Medicaid Spending More Than Doubled, 1999-2010

Sometimes a picture tells a thousand words. And this growth in Medicaid dependency happened mostly during a Republican Administration, well before ObamaCare’s expansion. And the trend from 2006 through 2010 is straight. That is, the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent recession did not cause the expansion. It’s just what our government does, apparently.

94460875-f241-4560-a89e-004d292b4a83

Comments (13)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Matthew says:

    Medicaid spending shot up nearly $100 million in Bush 43 first term. Then is has steadily been increasing. I wonder what it will look like after Medicaid expansion is included in the next couple of years.

    • Walter Q. says:

      Had the years in his first term been included in the graph, it would likely show a steady increase from 1999 to 2010.

    • John Fembup says:

      No, Matthew, it didn’t. Look at the chart again.

  2. Thomas says:

    Not what I would have expected, but it seems like through the years, reliance on Medicaid has been growing and it isn’t a recent phenomenon.

    • James M. says:

      Evidently Medicaid had been growing, but now how much will it grow from the expansion.

      • Bill B. says:

        I think the rise could be substantial, especially as Medicaid enrollment is increasing not only in states that expand Medicaid, but with states that denied Medicaid expansion as well.

  3. Bart I. says:

    I wonder why the gap between 2000-2004. It would be interesting to see what happened in the intervening three years.

    • John R. Graham says:

      I am a little baffled by that presentation, too. It actually looks like the compound annual growth rate in those years was faster than the entire period. As Matthew points out, that was President Bush’s first term.

  4. Jennifer says:

    I agree that it seems like Medicaid has been increasing every year, but I wonder what the projections far after 2010 with the new expansions in the program as a result of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)/Obamacare.

  5. SPM says:

    There is no doubt that liberal statists will like the increased numbers shown on this graph. However, conservatives define progress as fewer people needing Medicaid.

  6. Bob Hertz says:

    One would like to know how much of the increase was for the poor, how much for the disabled, and how much for the elderly. (nursing homes plus dual beneficiaries.)

    I am afraid that conservatives blame the poor, and maybe that is accurate, but maybe not.

    Harold Pollack once estimated that the average new young poor person on Medicaid costs the system about $580 a year. That is not much.

    • John R. Graham says:

      I agree with you there. The stats on Medicaid nursing-home use by middle-class seniors via artificial impoverishment, discussed by Stephen Moses of the Center for Long-Term Care Reform.

      I should also note that many conservative/libertarian types view Medicaid reform (i.e. lack thereof) as the gaping hole in the welfare reform of Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton.