Congress floats temporary patch for CHIP funding shortfalls

https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/cms-chip/congress-floats-temporary-patch-for-chip-funding-shortfalls?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkdKallqUmhOV1prTmpZMyIsInQiOiIzV0NnWXA2amJKeHRybHVFTWl3bCtXMHpQXC92SXRnZyt0WGV0VFFUTkxoQk1UTHlyMGRlTFZkc3V2aXM0cGY5Q1Fndmh0ck5venI0OVJVMWhpNHQrakJWSytReEVBc2N4Y1lwRXBHQmZ2RGR6bk9cLzJxREZIbDk2VWQ2bzFKSmZvIn0%3D&mrkid=959610&utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal

Image result for kicking the can down the road

 

In its short-term appropriations bill, Congress has included a provision aimed at helping states keep their Children’s Health Insurance Programs afloat while lawmakers try to pass a longer-term measure. But that gesture may not go nearly far enough.

The bill would direct the secretary of Health and Human Services to allocate previously unused CHIP funding first to “emergency shortfall states”—or ones that are in danger of running out of money—before other states. The federal government has already been redistributing funding from past years to states that were facing shortfalls in October and November.

Those shortfalls exist because federal funding for CHIP expired Sept. 30, and Congress’ efforts to pass funding reauthorization measure have been stalled by partisan disputes over how to pay for it. The Senate Finance Committee has advanced its version of a CHIP bill—which doesn’t outline any offsets—while a companion bill, containing cuts to other healthcare programs, cleared the House despite Democrats’ objections.

If Congress fails to pass a long-term CHIP funding measure, at least five states and the District of Columbia predict they will run out of money for the program by the end of 2017 or early in January, according to a survey from the Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families. Some states have already sent notices to families advising them to start researching private health insurance options.

The center’s executive director, Joan Alker, also isn’t impressed by the CHIP provision in the short-term appropriations bill, calling it a sign Congress is trying to “kick the can down the road.”

“The longer Congress postpones action on long-term CHIP funding, the more states will be forced to waste time and money developing contingency plans,” she wrote in a blog post, adding, “the more states that send out notices, the more likely it will be that some kids will fall through the cracks.”

Freedom Caucus chair opposes ObamaCare funding pushed by GOP senator

Freedom Caucus chair opposes ObamaCare funding pushed by GOP senator

Image result for band aid on a gunshot wound

 

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) said Wednesday that he opposes ObamaCare funding known as “reinsurance” that was part of a commitment given to Sen. Susan Collins(R-Maine) to help gain her vote for tax reform.

“That’s a totally different thing because that actually puts more money into a failing system where the money will not actually lower premiums and reduce costs in a substantial way,” Meadows told The Hill. “I think that’s a bigger problem.”

Meadows’s objections, and those among House Republicans more broadly, could be an obstacle to the deal that Collins worked out on Tuesday.

Collins said that President Trump had agreed to support the reinsurance funding, as well as another bill from Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.), to help assuage her concerns about repealing ObamaCare’s individual mandate in the tax bill.

Senators said those two ObamaCare bills could be added to a must-pass government funding bill after the tax bill passes the Senate. But Meadows’s objections are an obstacle in that situation.

Reinsurance is government funding that helps pay for the cost of sick enrollees, with the intention of bringing down premiums. But conservatives oppose it as simply throwing more money at the health-care law.

Meadows was more open to the Alexander-Murray bill, but said that he wanted certain concessions for Republicans on that before adding it to a short-term government funding bill, known as a continuing resolution (CR).

“The Alexander-Murray bill, the problem with it is that it was more give on Sen. Alexander’s part than Sen. Murray’s part, so suggesting that Sen. Murray would perhaps be a little bit more engaging in the negotiation, I would certainly be willing to [work with them],” Meadows said.

The Alexander-Murray bill funds key payments to insurers for two years in exchange for more flexibility for states. But conservatives say the flexibility in the bill currently is not substantial.

Meadows said Wednesday he is willing to work on the issue.

“I think with the CR really at this point, I’ve been one that’s been willing to work with our Senate colleagues on a CR,” he said.