES THE OF THE
SERVICE RIPPED PROVIDE FOR
PEOPLE AS WELL THERE IS THERE'S
A THERE'S A THERE'S A STRONG
TEN VALUE- YOU IN THE- THE- ARE
THERE ANY PRINT. DOC REQUIRED
THE YOU THINK ARE PART BIRD THE
THAT TERM SHOULD BE CHIU OR- OR
TO REGISTER TO THROW THE WHOLE
OUT. THANK IT'S A GREAT- I
THINK. TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE
ARE COULD BE CHANGE. AND SOME
OF THE MORE ARCANE PART OF THE-
I MEAN CERTAINLY SAY. FOR THE
WHOLE THING OUT I THINK WOULD
OUR PRESS FROM FOR MY-
PERSPECTIVE. BUT IF THAT'S NOT.
OR UP NOW BEING THAT. SORT OF
FINAL. THERE ARE A LOTOF
THINGS THAT ARE ASKED FOR I
MEAN I THINK I MENTIONED THE
BURIAL PLOTS IS SORT OF THAT.
FOR ME THE HALLMARK EXAMPLE OF
WHY ARE WE ASKING SOMEONE ABOUT
THEIR BURIAL PLOT I MEAN IT'S
JUST. LIKE THEY'RE GONNA GO
SELL IT AND THEN PAY FOR
COVERAGE FOR IT BUT OTHER
EXAMPLES I MEAN. EVERY SINGLE
KIND OF LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES
IRAS STOCKS BONDS RETIREMENT
ACCOUNTS. THERE IS- THINGS
LIKE. YOU WERE YOU WERE SAYING
AND OTHERS WERE SAYING IN THE
IN THE CONVERSATION WITH MISSY.
THERE IS A NEED ESPECIALLY THE
STATE WITH A HIGH HIGH COST OF
LIVING WITHOUT. TO BUILD. AND
EGG. SOME OF FALL BACK FOR MORE.
THANK GO BEYOND JUST HEALTH.
THERE ARE ARE A HUGE PART OF
LIVING. I KNOW THIS KID THAT
MAKE GOD LET'S HOPE IT'S IN A
LIFETIME- FOR MOST OF US MIGHT
NINETY SIX YEAR OLD MALE ACROSS
THE STREET NOT. TO ANALYZE. BUT
FOLKS YOU KNOW FOLKS WHO NEED
HAVE A I FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE
SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN. YOU
KNOW PLANNED OF. AND SO HAVING
THE LOOK AT. YOU KNOW. WHICH
TYPE TO RETIRE ACCOUNT DID YOU
GO AND HOW OUR- WORKER. HAVE TO
SAY THAT. YOU KNOW THIS YOU'VE
MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE BECAUSE
NOW I NEED A- YOUR RETIREMENT
ACCOUNT YOU'VE BEEN. INTO THOSE
ARE I MEAN ARE KIND OF LIKE A
DEATH DECISIONS AND SOME. IF
YOUR IF ILL AND YOU KNEW THE
COVERAGE I DON'T. THAT IF WE
TELL YOU TO. AND THAT'S WHERE
PRETTY AWFUL THAT TO SAY THE
SOMEBODY THINK IT YOU KNOW
SERVE OUT OF THE FIRST. OF THE
WORKER. FOR WHOM SOME SAYS BUT
THAT'S MY- HOW I. AND WE WHAT
WE'RE SEING NOW. OR YOU KNOW
SO YOUR BURIAL PLOT OR SELL
YOUR- YOU KNOW IF ANY OF THESE
THINGS IT'S PRETTY FRUSTRATING
AND SO THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF
THINGS THAT I WOULD SAY. TRYING
TO MINIMIZE THAT TRYING TO GET
RID OF THOSE TO MASS THAT TEST
IF WE CAN'T GET RID OF THE
ASSET TEST ALTOGETHER. WOULD BE.
HOPEFUL ON MANY LEVELS OF WHAT
WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW. WELL
THANK YOU I THINK THE I JUST
SIT HERE AND KIND OF SHAKE MY
HEAD REGARDING THE BURIAL PLOT
YOU KNOW HEAR SOMEONE TRYING TO
BE RESPONSIBLE IN PLANNING AND
IT'S A BURDEN FOR THEIR FAMILY
NO ONE WANTS TO GO OUT AND DO
THAT BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO
TELL THEM THEY NEED TO SELL
THAT AND CREATE ANOTHER.
ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES FOR THEIR
FAMILY AT AT A FUTURE DATE MAKE
IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE SO
I'M CURIOUS AND A COUPLE JUST A
COUPLE FINAL QUESTIONS HERE.
OUR DENIALS FOR EXCEEDING THESE
REQUIREMENTS COMMENT OR IS IT
MORE COMMON THAT PEOPLE SEE THE
PAPERWORK AND SAID I'M NOT
TELLING THEM ANYTHING ABOUT
THAT- I DO NOT HAVE THE DATA
THAT I APOLOGIZE- SO I CAN'T
ANSWER SPECIFICALLY. I KNOW WE
SEE BOTH. AND AGAIN AS YOUR
NOTING I MEAN IT'S CERTAINLY
SOMETHING WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH
AND WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENTS
TO TRY TO PROVIDE. SORT OF THE
REASON FOR DENIAL- IS ACTUALLY
DUE TO THE ASSETS OR IS IT DUE
TO FAILURE TO PROVIDE. I DO- I
DO THINK THAT- IT'S MORE BASED
ON WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM OUR
COUNTIES JUST ANECDOTALLY. BUT
IT IS STILL MORE PEOPLE GOING
THROUGH THE PROCESS AND BEING
TOLD NOW- THAN THOSE WHO JUST
DROP OUT AND FAILED TO PROVIDE
THE INFORMATION BUT THERE ARE
DEFINITELY SOME OF. SO WHAT ARE
THE MOST COMMON REASONS THAT
PEOPLE FALL OUT IS IT JUST THEY
JUST EXCEED THE NUMBER OR IS
IT- I GUESS I GUESS THAT'S WHAT
IT WOULD BE. IT WOULD BE YEAH I
MEAN I MEAN THE BANK ACCOUNTS
THE TWO THOUSAND AND THREE
THOUSAND LIMITS ARE FOR BANK
ACCOUNTS. AND SO SOMEONE HAD
ESPECIALLY I MEAN WE SAW THIS
IN THE PROCESS AND TWO THOUSAND
EIGHT AND NINE. ALL YEAR WE HAD
A REALLY GOOD ECONOMY AND SOME
PEOPLE HAD PUT AWAY. EVEN JUST
A FEW THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR
EMERGENCIES AND THEN THEY WERE
TOLD YOU HAVE TO SPEND DOWN.
THAT MONEY TO BE ABLE TO COME
BACK SO PEOPLE MAY GO AWAY AND
THIS IS WHY SO MANY DO COME
BACK WE'LL GO. ALL RIGHT WELL
I'LL GO SPEND THAT MONEY. AND
INSTEAD OF SAVING AT ALL SPEND
IT ON SOMETHING AND- THAT'S
THAT'S KIND OF THAT THE CHOICE
THAT WERE FORCING PEOPLE TO
MAKE. WELL WE'RE ALSO DOING. MY
ONE OF MY LEAST FAVORITE THINGS
IN LIFE THIS IS THE ONE SIZE
FITS ALL APPROACH AND- SOME
AREAS MIGHT BE A LITTLE LESS
EXPENSIVE TO LIVE IN MAYBE. BUT
CERTAINLY AREAS OF THE BIKE THE
BAY AREA THAT THAT TWO THOUSAND
DOLLARS OR IS IT GOING TO GO
VERY FAR. OR OR OR PARTS OF LA
OR OR WHATEVER BUT- SO IT'S IT
JUST. YOU KNOW I HAVE A HUGE AT
THE HUGE DISTASTE FOR ONE SIZE
FITS ALL APPROACHES TO THINGS
THAT DON'T. TAKE INTO FACTOR
THE REGIONAL VARIATIONS AND-
AND I THINK OF I THINK OF SAN
FRANCISCO- IS BEING ONE OF
THOSE AREAS IT'S- REALLY REALLY
EXPENSIVE AND- WELL TELL YOU IT
JUST DOESN'T GO VERY FAR. AND
IT'S- IT FEELS IT FEELS IT
FEELS VERY VERY UNFAIR SO. WHAT
THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US
THIS MORNING WE VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE IT- WE'RE GONNA MOVE
ON TO OUR OUR NEXT SPEAKER- OUR
NEXT BECAUSE OUR FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE
SERVICES- WILL LIGHT BORN IS A
DIRECT YOU'RE- A DIRECTOR OF
THE DEPARTMENT AND RENAME ALL I
WAS THE HEALTH CARE BENEFITS
AND ELIGIBILITY DEPUTY
DIRECTOR. I APPRECIATE THE
LEVEL OF DETAIL IN THE WORK
THAT WAS PUT INTO THE
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. AND THE
FISCAL- AND ENROLLMENT
ESTIMATES IN THE BACK AND FORTH
WITH CMS ON WHAT'S ABLE TO BE
PROVIDE APPROVED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT- AND I THANK YOU.
FOR BEING HERE TO DISCUSS YOUR
REPORT AND- LOOK FORWARD TO-
LOOK FOR TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE
TO SAY. WELL GOOD MORNING- AND
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE-
DR WOODSTOCK ARAMBULA CHARGING.
AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS- I WILL
LIKE WILL DIRECTOR OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE
SERVICES JOINT FIRING NAME ALL
OF OUR DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR
BENEFITS AN ELIGIBILITY I'M I'M
JUST GOING TO GIVE US A BRIEF
OVERVIEW. OF HOW. TRY TO FIND-
BE OBJECTIVE OF THE
SUPPLEMENTAL BANK WHICH WAS
FIRST PROVIDED ANALYSIS. ON
TROUBLE I JUST OR COMMITTEES.
ARE FOUR THREE VIABLE OPTIONS
ARE. TO INCREASE. OUR ASSET
LIMIT ANNUALLY. FOR THE TWO
MILLION. ON MATCH- FOR
BENEFICIARIES OUR PROGRAM.
COURT WHICH WAS LAST JULY ALL
INCLUDE ASSESSMENT OF THE
FEDERAL AUTHORITIES ARE UNDER
WHICH OPTIONS COULD BE PURSUED
ALL ESTIMATES WOULD BE
INCREASED PRO COSTS WILL BE
OPTIONS AND TIME LINES FOR
SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
POLICY ARM AND- TO COMPLETE
THE- R. SALAH REPORT READ MORE
INVOLVED YOU KNOW WE DISCUSSED
WITH CMS OTHERS- AS WITH THE
MENTION PREVIOUSLY- BE R.
APPROACH IS THE HOUSING USABLE.
THE ONLY OTHER OF- INTRODUCTORY
COMMENTS THAT MAKE IS THAT- THE-
WE THINK OF METACARPALS ONE OF
OUR MAJOR PUBLIC BENEFIT FROM.
WITH THE BALL OVER THE- DECADES
AND I'VE BEEN MORE HELPFUL.
FROM A SORT OF A MORE
GATEKEEPING CULTURE. CULTURE OF
COKE AND SO. REYES ISSUES LIKE
THE ONES THAT- ARE. YEAH
COMMITTEE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY
ALL SO WE VERY WELCOME CONGRESO.
LET ME TURN IT OVER TO ALL
SMALL. THANK YOU SO MUCH WELL-
AND I THINK YOU CAN MAYBE CARE
SOME ON VERY HIGH TO BE TODAY.
OCTOBER FOR NOW ON OUR WILL
THAT WE IN THE SOUTH FOR THAT
WAS SUBMITTED THE LEFT. LAST
YEAR. I AM A LOT OF DISCUSSION
HAS BEEN. WITH THE YEARS. IN
TERMS OF HOW ASSETS WORK IN THE
MEDICAL PROGRAM. AND AGAIN I
JUST WANT TO KNOW- AS HAS BEEN
STABLE. WHAT THE ASSET LIMITS
ARE IN THE MATTER HOW PROGRAM
AGAIN FALLEN INDIVIDUALS TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS. OR THREE
THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR. THE
FOURTEENTH. ALL AS WAS NOTED
THESE CHANGES THESE AMOUNTS NOT
USE NINETEEN EIGHTY NINE WHAT
I'D LIKE TO DO IS I'M GOING TO.
THE REPORT AND THE FINDINGS AND
KIND OF GIVE SOME EXAMPLES OF
HOW IT WOULD WORK I THINK
THAT'S KIND OF BEEN
COMMUNICATED THROUGH SOME OF
THE EARLIER COMMENTS AND I DO
WANT TO NOTE I'M BECAUSE OF
SOME OF THE- QUESTIONS THAT
WERE ASKED. THAT ONE WE ARE
LOOKING AT- ELIGIBILITY FOR.
WELL FIRST LOOK AT WHAT THE
ASSETS. AND THEN BASED UPON IF
THEY MEET OUR ASSET LIMITS OR
NOT. THAT WOULD BE LIKE ONE OF
THE FIRST DECIDING FACTORS TO
DETERMINE IF THEY ARE ELIGIBLE
FOR OUR- IF THEY'RE ABLE TO-
MEET WHAT CORE ASSET LIMITS ARE
OR SPEND DOWN UNDER OUR ASSET
LIMITS. THEN WE WOULD LOOK AT
WHAT THEIR ACCOUNTABLE INCOME
IS IN TERMS OF DETERMINING
ELIGIBILITY FOR THAT MATTER.
WELL WE'RE LOOKING AT INCOME
THE ONE THING I DO WANT TO NOTE
I'M IN THAT HAVE BEEN MENTIONED-EARLIER BY THE FIRST SPEAKER
THAT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE
COUNTABLE INCOME BASED ON WHAT
THE INCOME LIMITS ARE FOR OUR
PROGRAM IN MEDIC COW. IF
INDIVIDUALS- YOU KNOW NEED THAT
ASSET LIMITS THEY MAY WELL HAVE
WHAT WE CALL A SHARE OF COST
FOR THE MEDICAL PROGRAM WHERE
THEY HAVE TO SPEND DOWN BASED
UPON MAINTENANCE NEEDS LEVELS
IN THE MEDICAL PROGRAM IN SO
INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE A SHERIFF
COST FROM APPLE. IT'S A MONTHLY
AMOUNT THAT THAT INDIVIDUAL
MUST EITHER CARE OBLIGATE
THEMSELVES TO PAY BEFORE
MEDICARE WILL THEN STEP IN TO
EVEN NEEDING MEDICAL SERVICES.
THAT THE PERSON. I'M ALL FOR IN
THE THAT HELLO TO UNDER COST AL
IF IN A MONTH THEY NOT ANY TYPE
OF MEDICAL IN THE FIRST. THEY
ARE THEN ALL. TO MEET SHALL. SO
THAT. IS USED ON A MONTH TO
MONTH BASIS FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR
THE PROGRAM. SO I'LL WITH-
EARLIER IN TERMS THE SUPPLE
REPORT ON THAT WE WERE-
REQUIRED CHECK THEN THE HOT-WE
DIDN'T LOOK AT THE TREATMENT OF
ASSETS FOR OUR NON MATCH ON OUR
PROGRAM AND MEDICARE SAVINGS
PROGRAMS. AND FOR LONG TERM
CARE. AND REPORT THAT OUTLINED
OPTIONS FOR MODIFYING THE
TREATMENT OF ASSETS. FOR
INCREASING THAT LIMIT ANGLED
FOR SOME HEALTH PROGRAMS WHAT
THE FEDERAL AUTHORITY IS UNDER
THE OPTIONS THAT COULD BE
PURSUED AND THEN AS SOON AS FOR
THE INCREASE PROGRAM COSTS FOR
EACH OPTION. AND THEN WE
ESTIMATED TIMELINES. FOR SYSTEM
IMPLEMENTATION. AGAIN FOR
PURPOSES OF HOW CAN BE TREATED
WHAT IS ALLOWED UNDER FEDERAL
LAW WE CAN SEEK APPROVAL BEEN
WHICH IS FROM WE CANNOT
ELIMINATE THE ASSET LET ME. WE
CAN'T INCREASE THE ABSENT WHEN
WE CAN MODIFY THE TREATMENT OF
CERTAIN ASSET TYPES AND THEN WE
CAN ALSO LOOK AT INCREASING
ASSETS. ALLMAN AT THE ASSET
LIMITS ON AN ANGLE BASIS. ON
WHAT WE DID CONSULT WITH C.
