Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowHealth care advocates and members of the Indianapolis City-County Council urged a city entity Thursday to drop a Medicaid lawsuit set to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court early next month.
The Health and Hospital Corp. of Marion County is a defendant in a lawsuit that some worry would impact any Medicaid beneficiary receiving care in a government-owned facility.
“If (HHC) wins this case, they will take away the basic right to sue in federal court under civil rights protections that have been there since Reconstruction,” said Michael Oles, a field director with Our Revolution. “This is a very dangerous case, in a very dangerous moment with a dangerous Supreme Court.”
Oles, the Community Action Coalition and three city-county council members—Vice President Zach Adamson, Dan Boots and Ethan Evans—presented a letter urging the HHC board, which meets next week, to reconsider the lawsuit.
Specifically, the letter asks HHC to withdraw the petition or ask for a narrow interpretation that wouldn’t have any impact outside of the case, known as Talevski v. Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County.
“A broad decision in favor of (HHC) and its co-parties… could effectively prevent people who receive federal safety net services like Medicaid from having the right to sue state and county entities in federal court for denying, reducing or terminating guaranteed benefits,” Adamson read from the letter.
Case and HHC background
The case stems from the treatment and death of Gorgi Talevski at a Valparaiso long-term care facility. The Health and Hospital Corp. of Marion County (HCC) owns that nursing home, along with 77 others across the state in addition to operating the Marion County Health Department and Sidney & Lois Eskenazi Hospital in Indianapolis.
The Indianapolis City-County Council appoints two board members while the remaining five are appointed by Mayor Joe Hogsett and the Marion County Commissioners—nearly all of whom are Democrats.
Oles noted that Democrats, traditionally supporters of Medicaid and social safety net programs, could inadvertently cause one of its biggest defeats.
“We don’t want to be the laughing stock of the nation because Indiana Democrats helped put a final nail in our safety net,” Oles said.
Hogsett told the IndyStar Thursday that the agency went “a step too far” in the case and urged it to backtrack by narrowing the scope.
Oles said that the decision to expand the litigation beyond the scope of one case, the treatment of Talevski, didn’t ever appear before the board, but rather was approved by President and CEO Paul Babcock. This is affirmed by the Indiana Public Access Counselor’s opinion determining that HHC had violated Open Door Laws by pursuing the litigation in private.
“We were met with a cold shoulder when we first started reaching out,” Oles said. “We were written off so we kept the pressure on all summer. I’ve talked to several board members now and we’re hoping that… there will be an effort to get this thing withdrawn.”
Pressure to withdraw the lawsuit
The City-County Council members said they bore the responsibility of appointing two members and typically took a “hands off” approach to the board.
“This isn’t something that came to them for a vote in the first place,” Adamson said. “We don’t want to create a process of meddling in (every) case… That’s not something we want to be a part of.”
Boots, an attorney, noted that city-county council members directly contacting board members created an ethical conflict and necessitated the public letter.
However, there are concerns that even if HHC withdraws from the case, other plaintiffs, including American Senior Communities and the Valparaiso nursing home, may continue to pursue it.
If so, those parties would have the support of a powerful coalition of state Attorneys General, as detailed in a brief from 22 attorneys, including Indiana AG Todd Rokita.
The HHC board will meet Tuesday at 1:30 p.m. in Indianapolis, their final meeting before oral arguments are due to begin in the Supreme Court on Nov. 8.
The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
When a patient is not paying for the cost of care why should they benefit from any financial gains in a lawsuit? We live in an overly litigious society and unfortunately there are those that prey on a scheme to sue , in order to enjoy financial gain. Mandating mediation would save billions of dollars and accomplish acceptable resolve to both parties.