The Alaska Department of Health has recently updated its projections regarding the potential impacts of President Donald Trump’s budget reconciliation bill on the state’s Medicaid program.
Initially, officials suggested a possible reduction of up to $500 million in Alaska’s annual $2.7 billion Medicaid budget due to this legislation, which includes significant cuts to social safety net programs.
However, state officials clarified that this estimate did not factor in Alaska-specific exemptions, such as those negotiated by Alaska’s congressional delegation for Alaska Native Medicaid recipients, which would exempt them from a new work requirement included in the bill.
In an interview, Alaska Health Commissioner Heidi Hedberg and Deputy Commissioner Emily Ricci noted that the projections shared earlier were based on national models that did not accurately reflect Alaska’s unique circumstances.
Ricci stated, “We really took a look at those estimates and we realized that those estimates really came from national models that looked at how enrollment changes in other states that had implemented community engagement requirements.”
Despite the initial projections, the department has not provided an alternate estimate regarding how the bill will affect Medicaid spending and enrollment in Alaska, where approximately one-third of residents depend on Medicaid for health care access.
On its website, the department mentioned that exemptions for many Alaskans from the new requirements complicate the ability to predict the full impact of the changes, indicating that further analysis is underway to capture Alaska’s distinct situation.
The budget reconciliation bill is projected to cut federal health care spending by $1 trillion in the next decade, leading to approximately 10 million people nationwide losing access to Medicaid, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Until the recent clarifications, the Alaska Department of Health had not disclosed formal estimates regarding the bill’s impact on the state’s health care system.
Healthcare advocates, such as the Alaska Hospital and Healthcare Association, have raised alarms about potential negative ramifications this law could bring to the state.
They predict that the bill could lead to a rise in the number of uninsured Alaskans, put additional financial pressure on rural hospitals, and increase healthcare delivery costs.
The budget reconciliation bill establishes new requirements that will necessitate many Medicaid recipients to engage in work, volunteer activities, or education starting in 2027.
In addition, the state will need to implement more frequent eligibility checks for Medicaid recipients as part of the new legislation.
Specific carve-outs in the bill for Alaska include exemptions from the work requirement for Alaska Native people and provisions designed to help seasonal workers, such as fishermen, maintain year-round eligibility for Medicaid.
Alaska is also allowed to apply for extensions to delay the adoption of some new rules.
On Monday, the Department of Health estimated the impending changes could potentially reduce annual Medicaid spending by $300 million to $500 million.
Although the majority of Medicaid funding in Alaska comes from the federal government, the state anticipates its spending may decrease by $26 million to $35 million annually as a result of these changes.
However, on Wednesday, Ricci revised her earlier statements, suggesting that the initial reduction projection was “too high.”
In a revised version of its frequently asked questions, the department omitted statements regarding potential declines in Medicaid enrollment stemming from the work requirements.
With approximately 250,000 Alaskans enrolled in Medicaid, including a third who identify as Alaska Native, the implications of these changes are significant.
Senator Lisa Murkowski cited the importance of the exemption for Alaska Native individuals and other associated amendments in securing her vote in favor of the legislation.
Deb Etheridge, director of Alaska’s Division of Public Assistance, expressed optimism that the work exemption could provide crucial relief.
She emphasized the division’s commitment to simplifying administrative processes for better efficiency and ease for clients.
In exchange for Murkowski’s support for the bill, Republican leadership agreed to delay the penalties imposed on states with higher error rates in administering food assistance, a concern particularly relevant for Alaska, which had the highest error rate in the country last year.
Etheridge remarked, “There was a lot of advocacy for Alaska within the bill that gave us opportunities to make some corrections before we have to implement large systemic changes.”
Both she and her team are still awaiting guidance from federal agencies such as the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services concerning the implementation of the new law.
Etheridge noted, “We need time to digest. In the meantime, we’re just trying to move forward and make improvements here.”
The Alaska Hospital and Healthcare Association has continued to voice concerns regarding the capacity of the Division of Public Assistance to manage the extensive changes mandated under the new legislation.
Jared Kosin, president of the association, expressed apprehensions about the division’s ability to handle increased eligibility checks amidst ongoing backlogs that have affected the system in recent years.
He stated, “It’s easy to write up carve-outs on paper.
It’s easy to draft language for those things and feel like the job is done.
But the reality is, the job’s not done until the system is developed for administering those carve-outs.”
Kosin highlighted the complexity of proving exemptions within the new system, warning that this additional requirement would fall on an already overburdened staff.
Etheridge acknowledged the challenges ahead but indicated that her division is actively working to enhance operations, including improving case processing and addressing backlogs that have resulted in significant financial penalties from federal agencies.
She conveyed the difficulty of managing ongoing demands, likening her team’s efforts to a complicated game of Jenga amid constant pressures.
The division has invested in new technology to streamline processes, allowing applicants to submit documentation via a mobile application instead of traditional methods.
Etheridge stated, “Generally, if we can use technology to make it easier for clients, that’s the direction we’re going.”
Additionally, the budget reconciliation bill has introduced a $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program intended to support rural healthcare systems impacted by the expected reduction in Medicaid funding.
While members of Alaska’s congressional delegation predict that the state could acquire hundreds of millions of dollars from the program, specific funding amounts will only materialize following a competitive application process.
The state has until the end of the current year to submit its application for funding that will be allocated between 2026 and 2030.
The Department of Health has characterized the Rural Health Transformation Program as a valuable opportunity to secure federal funding for initiatives tailored to rural Alaskan communities.
With a deadline for community input for potential funding uses set for August 18, Kosin pointed out the urgency to develop a comprehensive plan.
He mentioned that balancing this effort with preparing for potentially significant Medicaid losses poses a substantial challenge.
Kosin remarked, “If a large swarm of individuals lose their coverage, and they happen to be concentrated in some rural areas, then even with this money coming in, that money is going to have to go towards staying afloat, rather than innovating care delivery.”
He concluded by questioning the excitement surrounding the new program when weighed against the backdrop of anticipated cuts and access challenges, stating, “How excited can you get about something when you’re just preparing to just get a jolt of cuts, uncompensated care and access problems?”
As Alaska navigates these legislative changes there remains considerable uncertainty regarding the future of its Medicaid program and the health care landscape within the state.
image source from：adn
