‘You Can't Just Take a Sledgehammer to Them'
As Republicans have labored to craft President Donald Trump's domestic policy megabill, conservative hardliners have been eager to slash spending on Medicaid, which many of them see as riddled with fraud and abuse. One target in particular for the right: the wonky, but hugely important, topic of provider taxes.
Conservative GOP lawmakers and think tanks accuse states of using taxes levied on hospitals as a loophole to get more money from the federal government — a practice they say is akin to legal 'money laundering.' The legislation, which couldsee a vote as soon as Wednesday, would freeze current provider tax rates and place a moratorium on any new provider taxes.
The proposal has drawn stiff blowback from hospitals and states, which use revenue from the taxes to pay for their share of Medicaid payments and make hospitals whole through higher payments. Red states — and Trump voters — in particular might suffer.
'It is a real problem if you change these programs without thinking through how they affect rural communities,' said Alan Levine, who previously led health agencies in Florida and Louisiana under Republican governors and now serves as president and CEO of the hospital system Ballad Health, which has rural hospitals across parts of Appalachia.
In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, Levine argued the taxes are not a scam, but a tool for states to help rural and underserved hospitals with high Medicare and Medicaid populations that already run on thin margins. The revenue can help offset losses from high care denials initiated by privately run Medicare Advantage plans.
Levine also discussed what he learned fighting Medicare and Medicaid fraud in Florida, and why he thinks the debate isn't over, even if this bill does eke its way to House passage.
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
You led top health agencies for two different red states. You're now concerned with what Republicans in Congress are proposing for Medicaid. Why?
My concerns aren't necessarily with what Republicans have been doing in Congress. My concerns have been individuals who have characterized legitimate and legal funding mechanisms for Medicaid to be something they are not.
Forty-nine different states use provider taxes as a mechanism for coming up with a state match to fund their Medicaid programs. While certainly there are states that the evidence shows have stretched and abused it, most states that I am aware of that use these mechanisms do it to keep access to rural hospitals for underserved communities.
Referring to this process as money laundering is simply not fair. It implies that something illegal and nefarious is being done and that is not true.
Governors have got to be entrepreneurial, thoughtful and innovative in terms of how they utilize these federal funds to keep access available.
Since 2016 we saw a huge spike in Medicare Advantage insurers and saw a huge increase in [care] denials. We need help, and states have used provider taxes as a means to offset the loss of these Medicare dollars. They are trying to draw down federal dollars in Medicaid to make up for the loss of federal dollars in Medicare.
I think there's a clear recognition by Congress that these mechanisms have been there for a long time and you can't just take a sledgehammer to them. The current bill as it relates to this funding mechanism puts a freeze on it, and that is probably a good start if you are going to evaluate how these programs are being done in the future.
We're a rural system. You have a disproportionate number of patients covered by Medicare and Medicaid. It is a real problem if you change these programs without thinking through how they affect rural communities.
Can you tell me a little about the dynamic between privately run Medicare Advantage plans and your hospitals? I know some hospital systems have clashed with the plans over how to set payment rates.
Our quarrel with Medicare Advantage insurance companies is not over rates. It is over behavior.
Let's say our rates for a Medicare Advantage insurer are 100 percent of traditional Medicare fee-for-service. When you net out what we get paid because of the denials and unilateral downcoding such as shifting a patient from inpatient to outpatient, we are generating 85 percent in the aggregate of what we get from traditional Medicare.
That is a 15 percent cut for the hospital.
I don't think Medicare Advantage is a bad thing. I do think the behavior of the insurance companies — and they are not all the same — is to take the premium and then systematically not pay claims.
It affects hospitals that have a disproportionate number of low income patients because you can no longer afford to pay them.
Going back to the House bill, it proposes a moratorium on new provider taxes. How is the moratorium going to impact Ballad's hospitals? Is that the right policy to pursue?
It could impact our hospitals, but I don't know yet. There are still things going on in Washington with respect to Tennessee's Medicaid program that remain undecided.
In theory the freezing of it based on the language of the bill would not hurt Tennessee, which is a positive thing.
