ThinkProgress Logo

Health

Why The Federal Government Must Increase The Medicaid Matching Rate To The States

June 30th — today — is the day the enhanced federal match for Medicaid funding that was included in the 2009 stimulus package (and extended in late 2010) expires, leaving “states struggling to sustain health care’s safety net,” Judy Feder and John Halahan remind us in this Kaiser Health News column. The problem with the current Medicaid structure is that it’s counter cyclical: the rolls swell when the economy turns south and people lose their jobs. But at that point states can’t afford to expand their programs because tax revenues have also declined. Currently, Medicaid enrollment still remains high and “states’ revenues are not back to their prerecession levels.”

So what to do? Feder and Halahan propose extending the increased federal match — when states need it most — and asking them to pay back the loan once the economy recovers. Otherwise, state programs will take a hit and the economic activity that resulted from additional spending on health care services (and all the purchases that supported) will come to a standstill.

The Council On State Governments estimates that for 20 states, the Medicaid match rate in the 2012 fiscal year will actually be lower than the pre-recession rate in the 2008 fiscal year. Seventeen states will experience a rate increase (although the rates will still fall below the enhanced rates provided by federal stimulus funds) and 13 and the District of Columbia will have the same match rates in 2012 as they did in 2008. Here are the states that will likely experience the largest Medicaid cuts and adverse economic consequences if the increased federal contribution is not sustained:

Politics

Major Karl Rove Donor Ken Langone On Debt Negotiations: ‘I Should Pay More Taxes’

Investor and Republican financier Ken Langone

In Feb. 2010, Karl Rove and operatives from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce convened a meeting of mostly Wall Street titans to fund a set of Republican groups designed to run attacks on Democrats. Ken Langone, a wealthy Wall Street investor and controversial former head of the New York Stock Exchange, was one of the very first major donors to the Rove campaign groups, which now include American Action Network, American Action Forum, American Crossroads, and American Crossroads GPS.

Yesterday on the Fox Business Network, Langone was asked by host Lou Dobbs about how to kickstart the economy. Langone repeatedly said high unemployment is the greatest problem, but conceded that corporations are doing better than ever. To get things going, Langone explained, everyone would have to feel “pain.” In a sharp contrast with his friend Karl Rove, Langone said wealthy guys like him “should pay more taxes”:

LANGONE: Well I say this as a devout Republican. I think in these negotiations, I think number one guys like me, I’ve said this before, there’s a caveat. I shouldn’t get Social Security. I should pay more taxes.

Watch it:

Langone says higher taxes on wealthy individuals like himself should go “entirely to paying down the debt.”

As President Obama and Democrats have pushed to include modest tax increases on the wealthy as part of the debt negotiations, as well as a repeal on tax subsidies to big oil companies (deemed a tax hike by some conservatives and those in the media), Rove’s front groups have hit back with nasty attack ads claiming any tax increase would hurt the economy. Perhaps Rove should listen more to his own wealthy donors.

Climate Progress

The Radiative Forcing of the CO2 Humans Have Put in the Air Equals 1 Million Hiroshima Bombs a Day

Aren’t we too puny to rival the great forces of nature that shape our planet?

Certainly some prominent [skeptics] have said as much.

But the facts show that we are fundamentally impacting planet Earth in unprecedented ways, and we’ve known about it for a century.

“The radiative forcing of the CO2 we have already put in the atmosphere in the last century is … the equivalent in energy terms to almost half a billion Hiroshima bombs each year.”  Radiative forcing is a measure of how out of balance the Earth’s energy budget is.  “When there’s more energy radiating down on the planet than there is radiating back out to space, something’s going to have to heat up.”

Australian scientists have been contributing to a multi-part series, “Clearing Up the Climate Debate” at “The Conversation” website.  I’m reposting some of the best.  Here, Mike Sandiford, Director of the Melbourne Energy Institute and Professor of Geology explores the staggering ways we influence the the globe and the climate.

Read more

NEWS FLASH

Fmr. GOP Sen. Alan Simpson Calls Republican Refusal To Raise Revenue ‘Absolute Bullshit’ | Former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson blasted his intransigent GOP colleagues on the Hill today for failing to reach a deal on the deficit. The blunt-talking co-chairman of President Obama’s bipartisan fiscal reform commission slammed Republicans for kowtowing to Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist (“Republicans can’t be in thrall to him”) and pushed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to stand fast on the August 2 deadline. Surveying the lay of the current fiscal land, Simpson said, “We’re at 15 percent revenue, and historically it’s been closer to 20 percent.” He added, “We’ve never had a war without a tax, and now we’ve got two. … Absolute bullshit.”

