Counting on
Medicaid, States Face Shortfalls
Published: June 7, 2010 - New York Times
Having counted on Washington for money that may not be delivered, at least 30
states will have to close larger-than-anticipated shortfalls in the coming
fiscal year unless Congress passes a six-month extension of increased federal
spending on Medicaid.
Governors and state lawmakers, already facing some of the toughest budgets
since the
Great Depression, said the repercussions would extend far beyond health
care, forcing them to make deep cuts to education, social services and public
safety.
Gov. Edward
G. Rendell of Pennsylvania, for instance, penciled $850 million in federal
Medicaid assistance into the revenue side of his statefs ledger, reducing its
projected shortfall to $1.2 billion. The only way to compensate for the loss, he
said in an interview, would be to lay off at least 20,000 government workers,
including teachers and police officers, at a time when the state is starting to
add jobs.
gIt would actually kill everything the stimulus has done,h said Mr. Rendell,
a Democrat. gIt would be enormously destructive.h
The Medicaid provision, which would extend assistance first granted in last
yearfs stimulus
package, was considered such a sure bet by many governors and legislative
leaders that they prematurely included the money in their budgeting. But under
pressure from conservative Democrats to rein in deficit spending, House leaders
in late May eliminated $24 billion in aid to states from a tax and jobs bill
that was approved and forwarded to the Senate.
The Senate plans to take up the measure this week, and the majority leader,
Senator Harry
Reid of Nevada, favors restoring the money, said his spokesman, Jim Manley.
The House speaker, Nancy
Pelosi, signaled last week that her chamber was open to reconsidering the
appropriation.
But state and Congressional officials said the evolving politics of a midterm
election year meant that the federal aid could no longer be taken for granted.
And if it does not arrive, it will leave gaping shortages for states that are
already slashing services and raising taxes to balance their recession-racked
budgets.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, states are
relying on the money to close more than a fourth of the $89 billion in
cumulative budget shortfalls projected for the 2011 fiscal year, which starts on
July 1 in 46 states.
In California, Gov. Arnold
Schwarzeneggerfs proposed budget assumed $1.5 billion in increased federal
aid for Medicaid. With his state reeling from $57 billion in cuts over three
years and facing a shortfall of $19 billion in 2011, further reductions would be
gboth cruel and counterproductive,h Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, wrote to
members of Congress last week.
In New York, which started its fiscal year on April 1 without a financial
plan, Gov. David
A. Patersonfs proposed budget included $1.1 billion in unsecured federal
financing. Mr. Paterson, who is depending on the money to narrow a $9.2 billion
gap, joined Mayor Michael
R. Bloomberg of New York City at Gracie Mansion on Thursday to lobby their
statefs Congressional delegation.
Governors and state lawmakers were caught largely by surprise by the Housefs
removal of the appropriation. Over the previous 10 months, the Medicaid money
had been included in separate bills passed by each chamber, and President
Obama had wrapped the extension into his executive budget proposal.
gThere was every reason to think theyfd get together,h Mr. Rendell said.
But in recent weeks, Republicans and conservative Democrats began to complain
that the proposed spending would add to the deficit because it was not gpaid
forh with new revenue or other cuts. Their success in reducing the size of the
bill reflected a deepening debate in Congress — and on the campaign trail —
about the long-term consequences of using deficit spending to fight the
recession.
Democratic aides in both the House and the Senate said state officials had
not pressed their case forcefully enough.
gWe may have fallen asleep at the wheel a little bit because we took it as a
certainty for so long,h said Michael Bird, federal affairs counsel for the
National Council of State Legislatures.
Republican governors in particular, the aides said, had been reluctant to
petition for relief while the partyfs leaders in Congress were criticizing
Democrats for driving up the national debt.
gGovernors need to make it clear that it is vital that their states receive
this money, instead of blasting Congress for eout-of-control spending,f h
said a senior Democratic aide in the House, speaking on the condition of
anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about the issue publicly.
But the need to balance state and federal interests makes for awkward
politics for some governors. Timing has made the conflict more pronounced
because state budgets typically do not recover until well after a national
recession fades.
gIfm very concerned about the level of federal spending and what it would
mean for the long term,h said Gov. Jim Douglas of Vermont, a Republican and
chairman of the National
Governors Association. gBut for the short term, states need this bridge to
sustain the safety net of human services programs and education.h
A report issued
Thursday by the National Governors Association and the National Association of
State Budget Officers projected that state revenues would gremain sluggishh for
two more years. State general fund spending declined by nearly $75 billion, or
11 percent, from 2008 to 2010, according to the report. But states, which unlike
the federal government must balance their budgets, avoided even harsher cuts
because of nearly $135 billion in stimulus grants from Washington.
The aid included $87 billion made available by adjusting how states and the
federal government share the growing cost of Medicaid, the health insurance
program for the poor and the disabled. The economic downturn is expected to
drive up enrollment in the program by 21 percent from 2009 to 2011, according to
the report.
Although the federal Medicaid share varies by state, the stimulus act raised
it to an average of 66 percent, from 57 percent, according to the Kaiser Family
Foundation.
The reimbursement increase was limited to a 27-month period that ends on Dec.
31. Almost as soon as it took effect, governors began fretting about the fiscal
precipice they would face when the enhanced payments ended. In February,
governors from 42 states and several territories signed a letter
to Congressional leaders pleading for a six-month extension.
But with the public alarmed about deficit spending, House leaders found that
they could not muster the Democratic votes needed to pass the tax and jobs bill
without jettisoning several expensive components.
In a conference call with bloggers last week, Ms. Pelosi, Democrat of
California, took note of the changed political climate, calling the package gtoo
large for members to digest.h
gIf I had all the votes that I needed in the non-Blue Dog world,h she said,
referring to the caucus of conservative Democrats, gI would not have had to make
some of the changes I made to get some of the Blue Dog support.h
Many states do not have contingencies for replacing the federal money. Their
options will be limited by the severity of the steps they already have taken,
and by federal requirements that they maintain eligibility levels for Medicaid.
gWe donft have a specific list of things we would do if we donft get the
money,h said Erik Kriss, a spokesman for Mr. Patersonfs budget office, gbut we
are looking for the most part at the cut side of the ledger.h