I don't think this bill will be the last of the conversation. I think there will be more discussions about the use of provider taxes going forward.
The megabill proposes a similar restriction for state-directed payments. The practice enables states to direct how providers are reimbursed by a Medicaid managed care plan, which is a private plan that oversees the Medicaid program for a state.
The bill would restrict any state-directed payments above the Medicare payment rate, as some of the payments can be made at commercial rates. Does Ballad rely on these state-directed payments?
We are 100 percent managed Medicaid. Any time a state wants to implement a payment policy they have to use state-directed payments so the insurance companies can pass the dollars through.
The problem with tying the payment rates to Medicare is the Medicare policy by design disadvantages rural areas. The Medicare area wage index, which adjusts Medicare payments by geography, severely disadvantages rural and non-urban areas.
If you tie state-directed payments to Medicare rates you are [hurting] rural hospitals yet again because the wage index applies to that.
One of the biggest policy changes in the bill would be to impose new work requirements for able-bodied Medicaid recipients, leading to 4.6 million people potentially losing insurance through 2034. Are you concerned about people being dropped off Medicaid and how can you prevent that?
When Democrats say work requirements mean people won't be able to access care, that generally is not true. As a not-for-profit health system, we are required to have a charity policy. For us if you make 225 percent of the poverty level you get your care for free from Ballad.
The lowest threshold I have ever seen in a hospital for charity care is 150 percent of poverty. We tend to run higher due to the demographics of our region, but 150 percent of poverty is above the eligibility threshold for Medicaid.
The reality is that people who lose their Medicaid coverage because they are not working can still access medically necessary care if they have not-for-profit hospitals available to them. What is also true is we are going to provide the care and the cost is still going to be incurred, it's just that we are eating it. The cost of care exists no matter what, it is just who is going to pay for it.
In your previous roles in Florida and Louisiana can you share what you did to combat waste, fraud and abuse in health programs?
In both states I worked collaboratively with the attorneys general and cracked down on Medicaid fraud. When you see the cleverness of the criminals and thieves inside these programs it is amazing. They are obviously very smart and very calculating.
A lot of our efforts were using computer mechanisms and technology that is ancient compared to what they have today. We would try to find patterns where, for instance, a new provider enrolled in the program and within a month is billing a million dollars a month.
To the naked eye when you are processing 160 million claims a year it is not easy to catch that.
With the use of technology, which I think [CMS Administrator Mehmet] Oz is committed to, I think you can catch a lot of those schemes and get those bad players out of the program.
What was the most egregious case that you saw?
Oh my gosh. I won't say this is the most egregious, but this is an example of how this [fraud] can happen.
This was in Florida. We were finding children who needed wheelchairs, and two-year-olds were given wheelchairs that cost $50,000 to $60,000 with off-road technology and certain types of adjustments. Why is this happening?
What we found was the wheelchair manufacturers were the ones deciding which types of wheelchairs these kids needed. It was the fox watching the hen house.
I will never forget when I had my confirmation hearing in Florida and 30 children in wheelchairs showed up to protest my confirmation. We found out a public relations firm was hired by the wheelchair manufacturer to prearrange having those kids there to protest me. That is what you are up against.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says US airstrikes 'obliterated' Iran's key nuclear sites
STORY: The U.S. struck three key nuclear sites in Iran, President Donald Trump said on Saturday. He warned that Tehran would face more attacks if it didn't agree to peace. "Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Trump's decision to join Israel's military campaign against Iran represents a major escalation of the conflict. :: Tel Aviv, Israel It comes after more than a week of aerial combat between the two, with death and injuries in both countries. "There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu congratulated Trump: "History will record that President Trump acted to deny the world's most dangerous regime the world's most dangerous weapons." While an Iranian official cited by Tasnim news agency confirmed that one of the nuclear sites was attacked by 'enemy aistrikes'. :: June 13, 2025 :: Tehran, Iran Israel launched attacks on Iran earlier this month, saying it wanted to remove any chance of Tehran developing nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. Diplomatic efforts by Western nations to stop the hostilities have been unsuccessful. CBS news reported that the US reached out diplomatically to Iran on Saturday... ...to say the strikes are all the U.S. plans and that it does not aim for regime change.