MASS AND WE HAD ALSO TALK. ON
BOTH ARIZONA TEAM WORK. IN
TERMS OF THE OPTIONS THAT MEET
WHAT LAY OUT IN THE WORKFORCE
AND THEN WHAT THE POTENTIAL
CHALLENGES WORK AND IMPACTS
ASSOCIATED WITH MODIFYING.
ASSET LIMITS IN CALIFORNIA. SO
IN LOOKING AT IMPLEMENTATION
TIMELINE- WE WALK AT THE TIME
IT WOULD TAKE FOR OUR- SAUCE
SYSTEMS WHICH ARE THE- COUNTY
ELIGIBILITY ENROLLMENT SYSTEMS.
THAT USED TO HELP SUPPORT THE
WORK OF OUR- PEOPLE. AND AGAIN
AS YOU ALL CAN IMAGINE GIVEN
THE SIZE OF OUR PROGRAM- WE DO
LEVERAGE OUR ELIGIBILITY AND
MOMENT SYSTEMS TO HELP
FACILITATE- ELIGIBILITY
DETERMINATIONS FOR THE MATTER
HOW FAR. AWAY IN THAT SAUCE
SYSTEMS THEY DO HAVE THE
ELIGIBILITY BUSINESS FALLS FOR-
FOR THE NON MAIENSCHEIN
ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS AND
SO BECAUSE OF THAT ANY CHANGES
THAT WE WOULD MEET IN TERMS OF
HOW ASSETS ARE TREATED IN OUR
PROGRAM. THOSE ARE CHANGES WHAT
HAVE TO BE- PROGRAMS IN PART
AND THE SAUCE SYSTEMS AND AGAIN
DUE TO THE MIGRATION TO A
SINGLE SAWS ANY CHANGES TO
ASSETS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE
INFORMED RTG. ONE OF TWENTY
TWENTY FOUR THE SYSTEMS ARE
SLATED TO BECOME ONE SYSTEM- IN.
TWENTY TWENTY FOUR TOWARDS THE
END OF THE YEAR. IN TERMS OF
WORKING AT THE DAY COLLECTION
IT WAS MEANT EARLIER ABOUT HOW
WE CAN Y. GET. THE POPULATIONS
THAT WERE I. FOR EACH OF THE-
WE DID MORE WITH THE SAUCE TO
COLLECT DATA ON BENEFITS WHO
ARE EITHER NOT OR DISCOUNT.
FROM NOW BECAUSE I HAD TO WIN
ASK. SO THIS INCLUDING FROM THE
ABOUT ME AND MY OF CASH ASSETS.
ASSETS THAT WERE OWNED BY
INDIVIDUALS AND THE PROGRAMS
FOR WHICH THEY INDIVIDUALS FROM
SUPPORT. AND THEN THIS
INFORMATION WAS USED TO
DETERMINE THE POPULATION SIZE
FOR EACH OF THE OPTIONS THAT WE
HAVE IDENTIFIED. TRY AGAIN IF I
THE TRENDS IN TERMS OF THE
AMOUNT OF RESOURCES THAT WERE
OWNED BY INDIVIDUALS AND THEN
THE TYPES OF ASSETS THAT COME
ONLY PLACES INDIVIDUALS. ASSETS
AND- OR IN THE THAT DO HAVE-
ASSETS OVER THAT THAT ASSET
LIMITS THEY DO HAVE AN ABILITY
TO SPEND DOWN ON THOSE LIMITS
SO THAT THEY CAN THEN QUALIFY.
AND MEET I WORK AT ON ASSETS
AND ALL. I'M IN THE CAR PARK.
AND THEN THIS WAS THE
INFORMATION THAT WAS USED TO
THEN DETERMINE THE COST
OPTIONS. AND AGAIN WHEN WE LOOK
AT THE COSTS THAT WERE
IDENTIFIED IN THE REPORT. THANK
TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT
OUR POPULATION AND THEN THE
COST IN TERMS OF- HOW THE
SERVICES ARE PAID. FOR IN THE
MEDICAL FROM. RECOGNIZING THAT-
ARE SENIORS IN PERSON WITH
DISABILITIES. OUR PRIMARY
INVOLVED IN MATTER HOW MANAGED
CARE TO MEMBERS. SO IN OF THE
THREE OPTIONS AND THERE WERE
SEVERAL QUESTIONS THAT WERE
PRESENTED TO THE DEPARTMENT TO
RESPOND ON CELL IN MY GOING
OVER THE THREE OPTIONS I HOPE
TO COVER MOST OF THOSE
QUESTIONS THAT WERE POSED TO US
AND THEN AT THE END I'LL TALK A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FROM
SYMPTOMS OF EACH OF THE
OPTIONS. AND THEN ALSO THE
FEDERAL AUTHORITIES THAT WE
COULD MOVE IN TERMS OF HOW WE
TREAT ASSETS DEPENDING UPON-
YOU KNOW WHERE THE FINAL
DETERMINATION ARE- IN TERMS. OF
HOW WE TREAT ASSETS IN THE
FUTURE. SO AGAIN THE WAY THE
REPORT LAID OUT- THE NUMBERS
THAT WE HAD IDENTIFIED ARE
TRULY NEW ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS
THAT WILL COME. PROGRAM EACH OF
THE OPTIONS THAT WERE
IDENTIFIED. ALL RIGHT I DO ALSO
WANT TO CALL OUT THAT THE
NUMBERS IN THE CALCULATIONS
WERE BASED ON A POINT IN TIME
SO DEPENDING UPON THE OPTION
THAT MAY BE ADVANCED IN
CALIFORNIA- INDIVIDUALS THAT
WERE EITHER PREVIOUSLY DENIED
OR THAT DID NOT COMPLETE THE
FULL MEDICAL APPLICATION
PROCESS. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE
POTENTIAL FUTURE ELIGIBLE MAY
BE AND THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL
INCREASES IN OUR POPULATIONS
JUST BASED UPON ASSETS MAY BE
TREATED GINGER WE DO NOT KNOW
WHAT BACK IMPACTING OUR
ASSESSMENT WAS REALLY BASED ON
JUST THAT SET UP INDIVIDUALS
THAT WE WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY
FONG. FROM. THE DATA THAT WAS
PROVIDED TO US. SO IN THE AT
OPTION ON ONE THIS IS THE
OPTION ELIMINATE THE ASSET TAG.
AS INDICATED IN THE REPORT-
THIS OPTION I'M HAS EIGHTY TWO
HUNDRED AND TWENTY MILLION
DOLLAR TOTAL FINE- COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH. IT IT IS THE
OPTION THAT HAS THE ESTIMATED
HIGHEST NUMBER OF NEWLY
ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS A
SEVENTEEN THOUSAND EIGHT
HUNDRED AND TWO. AND AGAIN IN
LOOKING AT THIS- THIS- THIS
OPTION AND HOW IT WORKS FINE SO
IF WE HAVE AN APPLICANT WHO HAD
TWELVE THOUSAND DOLLARS IN A
SAVINGS ACCOUNT. ON THE SECOND
WEEK ALL THAT WITH WERE SAYING
NINETY EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS
UNDER OUR RULES TODAY THEY WILL
BE IN ELIGIBLE FOR PROGRAM
BECAUSE THEY'RE OVER THE TWO
THOUSAND DOLLAR ASSET LIMIT.
AND THEN THAT SECOND VEHICLE IN
A SAVINGS ACCOUNT WITH BACON
OVER. OUR ASSETS. SO IF THERE'S
MORE INFORMED. THERE WOULD BE
NO TASK AND THEN THE END OF THE
WITH THE ASSESSED FROM ALPHA ON
THEIR ACCOUNT IN. AND THAT IS
SOME TO WHAT WE DID. OUR NON
MATCH I'VE AYE FARM I'VE- AND
AGAIN THOSE ARE BASS ON THE
CHANGES THAT WERE DONE UNDER
THE AFFORDABLE CARE AND AS WAS
STATED EARLIER JUST AS A
REMINDER- OUR- MAJORITY OF
PEOPLE IN OUR PROGRAM. USE OF
THAT LAND JOHN HIGH- CAMPBELL
INCOME LIMITS FOR THE PROGRAM
AND THERE IS NO CONCEPT ONE.
WHICH SO IN THE AT OPTION
NUMBER TWO. THIS WOULD NEED TO
INCREASE THE ASSET LIMITS-
AGAIN WE LOOK AT INCREASING
ASSET LIMITS FOR AN INDIVIDUAL
AT TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS AND
THEN FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR
EACH ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD
MEMBER AND THEN TO CHANGE THE
TREATMENT OF CERTAIN ASSETS
SUCH AS NOT COUNTY MULTIPLE
VEHICLES. OR RETIREMENT
ACCOUNTS IN THE ASSET. THESE
ARE COMMON ASSETS THAT WE DID
SEE WHAT APPLICATIONS AND AGAIN
THIS OPTION WAS BASED ON SOME
MORE PROVISIONS IN EIGHTY SIX
EIGHTY THREE OF THAT COMING UP.
I THE ESTIMATED TOTAL- FISCAL
IMPACT IS NINETY ONE MILLION
DOLLARS TOTAL SON. AND THEN FOR
AGAIN ARE ESTIMATED NEWLY
ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS IS. SIXTY
NINE SIX THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED
AND SEVENTY. AND AGAIN HAS A
SIMILAR EXAMPLE WE HAVE AN
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS SIXTY FIVE
YEARS OF AGE THEIR RETIREMENT.
ALL HAVE A TWENTY FIVE HUNDRED
DOLLARS IN A SAVINGS ACCOUNT
AND RETIREMENT PLAN THAT'S
VALUED AT STATE TWENTY SIX
THOUSAND DOLLARS BUT THE
APPLICANT DOES NOT WANT TO DRAW
INCOME AT THAT TIME AND ARE NOT
REQUIRED TO. DRAW INCOME BASED
UPON AYE AT IRS RULES FOR
MANDATORY DISTRIBUTIONS. UNDER
OUR RULES TODAY THAT APPLICANT
WOULD BE AN ELIGIBLE FOR
MEDICARE NOW BECAUSE THEY'RE
OVER THE ASSET LIMIT BECAUSE OF
BAD A SAVINGS ACCOUNT. THAT I
CANNOT IN THE RETIREMENT. IF WE
WERE EMPLOY THE TO BECAUSE OF
RAISING ASSET LIMITS SAID TEN
THOUSAND DOLLARS- THAT
INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS
THE RETIREMENT ACCOUNT WOULD NO
LONGER BE COUNTABLE. AND THEN
THE APPLICANT WOULD PASS ONE
CAR ASSETS. AND LOOKING AT
OPTION NUMBER THREE THIS WAS
JUST TO LOOK AT INCREASING
ASSET LIMITS AND AGAIN AT TEN
THOUSAND FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AND
THEN FIVE THOUSAND FOR EACH
ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD MEMBER.
AND THAT FISCAL IMPACT IS
SEVENTY THREE POINT FIVE MONEY
TALKS. ARE THE ESTIMATED NEWLY
ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS IN THIS
OPTION IS FIVE THOUSAND SIX
HUNDRED AND THIRTY EIGHT. AND
AGAIN AS AN EXAMPLE OF A PERSON
HAD EIGHT OF FORTY EIGHT
HUNDRED DOLLAR SAVINGS ACCOUNT.
AND THAT INDIVIDUAL WOULD BE AN
ELIGIBLE BUT IF WE HAVE OPTION
THREE IN PLACE. I BECAUSE OF
RAISING THE ASSET LIMITS THEY
WOULD PASS THE ASSET. WITHIN OF
THE OPTIONS WE DID DETERMINE
NEWLY ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS
BASED UPON THOSE THAT WERE
DENIED FROM MEDIC COW OR FOR
THE MEDICARE SAVINGS PROGRAMS.
AS ACT EXCESS ASSETS AND THOSE
INDIVIDUALS I DID NOT SPEND
DOWN ON THE ASSETS TO BECOME
ELIGIBLE. ANOTHER AREA THAT WE
AT LOOK AT IN THE REPORT WAS AT
THE ANNUAL INDEXING OF ASSETS.
THIS IS DONE WITH THE MEDICARE
SAVINGS PROGRAM BUT FOR
MEDICAID PROGRAMS THIS IS NOT
SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE.
SO IN LOOKING AT THE
FEASIBILITY OF THIS I'M JUST
LOOKING AT WHAT CHANGES WHAT
THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX- THE
ANNUAL UPDATE USING ONE OUR
ASSET LIMITS ARE- WHAT HAVE A
HIGH SYSTEM COST BECAUSE OF THE
CHANGES THAT WE WOUL HAVE TO
MAKE. TO THE ELIGIBILITY
SYSTEMS UPDATE THOSE- IN
INDICES ON ANNUAL BASIS. AND
THEN THERE'S ALSO THE NEED TO
THEN MAKE- TO APPLY THOSE
CHANGES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS SO
AS THEY CHANGE THEIR MORE HAVE
TO UPDATE AND RE RUN
ELIGIBILITY FOR INDIVIDUALS.
THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHAT
HAPPENS. GOLD ONE WE HAVE INYO
FTL UPDATE. ON THAT UPDATE WHEN
WE HAVE FAILED CHANGES ARE
OFTEN NOT AVAILABLE UNTIL A FEW
MONTHS LATER- WHEN BE
EFFECTIVE- NEW OUTBREAKS COME
OUT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
SO THIS DOES WORK OUR COUNTY
ELIGIBILITY WORKERS TO DO MINE
THE TERMINATION.BACK TO THE
ACTUAL AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION
DATE I'M OF THOSE CHANGES
FOLLOWING THE COMING. AND
LOOKING AT CHANGING ASSET
LIMITS BASED ON THE- PRICE
INDEX. WE'VE ONLY IT WOULD HAVE
A MINIMAL IMPACT ON JUST. OF
ONE CPI IN. SUFFERED A JEFF
LOOKING ONE OUR CURRENT LIMIT
IS AT TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS. I
WANT SOME- IN. WOULD RESULT IN
A ASSET LIMIT TWO AND THIRTY
FOUR IN. TWENTY TWENTY TO. SO
AGAIN IN LOW AT THAT AND THAT
THAT WOULD HAVE IF YOU WOULD A
LOW OF IN THIS- WILL IT WOULD
HAVE MEANT IMPACT IN TERMS OF
THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD
BE CALM ELIGIBLE. BECAUSE OF
THE VERY SMALL DOLLAR-
INFORMATION AGAIN THAT THIS IS
BASED UPON THE EXISTING ASSET
LIMITS BUT WE DO HAVE YOU KNOW.
I DO WANT TO TOUCH ON THE
HOUSING CONS OF WORKING
AGUIAR-CURRY- OPTIONS. THAT
WERE LAID OUT IN THE CAPE FOR.
