Hey can't let those pesky poor kids get healthy you know, they may grow up to 
vote for the Democrats.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/washington/21health.html?ex=1345348800&en=f98ec523f6e60c2c&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

August 21, 2007
Rules May Limit Health Program Aiding Children
By ROBERT PEAR

The Bush administration, continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the 
popular Children’s Health Insurance Program, has adopted new standards that 
would make it much more difficult for New York, California and others to extend 
coverage to children in middle-income families.

Administration officials outlined the new standards in a letter sent to state 
health officials on Friday evening, in the middle of a monthlong Congressional 
recess. In interviews, they said the changes were intended to return the 
Children’s Health Insurance Program to its original focus on low-income 
children and to make sure the program did not become a substitute for private 
health coverage.

After learning of the new policy, some state officials said yesterday that it 
could cripple their efforts to cover more children and would impose standards 
that could not be met.

“We are horrified at the new federal policy,” said Ann Clemency Kohler, 
deputy commissioner of human services in New Jersey. “It will cause havoc 
with our program and could jeopardize coverage for thousands of children.”

Stan Rosenstein, the Medicaid director in California, said the new policy was 
“highly restrictive, much more restrictive than what we want to do.”

The poverty level for a family of four is set by the federal government at 
$20,650 in annual income. Many states have received federal permission to cover 
children with family incomes exceeding twice the poverty level — $41,300 for 
a family of four. In New York, which covers children up to 250 percent of the 
poverty level, the Legislature has passed a bill that would raise the limit to 
400 percent— $82,600 for a family of four — but the change is subject to 
federal approval.

California wants to increase its income limit to 300 percent of the poverty 
level, from 250 percent. Pennsylvania recently raised its limit to 300 percent, 
from 200 percent. New Jersey has had a limit of 350 percent for more than five 
years.

As with issues like immigration, the White House is taking action on its own to 
advance policies that have not been embraced by Congress.

In his budget in February, President Bush proposed strict limits on family 
income for the child health program. Both houses of Congress voted this month 
to renew the program for five years, but neither chamber accepted that 
proposal. Legal authority for the program expires on Sept. 30.

The administration’s new policy is explained in a letter that was sent about 
7:30 p.m. on Friday to state health officials from Dennis G. Smith, the 
director of the federal Center for Medicaid and State Operations. The policy 
would continue indefinitely, though Democrats in Congress could try to override 
it.

The Children’s Health Insurance Program has strong support from governors of 
both parties, including Republicans like Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, 
Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and Sonny Perdue of Georgia. When the Senate passed a 
bill to expand the program this month, 18 Republican senators voted for it, in 
defiance of a veto threat from Mr. Bush. The House passed a more expansive bill 
and will try to work out differences with the Senate when Congress reconvenes 
next month.

In his letter, Mr. Smith set a high standard for states that want to raise 
eligibility for the child health program above 250 percent of the poverty level.

Before making such a change, Mr. Smith wrote, states must demonstrate that they 
have “enrolled at least 95 percent of children in the state below 200 percent 
of the federal poverty level” who are eligible for either Medicaid or the 
child health program.

Deborah S. Bachrach, a deputy commissioner in the New York State Health 
Department, said, “No state in the nation has a participation rate of 95 
percent.”

And Cindy Mann, a research professor at the Health Policy Institute of 
Georgetown University, said, “No state would ever achieve that level of 
participation under the president’s budget proposals.”

The Congressional Budget Office has said that the president’s budget, which 
seeks $30 billion for the program from 2008 to 2012, is not enough to pay for 
current levels of enrollment, much less to cover children who are eligible but 
not enrolled.

When Congress created the Children’s Health Insurance Program in 1997, it 
said the purpose was to cover “uninsured low-income children.” Under the 
law, states are supposed to make sure public coverage “does not substitute 
for coverage under group health plans.”

In an interview yesterday, Mr. Smith said, “The program was always meant for 
children in lower-income families.” As a state increases its income limits, 
he said, “it’s more likely to substitute for private coverage.”

To minimize the risk of such substitution, Mr. Smith said in his letter, states 
should charge co-payments or premiums that approximate the cost of private 
coverage and should impose “waiting periods” to make sure middle-income 
children do not go directly from a private health plan to a public program.

If a state wants to set its income limit above 250 percent of the poverty level 
— $51,625 for a family of four — Mr. Smith said, “the state must 
establish a minimum of a one-year period of uninsurance for individuals” 
before they can receive public coverage.

That is considerably stricter than past requirements. In February, for example, 
the Bush administration allowed Pennsylvania to increase its income limit to 
300 percent of the poverty level after the state agreed to a six-month waiting 
period for children who were 2 and older with family incomes exceeding 200 
percent of the poverty level.

As another precaution, Mr. Smith said, states that want to cover children above 
250 percent of the poverty level must show that “the number of children in 
the target population insured through private employers has not decreased by 
more than two percentage points over the prior five-year period.”

In New Jersey, which has a three-month waiting period, Ms. Kohler said, “we 
have no evidence of a decline in employer-sponsored coverage resulting from the 
Children’s Health Insurance Program.”

In the Senate debate this month, several Republicans offered a proposal similar 
to the new Bush administration policy. They wanted to require states to cover 
95 percent of low-income children before allowing states to expand eligibility.

Senator Max Baucus, the Montana Democrat who is chairman of the Finance 
Committee, argued against the proposal, saying: “No state can meet 95 
percent. No state currently meets 95 percent.”

In his letter, Mr. Smith said the new standards would apply to states that 
previously received federal approval to cover children with family incomes over 
250 percent of the poverty level. Such states should amend their state plans to 
meet federal expectations within 12 months, or the Bush administration “may 
pursue corrective action,” Mr. Smith said.

Two Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Pat Roberts of Kansas, 
urged the Bush administration last week to deny New York’s request to cover 
children with family incomes up to four times the poverty level. The proposal, 
they said, violates the original intent of Congress.

But Gov. Eliot Spitzer of New York said that, “contrary to the senators’ 
objections,” federal law allows states to set higher income limits. 
“Granting this expansion,” Mr. Spitzer said, “is essential to the health 
and well-being of New York’s children.”

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Download the latest ColdFusion 8 utilities including Report Builder,
plug-ins for Eclipse and Dreamweaver updates.
http;//www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitlement/index.cfm?e=labs%5adobecf8%5Fbeta

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:240900
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to