In recent weeks many pundits and think tank types have raised questions about whether Governor Mitch Daniels is a 'real' conservative. Or more transparently put: there are many conservatives who don't agree with Daniels on specific issues and therefore categorize him as not conservative enough.
I won't go into pre-positioning around his so-call called for a truce on social issues. (He didn't say surrender or truce but a timeout and he suggested that the most immediate threat to our nation's future is the rocketing debt.)
And I will only note in passing that playing to most ideological elements of a party is par for the course of running for president.
My concern is the allegation that Daniels health care programs in Indiana is either creeping socialism or warmed over Medicaid. This argument is advanced by Michael Cannon’s article: “ Mitch Daniels’s Obamacare Problem: His state’s health-care plan promotes dependence on government.” www.nationalreview.com/articles/261285/mitch-daniels-s-obamacare-problem-michael-f-cannon
Cannon’s major claim is that under Daniels the number of people on Medicaid have increased and the creation of a program to provide health savings accounts for Hoosiers that cant afford insurance (and have not had it for 60 days) and do not qualify for Medicaid. The Healthy Indiana Plan is funded by a combination of Medicaid dollars and an increase in the state tobacco tax.
Cannon’s complaint is “Like Obama, Daniels increased cigarette taxes to expand government-run health care. Whereas Obamacare requires states to open their Medicaid programs to families of four earning $31,000 (138 percent of the federal poverty level), Daniels expanded Indiana’s Medicaid program to families of four earning $44,000 (200 percent of poverty). From 2008 to 2010, Indiana’s Medicaid enrollment spiked: Adult enrollments grew 21 percent, a rate nearly double the national average. By 2010, Daniels had enrolled another 62,000 Hoosiers in government-run health care. “
First, Cannon should get his facts straight. Indiana’s adult Medicaid enrollment increased 17 percent from 2008-2010, slightly higher than the national average of 14. 6 percent. And between 2009-2010 the rate of increase in Indiana's adult Medicaid enrollment declined (as it did in only 16 other states) and did so more dramatically than most. Second, Cannon cites Indiana’s income eligibility levels for families when he should have cited the income levels for adults. But that would undermine his argument since Indiana caps eligibility at 50 percent of poverty.
Cannon believes Daniels ultimate sin is that he “made Medicaid more attractive: Under his plan, the government hands out coverage plus something a lot like cash.”
Do Cannon and other Daniels denialists regard the governor’s proposal to convert public education funding into a statewide school voucher program an example of making “public education” more attractive by handing out coverage and cash. Cannon dismisses the shift in personal responsibility, the creation of competition, the cost savings and the qualitative differences that vouchers and health savings accounts bring.
Daniels can push such a change because he has control over state funding of schools. As of now, Daniels and other governors that would want to turn Medicaid into a voucher program must wait years and face a hostile Obama administration.
I know Cannon works for the Cato Institute and is therefore more likely to object to any expansion in government. But governing is not ideology. And policy disagreements should be based on facts.
And facts matter. And the facts show that Indiana's Medicaid population did not double compared to the national average. Healthy Indiana has enrolled the most chronically ill and chronically un-insured Hoosiers since 2006. Over that time costs have stabilized and not exploded. Those who have found jobs don’t forfeit the coverage they have. They can keep it, along with the health savings accounts they have created. Which might be one reason that Indiana has more business startups than other states and its workforce and population has increased.