I SOMEONE LOOKING AT- HELLO THE
ASSETS. AGAIN IN TERMS OF OUR-
HELLO IT DOES ALIGN WITH MAN
TIME METHODOLOGIES THIS HAS
BEEN STATED. IT DOES SIMPLIFY
PROCESS FOR- INDIVIDUALS IN
TERMS OF THE ELIGIBILITY
PROCESS AND IT DOES EASE THE
ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN ON. THERE
ARE FALSE BETTER ASSOCIATED
WITH IT- AND AGAIN WE DON'T
KNOW WAIT THEY CHANGES IN
ASSETS WENT BACK MIGHT DO- FONG
INDIVIDUALS NOW YOU KNOW COMING
INTO THE PROGRAM I'M SO YOU
KNOW THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL
INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD BE FOUND
TO BE ELIGIBLE. AGAIN WE DON'T
KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS BEYOND
THE ESTIMATES THAT WE CAN. IN
TERMS OF LOOKING AT OPTION
NUMBER TWO WHERE WE INCREASED
THE ASSET LIMIT CAN ONE CHANGE
THE TREATMENT OF CERTAIN
ASSETS. IT DOES HELP US TO BE
MORE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE
CURRENT COST OF LIVING BY
INCREASING ASSET LIMITS FOR NON
MATCH I PROGRAMS AND IT DOES
PROVIDE SOME MORE GLOBAL MOVIE
FOR INDIVIDUALS ARE RELATED TO.
ASSETS WHEN IT DOES A LINE WITH
THE PROVISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN-
LAID OUT IN EIGHTEEN SIXTY. ONE
AND THEN AGAIN- IN TERMS OF A
CON YOU KNOW STILL DEALING
WITH- BETTER TREATMENT OF
SPECIFIC ASSETS IS COMPLEX
THERE COULD BE SOME INITIAL-
INAPPROPRIATE APPLICATIONS- OF
THE ASSETS WHERE THERE COULD BE
SOME INCORRECT ELIGIBILITY
DETERMINATIONS AS OUR CAMERAS
ARE BECOMING FAMILIAR WITH THE
NEW POLICIES BUT THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT OUR CARS YOU
KNOW THAT CAN OCCUR WHEN WE
HAVE NEW POLICY CHANGES OR FROM
WHAT WE DO FORCE CORRECT. AND
IN TERMS OF JUST OPTION THREE
LOOKING BACK INCREASE THE ASSET
LIMITS AGAIN. WILL BE A BETTER
ALIGNMENT WITH CURRENT COST OF
LIVING FOR INCREASING ASSET
LIMITS OR BOTH ARE NOT
MAIENSCHEIN AND I'M LIKE
SAVINGS. IT IS THE LEAST COSTLY
OF THE THREE OPTIONS AND
THEREFORE IN MANY INDIVIDUALS
THAT WE'RE DEADLINE FOR BEING
OVER A FAST SUPPLEMENTS I'M IT
COULD- INCREASE THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE THAT CAN BECOME ELIGIBLE
FOR OUR- THERE ARE STILL IN
TERMS OF A CON THERE ARE STILL
MANY TO A SENSE FOR AVAILABLE
ASSETS FOR INDIVIDUALS AND TO
DETERMINE WHAT IS OR IS NOT
AVAILABLE. WHEN MAKING.
ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS. THE
LAST THING I DO WANT TO TALK ON
IS. ON IN LOOKING AT DISK WITH
OUR FEDERAL COURT. IN TERMS OF
WHY THIS FEDERAL FROM SO ALL OF
THE OPTIONS OBVIOUSLY. FROM WE
CAN MAKE THE CHANGE THROUGH-
SAFE AND THEN HOWEVER IF WE
WANTED TO A WOMEN THE LONG TERM
CARE POPULATION- FOR IN OF
THESE. AND WE HAVE TO FILE A
FEDERAL WAIVER DUE TO
PROFITABILITY BECAUSE WE CANNOT
TREAT POPULATIONS THAT FALL
WITHIN THE SAME COVERAGE BURKE
WE CANNOT TREAT THEM
DIFFERENTLY SO IF THERE WAS A
DESIRE TO LOOK AT THE TREATMENT
OF ASSETS BOB FOR PEOPLE THAT.
MAY BE ON TERM CARE. I THEN WE
WOULD HAVE TO SEEK A FEDERAL
WAIVER OUT FOR MAKING CHANGE.
SO AT THIS I LIKE TO STOCK IN
THEN WELL ANY COMMENTS
QUESTIONS FROM. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH- QUESTIONS. MR TANG A
QUICK QUICK QUESTION COULD YOU
WALK THROUGH HOW YOU GOT TO THE
SEVENTEEN THOUSAND. SO
SEVENTEEN THOUSAND WE FIRST
LOOK AT THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT
HAVE APPLIED FOR COVERAGE. AND
THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE
IDENTIFIED TO BE ELIGIBLE AND
THEN FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO
HAVE APPLIED FOR COVERAGE. OUT
ONE OVER THE ASSET AMOUNTS BUT
HAD SUBSEQUENTLY COME BACK AND
HAD SPENT DOWN TO THOSE ASSETS
AND THEN BECAME ELIGIBLE IT WAS
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE
TWO NUMBERS. IN TERMS OF HOW WE
CAME UP WITH A NET NEW ELIGIBLE
INDIVIDUALS OUT FOR THAT- GOT
HE DID DID DID DETERMINE PEOPLE
WHO WOULD EVENTUALLY BECOME
ELIGIBLE AND YOU TOOK THE
DIFFERENCE THAT. THAT'S THE
ONLY TWO THOUSAND MINUS THE
FOUR SIX HUNDRED OR SO. OKAY
THANK YOU. YOUR THANK YOU
OTHERS AFTER REGULAR THANK YOU
AND- DIRECTOR LAKEPORT IT'S
NICE TALKING TO YOU TWO DAYS IN
A ROW INTO DO NOTICE THAT YOU
WERE SHORT ON WORDS TODAY BUT
DO WANTS TO ACTUALLY- ABOUT
YOUR- CHOICE ARCHITECTURE AND
I'M SORRY TO GET WONKY AGAIN
BUT- THE IDEA THAT WHEN YOU
pBENEFIT FROM ONE OF GATE
KEEPING TO ONE. OF COVERAGE
IT'S A CHANGE IN MENTALITY AS
WELL. SO WANTED TO ASK YOU IF I
COULD ABOUT THE C. W. D. A.'S
COMMENTS THAT THE ACID TEST HAS
A CHILLING EFFECT. INSIDE I
THINK THE OPPOSITE OF THAT THEN
IS TO QUESTION WHETHER REMOVING
THE ASSET TEST MAKES US A
WARMER AND MORE COMPASSIONATE
STATE. AND MOVES US CLOSER TO
UNIVERSAL COVERAGE. AS WE LOOK
DURING THIS PANDEMIC I HOPE WE
ALSO SEE THAT THE HEALTH OF
EACH OF US IS DEPENDENT ON THE
HEALTH OF ALL OF US. AND THAT
WAS OUR ELDERLY DURING THIS
PANDEMIC WHO BORE THE BRUNT OF
THE PANDEMIC. AND WOULD HOPE
THAT WE COULD FIGURE OUT HOW WE
COULD HELP TO ENCOURAGE HIM TO
MOVE TOWARDS UNIVERSAL COVERAGE
BY INCLUDING THIS CONVERSATION.
I WILL ADD IT AS WELL HAVING
BEEN AN EMERGENCY ROOM DOCTOR.
I KNOW THAT PEOPLE ARE ONE FOUR
HUNDRED DOLLAR EMERGENCY AWAY
FROM FINANCIAL DISTRESS AND
LOOKING AT THESE ASSETS LIMITS
OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS AND
THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS. IT
MAKES ME CONCERNED THAT WE
REALLY ARE CREATING A SYSTEM
THAT IS PLACING STRESS ON TO
OUR COMMUNITIES. FINAL AND THIS
IS JUST THE REAL QUESTION IT
SEEMED AS IF C. W. D. A. WAS
SAYING THAT THE PURPOSE OF
CATALAN WHOLE PERSON CARES WAS
TO MOVE. IN A DIRECTION THAT
WAS MORE PREVENTATIVE TO MOVE
IN A DIRECTION THAT INCREASED
CONTINUITY OF CARE AND IT SEEMS
THAT BY REMOVING THE ASSET TEST
WE WOULD INCREASE CONTINUITY OF
CARE. AND MOVE IN THE DIRECTION
THAT CALIFORNIA'S IS. POINTING
US IN AND WOULD ASK IF YOU
WOULD AGREE WITH C. WTA'S-
ASSESSMENT- THANK YOU FOR THE
QUESTION- FIRST I WOULD SAY-
QUOTE CENTER LANGS OF OBSERVER
ABOUT THE SORT OF THE- BOB
WARMTH IN TELLING TO OF THEIR A
BURIAL PLOT. SPEAKS FOR ITSELF-
IT IN TERMS OF THE OF. IN THE
ABILITY OF PEOPLE GET CARE
EARLIER ON COVERAGE EARLY ON
RIGHT I THINK IT IS WITH THE
ARMOR GOALS ARE STRONG OF
TALENT ON THE COURT OF COURSE
YOU KNOW IS AS THE LEGISLATURE
THE ADMINISTRATION THROUGH ON-
PRIORITY. INVESTMENTS OF OUR
RACE- THAT'S- WHERE THE VICTIMS.
OF THE STATE HAS TO SB. MUCH OF
THE. IF WE OF THE EVOLUTION OF
COST OF LIVING AND TELL SINCE
THE TIME PLEASE SUPPLEMENTS
WERE ABOLISHED IN ONE THEY ARE
NOW I MEAN IF YOU- ATTENDS A
BENEFICIARY. ALL IS HOME AND
HAS HOMEOWNER INSURANCE THE
DEDUCT IS PROBABLY HIGHER OR AS-
AS YES LIMIT SO IF THERE. HAVE
THAT MUCH IN YOU KNOW. BECAUSE
THEY ANTICIPATING WHAT HAPPEN.
IN THE EVENT A- FIRE FLOOD
CONTROL OR THINGS WERE FROM-
IT'S. IT'S NOT EXCESSIVE
BROWN'S THE PROBLEM. YEAH I'D
LIKE YEAH ON. I WILL THANK YOU
AND- KNOWING THAT IT IS A LINE
WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE
MINISTRY IS MOVING I WOULD-
ENCOURAGE COLLEAGUE FOR US TO
CONTINUE THIS CALL AND TO. THIS
THAT WE CAN GET THERE A LITTLE
FOR THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU- MISTER MATHIS. THANK YOU
CHAIR JUST JUST DOING A COUPLE
GOOGLE SEARCHES. THE MEDIAN
INCOME IN TWENTY NINETEEN AND
CAL WILL SEVEN EIGHT THOUSAND A
YEAR. AND GOOGLING. HOW MUCH
SHOULD I PUT IN MY SAVINGS
ACCOUNT. THE ANSWERS WE GET
BACK OR THREE TO SIX MONTHS. OF
OUR ANNUAL INCOME. SO JUST
BASED ON SIMPLE NUMBERS IN A
SIMPLE GLOBAL SEARCH- EVEN
MOVING. THE ASSET LIMIT TO TEN
THOUSAND I HONESTLY DON'T THINK
IT'S ENOUGH- BECAUSE OF WITH IT
THE WORD PUNISHING PEOPLE. WE
HAVE WORKED HARD THEIR ENTIRE
LIVES AS IS DR ABULAFIA WENT
OUT. WITH OUR ELDERLY. AND YOU
KNOW WE GET IN THESE BURIAL
PLOT DISCUSSIONS WE GET AND ALL
THESE OTHER DISCUSSIONS. ON
WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO. AND YOU
KNOW SOME PEOPLE WORK THEIR
ENTIRE LIVES TO. HOLD ON TO THE
FAMILY FARM THE FAMILY BUSINESS.
THANK CENTER- AND IF WE'RE
GONNA MAKE CALIFORNIA IN AND
YES I'M A REPUBLICAN THING
CALIFORNIA FOR ALL. REFER GONNA
DO THIS IN A WAY THAT MAKES
SENSE. FOR FAMILIES OUT THERE
STRUGGLING FOR GOING TO
INCREASE OUR WHOLE. FOR THIS
INSURANCE WE HAVE TO GET RID OF
THIS ASSESSMENT. I MEAN THAT
THE BASIC NUMBERS JUST DICTATE
THAT. SO I'M GONNA LEAVE THAT
WITH THAT DIRECTOR LIKE BORN
I'D I'D LOVE YOUR HELP IN
CHANGING THAT MENTALITY. ON IT
TO GET RID OF THIS ASSESSMENT
WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE MOVING
FORWARD OBVIOUSLY THAT'S ONLINE
NOT AN ANSWER FOR NOW WITH
SOMETHING TO WORK. TOWARDS IN
THE FUTURE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU MISTER MATHIS MISSED
CARILLO. THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR
CALIFORNIA FOR ALL HAS NO
POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS IT'S
REPUBLICAN DEMOCRAT THE ABILITY
TO HAVE HEALTH CARE HAS NO
POLITICAL AFFILIATION IT IS
ABOUT ENSURING THAT WE ARE
TAKING CARE OF OUR MOST
VULNERABLE ABOUT CREATING
DIFFERENT LANDSCAPES AND POLICY
FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THAT ENSURES THAT ACCESS TO
HEALTH CARE IS A HUMAN RIGHT.
AND OUR ABILITY TO LIVE IN
DIGNITY AS WE RETIRE AS WE GROW
OLD IS OUR RIGHT AS WELL AS
CALIFORNIANS OF THOSE PEOPLE OF
THIS COUNTRY ELIMINATING THE
MEDICAL ASSETS TEST IS WHERE WE
NEED TO BE AS A STATE POLICIES
HAVE BEEN CREATED THAT MAKE IT.
EVEN MORE DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE
TO RECEIVE HEALTH CARE AND IT
DOESN'T MATTER WHERE YOU COME
FROM WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE WHAT
LANGUAGE YOU SPEAK. OR ANY
OTHER BARRIER THAT COMES YOUR
WAY WE SHOULD BE CREATING
POLICIES THAT AT THE END OF THE
DAY HELP PEOPLE AND INSTEAD.
POLICIES HAVE BEEN CREATED THAT
ACTUALLY MAKE IT EVEN MORE
DIFFICULT FOR FAMILIES TO
ACHIEVE. A GENERATIONAL WEALTH
TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THE FAMILY
FARM TO BE ABLE TO KEEP YOUR
YOUR MODEST HOME. TO HAVE A
SAVINGS IN YOUR ACCOUNT FOR
YOUR RETIREMENT. THIS IS NOT
WERE CALIFORNIA SHOULD BE OR
ROOM WHERE THE COUNTRY SHOULD
BE AND IF WE COULD SET A TONE
THAT'S DIFFERENT. FOR ONE OF
THE LARGEST STATE IN THE UNION.
THEN WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
DO THAT WE JUST NEED THE
POLITICAL COURAGE THE GOES
BEYOND PARTISAN LINES TO
ACTUALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY.
HELP PEOPLE WHICH IS THE CHARGE
THAT WE ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR.
IF WAS WELL SIR I THINK YOU.
HAVE TO ECHO. MY COLLEAGUE MISS
CARRILLO THIS. STAY MANDATE I
ALSO CONTINUE TO HEAR THE
CONCERN ABOUT HOW MUCH THIS IS
GOING TO COST THE STATE. NINE
IT'S GONNA POINT ONCE AGAIN TO
THE STATE AUDITOR'S ET DE
REPORT. OUR STATE IS BLUE OVER
TEN POINT FOUR BILLION DOLLARS.
SAY IT AGAIN TEN POINT FOUR
BILLION DOLLARS. BUT YET WE'RE
HAVING A FINANCIAL DEBATE.
