Latest news with #ObamaCare
Wall Street Journal
16 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Exposing ObamaCare Subsidy Fraud
Bigger government invariably creates more opportunities for fraud. Exhibit A is the ObamaCare insurance subsidy racket, which a new Paragon Health Institute report finds has resulted in some 6.4 million people this year receiving free health insurance to which they aren't entitled. Enrollment in the ObamaCare exchanges ballooned after Democrats sweetened subsidies in 2021. The 2021 law capped how much households are required to pay toward their premiums as a share of income on a sliding basis. Households get a tax credit that covers the difference between their plan premium and what they are required to pay.
Yahoo
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Look to Wisconsin for Medicaid reform
Medicaid was created to help people living in poverty have access to health care. Under ObamaCare, it was expanded to include able-bodied, working-age adults without children. That was wrong. When I was governor of Wisconsin, we opted not to take the expansion. First, we could create our own plan for covering everyone living in poverty. We did — and it worked. My predecessor had raised the income requirements for Medicaid, but did not fund the gap. That left many impoverished people on a waiting list. Once I was in office, we restored the limits to cover those living in poverty and eliminated the waiting list. Today, my state is the only one in the nation to have no gap in insurance coverage despite not having taken the expansion. Second, I did not want to put more people on government assistance. For those who are able, public assistance should be more like a trampoline than a hammock. True freedom and prosperity do not come from the clumsy hand of the government. They come from empowering people to control their own destiny through the dignity of work. When I first took office, the Cabinet member who oversaw labor issues asked what my priorities were for the agency. He told me that the prior administration said their goal was to bring in as much federal assistance as possible to the state. I told him my goal was the opposite. I wanted to receive less federal funding because more people were working. During my tenure as governor, we pushed for work requirements for those who were able. We funded worker training and addiction recovery programs to get people into the workforce. It was a success. More people were employed during my years in office than had been at any point in our past. Third, I was concerned the federal government would not be able to sustain its commitments to the states. Unlike Wisconsin, which had a budget surplus each year I was in office, the federal government continues to have massive deficits and debt issues. Things have only grown worse since my early warnings. Initially, opposition to expanding Medicaid under ObamaCare was strong. Over the years, however, the appeal of 'easy money' from the federal government became too tempting for many state leaders — saddling private payers with higher costs as well. Thankfully, Republican lawmakers in Wisconsin remembered my concerns. With federal cuts increasingly likely, the Badger State will be one of the few not facing a major budget crisis. One of the proposals being circulated by congressional leaders is a plan to cut the rate of reimbursement to the states for the Medicaid expansion population from 90 percent to less than 60 percent. States that looked to the federal government to balance their budgets in the past will now experience significant shortfalls due to these reductions in federal funds. The reduced reimbursement rate being considered by Congress would have cost Wisconsin taxpayers an additional $154 million each year had the state taken the expansion funds according to a recent study by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty. This is for a program that already represents about 30 percent of the state budget. Overall, Medicaid is a program that should provide assistance for children, families and seniors living in poverty. It should not be a barrier to able-bodied, working-age adults entering the workforce. These reforms will help provide true savings while ensuring the program serves the population it was intended to serve when it was established 60 years ago. Looking ahead, officials in the federal government as well as states would be wise to look at the Wisconsin model as they consider reforms to Medicaid. We showed that conservative reforms work. Scott Walker was governor of Wisconsin from 2011 to 2019. He is currently president of Young America's Foundation. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
08-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Look to Wisconsin for Medicaid reform
Medicaid was created to help people living in poverty have access to health care. Under ObamaCare, it was expanded to include able-bodied, working-age adults without children. That was wrong. When I was governor of Wisconsin, we opted not to take the expansion. First, we could create our own plan for covering everyone living in poverty. We did — and it worked. My predecessor had raised the income requirements for Medicaid, but did not fund the gap. That left many impoverished people on a waiting list. Once I was in office, we restored the limits to cover those living in poverty and eliminated the waiting list. Today, my state is the only one in the nation to have no gap in insurance coverage despite not having taken the expansion. Second, I did not want to put more people on government assistance. For those who are able, public assistance should be more like a trampoline than a hammock. True freedom and prosperity do not come from the clumsy hand of the government. They come from empowering people to control their own destiny through the dignity of work. When I first took office, the Cabinet member who oversaw labor issues asked what my priorities were for the agency. He told me that the prior administration said their goal was to bring in as much federal assistance as possible to the state. I told him my goal was the opposite. I wanted to receive less federal funding because more people were working. During my tenure as governor, we pushed for work requirements for those who were able. We funded worker training and addiction recovery programs to get people into the workforce. It was a success. More people were employed during my years in office than had been at any point in our past. Third, I was concerned the federal government would not be able to sustain its commitments to the states. Unlike Wisconsin, which had a budget surplus each year I was in office, the federal government continues to have massive deficits and debt issues. Things have only grown worse since my early warnings. Initially, opposition to expanding Medicaid under ObamaCare was strong. Over the years, however, the appeal of 'easy money' from the federal government became too tempting for many state leaders — saddling private payers with higher costs as well. Thankfully, Republican lawmakers in Wisconsin remembered my concerns. With federal cuts increasingly likely, the Badger State will be one of the few not facing a major budget crisis. One of the proposals being circulated by congressional leaders is a plan to cut the rate of reimbursement to the states for the Medicaid expansion population from 90 percent to less than 60 percent. States that looked to the federal government to balance their budgets in the past will now experience significant shortfalls due to these reductions in federal funds. The reduced reimbursement rate being considered by Congress would have cost Wisconsin taxpayers an additional $154 million each year had the state taken the expansion funds according to a recent study by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty. This is for a program that already represents about 30 percent of the state budget. Overall, Medicaid is a program that should provide assistance for children, families and seniors living in poverty. It should not be a barrier to able-bodied, working-age adults entering the workforce. These reforms will help provide true savings while ensuring the program serves the population it was intended to serve when it was established 60 years ago. Looking ahead, officials in the federal government as well as states would be wise to look at the Wisconsin model as they consider reforms to Medicaid. We showed that conservative reforms work. Scott Walker was governor of Wisconsin from 2011 to 2019. He is currently president of Young America's Foundation.
