Program helps HIV/AIDS patients

 

Tribune Editorial
Updated: 04/15/2010

 

For years, applications for federal grants for Utah's Ryan White program crossed the table of the Legislature's Executive Appropriations Committee without comment or controversy. And no wonder. The program, heavily subsidized by the federal government, saves lives by helping low-income HIV/AIDS patients acquire health insurance and/or the life-sustaining medications they can't afford.

That changed this month. Looking to save a few bucks, and perhaps make a social statement, Senate President Michael Waddoups flagged the annual grant application when it came to the committee for what is typically a rubber-stamp approval.

"It looks to me like we're funding a program providing insurance and [medical care] that is going to be covered under Obamacare: pre-existing conditions, lifestyle choices and things of that nature," Waddoups said. "I'm just concerned about that."

Now, it's social workers, public health advocates and program participants who are concerned. With the grant renewal on hold, the 450 HIV/AIDS patients who rely on the program face an uncertain future.

It's true, as Waddoups suggested, that many program participants have been denied health insurance coverage because their disease was a pre-existing condition, an abomination that will be corrected by the recently approved federal health care reform legislation. But that change won't take effect until 2014. Discontinuing the program now could force some patients to forgo vital care for years. And for what?

Saving money can be expensive. But in this case, it is prohibitively so. If the Ryan White program is allowed to lapse, Utah would sacrifice the health of HIV/AIDS patients and forfeit $3.8 million in federal funds to save state taxpayers a paltry $45,000. (The balance of the $1.4 million state match necessary to leverage the federal funds is provided through "in-kind" services -- money spent on other existing programs that the state will fund with or without the Ryan White grant.)

Now, it appears that committee members were unaware of the paltry savings that would be gained by abolishing the program. Their objections apparently stemmed from a lack of knowledge, not cold hearts.

Waddoups, after learning how little the state would save, says he no longer sees a need to chop the program. Hopefully, his fellow committee members will agree when they meet next month, and the grant application will be submitted before services to this vulnerable population are disrupted.

www.sltrib.com