Hamilton Spectator
36 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
US strikes 3 Iranian nuclear sites, inserting itself into Israel's war with Iran
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The United States attacked three sites in Iran early Sunday, inserting itself into Israel's war aimed at destroying the country's nuclear program in a risky gambit to weaken a longtime foe that prompted fears of a wider regional conflict. Addressing the nation from the White House, President Donald Trump asserted that Iran's key nuclear sites were 'completely and fully obliterated.' There was no independent damage assessment. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran confirmed that attacks took place on its Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz sites, but it insisted that its nuclear program will not be stopped. Iran and the U.N. nuclear watchdog said there were no signs of radioactive contamination at the three locations. It was not clear whether the U.S. would continue attacking Iran alongside its ally Israel, which has been engaged in a war with Iran for nine days. Trump acted without congressional authorization , and he warned that there would be additional strikes if Tehran retaliated against U.S. forces. 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,' he said. Iran's top diplomat, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, warned in a post on X that the U.S. attacks 'will have everlasting consequences' and that Tehran 'reserves all options' to retaliate. Hours later, Iranian missiles struck areas in northern and central Israel, according to an Israeli rescue service. United Hatzalah said it was dispatching first responders, but here was no immediate word on casualties or damage. The US helped Israel strike Iran's toughest nuclear site Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Tehran is not actively pursuing a bomb. However, Trump and Israeli leaders have claimed that Iran could quickly assemble a nuclear weapon, making it an imminent threat. The decision to directly involve the U.S. in the war comes after more than a week of strikes by Israel that significantly degraded Iran's air defenses and offensive missile capabilities, and damaged its nuclear enrichment facilities. But U.S. and Israeli officials have said American B-2 stealth bombers and the 30,000-pound (13,500-kilogram) bunker-buster bomb that only they have been configured to carry offered the best chance of destroying heavily fortified sites connected to the Iranian nuclear program buried deep underground. Trump appears to have made the calculation — at the prodding of Israeli officials and many Republican lawmakers — that Israel's operation had softened the ground and presented a perhaps unparalleled opportunity to set back Iran's nuclear program, perhaps permanently. 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan,' Trump said in a post on social media, using common alternate spellings for two of the sites. 'All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home.' Trump added in a later post: 'This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR. THANK YOU!' Israel announced Sunday that it had closed its airspace to both inbound and outbound flights in the wake of the U.S. attacks. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately elaborate on the operation. U.S. military leaders are scheduled to provide a briefing at 8 a.m. Eastern. The attack used bunker-buster bombs on Iran's Fordo nuclear fuel enrichment plant that is built deep into a mountain, a U.S. official said. The weapons are designed to penetrate the ground before exploding. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss military operations. In addition, U.S. submarines launched about 30 Tomahawk missiles, according to another U.S. official who also spoke on condition of anonymity. The International Atomic Energy Agency wrote on X that there has been 'no increase in off-site radiation levels' after the strikes. 'The IAEA can confirm that no increase in off-site radiation levels has been reported as of this time,' it said. The 'IAEA will provide further assessments on situation in Iran as more information becomes available.' Trump's turn to strikes departs from some previous statements The strikes are a perilous decision for Trump, who won the White House on the promise of keeping America out of costly foreign conflicts and scoffed at the value of American interventionism. But Trump also vowed that he would not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, and he had initially hoped that the threat of force would bring the country's leaders to give up its nuclear program peacefully. For months, Trump said he was dedicated to a diplomatic push to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. And he twice — in April and again in late May — persuaded Netanyahu to hold off on military action against Iran and give diplomacy more time. After Israel began striking Iran, Trump went from publicly expressing hope that the moment could be a 'second chance' for Iran to make a deal to delivering explicit threats on Khamenei and making calls for Tehran's unconditional surrender. He has bristled at criticism from some of his MAGA faithful who have suggested that further U.S. involvement would be a betrayal to supporters who were drawn to his promise to end U.S. involvement in expensive and endless wars. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump's decision to attack in a video message directed at the American president. 'Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities, with the awesome and righteous might of the United States, will change history,' he said. Netanyahu said the U.S. 