Wall Street Journal
06-06-2025
- Health
- Wall Street Journal
My Son Is Counting on Medicaid Work Requirements
Benton, Ark. Medicaid was created to help people like my son. He is 17, has severe autism and epilepsy, and needs constant attention. Yet thanks to ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion, he is stuck on a multiyear waiting list for in-home care because able-bodied adults are competing for the same resources. Republicans in the Senate can help states fix this by strengthening the Medicaid work requirements in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act they're about to pass.
New York Post
05-06-2025
- Health
- New York Post
Ignore the hysteria over GOP ‘cuts' to Medicaid — it would still GROW dangerously fast
Over the past five years, federal spending has exploded. In 2019, Washington spent $4.5 trillion (20.9% of GDP). Today, that figure is closer to $7 trillion (23.3% of GDP). That surge, driven by pandemic emergency spending and entitlement expansions, is projected to persist unless Congress takes action. Yet even the most modest restraint to just one of the major programs driving this deficit, Medicaid, is triggering hysteria on Capitol Hill. Advertisement Over the last decade, Medicaid growth has outpaced that of the other two largest federal entitlement programs: Social Security and Medicare. Including state and federal funding, total Medicaid spending ($873 billion) will exceed national defense this year, and it will only continue to balloon over the coming decade. Medicaid's rapid growth can be traced, in part, to the program's imbalanced financing structure. The core problem: The federal government finances up to $9 for every $1 states spend. Advertisement That encourages states to expand the program recklessly while letting Washington foot the bill. The result: rampant fraud, spiraling costs and a system that rewards size over need. ObamaCare exacerbated the issue by amplifying this imbalance. States receive a far higher federal 'match rate' to cover newly eligible, able-bodied adults than they do for the traditional Medicaid population — those who are poor, disabled, pregnant, or elderly. That means federal dollars flow more generously to those least in need. Advertisement Medicaid has grown by 78% since 2016. Jack Forbes / NY Post Design Meanwhile, states use gimmicks like taxing providers (and then reimbursing them through higher state payments) to artificially inflate their reported spending and draw down even more federal funds without actually contributing more of their own money. These perverse incentives explain why Medicaid's size and cost have spiraled far beyond anything envisioned when the program was founded. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Advertisement When Congress launched Medicaid in 1966, the financing burden was roughly equal, with states covering half of the budgetary costs of the program. Today, states generally cover only a quarter (or less) of the costs of running the program. When Washington picks up the tab, states lose incentives to spend wisely. Any serious reform effort must fix the incentives generated by the matching scheme at the heart of the Medicaid program. Despite attacks on Republicans, they're not planning to attempt real Medicaid reform anytime soon. As Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) noted: 'Just had a great talk with President [Donald] Trump about the Big, Beautiful Bill. He said again, NO MEDICAID BENEFIT CUTS.' So much for being the party of fiscal responsibility. Even under the Republicans' optimistic savings targets (and they are very optimistic), Medicaid spending would still rise by hundreds of billions over the next decade. The One Big Beautiful Bill aims to trim the rapid growth of federal Medicaid outlays from about 4.5% per year to roughly 3%. Advertisement Let's be clear: That is not a spending cut. And it's not austerity either. It's barely the fiscal equivalent of easing off the accelerator as we hurtle toward a debt cliff. As for those draconian 'cuts' cited in headlines — like the CBO's estimate that 10.3 million people could lose coverage? They assume states will drop beneficiaries en masse rather than adjust budgets, improve eligibility oversight or game the system via creative financing gimmicks. If states care about coverage, nothing in the House bill stops them from funding it themselves. Advertisement Republicans should not be cowed by apocalyptic rhetoric. Course corrections today could prevent a much deeper fiscal reckoning tomorrow. Instead of debating whether Medicaid should grow 4.5% or 3% per year, legislators should be asking: Why is this program growing faster than the economy? Why has it become untouchable? And how can we put this program on a sustainable path? Until that conversation takes place in good faith, expect Washington to keep racking up debt like there's no tomorrow. Advertisement Americans deserve a sustainable safety net — not one built on borrowed money and political cowardice. Dominik Lett is a budget-policy analyst at the Cato Institute.
