logo
Health department report says Medicaid cuts would harm patients, increase health costs

Health department report says Medicaid cuts would harm patients, increase health costs

Yahoo29-04-2025

Getty Images
Major cuts to Medicaid under discussion in Congress would harm patients, the health care system and the economy in Wisconsin, the state health department said in a report Monday, likely increasing health care costs in the long run rather than saving money.
Depending on what route the federal budget takes to reduce spending on the program, it could cost the state up to $16.8 billion over 10 years, according to the report from the Department of Health Services (DHS).
Medicaid — jointly funded by the federal and state governments — provides health care coverage for low-income Wisconsinites as well as long-term care for elderly people and people with disabilities.
GOP leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives are looking for ways to cut $880 billion from programs under the supervision of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The budget plan hasn't taken formal shape. Because Medicaid is the single largest program in the committee's budget portfolio, however, 'substantial impacts to Medicaid and other health programs are unavoidable,' the report states.
In Wisconsin Medicaid covers about 1 million Wisconsin residents up to the age of 65 for primary health care through BadgerCare Plus. It also covers long-term care for people with disabilities and the elderly under a variety of different programs. Medicaid covers 20% of state residents and 40% of births, along with 38% of Wisconsin children and 60% of state residents in nursing homes.
'Medicaid is an important part of our health care infrastructure,' said Wisconsin Medicaid Director Bill Hanna at a DHS press conference Monday.
One possibility the report considers is a cap on federal coverage for each Medicaid patient.
Currently the federal share is 60% of the health care costs incurred by Wisconsin Medicaid recipients, with the state paying the remaining 40%. 'This arrangement allows state budgets to cope with unforeseen circumstances, such as economic downturns or faster-than-expected medical cost growth,' the DHS report states.
The report states that a per-person ceiling on Medicaid costs, which Congress is reportedly considering, 'would squeeze state budgets and put Wisconsin taxpayers on the hook if medical costs rise quickly, with cuts to benefits and cuts to provider payments.'
Hanna said that there remains 'a lot of unknowns' in how Congress might structure a payment system with a ceiling. The report considers various scenarios under a cap, including low, medium and high increases in health care costs.
Over 10 years, Wisconsin could lose anywhere from $6.4 billion to $16.8 billion, DHS projects.
Other Congressional proposals include adding higher barriers to Medicaid coverage — primarily through a work requirement.
Work requirements have long been found to eliminate eligible people from Medicaid because of the additional burden to demonstrate that they are eligible.
'Adding an additional burden for this population will certainly result in fewer people making it through, even if they are working, just struggling with the paperwork pieces,' Hanna said.
According to the report, Wisconsin Medicaid enrolled about 191,000 childless adults per month in late 2024. Nearly half of them would be exempt from a work requirement.
'It is unknown how many people would lose coverage simply because it would be difficult to report their hours or wages,' the report states. It calculates that about 52,000 people 'would be at the highest risk for losing eligibility.'
Reducing the Medicaid rolls through a work requirement, however, will carry other costs, the report argues.
'It's not like these people disappear,' Hanna said. 'They still need care that now they just won't have the insurance [to cover]. Meaning hospitals again will be picking up additional costs, which gets passed on to all health care consumers.'
A third approach Congress is said to be considering would reduce the federal government's share of the cost to run Medicaid programs. That could cost Wisconsin up to $93 million, the report finds.
While congressional leaders have pointed to data on 'improper payments' in Medicaid in defense of cuts and say they're targeting 'waste, fraud and abuse,' Hanna said members of Congress are conflating two sharply different issues.
'Improper payments are not fraud, waste and abuse,' Hanna said. 'Improper payments are often documentation errors that can be for any number of reasons.'
Wisconsin's last Medicaid audit — required every three years — found an improper payment rate of 0.5%, which was due to clerical errors.
'In Wisconsin, you're definitely not going to find significant savings' in the form of ineligible people getting covered, he said. 'We have a very robust system in Wisconsin with very few errors.'
Facing substantial federal reductions, the state has four policy options, Hanna said: putting in more state funds to keep the program the same; restricting eligibility, so there are fewer Wisconsinites covered; cutting some services that Medicaid now pays for; or cutting what Medicaid pays to doctors, hospitals and other providers.
If the state pays more, then it will have to raise taxes or divert funds from other priorities. But each of the alternatives has other consequences, Hanna said.
Cutting provider rates 'would have major impacts on our state's health care system,' the DHS report states, with hospitals offsetting those by charging other payers more.
If fewer people are eligible for Medicaid, the rate of uninsured people in Wisconsin will increase, potentially driving up health care costs as well.
'Uninsured rates going up means more uncompensated care' for hospitals and other health care providers, Hanna said.
Reducing the services that Medicaid covers, however, would likely mean that people put off getting health care until an illness or condition gets worse, he said — 'which ultimately means we end up spending more.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Suffers Major Blow in Attempt to Overhaul U.S. Elections
Trump Suffers Major Blow in Attempt to Overhaul U.S. Elections

