Friday, November 17, 2017
Opinion

Column: Paying for benefits, getting none

RECOMMENDED READING


Economists like myself are accustomed to seeing politicians act in ways that don't make economic sense. That being said, the decisions many are making about health care policy are truly dumbfounding. ¶ Florida recently failed to pass a budget that included the expansion of Medicaid that is part of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and will be implemented on Jan. 1, 2014. In so doing, Florida joins 24 other states that are "opting out" of expanding Medicaid. Not surprisingly, most of the South is in that group. The economic consequences of opting out are likely to be large. ¶ A little background: The Affordable Care Act includes an expansion of Medicaid to people aged 19 to 64 with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty line. This expansion potentially covers more than 15 million people without health insurance in the United States. Of the opting-out states in the South, Florida and Texas have the largest populations that would be affected at 1.3 and 1.75 million eligible people respectively.

The Medicaid expansion is one of the largest costs of health care reform (subsidies to buy private insurance are the other). The costs of the reform are paid for by 20 new or higher taxes, which are clearly targeted at the rich and the medical industry.

Health care reform thus is in large part a transfer: Rich households and the medical industry pay higher taxes to cover the cost of insurance for those who lack it. The extra spending on Medicaid might boost the economy, but the higher taxes will weaken it. Most economists thus would not expect a positive impact on economic growth from the expansion — any benefits from the extra spending will likely be offset by the extra taxes. We would view a decision to pursue greater equity at the cost of some efficiency as a value judgment best made by the political system, as has happened.

Many conservative states have thus opted out of the Medicaid expansion on the grounds of refusing to redistribute income and increase entitlement spending. These politicians are certainly entitled to their value judgment of opposing redistribution.

Economically, however, the decision to opt out is astounding because states that opt out of the expansion still pay for it. The new taxes are all federal taxes that will not be lower even if states save money by opting out. Opting out of the expansion just makes sure that the poor in the South don't see any benefits; rather, taxpayers in the South and other "red" states that opt out are kindly paying for the expansion of Medicaid in the states that opt in.

While an income transfer within a state is not likely to impact economic growth, a transfer from the rich in the South to the poor everywhere else will have economic consequences. The states making a stand against redistribution should expect that the higher taxes with little additional spending will slow economic growth and decrease the number of jobs in those states.

The costs of the redistribution cannot be avoided, so opting out is really only avoiding the benefits.

The states that opt in, on the other hand, will see more spending and thus higher aggregate demand and relatively stronger economic performance.

Extra spending on Medicaid does affect the wider economy — it pays the salaries of nurses, doctors and everyone else in the health care industry, who then spend that money throughout the region. Businesses and jobs will head to those states where people have more money to spend.

Starting next January we can thus expect a slump in the South and other red states compared to economic growth everywhere else. Politicians in the opt-out states are choosing slower growth, fewer jobs and greater suffering amongst the poor to go along with the higher taxes on the rich that are already being implemented.

That's a lot to pay for a principled opposition.

Alan Green, an economics professor, will be joining Stetson University's Economics Department in August. He wrote this exclusively for the Tampa Bay Times.

Comments

Editorial: Good for Tampa council member Frank Reddick to appeal for community help to solve Seminole Heights killings

As the sole black member of the Tampa City Council, Frank Reddick was moved Thursday to make a special appeal for help in solving four recent murders in the racially mixed neighborhood of Southeast Seminole Heights. "I’m pleading to my brothers. You ...
Updated: 1 hour ago
Editorial: It’s time to renew community’s commitment to Tampa Theatre

Editorial: It’s time to renew community’s commitment to Tampa Theatre

New attention to downtown Tampa as a place to live, work and play is transforming the area at a dizzying pace. Credit goes to recent projects, both public and private, such as the Tampa River Walk, new residential towers, a University of South Florid...
Updated: 5 hours ago
Editorial: Rays opening offer on stadium sounds too low

Editorial: Rays opening offer on stadium sounds too low

The Rays definitely like Ybor City, and Ybor City seems to like the Rays. So what could possibly come between this match made in baseball stadium heaven? Hundreds (and hundreds and hundreds) of millions of dollars. Rays owner Stu Sternberg told Times...
Updated: 1 hour ago
Editorial: Wage hike for contractors’ labor misguided

Editorial: Wage hike for contractors’ labor misguided

St. Petersburg City Council members are poised to raise the minimum wage for contractors who do business with the city, a well-intended but misguided ordinance that should be reconsidered. The hourly minimum wage undoubtedly needs to rise — for every...
Published: 11/16/17
Editorial: Firing a critic of his handling of the sewer crisis is a bad early step in Kriseman’s new term

Editorial: Firing a critic of his handling of the sewer crisis is a bad early step in Kriseman’s new term

Barely a week after St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman promised to unite the city following a bitter and divisive campaign, his administration has fired an employee who dared to criticize him. It seems Kriseman’s own mantra of "moving St. Pete forwar...
Published: 11/15/17
Updated: 11/16/17
Editorial: USF’s billion-dollar moment

Editorial: USF’s billion-dollar moment

The University of South Florida recently surpassed its $1 billion fundraising goal, continuing a current trend of exceeding expectations. At 61 years old — barely middle age among higher education institutions — USF has grown up quickly. It now boast...
Updated: 1 hour ago
Editorial: Vets should not have to wait years for benefits

Editorial: Vets should not have to wait years for benefits

American military members hurt in service to their country should not have to wait a lifetime for the benefits they deserve. But that’s a reality of the disability process at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, which hasn’t made payi...
Published: 11/14/17

Editorial: Deputies’ rescue reflects best in law enforcement

The bravery two Hillsborough County sheriff’s deputies showed a week ago is a credit to them and reflects the professionalism of the office.Deputies Benjamin Thompson and Trent Migues responded at dusk Nov. 11 after 82-year-old Leona Evans of Webster...
Updated: 1 hour ago

Another voice: An untrustworthy deal with Russia

President Donald Trump’s latest defense of Russian leader Vladimir Putin included — along with a bow to his denials of meddling in the U.S. election — an appeal to pragmatism. "Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing,"...
Published: 11/13/17
Updated: 11/14/17
Editorial: U.S. should resume processing visas for Cubans

Editorial: U.S. should resume processing visas for Cubans

The health attacks reported on American diplomats in Cuba deserve a serious investigation, and the Cuban government’s cooperation in the case will — for better or for worse — shape the emerging relationship between the two nations. But the Trump admi...
Published: 11/13/17