Corbett health care proposal entails 700 hires, paper reports
HARRISBURG — Gov. Tom Corbett's Healthy PA, an alternative to expanding Medicaid, would require the state to hire more than 700 employees, a newspaper reported on Monday.
The figure was far higher than most states have experienced and was a surprise to some experts in public policy, The Philadelphia Inquirer said.
Most of the hires would be caseworkers in offices scattered around the state, said Bev Mackereth, Corbett's public welfare secretary. She said that under Pennsylvania's system, the caseworkers do more than in some other states, including evaluating applicants for eligibility for other benefits.
She said that Pennsylvania trails some other states in automation, which adds to the cost.
“We're getting there, and we're not where other states are,” she said. “Some states have everything automated — it's very easy for them to do.”
The newspaper said the state has estimated about 605,000 people would be newly eligible under Healthy PA. The first-year cost of the 700-plus new hires would be more than $30 million, much of it subsidized by the federal government.
Mackereth said the personnel costs would be more than covered by the estimated Healthy PA savings of $125 million.
The Department of Public Welfare estimates it would require even more new workers — about 1,200 of them — to expand Medicaid under President Obama's landmark health care law.
Corbett, a Republican seeking a second term this year, is waiting to hear back from federal regulators about Healthy PA. It would use Medicaid expansion money to provide private insurance coverage for the same group of people. Those private insurers would be able to operate without some of Medicaid's coverage rules.
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.
- Former undercover agent files suit against Kane
- Pennsylvania police officer charged with criminal homicide in killing similar to South Carolina one
- Man charged in fight over whether Jordan or LeBron is better
- Penn State alumni trustees ask court for access to Freeh documents
- Sex-soaked culture faulted for fraternity house parties