Trump Administration Plan to Add Medicaid Work Requirement Stirs Fears
For this blog
post I found an interesting one from the Kaiser Health News titled, “Trump
Administration Plan to Add Medicaid Work Requirement Stirs Fears.” The article
goes on to discuss how Seema Verma, administrator of the Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services, announced how the federal government will implement
work requirements for Medicaid enrollees. This is just the start of changes to
come to Medicaid, others to follow include drug testing for enrollees and a
time limit on the coverage. While there are many opposed to these changes Verma
feels that it would work to improve overall change and hopefully “break the
chains of generational poverty (Kaiser Health News).” This proposal isn’t that
far off from other government programs such as food stamps.
While many
oppose this proposal, I feel this could help control costs and offer greater
care to all. There is a greater sense of achievement in working towards
something rather than sitting back and taking what is given to you. While there
is a large portion of Medicaid recipients that are sick, in school, or taking
care of family members there should be a requirement for them to receive care.
Many states have already proposed to have enrollees work or do community
service as a requirement for enrollment. This proposal was shut down but I feel
it’s a start to having work status be a requirement for enrollment of Medicaid.
Not only would work be required for enrollment it would provide opportunities
for those that are struggling to find a job. If states mandated for work status
to be a requirement they would have to provide services for those people to
find jobs.
One of the problems with this is a large portion of the users of Medicaid are the elderly, who are dual eligibles. Many people residing in nursing homes have their expenses covered by Medicaid.
ReplyDeleteProfessor Bonica is correct, there are many elderly patients that have their nursing home expenses paid for by Medicaid. Medicaid also covers many disabilities. I know the population of coverage is too large to be a case by case basis, but I also understand the government trying to keep costs down and prevent fraudulent usage. As with any political discussion, this will be interesting to see it through fruition.
ReplyDelete