During this past legislative session, two issues dominated the debate on health care.

The first was the desire to repay old obligations to Maine’s hospitals, some of which dated back for several years. The second was the opportunity to open up access to health care for nearly 70,000 Mainers by accepting federal funds.

In both cases, there was bipartisan support for doing the right thing. Unfortunately, only one of those two important goals was achieved. Democrats, Republicans and independents worked together to repay Maine’s hospitals. While a proposal to cover more Maine people with federal funds also drew support from a large majority in the Legislature last session, it failed to become law because it was vetoed by Gov. Paul LePage.

The governor, and those who supported his veto, effectively denied access to health insurance to 70,000 people, including working families and veterans, even though the federal government would pay 100 percent of the cost for three years.

Some members of the Legislature are claiming this rejection of readily available federal health care funding as a victory, but it was an enormous mistake. Refusing those federal funds will cost Maine hundreds of millions of dollars and deny tens of thousands of people the ability to see a doctor when they need to.

When the Legislature reconvenes, lawmakers will have a chance to make it right. The effort to override the governor’s veto last session failed by only a very few votes; if those who voted “no” to more health care coverage take a good look at the facts, the Legislature will quickly reverse that error.

The following are some of the facts that should capture their attention and persuade them to accept these funds without further delay:

A study by Maine Equal Justice Partners and the Maine Center for Economic Policy concludes that accepting those funds would add more than 3,000 jobs statewide. In Androscoggin County, one of every five jobs are in health care, so our communities would see especially strong job growth.

Covering and employing more people will generate $350 million in new economic activity, a boost the whole economy needs.

Maine would save $690 million over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Foundation and the conservative Heritage Foundation. The federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost for newly eligible people for the first three years. After that, the state’s share would be small: the average match rate from the federal government during 10 years exceeds 94 percent.

Covering more Maine people would improve the state’s business climate by slowing the growth of health insurance costs. On average, caring for the uninsured currently increases premiums for insured by an estimated $1,000 a year nationwide. States that accept federal funds to cover more people will have a competitive advantage over states that do not.

When workers have coverage, they resolve health problems more quickly and can better manage chronic illnesses such as asthma and diabetes, avoiding absences and increasing productivity.

Hospitals would be stronger, as more services would be provided, more jobs would be created, and there would be less charity (“free”) care.

Maine routinely accepts federal funds for highways, ports and similar projects because they generate jobs, and the resulting improvements make the state a better place to live and help businesses thrive. Improving the state’s health care infrastructure has all the same benefits. Even more, because no state matching funds are needed to begin reaping the rewards. The federal government has said that states can opt out at any time.

Failing to accept these funds will deprive Maine of great economic benefits in 2014. Even worse, it will directly harm approximately 25,000 of our neighbors, who previously had coverage but will lose it on Jan. 1. Until that mistake is corrected, they will go without care and get sicker. They will suffer; they will miss work. They will seek charity care after their situation becomes desperate, driving up insurance costs. Some will die; it is well established that mortality rates are higher for those without health insurance coverage.

I know many people who work hard but have health needs they can’t afford to address. I am sure that Maine legislators do, too.

When the proposal to accept Affordable Care Act funds comes back to the Legislature in January, I hope senators and representatives will vote “yes” for their neighbors who need health care, “yes” for their neighbors who need jobs, and “yes” for all of us who would benefit from a stronger economy.

Charles Dingman of Leeds is a lawyer whose practice concentrates on health care and administrative law. He is president of the board of directors of Maine Equal Justice Partners, a nonprofit legal aid organization that represents low-income Mainers.