Corbett aide doesn't foresee Medicaid expansion in 2014
HARRISBURG — A top aide to Gov. Tom Corbett said expanding Medicaid eligibility in Pennsylvania under a sweeping federal health care law probably would not take effect before January 2015, even if the governor embraces the idea that would provide taxpayer-paid health care insurance to hundreds of thousands of residents.
Beverly Mackereth, Corbett's Department of Public Welfare chief, told a newspaper on Friday that the administration would need until 2015 to negotiate with the federal government and create the program.
Still, Mackereth told the newspaper that the timeline remains ambiguous, and is predicated on negotiations, agreements and the creation of the program going well. “And those are huge ‘ifs,' ” she said.
The revelation seemed to be the first that lawmakers had heard of it, even among Corbett's fellow Republicans who control the Legislature. Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee Chairwoman Pat Vance, R-Cumberland, said she first heard about it on Monday and that it had not been a subject of discussion among Republican senators.
Democratic lawmakers say waiting until 2015 would mean the loss of $4 billion in 2014 for Pennsylvania, and they vowed to keep pushing Corbett to expand Medicaid next year.
“I think Pennsylvania citizens would have a big problem — a big problem — if $4 billion targeted toward Pennsylvania found their way somewhere else across the country, especially in a tight budget situation,” Sen. Vincent Hughes, D-Philadelphia, said Monday.
In addition, Pennsylvania's hospitals could lose nearly $34 million in federal funding next year that they've received in the past to help offset the cost to treat uninsured patients, according to rough estimates from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The 2010 health care law assumes that more residents will have Medicaid or private health insurance and that hospitals will see fewer uninsured patients and need less financial assistance. But the law had also assumed that all states would expand Medicaid, which a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year effectively made a state-by-state decision.
In Pennsylvania, a Medicaid expansion would require approval from the Legislature.
The federal government would foot nearly all of the cost of providing health care to hundreds of thousands of additional Pennsylvanians by widening Medicaid's income eligibility guidelines to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $31,300 for a family of four. The federal law initially promises 100 percent funding to expand Medicaid eligibility beginning Jan. 1, 2014, primarily to extend insurance to low-income working adults.
After three years, the federal government begins to drop its portion of the cost to 90 percent.
Debate around whether to expand Medicaid eligibility is figuring into a spending plan for the fiscal year that starts July 1. Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware, said last week that the deadline to decide whether the budget will reflect a Medicaid expansion “is fast approaching.”
Thus far, top Republican lawmakers have not taken a position on a Medicaid expansion, preferring that Corbett take the lead.
Last month, the Legislature's nonpartisan fiscal analysts reported that an expansion of Medicaid eligibility would boost the state's finances by hundreds of millions of dollars a year, echoing the conclusions of previous studies sponsored by health care groups that support a Medicaid expansion.
That analysis undercut a primary concern of Corbett, who is opposing a Medicaid expansion out of concern for the cost to Pennsylvania taxpayers. Corbett has warned that the federal government cannot necessarily be trusted to follow through on its promises to send money to the states. As attorney general in 2010, Corbett unsuccessfully sued in the federal courts to throw out the law.
So far, the Corbett administration has produced no analysis that looks just at the cost of a Medicaid expansion or that counts any resulting economic benefit. But it has warned that a solid projection cannot be made until more is known from the federal government about the program's rules, and Corbett's budget secretary, Charles Zogby, said he doesn't think it would have any financial benefit in the next fiscal year.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.