Revamped Medicaid expansion could return to Wyoming next year

2013-02-10T11:00:00Z 2013-08-26T20:57:17Z Revamped Medicaid expansion could return to Wyoming next yearBy JOSHUA WOLFSON Star-Tribune staff writer Casper Star-Tribune Online

Medicaid expansion may be dead in Wyoming, but there’s a chance it could return to life next year in a new form.

Gov. Matt Mead has asked state health officials to explore options for an alternative Medicaid program that might be better suited for Wyoming. That could include a system that mirrors private insurance, with incentives that push patients toward preventive care and away from costly emergency room visits, said state Health Department Director Tom Forslund.

Copayments and deductibles could also be built into the alternative program.

Lawmakers voted last month to reject optional parts of Medicaid expansion, which is a key component of the federal Affordable Care Act. The decision is expected to cost Wyoming $79 million over six years.

The state won’t feel the full budgetary effect of that decision until next year, when mandatory parts of the expansion go into effect. Roughly 10,600 people may be added to Wyoming’s program, according to state estimates.

Health officials want to be prepared with alternatives in case lawmakers, faced with a sizable Medicaid bill, reconsider the optional expansion, which could turn a $79 million loss into $47 million in savings, according to a Health Department study.

“We want to present options without having to scramble,” Forslund said.

States must expand Medicaid, a government health program that covers the poor and medically needy, as part of federal health care reform. But a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling gave states the power to opt out of certain parts of the plan.

Optional expansion would add about 17,600 poor adults to the state’s Medicaid rolls. Wyoming currently does not offer income-based coverage to childless adults and only covers parents with incomes well below federal poverty guidelines.

Extending coverage to those groups would allow the state to spend less on other health programs, resulting in the projected $47 million savings. However, those savings did little to persuade Republican lawmakers, who worry the federal government won’t honor its promises to cover the cost of at least 90 percent of the expansion.

Some lawmakers also complained that the traditional Medicaid program was inefficient and encouraged unnecessary care.

Problems remain

Wyoming lacks another program to significantly reduce its uninsured population or address the roughly $200 million a year in uncompensated care that hospitals perform for people without coverage. That seemingly leaves the state with the choice of expanded Medicaid or the status quo.

Enter the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which has offered a third choice: Build a more flexible Medicaid program for the expansion population.

“You could put people on the traditional Medicaid plan, or the state could have an alternative plan that is quite a bit different,” Forslund said.

Mead opposed optional expansion and has criticized federal officials for failing to provide the state with adequate information on the effects of the Affordable Care Act. But the governor has also said Wyoming should explore a Medicaid package with more flexibility. He’d like to get the Legislature’s input on alternatives, said Mead spokesman Renny MacKay.

The Health Department plans to present Mead with alternatives this summer.

A second chance?

Some lawmakers say they’d reconsider Medicaid expansion if state officials and the federal government can agree on a plan that works for Wyoming. Sen. Bill Landen, R-Casper, voted against optional expansion when it was debated earlier this month, but said he’d be open to discussing alternatives that cover more of the uninsured.

Like many lawmakers, Landen questions whether the federal government will meet its financial commitments. But regardless of what happens, Wyoming’s health care problems aren’t going away, he said.

“We have a lot of folks who are uninsured,” he said. “And that is not good for our hospital system, not good for our providers, and most importantly, it’s not good for our citizens.”

If federal officials are willing to be more flexible with Medicaid, lawmakers should revisit their decision, said Sen. Charlie Scott, who was among the most vocal critics of optional expansion. But he said state leaders might want to wait until the 2015 legislative session — after expansion has been in effect for more than a year — before making a decision.

“We may have our hands full the next few years dealing with the consequences of [the Affordable Care Act.]” he said. “We just don’t know.”

Contact Joshua Wolfson at 307-266-0582 or at

Visit to read his blog. Follow him on Twitter @joshwolfson.

Copyright 2015 Casper Star-Tribune Online. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(1) Comments

  1. JLF
    Report Abuse
    JLF - February 10, 2013 5:55 pm
    Wyoming state legislators appear to be more focused on maintaining their memberships in the NRA that addressing the health care needs of our uninsured citizens. When will the legislators stand up and deliver a viable health care option for those who are left out and left behind. Our state will be loosing money due to the rejection of aspects of the Affordable Care Act and the budget will suffer along with our people. The state has no income tax for the advantage of wealthy property owners who call Wyoming home just to save taxes, others who actually live here suffer as the budget is squeezed to cover the deficit that is created by this special interest boondoggle. If the legislature actual has a viable alternative, lets hear it, health care is to important to our families to be a political football. Weak excuses will not cut it.
Untitled Document

Civil Dialogue

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters.

If your comment was not approved, perhaps...

  1. You called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).

  2. You rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.

  3. YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.

  4. You have issues with a business. Have a bad meal? Feel you were overcharged at the store? New car is a lemon? Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns.

  5. You believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write the editor at, or call Editor Jason Adrians at 266-0545 or Content Director David Mayberry at 266-0633. This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.

  6. You included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.

  7. You accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.

  8. Your comment is in really poor taste.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

Featured Businesses

Latest Offers