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump Suffers Major Blow in Attempt to Overhaul U.S. Elections

A federal judge blocked portions of a Trump administration order Friday that would have required voters to show proof of citizenship at the voting booth. In a 44-page memorandum, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper ordered that adding layers of difficulty to the voting process would only harm eligible voters by adding significant barriers before they can cast their ballots. Casper further noted that Donald Trump's order was an executive overreach and that the authority to set new election requirements rests with Congress. 'There is no dispute (nor could there be) that U.S. citizenship is required to vote in federal elections and the federal voter registration forms require attestation of citizenship,' Casper wrote. 'The issue here is whether the president can require documentary proof of citizenship where the authority for election requirements is in the hands of Congress, its statutes … do not require it, and the statutorily created [Election Assistance Commission] is required to go through a notice and comment period and consult with the states before implementing any changes to the federal forms for voter registration.' One of five provisions in the executive order blocked by Casper mandated that the Election Assistance Commission collect and record information on provided documentary proof of citizenship in the national voter registration form. Casper's ruling also intervened in a White House decree that ordered the secretary of defense to update the absentee application for overseas voters or Americans in the military, which under Trump's direction would have required such voters to provide proof of citizenship as well as proof of eligibility to vote in their respective states. 'Neither the Constitution nor any statute grants the president the authority to enact' such an order, the judge wrote. Since Trump lost the 2020 election, he and his allies have obsessed over contrived claims of voter fraud—a statistical nonissue in U.S. elections. For instance, a statewide audit out of Georgia, the epicenter of Trump's baseless theory, revealed in September that just 20 noncitizens out of 8.2 million residents existed on the state's voter roll. Out of those 20, only nine participated in elections, years ago, before ID was required as a part of the voter verification process. The other 11 individuals were registered but never actually voted, according to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. Critics argue that restrictions on the front end of the electoral process—such as one-day voting and requiring day-of voter ID, which Trump pledged to apply in December—would minimize voter turnout and limit the democracy's ability to represent its constituents. This would especially be true in high-density areas like the nation's biggest cities, where those stipulations would significantly drain resources (i.e., boost the number of volunteers required) and require more time to process, potentially leading to delays. Trump's continued focus on the nativist nonissue belies the fact that it is, of course, already illegal and impossible for noncitizens to vote in U.S. elections, including in Georgia, where the individuals who fell through the cracks in the system accounted for just 0.00024 percent of the state's voting population. Meanwhile, Trump has said nothing about campaign finance reform, an electoral issue that has, over the last few decades, increasingly placed politicians in the pockets of major corporations and billionaire donors. Instead, the president's allies have actually lobbied him to loosen campaign finance laws, raise limits on campaign contributions, and oppose Federal Election Commission reforms that would help the agency enforce the laws regarding the country's elections.