ABOUT ENSURING. FAMILIES IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE RICHEST
STATE IN THE UNION. TO ENSURE
THAT THEY CAN GET HEALTH CARE
THEY CAN GET VISION THEY CAN
GET DENTAL. IMAGINE WHAT OUR
STATE COULD LOOK LIKE. THANK
YOU. OKAY JUST TO CUT THEIR IN
HERE ANYONE ELSE I JUST JUST A
COUPLE QUESTIONS AND THEN THAT
WAY HE WILL WANT TO MOVE ON TO
OUR NEXT PANEL- SO THE REPORT
INDICATES THAT ROUGHLY TWO
MILLION PEOPLE ARE SUBJECT TO
AN ASSET TEST WHAT IS THE
BREAKDOWN LOOK LIKE ARE THESE
PRIMARILY SENIORS- DO WE HAVE.
A HANDLE ON. THAT CAN WE HAVE
A- BACK OF THE BACK OF THE
NAPKIN ESTIMATE OF WHAT'S YOU
KNOW WITH WITH THIS POPULATION
LOOKS LIKE. SO THIS IS RUNNING
SO IT WOULD BE FOR OUR SENIORS
AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
THERE CAN ALSO BE SEEN. MATTER
EMBARRASSED SO UP THERE OVER
THE- THAT MATCH I INCOME LIMITS
THEY CAN ALSO BE IN THERE BUT
THE MAJORITY ARE OUR SENIORS
AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
WELL WE CAN CERTAINLY WORK
THOSE NUMBERS CREDIT IT'S A
COMBINATION OF THE COVERAGE
GROUPS THAT WE COVER IN THE
MORNING OUR PROBLEM- SO. THE
TIMING OF MAKING ANY CHANGES TO
THE ASSET TEST- YOU KNOW WE'RE
WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE
DIFFERENT ELIGIBILITY SYSTEMS
MOVE INTO A SINGLE SYSTEM- WE
THOUGHT WE HEARD YOU SAY WE
COULDN'T DE CHANGE WHAT'S AN
ASSET VERSUS WHAT'S NOT AN
ASSET BECAUSE OF THE SARS
MIGRATION UNTIL TWENTY TWENTY
FOUR CAN YOU RE EXPLAIN THAT OR
DID WE- HEAR THAT WRONG. NO SO
YOU'RE HEARD THAT CORRECTLY SO
AT THE TIME THAT WE HAD
CONTAINED THE ESTIMATES ON THAT
SONG. I'M IN IN TERMS OF
LOOKING AT A TIMELINE FOR WHEN
THEY COULD MAKE THOSE CHANGES-
THOSE WOULD BE CHANGES AND THAT
WAS THE ESTIMATE THAT WAS
PROVIDED TO US IN TERMS OF HOW
WE WERE LOOKING AT MAKING THE
CHANGES. TO THE ASSET LIMIT SO-
WE TEND TO WORK WE DO WORK WITH
OUR OUR SAAS PARTNERS IN TERMS
OF COMING UP WITH THE ESTIMATES
FOR WHEN WE MAKE THESE CHANGES-
BUT AGAIN I THINK WHICH
ANYTHING THAT COMES THROUGH THE
LEGISLATURE. THEN IF IT IS A
POLICY. THAT IS- THEN WE HAVE
HAVE THIS ON THE TIME I THINK
WE HAVE ALL SHARE. OF WITH- LED.
AS SOME OF THE COMPLEXITY. WITH
MAKING CHANGES GIVEN THE TIMING
OF WHERE WE'RE OUT WITH THE
SYSTEM MIGRATION SO THERE MAY
BE OTHER PRIORITIES THAT THEY
DO HAVE IN THE QUEUE THAT WOULD
HAVE TO THEN BE. ACCOUNTED FOR
IN DECISIONS WHAT HAVE WE NEED
IN TERMS OF YOU KNOW WHAT FOR
DO THEY CONTINUE TO ADVANCE
SOMETIMES IT'S NOT THIS WOULD
BE WORK. THAT IS NOT- BEEN
CONTEMPLATED SO THEY WOULD HAVE
TO FACTOR IN IF THERE WAS AN
ABILITY TO DO ANYTHING OUR
TEAM. TWENTY TWENTY FOUR ONE-
MIGRATION HAVE BEEN. BEEN
COMPLETE. SO RE. OF WHETHER
THERE'S LARGE. HERE ASKING THE
CHANGED THE SOONEST WE COULD-EXPECT A CHANGE MAYBE EVEN
POSSIBLY THE ELIMINATION OF THE
ASSET TEST IS TWENTY TWENTY
FOUR. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE
SAYING. WELL I THINK THAT. SO
BASED UPON THE DECISION THAT'S
ME MORE THEN WHAT WOULD THEN BE
USED TO INFORM WHAT THOSE
DISCUSSIONS WILL BE WHAT'S
SAUCE IN TERMS OF WHAT THEIR
CAPABILITIES ARE THEY ALREADY
HAVE. A FULL LIST OF POLICIES
THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY WORKING
ON AND SO THIS WOULD BE A NEW
POLICY AND CHANGE THAT WHAT
HAPPENED THEN BE ACCOUNTED FOR.
AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO
IDENTIFY WHAT THE- AVAILABILITY
IS TO MAKE THE CHANGE PRIOR TO
THE ESTIMATED TIMELINE THAT
THEY PROVIDE. I THE TIME WHEN
WE WERE ON THE- OKAY AREA IT'S
A SEEMS LIKE AWFUL LONG TIME I
MEAN REALLY. I UNDERSTAND. YOU
KNOW I JUST I JUST THAT MEANS I
THINK SOMETIMES WE TRIP OVER
CELLS WITH COMPLEXITY AND- AND
SO ON I MEAN I THINK JUST THE
COMPLEXITY THAT'S NEEDED TO
DOCUMENT ASSETS CAN BE PRETTY
ONEROUS YOU KNOW IF YOU'VE GOT
JEWELRY AND IN YOUR HAVE TO
PRODUCE RECEIPTS WELL YOU KNOW
WHAT IF I BOUGHT THAT TWENTY
YEARS AGO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN
AND WHERE IS THAT RECEIPT YOU
KNOW BUT I REST DOESN'T REQUIRE
ME TO KEEP ANYTHING BEYOND.
SEVEN YEARS SO- YOU DON'T HAVE
A RECEIPT YOU GONNA HAVE TO GET
AN APPRAISAL SO I'M GONNA HAVE
TO SPEND MONEY TO HAVE
SOMETHING APPRAISED. TO DECIDE
WHETHER OR NOT I CAN KEEP IT-
THAT. THOSE KINDS OF THINGS
JUST FEEL REALLY ONEROUS AND-
AND YOU KNOW ADDING QUITE
FRANKLY MORE INSULT TO INJURY
ON TOP OF. WHAT'S ALREADY
DIFFICULT SITUATION FOR PEOPLE
THAT ARE VULNERABLE AND- AND
YOU KNOW JUST TRYING TO JUST
TRYING TO SURVIVE SO THAT'S
MORE ABOUT. WHERE THE COMMENT
THAN A QUESTION- I JUST HOPE WE
CAN AT SOME POINT- IF WE- MOVE
MOVING FORWARD IF WE CAN YOU
KNOW EXPEDITE THIS IT'S THIS
HAS A REAL EFFECT ON PEOPLE'S
LIVES AND- HERE IS CENTURY
SAYING THAT WE- COULDN'T. WE
COULDN'T DO ANYTHING UNTIL
TWENTY TWENTY FOUR BUT THEN
AGAIN I JUST TO WONDER DOES
WITH THIS WHEN IS IT GOING TO
AFFECT IS IT TWENTY TWENTY FIVE
TWENTY TWENTY SIX- THREE YEARS
IS A LONG WHAT TIME TO WAIT. TO
MAKE CHANGES BUT YOU KNOW AT
WHAT POINT ARE WE AT THE END OF
THE DECADE BEFORE WE SEE YOU
KNOW- RELIEF FOR PEOPLE. I
DON'T KNOW I MEAN M. BUT IT
JUST IT JUST FEELS LIKE UP
CLOSE I GOT OFF A LONG TIME.
YOU KNOW UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU
THANK YOU. OKAY GOING TO MOVE
ON TO OUR LAST PANEL OF
SPEAKERS- AND THIS IS ON
MEDICARE ACID TEST HOW HOW THE
MEDICO ACID TEST AFFECTS
SENIORS AND PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES- CHEN FLORIDA'S A
POLICY ADVOCATE FRUIT WITH
WESTERN CENTER AMMAN PART
POVERTY AND CLEAR RAMSEY WHO IS
A SENIOR STAFF ATTORNEY WITH
JUSTICE IN AGING SO- WILL- GO
AHEAD AND- LET YOU GUYS SO.
COME ON AND JOIN US. GOOD
MORNING THIS IS JANICE LORI
WITH THE WESTERN CENTER ON LAW
AND POVERTY- WE ARE THE STATE'S
OLDEST AND LARGEST LEGAL
SERVICES SUPPORT CENTER AND WE
WORK WITH LEGAL SERVICES AROUND
THE STATE WHO HELP PEOPLE WITH
THE MEDICARE PROGRAM AND
DEALING WITH A MEDIC CAL ASSETS
TEST WERE ALSO MEMBER OF THE
HEALTH CONSUMER ALLIANCE WHICH
HAS HEALTH CONSUMER CENTERS
AROUND THE STATE- FIRST OF ALL
I'D LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIRS
FOR HAVING- THIS IMPORTANT
HEARING AND ALL OF THE MEMBERS
WHO PARTICIPATED IN PARTICULAR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER PATIO WHO HAS
BEEN OUR CHAMPION. ON MOVING
FORWARD IN THIS ISSUE- I ALSO
LIKE TO THANK ALL THE SPEAKERS
BEFORE ME WHO HAVE ALL BEEN
ENGAGED IN REALLY ANALYZING HOW
WE CAN START TO TAKE APART THE
MEDIC HOW ASSETS TESTING
CALIFORNIA. SO THE MEDICAL.
JUST REALIZE IT'S BEEN
MENTIONED BEFORE IT HASN'T
SERIOUSLY BEEN REVISITED SINCE
THE NINETEEN EIGHTIES. YET OUR
VIEWS ON HOW TO BEST RUN HEALTH
COVERAGE PROGRAM OR HOW TO BEST
OFFER PUBLIC ASSISTANCE HAVE
CHANGED DRAMATICALLY SINCE
THEN- KATHY SANDERLING SPOKE A
LITTLE BIT BEFORE ABOUT THEIR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND HOW
THAT AFFECTED ELIGIBILITY FOR
MEDICARE. BUT I'D ALSO LIKE TO
FOCUS ON HOW THAT AFFECTED THE
MEDIC HOW PROCESS SEES. THERE
WAS A DRAMATIC SHIFT IN HOW WE
DETERMINE WHETHER SOMEONE WAS
ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICARE FOR MOST
THE PEOPLE IN THESE PROGRAMS.
PREVIOUSLY WE WERE RELIANT ON
SEMI ANNUAL STATUS REPORTS
PROOFS OF RESIDENCY DISABILITY
DETERMINATIONS. AND WE MOVED TO
A SYSTEM THAT BEGAN TO RELY
MORE AND MORE ON USING
ELECTRONIC DATABASES. AND
REALLY TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING
MORE ON THE BACK AND RATHER
THAN ASKING THE APPLICANT TO
PROVE UP EVERYTHING ON THE
FRONT EDGE- THIS AFFECTED NOT
JUST APPLICATIONS BUT ALSO
RENEWALS. SO FOR AN EXAMPLE OF
THAT- IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
THE MATCH I POPULATION WHO
ISN'T SUBJECT TO THE ASSET
TEST. UPWARDS OF 50% OF THEM
ARE ABLE TO RENEW THEIR MEDIC
HOW EVERY YEAR WITHOUT DOING
ANYTHING. THE COUNTY WORKERS
ARE ABLE TO CHECK ELECTRONIC
DATABASES VERIFY THAT THEY'RE
STILL ELIGIBLE AND THEN SEND
THEM A NOTICE. SAYING THIS IS
WHAT WE FOUND LET US KNOW IF
THERE ANY CORRECTIONS IF NOT.
YOU'RE GOOD TO GO- THIS DOESN'T
HAPPEN FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE
SUBJECT TO THE ASSETS TEST. AND
SO PART OF WHAT CAUSED THE
DRAMATIC INCREASE IN MEDIC CAL
AND ROMANCE IN TWENTY FOURTEEN
WASN'T JUST THE NEWLY ELIGIBLE
BUT IT WAS THOSE WHO HAD BEEN
ELIGIBLE ALL ALONG WHO CAN NOW.
MORE EASILY GET ON MEDI CAL WE
REFER TO THIS PHENOMENON AS THE
WELCOME MATS AND I'M OUT AND
ABOUT IN MEDICARE. FOR THOSE TO
THAT TEST THOUGH WE QUITE
ROLLED OUT THEN WELCOME MAT.
IT'S STILL HARD TO GET AND STAY
ON MEDICARE OUT AS THEY HAVE
TOGETHER RECENT BANK ACCOUNT
STATEMENTS THEY HAVE TO HAVE
PROPERTY VALUE WOULD BE THAT
THEY HAVE TO PROVE WHAT THEY
OWN. AND IN SOME CASES WHAT
THEY NO LONGER OWNED- ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT HASN'T BEEN
DISCUSSED HERE IS AS LONG AS
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CONTINUES TO HAVE AN ASSETS
TEST. THEY'RE ALSO REQUIRED- BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO
CONDUCT AUDITS OF BENEFICIARIES
TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT
LYING ABOUT THEIR ASSETS. SO
THERE WOULD ALSO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE SAVINGS- TO NOT
HAVE TO ENGAGE IN ALL THE
PROGRAMS THAT ALLOW THEM TO DO
THAT AUDIT. I WOULD ALSO
MENTION THAT POLICYMAKERS IN
CALIFORNIA HAVE TAKEN
CONSIDERABLE EFFORTS TO PROMOTE
SAVINGS IN OTHER ARENAS.
INCLUDING THROUGH THE NEW CAL
SAVERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM FOR
PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A
RETIREMENT SAVINGS. SAVINGS
OPTIONS THROUGH WORK. ON THE
OTHER HAND THOUGH FOR THIS
GROUP OF PEOPLE AND MEDIC HAL.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY PENALIZED WHEN
THEY DON'T START THAT DEPLETING
THEIR RETIREMENT JUST AS SOON
AS THEY'RE ELIGIBLE.
UNFORTUNATELY BY NOT REVISITING
THE ROLE WE FURTHER INGRAINED
INTO OUR MEDIC HEALTH SYSTEM A
RULE THAT PERPETUATE STRUCTURAL
RACISM BOTH BY WHO GETS ON THE
PROGRAM. AND BY THE SACRIFICES
THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE EXPECTED
TO MAKE. AS AN EXAMPLE ONE OF
OUR LOS ANGELES PARTNERS HELP A
WOMAN WHO NEEDED MEDICARE
BECAUSE OUR TEETH WERE ROTTING.
