Since President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program, there has been a wide range of reactions from states to the provisions in general—and to the sudden abundance of federal money for health care programs. These two major pieces of national legislation offer federal guidance and resources, but leave a significant amount of flexibility to states. Key questions facing state leaders and policymakers are: What is the best use of federal stimulus dollars? If one-time funds are used to offset state General Fund obligations now, how will those programs be funded in the future? Read more »
The situations in Washington State, Ohio, and Louisiana are representative of a debate that is playing out across the country. They illustrate variation in strategies for using—or declining—one-time stimulus funds, based on political and economic considerations. Read more »
Washington is a traditionally progressive state in terms of health reform, and the Governor's Office welcomes the opportunities offered by the Recovery Act's health information technology grants and other provisions, and the Children's Health Insurance Program reauthorization. Read more »
Rather than scaling back Medicaid, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, a Democrat, has proposed increasing eligibility for children from 200 to 300 percent of poverty, using one-time federal stimulus money to cover the cost. Read more »
Louisiana's Governor Bobby Jindal (R) said he would turn down some of the temporary federal funding that would require Louisiana to make changes in state law—such as expanding unemployment benefits, which the governor indicated would force the state to raise taxes on businesses. Read more »