Editorial: What happened to those who lost BadgerCare?

The numbers are in on the effect of Wisconsin’s some-win, some-lose approach to medical assistance, but more than these numbers are needed to tell the true story.

Under the plan, pitched by Gov. Scott Walker and approved by the state Legislature, the state eliminated the waiting list for people up to 100 percent of the federal poverty level — $23,850 for a family of four — but stop providing health care coverage for those between 100 percent and 200 percent of the level.

It was Walker’s alternative to the Medicaid expansion coverage that was part of the federal Affordable Care Act. The federal government would have picked up the entire tab for all adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level for three years, and 90 percent after that. But Walker rejected that plan because he feared the feds wouldn’t follow through on the funding commitment, leaving the state to make up the difference.

The governor contended his plan would work because those dropped from BadgerCare coverage would be able to pick up insurance from the new federal exchange. The state said 90 percent of those people would do so.

But the numbers released by the state Department of Health Services last week didn’t bear that out. Of the 57,000 people who lost BadgerCare insurance, only 19,000 of them — one-third instead of 90 percent — got insurance from the exchange.

What happened to the other 38,000 people? The state needs to find out.

The fear of state hospitals was that more uninsured people would result in more uncompensated care. They would have to absorb the costs of that care or pass them on to insured consumers. The Legislature tried to appease hospitals by including an extra $73.5 million in the current two-year budget to compensate them, but does it cover the costs? One way or another, we’re paying for it.

County officials also expressed concern because counties have to pay health care costs of uninsured people who come to emergency rooms with a medical crisis.

Though it would take effort and, perhaps, added cost, the state should track down those didn’t get insurance on the exchange and find out why.

Did they get insurance through an employer? Was insurance from the exchange unaffordable, even with a federal subsidy? Were they too confused by the exchange to get insurance? Or did they simply decide to go without?

If the state’s goal is to make sure every resident has access to health insurance and health care — and that appears to be a bipartisan goal, no matter anyone’s view on Obamacare — it has an obligation to determine what happened to those whose coverage it dropped.