White House says ‘Medicare for All’ bad for patients’ health—and their wallets
The Trump administration issued its annual economic review, and in the document the White House says that a single-payer health system—branded “Medicare for All”—would harm patients’ health.
The report, prepared by the White House Council of Economic Advisers, warns that such a policy would cut the gross domestic product by 9% and cut after-tax incomes by 19%. In addition, the system overhaul would boost the federal budget, which could lead to care shortages and long wait times, the council said.
“M4A will be neither more efficient nor cheaper than the current system, and it could adversely affect health,” the council wrote. (Report—PDF)
Iowa Senate approves Medicaid work requirements
Iowa’s Republican-controlled Senate voted to approve a plan that would institute work requirements in the state’s Medicaid program, particularly for those in the expansion population.
The impacts of the requirements on enrollment remain unclear. However, state officials that it would cost an additional $5 million in the first year and $12 million in the second to administer.
Iowa’s work requirements would require members to work or volunteer an average of 20 hours a week over a six-month period. If those requirements are not met, coverage would be terminated.
“If there’s nothing holding you back except your own decision not to go forward, we’re going to bump you forward,” Sen. Jason Schultz, the bill’s floor manager said. “It’s not only good policy, it’s moral.” (Des Moines Register)
Connecticut public option plan clears key committee
A Connecticut bill that would establish a public insurance option in the state got a thumbs up from a key committee.
The state General Assembly’s Insurance and Real Estate Committee gave the green light to a measure that would create a state advisory council to develop a statewide public option, alongside a second bill that would open the state’s health plan to nonprofits and small businesses with 50 or fewer employees.
The council’s recommendations would be subject to a second round of legislative approval, so the earliest launch date is estimated to be 2021. (The CT Mirror)