Nebraska favored over Nevada?

Politics and Senators. There is a tiny clause tucked into a 383-page Manager’s Amendment to the Senate health care reform bill. You can read it on page 98. It relates to money that states will have to pick up with regard to Medicaid. The Senate bill would expand Medicaid to people below 133 percent of the poverty level. Up until 2017, the federal government will pick up the tab for the added cost that will place on Nevada and all the other states of the union. After 2017, Nevada (and all the other states, except Nebraska) will have to start sharing the cost.

The bottom line is that Nebraska will never have to share the added cost of Medicaid if that amendment becomes law. The federal government would continue to pay for the added cost to Nebraska even after the year 2017. But Nevada will have to pay.

How come? It is because it required 60 votes in the senate to pass the Health Care Reform bill. No Republican would vote for it.

Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska refused to vote for the reform unless Nebraska was exempt from the added cost of the Manager’s Amendment. The Democratic majority in the Senate got their 60^th vote from Nelson by agreeing to exempt Nebraska.

How much money are we talking about? The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office didn’t specifically break out Nebraska, but said the cost of expanding Medicaid eligibility would be about $1.2 billion for Nebraska, Massachusetts and Vermont over the next 10 years. Not an insignificant piece of change. One Nevada newspaper says Nevada’s burden will be at least $600 million per year. [Las Vegas Review Journal]

Several Republicans have blasted Nelson for essentially selling his vote on health care reform in exchange for a special, backroom deal that could save the Nebraska state government millions of dollars in Medicaid subsidies.

“You’ve got to compliment Ben Nelson for playing ‘The Price is Right,’” said Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C. “He negotiated a Medicaid agreement for Nebraska that puts the federal government on the hook forever. Not for six years, not for 10 years. This isn’t the Louisiana Purchase; this is the Nebraska windfall.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C called the deal “sleazy.” Attorney General Henry McMaster of South Carolina said he and his counterparts in Michigan and Washington state were investigating whether the special provisions for Nebraska are unconstitutional.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, defended the deal, saying, “You’ll find a number of states that are treated differently than other states. That’s what legislating is all about. It’s about compromise.”

Nelson defended himself. The provision, he said, was not a “carve-out” for Nebraska. To the contrary, he said, he pushed for the language because he opposes unfunded mandates placed on states by the federal government — such as this Medicaid expansion — and saw the exemption for Nebraska as a way to open the door for other states to do the same.

Republican Attorneys general for 13 states have written a letter warning congressional leaders they must remove Nebraska’s “special dispensation” from new taxes under Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s health care bill or face legal action. Democratic Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto is being urged to join the action on Nevadans’ behalf. “Some will hold that unlikely, since it might be seen as a challenge to Sen. Reid, the presumed godfather of Nevada Democrats.

“The question is, does Ms. Masto represent the Nevadans who will have to pay “more than their share” under Sen. Reid’s Nebraska payoff scheme … or someone else?” the Nevada newspaper editorialized. [Las Vegas Review Journal]

Related posts:

1. Democratic Senators balking at deals cut for their states being cut from healthcare reform
2. Votes of Nevada’s Congressional Delegation
3. Falsely Appealing to Women’s Fears
4. Votes of Nevada Congressional Delegation
5. My Healthcare Pitch to Nevada’s Congressional Delegation