By State Representative, Leon D. Young
Leon D. Young
With much ballyhoo and hoopla, Scott Walker recently signed legislation that expands access to a longterm assistance program known as Family Care. The bill in effect lifts the enrollment cap on the long-term care program for the elderly and disabled.
On its face, this is a good thing and most would say a positive political development. Mr. Walker, naturally, has attempted to get as much political mileage out of this recent development as possible. The bill signing ceremony was turned into a media event and staged at Independence First in Milwaukee , where the governor was conveniently surrounded by a cadre of elderly and disabled recipients.
But, let’s keep it real. This is nothing more than another (blatant!) example of Scott Walker playing politics — in trying to make the best of a bad situation. Initially, Scott Walker had proposed cutting 65,000 elderly, disabled and young children from the Family Care rolls in an effort to help balance his budget on the backs of the state’s most vulnerable residents.
But, late last year, the Obama administration forced Mr. Walker’s hand by pressuring him lift the enrollment cap on Family Care, when it refused to allow him to divert $100 million in federal Medicaid money from the state program. Left with no real choice, Mr. Walker finally agreed to lift the cap and also stated that he planned to expand the program to all 72 counties in the state.
This was a monumental change of direction for Mr. Walker, but begs the question: where would the additional revenue come from to fund the expansion? After all, Walker had initially made the case that the enrollment cap had to be frozen because of the state budget shortfall. Now, all of sudden, Walker is insisting that he will be able to extract $80 million from thin air from some nebulous “efficiencies.”
Lifting the enrollment cap on the Family Care program is good public policy, but expanding the program to all 72 counties presents a financial dilemma for the state. However, it is imperative that the expansion doesn’t proceed at the expense of reducing the level of service for current Family Care recipients.