The so-called “bipartisan” proposal to adopt Medicaid expansion in Kansas is certainly earning Gov. Laura Kelly major political points. The Democrat ran on the liberal policy, and within a year of Kelly assuming office, Kansas is on track to become the latest state to expand the welfare health insurance program.
But while it might make good headlines for Kelly, Medicaid expansion is bad for Kansans. No amount of “bipartisan” posturing will change that.
This deal masquerades as a bipartisan solution to the high cost of healthcare. But it’s basically the same policy that Democrats in states such as California, New York, and New Hampshire championed: bigger government, more dependency on welfare, and more state spending — all at the expense of the truly needy.
Instead of prioritizing Medicaid funds for the state’s most vulnerable, who in the past have had to sit on waiting lists for care, this expansion will allow able-bodied adults to receive healthcare benefits intended for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. Medicaid expansion effectively creates a new class of able-bodied welfare recipients. It diverts resources away from the truly needy.
This expansion proposal would add at least another 262,000 able-bodied adults to Kansas’s Medicaid rolls. But in truth, no one really knows how many people will take advantage of this new government handout. Because in state after state that has expanded Medicaid, actual enrollment in Medicaid expansion has far exceeded projections, straining state budgets and threatening funding for other programs.
Nationwide, Medicaid spending has already grown to more than $603 billion, with nearly one out of every three dollars states spend going to prop up the program. In Kansas, the Medicaid budget has quintupled just since 2000 — and that’s without Medicaid expansion. If the state adopts Medicaid expansion, Kansans will be asked to further foot the bill when enrollment inevitably exceeds projections in Kansas — as it has everywhere else.
Additionally, research shows that a majority of the nation’s expansion enrollees are not working and report no earned income. Instead of promoting work for able-bodied adults, Medicaid expansion is just another government-sponsored trap that is encouraging able-bodied adults to sit back and become dependent on the government — an idea that’s foreign to hardworking Kansans.
Kansans should also be wary of arguments that the plan includes a “work referral” program as a way to combat this growth in dependency. In reality, that line item is just lip service with no actual teeth to get the job done. Arkansas tried the same thing when it expanded Medicaid, but the policy was wildly unsuccessful. Less than 5% of the referred expansion enrollees took any action at all on the work referrals they received. Arkansas has since pursued commonsense work requirements for its Medicaid expansion population to try to help more individuals move from welfare to work.
Kansas should learn from the missteps of states that have already passed Medicaid expansion and felt the ill effects. It would be a mistake to think that this Medicaid expansion is somehow more conservative or that it will produce different results in Kansas than it has anywhere else.
It’s time for policymakers from both sides of the aisle to put aside their political ambitions and find a workable solution to healthcare for all Kansans. It’s not too late for that conversation to begin, but it starts with abandoning this foolish Medicaid expansion plan.
Sam Adolphsen is the policy director at the Foundation for Government Accountability.
