The Protect MI Care coalition is gathering information from candidates seeking public office in Michigan about their perspectives on Medicaid. Please note that the Protect MI Care coalition does not endorse candidates for office. The information collected in this questionnaire is for educational and informational purposes only. Responses from candidates are published as received, without editing or commentary. Candidates have agreed that their responses may be reproduced and attributed to them in Protect MI Care communications, including newsletters, social media, websites, and materials shared with coalition partners.
The following responses are from Brenda Carter, Democratic candidate for Michigan House of Representatives District 53.
Medicaid covers about one in four Michigan residents—children, seniors, people with disabilities, working families, and veterans — across every county in the state. In the communities you seek to represent, who relies on Medicaid, and how would Medicaid fit among your priorities if elected?
Medicaid is a lifeline for children, pregnant people, seniors, people with disabilities and working families in Pontiac, Waterford and Auburn Hills. It pays for routine care, births, mental health treatment and long-term services. Protecting coverage and access is a top priority for me because a lost card or a closed clinic has an immediate effect on a family’s health and finances.
Michigan has funded the state share of Medicaid through financing tools that federal law (HR-1) enacted in 2025 now limits, including provider taxes and state-directed payments. As a result, Medicaid funding will be renegotiated under intense pressure nearly every year. In the office you are seeking, what would you do to promote stable, long-term Medicaid funding rather than relying on short-term fixes? Would you support establishing a dedicated, sustainable funding source for the program? Why or why not?
Yes. I would work toward a dedicated, sustainable state funding plan with transparent forecasts, while preserving every lawful federal dollar and examining fair revenue options. We should budget for federal changes over several years, publish the expected coverage and provider impacts, and avoid annual surprises that force clinics and families into crisis. I would not commit to a particular tax mechanism without reviewing its distributional impact and legal viability.
With major decreases in federal Medicaid funding starting in 2027, the state will face choices including replacing those dollars, reducing eligibility, cutting provider payments, reducing covered benefits, increasing revenues, or reducing spending elsewhere in the budget. What approach would you support, and what options would you rule out?
I would first maximize federal funding still available, use lawful financing tools, cut administrative waste, and identify progressive, sustainable state revenue before reducing care. I would oppose throwing eligible people off coverage or cutting essential benefits to balance the books. Across-the-board provider cuts that close safety-net clinics are also a poor answer. Any proposal should disclose its impact on coverage, rural and urban providers, and the state budget before a vote.
Roughly 660,000 Michiganders are covered through the Healthy Michigan Plan, the state’s Medicaid expansion. Federal law enacted in 2025 reduces the federal share of that coverage and will lower eligibility levels – decisions made in Washington that state officials cannot undo. If you are seeking federal office, what would you do to restore federal support and eligibility for expansion coverage? If you are seeking state office, what should Michigan do for residents who lose coverage as a result, and would you support using state resources to keep any of them covered?
Michigan should help affected residents keep or regain affordable care through outreach, enrollment assistance and every available state and federal coverage pathway. Yes, I would consider state resources to bridge coverage for people at greatest risk, especially those with chronic conditions, pregnancy-related needs or no realistic alternative. The Legislature should ask for a clear cost and eligibility analysis so the response is targeted and sustainable.
Beginning January 1, 2027, most Healthy Michigan Plan enrollees ages 19–64 must document 80 hours per month of work or other qualifying activity to keep coverage. In other states, people who met the requirement still lost coverage because reporting systems, notices, and staffing were not ready. Would you support self-attestation and automatic verification using data the state already holds, applying the full range of allowable exemptions, and requiring plain-language notices so that no eligible Michigander loses coverage over paperwork?
Yes. Michigan should use information it already has, allow self-attestation where federal rules permit, apply every lawful exemption, and send clear notices in accessible languages and formats. I would fund caseworker training and require public reporting on procedural terminations and successful reinstatements. An eligible person should not lose care because a system failed to process paperwork.
6. New premiums and limits
Beyond what is required by federal law beginning in 2027, would you support or oppose adding new premiums, copayments, enrollment fees, or benefit limits to Michigan’s Medicaid program as a way to manage costs? Please explain.
I would oppose new state-imposed premiums, enrollment fees, copayments or benefit limits that deter needed care. Delayed treatment often costs more and hurts families. We should seek savings through better coordination, prevention, fair purchasing and reduced administrative burden rather than shift costs to people least able to pay.
Medicaid brings billions of federal dollars into Michigan’s economy, supports thousands of jobs, and is a primary revenue source for Michigan hospitals, health centers, and clinics. Reduced funding is expected to increase uncompensated care, and rural and safety-net providers are the most exposed. What would you do to keep hospitals, clinics, and providers open and accessible in rural and underserved communities?
I would protect reimbursement needed to sustain safety-net providers, support community health centers and rural facilities, and use targeted stabilization funds where the evidence shows a genuine access gap. Workforce training, telehealth, transportation and coordinated care can help, but they cannot replace a local clinic. I would monitor closures, appointment wait times and travel distance to care by community.
Medicaid is the largest payer for mental health and substance use disorder treatment in Michigan, and in many rural communities it is the only way people reach that care. What would you do to protect and strengthen access to behavioral health care, including crisis services, treatment for opioid and other substance use disorders, and services for children and youth?
Medicaid pays for the care of 65% of nursing home residents in Michigan and funds home- and community-based services that allow seniors and people with disabilities to remain in their own homes. What would you do to protect long-term care and home- and community-based services, and to support the direct care workforce that provides them?
I support reliable nursing-home care and home- and community-based services that let people live with dignity in the setting they choose. I would resist cuts to these supports, improve direct care worker pay and training, and examine whether rates reach workers and produce safe staffing. We should publish waitlists, staffing turnover and avoidable hospitalizations.
