SA L
E
+ news vIEWS
page 11
4223 MAGAZINE ST. CLOTHING
apparel shoes jewelry
872-9230 | Free Parking Mon-Sat 10-6 | Sun 12-5
facebook.com/ryeclothing
BACK TO SCHOOL
HEADQUARTERS
3 for $33
3-Course Dinner tues - wed - thurs lo c a l fa r m s • lo c a l f i s h lo c a l f l avo r s
Gambit > bestofneworleans.com > july 10 > 2012
Reservations 861-7610 723 Dante Street (Riverbend)
12
summertime savings ROSES $6.50/DOZEN CASH & CARRY
815 FOCIS STREET [OFF VETERANS ]
837-6400
HAASE’S
8119-21 OAK ST
504-866-9944 • HAASES.COM
Stanford University health economist Dr. Jay Bhattacharya wrote on Stanford’s medical school blog that some states may opt out. “Cash-strapped states will almost certainly consider this option, since they will ultimately be on the hook for financing at least a portion of this expansion,” he wrote. “If enough states decide to deny the Medicaid expansion, this may substantially reduce the ability of ACA [the Affordable Care Act] to expand insurance coverage.” Medicaid is a joint state-federal program that provides health coverage to the poor and disabled, with states putting up a portion of the money and the federal government funding the rest. Each state’s matching percentage is based on per capita income. According to a separate Kaiser Family Foundation report, “Medicaid currently provides health coverage for over 60 million individuals, including 1 in 4 children, but low parent eligibility levels and restrictions in eligibility for other adults mean that many low income individuals remain uninsured. The ACA expands coverage by setting a national Medicaid eligibility floor for nearly all groups.” Under the law, the federal government would cover nearly 93 percent of the costs of the Medicaid expansion from 2014-22, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “Specifically, the federal government will assume 100 percent of the Medicaid costs of covering newly eligible individuals for the first three years that the expansion is in effect (2014-16). Federal support will then phase down slightly over the following several years, and by 2020 (and for all subsequent years), the federal government will pay 90 percent of the costs of covering these individuals. According to CBO, between 2014 and 2022, the federal government will pay $931 billion of the cost of the Medicaid expansion, while states will pay roughly $73 billion, or 7 percent.” States that challenged the law argued that it was coercive to require them to either expand Medicaid or risk losing all Medicaid funding, a practical impossibility given the size of the program in most states. The court ruled that while it was constitutional for Congress to offer states money to expand Medicaid, it could not take away funding for their existing program if they declined, according to SCOTUSblog. Immediately after the ruling, some Republican state officials said they were inclined to reject the new federal money, although there has been no deadline set for doing so. In Missouri, according to The Associated Press, “House Majority Leader Tim Jones says the Republican-led legislature will not consider the expansion. Republican Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder called the Medicaid expansion a ‘break-the-bank provision.’” The Birmingham Business Journal said “opting out of the Medicaid expansion seems increasingly likely for Alabama — though Medicaid officials said they were still reviewing the court’s ruling.” After all, Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley said, “The health care law is an overreach by the federal government that creates more regulation, bureaucracy, and a dramatic increase in costs to taxpayers.” South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackle was likewise blunt: “I am relieved that the act’s Medicaid expansion has been declared unconstitutional and has been significantly limited by the court.” That said, rhetoric does not always translate to action. Many Republican governors said they would not accept funds from the 2009 stimulus package, but they ended up taking the money in the end. Three governors, in Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio, turned down money to build a high-speed rail line. Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford tried to turn down federal education stimulus money, but his state Supreme Court rejected that. And former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin rejected some state energy funding, but her state legislature overruled her. ProPublica reporter Michael Grabell contributed to this report.