'Failed' federal policy costs $1M / LJWorld.com

Archive for Thursday, June 19, 2008

State taxpayers fund new anti-illegal immigration checks

June 19, 2008

Topeka — Taxpayers spent upward of $1 million and thousands of eligible Kansans lost their health insurance because of federal anti-illegal immigration rules that ended up catching one illegal immigrant trying to apply for health coverage, officials said Wednesday.

Senate Majority Leader Derek Schmidt, R-Independence, said the situation showed the federal government had failed to enact common sense immigration policies.

"Instead of doing that, they've imposed a bunch of ancillary mandates on states, which are akin to trying to push a wet noodle up a hill with your nose," Schmidt said. "State taxpayers are picking up the dollars and cents costs of a failed federal policy," he said.

The criticism dealt with federal rules implemented July 1, 2006, that required Medicaid recipients to provide proof of citizenship.

This produced a huge logjam because of the increase in time it took to process current recipients and new applicants. For instance, many people had trouble obtaining needed documents, such as birth certificates, from other states.

"We lost 20,000 eligible Kansans as a result of the requirements," said Kansas Medicaid director Andy Allison.

The state was forced to hire more personnel to handle telephone calls and applications, and to determine eligibility. That cost approximately $1 million, Allison said.

He said about half, or 10,000 of the 20,000 dropped, had been re-enrolled. Only one person has been determined to be ineligible because of citizenship status, he said.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

19 June 2008
at 6:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

davidsmom (Anonymous) says…

How do they know they lost 20,000 eligible Kansans? How do they know those people were all eligible? Just because they had been receiving benefits previously doesn't mean they should have been. Some of them probably were not eligible before and this process caught them because they dropped their application instead of being found illegal.
19 June 2008
at 7:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says…

Take the numbers in the article at face value: 20,000 dropped, 10,000 reenrolled after they were able to prove their status, and 1(!) was outright disqualified. That means 9,999 more people in Kansas have lost their Medicaid coverage without any evidence that they should have. That's plain dumb. Claiming that we somehow saved money is similarly dumb since these folks will now have a greater need for emergency medical treatment (no access to preventative or early-intervention treatment means their conditions worsen before they can seek help) and we'll be paying for that without the federal Medicaid money. To justify this regulation, which even the GOP Majority Leader says is stupid, by assuming that some portion of the newly uninsured were undocumented immigrants scared off by the regulation is the worst sort of cognitive dissonance.
19 June 2008
at 7:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says: “That means 9,999 more people in Kansas have lost their Medicaid coverage without any evidence that they should have. That's plain dumb.”Try again. It means 9,999 had been receiving benefits without any evidence that they were eligible. The burden of proof for most things is on the applicant, it's not up to the government to take every application as valid until they can prove it isn't.And remember this is a federal regulation; just because there was only one definite case of an illegal applying for benefits here doesn't mean there weren't several thousand in New York, LA, etc.
19 June 2008
at 7:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

sfjayhawk (Anonymous) says…

You think this is bad - take a look at how much the failed federal policy on Iraq cost. Makes this look like peanuts.
19 June 2008
at 8:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

bh99, did you read the article? Let me quote it for you:”Only one person has been determined to be ineligible because of citizenship status”Republican xenophobes asked for it, and they got it.Money well spent indeed.
19 June 2008
at 8:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

staff04 (Anonymous) says: (quoting)”Only one person has been determined to be ineligible because of citizenship status”Of course, that's based on the bleeding heart liberal A$$umption that the 9,999 who dropped out were eligible, not that they just didn't come back because they couldn't prove they were eligible.Let me ask you, staff - if there was a government program worth thousands of dollars to you and your family that you applied for and were eligible as long as you could secure the proof (say, in-state tuition or something), would you just say “Oh, okay, forget it” or would you come back with the proof? Get a grip.
19 June 2008
at 9:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says…

