The Real Medicaid Crisis Isn't Cuts—It's The Model Itself
WASHINGTON, DC: U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) speaks to the media after the House ... More narrowly passed the "One, Big, Beautiful Bill" Act on May 22, 2025. Johnson was flanked by House Committee Chairmen who helped craft the legislation. (Photo by)
Hospitals and trade groups are sounding the alarm over proposed Medicaid reductions, warning of serious consequences to access and financial stability. The concern is warranted, but it's only part of a larger, more systemic problem that keeps getting overlooked.
If we want to protect access to care, especially for the most vulnerable, we have to move beyond the rhetoric of funding shortfalls. The root cause isn't this or that funding change. It's the broken business model that continues to siphon resources into unproductive spending. The real question isn't whether we can afford to keep expanding Medicaid. It's whether we can finally confront the inefficiencies that make even basic coverage feel out of reach.
Though Medicaid has historically been the least attractive payment mode for providers–characterized by low reimbursement rates and administrative burden–it provided a lifeline for many delivery organizations post-ACA. The expansion meant more patients came through the doors with some form of coverage.
But that window is closing. As the federal government reassesses eligibility and reduces its contribution, states are being asked to absorb the difference. That's a tall order. Many states are already grappling with budget constraints, and municipal systems are ill-equipped to fill the gap.
Trade associations warn that millions may lose coverage. But hospitals aren't just worried about patients, they're also worried about the bottom line. They're ringing alarm bells not just because coverage is vanishing for individuals, but because revenue is vanishing for them.
Medicaid cuts don't stand alone. They're the latest in a long string of policy changes that have slowly but steadily eroded confidence in the healthcare business model.
Each time CMS or Congress tweaks funding, adjusts metrics or rolls out a new pilot program, providers find ways to adapt. But they can do that without ever truly transforming the underlying business model. And it's the transformation that has been at the heart of many of the actions that CMS and Congress have taken.
We've seen this before: narrow fixes, more requirements, shifting incentives. It's become a pattern. And over time, these piecemeal adjustments have created a system so complex that even well-meaning changes produce unintended negative consequences.
The deeper issue isn't a specific cut, it's the habit of tinkering at the margins instead of addressing the foundational issues: lack of alignment around value, bloated administrative structures and incentives that reward volume over outcomes.
In my book Bringing Value to Healthcare, I estimated $500 billion per year in unnecessary healthcare spending. That figure was based on data from 2016–and there's little evidence the situation has improved. From duplicative testing to redundant administrative overhead, inefficiencies plague every corner of the delivery system.
When policymakers say we 'can't afford' to provide coverage, they're missing the point. We're already spending far more than we need to. We're just not using it effectively.
If we changed the underlying structure of the system, we could afford to provide coverage for every eligible American without increasing the total spend. The resources exist; we're just not deploying them wisely.
Medicaid expansion gave providers short-term relief, but it also prolonged the illusion that the current system could be made to work with just a few more adjustments. Every time we patch the model rather than redesign it, we lock ourselves deeper into a framework that no longer serves patients or the public good.
As I outlined in a recent column, the core cause of escalating costs is an underlying payment model with three fundamental flaws. First, it lacks transparency in cost and quality–either at the transaction level or across the continuum of care. Second, there is little accountability for outcomes that matter, with payment generally disconnected from the services provided. And third, without clear line of sight to outcomes and cost, consumer-patients have little ability to comparison shop for non-emergent care.
If we're serious about protecting access, improving outcomes and reducing cost, we need to change the model on these three points. That means paying for value, not volume. It means holding providers accountable for outcomes. And it means demanding transparency from systems that have been opaque for far too long.
Medicaid cuts may be painful, but they're not the root of the crisis. They're one more stress test on a business model that's already failed. If we don't want to keep reliving this same debate with every fiscal cycle, we need to stop managing symptoms and start curing the disease.
There is enough money in the system to provide meaningful coverage. But only if we stop pouring it into inefficiency. Until then, we'll continue to panic over the symptoms of our problems, without ever addressing their causes.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNET
21 minutes ago
- CNET
Upgrade Your Home Security With Up to 62% Off Some of Our Absolute Favorite Arlo Security Cameras
Home security cameras are so versatile these days. From keeping an eye on pets or kids to deterring package theft and protecting your home while you're sleeping or away, there are plenty of reasons for you to invest in some cameras for your space. Right now Woot is making it even easier to get your hands on some for cheap, marking down a number of Arlo security cameras by up to 62%. Prices start at just $67. If you're looking for outside security there are a few options, but one of the best deals in this sale is the Arlo Ultra 2 Spotlight camera bundle. The cameras have 4K HDR, a 180-degree field of view, great smart home support and local storage. It's our pick for the best wireless 4K home security camera of 2025. Our biggest gripe was the price, but this deal alleviates that worry. Along with two cameras, you'll also get a SmartHub, a power adapter, two rechargeable batteries, two ethernet cables and mounting kits. This bundle would normally run you $600, but a nice 50% discount slashes that price in half so that you'll pay only $300 if you act fast. For something with a dual function, try the Arlo Pro 3 Floodlight security camera. It has a motion-activated floodlight that can reach up to 3,000 lumens, which is great for when you get home late at night. But it will also ensure anyone in your driveway is illuminated and recorded just in case they're up to something nefarious. The camera itself has 2K resolution, color night vision and two-way audio. It's also one of our favorite options for security cameras with floodlights for 2025 and won our Editors' Choice award. Regularly priced at $250, you can get yours for just $120 at Woot. Hey, did you know? CNET Deals texts are free, easy and save you money. For indoor coverage, grab yourself a 2-pack of 2nd-gen Arlo Essential security cameras for $67. These indoor cameras are currently our pick for the best overall nanny cam of 2025 thanks to its 2K resolution, solid two-way audio, clear night vision and zoom capabilities. There are some other choices available as well, so be sure to shop the entire sale selection to grab exactly what you need for your home. And don't forget -- Prime members get free shipping, too. Just be sure to log in with Amazon before placing your order. Why this deal matters There are a ton of great options in this sale, including some of our top picks of 2025. If you've been considering getting a home security camera (or several), now is the time. It's rare to see so many discounts saving you half the cost -- or more -- and we are fairly certain these offers will sell out quick. Lock in your order soon to avoid disappointment.