NEWS FLASH

DOJ To Drop Investigations Into CIA Officials Involved In Torture | The National Journal reports that Attorney General Eric Holder announced today that the Justice Department “will end a wide-ranging probe into the CIA’s past interrogation, rendition and detention activities but launch a formal criminal investigation into agency officials involved in the deaths of two detainees.” Over at Danger Room, Spencer Ackerman says that “it’s one of the greatest gifts the Justice Department could have given the CIA as David Petraeus takes over the agency.”

Yglesias

Government By Lottery

One thing that occurs to me on this jury duty day is that I think there’s a decent case to be made that we ought to rely on lotteries more as a tool of governance. There’s an obvious appeal to something like town meeting direct democracy, but also some obvious logistical problems with it. The main alternative we’ve come up with is representative democracy, where you vote for some folks to serve as a legislature on your behalf. This has a lot of virtues and I by no means think can or should be dispensed with entirely. But it also does have its limits and problems, and isn’t in any obvious way “fairer” than selecting representatives at random.

There seem to me to be plenty of municipalities across America that are too big for town meetings, but still sufficiently rinky dink that they don’t want full time professional legislatures. Many of these places already use a council-manager system of government where the idea is for day-to-day running of the city to be in the hands of a hired professional team, with the legislature just serving as a kind of generic check and authorizing tool. In those cases, wouldn’t a legislature chosen by lottery make a certain amount of sense? The city manager would basically run the city, and the council wouldn’t do much other than approve budgets and if necessary fire the manager and hire a new one. It seems to me that it would work fine, and be actually fairer and more democratic than the current practice.

I suppose this is a solution in search of a problem, but America in general seems to me to suffer from a kind of weird elections-mania and I’m always looking for opportunities to serve democratic values without all this constant proliferation of campaigning.

Economy

Paul Ryan Falsely Claims That Food Stamp Program Is ‘Rife With Fraud’

In addition to releasing a radical budget that dismantled Medicare while likely raising taxes on the middle class, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) has suggested a radical reworking of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps). Under his plan, which would simply block grant SNAP to state governments, “SNAP would largely lose the ability to respond to rising need, forcing states during economic downturns to cut benefits or create waiting lists for needy families.”

In order to build support for his dismantling of the food safety net, Ryan has been spreading falsehoods regarding SNAP. Case in point, during a question and answer session hosted by the Spolight on Poverty and Opportunity, Ryan claimed that SNAP is “rife with fraud“:

Help us figure out how to reform these programs so they can grow at more sustainable rates and so that they really work. Help us reduce the redundancy and the duplicativeness of programs. Help us figure out how to make sure that these things are actually getting the assistance to the people who really need them.

Look at SNAP for example. You know we get all these reports. We get hearings and GAO and reports about how the SNAP program is rife with fraud, how it’s not getting the assistance to the people who need it, how there’s no incentive to – we’ve got a guy who won a lottery that’s on the program you know. Help us figure out how to reform these programs so that they can work better.

Listen here:

But as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found, SNAP errors are currently at an all-time low, with errors accounting for less than three percent of the program’s cost:

To ensure that benefits are provided only to eligible households and in the proper amounts, SNAP has one of the most rigorous quality control systems of any public benefit program and, in recent years, has achieved its lowest error rates on record. In fiscal year 2009, even as caseloads were rising, states set new record lows for error rates. The net loss due to errors equaled only 2.7 percent of program costs in 2009. There is no evidence that program errors are driving up SNAP spending.

During the recession, SNAP has been critical for reducing poverty and pumping money into local economies. So in order to push his radical revamp of the program, Ryan is simply inventing reasons to attack its current structure, which is actually functioning quite well.

Politics

Fringe Anti-Choice Group Pressuring Candidates To Sign Extreme Pledge

Our guest blogger is Elon Green, a freelance writer living in Brooklyn.

The conservative Susan B. Anthony list has been attempting to get GOP presidential candidates to sign a pledge committing them to a fierce anti-abortion agenda, which would include: appointing anti-abortion judges to the Supreme Court, the Cabinet and the Executive Branch; defunding Planned Parenthood; and signing into law the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act. A week ago, the head of Susan B. Anthony List, Marjorie Dannenfelser, gave former Gov. Jon Huntsman an ultimatum:

DANNENFELSER: I take him at his word except that when he did write his own pledge, he excluded the appointments piece and that gives us great concern. I do think — I know that Huntsman — we have seven days for Huntsman to sign, however he’s communicated that he doesn`t sign pledges. And I think that will be a very big problem for him if he doesn’t.

