The Hidden Costs of Medicaid Expansion

This column, originally published by the Chesterfield Observer back in June, is a bit dated. I neglected to re-post it on Bacon’s Rebellion at the time. But, what the heck, with the new debate about how to dish out Virginia’s windfall from federal tax reform, it never hurts to remind middle-class taxpayers how they continue to get the shaft.

After years of debate Virginia has enacted Medicaid expansion. Backers of the new entitlement proclaim the legislation a humanitarian triumph, providing health insurance to as many as 400,000 Virginians above the poverty line and injecting some 2 billion federal dollars into Virginia’s health care system. Miraculously, the state will deliver this new benefit at seemingly no expense to Virginia taxpayers. The federal government will pay 90 percent of the cost, while the balance will be recouped through reduced expenditures on prisons, mental health and other state programs, plus a tax on hospital revenue.

As the old political saying goes, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. It always pays to dig deeper to uncover what the politicians aren’t telling you. And in the case of Medicaid-expansion funding, there’s a lot they are glossing over.

First, Virginia’s 69 private, acute-care hospitals will pay a $281 million provider “assessment” in the first two-year budget. Second, legislators need to find a comparably large sum to bolster Medicaid payments to physicians. By the time it all shakes out, taxpayers and paying patients could end up paying, by my estimate, on the order of $250 million a year in higher taxes and/or insurance fees – although, to be honest, no one really knows.

What, you didn’t read that in the newspaper? Gov. Ralph Northam and GOP lawmakers didn’t tout these costs among their list of legislative accomplishments? Welcome to Virginia government in the 21st century. The political class has perfected the art of picking your pockets so quietly you don’t even notice.

According to the Virginia Hospital and Healthcare Association, Virginia’s health care program for the poor at present reimburses providers only 71 percent of the cost of treating Medicaid patients – well below the 78 percent rate that state code declares to be an acceptable level. Virginia hospitals also provide hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of charity care – free or discounted health care provided to low-income patients – and write off hundreds of millions more on bad debts. On top of that, the Medicare program for retirees is squeezing hospital payments, too, although not to the same degree. The VHHA claims that the Medicare shortfall reached $909 million in 2016.

Under those circumstances, hospitals have been reluctant to absorb the cost of a provider “assessment” to pay for Medicaid expansion. But in negotiations with legislators this year, hospital lobbyists folded. They backed the provider assessment knowing they’d gain roughly $2 billion in extra federal dollars.

Where will hospitals find $241 million for the assessment? That’s not at all clear. Collectively, Chesterfield hospitals generated almost $1 billion in revenue in fiscal 2016, according to Virginia Health Information data. They paid about $100 million in charity care, wrote off roughly $75 million in bad debt, and ran profits of about $80 million. In the first year the assessment will be 1.1 percent of net patient revenues, or about $10.8 million based on 2016 revenues; the second year the tax will be 2.3 percent, or about $23.6 million.

In theory, the influx of Medicaid dollars will reimburse hospitals for most of the cost of treating near-poor patients who account for the bulk of that charity care and bad debt, offsetting the tax assessment. No one has projected how it will impact finances on a hospital-by-hospital basis across the state. And no one has provided any guarantee that hospitals won’t pass on the cost to their privately insured patients. We don’t know what will happen. The hospitals probably don’t know yet either.

A related problem is that Medicaid’s reimbursements are so chintzy that many physicians don’t accept Medicaid patients. When there’s a physician shortage to begin with, the result is that many Medicaid recipients won’t be able to find a doctor. They’ll continue seeking treatment episodically in hospital emergency rooms, as they always have, undercutting a key rationale of expanding Medicaid in the first place.

Legislators have discussed raising the reimbursement rate for physicians from 71 percent of cost to 88 percent of cost, enough to induce most doctors to take on Medicaid patients. But that will require tens of millions of dollars more each year. A report by the Richmond Times-Dispatch mentioned a figure of $47 million, but that would average out to about $27 per Medicaid patient per year, which seems absurdly low. To boost physician reimbursements to a meaningful level, lawmakers likely will have to ask for a much larger sum in a future session.

