Graham-Cassidy: Radical Change in the Federal-State Health Relationship

eAlert 8dd5d986-035d-411e-a643-235be336f61d

<p>The Graham-Cassidy legislation currently before Congress contains many provisions that are consistent with previous Affordable Care Act (ACA) repeal-and-replace bills. But in a new post on <em>To the Point</em>, the Commonwealth Fund’s David Blumenthal, M.D., observes that in its treatment of states and their envisioned role, the new bill departs dramatically from prior repeal efforts. </p><p>Graham-Cassidy does something rare, if not unprecedented, Blumenthal says, by moving funds from one group of states (those that expanded Medicaid) to another (those that did not). Moreover, it gives states extensive authority to manage these federal funds but offers them only a short amount of time to develop the administrative structure for a state-based coverage expansion program. </p>
<p>“The correct balance between federal and state prerogatives in extending and regulating health insurance coverage is not straightforward,” Blumenthal says. “Graham-Cassidy takes a radical position that departs from past precedent.”</p> Read the post