AHCCCS
AHCCCS NOT A Model for The Nation
September 25 2009 09:54
Rep. Matt Heinz recently wrote an op/ed for The Arizona Republic titled, “AHCCCS a model for nation.” Although on many levels AHCCCS is a very well-managed program, without continual cash infusions from the taxpayers, AHCCCS is a model for financial instability and care rationing down the road.
AHCCCS is Arizona’s Medicaid program that provides free healthcare for Arizona’s poor. The state’s program has doubled in size over the past 10 years and just in the past four months, enrollment has increased by another 100,000. AHCCCS is one of Arizona’s largest programs and eats up 16 percent of the state’s entire budget at a cost of $1.5 billion to the General Fund.
The state deficit and the growing need is straining the program to the point where it may be necessary to re-evaluate which medical services may need to be eliminated to control costs. The program may need to cut reimbursement rates to providers even further.
AHCCCS already underpays physicians and hospitals at rates 20 to 30 percent below the actual cost of care, shifting costs onto private insurance. In true trickle down fashion, those costs are passed onto businesses and employees who must pay higher costs to receive the same type of health coverage.
AHCCCS is currently an unsustainable model and from various bills floating around in the U.S. Senate, the program’s costs will likely increase again by $1.2 billion to $5.9 billion depending upon how many people are eligible for the program.
Clearly Arizona’s Medicaid system cannot sustain itself. It is expanding rapidly, and has a detrimental affect on the private sector. Based on these factors it is unclear how AHCCCS can be a national model for the healthcare reform debate.
Some better ideas for healthcare reform may include incentives for wellness and prevention care and perhaps allow individuals to purchase health care plans across state lines, which would drive down costs and provide a wider menu of options.
AHCCCS is Arizona’s Medicaid program that provides free healthcare for Arizona’s poor. The state’s program has doubled in size over the past 10 years and just in the past four months, enrollment has increased by another 100,000. AHCCCS is one of Arizona’s largest programs and eats up 16 percent of the state’s entire budget at a cost of $1.5 billion to the General Fund.
The state deficit and the growing need is straining the program to the point where it may be necessary to re-evaluate which medical services may need to be eliminated to control costs. The program may need to cut reimbursement rates to providers even further.
AHCCCS already underpays physicians and hospitals at rates 20 to 30 percent below the actual cost of care, shifting costs onto private insurance. In true trickle down fashion, those costs are passed onto businesses and employees who must pay higher costs to receive the same type of health coverage.
AHCCCS is currently an unsustainable model and from various bills floating around in the U.S. Senate, the program’s costs will likely increase again by $1.2 billion to $5.9 billion depending upon how many people are eligible for the program.
Clearly Arizona’s Medicaid system cannot sustain itself. It is expanding rapidly, and has a detrimental affect on the private sector. Based on these factors it is unclear how AHCCCS can be a national model for the healthcare reform debate.
Some better ideas for healthcare reform may include incentives for wellness and prevention care and perhaps allow individuals to purchase health care plans across state lines, which would drive down costs and provide a wider menu of options.
Legislature To Hear AHCCCS & Unemployment Insurance Bills Today
April 21 2009 10:36
The House and Senate are hearing identical bills today in their respective Commerce Committees dealing with AHCCCS eligibility and Unemployment Insurance.
HB2631 (eligibility determination; AHCCCS) fixes a problem with last year’s Democratic budget that changed the AHCCCS requirement of re-applying every six months instead of the annual application requirement.
Federal stimulus dollars are contingent upon compliance with a prohibition of reducing the maintenance of effort. The “stimulus” legislation required all modifications to have been made by July 1, 2008. Since the modification did not take affect until September 26, 2008 the Legislature is now required to fix it.
HB2632 (unemployment insurance; benefits) extends the length of unemployment benefits with no programmatic changes. When the federal money is no longer available, the state will not have to continue the extension.
If the bills pass out of Commerce Committee, they will go to Caucus tomorrow and more than likely onto the Committee of the Whole (COW) and Third Read on Thursday. This means both bills could go up to Governor Brewer’s desk as early as Thursday.
Both bills have an emergency clause meaning they have to pass with a two-thirds majority so the bills need 41 votes in the House and 21 votes in the Senate.
HB2631 (eligibility determination; AHCCCS) fixes a problem with last year’s Democratic budget that changed the AHCCCS requirement of re-applying every six months instead of the annual application requirement.
Federal stimulus dollars are contingent upon compliance with a prohibition of reducing the maintenance of effort. The “stimulus” legislation required all modifications to have been made by July 1, 2008. Since the modification did not take affect until September 26, 2008 the Legislature is now required to fix it.
HB2632 (unemployment insurance; benefits) extends the length of unemployment benefits with no programmatic changes. When the federal money is no longer available, the state will not have to continue the extension.
If the bills pass out of Commerce Committee, they will go to Caucus tomorrow and more than likely onto the Committee of the Whole (COW) and Third Read on Thursday. This means both bills could go up to Governor Brewer’s desk as early as Thursday.
Both bills have an emergency clause meaning they have to pass with a two-thirds majority so the bills need 41 votes in the House and 21 votes in the Senate.