SHE WAS UNABLE TO GET MEDIC HOW
BECAUSE SHE HAD TOO MUCH MONEY
IN HER BANK ACCOUNT. BUT THE
REASON THAT SHE HAD TOO MUCH
MONEY IN HER BANK ACCOUNT IS
BECAUSE HER HUSBAND HAD
TERMINAL CANCER AND SHE WAS
SAVING MONEY TO PAY FOR HIS
FUNERAL COSTS. SHE WAS UNABLE
TO BRING HERSELF TO SPEND DOWN
THE MONEY EVEN ON HER OWN
DENTAL NEEDS. SO SHE WENT
WITHOUT DENTAL CARE. WHEN YOU
NEED PUBLIC ASSISTANCE DURING A
PARTICULARLY DIFFICULT TIME IN
LIFE. THE INABILITY TO ACCESS
IT BECAUSE YOU DO NOT MEET THE
PROGRAM CRITERIA FEELS DEEPLY
PERSONAL. YOU FEEL THAT THE
SYSTEM HAS JUDGE THE
CIRCUMSTANCES YOU FOUND
YOURSELF IN AND DEEMED YOU
UNWORTHY OF ASSISTANCE. THIS
INDIVIDUAL FELT THE DENIAL OF
MEDIKAL SHOULD THE SYSTEMS AND
DIFFERENCE TO HER HUSBAND'S
WORSENING HEALTH AND HIS
ULTIMATE. NOW THAT COUNTY
SANDERLING MENTIONED BEFORE THE
IDEA THAT THERE ARE
MILLIONAIRES WITHOUT INCOME
WAITING TO GET ON MEDICARE HOW
IS A BIT OF A UNICORN. AND I
COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT
HOWEVER IF ANYONE IS ABLE TO
GET AROUND THE MEDIC HOW ASSETS
TEST IT'S GOING TO BE SOMEBODY
WHO'S WEALTHIER WHICH TYPICALLY
MEANS SOMEBODY WHO'S WIDER. AND
THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET
AROUND IT BY KNOWING WHICH
BURIAL INSURANCE WITH NO CASH
SURRENDER VALUE MIGHT WORK FOR
THEM. OR IF THEY CAN WORK WITH
A FAMILY MEMBER TO SET UP AN
ABLE ACCOUNT TO PAY FOR THEIR
NEEDS IS THERE A PERSON WITH A
DISABILITY. OR THEY CAN
PURCHASE OTHER EXEMPT ASSETS OR
THEY CAN DO THINGS TO BUSINESS
ASSETS. THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO
HAVE THAT KIND OF ACCESS OR
PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACCESS TO
ESTATE PLANNING ATTORNEYS OR TO
OTHER INFORMATION BECAUSE MUST
CHECK THIS IS IN REGULATIONS.
SOME OF IT IS EVEN AND
REGULATIONS THAT ARE NOT
CODIFIED SO YOU HAVE TO GO
THROUGH SIGNIFICANT AGENCY
GUIDANCE TO UNDERSTAND HOW
THESE RULES WORK AND HOW YOU
CAN BEST UTILIZE THEM.
FURTHERMORE THE MEDIC HOW
ASSETS TEST IS ANOTHER WHAT WAY
ARE LAWS STRUCTURALLY DEPRIVE
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR OF WEALTH.
EVEN IF A BENEFICIARY SUBJECT
TO THE TEST WANTED TO SAVE THEY
COULDN'T. FOR FEAR OF LOSING
THEIR HEALTH CARE. THEY CAN'T
SAVE FOR THINGS THEY KNOW THEY
NEED I SPOKE TO AN INDIVIDUAL
THIS SUMMER IN LONG BEACH. BUT
AS TO HOW THE ASSETS HAS HARMED
HIM AND HE MENTIONED TO ME THAT
HE WANTED TO VISIT HIS OWN
FATHER WHO LIVED OUT BEYOND BIG
BEAR OR HIS NEPHEWS THAT LIVE
ON THE PAHLAVAS AVACEN YOU'RE
DOING. THERE'S NO PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION OR WAY TO GET
THERE SO THE ONLY WAY FOR HIM
TO GET HIMSELF THERE WOULD BE
IF YOU CAN DRIVE. HOWEVER
BECAUSE HE NEEDS A VAN THAT
SPECIALLY OUTFITTED TO
ACCOMMODATE HIS WHEELCHAIR. HE
CAN'T GET THERE HE USED TO HAVE
ONE OF THESE BANDS BUT EVER
SINCE THAT BAND BROKE DOWN HE
HAS NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO SAVE
ENOUGH MONEY TO GET ANOTHER ONE
TO REPLACE IT. SO HE HE JUST
CAN'T SAVE THE MONEY FOR THE
THINGS WE NEED- AND WE HEAR
COUNTLESS EXAMPLES OF PEOPLE
NOT BEING ABLE TO SAVE TO
REPLACE THE ROOF- NOT BEING
ABLE TO SAVE IN THE EVENT OF AN
ADDICTION. OR ALL SORTS OF
OTHER THINGS THAT PEOPLE
ACTUALLY NEED TO SAVE FOR- WHEN
I ASKED HIM HOW HE THIS MADE
HIM FEEL HE ASKED ME IF I KNEW
WHAT THE WORD INDENTURED ME.
AFTER SAID YES HE SAID WELL.
THE IT MEDIC HOW MAKES ME AND
MY FRIENDS ARE ON IT FEEL
INDENTURED. IT'S LIKE WE NEED
TO ASK FOR PERMISSION ON HOW TO
LIVE OUR LIVES- SO IT. IN CLOSE
THERE'S NO OTHER FORM OF HEALTH
CARE AVAILABLE IN CALIFORNIA
INCLUDING THE REST OF THE
MEDICARE PROGRAM AND SUBSIDIES
AVAILABLE THROUGH COVERED
CALIFORNIA. THAT REQUIRES AN
INDIVIDUAL TO DOCUMENT A
COMPLETE ACCOUNTING OF THEIR
ASSETS EVERY YEAR- POTENTIALLY
AUDITS THEIR ASSETS AND LIMITS
HOW THEY CAN SAVE. EXCEPT FOR
THIS PART OF THE MEDICARE
PROGRAM. THE CRUEL IRONY IS THE
ONLY PEOPLE SUBJECT TO THIS
RULE ARE THOSE THAT HAVE LITTLE
TO BEGIN WITH AND THE LEAST
ABILITY TO INCREASE THEIR
ASSETS. MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN
THE ASIAN DISABLED PROGRAM ARE
ACTUALLY ON FIXED INCOMES
THEY'RE OUT OF THE WORK FORCE
OR WILL SOON BE LIVING THE WORK
FORCE. IT'S PAST TIME WE STOP
THE INEQUITY PERPETUATED BY
THIS OUTDATED RULE AND REPEAL
IT ENTIRELY. AND THEN FINALLY
IT JUST TO AREAS- OF COST.
SAVINGS THAT MAY BE THERE- FOR
ONE THING WE APPRECIATE THE
WORK THAT DH CS DID IN COMING
UP WITH COST ESTIMATES AND WE
RECOGNIZE HOW MUCH OF THIS IS
COMPLETELY SPECULATIVE. TRYING
TO FIGURE OUT HOW MANY PEOPLE
WITH SUCH LOW INCOMES HAVE
ASSETS AT ALL IN CALIFORNIA IS
A CHALLENGE- BUT ONE AREA THAT
WE FEEL THAT THE COST MAY BE
SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IS
AROUND THE I. HSS COSTS THE IN
HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES COST-
AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IS. THE
BIGGEST FACTOR IN THE EXPENSE
FOR THIS BUT OUR EXPERIENCE AS
LEGAL SERVICES ADVOCATES HAS
BEEN THAT PEOPLE WHO NEED I.
HSS- TEND TO GET ON THE PROGRAM
FASTER THAN OTHERS BECAUSE THEY
HAVE SUCH SEVERE MEDICAL NEEDS.
THE OTHER AREA HAS BEEN TALKED
ABOUT A BIT WHICH SIZE
MIGRATION IF WE ACTUALLY ARE
ABLE TO IMPLEMENT. THIS RULE
AND TELL SAW'S MIGRATION IS
COMPLETE THEN WE WOULDN'T BE
PAYING FOR THREE DIFFERENT
SYSTEMS TO IMPLEMENT IT SO
THERE MAY ALSO BE A SAVINGS
THERE- SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE
RIGHT NOW I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER
ANY QUESTIONS BUT I STRONGLY
ENCOURAGE- ALL THE MEMBERS OF
THIS LEGISLATURE AND THIS
ADMINISTRATION TO HIGHLY
PRIORITIZE. ELIMINATING THE
ASSETS TEST IT'S ONE OF THOSE
THINGS THAT EVERYBODY TENDS TO
AGREE WITH. BUT UNLESS PEOPLE
START PUTTING IT AS A PRIORITY
THAT THIS IS WHERE WE SHOULD
SPEND STATE DOLLARS IT'S NOT
GOING TO HAPPEN. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU MISS FOR IT WILL GO
AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO CLEAR AT
THIS POINT AND THEN WILL ASK
QUESTIONS JOINTLY A FEW OF THE
TWO OF YOU SO- MISS RAMSEY.
THANK YOU- CHAIRS AND MEMBERS
FOR HOLDING THIS HEARING TODAY.
MY NAME IS CLINT RAMSEY I'M
WITH JUSTICE IN AGING. AGING IS
A NATIONAL LEGAL NONPROFIT THAT
USES THE POWER OF WATER FIGHT
TO YOUR PROPERTY. WHY WESTERN
CENTER WE ARE ALSO. SUPPORTS
AND WORK CLOSELY WITH OUR LEGAL
SERVICES PARTNERS ON MEDIC CAL
AND ON HSS AND OTHER HOME AND
COMMUNITY BASED SERVICES
PROGRAM. I WANT TO THANK YOU
ALL. YOUR STRONG VALUE BASE
SUPPORT PROTECTING THOSE
PROBLEMS- AND I REALLY WANT TO
FOCUS MY TESTIMONY ON THE WAYS
IN WHICH THE MEDICAID ASSET
LIMIT WORKS AGAINST OUR VALUES
TO BUILD A CALIFORNIA FOR ALL.
I'M GONNA DO THAT SORT OF BY
FOCUSING ON. FIRST THE WAY WE
CAN FIGHT RIGHT ENOUGH. THAT'S
NOT HOW IT POVERTY SEEN AND
PEOPLE WITH THIS. AND THEN HOW
IT SUSTAINS THIS POP AND YOU'VE
HEARD SOME OF THIS BUT I REALLY
WANT TO- GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES
OF HOW THAT OPENS. UP FIRST.
WITH REGARD CHIU RATIONS EXCUSE
ME PERPETUATING IN WIDENING
RACIAL INEQUALITY- YOU KNOW THE
ASSET LIMIT APPEARS TO BE RACE
NEUTRAL AND SOMETIMES WERE
VERY- QUICK TO OVERLOOK THOSE
TYPES OF POLICIES POLICIES WHEN
IT COMES TO REALLY. ELIMINATING
INEQUALITY IN THE STATE BUT THE
REASON THAT THIS MEDICARE RULE
IS CREATING MORE OFFICIAL
INEQUALITY IS BECAUSE WE TREAT
DIFFERENT ASSETS DIFFERENTLY.
AND SPECIFICALLY UNDER CURRENT
COUNTING BOWLS HOME OWNERSHIP.
IS NOT- COUNTED SO OUR PRIMARY
RESIDENCE ISN'T COUNTED. IN OUR-
YOU KNOW ASPECTS IT'S AN EXEMPT
ASSET AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS
AN OLDER ADULT. MORE LIKELY A
WHITE OLDER ADULT COULD ONLY A
MILLION DOLLAR HOME. WALL BLACK
OLDER ADULT WHO'S LESS LIKELY
TO OWN A HOME COULD HAVE A FEW
THOUSAND DOLLARS IN ASSETS AND
THAT WILL PUT THEM OVER THE
ASSET LIMIT. AND TO QUANTIFY
THIS SOMEWHAT IS- IN RECENT
RESEARCH BASED ON SAN FRANCISCO
61% OF WHITE RESIDENTS OWN
THEIR OWN HOME WELL ONLY 33% OF
BLACK RESIDENTS DO. IN AN LA IT
WAS 50% OF WHITE RESIDENTS
OWNING OUR OWN HOME. AND
THEY'RE ONLY 33% OF BLACK
RESIDENTS OWNING YOUR OWN HOME
AS WELL. WE CAN REALLY SEE THAT
STARK DIFFERENCE WHERE THE HOME
OWNERSHIP- YOU KNOW YOU
CERTAINLY COULD BE LOW INCOME
AND OWN A HOME. AND GOT CREATES
ITS OWN SET OF PROBLEMS BUT
WHAT IT DOESN'T CREATE A
PROBLEM IS FOR YOU TO ACTUALLY
ACCESS META CAL. AND SO WE SEE
THAT HOMEOWNERSHIP HAS BEEN
RESTRICTED BECAUSE OF REDLINING
AND PREDATORY LENDING AND
DISCRIMINATION AND HOME
OWNERSHIP- AND THEN WE CREATE
EVEN. ADDITIONAL HURDLES NOW TO
GET ON HEALTHCARE AND ON TO
MEDIC HOW- BY CREATING A ROLE
THAT. SUBSTANTIALLY LIMITS HOW
MUCH THE AND ONE CAN HAVE IN A
BANK ACCOUNT- AND STILL GET ON
THE MEDICARE PROGRAM. I'M NEXT
I REALLY THAT- HI. THE WAY THAT
MEDIC HOW. YOU KNOW WE OFTEN
TALK ABOUT IT OBVIOUSLY IT'S
PRIMARY HEALTH. CARE PROGRAM
WHICH IT IS BUT YOU KNOW
RESEARCH HAS REALLY SHOWN THAT
IT IS ALSO A HUGELY IMPACTFUL
WAY TO REDUCE POVERTY. OLDER
ADULTS- A BIG DRIVER OF POVERTY
FOR OLDER ADULTS IS HEALTHCARE
COSTS. IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS
THAT- WE SEE EVEN WITH MEDICARE
WHICH IS A GREAT PROGRAM IT'S
NOT ENOUGH FOR LOW INCOME OLDER
ADULTS TO SUCCESSFULLY- GET
ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE IS
AFFORDABLE. AND THAT'S WHY
MEDICAL BECOME SO IMPORTANT. SO
IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MET A
COW BEING AFFECTED AND HE
POVERTY PROGRAM WE REALLY NEED
TO TAKE AWAY THE ASSET TEST
WERE SUBSTANTIALLY RAISING TO
REALLY GET THAT EFFECT FOR
OLDER ADULTS AND PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES AND THIS IS
PARTICULARLY TRUE IN THE
PANDEMIC WHEN ACCESS TO
HEALTHCARE INCLUDING HOLDING
COMMUNITY SERVICES IS VITAL FOR
BOTH PEOPLE'S HEALTH AND SAFETY
I'M I WANT TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE
ONE OF OUR- PARTNERS WHO WORKS
IN A MEDICAL LEGAL PARTNERSHIP
SHARED A STORY ABOUT A CLIENT
SHE'S CURRENTLY HELPING US IN
OUR SEVENTIES AND IS TRYING TO
GET. ON TO MEDICARE. OF THE
CLIENT SINGLE AND WORK FOR MANY
YEARS THE PACKAGING DEPARTMENT
OF A FACTORY. IN HER LIFETIME
SHE WAS ABLE TO SAVE ABOUT
ELEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS- SHE'S
NOW BEEN DIAGNOSED WITH
DEMENTIA AND SHE CANNOT LIVE
ALONE ANYMORE- SHE'S MOVED IN
WITH HER BROTHER AND HER
BROTHER. AND OBVIOUSLY WITH
ONLY ELEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS IN
SAVINGS. AND ONLY SOCIAL
SECURITY INCOME SHE CAN'T
AFFORD TO PAY HIM. SO NOW
THAT'S CREATING FINANCIAL
INSTABILITY FOR THE ENTIRE
FAMILY- SO NOW SHE'S REALLY
FACED WITH THE CHOICE. OF SHE
CAN SPEND DOWN BELOW TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS TO GET THE
MEDICATION NEEDS UNLIKELY
OBJECT MENTIONING I JUST AS SHE
WOULD NEED SO THAT'S- GOING TO
HAVE TO BE A HIGH PRIORITY FOR
FAMILY. BUT ALSO IT'S REALLY
PUTTING HER FAMILY'S. FINANCIAL
STABILITY IN DISTRESS AS WELL
BECAUSE IF SHE HAS ANY- NEEDS
THAT ARE EXTRAORDINARY BEYONCE
OR HER MONTHLY NEEDS SHE NOW
DOESN'T REALLY HAVE A RAINY DAY
FUND- AND SHE HAS TO BASICALLY
DEPLETE HER ALREADY VERY MODEST
SAVINGS. I JUST WANT TO SAY
THAT THIS IS A VERY. IT'S SORT
OF STARTLING BUT IT'S ALSO VERY
TYPICAL YOU KNOW THIS IS WHAT
YOU'RE GETTING AGAIN PEOPLE
WITH. FIVE THOUSAND TEN
THOUSAND OR FIFTEEN THOUSAND
DOLLARS IT'S GENERALLY
EXTREMELY MODEST AND THAT'S
WHAT THE STATE OVER THEIR
ENTIRE LIFETIME. AND NOW IT'S
REALLY PREVENTING THEM FROM
GETTING THE CARE THEY NEED- AND
ONE THING I ALSO REALLY WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT IS SO THAT'S YOU KNOW
A THRESHOLD ISSUE OF GETTING ON
TO THE MEDICARE PROGRAM BUT-
YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH. THOSE
RESOURCE LIMITS THE ENTIRE TIME
YOU'RE ON THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.
