View this email .
American Dental Education Association

Volume 1, No. 71, July 21, 2020

ADEA Advocacy in Action

This feature will appear weekly in the ADEA Advocate to summarize and provide direct links to recent advocacy actions taken by ADEA. Please let us know what you think and how we might improve its usefulness.

 

Lost Clinic Revenue—Provider Relief Fund

May 1 – Joint with the Partnership for Medicaid on fund reimbursement for Medicaid providers.

April 30 – Joint with ADHA on availability of reimbursement from Fund.

 

Other COVID Issues

July 10 – Joint to Sec. Wolf Regarding the Student and Exchange Visitor Program

July 2 – Joint to Dept. of State and DHS Regarding Guidance for International Students.

May 28 – Joint with the American Council on Education regarding liability protection shields.

 

Dental School COVID Related Capital Needs

July 2 – Joint to HELP Committee Regarding Reopening Costs.

June 1 – ADEA to Sen. Lamar Alexander regarding reopening guidelines.

 

2019 Graduate Licensure

April 9 – ADEA to National Governors Association.

 

For a full list of ADEA Letters and Policy Memos, click .
ADEA Offers State Advocacy Webinar

 

ADEA is pleased to announce the release of a webinar designed to help you improve your state advocacy efforts. is hosted by Phil Mauller, ADEA Director for State Relations and Advocacy, and provides insight into the ways in which your role as a dental educator or student puts you in a position to be a strong voice for dental education. The webinar covers more than just the legislative process. It also details ways to get involved, strategies to adopt and a review of ADEA resources designed to help advocates like you.

 

The webinar can be taken for continuing education credit, and can be used in conjunction with ADEA’s . ADEA’s can also be used to help you stay up-to-date on recent developments in your state and others.

Trump Administration Rescinds Guidance Banning International Students from Taking Classes in the U.S.

 

The Trump administration rescinded guidance issued on July 6 that would have banned international students from taking classes in the United States this fall.

 

On July 8, Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) filed against the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement Agency (ICE), arguing that the guidance violates the Administrative Procedures Act and requesting a temporary restraining order. The lawsuit also argued that the rule is a backdoor attempt by the Trump administration to force colleges and universities to hold in-person classes. The universities noted the on their schools, their international students and the U.S. economy.

 

Last week, at the start of a scheduled hearing to address Harvard University and MIT’s request for a temporary injunction, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs announced that between Harvard University and MIT and the federal government. Under the agreement, the federal government and universities agreed to:

  • Rescind the July 6 directive and the July 7 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), which provided additional explanation of the July 6 directive,
  • Preclude the nationwide enforcement of the July 6 directive and July 7 FAQs,
  • Return to the status quo reflected in the and the
  • Moot the motion for a temporary injunction.

Had the July 6 directive gone into effect, international students whose classes were completely online would not have been eligible for an F1 student visa. If these students wanted to retain their current F1 visa status, they would have had to transfer to a school with in-person classes or a school offering hybrid classes (i.e., a combination of in-person and online instruction).

 

It is expected that the federal government will take formal actions to rescind the July guidance and FAQs, and make any conforming revisions to the March 2020 policy directive and addendum. The case will remain open until open then.
New Hampshire May Establish Dental Coverage for Adults on Medicaid, While Other States Make Coverage Cuts

 

The state of is one step closer to providing dental coverage for adults on Medicaid. The state’s General Court recently passed a that requires the Commissioner of the state’s Department of Health and Human Services to contract with a dental managed-care organization to provide dental care to people over the age of 21. The bill establishes a quick timeline, as it requires amendments to the state Medicaid plan to be submitted to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services by Nov. 1, and implementation to begin by April 1, 2021. The bill will be sent to Gov. Chris Sununu (R) for consideration.

 

While New Hampshire has taken steps toward implementing benefits, other states are making or considering cuts. Shutdowns due to the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in lost revenue and budget shortfalls for several states, resulting in a need for them to trim spending. One area where several states have started to look at making cuts are provided under state Medicaid programs. At the end of June, Gov. Jared Polis (D), signed HB 1361, which placed an annual cap of $1,000 on dental benefits for adults on Medicaid, a decrease of $500 from the current cap. The cap would expire after 2022 and would only be implemented after the requirement for a higher match through the federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act expires.

 

Recently passed budget cuts in include a 6% reduction in Medicaid reimbursement rates as the state looks to shore up a $1.2-billion budget shortfall. The legislation to the state’s fiscal year 2020-21 budget, and would also cut appropriation for the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, School of Dental Medicine by $1,927,570, reducing the total appropriation from $9,806,394 to $7,878,824. The final bill will be sent to Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) for consideration.

Michigan Governor Orders Implicit Bias Training for Health Care Professionals

 

Under a new executive directive issued by Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D), medical professionals in the state will be required to participate in in order to renew or receive an initial professional license. The executive directive is based on a recommendation from the Michigan Coronavirus Task Force on Racial Disparities. The recommendation requires the state’s Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to work with the state’s licensing boards and task forces to establish implicit bias training standards.

 

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored health inequity in the state, as 40% of the coronavirus deaths in Michigan have been Black people, who comprise only 14% of the state’s population. According to Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist II (D), who chaired the task force, “The coronavirus pandemic has shown that this inequity is particularly and dangerously true.”

 

A handful of states have laws that require for health professionals. Most of these laws, however, only apply to select professions, and do not apply to all licensed health care workers in the state.
State Attorneys General Oppose DeVos’ Borrowers Defense Rule

 

Twenty-two state attorneys general and the District of Columbia have Education Secretary Betsey DeVos to block implementation of the Borrowers Defense Rule, which became effective on July 1. The attorney generals that the rule is arbitrary and capricious and violates the Administrative Procedures Act and is therefore illegal.

 

DeVos last year issued an overhaul of Borrowers Defense regulations, which provide a path for students who are defrauded or misled by their college to get their federal loans discharged. The new rule significantly tightens standards for federal student loan debt relief for those defrauded by their colleges. The Department of Education estimates that the new regulation would produce $11 billion in savings.

 

Congressional Democrats tried to block the rule by introducing a resolution, , disapproving of the rule and repealing it. Though the resolution had bipartisan support, President Trump vetoed the resolution. Congress failed to secure enough votes to secure a . Democrats called the rule unfair and noted that it favored for-profit colleges, which is the sector that spurred most of the claims under the Obama-era Borrowers Defense Rule.

The is published weekly. Its purpose is to keep ADEA members abreast of federal and state issues and events of interest to the academic dentistry and the dental and research communities.

 

©2020

American Dental Education Association

655 K Street, NW, Suite 800

Washington, DC 20001

202-289-7201,

 

twitter
Unsubscribe

B. Timothy Leeth, CPA

ADEA Chief Advocacy Officer

 

Bridgette DeHart, J.D.

ADEA Director of Federal Relations and Advocacy

 

Phillip Mauller, M.P.S.

ADEA Director of State Relations and Advocacy

 

Brian Robinson

ADEA Program Manager for Advocacy and Government Relations

 

Higher Logic