nota:”would you just say “Oh, okay, forget it” or would you come back with the proof?”Quoth the article: “For instance, many people had trouble obtaining needed documents, such as birth certificates, from other states.”In other words, proof is hard to get. Let's assume that everyone who was dropped could get proof (I know, bleeding heart not wanting to leave people without medical attention, but indulge me). Until they got such proof, they were dropped (hence the numbers that had to reenroll). So all of those who are eligible recipients still have to go a period of time without Medicaid coverage because of an increased standard of proof. No fewer than 10,000 people *in this state alone* were left without adequate health insurance because the federal government decided to crack down on a problem that didn't really exist.Liberal assumption: it's better to have people getting health care regardless of immigration status because healthy people are more productive, better parents, better students, and less costly to the economy.Not-liberal (because I wouldn't deign to call these nonsense comments “conservative,” it would imply a coherent approach to governing) assumption: anyone who can't prove that they are a citizen (because being a recipient of government aid usually means you have a lot of time on your hands to deal with multiple state, county, and local governments) must have been stealing benefits.

19 June 2008
at 9:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

I wonder how hard it is really to get a copy of one's birth certificate?Liberal attitude: Even if they're here illegally, we should subsidize them.Conservative attitude: If they're here illegally, we should deport them.Which makes more sense?
19 June 2008
at 10:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

OldEnuf2BYurDad (Anonymous) says…

This is what fear does. Policies founded on fear and not on values always end up embarrasing us all.
19 June 2008
at 10:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says…

“I wonder how hard it is really to get a copy of one's birth certificate?”In Kansas, the expected turnaround is anywhere from 3-10 days, along with a fee. You also need a second document unless you have a passport. Then one has to wait to be cleared by the state a second time, which takes longer because of the increased applications requirements. Let's assume three weeks, and now you're talking about a month without health insurance all because you didn't happen to have a spare birth certificate sitting around when it came time to renew your coverage.If you were born elsewhere, you might have more trouble. Getting my birth certificate from West Virginia would take anywhere from 2-6 weeks, depending on when the request was made. Add three weeks for clearing by the state and I could be out of coverage for almost two and a half months.
19 June 2008
at 10:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says…

Oh, and more than a year ago, the Center on Budget Policy and Priorities issued a report saying “The available evidence strongly suggests that those being adversely affected are primarily U.S. citizens otherwise eligible for Medicaid who are encountering difficulty in promptly securing documents such as birth certificates and who are remaining uninsured for longer periods of time as a result.” The report concludes, “the fact that significant numbers of individuals are being approved for Medicaid after delays of many months, during which they were uninsured, demonstrates that the requirement is adversely affecting substantial numbers of U.S. citizens, especially children who are citizens. Moreover, a large body of research conducted over a number of years has conclusively shown that increasing documentation and other administrative burdens generally results in eligible individuals failing to obtain coverage as a result of the enrollment and renewal processes having become more complicated to understand and more difficult to navigate.” The report continues, “Anita Smith, Chief of the Bureau of Medical Supports for the Iowa Department of Human Services has stated: “There is no evidence that the [enrollment] decline is due to undocumented aliens leaving the program. Rather, we believe that these new requirements are keeping otherwise eligible citizens from receiving Medicaid because they cannot provide the documents required to prove their citizenship or identity.” You can read the whole thing here: http://www.cbpp.org/2-2-07health.htmThe six states for which the CBPP report had specific numbers (wi, ks, la, va, nh, oh) lost more than 107,000 people from their Medicaid enrollment in six months, the overwhelming majority of which the states attributed to difficulties in completing the applications (which often have a specific timeframe before they are discarded). In other words, tilting at the windmills of undocumented immigrations have inexcusably left hundreds of thousands of low-income citizens without health coverage for at least some period of time in the last two years. New conservative assumption: open windows solve both babies and bathwater.
19 June 2008
at 10:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

compmd (Anonymous) says…

“many people had trouble obtaining needed documents, such as birth certificates, from other states.”It is not hard to get a birth certificate, give me a break. I needed a certified copy of mine recently. I had a family member go to a courthouse in the county I was born (a couple states away from here), she got it, and sent it to me overnight with USPS. I had it in 24 hours.I find it absurd that a significant fraction of *10,000* people couldn't get a birth certificate. It is probably the easiest and cheapest identifying document to obtain.
19 June 2008
at 10:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

nota-Again, I shall say, “Read the article.”Directly from the article:”We lost 20,000 eligible Kansans as a result of the requirements,”See the word 'eligible' in that sentence? Now, the article could have been written more clearly, for example, noting whether the backlog is the problem or the documents are a problem, but I suppose time will tell us in the end if the other 10,000 end up being re-enrolled as well.
19 June 2008
at 10:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Phill_Davis (Anonymous) says…

