Arkansas’ Approach to the Medicaid Expansion: Premium Assistance

As New Hampshire considers the opportunity to accept millions of dollars in federal funds to reduce the number of people without insurance, some policy makers are looking at an experimental approach embraced by the state of Arkansas as it seeks to extend Medicaid to more of its low-income workers.

This issue brief explains the basic framework of Arkansas’ premium assistance proposal, examines the federal standards that will have to be met in order to implement such an approach, and explores some of the issues that must be weighed.

Testimony Regarding BET and Tipped Wages

I am here today to voice opposition to Amendment 2013-1668s, which seeks to reduce the taxes owed by businesses that employ wait staff and other workers that receive some of their pay in the form of tips. As proposed, the amendment would make the struggle to finance public services vital to New Hampshire’s economic health that much more difficult. Furthermore, the amendment may establish a double standard in the treatment of tips under law. Finally, the amendment would undermine the basic purpose of the BET, eating away at its base and compromising the stability it brings to New Hampshire’s tax system. Consequently, I urge the Committee to reject the amendment.

Testimony Before Senate Finance on State Budget

I am here to express support for the provisions of the FY 2014-2015 budget that would enable New Hampshire to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal Medicaid funds and to reduce the number of Granite Staters who currently lack affordable health insurance coverage.

New Hampshire can extend coverage to 40 percent more people and do it with no net cost to the state, as long as managed care goes forward and the state takes advantage of offsetting savings in other areas. The even better news is that there is the potential for the state to achieve net savings if all savings targets and revenue projections hold.

House Finance Committee’s Proposed FY 2014-2015 Budget

Like the plan offered by Gov. Hassan earlier this year, the FY 2014-2015 budget the House of Representatives will consider this week begins to undo some of the damage wrought by several years of spending cuts. The principal difference between the two budgets centers around casino gambling. In total, the House would spend $187 million or 4.2 percent more than what New Hampshire is expected to spend in the current biennium, but it is approximately $54 million lower than the General and Education Fund appropriations recommended by the Governor and does not include $80 million in potential licensing fees from gambling.