Medicaid mistake in Arkansas

I know and love many of the Arkansas Republicans that voted for this poor solution in Arkansas but my friend Dan Greenberg got it right in this article below when he takes them to task.

Medicaid Expansion in Arkansas: A Fig Leaf, Not a Solution

MedicaidChart_ARKANSAS_FINAL

As action to stop Obamacare languishes in Washington, the debate continues at the state level. Heritage is hosting a series of health care reports from our allies in the states to provide an up-close view of state-level action regarding Obamacare.

The states play an important role in protecting citizens against this flawed federal health care law–from challenging the health care law before the Supreme Court, to resisting efforts to establish Obamacare exchanges or expand a failing Medicaid program, to offering alternative proposals that will ensure citizens are not left abandoned when the federal law collapses.

Today, Dan Greenberg—President of the Advance Arkansas Institute—updates Foundry readers on developments in Arkansas.

A bipartisan alliance succeeded in convincing the Arkansas legislature to expand Medicaid. That was because enough Republicans were won over by the legislation’s theoretically pro-market design. However, a closer look suggests a textbook case of a beautiful theory slain by ugly facts.

Republican proponents of expansion claimed that the proposal was fundamentally different from a traditional Medicaid expansion, because it would enroll the new Medicaid clients in private insurance through the state’s Obamacare exchange. They dubbed it the “private option,” and argued that private plans would provide better care at lower cost.

When the arrangement was first proposed, it was greeted with cautious optimism in some quarters. But that optimism predated the “Good Friday memo from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which clarified that any Medicaid expansion provided through private coverage would still have to conform to standard Medicaid benefit requirements and cost-sharing limitations.

In plain English, the maneuver Arkansas was contemplating would gain the state no additional flexibility on benefits or cost sharing beyond the (very limited) scope allowed under current federal Medicaid rules.

Thus, the notion that the “private option” could somehow produce significantly lower costs and better patient outcomes relative to traditional Medicaid became highly doubtful. At best, it would simply be a variant on the existing and common strategy of states contracting with private managed care companies to deliver Medicaid benefits. Yet, while the policy differences were vanishingly small, to the point of nonexistent, the rhetorical shift was enough for the pro-expansion forces to eke out a win in the end. Given that, it is worth deconstructing the rhetoric offered in support of the Arkansas plan.

  • The expansion isn’t really an expansion. Medicaid expansion, explained Republican Representative Charlie Collins, “is dead.” The expansion that Republican lawmakers were crafting was supposedly categorically different. Collins argued that the “private option” would take hundreds of thousands of people off the Medicaid rolls. Yet the notion that clients who get their Medicaid benefits through a private plan are somehow not on the Medicaid rolls is as factually incorrect as saying that seniors who get their Medicare benefits through a private Medicare Advantage plan are magically not in Medicare.
  • Reforming the state’s existing Medicaid program required expanding Medicaid to new enrollees. Private-option advocates argued that a number of taxpayer-friendly Medicaid reforms included in the legislation were part of the private option, implying that those reforms were an inseparable part of Medicaid expansion, but the need for joining these two measures was never explained. Indeed, at no point in the debate did the advocates offer to simply strip out the expansion provisions and then enact the other, meritorious reforms—such as new measures to detect and deter Medicaid fraud and abuse.
  • Medicaid expansion was linked to tax relief and economic growth. Democratic Governor Mike Beebe claimed that the two were linked, while Republican Speaker of the House Davy Carter provided a more nuanced explanation suggesting that negotiations over tax relief were in conjunction with Medicaid expansion. Speaker Carter also appeared to argue that the private option would increase net state government revenue. Shortly after the votes for Medicaid expansion were secured in the House, multiple tax relief bills began to roll onto the House floor. Yet, after the votes for Medicaid expansion were secured in the Senate, most of those tax relief bills were immediately amended so that they would not take effect until future budget years. If there was, in fact, some deal between the Governor and the legislative leadership that tied tax relief to the Medicaid expansion, its terms were never made public.
  • Arkansas could exit from expansion if federal promises weren’t kept. The legislation included provisions for the state to reverse the expansion if the federal government’s promised funding declined in the future. Setting aside the political question of how likely it is for politicians to terminate a government program—especially one that creates hundreds of thousands of new clients—once it has begun, there are also legal and constitutional questions about whether the contractual commitments that Medicaid expansion creates might make it a one-way street. To their credit, private-option advocates attempted to minimize the “Hotel California” problem with a last-minute amendment to their bill.

In sum, the advocates of Medicaid expansion in Arkansas built bipartisan political support by linking the Medicaid expansion to conservative reform. Republican Senator Jeremy Hutchinson argued on the Senate floor that the private option was a “down payment” on future reform of “entitlement programs.” Republican Senator Jason Rapert argued that the private option was “essentially what we all say we want—Medicaid block grant funding to allow states to innovate for their own populations.” Indeed, Representative Collins argued that the private option would allow Arkansas to “transcend Obamacare” while Speaker Carter insisted that a vote for the private option is “a vote against Obamacare.”

