By skyforbes 
What do the Republican “kill Obamacare” bills have in common? They all want to cap Medicaid spending, and convert the program to block grants.
Unfortunately, those unmovable goals are going to collide with an unstoppable force: the aging population of America.
::
As noted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Republican healthcare plans want to “… convert federal Medicaid funding to a per capita allotment and limit growth in federal Medicaid spending beginning in 2020 …”
The bills should have been named budget control acts, because the purpose appears to be reducing the deficit, instead of either extending healthcare to more Americans or enhancing the quality of healthcare in America.
The plans decrease the deficit mainly by reducing Medicaid financing over ten years:
- The “Better Care Reconciliation Act” proposes a deficit reduction between $119B and $321B, with a Medicaid reduction between $772B and $834B
- The “Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson Amendment” has not been scored by the CBO, but considering the Medicaid reduction is the same we can assume the reduction will be the same over time. Avalere, a healthcare think tank, estimates Medicaid reduction of $489B by 2027.
What’s lost in the analysis, though, is what will happen to the millions of future older Americans who are in danger of losing nursing home care through Medicaid. This is the coming collision — cutting Medicaid at the same time that more and more senior adults will need it.
This report from the Kaiser Family Foundation shows the effect aging baby boomers will have on the US Healthcare system:
- In 2012, 70% of Americans who are 65 and older will use Long-Term Services and Supports (LTSS), which includes nursing facility care, adult daycare programs, home health aide services, personal care services, transportation, and supported employment, as well as assistance provided by a family caregiver.
- The numbers of Americans over 65 and over 85 will continue to grow for decades to come.
- About half of these senior adults will need to use Medicaid to pay for their care.
Thus, the following equation is our future:
Aging baby boomers
(+) Those older Americans will need services
(+) 51% of those services funded by Medicaid
(=) MORE money needed for Medicaid, NOT less.
There is no way around the math. If demand for Medicaid services increases AND you cut funding, services somewhere will have to be reduced:
- Cut children’s health care (CHIPS)
- Cut poor adults out of their healthcare
- Cut the disabled out of their healthcare
- OR cut elderly from nursing homes and other services.
The “taker states” — those poor states like Kentucky who “take” more federal funds than they pay in taxes — will be hurt the most.
I am one of those who believe all Americans are entitled to basic food, clothing, shelter, education and healthcare. I actually care about the poor in South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, and Kentucky. I can’t see how these poor states will be able to handle the coming collision between increased demand and decreased funding.
In the face of these numbers and this coming collision, our governor, Matt Bevin, still supports capping and cutting Medicaid, and turning it into a block grant program. I have heard no answer from him as to how he plans on dealing with this problem.
Cutting Medicaid in the face of these coming numbers is a slow-motion disaster. Block grants just shift the problem to each state. Neither is a logical or effective solution.
— 30 —
This article was written by Greg Caudill, a retired healthcare professional, and shared with a number of sites including Forward Kentucky. Our thanks to Greg for submitting it to us!