Sept. 30, 2005 – The White House is trying to block a bill that would extend Medicaid benefits for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Introduced by lawmakers from the nation’s two controlling parties, the measure would cover all state Medicaid expenses in Louisiana, Mississippi and the hardest-hit parts of Alabama for five months and leaves open the possibility for an extension of equal duration.
Sign up to receive NewStandard headlines and extras by e-mail weekday mornings!
In addition, the Emergency Health Care Relief Act of 2005 (S. 1716) would increase the amount of funding for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) and expand government-backed unemployment insurance. Republican senator and Finance Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (Iowa) and ranking committee Democrat Max Baucus (Montana) are the bill’s principal sponsors.
Earlier this week, a small group of Senators prevented a floor vote on the measure over concerns that the estimated $8.9 billion price tag was too high. Supporters of the bill claimed that the Bush administration was behind the move. The Department of Health and Human Services has reportedly told lawmakers that the bill would duplicate existing government actions.
In a detailed statement released yesterday, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a progressive think tank, disputed that claim, citing inadequacies in the administration’s proposal for Medicaid waivers.
"The administration’s waiver policy forces states to deny Medicaid coverage to many low-income Katrina survivors solely because the survivors do not fit into one of Medicaid’s traditional eligibility ‘categories’," CBPP noted in the statement. "The waiver policy explicitly continues the use of these categories for Medicaid coverage provided to Katrina survivors.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
This means that many Katrina survivors who now are severely impoverished but do not fit into one of these categories – particularly poor adults under 65 who do not have dependent children and are not sufficiently disabled – would be left out, even if they have serious medical conditions."