Bloomberg
23 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Tesla Robotaxi Videos Show Speeding, Driving Into Wrong Lane
Tesla Inc. 's self-driving taxis appeared to violate traffic laws during the company's first day offering paid rides, with one customer capturing footage of a left turn gone wrong and others traveling in cars that exceeded posted speed limits. In a video taken by Rob Maurer, an investor who used to host a Tesla podcast, the Model Y he's riding in enters an Austin intersection in a left-turn-only lane. The Tesla hesitates to make the turn, swerves right and proceeds into an unoccupied lane meant for traffic moving in the opposite direction.
CNN
23 minutes ago
- CNN
Tesla finally begins long-promised robotaxi service
Tesla's much-publicized robotaxi service began this weekend — but only in one neighborhood in Austin, Texas, only for a select group of the company's fans and only with a Tesla employee in the front passenger seat. It was a far more modest rollout for robotaxis than Tesla CEO Elon Musk had promised. While other companies have already achieved and surpassed this initial test, Tesla fans still cheered the unassuming launch as a game-changing first step. Musk has promised since 2019 that Tesla was on the verge of providing a wide-ranging ride-hailing service that would change the basic way riders get around, including the promise that Tesla owners would profit from renting their cars to the service. Last fall, Musk debuted a prototype for a 'Cybercab' without a steering wheel or pedals, and he said the service would greatly change the financial outlook for Tesla, making it the most valuable company on the planet. But the start of the Tesla service Sunday was only a fraction of any of that. A small number of company-owned cars were used and they were existing Model Y vehicles — not Cybercabs, which are not yet allowed on roads, let alone produced on a mass scale. It was not even the most extensive robotaxi service in Austin — a joint effort between Uber and Waymo, the self-driving car unit of Google parent Alphabet, has been up and running in Austin since March. But the Austin test pressed on regardless. The rides were made available to a select group of Tesla fans, according to Dan Ives, a tech analyst with Wedbush Securities and an effusive Tesla bull, and Joey Klender, who writes for the site Klender and a member of Ives' team took multiple rides in a Tesla Model Y robotaxi on Sunday. Ives' note to clients, which cited how a Tesla 'safety monitor' sat in the front passenger seat while no person was in the driver's seat, praised the quality of the rides taken by his team member. 'We took a route through a park with dirt roads and traffic cones, yet the car was able to navigate perfectly and picked us up right at our exact location,' Ives said in the note. 'To really put it into perspective, there was a moment where we drove up a narrow road going up a hill with cars parked on both sides with oncoming traffic and people opening their car doors into the road and the Robotaxi masterfully maneuvered.' But it was not all smooth sailing, with multiple videos showing the car making mistakes. In one YouTube video, the robotaxi drove on the wrong side of the road after it attempted and abandoned a left turn, only to continue traveling down the street on the opposite side of a double yellow line before making the left turn on the following block. Fortunately, there were no vehicles driving on the other side of the road. A separate YouTuber posted a video in which the robotaxi kept driving past its destination for several minutes as he tried to get it to pull over so he could get out. 'Please exit safely,' a screen in the rear seat of the car said, as it continued driving down the road. All the rides on Sunday, no matter the distance, cost $4.20, a favorite number of Musk based on its association with marijuana. Musk reposted tweets on X from others who took rides on the initial day of service. Unsurprisingly, all the posts were positive. Musk and his fans have insisted the service will rapidly be expanded to other cities and will dramatically change the financial performance of Tesla. But the EV maker is playing a game of catch up. Waymo, a unit of Google parent Alphabet, has been providing paid rides since 2020, and now provides more than 250,000 rides a week to paying riders in Austin, Phoenix, Los Angeles and San Francisco. It soon plans to expand the service to Atlanta, Miami and Washington, DC. General Motors pulled the plug on its own self-driving car hailing service in December, citing the 'considerable' resources needed and 'an increasingly competitive robotaxi market.' It also had an accident in which one of its robotaxis in San Francisco hit a pedestrian and dragged the woman along the road for 20 feet. The woman had already been hit by a human-driven car before she was struck by GM's robotaxi. California authorities ordered the company to halt its operations in the state as a result.
