Thread by @charles_gaba

In 2015 I wrote a piece which looked at the naming/branding of every state Medicaid program in the country. 1/

https://twitter.com/sarahkliff/status/1352269046696341504

Out of over 106 Medicaid programs, only *15* actually have the word "MEDICAID" in their name.

Most states either use an equally-bland/generic name like "Medical Assistance" or use cutesy branding like "BadgerCare." 2/

acasignups.net/15/09/18/whats…

The upside of using a soft 'n fuzzy name like "BadgerCare" or Healthy Michigan" is that, like the "kynect" saga in Kentucky, it makes it easier to get people to actually sign up for the program, which is the most important goal. 3/

The downside is that it causes a massive disconnect & confusion to the average voter. A Maine resident who's enrolled in "MaineCare" might ignore a news story about the state legislature passing a bill to slash Medicaid funding, thinking it wouldn't impact *them*. 4/

Not to pick on Maine too much, but here's their Medicaid home page. Aside from a link on the right-hand side to the CMS website, do you see *any* reference to "Medicaid"? That's a deliberate choice. 5/
maine.gov/dhhs/oms

Here's Kansas' Medicaid site. They call their program the equally-creative "KanCare", but clarify that it's "KanCare: Medicaid for Kansas". 6/
kancare.ks.gov

In addition, some states use completely different names for *different* Medicaid programs, confusing the issue even more. In Rhode Island they have "Rhody Health Partners", "Connect Care Choice", "RhodyHealth Options", "Connect Care Choice Community Partners" and "Rite Care". 7/

Not one of these has the word "Medicaid" in their names (though some may mention it somewhere in their descriptions), so it's hardly surprising if the average Joe makes no connection whatsoever between "Medicaid funding"/"Medicaid expansion" and the program they're enrolled in.

I’m not saying which approach is better. The Medicaid name has historically carried a negative stigma, though expansion via the ACA has helped break that stigma somewhat (see the angry 2017 repeal/replace town hall meetings).

There’s a very good reason why Bernie brands his proposed single payer plan as “Medicare for All” instead of “Medicaid for All” even though it’s closer to Medicaid in some ways. Branding matters.

However, branding can also backfire. Calling a program which covers 100% of costs of 100% of medical expenses for 100% of the population the same thing as the current program, which includes premiums, co-pays & deductibles & doesn’t cover a lot of stuff confuses people as well.

As mentioned above, Kentucky’s “kynect” ACA exchange is the poster child for this. On the upside, it was a huge success because a bunch of Obama-hating Republicans enrolled in the program without ever knowing it was “Obamacare”.

On the other hand, they also voted for Mitch McConnnell & Donald Trump who had both pledged to kill “Obamacare”.

Of course in some cases, it was even worse, as @sarahkliff herself noted at the time: They KNEW kynect was Obamacare, but simply didn’t think the GOP was seriously going to kill it:

acasignups.net/16/12/20/updat…