Why would a fiscal conservative support the reauthorization of Medicaid Expansion (SB313)?
Reauthorization as a managed care program reduces the actuarial cost from 22.7 million dollars to 10.0 million dollars.
Source: Millman p.59
If NH did not reauthorize Medicaid Expansion, NH would have to spend more money to meet its obligations.
NH would have to spend 4.0 million dollars for State Employees currently covered under Medicaid Expansion.
NH would have to pay 3.0 million dollars for inmates currently covered under Medicaid Expansion.
Medicaid Expansion paid 17.3 million in FY18 for behavioral health programs targeting our opioid epidemic.
The total cost to NH to fund these 3 items without Medicaid Expansion would be 24.3 million dollars.
Sources: Lewin Group p. 22 and April 2017 report to Senate Finance p. 15
2019 individual insurance market rates released by the NH Insurance Department on Aug 6 demonstrate that SB313 not only saved money for the State of NH, but also will save money for consumers with a 6.75% rate decrease in the individual market.
Perhaps we should ask why a fiscal conservative would vote to have NH spend 24.3 million dollars instead of 10 million dollars?
Reauthorization as a managed care program reduces the actuarial cost from 22.7 million dollars to 10.0 million dollars.
Source: Millman p.59
If NH did not reauthorize Medicaid Expansion, NH would have to spend more money to meet its obligations.
NH would have to spend 4.0 million dollars for State Employees currently covered under Medicaid Expansion.
NH would have to pay 3.0 million dollars for inmates currently covered under Medicaid Expansion.
Medicaid Expansion paid 17.3 million in FY18 for behavioral health programs targeting our opioid epidemic.
The total cost to NH to fund these 3 items without Medicaid Expansion would be 24.3 million dollars.
Sources: Lewin Group p. 22 and April 2017 report to Senate Finance p. 15
2019 individual insurance market rates released by the NH Insurance Department on Aug 6 demonstrate that SB313 not only saved money for the State of NH, but also will save money for consumers with a 6.75% rate decrease in the individual market.
Perhaps we should ask why a fiscal conservative would vote to have NH spend 24.3 million dollars instead of 10 million dollars?