The Corner

The Obama Administration Is Trying to Force Florida into the Medicaid Expansion, So Florida’s Suing

Florida governor Rick Scott

The Obama administration, via the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has threatened to cut off a billion-dollar pool of funds that Florida gets every year from the federal government to pay hospitals to take care of poor patients, called the Low Income Pool, unless Florida agrees to expand Medicaid under Obamacare. (It’s the Florida legislature that’s solidly opposed to doing so; Governor Rick Scott has gone back and forth.) So Governor Scott announced today he’s suing the federal government over the issue, citing the fact that the Supreme Court struck down part of Obamacare back in 2012 because it involved coercing the states, which the federal government isn’t really allowed to do. 

From the governor’s announcement:

The President’s healthcare agency sent us a letter this week saying the ‘the future of LIP’ and ‘Medicaid expansion are linked.’ But, the Supreme Court has already ruled in NFIB v. Sebelius that the President cannot force Medicaid expansion on states. In fact, the Court ruled that the President could not use ‘gun to the head’ approaches in pushing for Medicaid expansion.

“Not only does President Obama’s end to LIP funding in Florida violate the law by crossing the line into a coercion tactic for Obamacare, it also threatens poor families’ access to the safety net healthcare services they need.

The idea, to be sympathetic to CMS, is that the Medicaid expansion obviates the need for programs like LIP, but it won’t, really, as Scott’s announcement points out. As Ramesh wrote yesterday, this looks a lot more like just a new strategy by President Obama to get states to sign onto Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion (the source of a lot of the law’s effect on the uninsured rate) before he leaves office in 18 months. The underlying idea CMS is citing is also appealing to the Obama administration: It papers over the fact that Obamacare leaves huge gaps in our health system that states, hospitals, etc. have to find a way to fill.

Scott’s comparison to the earlier Supreme Court is quite fair — there certainly seems to be some intentional coercion here — but the situation is not exactly the same. The struck-down portion of Obamacare threatened to completely wreck states’ health-care systems and budgets by withdrawing all federal Medicaid funding if they didn’t implement the expansion, while CMS is now just threatening to cut off a much smaller, discretionary piece of funding that has only existed since 2005 and varies widely across states. It seems quite possible what the Obama administration is trying to do now is legal by the standard that deemed the original Medicaid expansion illegal.

Patrick Brennan — Patrick Brennan is a writer and policy analyst based in Washington, D.C. He was Director of Digital Content for Marco Rubio's presidential campaign, writing op-eds, policy content, and leading the ...

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The Second(-Class) Amendment

Editor’s Note: The following is the fourth in a series of articles in which Mr. Yoo and Mr. Phillips will lay out a course of constitutional restoration, pointing out areas where the Supreme Court has driven the Constitution off its rails and the ways the current Court can put it back on track. The first entry ... Read More

The Brexit Crisis

After what seem like years of a phony war, British and European Union negotiators finally agreed on the terms of Britain’s departure from the EU earlier this week, and Theresa May announced it in the House of Commons. The deal covers more than 500 pages of legal and bureaucratic prose, and few but the ... Read More

Friends of Elmer

Do you know what scares an American outdoorsman more than a grizzly bear? Twitter. In the late summer and early autumn, the hunting world had its eyes on the courts: The Trump administration had issued new guidance that would permit the hunting of brown bears (popularly known as grizzly bears), including in ... Read More