Such statements are less analytical than rhetorical—and to those who understand the basic workings of Medicaid and Obamacare, they are unpersuasive. In any event, such statements were enough to let Governor Beebe achieve his goal of expanding Arkansas’s Medicaid program.

Dan Greenberg, the President of the Advance Arkansas Institute, is both a former member of the Arkansas legislature and a former Heritage Foundation analyst.

Related posts:

‘Why Indiana Shouldn’t Fall for Obamacare’s Medicaid Expansion’

Expanding government is not right. Take a look at this article: APRIL 25, 2013 6:35PM ‘Why Indiana Shouldn’t Fall for Obamacare’s Medicaid Expansion’ By  MICHAEL F. CANNON SHARE My latest oped, in the Indy Star: Meanwhile, many [Medicaid] enrollees can’t even find a doctor. One-third of primary care physicians won’t take new Medicaid patients. Only 20 percent of […]

Conservatives win the first round in the medicaid expansion debate

  I was glad to see that the true Tea Party Conservatives won the first round in the medicaid expansion debate. According to AFP in the last 5 years Arkansas’ current Medicaid program has run a deficit of a billion dollars. Why expand it willingly with Obama? The “Do Nothing” expansion plan increases spending by […]

Will President give up any control of Medicaid program to the states?

CATO Institute Michael Cannon on the OReilly Factor Published on Mar 19, 2013 The CATO Institute’s Michael Cannon spoke at the Arkansas Conservative Caucus on Tuesday March 19th. Several conservatives were present. Cannon talked about how to defeat Obamacare in Arkansas & how the states can stop Obamacare on a national level. Max Brantley of […]

Rick Crawford warns Republican state lawmakers about expanding medicaid program in Arkansas

Nic Horton Medicaid Expansion will “Cost Almost Double than Doing Nothing” part II _______ I am hopeful that the Arkansas Republican state lawmakers will not expand the broken medicaid program. Evidently Congressman Rick Crawford feels strongly about this too. Crawford: Even With Arkansas Plan, ObamaCare Is Unaffordable Crawford urges state legislators to reject ObamaCare, because […]

Heritage Foundation mentions Arkansas lawmakers and medicaid expansion

Mike Maharrey talks AR Medicaid Expansion on the PHP ______________ This article from the Heritage Foundation mentions that the lawmakers in Arkansas are getting ready to make a big mistake if they think they will get flexibility from Obamacare on Medicaid expansion. Administration Rules Out “Deals” on Medicaid Expansion Edmund Haislmaier April 3, 2013 at […]

Americans for Prosperity against expanding Medicaid in Arkansas

  A Red-Ink Train Wreck: The Real Fiscal Cost of Government-Run Healthcare Uploaded on Nov 9, 2009 This CF&P Foundation video explains why healthcare proposals in Washington will result in bloated government and higher deficits. This mini-documentary exposes the pervasive inaccuracy of congressional forecasts and succinctly lists 12 reasons why Obamacare will be a budget […]

Great article by Michael Cannon on Arkansas Medicaid expansion plan

CATO Institute Michael Cannon on the OReilly Factor Published on Mar 19, 2013 The CATO Institute’s Michael Cannon spoke at the Arkansas Conservative Caucus on Tuesday March 19th. Several conservatives were present. Cannon talked about how to defeat Obamacare in Arkansas & how the states can stop Obamacare on a national level. __________________ CATO Institute […]

States response to Obamacare and Medicaid expansion

Great article from Heritage Foundation: Chart of the Week: The States That Have Expanded Medicaid T. Elliot Gaiser March 13, 2013 at 5:30 pm         «Expanding Medicaid will be costly for most states. The authors of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (Obamacare) threatened to strip all federal funding […]

Heritage Foundation says Arkansas would be “net payer” while NY would be “net saver” with medicaid expansion (editiorial cartoon included)

New York is the real winner in medicaid expansion  while Arkansas would lose out in the long run. The Arkansas Times has reported that Republican lawmakers were warming up to the idea of expansion recently. The representatives and senators in Arkansas need to take a close look at both this article below and this editorial […]

Arkansas should not take the federal Medicaid deal because the money is not free but we pay for it!!!

The Medicaid deals being presented by the federal government seem like great deals until you realize that the taxpayer will end up paying the bill and the taxpayer is us!!!! January 25, 2013 5:09PM Federal Money to the States Isn’t ‘Free’ By Tad DeHaven Share Tweet Like Google+1 Richmond Times-Dispatch columnist A. Barton Hinkle recently […]

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: