NYTimes.com Article: A Prescription Plan Hailed as a Model Is a Budget Casualty
Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:28:07 -0800
federal: compensated at different rates wrt medicaid
state: different wrt to statutes governing eligibilty, by program
what's obvious: washington's and oregon's priorities differ and different
folks benefited during the boom. that washington's deliverables remained
static during the boom while oregon's increased can be interpreted more than
From: johnhall [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:44 AM
To: 'geege'; email@example.com
Subject: RE: NYTimes.com Article: A Prescription Plan Hailed as a Model
Is a Budget Casualty
> From: geege [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> john asks "The state of Washington and the state of Oregon don't share
> Federal Government? And if they do, why is such a drastic difference
> increased spending not noteworthy?'
> depends on the program. medicaid is compensated by the feds at
> rates, depending on the state's relative wealth.
Compensated at different rates, or more people are eligible?
In any case, do you have any evidence that there is a significant
difference between the states due to Federal discrimination against
Or might the difference be far more mundane. Oregon's revenues
skyrocketed far more than Washington's during the boom because Oregon
has an Income tax. With more money, they spent more.
Now it is time to pay the piper.