Pawlenty Tells Feds to Keep Their Medicaid Money

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty is feeling pretty good today. After using his political power as the state’s Republican leader and his veto power as governor, Pawlenty has notched a massive state budget victory that Politico’s Ben Smith says lays the groundwork for the governor’s assumed 2012 presidential run.

Refusing to compromise with Democrats who control the state legislature, Pawlenty held Republicans together and essentially forced the passage of a budget making huge spending cuts roughly the same size as the ones the governor tried to do unilaterally before he was rebuffed by the state supreme court.

Says Smith:

He will complete his two-term tenure at the end of this year having fulfilled his pledge not to raise taxes, with his approval ratings in positive territory, and having largely avoided the pragmatic compromises that often bedevil governors in polarized party primaries. His success gives him the accomplishments to match his conservative rhetoric, and set a high bar for other ambitious governors facing budget crises of their own in this lean year.

One Democratic budget priority that fell under the bus would have expanded the state’s Medicaid eligibility rules. Medicaid is jointly funded by states and the federal government, so expanding eligibility would bring Minnesota lots more federal dollars, but only on the condition that the state spend more of its own money.

Under federal health reform, beginning in 2014, states will be eligible for federal matching funds of 90% or more of their total Medicaid costs for new enrollees – this is far better match than they currently get. Between now and then, states that choose to voluntarily expand their Medicaid programs, as Democrats wanted, will get their standard federal match – 65% of total costs, in Minnesota’s case.

But because Minnesota already pays for care for some poor residents who aren’t eligible for Medicaid, it would only have to spend – say Democrats – $188 million to be eligible for $1.4 billion in federal Medicaid funds. In other words, it would have been a good financial deal for the state.

But it would be an expansion of government, something Pawlenty abhors and which would not help his cause as a potential 2012 Republican presidential candidate. Of Democrats in the state legislature, the Star Tribune in Minnesota reported:

They see the Medicaid option as a chance to cover more people, ensure better compensation for doctors and leverage $7 in federal money for every $1 the state spends.

Republicans, many of whom supported a similar plan a year ago, stoked conservative ire about the national health care debate and called it a headlong rush into so-called Obamacare.

State Senator John Marty, a member of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, told Smith:

“… [Pawlenty] learned that politically the more often he says no to us, the more his political standing rises.”

“We are helping him sacrifice Minnesota for his presidential ambition.”

Medicaid will be an interesting marker in the next several years. It’s a program that costs states a lot, but also brings them billions in federal dollars. It’s technically a voluntary program, meaning states could opt out of it completely or refuse to expand their programs as allowed under the new health reform law. The former is basically an impossibility, but the latter may be something we hear calls for in states where opposition to government programs and spending runs high.

Related Topics: ben smith, Health Care, health reform, medicaid, Minnesota, obama, tim pawlenty, Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • Ohg Rea Tone

    Pawlenty is a fool. His desire for Republican recognition promotes the dumbing down of the party. He and other slick political operatives have stirred the ignorant classes into a mob mentality. Now Pawlenty and his cohorts have lost control – they say whatever the mob wants to keep from being run over.

    I know the people being deceived by the slick politicians. I live in rural NW Missouri and the sheep are my friend, neighbors, and even my family. ..

    http://thefiresidepost.com/2010/04/12/personal-experience-with-tea-bag-mentality/

  • 53_3

    I feel sorry for anyone who lives there and has to dialyse due to renal failure!
    .
    I’m sure that they will be positively leaping out of their graves to give them their vote…

  • nibblybits

    The SurveyUSA poll from 2 months ago: Minnesotans overwhemingly don’t want Pawlenty to run for President 63-28.
    .
    http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=7dc13545-cf92-40d3-a8c8-a5bd54577a8e
    .
    Which basically echoes the rest of the country’s collective, “Who?” The guy has the charisma of a bowl of cold oatmeal. He’s truly delusional if he thinks he has a chance.

