COVID-19 & Healthcare

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

After much posturing on the part of most of the Republicans in the AZ House of Representatives (which is a continuous activity there), the state budget/Medicaid restoration package of bills passed by the Senate three weeks ago is finally moving.

Well, one of the bills, anyway…

An agenda has been posted for a meeting of the House Appropriations Committee for Monday morning at 10 a.m. in HHR1.

The agenda has two bills, and only one of them is related to the budget.  Related directly, anyway –

SB1492, the budget bill with the Medicaid restoration language; and part of the price –

A striker to SB1069, with language from the Center for Arizona Theocracy Policy that both attacks abortion clinics and bars Medicaid providers from performing abortions.

In
addition, while no amendment language has been posted as of this
writing, don't be shocked if there is a move to removed the Medicaid
language from SB1492.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Ezra Klein reports on a new study by the Rand Corporation today in the Wonkbook: The terrible deal for states rejecting Medicaid:

Curious why some hardcore conservative governors, including Jan
Brewer of Arizona and Rick Scott of Florida, are fighting with their
legislators to accept Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion? A new study in the journal Health Affairs article will clear it up.

The study, by the Rand corporation, looks at the 14 states that have
said they will opt out of the new Medicaid funds. It finds that the
result will be they get $8.4 billion less in federal funding, have to
spend an extra $1 billion in uncompensated care, and end up with about
3.6 million fewer insured residents.

So then, the math works out like this: States rejecting the expansion
will spend much more, get much, much less, and leave millions of their
residents uninsured. That’s a lot of self-inflicted pain to make a
political point.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Last month there was the economics debunking of the Reinhart-Rogoff thesis, which led to a back and forth argument between traditional economists (Keynesians) and conservative economists. In the end, Reinhart-Rogoff were proved wrong and Paul Krugman proved right. Of course, the conservative economists refused to concede they were wrong. For them it is a matter of faith, not science (which means they should not be taken seriously as economists).

This month, a new economics back and forth argument has developed between economists. Karoli reports Forbes Tells The Truth, Then Lies About Obamacare:

Last week, Forbes blogger Rick Ungar admitted he was wrong about Obamacare and insurance rates, following the news that California's rates were actually less than expected.

For quite some time, I have been predicting that
Obamacare would likely mean higher insurance rates in the individual
market for the “young immortals” and others under the age of 40. At the
same time, my expectation was that those who fall into the older age
ranges would benefit greatly as their premium charges would be lowered
thanks to the Affordable Care Act.

It is increasingly clear that I had it wrong.

That must have come as a shock to the Forbes community, so they quickly put Avik Roy, their corporate pharma shill, on the job. His post making the claim that rates double is incredibly disingenuous on a number of levels.

If you’re a 25 year old male non-smoker, buying insurance
for yourself, the cheapest plan on Obamacare’s exchanges is the
catastrophic plan, which costs an average of $184 a month. (By
“average,” I mean the median monthly premium across California’s 19
insurance rating regions.)

The next cheapest plan, the “bronze” comprehensive plan, costs $205 a
month. But in 2013, on eHealthInsurance.com (NASDAQ:EHTH), the median
cost of the five cheapest plans was only $92.

In other words, for the typical 25-year-old male non-smoking
Californian, Obamacare will drive premiums up by between 100 and 123
percent.

Under Obamacare, only people under the age of 30 can participate in
the slightly cheaper catastrophic plan. So if you’re 40, your cheapest
option is the bronze plan. In California, the median price of a bronze
plan for a 40-year-old male non-smoker will be $261.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona legislature is still in session as it engages in a protracted battle over Governor Jan Brewer's Medicaid (AHCCCS) restoration/expansion plan and the state budget, the one constitutionally prescribed duty of the legislature, which is due by July 1. Arizona Constitution, Article 9, Section 4.

Today marks the end of the temporary one-cent sales tax approved by voters, resulting in a substantial loss of sales tax revenue. State’s 3-year-old temporary sales tax ends today:

The tax has raised $2.7 billion during its three-year run, with
two-thirds of it going to the K-12 system. The remaining third was split
between health care and public safety.

With the expiration of the temporary one-cent sales tax, the corporate welfare tax-giveaway plan laughingly labeled a "jobs bill" that passed in a special session back in 2011 will now begin to phase in over time beginning with FY 2014 (July 1), further reducing state revenues:

Senate Bill 1001 (2011) is
filled with tax breaks and incentives for businesses large and small.
The legislative budget office estimated its cost at $538 million by 2018, when all the tax cuts
are phased in.

Brewer's advisors acknowledged that there
is no guarantee the changes would yield enough new investment and jobs
to offset the anticipated revenue loss.

Several other business tax cut measures enacted since 2011 are also scheduled to be phased in over time beginning with FY 2014 (July 1).