Ohio House Budget Draft Reduces Funding for Key Child Health and Pediatric Cancer Research
Advocates for child wellbeing are sounding the alarm over the Ohio House’s budget proposal, which includes sweeping cuts to Medicaid, pediatric cancer research, and early childhood health programs, sparking concern over the state’s ability to protect its most vulnerable residents.
Kathryn Poe, a budget and health researcher at Policy Matters Ohio, criticized the proposed budget, saying it “feels like they had taken a hacksaw to some of these line items without real consideration to what they did.” She warned that the cuts could destabilize essential services without meaningfully improving Ohio’s finances or health outcomes.
One of the most alarming changes is a provision that would eliminate Ohio’s Medicaid expansion, which currently provides coverage to hundreds of thousands of low-income adults if federal matching funds dip below 90%. This could strip healthcare from more than 700,000 Ohioans, many of whom work low-wage jobs without benefits.
“What do you do when 700,000 people lose their insurance overnight?” Poe asked. “It would be a devastating economic loss.”
Data from the Health Policy Institute of Ohio shows Medicaid expansion has halved Ohio’s uninsured rate since 2010 and significantly improved access to care. Ending the expansion could particularly impact working parents and families already struggling to stay afloat.
In addition, the House budget would:
-
End a requirement for continuous Medicaid coverage for children under age 3, threatening healthcare stability for nearly half of Ohio’s children under six.
-
Slash pediatric cancer research by $5 million.
-
Eliminate lead abatement programs, despite Ohio’s rate of childhood lead poisoning being nearly twice the national average.
-
Restrict Medicaid coverage for doulas to just six counties with the highest infant mortality rates.
-
Cut $1.5 million from infant vitality programming and drop a proposed child tax credit.
Groundwork Ohio, a key child advocacy group, said the proposal “represents a step backward at a time when we can least afford it.”
“The program covers about half of all births in the state,” the group stated, emphasizing the ripple effects these cuts would have on maternal health, child development, and long-term family stability.
