This week, liberal Gov. Laura Kelly of Kansas announced her plan to bring ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion to the state, opening up the program to an unlimited number of able-bodied, working-age adults. But state lawmakers should be very skeptical of the alleged benefits of this “Medicaid For All” plan. Specifically, there are five major myths about the proposal that should be rejected, full stop.
Myth #1: Gov. Kelly’s plan is not ObamaCare but rather a “conservative” approach.
In reality, this plan is nothing short of a full ObamaCare expansion plan. If adopted, it would provide full ObamaCare benefits to ObamaCare-eligible able-bodied adults, using ObamaCare dollars, funding with new national debt. Plain and simple, this is a proposal to bring ObamaCare’s reckless expansion to Kansas. Continue reading
Yesterday, The Wall Street Journal editorial page covered our ObamaCare expansion explosion report that published last week, calling the explosion itself an “embarrassment:”
In a new report this week for the Foundation for Government Accountability, Jonathan Ingram and Nicholas Horton tracked down the original enrollment projections by actuaries in 24 states that expanded and have since disclosed at least a year of data on the results. Some 11.5 million people now belong to ObamaCare’s new class of able-bodied enrollees, or 110% higher than the projections. Continue reading
Welfare programs such as food stamps should offer individuals a hand up – temporary assistance until they are able to get back on their feet – rather than becoming a way of life. Work requirements are an important part of this prescription. Without work requirements, adults can become trapped in the welfare system, which robs them of opportunity. And unfortunately, that’s exactly what’s happening in Illinois today.
Federal welfare legislation signed by former President Bill Clinton in 1996 mandates that able-bodied adults ages 18-49 without dependents must work in order to receive food-stamp benefits. These adults are required to work at least 20 hours per week in order to qualify for food-stamp welfare. If they don’t meet these requirements, their eligibility is limited to three months (in a three-year period).
Most states are enforcing these federal requirements to help these adults get back to work and free up limited resources for those who need them most. Unfortunately, Illinois is not one of these states. Continue reading
By Josh Archambault and Nic Horton
Why should the exact same treatment for pneumonia cost $5,000 in one building and $124,000 in another? Or the exact same infusion drug for a chronically ill patient that requires them every six weeks cost $14,000 per shot in one setting, but $28,000 down the street? Why should patients have to pay so much more, simply based on where they park their cars? The answer is simple: they shouldn’t.
But the black box of pricing leaves patients in the dark. As a result, the financial futures of too many American families are in jeopardy as their paychecks fail to keep up with skyrocketing health care costs.
By Nic Horton, Jonathan Ingram and Josh Archambault
Over the last several years, even as the economy has started to improve, more and more Americans have become trapped in the food stamp program, now called the “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program” or SNAP. In 2013, food stamp enrollment and spending hit all-time highs.
But a new report from the Foundation for Government Accountability provides governors and legislators with a roadmap to reverse this trend. The first step: getting able-bodied adults work-oriented and eventually off of welfare.
Able-Bodied Childless Adults Drive Food Stamp Explosion
So what’s causing the rise in food stamp dependency?
One key contributor is the growth in able-bodied childless adults on the program. Between 2000 and 2008, the number of able-bodied childless adults receiving food stamps hovered at or below one million.
But by 2013, a record-high 4.9 million able-bodied, childless adults were receiving food stamps. Federal spending on food stamps for these able-bodied adults skyrocketed to more than $10 billion in 2013, up from just $462 million in 2000.
On March 12, the Foundation for Government Accountability published “The ObamaCare Straightjacket: Section 1332 Waivers Are a Fool’s Errand, Not an Escape Hatch.”
The report is coauthored by FGA’s Jonathan Ingram and Nic Horton. Here’s an excerpt:
State lawmakers across the country are looking for an escape hatch from ObamaCare. A number of health care consultants have recommended Section 1332 waivers as a cure for ObamaCare’s biggest problems, promising that states will gain unprecedented flexibility to implement innovative, state-led reforms. This is a dangerous idea.
Instead of an innovative escape hatch from ObamaCare, Section 1332 waivers create a stranglehold on state-led reform initiatives. Lawmakers exploring these waivers under the false promise of “flexibility” will be disappointed. After all, Washington bureaucrats hold all the cards and they are interested in only one thing: protecting and expanding ObamaCare.
These waivers will only make ObamaCare’s impact on states worse, not better. States would be required to provide benefits at least as generous as ObamaCare, cap cost sharing at least as low as ObamaCare, and cover at least as many people as ObamaCare. Worse yet, experimenting with these waivers would put state taxpayers at risk for cost overruns for federal programs.
Section 1332 is not an escape hatch from ObamaCare. As the Obama administration itself stresses, it is a backdoor to implement even more liberal welfare policies.
To read the full paper, click here.