SO THAT'S WHY IT ALSO NOT ONLY
CREATES POVERTY BUT THAT IT CAN
SUSTAIN IT BECAUSE YOU NEVER
HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE
SAVINGS. BUT TO CONTINUE
SAVINGS SO- THE- BOB BAER YOUR
FOR THAT IS IF YOU GO OVER THE
LIMIT BY ONE DOLLAR YOU'RE
ACTUALLY TERMINATED FROM THE
PROGRAM AND THAT'S A BIG
DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE INCOME
LIMIT AND THE ASSET LIMITS TO
WHAT WE WERE TALKING- FOR THE
LAST COUPLE YEARS NOT RAISING
THE INCOME LIMIT. YOU KNOW AT
LEAST PEOPLE COULD STAY ON THE
PROGRAM YOU WANT TO SHARE OF
COSTS INSURANCE COSTS HAS ITS
OWN PROBLEMS AND AFFORDABILITY
ISSUES BUT ASSETS ACTUALLY
TERMINATE YOU FROM THE PROGRAM
SO IF YOU GO ONE DOLLAR OVER
YOUR TERMINATE SO AGAIN GIVEN
THE CHOICE PEOPLE CAN NEVER
ACCRUE MEANINGFUL SAVINGS
BECAUSE THEY'RE SO SCARED TO
GET BUMPED OFF A BETTY CAL. AND
IN MY EXPERIENCE AS A LEGAL AID
ATTORNEY I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE
EVER HAD CLIENTS PAYING MORE
THAN WHEN THEY ARE TERMINATED
FROM MEDICAID EVEN LOSS OF
INCOME LIKE IN TERMINATED FROM
SSI OFTEN DIDN'T RANK AS
FRIGHTENING TO PEOPLE BECAUSE
THEY KNEW ONCE THEIR MEDICARE
WAS CUT OFF THEIR ACCESS TO A
HUGE. VARIETY OF PREVENTATIVE
CARE CHRONIC CARE MANAGEMENT-
DISEASE PREVENTION ONGOING
TREATMENTS WAS GOING TO STOP SO
YOU KNOW IT'S TRULY FRIGHTENING
TO THEM TO FACE THAT- AND SO I
WANT TO SHARE A STORY OF A
WOMAN I ATUALLY WORKED WITH A
FEW YEARS AGO- WAS REALLY
FRIGHTENED AND FRANTIC WHEN SHE
CAME IN BECAUSE SHE RECEIVED A
TERMINATION NOTICE FROM MEDIC
HELL BECAUSE SHE WAS OVER THE
ASSET LIMIT. SO WE WERE TALKING
SHE EXPLAINED THAT- SHE HAD
BEEN SITTING BECAUSE SHE NEEDED
TO HEARING AIDS AND BECAUSE
THEY WERE SO EXPENSIVE SHE NEED
TO DO THAT OVER TIME SHOULD
SLOWLY BEEN SAVING AND FINALLY
SAVED THE TWENTY FIVE HUNDRED
DOLLARS SHE NEEDED- SO WHAT SHE
DIDN'T REALIZE WHAT SHE WAS
DOING THAT WASTHAT THAT
SEATINGS WAS GOING TO PUSH HER
OVER THE MEDIC CALUMET AND THAT
WAS ACTUALLY GONNA LEAD TO HER
TERMINATION. FROM THE PROGRAM.
SO YOU KNOW SORT OF. IN HER
CASE. SHE HAD WHERE WITH ALL TO
SEE HELP KNEW THAT WE MEDICAID
WOULD BE AS- PROBLEM FOR HER
AND- WE WERE ABLE TO HELP HER
GET BACK ON THE PROGRAM. BY
SPENDING DOWN THE MONEY AND
BUYING HEARING AIDS SHE NEEDED
BUT- YOU KNOW IT. IS ALWAYS
STUCK WITH FEEDBACK YOU KNOW
SITTING THERE IN MY OFFICE
TALKING THIS WOMAN EXPLAINING.
JUST ABSOLUTELY PUNITIVE AND
NONSENSICAL. GRAMMARLY TO HER
WAS YOU KNOW SHE UNDERSTOOD IT.
ON ONE LEVEL JITTERS ABOUT WAS
THE RULES BUT SHE WAS REALLY
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT
MADE ANY SENSE AND I THINK
THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE
DISCONNECT IS- AND AS WE WERE
TALKING AND EVERYONE ELSE WAS
TESTIFYING YOU KNOW ONE OF
THINGS THAT KEPT COMING UP AND-
ORIGINAL. SPEECH BUT I JUST
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT QUICKLY IS
THE PREVENTATIVE CARE ASPECT OF
THIS YOU KNOW WHAT PEOPLE THINK
THEY'RE GOING TO BE CHARGED A
LOT FOR HEALTH INSURANCE. THEY
WAIT EVERY WEEK TO GET WHAT
THEY NEED AND WE'RE NOW SEEING%
BECAUSE THE AC HAS OPENED UP
COVERAGE WITH SO MANY PEOPLE
REALLY SEEM THOSE. REALLY
ACADEMIC RIGOR STUDIES NOW THAT
ARE ACTUALLY SHOWING THE WAYS
IN WHICH PREVENTIVE CARE IS
REALLY MAKING A HUGE DIFFERENCE
IN PEOPLE'S LIVES. AND SO I
JUST WANT TO POINT OUT
YESTERDAY ON HEALTHCARE IS
PUBLISHED A STUDY FROM UCLA
CENTER FOR POLICY HELP IF YOU
NEED FOR HEALTH POLICY AND- IN
CONJUNCTION WITH UNITS. OF
CHILE WHERE WE- FOUND. THAT THE
ACA REDUCE CANCER THE CANCER
DETECTION SPIKE THAT USED TO
OCCUR AT AGE SIXTY FIVE BY 45%
SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS. BECAUSE
PEOPLE OFTEN UNINSURED UNTIL
SIXTY FIVE. A WHEN THEY SHOWED
UP AT THE DOCTOR'S OFFICE BASED
ON THIS HUGE SPIKE IN CANCER-
DETECTION BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE
BASICALLY BEEN IGNORING
SYMPTOMS. UNABLE TO GET
PREVENTIVE CARE AND THEN WHEN
PEOPLE DID GET THEIR CANCERS
DETECTED THEY WERE MUCH MORE
SIGNIFICANTLY FAR ALONG IN
TERMS OF SEVERITY. SO THE OTHER
THING THAT'S HELPED REDUCE WAS-
THAT TWO THIRDS OF THE CANCERS
DETECTED. EARLIER MAJOR MIDDLE
STAGES AND WERE MORE HIGHLY
TREATABLE. SO I JUST WANT TO
REALLY SHOW HOW EFFECTIVE
COVERAGE ISN'T KEEPING PEOPLE
HEALTHY AND I KNOW WE STAND ALL
THE TIME BUT THAT TO ME JUST
FELT LIKE. SUCH A STARK
REMINDER OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT WHEN PEOPLE CAN GET THE
CARE THEY NEED. THEY CAN STAY
HEALTHIER AND GET THE TREATMENT
THEY NEED- AND LASTLY BEFORE
BECAUSE I JUST REALLY WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT HOW THIS ALL REALLY
ALSO FITS IN WITH OUR STATE
GOALS AROUND THE MASTER PLAN
FOR AGING. BUT I WAS ON THE
LTSS SUBCOMMITTEE AND JUSTICE
IN AGING WAS ALSO- MY-
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WAS ALSO ON
THE STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY.
COMMITTEE- YOU KNOW THE MASTER
PLAN JUST CAME OUT FROM
GOVERNOR'S. IN JANUARY AND I
JUST REALLY WANT TO POINT OUT
THAT CHANGING THIS POLICY. IS
IN LINE WITH THREE OUT OF THE
FIVE GOALS. A BROAD GOALS FOR
THE MASTER PLAN AND THAT'S TO
BASICALLY ENSURE ACCESS TO
AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE TO
INCREASE EQUITY IN CALIFORNIA
AND TO REDUCE POVERTY AMONG.
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND
OLDER CALIFORNIANS AND SO I
JUST REALLY THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT
COULD REALLY SHOWS WHAT A
POWERFUL BACK ADDRESSING THIS
OUTDATED CAN HOW- JUST ONE RULE
CHANGE CAN CAUSE HUGE
DIFFERENCE. UP AND REALLY
ADVANCE IS THREE REALLY
MEANINGFUL POLICY GOALS AND
CREATE A CALIFORNIA FOR ALL SO
WITH THAT I'LL STOP AND THANK
YOU AGAIN FOR ALLOWING ME TO
TESTIFY TODAY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH I AM COMING BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS DR ABDUL-
FIRST I ALWAYS LOVE TALKING
WITH LEGAL AID LAWYERS LIKE I
THINK IT'S IN PART BECAUSE MY
MOM HAS ONE AND- SE FIGHTS TO
HELP TO KEEP PEOPLE- TO GET
THEM THE COVERAGE THEY HAVE
WHEN THEY HAVE INTERESTS. I
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW OF THE
COMMENTS THAT YOU MADE- I DON'T
INHERENTLY HAVE A QUESTION BUT
I FOUND YOUR- TESTIMONY QUITE
POWERFUL. YOUR LAST WORDS WERE
IT'S A STARK REMINDER BUT WE
NEED TO REMEMBER THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE IMPACTED BY THE POLICIES
AND PROGRAMS THAT WE PUT IN
PLACE. I WAS PARTICULARLY MOVED
BY YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT
STRUCTURAL RACISM AND HOW THIS
CONTINUES TO PERPETUATE THOSE.
INCOME INEQUALITIES FOR OUR
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. BUT
REALLY WANT TO FOCUS IN IF I
COULD ON TO ONE OF CHEN
FLURRIES COMMENTS. WHERE SHE-
HAD ASKED THE PERSON O YOU
KNOW WHAT THE TERM INDENTURED.
BECAUSE EARLIER WE HEARD THAT
THE ACID TEST WAS A GATE KEEPER
IF YOU WILL. BUT NOW THAT IMAGE
IS DIFFERENT IF WE'RE ACTUALLY
LOOKING AT- THE FACT THAT YOU
HAVE TO LIVE YOUR LIFE
DIFFERENTLY AFTER YOU GET
THROUGH THAT. AND SO RATHER
THAN MAKING A METAPHOR THAT.
MIGHT PUSH IT TOO FAR I SIMPLY.
BELIEVE THAT HIS STATEMENT IS
POWERFUL AND THAT WE NEED TO
REMEMBER THAT IF PEOPLE ARE
MAKING DECISIONS BASED OFF OF
THE POLICIES WE HAVE WE HAVE A
RESPONSIBILITY TO HELP MAKE AND
IMPROVE UPON THOSE. WITH THAT I
WILL END BECAUSE I DON'T THINK
I COULD HAVE SAID IT MUCH
BETTER THAN CLEAR RAMSEY OCEAN
FLOORING- AND DO WANTS TO
WELCOME CHEN TO HER NEW ROLE WE
WILL MISS JESSICA. FORWARD
WORKING WITH HER IN HER NEW
ROLE- I KNOW YOU BRING UP A LOT
TO WESTERN CHANNEL ON POVERTY
IS. MR TRUMP. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. OTHER OR COMMENTS ON THIS
CARILLO. THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR
AND I. THINK OF MISS LORI
MISSILE RAMSEY FOR ALL THEIR-
DILIGENT WERE AND WORK WITH
WITH MY OFFICE ON ON MOVING
THIS- MEDICAL ASSET ELIMINATION.
PIECE OF LEGISLATION FORWARD WE
ARE IN THE PROCESS OF- RE
INTRODUCING THAT PIECE OF
LEGISLATION AND- ANY MEMBER
THAT IS. THAT HAS BEEN AT THIS
HEARING OR IS WATCHING THE
HEARING. AND WOULD LIKE TO CALL
OUT THERE PLEASE. TEXT ME LET
ME KNOW BECAUSE THIS IS. TOO
AGAIN OR LET MY OFFICE KNOW
AGAIN TO THE POINT BEING MADE
EARLIER. A BUDGET IS A
REFLECTION OF OUR VALUES. AND
IT IS IT IS MORE AND MORE THAN
ENOUGH TIME HAS PASSED FOR US
TO REVISIT. A CONVERSATION.
ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS TO ACTUALLY
IMPLEMENT THAT POLICY. AND AT
THE END OF THE DAY. HELP PEOPLE
WHICH I EIGHT CONTINUOUSLY
KEEPS SAYING IN IN THIS
HEARING. BECAUSE WE GET LOST I
THINK AND HOW MUCH TO SOMETHING
COST. VERSUS WHAT ARE THE
ADDITIONAL COSTS FROM WE
ACTUALLY MAKE IT HARDER FOR
PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY ACCESS
HEALTHCARE. AND I WANT TO BRING
UP THE SITUATION ON THE
FINANCIAL- BANKING. WHEN IT
WHEN. THE EXAMPLES THAT ARE
BEING GIVEN IN TERMS OF YOU
CAN'T HAVE X. AMOUNT OF DOLLARS
IN YOUR BANK ACCOUNT. OR IN
YOUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT AND YOU
HAVE TO CLEAN THOSE RESOURCES
AND WE'RE ACTUALLY CREATING.
MORE POVERTY WE'RE CREATING
OPPORTUNITIES- ARE ACTUALLY AN
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE
TO ACTUALLY HAVE TO STORE THOSE
FUNDS. YOU KNOW IN THEIR HOMES-
NOT HAVE ACCESS TO FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS ALL IN AN EFFORT
TO CIRCUMVENT AND GO AROUND.
CERTAIN POLICIES ON ON HOW MUCH
MONEY YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE IN
YOUR SAVINGS ACCOUNT YOU KNOW
AND END UP. WITH YOUR SPOUSE OR
YOUR PARTNER OR YOURSELF
INDIVIDUALLY I CRINGE AT THE
EXAMPLE. THAT I BELIEVE MISS
LORI. I TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS
OF THE WOMAN WHO IS SAVING FOR
HER HER HUSBAND'S. CANCER
TREATMENT AND UNABLE TO YEAH.