  • davethompsonmpls

    The fall elections in Minnesota will be interesting. The budget bill that passed will allow the next governor to decide whether or not to expand the use of Medicaid funds. Minnesota voters will be deciding on Medicaid expansion when we choose our next governor.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    I used to think of democrats and republicans as essentially two streams of classic liberalism, one being focused on positive liberty and the other on negative. I assumed both streams shared a great deal in common, including origins in the age of enlightenment and a respect for empiricism or the scientific method. That no longer seems to be the case with republicans. They have returned to the worship of cults and idols, adopting a strange new form of mysticism where reason is the thing sacrificed on the alter.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Given that both parties have almost entirely lost touch with their once-defining belief systems (liberalism & conservatism) one can only hope 3rd & 4th parties living up to such ideals might spring up as correctives.
    .
    Our present parties provide only palliative care to a cancer-ridden body politic. i.e. Relieving or soothing the symptoms of a disease or disorder without effecting a cure. Correct the parties, via coalition or replacement, or watch the body die.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    jcapan the thing I find most disturbing is the fact that a rational approach to public policy is no longer possible, for political reasons. For example, one can no longer raise taxes to balance budgets because raising taxes is political suicide. Debt is the natural result. In fact, taking a rational approach to policy today is the best way to get yourself branded a communist. The teabaggers, and their republican sycophants, are bound and determined to pursue policies that have never worked to solve unemployment anywhere in the past. Ask Thatcher how voodoo economics worked when she first tried it.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Obviously agreed, Derek. Reminds me of Krug’s column today. But my response to both is that such irrational political behavior/policy solutions (during horrible economic times) can only remain philsophically solvent when the only alternative in town is corporate-bosomy faux-liberalism. People talk about 30 years under Reagan’s pulpit, but they fail to recognize that for 20 years, democrats have abandoned virtually everything they once passionately believed in. e.g., as Sgt. Pepper said yesterday:
    .
    “So as I remarked in an earlier thread, the Dems accidentally let a tough provision into a bill that is meant to pretend to regulate Wall Street, and now they can’t figure out how to remove it.
    .
    God I love my party! /snark”
    .
    IOW, how can the population understand how irrational, historically-proven-tragically-wrong policies are when the supposed opposition party fails to call them out. When we have a “liberal” president committed to cutting taxes, crafting deals with the lords of industry etc. Not to mention a media that long ago gave up any pretension of oversight or siding with the rabble over the village.

  • formerlyjames

    Dear Gov. Pawlenty, thank you from the bottom of my liberal heart. We need all the money we can save, and your sacrifice of the citizens of your state is greatly appreciated.
    .
    I fear, however, that when you run for President, that your idiot policies will be revealed for what they are and you won’t achieve your ultimate goal. But, good luck with the cheap, two faced, effort.

  • shepherdwong

    “They have returned to the worship of cults and idols, adopting a strange new form of mysticism where reason is the thing sacrificed on the alter.”
    .
    That’s been going on since Reagan announced that “government is the problem” and the country started worshiping Gordon Gekko and John Galt. Everything that afflicts the country now, from the Republicans’ Frankenstein monster, the Teabaggers, to our corporatist Conservadems, flows from that movement. It’s always been a corporatist scam and there’s never been anything liberal about it. Quite simply, they had to kill reason (and taint expertise) to sell it, even to the rubes.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    You know, I’m teaching The Matrix script to some geeky otaku(s) later, and as I was reading it over, for the first time I realized something.
    .
    Agent Smith refers to Judas-figure Cypher over the famous “steak” dinner thusly:
    .
    “Whatever you want, Mr. Reagan.”

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    One of the things I find fascinating is how Reagan has avoided the ire of the teabaggers, as the guy who did cut gov’t revenue yes, but who also increased expenditures at the same time, which naturally resulted in a huge debt, since there were no revenues to pay for the expenditures. I thought debt was the teabaggers biggest concern and yet they are deathly opposed to tax increases. A new system of math will need to be devised to account for their train of thought.

  • gysgt213

    Americans don’t like high taxes. But they also like their government services. Americans like the services but, they don’t like the costs. They don’t like paying for anyone else to enjoy the services, especially if appears that others are getting what they are getting for free. But business can get things for free. That’s okay.

    And if put in the same situtation as the apparent downtrodden. Americans who were on top will be the first to ask their government to help them. Every one else can pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Of course, unless its me you are talking about.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    For example, one can no longer raise taxes to balance budgets because raising taxes is political suicide. Debt is the natural result.
    .
    But then faced with this obvious logical quandary the media insists on pointing out “isn’t it interesting” that people believe something instead of actually mentioning it when ‘what people believe’ happens to be utter Horse manure.
    .
    That taxes are toxic happens to be a self-fufilling prophesy. It isn’t an actual law…….

  • acameronw

    I waded through the above comments, and while I’m well aware that this is primarily a blog about politics, only 53_3 alluded to the suffering that Gov. Pawlenty’s actions are going to cause. It’s not likely that his 2012 primary opponents are going to bring it up (they don’t care about the well being of people without health care any more than he does) but I hope the Democrats hang it around his neck if he’s the nominee.

  • gysgt213

    “Democrats hang it around his neck if he’s the nominee.”
    .
    Have you been following the democrats lately? Good luck with that.

