Bill Overview
Title: Property Tax Reduction Act of 2022
Description: Property Tax Reduction Act of This bill reduces federal Medicaid funding beginning in FY2025 for certain states that require political subdivisions to contribute funds towards medical assistance. Specifically, the bill applies to states that received, for FY2022, disproportionate share hospital (DSH) allotments greater than six times the national average. (DSHs are hospitals that receive additional payment under Medicaid for treating a large share of low-income patients.) Excepted from the bill are contributions that: (1) are required from a political subdivision that has a population greater than 5 million and imposes a local income tax upon its residents, or (2) were required for administrative expenses as of January 1, 2022.
Sponsors: Rep. Jacobs, Chris [R-NY-27]
Target Audience
Population: People relying on Medicaid-funded services in states with high DSH allotments
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill impacts federal Medicaid funding, specifically targeting states with DSH allotments greater than six times the national average.
- DSH allotments are related to hospitals that treat a large number of low-income patients.
- The population affected will primarily be low-income individuals who rely on Medicaid-funded services in the impacted states.
- The bill does not impact states where the political subdivision populations are greater than 5 million and impose a local income tax, or where contributions were required for administrative expenses as of January 1, 2022.
Reasoning
- The population affected will primarily be low-income individuals who rely on Medicaid-funded services in states with high DSH allotments.
- These individuals might have a lower baseline economic stability due to reliance on Medicaid, making potential reductions in hospital support more impactful.
- Changes in funding could result in reduced access or quality of medical services, which can adversely affect wellbeing.
- People in large metropolitan areas or in states not heavily dependent on DSH funding might not see any impact.
- The policy provides exemptions for certain large areas, further narrowing the field of those impacted.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (New York City, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on Medicaid for my healthcare needs. This policy worries me because it might reduce the quality of care at the hospitals I can access.
- I'm concerned about longer wait times and reduced services if funding is cut.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hoping the exceptions for large cities mean that my access to services won't change much.
- It would be tragic if people in smaller towns lost their healthcare resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired (Rural Mississippi)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The cut in funding could mean the small local hospital will have even fewer resources.
- I worry I may have to travel farther for care or face longer wait times.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
Construction Worker (Dallas, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There might be fewer structures and support for work injuries like mine if hospitals lose funding.
- I'm already dealing with a hard job market; health issues will make it worse.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
Artist (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not sure how this policy might affect us freelancers, but I worry about hidden costs.
- Reduced support might mean I have fewer affordable clinics to go to for my needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
Caregiver (Seattle, WA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry not just for myself but for those I care for. Access to quality services might diminish.
- Hope the state can cushion some of this impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
College student (Miami, FL)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy being about states with high allotments makes me think it might shift resources to bigger cities.
- I'm worried about costs increasing and services decreasing in the state.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Tech worker (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think large city policies cushion certain impacts because they have income tax revenues.
- But I'm worried about long-term cost increases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired factory worker (Rural Alabama)
Age: 68 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have very few options if the local hospital loses funding. My wellbeing heavily depends on Medicaid coverage.
- Traveling to bigger cities isn't feasible.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 1 | 3 |
Part-time librarian (Louisville, KY)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- How this policy changes things may depend on out-of-state politicians. We might see cuts we're not prepared for.
- If things get tighter, I'll have to make tough choices about healthcare.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3500000000)
Year 2: $3100000000 (Low: $2600000000, High: $3600000000)
Year 3: $3200000000 (Low: $2700000000, High: $3700000000)
Year 5: $3400000000 (Low: $2900000000, High: $3900000000)
Year 10: $3800000000 (Low: $3300000000, High: $4300000000)
Year 100: $5000000000 (Low: $4500000000, High: $5500000000)
Key Considerations
- The impact on healthcare services for low-income populations in affected states is significant.
- The potential need for states to increase local funding to make up for reduced federal support could lead to budget reallocations or tax increases.
- The national budget will experience savings, but these could be counterbalanced by long-term healthcare costs due to increased uncompensated care.