Kansas House Majority Leader Dan Hawkins recently wrote an opinion piece about Medicaid (Kancare) expansion filled with fear, misleading statements and downright untruths. He cited few facts, numbers or statistics. Instead, he relied on outrageous statements that have floated around unreliable websites for years.
I’d like to set the record straight.
Hawkins warns that disabled citizens’ care would be put in jeopardy by Medicaid expansion. He writes that by “adding able-bodied adults to the program” it “results in the same resources being spread more thinly across an ever-growing population.”
That’s not true. The fact is that new money and new resources are available to all currently on Medicaid and also to those newly qualified after expansion. The federal government offers the additional money when the state agrees to expansion. To date, Kansas has already lost more than $5.5 billion dollars by not expanding Medicaid.
Worries that the program isn’t sustainable can be answered by looking at expansion states.
To date, 38 states plus Washington, D.C., have already expanded the program, including all of our neighboring states. Wyoming is set to be the 39th this fall. Not one state has changed its mind.
Hawkins suggested that expansion has failed in these states because more citizens signed up than planned. Hawkins conflates dramatic increases in Medicaid enrollment with failure. In fact, increased enrollment proves success. The extra federal dollars Kansas will receive are intended for the increased enrollment. In the meantime, Kansans’ tax dollars are used by those states that have already expanded.
The Kansas economy would experience a significant boost through expansion.
“Several comprehensive analyses of current expansion states have found that Medicaid expansion had a net positive impact on state budgets,” writes the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation.
In another misstatement, Hawkins claims that hospitals, especially in rural areas, are at risk because of expansion. The fact is that Kansas has the unfortunate distinction of having the most hospitals at risk of closure in the United States, according to the Alliance for a Healthy Kansas. With expansion, hospitals get Medicaid reimbursement rather than footing the bills themselves for uninsured patients.
Both rural and urban communities would experience economic development with the expansion of KanCare.
Hawkins maintains that able-bodied Kansans become eligible under expansion. He shames them for enrolling and suggests that they are already eligible for low-cost insurance or through their employment.
Hawkins fails to mention that almost all those who are “able-bodied” are already working but because of their low wages they are “caught in the gap,” making too much to qualify for current Medicaid and too little to afford health insurance — while not having access to healthcare through employers.
A single mom of two who makes more than $4 an hour full-time would be caught in the gap. Remember, she’s working! Those in the restaurant, construction, and lodging industries are examples of this situation. Others who would qualify include those who must care for a disabled person or who are younger and disabled.
Hawkins misstates that Medicare-covered seniors and disabled citizens will lose access to health care and end up on long wait lists. He’s trying to confuse Kansans by implying that Medicare and the current Medicaid are the same thing. Of course, that’s not true.