  • shepherdwong

    If any Democrat tried to raise taxes as Reagan eventually did or reduce our nuclear arsenal (negotiated with the “evil empire”) as Reagan did, not to mention trading arms to Iranian Muslim extremists, Washington would be in flames. But it doesn’t matter as long as their authoritarian leaders, Limbaugh, Beck and Palin, etc. keep holding up Reagan as an icon of the movement. The Teatards are the ultimate authoritarian followers and, needless to say at this point, the word hypocrisy isn’t in their tiny, tiny dictionaries.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Paul the main preoccupation of the media seems to be maintaining an ideological balance as opposed to conducting a rational analysis, that makes use of the empirical evidence. Every opinion is given equal weight no matter how ridiculous or isolated. What we get is the sort of analysis that claims conservatives believe in lowering taxes and liberals believe in raising them, without any sort of contextual analysis, such as the current state of the economy, or the easy evidence that a huge percentage of the stimulus, for example, were tax cuts. Once we are sure the recovery has taken hold their heads may explode when liberals start talking about reducing the deficit.

  • square1

    I believe that Pawlenty has fundamentally misread the electoral tea-leaves. There is absolutely no evidence that the country is clamoring to elect a hard-core Republican. If the GOP has any shot at beating Obama in 2012, the best opportunity is to run someone who doesn’t scare the bejeesus out of Democrats and Independents. I don’t care how much the teabaggers love you, they can only vote once.

    I don’t think the key to cross-over electoral appeal is to cut off health care services and to cut spending during a recession (all those government cuts might sound great on paper, but those are people’s JOBS. Do you really want to go into 2012 with your state’s economic recovery lagging the national average?)

    Remember, Pawlenty was the guy that McCain didn’t pick because McCain wanted someone to stir up the base. At that point, Pawlenty was a credible “moderate” Republican, to the extent any still exist. Pawlenty is flushing that reputation down the toilet and destroying any hope that he would have for winning in the general election.

  • dbcooper71

    Is Pawlenty Rove’s stalking horse?

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Yes-but, the path to Nov. 2012 runs through the crazy gauntlet first. And the republican base (insert obligatory shudder) thinks they already rolled over like b!tches by embracing McCain last go around, someone almost universally disdained in such circles. I cannot fathom the idea that the GOP base is going to suffer anyone markedly less crazy than themselves. Meaning that our faux-liberal president will go head to head with a nutter in 3 short years. If the economy is showing signs of life, beyond the comatose toe wiggling at present, he’s assured a win. Long live the center!

  • apr2563

    NY Times just posted an article that Richard Blumenthal, running for Dodd’s Senate seat, has lied about serving in Vietnam. Like Cheney he had 5 deferments. Like Bush he finally got into the Marine Reserves guaranteeing he wouldn’t have to go.
    Why are politicians sooooooooo stupid? How did he delude himself that this would not be exposed?
    .
    He was considered a shoo in for election. Stupid, stupid. I sat at many dinner tables with friends trying to figure out how to avoid the war. Many did avoid it and many served. Some of my friends died. I can’t condemn anyone for their position on serving or not serving in Vietnam. But, don’t lie!

  • Cliff

    That’s been going on since Reagan announced that “government is the problem” and the country started worshiping Gordon Gekko and John Galt
    .
    It’s been going on a lot longer than that. Look at the robber barons and the Gilded Age. Look at some quotes from prominent businessmen in the twenties, agitating for less government in business and more business in government.
    .
    I think we’re seeing a natural human urge towards plutocracy and oligarchy, an urge which managed to gain some traction in the seventies.

  • Cliff

    If Pawlenty’s move does cause devastation, will it start showing up in 2012, soon enough to have an impact on the primaries?

  • 3xfire3

    Apr,
    .
    You ask a very good question. I also can’t understand why politicians from both parties tell lies and live double lives and think some how they will not be caught.
    .
    Your explanation of stupid is the only thing I can think of. The old saying that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” comes to mind.
    .
    The politicians who engage in this type behavior seem to think they are so smart that they can get away with it. They are stupid in that sense is probably the only answer.

  • justmy02cents

    I really cannot believe that I am writing this…but.
    .
    I heard the voice clip and it appears to me that this was a phrasing error on his part.
    .
    He clearly stated that he was “in Vietnam”…..had he only said that he served DURING the Vietnam war…he would have been OK and the statement would have been honest.
    .
    I heard only ONE clip so he may have been more definitive about his USMCR service at other times, but I do not know for sure.
    .
    If he has repeatedly said categorically that he served IN Vietnam, then he is a liar.
    .
    Otherwise, this is a tempest in a teapot and the guy should be judged by his character and accomplishments.
    .
    One of the things I disdain about Fox and the RW crazies (which fellow posters here assume that I am ) is using a sound bite to incite a lynch mob.
    .
    Generally I verify what I receive via email BEFORE passing it on to like-minded friends AND I report inaccuracies back to the person who sent it to me.
    .
    you know…fair and balanced

  • gloriousglo2

    Careful driving over those bridges there, Olaf…..

blog comments powered by Disqus