Liam, thanks for a good take on an important issue. Couple points of debate I would offer:
1) as a former contracted internal auditor of CMS, I challenge anyone to quantify if an 8.6% rate of FWA is a "serious integrity" issue. My audit team challenged Deloitte on the same take. Given that the Blues typically report "administrative costs" of their plans at 15%, it demands very specific discussion, not the usual hand-wave.
2) as a resident of Mississippi, I'm here to offer you can change any level of Medicaid programming and CT will always get more than MS. There's a fairly direct correlation of state revenue to political attitude towards Medicaid. How can a state like MS that remains 1 of 10 holdouts in expanding their Medicaid program (which CT did immediately in 2013) ever expect to be allocated the same dollars or more?
Liam, thanks for a good take on an important issue. Couple points of debate I would offer:
1) as a former contracted internal auditor of CMS, I challenge anyone to quantify if an 8.6% rate of FWA is a "serious integrity" issue. My audit team challenged Deloitte on the same take. Given that the Blues typically report "administrative costs" of their plans at 15%, it demands very specific discussion, not the usual hand-wave.
2) as a resident of Mississippi, I'm here to offer you can change any level of Medicaid programming and CT will always get more than MS. There's a fairly direct correlation of state revenue to political attitude towards Medicaid. How can a state like MS that remains 1 of 10 holdouts in expanding their Medicaid program (which CT did immediately in 2013) ever expect to be allocated the same dollars or more?
Thanks for great topics to discuss!