TODD: Do you plan on — see, you have this pledge. Do you plan on spending money on behalf of those who sign the pledge or do you spend money and advertise against those who did not?

DANNENFELSER: Well, we will definitely support in every way that we possibly can in word and in deed the folks who sign it. Part of politics is communicating who has not done what you like to do.

TODD: So you plan on doing that. So people –

DANNENFELSER: Without question. Yes.

The deadline has passed. And this morning, Dannenfelser wrote an email to her SBA list attacking Huntsman, calling it “extremely disappointing to see another candidate who is running on a pro-life message refuse to sign the promise to voters that he will act as a leader for our movement if elected to the White House.” For his part, Huntsman has said he won’t sign political pledges of any kind.

Mitt Romney, however, is not averse to signing pledges. Yesterday, he pledged his support to Cut, Cap and Balance, a promise not to raise the debt ceiling short of “substantial” deficit-reducing spending cuts, spending caps and a balanced budget amendment. Last week, he signed Grover Norquist’s Taxpayer Protection Pledge, which he happily supported during the last Presidential election cycle. But Romney has drawn a line in the sand: He will not, he says, sign the Susan B. Anthony List’s four-pronged pledge. The pledge, Romney wrote two weeks ago in The National Review, is “overly broad and would have unintended consequences.”

But Dannenfelser has taken a gentler tone towards Romney, saying “we look forward to [Romney’s] signature on this important promise to the cause.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Tim Pawlenty are all signatories of the SBA pledge, while Cain has abstained — albeit in Cain’s case, his decision is not a matter of anti-abortion convictions. Congress, he said, would have to “advance the legislation” before he could sign it.

Bachmann, who has risen in the polls on the strength of her social conservatism, has used Romney’s inaction to her advantage. She told a South Carolina audience she takes Romney “at his word” that he’s pro-life. But, she noted, “he’s had some issues with that in his past.”

NEWS FLASH

UPDATED: One Kansas Abortion Provider Will Receive A State License | Via the Associated Press: “A Planned Parenthood clinic in Kansas has been denied a state license to allow it to continue performing abortions as of Friday. That means Kansas will become the only state without a clinic or doctor’s office performing abortions, at least temporarily.” Several clinics and doctors are suing the state over the new regulations.

Update

The Associated Press is now reporting that “one of the state’s three providers will get a license so that it can continue performing abortions as of Friday. The department wouldn’t name the provider.”

Climate Progress

Climate Crisis: In Drought-Stricken Texas, Drillers Use Billions Of Gallons Of Water For Fracking

Texas is facing the driest eight-month period in its recorded history, a drought so bad that Texans are praying for hurricanes to get rain. But as fields dry up and the state’s reservoirs run dry, “plastic-lined pits holding millions of gallons of blue-green water are tucked away in fields chock-full of withering mesquite trees.”

The much-needed water, it turns out, is being pumped out of underground aquifers by oil companies that are using it for hydraulic fracking.

Not only does fracking come with potentially huge air pollution costs, it consumes billions of gallons of water each year, much of which cannot be recovered and reused for more imminent needs:

It can take millions of gallons of fluid to hydraulically fracture, or “frack,” a single well. Only about 20 percent to 25 percent on average of the water is recovered, while the rest disappears underground, never to be seen again.

The Texas Water Development Board estimates the total amount of water used for fracking statewide in 2010 was 13.5 billion gallons. That’s likely to more than double by 2020, and decline gradually each decade after that until dropping back down to current levels between 2050 and 2060.

We’re using scarce resources to get scarce resources,” said John Christmann, Permian Region vice president for Apache Corp., a Houston-based oil and gas company that operates in almost every West Texas county.

Since October, parts of Texas have received as little as a tenth-of-an-inch of rain, forcing water restrictions on residents and leaving the ground dry and barren, resulting in massive wildfires that now cover large swaths of the state. The water shortage has gotten so bad that even Gov. Rick Perry (R), a staunch protector of the state’s oil industry, recently signed legislation forcing companies to disclose how much water they use in fracking operations.

Instead of using the plentiful amounts of non-potable water Texas has beneath its surface, these companies have decided to deprive the state of a valuable resource in a time of need. And for Texas, the problem is two-fold: not only is it losing its water, it’s losing it to companies who use a process that may be so destructive and dirty, not even coal mining compares.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up