Report: Medicaid Expansion Denial Will Cost States Billions
Medicaid Expansion Denial Will Cost States Billions: Report
States that refuse to expand Medicaid under President Barack Obama's health care reform law not only will deny health coverage to poor residents and lose access to a huge influx of federal dollars, they also will see increased spending on uninsured people's unpaid medical bills, according to a new report by the Rand Corp., a consulting firm.
The Rand Corp. analyzed 14 states with governors who oppose the Medicaid expansion. It found their actions will deprive 3.6 million people of health coverage under Obamacare, forgo $8.4 billion in federal funding, and cost them $1 billion for programs that partially compensate medical providers who care for the indigent, according to the report published in the journal "Health Affairs." Since nearly half of states may not undertake the Medicaid expansion next year, those figures could be even higher. Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia plan to broaden Medicaid in 2014, according to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
Obama and congressional Democrats intended the health care reform law to target financial assistance to those with the lowest incomes by offering Medicaid coverage to people who earn just over the federal poverty level and tax credits to other low- and middle-income people to subsidize the purchase of private health insurance. When the Supreme Court upheld the law last year, it also ruled that states could opt out of the Medicaid expansion, which will dull the impact of Obamacare on the poorest uninsured.
"State policymakers should be aware that if they do not expand Medicaid, fewer people will have health insurance, and state and local governments will have to bear higher costs for uncompensated care," Carter Price and Christine Eibner of the Rand Corp. write. "We estimated states' costs for expansion to be less than the reduction in their costs for uncompensated care."
-snip-
Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/03/medicaid-expansion_n_3367301.html
Skittles
(153,147 posts)ReRe
(10,597 posts).... I scanned the article and didn't see them. It did mention a few of them, but it would be nice to see a list. If it's a Federal Law, how do the states get away with refusing the ACA or parts thereof? Because someone stuck in a loophole to allow their escape? Wonder how many of those 14 states will have a Republican governor after their next gubernatorial elections? Thanks, Tx4obama, for this OP!
and unfortunately will have a Republican governor -- likely not Rick Perry but very likely worse -- in 2014.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... the needy in your country-sized state.
PDittie
(8,322 posts)and it is also accurate that many of them must begin voting consistently, and they must also vote for people who don't want to just watch them suffer and die.
This seems intrinsic, but it is not.
Triana
(22,666 posts)...not sure what the rest are.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)The Rand Corp. based its analysis on the assumption that Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Wisconsin wouldn't expand Medicaid. The outcome of the Medicaid debate remains uncertain in several states, however. Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) and state lawmakers struck a deal on the expansion last month, for example, and states like Florida appear all but certain to reject the expansion for next year.
-snip-
I see 12.
tartan2
(314 posts)Even though the Governor has said he wanted the expansion it's the state legislature that is blocking it now with their ridiculous conditions on the expansion. I don't understand why the health care industry isn't jumping up and down about this. There are so many health care facilities that are enrolled providers of Medicaid that would benefit from this. What this all boils down to is the right wing's passionate hatred of President Obama.