Thursday, October 15, 2015

Brian wants to know "How would expanding Medicaid save money?"

Hundreds gathered at the Alabama State Capitol on May 31, 2014 to ask Gov. Robert Bentley to save lives and expand Medicaid in the state. They chanted, sang and told their stories. (Erin Edgemon/
Brian said:
How would expanding Medicaid save money? The Federal Government says it would pay for 100% of the expansion for the first three years of the expansion. Yes, Medicare has been expanded, but only the expansion is being paid for. After three years, the amount the federal government will pay for drops to 90%. 
How would expanding Medicaid save money?
EYE am glad you asked how Governor Bentley's refusal to expand Medicaid will cost the state of Alabama BILLIONS of dollars.
Alabama is one of fourteen states that have chosen not to expand Medicaid, the federal-state program that provides health insurance to low-income families. The Affordable Care Act provides support to expand Medicaid to include families that earn up to 138% of the federal poverty level. The federal government will pay 100% of the costs for expanding Medicaid beginning in 2014 through 2016, and then gradually decrease support to 90% beginning in 2020.
A new study by the nonprofit research group, the RAND Corporation, shows the decision rejecting the expansion will cost these 14 states $1 billion more in spending on uncompensated care in 2016 alone, plus $8.4 billion annually in federal payments, and leave 3.6 million people without health insurance. The study's authors found that expanding Medicaid is "in the best economic interests of states."
Of course EYE don't expect you to believe expanding Medicaid is in the the best econominic interest of Alabama, but it's true.
In Alabama, Medicaid expansion would mean health care for about 300,000 additional people, most of whom will otherwise remain uninsured. Researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Public Health estimate the expansion would generate nearly $20 billion in new income, which would mean $1.7 billion in additional tax revenue in state and local governments across the state.
EYE don't know what part of not expanding Medicaid is killing people you and our Doctor/Governor don't understand.
Experts estimate that expanding Medicaid in Alabama would save 550 lives each year. 
Alabama's governor, a doctor, rejected the Medicaid expansion option after the United States Supreme Court ruled that states can refuse to participate in that part of the new health care law. A recent poll shows that 64% of Alabama residents support expanding Medicaid to cover more low-income adults.
EYE thought Republicans were pro-life?

Oh, and if you don't believe the Equal Justice Initiative report, maybe you will believe this report by the University of Alabama in Birmingham.
In short, their analysis points to a win-win scenario for the state and Medicaid-eligible patients.
“Across the first seven years of Medicaid expansion, the net budgetary effect is positive throughout,” Becker said. “In a very real sense, the state makes money while expanding coverage to nearly 300,000 Alabamians.”
Under the PPACA, the federal government will cover 100 percent of health care expenditures from 2014 through 2016. During these first years of the program, Alabama would be responsible for a share of the administrative costs of the expansion. The federal matching rate declines after 2016, falling to 95 percent in 2017, 94 percent in 2018, 93 in 2019 and 90 percent in 2020. As a result, the annual costs to the state increase from $39 million in 2014 to $222 million in 2020 for a total of about $771 million.
However, during those same years, the federal government will spend an additional $11.7 billion more on Medicaid in Alabama.
“While this is a substantial increase in federal spending, it is new income flowing into Alabama,” Becker said. “Moreover, when physicians, hospital employees, pharmacists and other employees in the health care sector receive these new dollars, they spend them on gasoline and groceries and clothes. This second-round spending generates additional economic activity.”
Yes, Brian, Red States, not  expanding medicare  is actually killing people,  and costing the state  billions, but you already knew  that.
In an interview with, Greer asked "How important is a human life?"
"We have to fight back," she said. "It is not like we are asking for something unrealistic. (Health care) is a human right."
EYE hope this answers your question. 


Brian said...

So experts estimate that it would save 550 lives, experts estimate it would generate $20 billion in new income, are these the same experts that estimated that told Obama the Affordable Care Act would only cost $900 billion over ten years and then we saw that estimate balloon to $2.6 trillion.

What happens if those estimates do not pan out?

We have already seen how reliable estimates from the government can be...

What happens if the federal government will no longer pay for the expansion?

Rick Scott in his explanation on why Florida pointed out that when the federal government stopped giving Florida $1 billion in education stimulus, that it was not an option to go back to pre-stimulus spending, that the state of Florida had to figure out how to get that $1 billion from other areas. And that if the state of Flordia expanded Medicare and the federal government stopped paying for the expansion, that it would not be an option to go back to pre-expansion spending, and in order to keep the expansion, cut would be necessary in other areas, which are all also necessary. Florida, like Alabama, has a balanced budget requirement in their state constitution.

Are states that expanded Medicare saving money?

It has been said that the states that were the most generous to the uninsured prior to the Affordable Care Act are the state that would save the most after it's implimentation.

Are states that expanded Medicare generating new income?

There is some evidence that some states are generating new income from expansion. Although it is nowhere near the $20 billion that you quoted. Michigan is seeing $26 MILLION in new income. Arkansas and New Mexico $30 MILLION each. Washington state, $34 MILLION.

Redeye said...

And your point is what exactly? That the state shouldn't expand medicaid because it might save lives and save money? One things for sure, Alabama, and Florida for that matter, are robbing Peter to pay Paul because their governors and legislatures hate President Obama more than they love their states and their country. Funny how republicans didn't have a problem with sending our troops and treasure to war based on dead wrong intelligence but they balk at the experts who say expanding medicare will save lives and generate income.