IBJNews

Daniels says legislators to decide Medicaid change

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Gov. Mitch Daniels chided President Barack Obama's health care law as "dangerously misguided" Thursday, but sidestepped the question of whether Indiana should continue resisting its implementation after the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision finding the law constitutional.

The Republican governor's tone was muted during an impromptu news conference at the Statehouse, one week after he was named the next president at Purdue University and pledged to refrain from political statements. He said the next step would likely be up to the Legislature and his successor as governor, who won't take office until January.

Daniels said he wants to make sure he understands the mixed, 5-4 ruling, particularly the sections that deal with the law's Medicaid expansion to cover people up to 133 percent of poverty level, and the establishment of online marketplaces for patients to shop for insurance policies.

"If it's optional as I'm advised that it is, that'll be a decision for future legislators to make," Daniels told reporters. "It's a $2 billion-plus cost to do what the federal government tried to order Indiana to do. So that's a big decision."

Later in the day, his staff released a more sharply worded statement critical of the law, but even it offered little insight into what Daniels believes should be done next. He predicted the law would drive up premiums for individual insurance by as much as 95 percent and increase deficits and the national debt, which he has characterized in a book as a "red menace."

"The court's ruling that the federal government has the constitutional power to do what it has done must be respected. But many actions that are constitutional are still unwise," he said.

The state must decide by Nov. 16 whether to operate its own marketplace, let the federal government do it, or form a partnership with the federal government. Operating a state online insurance market, or exchange, could cost $50 million to $65 million in the first several years of operation, Daniels' statement said.

The court found problems with the Medicaid expansion but said it could proceed as long as the federal government does not threaten to withhold states' entire Medicaid allotment if they don't take part in the law's extension.

But he didn't call the health care overhaul socialism, as other conservatives have done.

Daniels' gentle touch may possibly have been a result of his June 21 pledge to refrain from political commentary for the remainder of his final term as governor. "Effective immediately, I will recuse myself from any partisan political activities or commentary," he said in a speech when Purdue trustees introduced him as the university's next president.

But some Indiana lawmakers apparently agreed with Daniels when he said the next step was up to them.

"I would suspect that it would be a legislative decision," said Rep. Charlie Brown of Gary, the top Democrat on the House Public Health Committee.

Asked if he thought Republicans who control the General Assembly would go along with a Medicaid expansion, Brown replied: "We have to remove the politics from it and look at what's good for Indiana."

But Indiana Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne, said the state would "certainly" opt out of the Medicaid expansion, which he said would have meant an inevitable tax increase.

"Now, Hoosiers can avoid such a tax increase by the state opting out of Obamacare's Medicaid mandate, which we will certainly do," Long said in a statement.

Indiana had proposed to use its medical savings account program, the Healthy Indiana Plan, to help cover the half-million people who will become eligible for Medicaid in 2014, but the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in September said the proposal was premature. The state runs HIP under a Medicaid waiver that is set to expire at the end of 2012.

Daniels said he wasn't sure if the ruling meant the state could proceed with its plans for HIP, which he called a success.

Daniels said he doubted that a special legislative session would be necessary to handle the state's response to the health care overhaul now that it's been upheld, but qualified that by saying that he "wouldn't rule anything in or out."

Republican gubernatorial candidate U.S. Rep. Mike Pence said the ruling meant it was now up to Congress to repeal the overhaul, while the spokesman for his Democratic opponent, John Gregg, said the health care law would benefit Hoosiers.

"Congress must act immediately to fully repeal ObamaCare and protect Hoosier families, small businesses and family farms from its tax increases and mandates," Pence said in a statement. "If ObamaCare is not repealed in full, Hoosiers will face higher health care costs and increased taxes."

Gregg campaign spokesman, Daniel Altman, said Gregg, a cancer survivor, knew the burden of health care costs firsthand.

"As governor, John will bring Indiana patients, physicians, stakeholders and insurance companies together to discuss how to implement this law in the most cost effective and consumer friendly way for Indiana while also focusing on important issues like preventative health care and wellness that can lower health care costs for all Hoosiers," Altman said.Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels says he wants to make sure he understands the Supreme Court ruling upholding the health care law before deciding how the state will respond.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • To Kay
    Kay said: "use the money our state collects to help our needy as WE see fit! So all you at planned womb scraping better get to cracking on some funding because it’s not going to be coming from our tax dollars for much longer." I would guess that you have insurance, and it is good, and you have no idea what it is like to work, not have coverage, and face an illness. Or worse yet, change jobs, and lose coverage due to a pre-existing condition. If not for Planned Parenthood, many women would not get the care they need at affordable prices. When the rich or well-to-do get to make all of the choices, they should try walking a mile in other's shoes before putting out such unhappy messages and thoughts.
  • re: to Mikki
    Mikki I couldn't agree more!!!!
  • Opt out on it ALL now!
    Well thank you Supreme Court Justices for making Indiana the first state in the United States to opt out of Medicaid completely! This is a great opportunity for Indiana to step out of the shadow of big government and use the money our state collects to help our needy as WE see fit! So all you at planned womb scraping better get to cracking on some funding because it’s not going to be coming from our tax dollars for much longer.
  • Agreement
    If you actually look at the agreement between Indiana and the Federal Government, it states that Indiana WILL cover those at or below the poverty line with Medicaid. We do not. Indiana even charges Copays to Indigents so that they can not purchase needed medications. Mitch Daniels instituted this ruling to rid our state of the surplus population. Our State even charges impoverished citizens for visits to the State Health Clinic, such visits are free in other states. Yes I am sure the poor would move if they could afford to, but they are too busy dying from treatable diseases.
    • Oh Mitch.
      You really expect anyone to listen Mr. Cronyism, I truly enjoy the way he throws out those figures. When it comes to money Mitch can't be trusted.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

    2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

    3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

    4. Exciting times in Carmel.

    5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

    ADVERTISEMENT