Subsidizing them. If you send them back, you have to increase funding for border patrols, social services staff to do checks keep them off the rolls, and military to deal with young, disaffected populations with negative views of the US. If you subsidize them, they stay in America, contribute to the tax base, and provide a wellspring to support aging boomers as they overload the social security system. Eventually, they become the proudest American citizens, more dedicated to egalitarian values and hard work than many lazy native citizens with a bizarre sense of entitlement.
19 June 2008
at 11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says…

“I needed a certified copy of mine recently. I had a family member go to a courthouse in the county I was born (a couple states away from here), she got it, and sent it to me overnight with USPS. I had it in 24 hours.”Good for you. I don't have family in the state where I was born anymore. Got a better solution for me? Seriously, the fact that your individual circumstances permitted a quick solution means absolutely nothing for anyone else. Stop making dumb arguments.

19 June 2008
at 11:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

“10000 ineligible recipients chose not to resign because they knew applications will be looked at closer.”I'm glad that you “know” this to be the truth… Just curious…how do you know? I didn't see anything about this in the article.What I DID see in the article is this:”We lost 20,000 eligible Kansans as a result of the requirements,”But, as your psychic abilities have shown, you clearly know more than what was offered in the article.
19 June 2008
at 11:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldvet (Anonymous) says…

I had to get mine from Missouri, took one call, one letter to them, and back in my hands from them in less then 2 weeks. Nothing here but liberal smoke with a good dose of BDS…
19 June 2008
at 11:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dirkleisure (Anonymous) says…

So, your personal story proves how easy it is to get a birth certificate?As long as personal stories are all that is needed to prove the point:http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/11/97-year-old-arizona-woman-disenfranchised-by-voter-id-law/Shirley Preiss was born in Kentucky in 1910 - a full 10 years before American women gained the right to vote. She first voted in a presidential election in 1932, for FDR. She's voted in every presidential election since…
19 June 2008
at 12:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

oldvet, amusing that you mention BDS…considering that you are the first person on this page to mention him, who has the obsession?Oh, and didja forget that he was pro-immunity? I doubt this policy has anything to do with him…
19 June 2008
at 12:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Confrontation (Anonymous) says…

Illegals find it quite easy to get a copy of your birth certificate and social security card.
19 June 2008
at 1:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

AndiMedi (Anonymous) says…

It is just astounding how the anti-legal and illegal immigration crowd respond when faced with credible evidence that most of their fears are based on faulty evidence and logic and that their solutions do more harm than good.Let's get everyone who is working and crime free into the system and recreate the system by which you could come legally in the first place so we won't keep making mistakes like this and can move on to solve issues like health care.
19 June 2008
at 4:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

Scott your reporting sucks, is not fact based, and you should NOT have reported this story, Why did you send this trash to print? Sho does your editing, LaRaza? THis thing SUCKS, You are another one that wants more “rights and benefits” for Mexicans and illegal aliens than American Taxpayers get. You are terrible!10,000 with an average of $5,000 (KSRS numbers) of minimum benefit (immunizations, checkups, dental, etc, but NO ER or surgery) is $5,000,000 right ther at the low point. If some had surgeries or long term care such as a car wreck the benefits are at $125,000-250,000 (Source is the Medicare/Medicaide benefits schedule), and if 1,000 developed cancer it could go as high as $1,000,000 for uncovered emporverished. That is an illegal alien getting that coverage, and being taken from legal reisdents, legal immigrants, and citizens!!Besides, they already had to verify to get their Meidicaie program. This was already required, just because the State of Kansas was not doing their job protecting the American Taxpayer.
19 June 2008
at 4:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

BTW, that “Center for Policy analysis” that was cited in an earlier post, it is a liberal think tank and propaganda site, look what a known lefty stated here about the site:”Paul Krugman, New York Times columnist,in a May 28, 2003 column on his website listingwebsites that are “must reading for anyone interested in government policy.”“Paul Krugman! What a liberal, and check about the “About us” section on these sites before you quote their “facts”, because it is not facts it is spin.

