September 19th, 2014
Debates about Medicaid expansion betray an underlying fundamental disagreement not only about the Affordable Care Act (ACA) but about the Medicaid program itself. Medicaid, unlike Medicare, lacks the near-universal buy-in to the fundamental value of the program to beneficiaries’ health and well-being. As a means-tested (read welfare-related) program, Medicaid raises concerns and disagreements regarding work (dis)incentives, labor market effects, the “deserving” poor, and how this relates to the construct of health care as a right and a public good.
The Medicaid program serves as a centerpiece of the ACA and of the nation’s health care safety net. The states that continue to oppose Medicaid expansion reveal an important and less acknowledged aspect of this debate: That there remains fundamental disagreement in the United States about whether to include Medicaid as a central and important component of the evolving health care financing and delivery system, or whether system transformation would involve a move away from or elimination of Medicaid, even as a safety net program. Alternatively, how does or might the Medicaid program maintain (or attain) sufficiently broad-based buy-in to withstand wide swings in political control at the federal and state levels?Read the rest of this entry »