'has done what no other country on earth could do.' The military showdown with Iran comes seven years after Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-administration brokered agreement in 2018, calling it the 'worst deal ever.' Fears of a broader war U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the 'dangerous escalation' of American strikes. 'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control — with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region and the world,' he said in a statement. Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen said they would resume attacks on U.S. vessels in the Red Sea if the Trump administration joined Israel's military campaign. The Houthis paused such attacks in May under a deal with the U.S. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned the United States on Wednesday that strikes targeting the Islamic Republic will 'result in irreparable damage for them.' And Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei declared 'any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region.' The Israeli military said Saturday it was preparing for the possibility of a lengthy war, while Iran's foreign minister warned before the U.S. attack that American military involvement 'would be very, very dangerous for everyone.' Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 865 people and wounded 3,396 others, according to the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists. The group said of those dead, it identified 363 civilians and 215 security force personnel. Trump's decision for direct U.S. military intervention comes after his administration made an unsuccessful two-month push — including with high-level, direct negotiations with the Iranians — aimed at persuading Tehran to curb its nuclear program. ___ Madhani reported from Morristown, N.J. Associated Press writers Nasser Karimi and Mehdi Fattahi in Iran, Lolita Baldor in Narragansett, Rhode Island, Samy Magdy in Cairo, contributed to this story. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
an hour ago
After Trump attacks Iran, what experts and officials fear for the American homeland
In the wake of President Donald Trump's "massive precision strikes" on Iran, concerns have been raised both for Americans in the region and at home. A principal area of worry is cyberattacks by Iranian state actors, including targeting the banking system or energy grid. A recent Department of Homeland Security bulletin warned: "Iranian government-affiliated cyber actors will probably prioritize retaliatory attacks against Israeli targets in the short term but may target U.S. networks due to their perception of U.S. support for Israeli strikes." The bulletin urged domestic critical infrastructure entities to "immediately" assess and shore up their security. Such attacks have already infiltrated U.S. water and wastewater systems, according to the non-profit think tank Center for Internet Security, which briefed law enforcement on Friday. The Center was also concerned that Iran, in the wake of Israeli military strikes, might use "crude or escalatory tactics" or informal networks if its capabilities were degraded. "The likelihood of such attacks will increase if the U.S. strikes Iran or overtly provides military support to the Israeli air campaign," the group said. And the Center assessed that Iran's considerable network of proxy groups might be able to strike U.S. interests in the Middle East, though their capacity to strike the U.S. homeland was more limited. The groups, they assessed, while less sophisticated, could still disrupt public infrastructure and the private sector. On top of that was the fear of attacks by foreign nationals or American citizens inspired to strike the U.S. In 2018, the National Counterterrorism Center issued a report saying Iran-sponsored or Shia-inspired -- referring to one of the two major branches of Islam which is dominant in Iran -- terror on the U.S. homeland is unlikely, except if the U.S. were to attack Iran. "Given sustained bilateral U.S.-Iran tensions, the occurrence of such a catalyst could prompt Shia HVE [homegrown violent extremist] activity relatively quickly, underscoring the benefits of early engagement with Shia communities about indicators of HVE radicalization. Potential triggering events for such Shia HVE violence include U.S. military action against Iran." Iranian forces themselves have previously targeted American interests, hitting U.S. bases in the Middle East, for instance, after top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Gen. Qassem Soleimani was killed in an American airstrike in Iraq in 2020. Iranian nationals have also carried out major cyberattacks. An Iranian national pleaded guilty last month to helping orchestrate the 2019 Baltimore, Maryland, ransomware attack that caused tens of millions of dollars in damage and disrupted critical city services. While prosecutors did not allege Sina Gholinejad was directed in his activities by the Iranian government, in announcing the case they warned more broadly of Iranian government-backed hacking groups targeting U.S. critical infrastructure. And in the summer of last year, the Justice Department also separately charged a Pakistani man with ties to the Iranian government for allegedly seeking to carry out political assassinations. Authorities told ABC News that among Asif Merchant's targets were Trump and other current and former U.S. officials.
