Forbes: There’s No Magic Pot Of Obamacare Medicaid Expansion Money

By Nic Horton, Jonathan Ingram and Josh Archambault — Mr. Horton is Policy Impact Specialist, Mr. Ingram is Research Director, and Mr. Archambault is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability.

A recent report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) confirms what many policy experts have known for some time: states that reject Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion aren’t sending that Medicaid expansion money to other states. Instead, that money is simply never spent.

This revelation is important because numerous governors and state lawmakers from across the country have used this argument to justify their support for expanding Medicaid through Obamacare. However, as CRS succinctly explains, these arguments are entirely frivolous.

There’s No Fixed Pot of Obamacare Medicaid Money

Politicians have made the case for Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion based on the false idea that rejecting Medicaid expansion will send their states’ shares of Obamacare money to other states.

Governor John Kasich (R-OH), for example, has repeatedly claimed that rejecting Medicaid expansion would send Ohio’s ‘Medicaid expansion money’ to states like California. These false sentiments have been echoed repeatedly in Missouri, Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming– just to name a few. Obamacare advocates promise that Medicaid expansion won’t increase federal spending, but will instead simply ‘bring back’ their own federal tax dollars.

The new CRS report explains that this claim is bogus: Continue reading

Forbes: TN’s Obamacare Expansion Would Give ‘Free’ Cash To The Insured

By Nic Horton, Jonathan Ingram, and Josh Archambault   Mr. Horton is a Policy Impact Specialist, Mr. Ingram is Research Director, and Mr. Archambault a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability.

Gov. Bill Haslam (R-TN), who has previously stood strong against Obamacare expansion, announced just before Christmas that he will push the legislature to create a new entitlement for able-bodied adults in a fast-approaching special session. We’ve previously written on Gov. Haslam’s backroom deal to expand Obamacare and its questionable financing structure.

Legislators still have very little information on the plan, having only sketched out the “basic concepts” and leaving many details blank. The informational packet Haslam recently delivered to legislators, for example, noted that many “operational details will be finalized” at a later date. But what little is known leaves no room for excitement.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Photo credit: Getty

Continue reading

Forbes: How The New Congress Can Thoughtfully Repeal Obamacare’s Expansion

By Jonathan Ingram, Nic Horton and Josh Archambault — Mr. Ingram is Research Director, Mr. Archambault is a Senior Fellow, and Mr. Horton is Policy Impact Specialist, at the Foundation for Government Accountability.

Tomorrow, a new Congress convenes, with the largest Republican majorities in nearly a century. These Republicans, elected on the promise of rolling back Obamacare, are ready to start chipping away at the law. One of their first targets? Obamacare’s immoral funding scheme that prioritizes able-bodied adults over the truly needy.

Obamacare Values The Able-Bodied Over The Truly Needy

The Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) rates determine how the cost of Medicaid will be divvied up between the federal government and the states. FMAP rates vary by state, depending on states’ per capita personal income. Under the traditional Medicaid rules, federal taxpayers reimburse states an average of 57 percent of the cost of providing Medicaid to poor children, pregnant women, seniors and individuals with disabilities. The match rates for these populations don’t change under Obamacare.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

PA as an illustration of the immoral funding formula under Obamacare’s expansion.

However, Obamacare introduced a new “enhanced” funding formula for its expansion population. If states expand Medicaid to working-age, able-bodied adults, federal taxpayers will pay for 90 percent of the cost of covering those adults. (The matching rate starts at 100 percent for most states and gradually declines to 90 percent by 2020.)

But the vast majority of the able-bodied adults covered under Obamacare expansion have never been considered among the most vulnerable, have no disabilities keeping them from work, have no dependent children and don’t typically qualify for other types of welfare, including cash assistance and long-term food stamps. Why should federal taxpayers pay states nearly twice as much to cover able-bodied adults as they pay to cover the truly needy? Continue reading

Idaho Reporter: Nonprofit Group Uses Tax Dollars to Push ObamaCare

From IdahoReporter.com:

For its part, the Mountain States Group didn’t want to discuss its use of tax dollars to lobby for more government health care in Idaho.

“Thanks, but we’ll let our report speak for itself,” the group’s Lauren Necochea responded to a host of questions from IdahoReporter.com.

As for the report itself, at least one critic suggests the group’s assertions are flawed. Nic Horton, a policy impact specialist working for the Foundation for Government Accountability, disputed the idea government saves money expanding Medicaid.

“You can’t add almost a hundred thousand new people to welfare and save money,” Horton said. “That’s just silly.”

The Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy’s report suggests expansion will save the state and its 44 counties $173 million through the next decade. But it doesn’t mention the extra burden offloading those costs will put on the federal government.

“They want taxpayers to believe that adding nearly a hundred thousand able-bodied adults to welfare will reduce government spending?” Horton questioned. “It just doesn’t pass the laugh test.”

Instead of simply adding 103,000 new, able-bodied adults to the system, Horton suggested Idaho lawmakers should first examine large-scale program changes.

“If Idaho lawmakers are really interested in saving money, they need to look at reforming their existing Medicaid program, not creating a new welfare program that will make it harder to reform existing Medicaid, cost taxpayers billions, discourage work and hurt Idaho’s economy,” he said.

Read the full story here.

Forbes: How States Can Unwind Obamacare Expansion And Restore The Working Class

By Jonathan Ingram, Nic Horton and Josh Archambault — Mr. Ingram is Research Director, Mr. Archambault is a Senior Fellow, and Mr. Horton is Policy Impact Specialist, at the Foundation for Government Accountability.

In November, voters across the country elected new Republican governors and legislators, many of whom campaigned heavily against Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion. Although some of these new leaders (including Governor-elect Asa Hutchinson in Arkansas) will be taking control of states that have opted into Obamacare expansion, there is new hope that these governors and state legislators will work to reduce government dependency and restore the working class.

One idea rapidly gaining currency among legislators and new governors’ transition teams is the possibility of renewing Medicaid expansion on a temporary basis for those who have already signed up, but immediately freezing enrollment going forward. This approach would stop the bleeding, but allow for a more gradual wind down of the program and allow enrollees to keep their plans until they increased their incomes, transitioning out of eligibility. Continue reading

Forbes: Will The Real Mike Pence Please Stand Up?

By Nic Horton, Jonathan Ingram  and Josh Archambault  Mr. Horton is a Policy Impact Specialist, Mr. Ingram is Research Director, and Mr. Archambault a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability.

Over the last few weeks, various news reports have fueled speculation that Governor Mike Pence (R-Indiana) may be preparing to walk away from his Obamacare Medicaid expansion plan. This speculation was reignited over the weekend when Pence announced he would reject increased federal funding for the state’s pre-K program, citing the federal government’s “intrusion” as a key reason for his decision. Pence is demonstrating a prudent approach to pre-K funding, and this approach may very well tell us something about his next move on Obamacare expansion. Continue reading