Skip to main content

Why Medicaid expansion is key part of health reform

By Aaron Carroll, Special to CNN
July 5, 2012 -- Updated 1139 GMT (1939 HKT)
Many people with little to no income do not qualify for Medicaid, but the health care law could remedy that, says Aaron Carroll.
Many people with little to no income do not qualify for Medicaid, but the health care law could remedy that, says Aaron Carroll.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Aaron Carroll: It's not true that Medicaid is a universal health care program for all poor people
  • Carroll: Medicaid has a chance to become a full safety net under the Affordable Care Act
  • But states are free to say no to the Medicaid expansion under the health care law, he says
  • Carroll: We'll have to make compromises, but first let's see if law will be stripped down

Editor's note: Dr. Aaron E. Carroll is an associate professor and vice chairman of health policy and outcomes research in the department of pediatrics at the Indiana University School of Medicine. He blogs about health policy at the Incidental Economist and tweets at @aaronecarroll.

(CNN) -- The big summer showdown has come and gone. The Supreme Court decided the Affordable Care Act could stand, and so it remains, for the most part, undisturbed. The next hurdle will occur in November, when the country goes to the polls.

For the sake of argument, though, let's assume the health care law will not be stripped down by a new president and Congress. In which case, we need to start asking an important question: What will happen with Medicaid?

Many Americans still don't understand how Medicaid works. The biggest misperception is that Medicaid is a universal health care program for all poor people. That's just not true. Many people with little to no income do not qualify for Mediaid.

Yes, all children up to 100% of the poverty line, and children under 6 up to 133% of poverty line, are covered. Pregnant women up to 133% of the poverty line are covered as well. So are elderly and disabled Americans who qualify for Social Security's Supplemental Security Income. But there's where things start to break down.

Aaron Carroll
Aaron Carroll

Parents are covered, but only to 1996 welfare levels. This keeps a lot of parents, even those who are very poor, from qualifying for Medicaid. Two parents and a child living in Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana or Texas with an income of $4,850 a year actually earn too much to qualify for traditional Medicaid. And if you're not a parent, then things are even worse. In most states, if you have no children, you can't qualify for Medicaid no matter how little you make. In most states, even if you make no money at all, there's no Medicaid for you.

This means Medicaid is far from the safety net many imagine it to be. It has so many holes that when the heath care law really gets going in 2014, more than half (PDF) of the newly insured will be those earning less than 133% of the poverty line. The poor still constitute a significant percent of the uninsured.

When the House and the Senate were debating how to cover all of the uninsured, they disagreed. Both bodies agree that those making more than 133% of the poverty line should get private insurance in the exchanges, albeit with subsidies for those making less than 400% of the poverty line. But what to do with those making less than 133% of the poverty line? The Democrats favored the idea of expanding Medicaid, as Medicaid is cheaper than private insurance. In fact, so much so that the House pushed to raise the eligibility for Medicaid for all Americans to 133% of the poverty line, above the Senate's suggested 100%, as it made the entire Affordable Care Act cheaper.

This is a radical change for Medicaid. It will finally be the fully universal safety net that many believe it already is. All Americans, regardless of age and parental status, will qualify if they are poor.

This won't be cheap, of course. States currently are on the hook for 50% to 75% of all Medicaid costs. Asking them to cover the many millions of newly eligible recipients would be too much for many to bear. Therefore, the federal government decided it would pay for the full cost of the expansion when it begins in 2014.

There are two problems, though. The first is that the federal portion decreases to 90% by 2020. That may still sound like a great deal, but even that 10% is a lot of money, and many states fear they won't have it. The second is that the individual mandate and Affordable Care Act in general will probably bring forward a lot of people who already qualified for Medicaid and just never signed up. The federal government won't pay for them, and a lot of states fear this expense. They feared it so much that they brought a case against the expansion that made it all the way to the Supreme Court.

The court decided in the states' favor. The health care law can ask states to expand Medicaid and offer them extra money if they will agree to the expansion. The law can even refuse states the extra money if they refuse to expand the program. But what the law can't do is threaten states with removal of their traditional Medicaid money if they won't expand.

What this means is that states are free to say no to the Medicaid expansion. That will mean some big problems in implementing the Affordable Care Act. There are really no provisions for people making less than 100% of the poverty lines to receive subsidies to buy insurance on the exchanges. Many will not be penalized by the mandate because they make too little (PDF), but that will still leave them without health insurance. In essence, without the Medicaid expansion, millions of the poorest among us will still be uninsured, with few options to rectify the situation.

