Las Vegas Sun

October 30, 2014

Currently: 59° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Obama’s health care overhaul turns into a sprint

Image

Charles Dharapak / AP

In this March 23, 2010, file photo, President Barack Obama reaches for a pen to sign the health care bill in the East Room of the White House in Washington.

WASHINGTON — Its place assured alongside Medicare and Medicaid, President Barack Obama's health care law is now in a sprint to the finish line, with just 11 months to go before millions of uninsured people can start signing up for coverage.

But there are hurdles in the way.

Republican governors who derided "Obamacare" will now have to decide whether they somehow can join the team. And the administration could stumble under the sheer strain of carrying out the complex legislation, or get tripped up if budget talks with Congress lead to scaling back the plan.

"The clarity brought about by the election is critical," said Andrew Hyman of the nonpartisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. "We are still going to be struggling through the politics, and there are important policy hurdles and logistical challenges. But we are on a very positive trajectory." Hyman oversees efforts to help states carry out the law.

In the two years since passage of the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration has been consumed with planning and playing political defense. Now it must execute.

States must notify Washington a week from Friday whether they will be setting up new health insurance markets, called exchanges, in which millions of households and small businesses will shop for private coverage. The Health and Human Services Department will run the exchanges in states that aren't ready or willing.

Open enrollment for exchange plans is scheduled to start Oct. 1, 2013, and coverage will be effective Jan. 1, 2014.

In all, more than 30 million uninsured people are expected to gain coverage under the law. About half will get private insurance through the exchanges, with most receiving government help to pay premiums.

The rest, mainly low-income adults without children at home, will be covered through an expansion of Medicaid. While the federal government will pay virtually all the additional Medicaid costs, the Supreme Court gave states the leeway to opt out of the expansion. That gives states more leverage but also adds to the uncertainty over how the law will be carried out.

A steadying force within the administration is likely to be HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. The former Kansas governor has said she wants to stay until the law is fully enacted. "I can't imagine walking out the door in the middle of that," she told The Kansas City Star during the Democratic convention. Her office declined to comment.

Republicans will be leading more than half the states, so governors are going to be her main counterparts.

Some, like Rick Perry of Texas and Rick Scott of Florida, have drawn a line against helping carry out Obama's law. In other states, voters have endorsed a hard stance. Missouri voters passed a ballot measure Tuesday that would prohibit establishment of a health insurance exchange unless the Legislature approves. State-level challenges to the federal law will continue to be filed in court.

But other GOP governors have been on the fence, awaiting the outcome of the election. All eyes will be on pragmatists like Chris Christie of New Jersey and Bob McDonnell of Virginia, whose states have done considerable planning of their own to set up exchanges.

"Republican governors are at the center of the health care universe right now," said Michael Ramlet, health policy director at the American Action Forum, a center-right think tank. "They do not have a uniform position across the board."

GOP governors are pressing Sebelius on whether the administration will approve partial, less costly Medicaid expansions. There has been no ruling yet.

On health insurance exchanges, some governors whose states aren't likely to be completely ready are considering the administration's offer of running the new markets through a partnership.

"The real question for Republican governors is, 'Are you going to let the feds come into your state?'" Ramlet said. "The question for the Obama administration is whether they are going to have more flexibility."

Major regulations due shortly and covering issues including exchange operations, benefits and protections for people with pre-existing health problems could signal the administration's willingness to compromise.

A recent check by The Associated Press found 17 states and the District of Columbia on track to setting up their own exchanges, while nine have decided not to do so. The federal government could end up running the new markets in half or more of the states.

The states on track include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia.

The nine definitely not setting up exchanges are Alaska, Florida, Louisiana, Maine, New Hampshire, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Wisconsin. Missouri and others are likely to join the list.

As far as Medicaid, 11 states and the District of Columbia have indicated they will expand their programs, while six have said they will not. That leaves more than 30 states undecided.

The states definitely expanding Medicaid include California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, and Washington. Those declining include Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas.

On Capitol Hill, Republicans say if a budget deal is going to include tax increases, it must also come with cuts to the health care law, or money-saving delays in its implementation.

While major changes can't be ruled out, they don't seem very likely to former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., who is close to the administration.

"I think Democrats are increasingly emboldened about the health care act," Daschle said. "The president won re-election partly by defending it. There is a new dynamic around the health care effort."

Republican attempts to amend the law will continue, he added, but outright repeal is no longer a possibility. "Budgetary issues will continue to be a big question mark," said Daschle.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 6 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. "On Capitol Hill, Republicans say if a budget deal is going to include tax increases, it must also come with cuts to the health care law, or money-saving delays in its implementation."

    This is where President Obama needs to take a harder line. Shut down government the way Clinton did, that woke up the Republicans before and will again. Republicans do not know how to negotiate unless the populace applies pressure...call there bluff and shut down government if they do not reasonably negotiate.

    Trying to use non-germane 'trades' is standard for Republicans. They are famous for attaching abortion amendments to any legislation they do not like causing Democrats to vote against the legislation because of their ridiculous amendments they KNOW will kill legislation...commonly called 'poison pill' amendments.

  2. And big business rushes to cut all full time employees to part time status to avoid having to offer them insurance. (loophole, he he he)

  3. Obama is already going to get a tax rise in the largest taxpayer group Jan 1, those making under $34,000, from 10 to 15% and a decrease for the child deduction from $1000 to $500 per kid, a tax on the working poor if you will. That isn't enough? He needs more taxes? Starting Jan 1 all working people will see their paychecks shrink. That is just a fact. All this "we'll only raise taxes on those who make over 250K a year" was a lie.

  4. @MickeyA is so bizarre that people don't understand this fact. Perhaps it was the rhetoric from Obama stating that he would not raise taxes. Correct, he isn't technically raising taxes, he's letting the tax rates expire which in turn raise the taxes for the low midddle and upper taxes.

  5. Mickey has it--we must eliminate all those credits for chucking out more kids than a family can support. The tax code should not be a welfare system where we send people $10,000 without having any income tax withheld from pay--actually had a credit with each pay check.

  6. "Starting Jan 1 all working people will see their paychecks shrink. That is just a fact."

    No, this is not a "fact." It's your assumption that Congress will do absolutely nothing to extend the Bush tax cuts in avoidance of the fiscal cliff.

    You can call that a guess, a prognostication, an assumption, a hypothesis... but it is not a fact.