Mar 1, 2017

What the Republican governors want to do on Medicaid

Evan Vucci / AP

No, they don't just want to do whatever House Republicans are putting in their Obamacare replacement plan. By the end of the National Governors Association meeting this weekend, the GOP governors were closing in on a framework for Medicaid reform to recommend to Congress, I'm told — and it goes beyond the standard Republican proposals of block grants or per-person limits on the funding.

Here's how it would work:

  • If a state that expanded Medicaid wanted to keep the expansion, and the extra federal money that goes with it, they'd have to agree to "put the state on a budget" by eventually switching to per-capita caps or block grants.
  • If they're not willing to do that, they could keep the expansion, but they'd have to do it under the regular federal matching rate — they'd stop getting the extra funds.
  • For a state that didn't expand Medicaid, but wanted to do so now, they could add coverage of childless adults up to 100 percent of the federal poverty line — not the 138 percent under Obamacare. And they, too, would have to switch to per-capita caps or block grants in the future.
  • If they're not willing to switch to per-capita caps or block grants, they could cover everyone up to 100 percent of the federal poverty line, but only with the regular matching funds.

They'd also get more flexibility to help them live within a budget — including using managed care plans, having more ways to control prescription drug spending, and requiring premium contributions.

Why we're going to hear more about this: The Republican governors made it clear to Trump that they don't want any of their residents to lose coverage, and this is how they think they can avoid that problem. But first, they'll have to draft it into enough detail to get cost estimates — and find out what happens to coverage over the long term.

Go deeper

George Zimmerman sues Buttigieg and Warren for $265M

George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida, in November 2013. Photo: Joe Burbank-Pool/Getty Images

George Zimmerman filed a lawsuit in Polk County, Fla. seeking $265 million in damages from Democratic presidential candidates Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren, accusing them of defaming him to "garner votes in the black community."

Context: Neither the Massachusetts senator nor the former Southbend mayor tweeted his name in the Feb. 5 posts on what would've been the 25th birthday of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black teen Zimmerman fatally shot in 2012. But Zimmerman alleges they "acted with actual malice" to defame him.

4 takeaways from the Nevada Democratic debate

Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images

The relative civility of the last eight Democratic debates was thrown by the wayside Wednesday night, the first debate to feature the billionaire "boogeyman," Michael Bloomberg, whose massive advertising buys and polling surge have drawn the ire of the entire field.

The big picture: Pete Buttigieg captured the state of the race early on, noting that after Super Tuesday, the "two most polarizing figures on this stage" — Bloomberg and democratic socialist Bernie Sanders — could be the only ones left competing for the nomination. The rest of candidates fought to stop that momentum.

Klobuchar squares off with Buttigieg on immigration

Buttigieg and Klobuchar in Las Vegas on Feb. 19. Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images

Former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg went after Sen. Amy Klobuchar on the debate stage Wednesday for voting to confirm Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan and voting in 2007 to make English the national language.

What she's saying: "I wish everyone was as perfect as you, Pete, but let me tell you what it's like to be in the arena. ... I did not one bit agree with these draconian policies to separate kids from their parents, and in my first 100 days, I would immediately change that."