I still believe that few states will choose to refuse the expansion money. It's hard to say no to a full funding of insurance for millions of constituents when it will cost you nothing. Moreover, it will be politically difficult to say no when so many other states are saying yes. There will also be enormous pressure from physicians, hospitals and other providers, who stand to lose a ton of money if people aren't insured. Let's remember that there were holdouts when Medicaid was passed decades ago. Today, threatening to take away that program is "coercive."

That said, plenty of states have shown their willingness to turn down such deals in the past. Likely, some will in the future. They are certainly threatening to already. Since those threats are nothing more than words at the moment, I'd take them with a grain of salt. But that doesn't mean a few won't hold fast.

There are ways to fix this, of course. Subsidies could be provided for everyone, for instance. States could ask for new deals. Or the federal government could make the expansion a federal burden for all time. The various solutions will cost money and require compromise. That's not happening soon.

So, for the moment, we will wait. On November 7, we will have a better idea of whether the Affordable Care Act will stand. And maybe then, we'll be able to get to work.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Aaron Carroll.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
May 20, 2013 -- Updated 1536 GMT (2336 HKT)
Julian Zelizer says that Obama, like many before him, chose to work within the system to get things done rather than lead transformative change.
May 20, 2013 -- Updated 1522 GMT (2322 HKT)
Meg Urry says loss of the failing, planet-finding Kepler satellite would be huge for NASA--but one way or another, it's a matter of time before we find signs of life on other worlds
May 20, 2013 -- Updated 1132 GMT (1932 HKT)
Elizabeth Dunn and Michael Norton write that people pass up opportunities to spend their money to avoid disagreeable tasks
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 2022 GMT (0422 HKT)
Paul Butler says when President Obama delivers the commencement address at Morehouse, he has explaining to do.
May 19, 2013 -- Updated 1345 GMT (2145 HKT)
Bob Greene on how 18th century Americans tried to make sense of the day with no sun
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 0057 GMT (0857 HKT)
With guest Rep. Keith Ellison, John Avlon, Margaret Hoover and Dean Obeidallah discuss the president's scandal trifecta, hope for immigration and what Jolie's revelation means for women.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1709 GMT (0109 HKT)
The press has turned on President Obama with a vengeance, writes Howard Kurtz
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 1801 GMT (0201 HKT)
Donna Brazile says our democracy is endangered, not by the Russians, North Korea, Iran or even terrorists. To quote Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us."
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 1759 GMT (0159 HKT)
Photographer Arne Svenson defends his show "Neighbors," portraits of the occupants of a building near him taken through their windows.
May 20, 2013 -- Updated 1337 GMT (2137 HKT)
Theater critic Kevin Williamson was kicked out of a play when he took the phone away from an audience member and threw it. He says it was worth it.
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 1425 GMT (2225 HKT)
U.S. actor Angelina Jolie (L) holds daughter Zahara as husband and actor Brad Pitt (C) carries son Maddox during a stroll on the seafront promenade at the historic Gateway of India outside their hotel in Mumbai on November 12, 2006.
Gil Welch says women must not panic over Angelina Jolie's mastectomies: 99% of women don't carry the BRCA1 gene.
May 18, 2013 -- Updated 0852 GMT (1652 HKT)
JR's "Inside Out" project brings public spaces alive with giant representations of people
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1922 GMT (0322 HKT)
Roger Colinvaux says the IRS scandal is fundamentally about disclosure of donors, not tax-exempt status.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1149 GMT (1949 HKT)
Alex Castellanos says Chris Matthews is wrong; the Washington controversies result from a government that is too big to control
May 20, 2013 -- Updated 1332 GMT (2132 HKT)
Mike Downey says Los Angeles has well-funded but clueless sports teams.
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1552 GMT (2352 HKT)
Grace Liu says It's time for some tiger cubs to approvingly roar for our strict and demanding parents
May 17, 2013 -- Updated 1157 GMT (1957 HKT)
Sens. Al Franken and Roger Wicker say we need a strong SEC to make sure credit ratings fraud doesn't bring down the economy again.
May 16, 2013 -- Updated 1425 GMT (2225 HKT)
LZ Granderson says instead of reducing the blood alcohol content threshold, how about enforcing existing laws better?
May 16, 2013 -- Updated 1514 GMT (2314 HKT)
Maia Goodell says the military should use civil legal remedies on sexual assault cases.
ADVERTISEMENT