Medicaid pays for 37% of births in Michigan and covers 39% of all Michigan children. What would you do to protect and strengthen Medicaid coverage for pregnant women, new mothers, infants, and children, including ensuring access to preventive care and behavioral health services?
I would protect continuous coverage and timely prenatal, postpartum and pediatric care, including mental health and substance-use treatment. Michigan should expand access to doulas, community health workers and preventive visits where outcomes show a need, and address racial disparities in maternal and infant health. Families should not lose coverage because of an administrative transition after birth.
Medicaid is the largest payer of services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Michigan, covering the community living supports, employment supports, and transportation that let people live at home, work, and take part in their communities. Unlike nursing facility care, these services are optional under federal law, which puts them at risk when budgets tighten. In the office you are seeking, what would you do to protect and strengthen these supports, and would you commit to ensuring eligible Michiganders are not left waiting to receive them?
Yes. I would protect community-based supports for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and work toward eliminating avoidable waits for eligible services. That requires transparent waitlist data, adequate provider rates, a stable direct care workforce and meaningful input from people with disabilities and families. The state should not treat these services as expendable merely because federal law labels them optional.
If elected, what is the first concrete action you would take on Medicaid in your first year in office? Please also tell us whether you would commit to meeting with Medicaid enrollees, providers, and advocates in your district, and to reviewing publicly reported data on how Michiganders are impacted by cuts as these changes take effect.
I would push for a public Medicaid impact and funding plan in the budget process, including a dashboard of coverage losses, procedural terminations, provider access and appeals by county. Yes, I will meet with enrollees, providers and advocates in the district and review the data with them as federal changes take effect. Their experience should shape the budget and any corrective legislation.
13. Additional comment
Is there anything else you would like Michigan voters to know about your position on Medicaid?
Health coverage is about the person who needs an appointment today and the family trying to stay financially stable. I will judge every Medicaid proposal by whether people can actually get care, whether providers can remain open, and whether Michigan is honest about the costs and tradeoffs.
The Protect MI Care coalition is gathering information from candidates seeking public office in Michigan about their perspectives on Medicaid. Please note that the Protect MI Care coalition does not endorse candidates for office. The information collected in this questionnaire is for educational and informational purposes only. Responses from candidates are published as received, without editing or commentary. Candidates have agreed that their responses may be reproduced and attributed to them in Protect MI Care communications, including newsletters, social media, websites, and materials shared with coalition partners.
The following responses are from Jason Robbins, Democratic candidate for Michigan House of Representatives District 59.
Medicaid covers about one in four Michigan residents—children, seniors, people with disabilities, working families, and veterans — across every county in the state. In the communities you seek to represent, who relies on Medicaid, and how would Medicaid fit among your priorities if elected?
Michigan has funded the state share of Medicaid through financing tools that federal law (HR-1) enacted in 2025 now limits, including provider taxes and state-directed payments. As a result, Medicaid funding will be renegotiated under intense pressure nearly every year. In the office you are seeking, what would you do to promote stable, long-term Medicaid funding rather than relying on short-term fixes? Would you support establishing a dedicated, sustainable funding source for the program? Why or why not?
With major decreases in federal Medicaid funding starting in 2027, the state will face choices including replacing those dollars, reducing eligibility, cutting provider payments, reducing covered benefits, increasing revenues, or reducing spending elsewhere in the budget. What approach would you support, and what options would you rule out?
Roughly 660,000 Michiganders are covered through the Healthy Michigan Plan, the state’s Medicaid expansion. Federal law enacted in 2025 reduces the federal share of that coverage and will lower eligibility levels – decisions made in Washington that state officials cannot undo. If you are seeking federal office, what would you do to restore federal support and eligibility for expansion coverage? If you are seeking state office, what should Michigan do for residents who lose coverage as a result, and would you support using state resources to keep any of them covered?
Beginning January 1, 2027, most Healthy Michigan Plan enrollees ages 19–64 must document 80 hours per month of work or other qualifying activity to keep coverage. In other states, people who met the requirement still lost coverage because reporting systems, notices, and staffing were not ready. Would you support self-attestation and automatic verification using data the state already holds, applying the full range of allowable exemptions, and requiring plain-language notices so that no eligible Michigander loses coverage over paperwork?
If the State already has the required information then no one should be kicked off insurance because a caseworker was stretched too thin to check tape matches and collateral contacts.
If the Feds are going to require this, then they should fund the additional staffing needed to complete these arduous and redundant tasks.
Beyond what is required by federal law beginning in 2027, would you support or oppose adding new premiums, copayments, enrollment fees, or benefit limits to Michigan’s Medicaid program as a way to manage costs? Please explain.
Being under insured is essentially being uninsured. The State should pay for these programs and the cost shouldn’t be passed on to those that can’t afford it. I believe adding cost to Medicaid nullifies the program and will actually do damage in the long run. Period.
Medicaid brings billions of federal dollars into Michigan’s economy, supports thousands of jobs, and is a primary revenue source for Michigan hospitals, health centers, and clinics. Reduced funding is expected to increase uncompensated care, and rural and safety-net providers are the most exposed. What would you do to keep hospitals, clinics, and providers open and accessible in rural and underserved communities?
Medicaid is the largest payer for mental health and substance use disorder treatment in Michigan, and in many rural communities it is the only way people reach that care. What would you do to protect and strengthen access to behavioral health care, including crisis services, treatment for opioid and other substance use disorders, and services for children and youth?
If the cost to provide services is higher than the cost of service it is not sustainable and will fail. A failure at this level will be catastrophic for the workers and families. We must ensure that these services continue.