Israel Bombing Iran Has Already Caused a MAGA Civil War
Israel Bombing Iran Has Already Caused a MAGA Civil War

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Israel Bombing Iran Has Already Caused a MAGA Civil War

MAGA seems to be split on whether continuing to fight and fund Israel's wars against the rest of the Middle East is 'America First' or not. Israel bombed multiple cities and nuclear facilities in Iran Thursday night, dragging its U.S. benefactor into a war against what Prime Minister Netanyahu swears is an imminent nuclear threat from Iran. And while Trump and most GOP officials have fallen in line, a recent X poll suggests disharmony among the base on this issue. 'Explain it to me like I am 5 years old,' wrote MAGA loyalist Laura Loomer. 'How is it not AMERICA FIRST to congratulate those who just made sure Islamists who chant 'DEATH TO AMERICA' and who openly plotted to assassinate President @realDonaldTrump never have an opportunity to have a nuke? Explain it to me.' Loomer was rebuked by some of her own fellow MAGA coalition members. 'Explain to me, how is it America First to openly support those who blatantly disregarded our diplomatic efforts in order to get us dragged into another war on behalf of them?' one 'America First' user replied. 'You can't be America first and support billions of dollars going to a foreign nation to sponsor their war. You can't be America first if you want our servicemen to die on behalf of another nation.' 'Iran has 'almost had a nuke' for 30+ years. Read 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf.' Not crying for Iran. Screw em!' an account named 'Silent Patriot' responded. 'But I also haven't forgotten all the children abused by the Mossad/CIA controlled Epstein/Maxwell. This is not good guys vs bad guys. Bad killing bad.' Republican Senator Lindsey Graham giddily egged on Israel's attack. 'Game on. Pray for Israel,' he posted shortly after Israel bombed Iran multiple times. 'War pig says what?' a prominent MAGA account replied. Using taxpayer dollars to help Israel start a war is certainly not 'America First,' and neither are most of Trump's actions compared to his rhetoric. Only time will tell if his base actually catches on.

RFK Jr team forced Medicaid officials to reveal the immigration status on millions of enrollees to DHS: report
RFK Jr team forced Medicaid officials to reveal the immigration status on millions of enrollees to DHS: report

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

RFK Jr team forced Medicaid officials to reveal the immigration status on millions of enrollees to DHS: report

The Trump administration has handed over the personal data of immigrant Medicaid enrollees to deportation officials, the Associated Press reports. Included in the data are the immigration statuses of millions of Medicaid enrollees, which could be used to identify individuals for deportation as part of President Donald Trump's hard-line immigration crackdown. This has caused notable concern among officials in California due to the raids in Los Angeles by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, supported by troops, which have ignited protests and civil unrest. An internal memo and emails obtained by the AP show that Medicaid officials unsuccessfully attempted to block the data transfer, citing legal and ethical concerns. They were overruled by two top advisers to Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr., who ordered that the dataset be handed over to the Department of Homeland Security, the emails reveal. The data consists of the details of people living in California, Illinois, Washington State, and Washington, D.C., all so-called 'sanctuary states' that permit non-U.S. citizens to enroll in Medicaid programs funded solely by state taxpayer dollars. California Governor Gavin Newsom's office expressed concern that the data would be used for immigration raids supported by the National Guard troops and Marines that President Trump deployed in Los Angeles. 'We deeply value the privacy of all Californians,' a statement said. 'This potential data transfer brought to our attention by the AP is extremely concerning, and if true, potentially unlawful, particularly given numerous headlines highlighting potential improper federal use of personal information and federal actions to target the personal information of Americans.' Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Andrew Nixon said the data was shared legally, 'to ensure that Medicaid benefits are reserved for individuals who are lawfully entitled to receive them.' The data includes addresses, names, Social Security numbers and claims data for enrollees in those states, the AP reported, based on details of the memo and two people familiar with what the states sent to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Officials at CMS were given just 54 minutes on Tuesday to comply with the RFK Jr. team's directive, the outlet reported. The AP states that Nixon wouldn't answer questions about how Homeland Security would use the data, and DHS officials did not respond to requests for comment.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store