Hospitals and doctors are following these developments closely and protecting their interests. Most Virginians aren’t. My prognostication: They’ll come out OK – and you’ll get stuck with a big Medicaid bill.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

9 responses to “The Hidden Costs of Medicaid Expansion”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    re: ” What, you didn’t read that in the newspaper?”

    hmm… what is the Chesterfield Observer? chopped liver?

    re: ” As the old political saying goes, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is”

    true – but this is similar

    ” Virginia hospitals also provide hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of charity care – free or discounted health care provided to low-income patients”

    It takes money to pay doctors, nurses, maintenance, operations, etc..and you can’t do that if you provide things “free”. The money has to come from somewhere…. and does.. in the real world …

    we pay these costs already – they’re already “hidden” by politicians who tell you that Medicaid will “cost” more than current… and pretend we’re not already paying for it.

    “Hidden” is what it is right now – without MedicAid – .. we already pay….

    What MedicAid is really about is more efficient and more cost effective health care by providing people with medical care BEFORE they cost the rest of us big dollars to treat their late-stage, untreated diabetes, organ failure and cardiovascular disease.

    The premise that we don’t pay these costs now but will after MedicAid is a myth for the gullible. We pay… We don’t turn people away from hospitals when they have late stage cancer or diabetes.. we admit them and we render thousands and thousands of dollars of medical care that is not “free” and IS shifted to someone else.. Doctors do not work for “free”.

    Some day- we might stop telling ourselves and others lies about this and actually start to deal with truth and realities instead of partisan poop.

  2. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    Larry, I am reminded of the famous P.J. O’Rourke line: if you think health care is expensive now, just wait to see what it costs when it’s free! That line is over a decade old, yet still true.

    Yes, a great deal of care is provided now without compensation and somehow the cost is already getting filtered to the rest of us, but there are many other medical services that this population is not getting – but may start lining up for with a payment method. I do not think demand will simply stay the same, and neither do you. I HOPE the emphasis is on prevention but am not holding my breath.

    I think Virginia was right to get in on this expansion plan, but I suffer no illusions about the ultimate cost. Nor do I trust that all the dollars will go to care and none of the dollars to provider profits. Paying for it the way they did with budget language will not hold more than a year or two.

  3. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    “We can do so much better. While the struggle for Medicare For All is ongoing, right here in Virginia, we should expand Medicaid to cover dental services. We should be giving state income tax breaks to dental professionals, from hygienists to DDSes, of up to 100% if they operate and practice in “dental care deserts”. “

    Copied just a moment ago from Blue Virginia! Kaching! Now the push is on to expand Medicaid to dental!

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Steve – have you heard about the govt subsidized insurance called Medicare Advantage?

      https://www.medicare.gov/what-medicare-covers/medicare-health-plans/medicare-advantage-plans-cover-all-medicare-services.html

      and yes.. it’s going to bankrupt Medicare…

      We RUINED Medicare when we created Medicare Advantage to cover the 20% that those covered were supposed to co-pay. As long as people had some skin in the costs – they would have to participate themselves in the “need vs want” choice. When you have the govt subsidize that last 20% – the whole thing goes up in flames.

      The other industrialized countries that ALL essentially have Medicare for All – they have strict rules for deciding “want vs need”… some folks call it “rationing” and it really is – but all insurance , all employer-provided , and – even Medicare ALSO rations. There are things they will not pay for.

      None of the other industrialized countries pay for any/all wants. They pay for basic needs to not die from preventable disease but if people want MORE than that – they have to pay out of their own pockets.

      We USED to do that with Medicare because we essentially destroyed it with Medicare Advantage – and I totally AGREE with you that Medicare Advantage for ALL – as opposed to basic Medicare with a 20% co-pay for all – is a recipe for failure..

      Finally – we are choosing essentially to provide something like Medicare for ALL for SOME people but not everyone because it is “too expensive” – as opposed to providing basic Medicare for ALL for everyone and then let those that want more – pay out of their own pockets for more.

      we are essentially advocating a two-tier health care system in the US – for the Haves and the Have Nots… it’s morally and fiscally a failure.

  4. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    How could this be? For years I’ve heard Democrats and the Ministry of Enlightenment and Propaganda say expanding Medicaid will save taxpayers and insurance premiums payers billions.

