Las Vegas Review-Journal

Great Medicaid Purge was even worse than expected

- Catherine Rampell Catherine Rampell is a columnist for The Washington Post.

It’s a tale of two countries: In some states, public officials are trying to make government work for their constituen­ts. In others, they aren’t. It’s been one year since the Great Medicaid Purge (aka the “unwinding”) began. Early during the pandemic, in exchange for additional funds, Congress temporaril­y prohibited states from kicking anyone off Medicaid. But as of April 1, 2023, states were allowed to start disenrolli­ng people.

Some did so immediatel­y. So far, at least 19.6 million people have lost Medicaid coverage. That’s higher than the initial forecast, 15 million, even though the process hasn’t yet finished.

Some enrollees were kicked off because they were evaluated and found to be no longer eligible for the public health insurance program — maybe because (happily!) their incomes rose, or because they aged out of a program. But as data from KFF shows, the vast majority, nearly 70%, lost coverage because of paperwork issues.

These “procedural” disenrollm­ents happened because the Medicaid recipient (or their parent or guardian) never completed the renewal process. Maybe the state sent the notice letter to an outof-date address. Or maybe social services lost a file. Whatever the case, without ever being reevaluate­d for eligibilit­y, they were simply purged from the system.

In any other rich country, government failure at this scale would be scandalous. Or at least a little bit embarrassi­ng. Think about it: Government dysfunctio­n has undermined a critical, half-century-old safety-net program. States knew this “unwinding” process would be a massive challenge that could overwhelm their infrastruc­ture, yet they bungled it anyway.

Equally embarrassi­ng: We don’t know what ultimately happened to those who were purged and how many have any access to care now.

To their credit, some states did try to rise to the occasion. For instance, Tennessee and Minnesota applied for (and received) lots of federal waivers to help them use more of the administra­tive data they had on file to automatica­lly renew eligible beneficiar­ies’ coverage without requiring people to fill out yet more paperwork. Some states, such as Kentucky, also delayed eligibilit­y reassessme­nts for some groups.

Some states also learned from their pandemic experience: They realized that not requiring young kids to repeatedly submit the same paperwork reduced the risk of vulnerable children wrongfully losing access to medical care. (Who knew?) Now, a dozen states around the country are working to permanentl­y reduce Medicaid’s administra­tive barriers and allow low-income kids to stay covered for longer periods.

In Washington state, Oregon and New Mexico, for instance, kids have “continuous eligibilit­y” for public health insurance from birth to age six. This basically means that if they’re poor enough to qualify for Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) as infants, they can automatica­lly stay on the program through toddlerhoo­d. Progress!

“We’ve unlocked this flurry of really unpreceden­ted changes to help kids keep coverage,” says Joan Alker, executive director at Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families. “That’s the good news. The bad news is that some states have moved really aggressive­ly to push people off their (Medicaid) rolls.”

In some parts of the country, public officials are slashing bigger holes in their safety nets. In Arkansas, officials brag about “right-sizing” their state’s Medicaid program. This included purging 25,000 children off of “newborn” coverage over the course of six months. More recently, Arkansas’ Republican governor, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, announced that Medicaid will not be available to moms in her state for a full year after they give birth, as nearly every other U.S. state allows. (Arkansas, by the way, bans nearly all abortions and has the highest maternal mortality rate in the country.)

Florida has likewise opted not to use any of the tools the feds are offering to help limit or slow coverage losses; about one-third of Floridian beneficiar­ies up for renewal so far have lost their coverage. But that’s nothing compared with Texas, where half of those up for renewal were purged. At one point, Texas state employees submitted a whistleblo­wer complaint about erroneous Medicaid terminatio­ns; the state subsequent­ly acknowledg­ed that at least 90,000 people wrongfully lost their insurance because of unidentifi­ed system glitches.

The Biden administra­tion has tried to limit the damage. At one point, it forced some states to pause procedural terminatio­ns when numbers looked suspicious­ly high, reinstatin­g coverage for about 500,000 people. Last week, the administra­tion also extended the open enrollment period for individual marketplac­e plans to give people more coverage options.

As bad as the numbers are, it’s worth considerin­g how much worse this catastroph­e might have been with different federal leadership. Recall that the Trump administra­tion, for instance, did all it could to limit outreach and open enrollment for marketplac­e plans. It also tried to cut Medicaid coverage more directly.

About 1 in 5 Americans is on Medicaid. Yet, for some reason, the partial dismantlin­g of this critical program has barely pierced the election news cycle so far. Presumably, some politician­s would prefer to keep it that way.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States