Obama administration says states will join Medicaid expansion

WASHINGTON Mon Jul 30, 2012 2:35pm EDT

Supporters of the Affordable Healthcare Act celebrate in front of the Supreme Court after the court upheld the legality of the law in Washington June 28, 2012. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

Supporters of the Affordable Healthcare Act celebrate in front of the Supreme Court after the court upheld the legality of the law in Washington June 28, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Joshua Roberts

Related Topics


Under the Iron Dome

Sirens sound as rockets land deep inside Israel.  Slideshow 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration on Monday said it expects that U.S. states will eventually join its planned expansion of the Medicaid healthcare program as they evaluate the benefits of providing health coverage to more low-income people.

U.S. Medicaid director Cindy Mann said states will likely spend the next several months analyzing the plan, which under President Barack Obama's healthcare law, would extend health coverage to about 16 million uninsured people based on new criteria that broadens eligibility to people with incomes of up to 133 percent of the federal poverty line.

A Supreme Court ruling that upheld the law in June also allowed individual states to decide whether to accept the Medicaid expansion, sparking an election-year revolt among Republican governors who have opposed the entire reform. The law takes full effect in 2014.

"There's much to consider. But we believe that when states do weigh in ... they'll decide that it's in their state interest to move ahead," Mann told a healthcare forum sponsored by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington-based think tank.

Many Republican governors say the multibillion-dollar 10-year expansion could lead to higher taxes and less education funding for state residents, despite federal subsidies that would cover 90 percent to 100 percent of the cost.

At least five governors have said they would not implement an expansion, and await the outcome of presidential and Congressional elections to see whether their party will have enough power to repeal the law.

The costs and benefits of the expansion include potential administrative spending, savings on state healthcare expenditures for the uninsured, and the financial impact of billions of dollars in federal subsidies on hospitals, clinics and state economies.

Medicaid is jointly funded by the federal and state governments but is overseen by Washington. In most states, current benefits are available only to narrowly defined groups of poor people including parents and pregnant women. But Medicaid spending still accounts for a large portion of cash-strapped state budgets.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 6 million people who are eligible for the expansion will not be covered by Medicaid because of resistance from state governments.

About half of those, with incomes above the federal poverty line, could still receive subsidized health coverage through a state-run exchange. The remaining 3 million would go without health coverage, according to CBO analysts.

The United States pays more for healthcare than any other country. But about 50 million of the roughly 310 million Americans still have no insurance at all.

(Editing by Bernard Orr)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (9)
justinolcb wrote:
repeal & replace – Movin’ Day starts Nov 7 :)

Jul 30, 2012 3:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:
We will see the states whose current leadership actually care about the health and welfare of their citizens.

@justinolcb, I understand the whole concept of repeal and replace, and it is obvious the GOP has the repeal part down, but I still have not seen the replace part, jus’ sayin’. Perhaps you could point out a plan put out by the GOP that will provide a path to coverage for 98% of Americans?

Jul 30, 2012 3:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
RexMax46 wrote:
Are these the same five governors who were writing articles against the stimulus with one hand, while taking stimulus money with the other?
It’s like they’re a Voltron of hypocrisy.

Jul 30, 2012 4:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.