20 June 2008
at 1:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

Bubarubu (Anonymous) says: nota:”would you just say “Oh, okay, forget it” or would you come back with the proof?”“In other words, proof is hard to get.” And I reiterate - what would you do, go through the 'trouble' of getting your birth certificate or just say “Screw it, that's too much to expect a person to do for free health insurance?”“Until they got such proof, they were dropped (hence the numbers that had to reenroll). So all of those who are eligible recipients still have to go a period of time without Medicaid coverage because of an increased standard of proof.”And when it was reinstated, it was retroactive (unless they took more than a couple of months to get the proof). Which means they got everything paid.”No fewer than 10,000 people *in this state alone* were left without adequate health insurance because the federal government decided to crack down on a problem that didn't really exist.”With the extreme possibility that they weren't eligible in the first place.Go to the Kansas Medicaid website, or SRS's. The rules are available online. It doesn't have to be a birth certificate, there are numerous other items a person can use to prove citizenship. For a person who was unable to come up with *any* of those listed, there must be some kind of reason.But hey, 10,000 people (in this state alone) geting Medicaid they're not entitled to, yeah, you're right, a problem that doesn't exist.
20 June 2008
at 1:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

staff04 (Anonymous) says: >>>nota->>>Again, I shall say, “Read the article.”>>>Directly from the article:>>>”We lost 20,000 eligible Kansans as a result of the requirements,”I hate to differ with such a notable spokesman as the head of the Medicaid program for the state, but as half the people were unable to prove citizenship, by definition they were not eligible. Maybe instead of swallowing the hogwash that supports your ideology, you should put a little thought into this: If they were unable to come up with any proof of citizenship, how could Mr. Allison possible know they were currently “eligible?”Perhaps he meant to say 'previously' eligible - i.e., people who were previously approved and when asked to verify that they were citizens, could not. That definitely indicates a problem, but not with the fact they were cut off. It's with the fact that they got it in the first place.*****************************Bubarubu (Anonymous) says: “Good for you. I don't have family in the state where I was born anymore. Got a better solution for me? Seriously, the fact that your individual circumstances permitted a quick solution means absolutely nothing for anyone else. Stop making dumb arguments.”As opposed to the the fact that *your* individual circumstances did not allow for a quick resolution, which *isn't* a dumb argument?
20 June 2008
at 1:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

staff04 (Anonymous) says: “But, as your psychic abilities have shown, you clearly know more than what was offered in the article.”Apparently the only psychic staff04 will listen to is the Medicaid chief - who, incidentally, is responsible for this mess and trying to pass the buck. Because he's claiming these 10,000 folks were 'eligible,' when none of them could provide evidence that they were. So, staff, I ask again, if Mr. Allison isn't using a psychic, how exactly does he - or you - know that all those people were eligible?[“Cause I read it in the award winning LJW, so it *must* be true…”]
20 June 2008
at 1:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

From the MFMAM manual:http://www.khpa.ks.gov/KFMAM/main.asp”Acceptable documents and the hierarchical protocol for obtaining acceptable documents are described in the KEESM Appendix Item A-12. When obtaining documents the following applies.”And from that KEESM Appendix Item A-12, the rather long list of ways a person can prove citizenship:http://www.srskansas.org/KEESM/Appendix/A-12_citizenship_identify_verification_for_medical_10_07.pdf
20 June 2008
at 1:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

janeyb (Anonymous) says…

“Auditors found that the number of calls coming into the state center had decreased by the start of fiscal year 2008 last July 1 to levels experienced before the federal requirements took effect.”This is the last line of the above story as it appeared in the Topeka Capital Journal. Pretty much makes it a non-story, other than maybe the Federal requirements were successful.