The chart does not show any offsetting. It shows a total cost increase of the new Medicaid mandate. I think the Senator is trying to imply there may be some savings for some areas if a State had a lot of catastrophic and the Federal Government were going to pick up 100 percent of that cost, I guess. That may be correct, but it does not have a column that shows that. Maybe if we would have had a little more time--the answer is no. I ask my colleague, though, since CBO did some work for the Senator, did they do a State-by-State analysis on what the impact of the State of Oklahoma would be?
Don Nickles: “The chart does not show any offsetting. It shows a total cost increase of the new Medicaid mandate. I think the Senator…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the financial implications of a new Medicaid mandate during Senate debate.
Share
More from Don Nickles
We should not be giving advantages to our international competitors over our U.S.-based companies.
I have a couple comments. Again, I compliment my colleagues, Senator Kennedy and Senator DeWine. They have been steadfast in their advocacy. Senator DeWine is right, he and Senator Kennedy introduced this a long time ago. If I am correct…
I would have to look at the figures. The baseline scored by OMB was 521. The baseline scored by CBO was 477. The figure we had before us in the budget resolution, I would want to check. CBO is in the process of revising that. We use CBO…
If we are going to do it, we should not do it through the Tax Code. I believe it should be done through the Armed Services Committee. I have great respect for Chairman Warner and Senator Levin. Let them have hearings on it. Let them decide…