DE IS THE BE OF THAT THAT IS
NOW. BE IN. OF WHAT THE MEDICAL
ASSETS TEST SHOULD BE WHICH IS
WHY WE NEED TO SERIOUSLY LOOK
AT LEGISLATION IN TERMS OF HOW
WE CHANGE IT HOW WE FIX IT HOW
WE MODERNIZE IT IDENTIFIED THE
PROBLEM AND FIND A SOLUTION FOR
IT AND HAVE THE POLITICAL
COURAGE TO MOVE SOMETHING LIKE
THIS BOARD. AND THE STATE
UNFORTUNATELYDURING COVE IT
HAS BROUGHT A LOT OF LIGHT IN
TERMS OF OF
FUNDS. LOSING FUNDS FRAUD SO
THIS IDEA THAT WE DON'T HAVE
THE MONEY. IS NOT REALLY THE
REALITY. IT'S REALLY ABOUT
WHERE WE PUT OUR VALUE IN THE
BUDGET- AND SO I'M EXCITED TO
HAVE THIS CONVERSATION- I'M
WARY ABOUT THE TIME THAT IT HAS
BEEN INTRODUCED IN TERMS OF
WHEN CAN WE POSSIBLY GET IT
DONE. BECAUSE PEOPLE NEED HELP
NOW- MORE SO THAN EVER BEFORE
AND SO I YOU KNOW I JUST WANNA
A COMMON AND THANK ALL THE
PANELISTS FOR TODAY AND THANK
YOU TO BOTH OF OUR CHAIRS FOR
HAVING THIS VERY IMPORTANT
HEARING. AND HOPEFULLY WE ARE
ABLE TO HAVE THE POLITICAL
COURAGE TO PUT. OUR OUR OUR
VALUE IN OUR BUDGET AND
ULTIMATELY AGAIN HELP PEOPLE I
HAVE ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE
WHICH IS A HUMAN RIGHT THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH WAS
CARILLO ANYONE'S MISERABLES
COULD. I JUST WELL FIRST OFF
THANK YOU BOTH FOR YOUR FOR
YOUR- COMMENTS IN YOUR YOUR
YOUR KNOWLEDGE IN YOUR
EXPERTISE- I PASSED- I'VE ASKED
THIS QUESTION EARLIER TODAY BUT
I'D LOVE TO HEAR YOUR
PERSPECTIVE ON THIS- HOW YOU
KNOW HOW OF OHER STATES USE
THE- THEIR THIRTIES TO ADOPT
LESS RESTRICTIVE ASSET LIMITS
DO YOU HAVE A- OR SOMETHING BUT
SOMEONE IN PARTICULAR YOU WOULD
POINT TO IS TO HAVE. HAVING
BEEN ABLE TO DO A PARTICULARLY
GOOD JOB. WE HAVE- OBVIOUSLY
WE'VE GOT TO DO NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT ASSETS OUT THERE
PLOTS LIFE INSURANCE- AND I
THINK ABOUT INCH I JUST THINK
THAT JUST INSURANCE IN GENERAL
IF YOU'VE GOT AN OLDER CAR.
YOU'RE NOT LIKELY TO HAVE-
COLLISION INSURANCE ON IT AND
YOU MIGHT HAVE A REALLY HIGH
DEDUCTIBLE- IF YOU'RE IN AN
ACCIDENT- YOU THEN YOU YOU YOU
WOULD POTENTIALLY SUCK UP YOUR
ENTIRE SAVINGS TO. YOU KNOW TO
PAY THE DEDUCTIBLE ON THE CAR-
WHICH YOU TO YOUR BANK YOU YOU
MAY NOT BE ABLE TO REPLACE SO-
YOU KNOW FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE
HOW MUCH FLEXIBILITY DO STATES
HAVE TO BUY WHAT'S AN ASSET
WHAT'S NOT AN ASSET. M. AS- SO
WE SHOULD BE MENTIONED BE. SCMA
HAS A BY. THAT STATES HAVE THE
ABILITY TO RAISE- THE CAP ON
ASSETS AS WELL AS THE
EXEMPTIONS INDEFINITELY- THEY
CLARIFIED IN THAT GUIDANCE THAT
THEY CAN HAVE MUCH HIGHER
LEVELS. ARE MUCH HIGHER CAPS OR
NO CAPS AT ALL- SO ARIZONA IS
THE ONLY STATE THAT TOOK THAT
AND THEY DIDN'T TAKE IT FOR THE
LONG TERM CARE POPULATION- BUT
THEY DID FOR THEIR ENTIRE
MEDICARE POPULATION SO THAT WE
DON'T HAVE TO. GET INTO ALL OF
THE DETAILS UP- SO YOU HAVE
LIFE INSURANCE IS THE RIGHT
KIND OF LIFE INSURANCE YOUR
BURIAL INSURANCE IS THERE CASH
SURRENDER VALUE- YOU KNOW IT
ALL OF. EVEN WE'RE TRYING TO
MAKE THE PROGRAM BETTER BY
PUTTING EXEMPTIONS IN THAT THAT
INEVITABLY MAKES THE PROGRAM
MORE COMPLICATED- SO YOU KNOW
OUR PREFERENCE WOULD OBVIOUSLY
BE TO REPEAL IT ENTIRELY AND
NOT GO DOWN THESE WORMHOLES. OF
WHAT KIND OF ASSET DO YOU HAVE.
TO THE EXTENT ANYTHING IS
CAPPED WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE EXEMPTIONS ARE AS
BROAD AS POSSIBLE SO THAT IT
DOESN'T TAKE. A AN ESTATE
PLANNING ATTORNEY OR SOMEBODY
WITH ADVANCED LEGAL KNOWLEDGE
TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT FITS
UNDER THE RULE AND WHAT DOESN'T
GET UNDER THE ROLE. GREAT WELL
THANK YOU I'M A BIG BELIEVER IN
SIMPLICITY AND- WE SEEM TO GO
INTO A LOT OF WORM HOLES IN
THIS BUILDING AND I'M NOT SURE
WE'D FIND OUR WAYS OUT SOME
QUITE. SOMETIMES QUITE FRANKLY
SO. THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY TODAY VERY
MUCH APPRECIATED- WE'D LIKE TO
MOVE ON TO. MY PUBLIC COMMENT
THIS POINT- THE CALL IN NUMBER
FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS
HEARING IS EIGHT SEVEN SEVEN
SIX NINE TWO. EIGHT NINE FIVE
SEVEN AND THE ACCESS CODE IS
ONE THREE. ONE FIVE. FOUR TWO
OH TWO. I READ THAT ONE MORE
TIME. 877-692-8952 AND THE
ACCESS CODE. IS. ONE THREE ONE
FIVE FOUR TWO ZERO TWO. SO YOU
SHOULD BILL ALSO FIND THIS- ON
OUR WEBSITE AS WELL AS ON YOUR
TV SCREEN- THE OUR- BURGER WILL
PUT YOU IN THE QUEUE- PLEASE
MUTE. YOUR DEVICE SO WEAK
ELIMINATE OUR BACK AS MUCH
BACKGROUND AND NOISE AND
DISTORTION AS POSSIBLE. AND
THEN- WILL- GO AHEAD GET
STARTED- TO SEE IF OUR OPERATOR
HAS ANYBODY IN THE QUEUE FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS POINT.
THANK YOU MR CHAIRMAN WE DO
HAVE PEOPLE INTO ALREADY WHO UP
TO SPEAK. AND AS A REMINDER
LADIES AND GENTLEMAN PLEASE
PRESS ONE THEN ZERO IF YOU DO
WISH TO SPEAK. ONE ZERO. IT
KEEP THEIR COMMENTS TO- TO TWO
MINUTES OR LESS PLEASE THANK
YOU. MEDICARE WILL WE'RE GONNA
GO TO LINE ELEVEN LINE ELEVEN
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. SHE WOULD BE
ON THE OF AN HERE YOU CALLING.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS FOR HOLDING THIS
IMPORTANT HEARING TODAY I
REPRESENTS ELIGIBILITY WORKERS
THROUGHOUT THE STATE TASKED
WITH HAVING THAT UNCOMFORTABLE
AND FRANKLY PUNITIVE AFFECT
CONVERSATION WITH APPLICANTS.
ARE ELIGIBILITY WORKERS COULD
BE SPENDING THE CRIME NOW
REQUIRED ON CHASING THE PAPER
AND TRACKING DOWN THESE ASSETS
AND VERIFICATION OF SAME
CONSERVING THE MILLIONS OF
CONSUMERS- AND MILLIONS MORE WE
NOW ARE ARE COMING AS A RESULT
OF- THE PANDEMIC AND THAT THE
FACT. ELIMINATION OF THE ASSET
TAG IS THE SUREST WAY ARE ONE
OF THE SUREST WAY TO REDUCE AN
UGLY ASPECT OF WEIGHT
STRUCTURAL RACISM AND
INEQUITABLE DETERMINATIONS IN
THE SYSTEM THANK. YOU VERY MUCH
THANK YOU. MOVE TURNING NOW CO
LAW. WELL NOW BUT A LINE
EIGHTEEN THE BILL HAS THANK YOU
MARTY AMODIO FAMILY MEMBER
PERSON WITH DEVELOPMENTAL
DISABILITIES- EXECUTIVE RECORD
CALIFORNIA DISABILITY SENIOR
CLEAN ACTION NETWORK CITY
CAMPUS WANT TO THANK BOTH
CHAIRS- FOR DOING THIS IS
REALLY IMPORTANT HEARING IT WE
REALLY APPRECIATE IT ONE ALSO
JUST TO ADD MY SUPPORT TO THE
COMMENTS MADE BY THE WISCONSIN
OR LONG POVERTY JUSTICE IN
AGING ALSO- BY THE CALIFORNIA
WILL FOR DIRECT ASSOCIATION
CATHOLIC KHAKI OF SUNDERLAND- I
JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE- WHICH
USES MENTIONED- MISTER WOULD
ABOUT YOU KNOW. THE TIMELINE
RIGHT OR MAYBE MIDDLE OF MR
ARAMBULA IT'S GOING TO BE
REALLY IMPORTANT ABOUT
IDENTIFYING THE TIMELINE OF THE
NEXT STEPS YOU KNOW FROM THIS
HEARING- THE ISSUE OF ASSET
TEST- IS REALLY HARMFUL TO
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND
SENIORS AND WE HOPE YOU TAKE
THAT NEXT STEP SOON AND WOULD
LOVE TO WORK WITH YOU THANK YOU
AGAIN FOR DOING. THIS YEAR
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WELL NOW
GO TO LINE THIRTY THE BILL HAS.
HI YES THIS IS CONNIE ARNOLD
I'M A DISABILITY RIGHTS
ADVOCATE FOR THIRTY PLUS YEARS
I LIVE IN EL GROW- ELK GROVE
AND I'M A PERSON WITH A SEVERE
DISABILITY AND- THE ASSET TEST
HAS BEEN. A BIG PROBLEM FOR
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES AND
FOR SENIORS AND I KNOW IN
CERTAIN CASES THAT SOME SENIORS
HAVE PORK ON THE CARE THAT THEY
NEEDED. BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T
AFFORD- THE SPEND DOWN
REQUIREMENTS AND MEET THEIR
DAILY EXPENSES. AND THIS WHOLE
SYSTEM NEEDS TO BE REVAMPED AND
I WOULD HOPE THAT. THE CHAIRED
THAT HELD THIS COMMITTEE THAT
YOU'LL MOVE FOR IN A BLACK
PUNITIVE. AND ADOPT THE LEAST-
MEDIC CAL ASSET TESTS THAT.
MAYBE ELIMINATED THAT WOULD BE
THE BEST I SUPPORT THE COMMENTS
BY MARTY OF MOTO AND JUSTICE IN
AGING AND SOME OF THE OTHER
AGENCIES ANY MENTION AND I WANT
TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE NOW
GO TO LINE TWENTY NINE LINE IS
OPEN. HI GOOD MORNING COMMITTEE
MEMBERS MY NAME IS JOSE TAURUS
WITH TOUGH ACT OF CALIFORNIA.
HEALTH ACTIVE CONTINUES TO
SUPPORT REMOVING THE ASSET TAG
AT THE BARRIER TO ACCESSING
HEALTHCARE THE CURRENT ASSET
TEST LIMITS HAVE NOT BEEN
UPDATED IN DECADES AND THEY
PREVENT SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH
DISABILITIES FROM CREATING
ADEQUATE SAVINGS FOR A RAINY
DAY. AS MENTIONED BY EITHER
CALLING ON TODAY IT FORCES
PEOPLE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN HAVING
HEALTHCARE OR SAVING THEIR
FINANCES FOR THINGS LIKE HAVING
A FEW EXTRA MONTHS RAN ON AND-
MOVING HOMES CARING FOR THEIR
FAMILY MEMBERS OR EVEN PAYING
FOR BASIC LIVING EXPENSES.
WHILE COST OF LIVING AND
HOUSING HAVE INCREASED IN
CALIFORNIA APOTEX HAVE
MAINTAINED THE SAME ASSET LIMIT
ON SOME OF OUR MOST VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES IT IS TIME WE
ADDRESS THE INJUSTICE AND
PRESERVE ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE
WHILE ALLOWING PEOPLE TO PAY
FOR BASIC NEEDS. WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOUR
ADMINISTRATION THE LEGISLATURE
AND OTHER PARTNERS STAKEHOLDERS
THIS YEAR TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH THANK YOU.
NOW GO TO LAW. TWENTY SIX.
TWENTY SIX OF ONE IS OPEN. HEY
WE'RE GONNA GO ON TO LINE
TWENTY LINE TWENTY YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD MORNING THIS IS JEFF
CARTER GEAR UP TO KICK- INCH
I'M NOT INVOLVED IN ANY OF
THOSE PROGRAMS BUT FOR FIFTY
YEARS I BELIEVE YOU HAVE THESE
ABSENT SITTING IN THERE. AND
JUST SIMPLY THE HOUSING COSTS A
LITTLE IN DEPOSITS OR ANYTHING.
THIS WHERE IT JUST DOESN'T WORK
SO PLEASE WOULD ENCOURAGE THE
REMOVAL OF THE ABSENT. FROM OR
AT LEAST REVIEWING THIS
PROCESS. THAT'S MY PUBLIC
COMMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE NOW GO TO LINE THIRTY EIGHT
LINE THIRTY EIGHT YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI GOOD MORNING AND
THANKS FOR CONVENING THIS
HEARING TODAY MY NAME IS MARK
TO COME ARE MY WORK WITH THE
PUBLIC LAWCENTER. GUILTY
PROVIDES ACCESS TO JUSTICE THE
LOW INCOME CLIENTS AN ORANGE
COUNTY INCLUDING CONSUMER
ADVOCACY FOR HEALTH BENEFITS
ALL OF THE CLIENTS ARELOW
INCOME. AND MANY ARE SENIORS
FIGHTING DISABLING CONDITIONS
INCLUDING BIPOLAR DISORDER.
SCHIZOPHRENIA AT EIGHT THIRTY
EIGHT DIABETES AND CANCER WOULD
PUT THEM AT FURTHER RISK I
THINK CRITICALLY ELEM THE
CLIENT CANNOT AFFORD THE
MEDICAL SERVICES COOPER BUT ARE
OFTEN PERFORMING A DELICATE.
AND STRESSFUL BALANCING ACT
BETWEEN PAVING ENOUGH MIGHT
SURVIVE OR NOT EXCEEDING THE
ASSET LIMIT. THAT'S REMOVED
AFTER TESTING LEVEL THE PLAYING
FIELD BUT DOES THE MEASURE
MEDICO THANKS FOR YOUR TIME
EFFORTS THAT FAR. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. NOW GO TO LINE
THIRTEEN YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI
GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS
CAROLINE AND I'M A PATH
RETURNING WITH THE HEALTH
CONSUMER CENTER AT THE LEGAL
AID SOCIETY OF TEMAS CAL
COUNTY. I STRONGLY SUPPORT
ELIMINATING THE NON MATCHING
MEDIC HOW ACTIVE MINUTES THIS
IS BOTH THE HEALTH AND REYES
EQUITY ISSUE MEDI CAL HAVE
ALLOWED EXCEPTIONS TO THE FACT
THAT WOMEN INCLUDING INCREASE
EXCLUDING YOUR REAL PROPERTY
DOES USE THAT THE PRESIDENT
PRIMARY RESIDENCE. BUT IF
POLICY TRACY HOMEOWNERS OVER
RENTERS AND HISTORICALLY BLACK
CALIFORNIANS HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED
FROM HOMEOWNERSHIP THREE
MORTGAGE DISCRIMINATION WHICH
FORCED THEM TO STAY AT CENTER
COMPLETE MARKET BASKET STATING.
