CBO Says Funding CHIP Actually Saves Gov’t Billions. So What’s The Holdup?

WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 20: (L-R) Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) arrive at the press conference after the senate vote of the tax reform bill o... WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 20: (L-R) Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) arrive at the press conference after the senate vote of the tax reform bill on December 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. The Senate has passed the tax reform bill and it will return to the House of Representatives for final approval. (Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

It has now been more than 100 days since the Republican-controlled Congress allowed funding for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) to lapse, and despite several infusions of stopgap funding from both Capitol Hill and the Department of Health and Human Services, states could run out of money as early as next week. By March, according to a new report from Georgetown University, nearly half of all states will exhaust all of their federal funding. The program covers nearly 9 million children and pregnant women across the country.

While members of Congress on both sides of the aisle insist that CHIP must be reauthorized, GOP leaders have yet to even schedule a vote, and the program has been stuck in limbo for months amid disagreements about how to pay for it.

A new email from the Congressional Budget Office to lawmakers obtained by TPM notes, however, that renewing the program could actually save the federal government money.

Extending CHIP for 10 years would save a total of $6 billion, CBO staffers said. The internal estimate comes just a few days after the agency reported publicly that it had slashed its estimate of how much it would cost the government to renew CHIP for five years—from $8 billion to around $800 million—following Republicans’ move to repeal the individual mandate as part of a tax overhaul.

“With all of their policies that have driven up premium costs in the individual market, not just the mandate repeal but also cutting cost-sharing reduction payments, they made CHIP even more of a bargain than it already was,” Joan Alker, the executive director of Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families, told TPM.

Essentially, killing the mandate dramatically raises premiums in Obamacare’s individual market, which is where millions of low-income families currently enrolled in CHIP would have to turn were the program to disappear. The higher those premiums go, the more the government has to pay in subsidies. So by raising the cost of not renewing CHIP, Republicans have dramatically lowered the cost of reauthorizing it.

But Matthew Fiedler, an economist at Brookings’ Center for Health Policy, told TPM that this not much of a cause for celebration, as part of the reason for the new, lower cost of CHIP is the expectation that many more parents around the country will go uninsured.

“If you think about a world with no CHIP, a lot of families would still want to have their kids covered, so they would look for private insurance in the individual market,” he explained. “There, once you’ve covered your kids, it’s basically free to cover yourself on the same policy, because of how the premium tax credits work. But if CHIP comes back, the parent is the only one to remain on the policy, facing a cost for the coverage. Without the mandate, more parents are likely to drop their insurance than CBO used to think.”

The news that renewing CHIP is now a net cost-saver, Fiedler emphasized, “isn’t really a silver lining of the repeal of the individual mandate. We’re going to have lower coverage for parents than we used to.”

Still, Democrats are seizing on the new information from CBO to push for swift renewal of CHIP, saying the past arguments about offsetting its cost are now irrelevant.

“This should be a no brainer,” said Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) in a statement citing the CBO e-mail showing the program to save billions over 10 years. “We should stop the uncertainty and permanently extend CHIP.”

Meanwhile, the nearly $3 billion for CHIP that Congress passed in December could run out in just a few weeks.

“CHIP has never operated like this before—on a short-term, month-by-month basis. You can’t manage a health program like that. It just doesn’t work,” Alker said. “We expect to see states start to send out notices out to families that CHIP may expire or possibly order enrollment freezes by February 1st if Congress doesn’t act.”

Latest DC

Notable Replies

  1. The burning question is: Will their vengeful ideology bankrupt the government??? Inquiring minds and all that…

  2. That’s a rhetorical question: the reason the GOP does anything is to hurt poor people, wrongfully stack the deck in favor of the 1% and to ensure that white protestants keep a death grip on power.

  3. Saving the government billions doesn’t matter to the GOP. It only matters if those billions can be routed directly to the 1 percenters, and the 99% pay for it.

  4. Avatar for caltg caltg says:

    The GOP hates poor, sick kids. “Let 'em die!” they say, “and reduce the surplus population.”

  5. Avatar for godwit godwit says:

    But where are the ghosts of Christmas past , present and future to set them straight?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

33 more replies


Avatar for system1 Avatar for marby Avatar for sysprog Avatar for clunkertruck Avatar for leftflank Avatar for cervantes Avatar for losamigos Avatar for drriddle Avatar for bonvivant Avatar for lastroth Avatar for mike_in_houston Avatar for dickweed Avatar for hoagie Avatar for steveinmanhattan Avatar for zlohcuc Avatar for gusfabriani Avatar for uneducated Avatar for greysea Avatar for not_so_fluffy Avatar for katscherger Avatar for tindalos Avatar for drtv Avatar for aiddon Avatar for theuniversalexecutive

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: