Study finds Medicaid expansion costs double previous estimate, totaling $1 trillion

Kamala Harris’ plans for America’s health-care system are still relatively unknown.

However, her strong support for ObamaCare, which has been very expensive, gives a significant hint about her intentions.

Recent research has shown that the Medicaid expansion under ObamaCare has cost over $1 trillion in the last decade, a number that will likely increase under a Harris administration.

Medicaid expansion, a key feature of the Affordable Care Act, has been a major part of the Democratic Party’s healthcare reform plans, including Harris’ previous support for “Medicare for All.”

The idea behind the policy is that the government can provide affordable coverage to every American. Since its implementation in 2014, 40 states and Washington DC have expanded Medicaid to include millions of able-bodied adults.

The Biden-Harris administration has been supportive of this expansion, but has overlooked the significant cost implications.

The initial estimate of extending Medicaid coverage to non-disabled, higher-income adults was around $450 billion, but the actual cost has exceeded $574 billion, more than double the expected amount.

The costs continue to increase rapidly, with a 180% increase in 2023 alone.

Unfortunately, the growth in Medicaid enrollment has led to longer wait times and poorer health outcomes for those truly in need of assistance.

The Biden-Harris administration’s decision to remove work requirements for Medicaid recipients has further exacerbated the situation.

Estimates suggest that another $670 billion would be needed to expand Medicaid to cover an additional 11 million able-bodied adults under a Harris presidency.

If Harris were to push for more substantial changes, such as a return to her support for Medicare for All, the financial burden on taxpayers would likely be even greater.

Donald Trump’s introduction of work requirements for Medicaid recipients has shown promise in helping individuals find jobs and transition to private insurance, ultimately saving billions of dollars.

Reviving these work requirements could lead to significant savings for states, as shown by the experience of Arkansas before the suspension of the policy due to litigation and the pandemic.

Arkansas’ Medicaid-enrollment population decreased by 40,000 people in a short period, either finding jobs with private coverage or earning too much to qualify for Medicaid.

If Trump were to reintroduce work requirements in a second term, many states would likely adopt them, resulting in substantial cost savings and improved access to private coverage for Medicaid recipients.

It is clear that taxpayers would benefit more from a return to Trump’s health-care policies rather than the potential financial strain under a President Harris.

Jonathan Bain is a senior research fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability, where Jonathan Ingram is vice president of policy and research.