HERE IN THE AREA WHICH IS ONE
OF THE MOST EXPENSIVE REAL
ESTATE MARKET WHY CALIFORNIANS
OWN HOMES THAT MORE THAN TWICE
THE RATE OF BLACK IMAGINEXT
CALIFORNIANS. A LOW INCOME
SENIOR WHO OWNS A HOME IN THE
BAY AREA WHICH IS NOW AVERAGING
A MILLION DOLLARS I HAVE NO
SAVINGS COULD QUALIFY FOR MEDI
CAL BOB ENTER WITH THE SAME
INCOME WILL NOT QUALIFY IF THEY
HAD JUST TWO THOUSAND AND ONE
DOLLAR AND THANK. THE DIFFERENT%
AMOUNT BUT NOT EVEN SUFFICIENT
TO PAY FIRST AND LAST MONTH'S
RENT IN THE EVENT OF INFECTION.
ELIMINATING THE LETTER HOW AT
AND THAT WE NOT ONLY INCREASE
FINANCIAL STABILITY. FIFTEEN
YEARS AND- AT. IN AUCKLAND. HOW
CONNECT WITH FACTORED BY THE-
MORE. BECAUSE HE- THINK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. VERY MUCH.
REMINDER AND LET NEWS ON IF YOU
WERE TO CALL PLEASE PRESS ONE
THEN. ONE NOW GO TO LAW FOR
ONE. HI THANK YOU FOR HAVING
THIS REALLY IMPORTANT MEETING
TODAY MY NAME IS KIM SELF BOND
I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF BAD
STATIC LEGAL SERVICES WHICH IS
THE LEGAL AID AGENCY IN LOS
ANGELES COUNTY. WE STRONGLY
SUPPORT ELIMINATING THE MEDICAL
ASSETS TAP I'VE WORKED HERE FOR
TWENTY YEARS AND A COUNCIL
PEOPLE FOR THE PAST TWENTY
YEARS OLDER DESCENT THIS OF
OLDER ADULTS WITH DISABILITIES
INCLUDING ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE AND OTHER
SERIOUS ILLNESSES. AND DISABLED
ADULTS TRYING TO ACCESS MY
ACCOUNT SO THEY HAVE ACCESS TO
THE IN HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES
PROGRAM. OUR CLIENT OF LOW
INCOME UNDER FIFTEEN HUNDRED A
MONTH AND MODEST SAVINGS FROM
FIVE THOUSAND MAYBE TWENTY
THOUSAND BUT AS WE DISCUSSED
TODAY DUE TO THESE MODEST
SAVINGS THERE AN. ELIGIBLE FOR
MEDICARE. OUR NEED THE SAVINGS
HEALTH EMERGING. IN BASIC
ONGOING EXT. I IT'S FOR ME TO
COUNSEL PEOPLE THAT THEY MUST
SPEND DOWN MINIMAL SAVINGS TO
QUALIFY FOR HOME CARE AND
MEDICARE. AT MEDIC HOW TO PAY
FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS AND SO
THAT THEY CAN STAY SAFELY IN
OUR HOME WITH HOME CARE AND NOT
HAVE TO GO TO A FACILITY. MY
CLIENTS HAVE NO CHOICE IF THEY
DON'T SPEND DOWN THEY HAVE TO
PAY OUT OF POCKET FOR HOME CARE
IN TOTAL SMOOTHLY FENCE DOWN.
IN A TIME WHEN HOMELESSNESS IS
RISING AND THE SAFETY IT HAS
HOLES. SAVINGS OUR CLIENT
SAFETY NET. HONESTLY I DON'T
UNDERSTAND HOW MY CLIENT CAN
TAKE TO PAY FOR THEIR PROPERTY
TAXES IF THEY CAN'T HAVE MORE
THAN TWO THOUSAND. ACCESS IS
AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY TO FORCE
INDIVIDUALS TO COVER HIMSELF
FACT THAT HOME CARE AND
MEDICARE. THANK YOU FOR
LISTENING AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. WELL NOW GO TO LINE FORTY
FOUR. AFTERNOON ACTUALLY GOOD
MORNING ASKED TO WHITE PM HERE
ON BEHALF OF DISABILITY RIGHTS
CALIFORNIA- AND WE BELIEVE THAT
THE CURRENT. UNFAIRLY
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST PEOPLE
WITH DISABILITIES AND SENIORS
AS PART OF THE ACA THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT ASSET LIMIT
AS WE LEARNED DURING- THIS A
HEARING OR ELIMINATED FOR MANY
CATEGORIES OF MEDIKAL AND
ROWLEY'S. BUT THE LIMIT FOR
PROGRAM SPECIFICALLY TARGETING
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND
SENIORS WERE NOT ELIMINATED IN
FACT IN CALIFORNIA THE ASSET
LIMIT FOR THESE PROGRAMS HAS
REMAINED AT THE SAME LEVEL WITH
NO ADJUSTMENT FOR COST OF
LIVING SINCE NINETEEN EIGHTY
NINE. HELLO ASSET LIMIT AB TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL AND THREE THOUSAND
FOR A COUPLE DO NOT ALLOW
MEDICARE RECIPIENTS WITH
DISABILITIES TO SAVE FOR
UNEXPECTED EXPENSES SUCH AS THE
HOME OR AUDIBLE AUTOMOBILE
REPAIR AND SIMILARLY. DO NOT
ALLOW INDIVIDUALS TO SAVE FOR A
DEPOSIT NEEDED FOR HOUSING DOWN
PAYMENT NEEDED TO PURCHASE A
HOME WHICH IS WHICH IN FACT
WOULD BE EXCEPT ONE TO
PURCHASE. ADDITIONALLY AND
LASTLY. THE LOW ASSET LIMIT.
DISCOURAGING ALL A PEEP AT THIS
AND- BECAUSE HONESTLY THE
POPULAR ARE FOR TO SPEND DOWN
AT THEIR FINANCIAL SAFETY NET
TO SUCH A LOW LEVEL IN ORDER TO
QUALIFY THAT MANY PEOPLE
DECLINE TO APPLY. BECAUSE THEY
FEAR CLAYTON HEALTH IMPACT OF
VULNERABLE FINANCIAL POSITION.
AND WE URGE THAT THE ASSET
LIMIT WOULD BE ELIMINATED THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LINE
FORTY THREE LINE IS OPEN. GOOD
MORNING AND THANK YOU HI MY
NAME IS DANTE ALLEN THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR CALLIE
FOR THAT CALIFORNIA'S- SAVINGS
AND INVESTMENT PROGRAM FOR
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES- I.
DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THE LEVEL
OF PRODUCT AND CONSIDERATION
HAS GONE INTO- TODAY TALKED AND
WANTED TO REMIND- INDIVIDUALS
THAT- HOLDING MONEY IN AN ABLE
ACCOUNT IS- AND AFFECTIVE WAY-
THE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT-
THAT NEST EGG SO TO SPEAK AND
THAT HAVE IT COUNTED AS IN APP
THAT GIVES FOUR PROGRAMS LIKE
MEDICARE- AND I KNOW THAT-
CALIBER IS NOT FOR EVERYONE
THERE ARE REGULATIONS THAT SAY
THAT YOU'RE DISABILITY. HAD TO
BEGIN BEFORE AGE TWENTY SIX SO
IT WILL NOT COVER EVERYONE SO
WE HIGHLY- APPRECIATE AND
ENCOURAGE. ON THE ELIMINATION
OF THE- OF THIS AFTER LIMITED.
FOR FOLKS WE THE ESPECIALLY
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WELL NOW
GO TO LINE FORTY SEVEN LINE
FORTY SEVEN YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
KILEY WHERE THE LADY FROM THE
NATIONAL HEALTH LAW PROGRAM-
THE NATIONAL HELP OUR PROGRAM
AND HELP SUPPORT CHANGING OUR
CURRENT MEDICAL AT THE TEST
EITHER ELIMINATE OR INCREASE
THE ASSET LIMITS FOR MEDICAL
PROGRAM THIRTY SENIORS. AND
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES. YEAH
AFTER HAS TRIED FINANCIAL THE
BILL FOR SENIOR. AND PERSONS
WITH THE IN A RACIALLY IN. WAY
INTO DEPLOYMENT HAVE NOT
CHANGED SINCE NINETEEN EIGHTY
NINE THEY FAIL TO TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT COST OF LIVING
ADJUSTMENTS ESPECIALLY IN AN
AREA AS EXPENSIVE CALIFORNIA.
THE CURRENT ASSET LIMIT PREVENT
SENIORS AND PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES AND HAVING
ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO WHETHER
CRISIS. SUCH AS AN ADDICTION A
LEAKING ROOF OR ANY MAJOR
VEHICLE REPAIR WAS FACED WITH
THE DECISION A QUALIFYING FOR
MEDICARE FOR HAVING ADDITIONAL
SAVINGS. BOTH JUNIORS
RATIONALLY SPEND DOWN THEIR
SAVINGS AT THE COST OF THEIR
HEALTH CARE MARK AND THEY HAVE
STATUS THE PUT THEM AT RISK OF
FURTHER AND THAT THE- OR
HOMELESSNESS FINANCIAL CRISIS
HAPPEN. IS WILL ALSO DO.
PUNISHED OF COLOR BECAUSE THEY
ARE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE CASH
SPEAKING INSTEAD BEEN EXEMPT
HOME. CONSEQUENTLY TWENTY
FOURTH LONG INEQUITIES FOR
EXAMPLE IN AND HAD THE CHANNELS
FROM ACCUMULATE IN. WEALTH
SAVING FOR RETIREMENT AND
INSURANCE THAT PEOPLE WITH LOW
INCOME ESSENTIALLY REMAIN IN
POVERTY. CHANGING THE ASSET
ROLES IS A CRUCIAL AVENUE TO
EXPAND ACCESS TO LIKE THE STATE
HEALTH COVERAGE FOR THOSE WHO
ARE MOST IN NEED ESPECIALLY AT.
THE IMPACT OF COVER 19% THE
NATIONAL HELP CUSTOMERS. ASK
THERE'S- TO CHANGE OUR CURRENT
ASSETS TO PUT ACT. INSTABILITY
HELLO INCOME. AND PERSONS WITH
THE- WHO SUBJECT TO THE- THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. WELL NOW ONLINE
FORTY EIGHT LINE EIGHT LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD MY NAME IS JIM AND I
AM THE FRIEND COMMITTEE
LEGISLATION THE CALIFORNIA WANT
TO FRANK AT THE COMMITTEE FOR
THE VARIANT FORMATIVE HEARING-
WE WANT TO ALIGN OURSELVES WITH
THOSE WHO SUPPORT GETTING RID
OF THE AFFECT ASSET PASSED FOR
MEDIC HOW RECIPIENTS- SO AS TO
NOT DISCOURAGE PARTICIPATION IN
THAT ACCOUNT AND TO ENABLE
SENIORS AND PERSONS WITH.
DISABILITIES TO HAVE ADEQUATE
RESOURCES IN ORDER TO MEET
THEIR INCIDENTAL EXPENSES WE
THINK THIS IS NOTHING- OTHER
THAN PRUDENT THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. WELL NOW GO TO LINE THIRTY
SO. HI GOOD MORNING MY NAME IS
EVELYN MATCHING AND I AM A
STAFF ATTORNEY AT THE LEGAL AID
SOCIETY ASSEMBLY PALE COUNTY
SENIOR ADVOCATES PROGRAM AND
HEALTH CONSUMER CENTER. OVER
THE PAST TWO YEARS I PERSONALLY
ADVISE LOCAL ONE HUNDRED
SENIORS THIS YEAR IT HEALTHCARE.
COULD CUT CHANGES ON THE TEAM
AFTER HELLO THE EXT. LOW NON I
KNOW ACCOUNT IT. EXISTING
POLICY PREVENTS. IN PERSON WITH
THIS. FROM SAY OF MIKE AND
THOUSAND A SINGLE THREE
THOUSAND A COUPLE. THESE LIMITS
VULNERABLE IN THE- ACTIVE
SEARCHING NEEDED TO WHETHER
CRISIS. SUCH AS IN THE DAY.
MAKING REAL ARMY LOCAL COMPARE
AND LESSONS THE LOG FOR JEAN
AND DISABLE PEOPLE. TO CHOOSE
BETWEEN THE TENETS SAVINGS
FISHER A MODICUM OF FINANCE BUT
THE- AND ASKING THE HEALTH
COVERAGE THEY NEED. AS I WE ARE
ADVISE CLIENTS TO SPEND DOWN
THERE'S- SO THAT THEY CAN CALL
TO RACE HELP CARE AS CENTRAL TO
THE WELL BEING. WHEN FACED WITH
THE DECISION OF CALL FOR MEDI
CAL I HAD THE ADDITIONAL. BOTH
THE CENTER DOWN DESPITE THAT
THIS PUTS THEM AT RISK OF
FURTHER INSTABILITY OR EVEN
HOMELESSNESS. WHEN EMERGENCIES
HAPPEN. INSANITY OKAY. TWO
THOUSAND DOLLAR IS NOW ENOUGH
BY ONE MONTH'S RENT MAKE SURE
THE SECURITY OFFICE. I'M BEHALF
OF US AND SITUATION WE RESPECT
ASK THAT YOU LEGISLATION SALEM
OR TO A THAT LEVEL. WHICH WOULD
ALLOW BY EQUITY IN THE BILL I
MOMENT SENIORS AND PER WITH
DISABILITIES THANK YOU THANK
YOU. YOUR CHAIR WITH NO AT THE
ALPS IN Q. THIS TIME TO. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH- WILL BRING IT
BACK TO THE THEN ANY FINAL
COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE-
JUST SEEN SEE NONE I JUST WANNA
THANK YOU THINK OUR SPEAKERS-
OBVIOUSLY- FOR US THIS IS A
REALLY IMPORTANT ISSUE I KNOW
THAT- THIS YEAR'S WE HAVE
HEARINGS WILL LIKELY- ANSWERED
OUR BUDGET HEARINGS ARE GOING
TO BE SOMEWHAT TRUNCATED- AND-
EVEN OUR POLICY COMMITTEE
HEARINGS WILL BE. A LIKELY
LESS- THAN NORMAL SO WE'VE BEEN
HOLDING A VARIETY OF HEARINGS-
SINCE- WE ADJOURNED LAST YEAR
ON FRIDAY TOPICS AND ON THIS
ONE ROSE TO THE TOP IS ONE OF
THOSE IT JUST FEELS LIKE IT'S
SO. FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR TO A
LOT OF PEOPLE AND- WHEN YOU GO
BACK TO THE FACT THAT THIS AT.
THIS NUMBER THAT IS TIED TO
THIS ASSET TEST HASN'T BEEN
CHANGED SINCE NINETEEN EIGHTY
NINE- THAT DEBT JUST TO KIND OF
PUT AN EXCLAMATION POINT ON IT
FOR A SELF. WHEN I THINK ARE
PER PER PARTICIPATION HERE WHEN
I THINK- ASSEMBLY MEMBER-
CARILLO FOR HER WORK ON THIS
WHICH IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO
WORK ON THIS OBVIOUSLY AND- I
KNOW SHE HAS- I'D I BELIEVE SHE
HAS A CHAIR. BY THE DAY I SHE'S
MY SUPPORT AS A CO AUTHOR ON
HER BILL I WANT TO SPEAK FOR DR
RAM DEALER BUT HE JUST GAVE A
THUMBS UP SO THAT I TO TELL YOU
SOMETHING. SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH AND WITH THAT. WE WILL GO
AHEAD AND ADJOURNED THANK YOU.