December 10, 2021 Christopher Holt
As
focus turns this week to the Build Back Better Act’s (BBBA) “Byrd Bath”—the
Senate parliamentarian’s review of the BBBA’s compliance with reconciliation
rules—one provision that has received little attention is an attempt to
penalize states that haven’t expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act
(ACA). Under the House-passed BBBA, Democrats seek to blackmail states
that haven’t expanded Medicaid by enacting significant funding cuts to
hospitals in those states starting in 2023.
By
law, the federal government provides disproportionate share hospital (DSH)
payments to states to distribute to their hospital systems to offset
uncompensated care for Medicaid patients and the uninsured. This raises a
couple of questions. First, why do hospitals need the federal government to
reimburse them for uncompensated costs associated with treating Medicaid
beneficiaries if Medicaid rates are reasonable? Setting that aside, in this
brave new world where the ACA has guaranteed that almost everyone has access to
insurance coverage, shouldn’t uncompensated care be a thing of the past? In
theory it should, and in fact the authors of the ACA did seek to curtail DSH
payments on those grounds, but those payment reductions have been pushed off
time and again and aren’t currently slated to kick in until 2024. Needless to
say, the entire DSH payment system is in need of an overhaul.
The ACA mandated Medicaid expansion, making continuation of
all federal Medicaid dollars contingent oncompliance. But the
Supreme Court famously called that “a gun to the head” and ruled that Medicaid
expansion had to be voluntary. Ever since, supporters of Medicaid
expansion have struggled to entice, prod, or force
reluctantstates to go along, but to date 12 states
still have not expanded (though Wisconsin is a
slightly more complex case). One major priority for Democrats,
particularly Democrats from non-expansion states, has been figuring out how to
extend Medicaid coverage to the 2.2 million people residing in those states who
aren’t eligible for ACA premium tax credits (PTCs), and aren’t eligible for
Medicaid. An earlier draft of the BBBA aimed to establish a parallel Medicaid
program, just for the coverage gap population, and provided temporary
eligibility for PTCs for ACA coverage until the program was up and running. The
House-passed BBBA, however, in a cost-cutting move, dropped the parallel
Medicaid program and instead offers the coverage gap population four years of free individual market coverage
under the ACA at a cost of $211 billion according to American Action Forum
projections.
There’s a catch, though: The BBBA would also cut DSH payments
to hospitals in non-expansion states by 12.5 percent starting in fiscal year
2023. The BBBA authors’ argument is hardly new. They maintain that
extending free individual market insurance to the coverage gap population will
reduce uncompensated care in these states, and so they won’t need as much
DSH funding. Of course, expansion states already have lower rates of
uncompensated care than non-expansion states, yet their DSH payments remain
curiously untouched. Additionally, the DSH cuts for non-expansion states are
permanent—unless they expand—even though the expanded PTC eligibility lapses
after just four years. If states want to avoid these funding cuts—which
the American Hospital Association estimates amounts to roughly $8 billion over 10
years—they do have one option: They can always cave and
expand their Medicaid programs.
Holding
hospitals hostage to force states to make your preferred policy choice is a
nifty trick, but it does raise the question of whether this latest attempt
to force states to expand Medicaid might run afoul of the Supreme Court’s “gun
to the head” objection. Regardless, even many supporters of
the BBBA have objected to this punitive policy,
which Senate leaders would do well to reject.
CHART
REVIEW: COVID-19 VACCINATION PROGRESS BY CONTINENT
Margaret Barnhorst, Health Care Policy Fellow
The
United States Agency for International Development recently announced an additional $400 million investment in global
COVID-19 vaccine distribution, including creation of the Initiative for Global
Vaccine Access to prioritize support in sub-Saharan African countries. As shown
in the chart below, only 11 percent of the African population is partially or
fully vaccinated as of December 1 of this year, lagging significantly behind
that of all other continents. Despite recent increases in vaccine deliveries to low- and middle-income
countries in need, unreliable infrastructure and limited health care workforces
in many countries have hindered vaccinations and, in some cases, resulted in batches of vaccines expiring and
becoming unusable. It appears many countries will not meet the World Health
Organization’s goal to vaccinate 40 percent of the population of every
country by the end of 2021— in Africa, only 6 out of 54 countries had met the
goal as of December 1, 2021.
Data source: Our World in Data COVID-19 vaccination dataset
TRACKING
COVID-19 CASES AND VACCINATIONS
Jackson Hammond, Health Care Policy Analyst
To
track the progress in vaccinations, the Weekly Checkup will compile the most
relevant statistics for the week, with the seven-day period ending on the
Wednesday of each week.
Sources:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Trends in COVID-19 Cases and Deaths in the US, and Trends in COVID-19 Vaccinations in the US
Note:
The U.S. population is 332,982,895.
Disclaimer
https://www.americanactionforum.org/weekly-checkup/the-bbba-cuts-hospital-funding-to-punish-medicaid-non-expansion-states/#ixzz7GOnYX8dY
Follow @AAF on Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment