Skip to main content

Deep Sixing the CLASS Act

The debt ceiling and deficit reduction command the attention of Congress this week.  Its members are trying to find trillions of dollars of cuts to balance the budget.

So why are some members of Congress trying to do something that is guaranteed to increase the already sky-high cost of the Medicaid program?  Do they want to drive us further into debt?

The Senate Gang of Six wants to deep six the CLASS Act before it takes effect.  The CLASS Act is the new national long term care insurance program that will take effect next year.  It will cost the federal government nothing and is projected to save the Medicaid program billions of dollars.
The Medicaid program, as most U.S. citizens now know, is a federal/state partnership resulting in different plans in every state.  In 2010, roughly 55 million people were insured through state Medicaid programs.  If they were all combined into one plan, Medicaid today would be the single largest health insurer in the nation. 

Of the 55 million people on Medicaid, half are children, and many more were working adults.  But they are not the most expensive people on the program.

The biggest costs in the Medicaid program are incurred on behalf of the five million elderly and nine million people with disabilities on Medicaid – the long term care populations.
Many members of Congress have put the Medicaid entitlement program at the top of their deficit reduction hit list. The federal government paid about $275 billion for Medicaid in 2010, and total state outlays approached $200 billion more.  That constitutes almost a half trillion dollars of health care spending. 

Almost half goes to long term care.  Medicaid typically becomes a long term care payer when an elderly person develops an age-related condition, like Alzheimer’s, which forces them to enter an institution for twenty-four hour care and exhaust their personal savings.  It also pays for younger people with mental retardation, or people with serious mental illness or other chronic diseases. 
The challenge for policymakers wanting to control Medicaid costs is, therefore, to control long term care spending for people with chronic conditions.  Cutting nursing home provider rates has long been a favored strategy, but this has never succeeded in reducing costs for any length of time. 

Policy makers have also explored managed care options.  These don’t work as well with people with chronic conditions as they do with a healthier population, because people with chronic conditions already have significant care needs.
So policy leaders are faced with only two choices. 

The first is for government to deny people care.  This is taking health care rationing to an extreme, choosing to leave older, sicker, and poorer Americans to fend for themselves while the government protects the interests of those who are better off.  This choice is inhumane and morally reprehensible to most people. 
The second is to devise a plan through which all people can pre-pay some of the cost of their long term care through private insurance before they get sick, reducing the government’s financial burden.

When Congress passed the CLASS Act in 2010, it chose the second way, the humane and rational way.    
It didn’t want to burden taxpayers, so it required the CLASS Act to be self-sufficient.  Premiums had to pay the full cost of benefits.  The premiums will only be affordable if younger, healthier people participate.  But if having to rely on Medicaid when they get sick is the alternative, then that may be the only reason people need to purchase a policy.

Earlier this year, the Congressional Budget Office projected that the CLASS Act will save the federal government $83 billion in its first ten years of implementation. That’s a lot of money.
This month, however, the Gang of Six joined an increasingly dissonant chorus wailing against common sense and humane, rational decision-making.  They don’t like the CLASS Act, so they want to get rid of it.  This won’t save anyone – ever – even a dime. 

The law may be flawed in its present form and need some revisions, but it’s the right idea.  Private long term care financing has to be part of our Medicaid long term care financing solution.
It is too soon to tell whether the CLASS Act will be deep-sixed as part of “deficit reduction,” gutted before it takes effect, left to languish unimplemented in 2012, or implemented as promised.

But there’s no way for our elected officials to argue that they care about deficit reduction if they jettison an $83 billion savings in Medicaid.
Unless, that is, they’re planning to choose the morally reprehensible option.

If you have questions about this column, or wish to be put on an email list notifying you when new Our Health Policy Matters columns are published, please contact gionfriddopaul@gmail.com.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Veterans and Mental Illness

On a sultry June morning in our national’s capital last Friday, I visited the Vietnam Veterans Memorial .   Scores of people moved silently along the Wall, viewing the names of the men and women who died in that war.   Some stopped and took pictures.   One group of men about my age surrounded one name for a photo.   Two young women posed in front of another, perhaps a grandfather or great uncle they never got to meet. It is always an incredibly moving experience to visit the Wall.   It treats each of the people it memorializes with respect. There is no rank among those honored.   Officer or enlisted, rich or poor, each is given equal space and weight. It is a form of acknowledgement and respect for which many veterans still fight. Brave Vietnam veterans returned from Southeast Asia to educate our nation about the effects of war and violence. I didn’t know anything about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder when I entered the Connecticut Legislature in the...

Scapegoats and Concepts of a Plan: How Trump Fails Us

When a politician says he has “concepts of a plan” instead of a plan, there is no plan. And yet, that’s where we are with Donald Trump, nine years after he first launched a political campaign promising to replace Obamacare with something cheaper and better, nearly four years after he had four years to try to do just that. And fail. Doubling down during Tuesday’s debate, he claimed he had “concepts of a plan” to replace Obamacare. Really? He’s got nothing. In fact, he sounds just like Nixon sounded in 1968, when he claimed he had a “secret” plan to get us out of Vietnam. That turned out to be no plan at all (remember “Vietnamization?”) and cost us seven more years there and tens of thousands of lives. The Affordable Care Act, about which I wrote plenty in this blog a decade or more ago, wasn’t perfect. But it was a whole lot better than what we had before it – and anything (save a public option) that has been proposed since. Back then, insurers could deny coverage because of pre-exi...

Anxiety and the Presidential Election

Wow. Could the mainstream media do anything more to raise our anxiety levels about the 2024 election? And diminish or negate all the recent accomplishments in our country? Over the past three-and-a-half years, our nation’s economy has been the strongest in the world. Unemployment is at record lows, and the stock market is at record highs. NATO – which last came together to defend the United States in the aftermath of 9/11 – is stronger than ever. Border crossings are down. Massive infrastructure improvements are underway in every state. Prescription drug costs are lower. We finally got out of Afghanistan – evacuating more than 100,000 U.S. citizens and supporters – with just a handful of deaths. Inflation – which rose precipitously in the aftermath of the pandemic – has come back down, and prices in many areas have even begun to decline. And yet, all the media commentators can talk about these days – and they are not “reporters” when they are clearly offering opinions to frame the...