Governor Points to Cost Concerns in Dialing Back Support for Reform

Governor Points to Cost Concerns in Dialing Back Support for Reform

Gov. Schwarzenegger said he remains convinced that the nation needs health care reform but cautioned lawmakers against pushing through a bill just to meet a deadline.  Schwarzenegger said current proposals would lead to a $3 billion increase in costs for California.

Necessity is the mother of invention, the old saying goes.  If you’re one of the millions of people who would say the U.S. is in dire need of health care reform, the question you might be asking yourself is, “But how long will it take?”

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) is firmly in the camp of people who believe that the U.S. health care system needs an overhaul, but as the reform debate has continued, he’s become less supportive of the proposals that have emerged.

In an appearance on ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Dec. 15, Schwarzenegger said that the current proposal being debated in the Senate would be a financial hardship for California: “This is the last thing we need, another $3 billion of spending when we already have a $20 billion deficit.”

A big part of that increase in spending would come as a result of a proposed expansion of Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California.  The federal government would pick up the costs for the expansion early on, but over time part of those costs would have to come out of California’s beleaguered general fund.

But Schwarzenegger doesn’t want to rush the process, urging senators against pushing ahead just to meet a timeline. Schwarzenegger said, “There’s no rush from one second to the next. Let’s take another week or two and come up with the right package.”

Schwarzenegger’s concerns about the long-term cost of the proposal echo the central argument a team of Harvard professors put forward in a Dec. 9 perspective published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The researchers acknowledge the emphasis that President Obama and other stakeholders in the debate have placed on health care reform being budget-neutral, but they also called for careful attention to be paid to the costs of the plan beyond the 10-year window that the Congressional Budget Office and other entities have used to frame their cost estimates.

Specifically, the authors assert that a number of 10-year cost estimates include one-time savings that would not have a major effect on the long-term trend toward greater spending on health care.  The researchers recommend prioritizing the creation of “institutions that will allow future cost containment to be successful.”  

But what do those institutions look like and how will they function? Who will oversee them?

These are just a few of the questions lawmakers continue to ask as they hammer together overhaul legislation.

More news on Senate votes on amendments and efforts to shape the debate appear below.

News From the Administration

Amendments

What’s in the Bills

Shaping the Debate

 

 

 

Exit mobile version