Monday, November 15, 2004
Kansas Medicaid to expand as Tennessee program collapses?
[Editorial, "Needed," The Wichita Eagle, 14 November 2004.
"Expanded Medicaid in Tenn. proves too costly," The Wichita Eagle, 11 November 2004.]
The Governor's Healthy Kansas proposal has received a great deal of attention, and just Sunday the editors of The Wichita Eagle chimed in to condemn "partisan" attempts to boil it all down to petty finances:
Almost the moment that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger unveiled their long-awaited HealthyKansas initiative last week, the topic switched from what they would do with it to how they would pay for it: higher tobacco taxes.
That shift of focus reflects the political reality about the Kansas Legislature. Its tax-averse GOP majority may be skeptical of even a tax hike that can be viewed as a user fee on a famously unhealthy product. Though we may see in such an increase the unique opportunity to raise revenue while actually preventing premature deaths by reducing smoking, lawmakers may not concur.
The reality is that this is no simple turf war between callous conservatives and a charitable Governor. As it stands, the proposal does little to address the tremendous growth in the program while at the same time raising a tax to expand the rolls. If the situation in Tennessee can provide any lessons, it is that reform must come first:
The governor announced plans Wednesday to dissolve Tennessee's expanded Medicaid system and drop 430,000 poor and disabled people from the rolls of the health-care program that has been devouring a large chunk of the state budget. Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen said Tennessee will instead return to a cheaper, more basic Medicaid program.
The move followed months of legal wrangling over the TennCare program, whose $7.8 billion price tag was projected to mushroom in coming years.
As the editors of the Eagle point out, "In Kansas, as in every other state in the nation, health care increasingly needs drastic measures." Unfortunately, Kansas Health can by no means be classified as a "drastic measure."
[Editorial, "Needed," The Wichita Eagle, 14 November 2004.
"Expanded Medicaid in Tenn. proves too costly," The Wichita Eagle, 11 November 2004.]
The Governor's Healthy Kansas proposal has received a great deal of attention, and just Sunday the editors of The Wichita Eagle chimed in to condemn "partisan" attempts to boil it all down to petty finances:
Almost the moment that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger unveiled their long-awaited HealthyKansas initiative last week, the topic switched from what they would do with it to how they would pay for it: higher tobacco taxes.
That shift of focus reflects the political reality about the Kansas Legislature. Its tax-averse GOP majority may be skeptical of even a tax hike that can be viewed as a user fee on a famously unhealthy product. Though we may see in such an increase the unique opportunity to raise revenue while actually preventing premature deaths by reducing smoking, lawmakers may not concur.
The reality is that this is no simple turf war between callous conservatives and a charitable Governor. As it stands, the proposal does little to address the tremendous growth in the program while at the same time raising a tax to expand the rolls. If the situation in Tennessee can provide any lessons, it is that reform must come first:
The governor announced plans Wednesday to dissolve Tennessee's expanded Medicaid system and drop 430,000 poor and disabled people from the rolls of the health-care program that has been devouring a large chunk of the state budget. Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen said Tennessee will instead return to a cheaper, more basic Medicaid program.
The move followed months of legal wrangling over the TennCare program, whose $7.8 billion price tag was projected to mushroom in coming years.
As the editors of the Eagle point out, "In Kansas, as in every other state in the nation, health care increasingly needs drastic measures." Unfortunately, Kansas Health can by no means be classified as a "drastic measure."
Comments:
Post a Comment