    How soon can we cover people in country illegally? After all Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren recently changed the subject from the murder of American citizen Mollie Tibbetts by an illegal immigrant to the separation of children from their parents who were caught being in the U.S. illegally. And true to form the Senator did not mention that the same practice occurred under Obama. As much as I really don’t like Trump, I find myself more and more attracted to him because of the actions and statements from Democrats.

  5. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Health care is NOT FREE!!! Never WAS and never WILL BE – but we are living in LA LA Land when we refuse to acknowledge the reality of how health care is done in all other industrialized countries – much cheaper with much better health outcomes!

    All other industrialized countries have MEDICARE FOR ALL – and they do it for 1/2 what we do – they live longer, have less infant deaths…

    If 20 other countries can do Medicare for ALL – at 1/2 what we are paying – why can’t we?

    we continue to insist we can do it different and we’re not – and we basically have no clue – no realistic and rational clue on how to do it. What we have is ideology and make-believe ideas…

    and then we conflate it with other things like immigration to turn it into a big monolithic philosophical MESS…

    The folks on the right have no clue how to do health care – as well as no clue how to do immigration – much less conflate the two into even greater ignorant ideologies.

    We messed up health care in this country when the Govt subsidized the insurance premiums for employer-provided and required insurance company to cover all conditions and to set premiums at the same price no matter age or health.

    That’s NOT a “market” and never will be no matter how hard people pretend.

    And the simple reality is – there is no place on the planet earth where health care actually works the way the Trumpsters and folks on the right say it should.

    If you take away the mandate for insurers to cover pre-existing conditions – across the board – to INCLUDE employer-provided insurance – even most of the idiots on the right would start to see the light… as their own families and loved ones would then also be excluded from coverage.

    It’s a pretend world when folks who have employer-provided insurance that the government guarantees coverage – those same people advocate DENYING that same protection to others.. who have to buy their insurance in the “market”.

    People who have EP “earned” it and people who don’t have EP – deserve not to have it! That’s the mentality.

    These are the folks driving the politics .. “I’ve got mine – Screw You” is their theme song.

    1. “Health care is NOT FREE!!!”

      Quite correct. Perhaps you belong in the camp of people who, knowing that health care is not free, do not want to bother knowing how much it costs. I do not fall in the camp. I want to know how much it costs — and how much taxpayers are subsidizing it. It is in the interests of politicians to obscure the facts. It is in the public interest to get the facts into the open so informed decisions can be made.

  6. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Actually , I almost NEVER FAIL to point out that we pay TWICE AS MUCH as other industrialized countries which you systematically ignore…..

    Second – in terms of “subsidies” – you do not acknowledge the disparity in how the govt subsidizes employer-provided verses market-bought insurance.

    I think that OBSCURES the DISCUSSION itself when you do not address those issues also.

    Finally – health care is not only not “free” here – it’s NOT FREE in the other industrialized countries EITHER. They ALL PAY for it through taxes – the difference is they all pay for it and they all get it – equally -with no disparate treatment by the govt.

    These issues almost always get ignored in discussions about health care … and discussions that ignore these facts – are not real… they are isolated with regard to how the real world actually does operate..

    All the other industrialized countries have Medicare for ALL… everyone is covered and yet they do not pay MORE – they pay LESS…. and yet we argue that Medicare for all will cost us more. If we have actual evidence that other countries provide healthcare for ALL for LESS – why do we continue to insist doing so in this country will cost even more than twice as much as other countries?

    Finally – “subsidize”. What is that? Do you think that education , police, roads, etc are “subsidized” or paid for with taxes? People in the other industrialized countries PAY for their healthcare through taxes… it’s NOT “free” and it’s not any more or less “subsidized” than a lot of other things that get paid for with taxes.

    a “subsidy” is when taxes are NOT collected on income – as is what we do in this country for employer-provided. We don’t tax it – but we DO tax the money spent on health insurance in the market… THAT’s a clear subsidy for those who have EP.

  7. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    One cannot just compare costs country by country. While I’d certainly agree the United States’ medical costs are high in comparison with those of other nations, I strongly suspect we do more elective medical procedures than other nations. Many foreign nations formally or informally ration care. I also suspect compensation for health care workers in the U.S. from executives to doctors to nurse and other workers is higher here than in many other countries.

Leave a Reply