Feds likely to help with state Medicaid bill after all
The U.S. Senate on Thursday passed a $26 billion package that includes some of the Medicaid funds Gov. Martin O'Malley relied upon to plug a $389 million hole in this year's budget.
The deal still must be approved by the U.S. House of Representatives, but House members have been far more supportive than the Senate.It is unclear how much Maryland will eventually get, since the package is smaller than the initial plan. ((**UPDATE** O'Malley spokesman Shaun Adamec writes in to say that the current language provides Maryland with $272.7 million.))
Nevertheless, any money from the feds will reduce the amount O'Malley will need to borrow from the income tax reserve fund and will leave whoever wins in November with a healthier cash balance.
O'Malley has taken some flak from the conservative Americans for Prosperity for offering a budget that relied on federal money. Dave Schwartz, the group's executive director, said the issue has surfaced at budget-themed town hall meetings and he questioned the governor about it during a recent Board of Public Works meeting.
Schwartz said their group is keeping an eye on what Congress does, and is still annoyed with the governor. "This is just not how you balance budgets," he said. "People at home don't balance budgets on what might come through."
The Senate, apparently also worried about Congress balking on the promised money, inserted a budget provision that allowed the state to borrow from the income tax fund to keep Maryland's spending plan balanced. Other states, including New York, face wide-spread layoffs if the money does not materialize.
The deal still must be approved by the U.S. House of Representatives, but House members have been far more supportive than the Senate.
Nevertheless, any money from the feds will reduce the amount O'Malley will need to borrow from the income tax reserve fund and will leave whoever wins in November with a healthier cash balance.
O'Malley has taken some flak from the conservative Americans for Prosperity for offering a budget that relied on federal money. Dave Schwartz, the group's executive director, said the issue has surfaced at budget-themed town hall meetings and he questioned the governor about it during a recent Board of Public Works meeting.
Schwartz said their group is keeping an eye on what Congress does, and is still annoyed with the governor. "This is just not how you balance budgets," he said. "People at home don't balance budgets on what might come through."
The Senate, apparently also worried about Congress balking on the promised money, inserted a budget provision that allowed the state to borrow from the income tax fund to keep Maryland's spending plan balanced. Other states, including New York, face wide-spread layoffs if the money does not materialize.
Comments
Why didn't Dave Schwartz object to a similarly sized federal bailout in 2003 when Bob Ehrlich was governor and he was on Mr. Ehrlich's campaign payroll?
In May 2003 when Ehrlich was governor, the Republican Congress passed and President Bush signed a $20 billion bailout of state and local governments. Maryland's state and local share was $500 million. Gov. Ehrlich didn't complain when he was on the receiving end of a federal bailout in 2003, but that hasn't stopped him from criticizing Gov. O'Malley for doing the same, except in the deepest recession since the Great Depression.
- Steve Lebowitz, Annapolis
Posted by: justdafacts | August 6, 2010 3:29 AM
Okay Steve no cross words just a simple-what is so great about MOM?
The state of Maryland taxes the crap out of its citizens-fact-please defend this to me.
Posted by: john | August 6, 2010 10:37 PM
Stevie,
Nice try, in May of 2003 Governor Ehrlich just came into office, the previous Democrat governors caused the problem by reckless overspending
.
Again this year a Democrat governor caused the problem with the same cronic spending issues.
STOP THE SPENDING!!!
Justa, you always only tell half the story trying to make your point. You are a great Democrat cheerleader.
Posted by: nofriendofMOM | August 9, 2010 3:56 PM
By May 2003 Bob Ehrlich had completed the first legislative session of his term and his FY 2004 budget was enacted.
If he objected to a federal bailout on principle, he could have said so at the time and rebuffed the $500 million in aid to the state and its localities. Instead, he accepted the funds without protest.
That's why he and his longtime staffer Dave Schwartz need to explain their about-face, attacking Gov. O'Malley for doing exactly what then-Gov. Ehrlich did when he was in the same position.
- Steve Lebowitz, Annapolis
Posted by: justdafacts | August 10, 2010 12:34 AM
Hey Steve does Marty talk in his sleep?
How about MOM's flip flop on slots-care to explain that one Mr. Lebovitz?
Posted by: john | August 10, 2010 2:16 PM