State-led changes to Medicare and Medicaid under discussion as ND eyes greater control, Oz says
WASHINGTON – A conversation about how Medicare and Medicaid costs are shared between the federal government and states drew attention to the idea that governors may gain more say in how the programs are run. The report describes North Dakota’s leadership as signaling a willingness to accept less federal funding in exchange for greater local control, a stance that could tilt how health programs are designed and financed in rural states.
In an exclusive interview on The Flag at The White House, Scott Hennen asked Dr. Mehmet Oz about the policy. Oz argued that the mechanism for implementing changes depends on state leadership and stressed the importance of governors talking to one another to chart the best path forward, since not all governors have the same level of health policy expertise. He framed the discussion around a holistic approach to health, noting that what communities eat—especially in states known for farming—has a direct impact on health outcomes.
The conversation also touched on agriculture and policy reform. Oz suggested that agriculture production is an important factor in health policy, indicating that the relationship between farming practices, nutrition, and public health needs careful consideration. There was mention of concerns about proposed reforms to agricultural practices and the role of administration advocates who support agriculture-friendly policies. The report also notes that Farm Action reportedly revoked its endorsement of RFK Jr.’s health policy platform, issuing a negative assessment of that approach.
Another development highlighted was North Dakota Senator Kevin Cramer’s invitation for Oz to visit the state in October, signaling continued engagement between national figures and rural communities on health, agriculture, and policy.
Note: The report identifies a North Dakota governor named Kelly Armstrong, but public records show the state’s governor is Doug Burgum. Armstrong is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Readers should view this as a potential error in the report rather than a factual element of the policy discussion.
What this means going forward
– The core idea is to give states more flexibility to shape how federal health dollars are used, potentially through waivers or redesigned program structures that better fit local needs.
– For North Dakota and other rural states, there could be opportunities to align nutrition programs with agricultural realities, encouraging healthier choices and supporting local farming ecosystems.
– There are risks as well: less federal funding or looser standards could affect access to care if state capacity to manage programs wanes or if waivers prove too complex to sustain.
Bottom line
The exchange highlights an ongoing debate over federal-state roles in Medicare and Medicaid, with nutrition, agriculture, and rural health emerging as intertwined themes. If states can collaborate effectively with federal agencies, there could be room for more tailored health solutions that reflect local realities, while preserving core protections for vulnerable populations. A potential trip to North Dakota in October may bring additional attention to how these ideas might be piloted in farming regions.
Summary note for editors
– Ensure factual accuracy on official roles (e.g., the current North Dakota governor is Doug Burgum; Armstrong is a U.S. Representative).
– If publishing, consider adding a brief explainer on how state waivers and funding mechanisms work in Medicare/Medicaid to help readers follow the policy implications.
– A future update could include quotes from local policymakers or health administrators to provide a clearer picture of the state-level implementation plans and timelines.