The U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently  the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to withdraw its proposed rule on Medicaid program financing and supplemental payments. The Chamber said the rule would 鈥渉ave detrimental economic ramifications on communities across the country; put patient access to critical services in jeopardy, exacerbate cost-shifting onto privately insured communities; and violate state sovereignty and ability to manage state programs and populations by providing CMS unprecedented discretion over its evaluation of state financing and payment approaches.鈥

Among other comments on the rule, the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission  the agency 鈥渘ot to implement new limits for supplemental payments and financing arrangements at this time because CMS has not fully assessed the effects of these changes. In particular, the Commission is concerned that the proposed changes could reduce payments to providers in ways that could jeopardize access to care for Medicaid enrollees. 鈥 A careful review of the access implications of new federal policies is especially important given CMS鈥檚 previous proposal to rescind the requirement that states evaluate access before reducing or restructuring provider payments.鈥

The National Association of Medicaid Directors  the rule 鈥渨ould impose uniform rules and requirements on states without sufficient consideration to the diversity of state program designs and financing mechanisms. This one-size-fits-all approach will inevitably create challenges for the majority of states. While we support clarifying the parameters of appropriate financing mechanisms, CMS should not do so in a manner that gives the federal government significantly more authority over state decisions or define parameters so tightly that states no longer have necessary flexibility to administer their programs.鈥 

As previously reported, the National Governors Association also urged CMS not to move forward with the proposed rule as written.

AHA has urged CMS to withdraw the rule because it would 鈥渟everely curtail the availability of health care services to millions of individuals鈥 and 鈥渕any of its provisions are not legally permissible.鈥 In a recent joint statement, AHA and the American Health Care Association detailed additional negative consequences if the rule were to go into effect. 
 

Related News Articles

Headline
Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, participated in a fireside chat during the afternoon plenary session today at the 2025 AHA Annual Membership meeting. As鈥
Headline
Rep. Robin Kelly, D-Ill., member of the Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee and chair of the Congressional Black Caucus Health Braintrust鈥
Headline
The AHA has released several resources that can be used to educate members of Congress and community stakeholders about the potential effects of harmful cuts鈥
Perspective
Public
The House Energy & Commerce Committee in just over a week is expected to mark up its portion of the budget reconciliation bill to enact key pieces of鈥
Headline
A study published April 28 by Health Affairs Scholar found low-income adults living in states with Medicaid expansion experienced an average 9.5% relative鈥
Headline
The AHA April 30 released a report highlighting how hospitals and health systems continue to experience significant financial headwinds that can challenge鈥