Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 92
  1. #1
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Looks like voters got fed up with Republican attempts to sabotage Obamacare


    Voters in Maine on Tuesday approved a ballot initiative to expand the state’s Medicaid program under Obamacare, sending a clear signal of support for the federal healthcare law to lawmakers in the state and Washington D.C.

    The approval of the ballot question in Maine comes after Republicans in Washington failed several times over the last few months to pass legislation that would dismantle the Affordable Care Act, former President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law.

    Maine has recently figured prominently in the nation’s debate on how to reform healthcare. U.S. Senator Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine, helped block her party’s efforts to repeal Obamacare this year, which angered President Donald Trump.

    Maine, which becomes the first U.S. state to approve Medicaid expansion by ballot initiative, is one of 19 states that has not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.

    About 60% of voters in Maine approved the ballot initiative, according to the Bangor Daily News newspaper.

    Tuesday’s ballot asked Maine voters to approve or reject a plan to provide healthcare coverage under Medicaid for adults under the age of 65 with incomes at or below 138% of the federal poverty level, which in 2017 is about $16,000 for a single person and about $22,000 for a family of two.

    The state’s Republican governor, Paul LePage, staunchly opposes expansion of federal health care insurance, vetoing legislation to do so on several occasions.

    “I’ve said it before, “free” is very expensive to somebody,” LePage said in a radio address last week.

    About 70,000 residents in Maine would be eligible for the state’s Medicaid program when and if state officials certify the results of the election. Lawmakers could vote to repeal or alter the referendum, much like they have recently for several citizen-initiated referendums, the Bangor Daily News reported.

    “It is now the responsibility and the duty of the governor and the legislature to fully and faithfully implement this law,” the state’s Speaker of the House, Sara Gideon, said in a statement.

    The Legislature’s Office of Fiscal and Program Review in Maine estimated that expansion of Medicaid would cost the state about $55 million and bring in about $525 million of federal money to the state each year, according to the Bangor Daily News

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/obamacare...092442593.html

  2. #2
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Gov LePrick already said he submit Medicaid expansion to the ME Congress to for validation and perhaps blocking, overriding voters.

    Maine governor says he will not expand Medicaid despite vote


    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...Health+News%29

  3. #3
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    6,202
    Good luck finding an extra 6.8% of your total income to pay for this expansion.

  4. #4
    Believe. Pavlov's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Post Count
    41,752
    The tax cut will totally take care of that.

  5. #5
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Good luck finding an extra 6.8% of your total income to pay for this expansion.
    but you have no plans to "pay for" $Ts in tax cuts for the oligarchy.

  6. #6
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    6,202
    but you have no plans to "pay for" $Ts in tax cuts for the oligarchy.
    What does Maine having to find 6.8% more income have to do with tax cuts? States can't just print money/add to debt like the Feds do.

  7. #7
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    What does Maine having to find 6.8% more income have to do with tax cuts? States can't just print money/add to debt like the Feds do.
    Repugs cut FEDERAL $Ts in taxes for the oligarchy, but they can't find $Ts to fund health care for the poor?

    Stop cutting taxes for the oligarchy, and pay for ripoff health care costs for the poor.

  8. #8
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    6,202
    Repugs cut FEDERAL $Ts in taxes for the oligarchy, but they can't find $Ts to fund health care for the poor?

    Stop cutting taxes for the oligarchy, and pay for ripoff health care costs for the poor.
    bou, MAINE voters approved Medicaid expansion - they will have to come up with their portion of it ($55 million and you know how accurate estimates are - especially concerning something that is free to recipients) - not by printing money or adding to the deficit as the Feds do - but from state income taxes, licenses or fees. Health care ALREADY consumes 32% of Maine's state budget - this will only increase the percentage - what's gonna give? Pensions - no, interest - no, education - probably not. Or RAISE TAXES - do Mainers (is that what they are called?) think that Medicaid money will come from the other pieces of the pie - nope, probably out of THEIR pockets.

    https://www.usgovernmentspending.com...19bs2n#usgs302

  9. #9
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    bou, MAINE voters approved Medicaid expansion - they will have to come up with their portion of it ($55 million and you know how accurate estimates are - especially concerning something that is free to recipients) - not by printing money or adding to the deficit as the Feds do - but from state income taxes, licenses or fees. Health care ALREADY consumes 32% of Maine's state budget - this will only increase the percentage - what's gonna give? Pensions - no, interest - no, education - probably not. Or RAISE TAXES - do Mainers (is that what they are called?) think that Medicaid money will come from the other pieces of the pie - nope, probably out of THEIR pockets.

    https://www.usgovernmentspending.com...19bs2n#usgs302
    ME's and EVERYBODY's problem is that for-profit health care is $1T+ / year too expensive.

    One of the fundamental insanity's, there are many, of America is that ME and others are cutting services, letting infrastructure rot, going bankrupt, in order to pay the vampire squid of the health industry.

    The solution to for-profit health care extorting $3T+ / year? no solution is possible. The oligarchy, health care division, is unbeatable.

  10. #10
    The Boognish FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,829
    bou, MAINE voters approved Medicaid expansion - they will have to come up with their portion of it ($55 million and you know how accurate estimates are - especially concerning something that is free to recipients) - not by printing money or adding to the deficit as the Feds do - but from state income taxes, licenses or fees. Health care ALREADY consumes 32% of Maine's state budget - this will only increase the percentage - what's gonna give? Pensions - no, interest - no, education - probably not. Or RAISE TAXES - do Mainers (is that what they are called?) think that Medicaid money will come from the other pieces of the pie - nope, probably out of THEIR pockets.

    https://www.usgovernmentspending.com...19bs2n#usgs302
    Hey fake Jaimaican, where are all the complaints of budget crisis in all the states that have had medicaid expansion going on a decade? I mean regurgitating the same doomcasting from 2009 is fun and all but it remains bull .

    The study examined data compiled by the National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO) from 2010-2015 in all 50 states (the District of Columbia was not included) and looked at changes in federal and state spending on Medicaid, along with spending in other budget areas, such as education and transportation.

    Medicaid expansion was associated with a statistically significant increase in both total spending and federal spending on Medicaid after expansion took effect in 2014, the study found. The federal investment under the ACA has enabled more than 11 million people to gain Medicaid coverage, which across the country, and in expansion states in particular, has led to the lowest uninsured rate on record.

    Importantly, the study found expansion was not associated with a statistically significant increase in state spending on Medicaid. This isn’t surprising because expansion is an extremely good deal for states: the federal government paid the entire cost of expansion from 2014-2016, and will pay no less than 90 percent of the cost going forward.

    The authors note that their study looked only at spending within state Medicaid programs, and did not examine expansion’s broader benefits for state budgets. Other research has found that expansion has produced savings in Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, and elsewhere. That’s because as more low-income people have gained Medicaid coverage, demand for state-funded health programs that serve the same population, such as behavioral health programs and payments to hospitals to cover uncompensated care, has dropped, providing net savings. Moreover, some expansion states project expansion will continue to produce net savings through the end of the decade, even as states pick up a greater share of expansion costs.
    https://www.cbpp.org/blog/more-evide...-state-budgets

    Now try and find a new argument that has not been empirically disproven, dimwit.

  11. #11
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    6,202
    Hey fake Jaimaican, where are all the complaints of budget crisis in all the states that have had medicaid expansion going on a decade? I mean regurgitating the same doomcasting from 2009 is fun and all but it remains bull .



    https://www.cbpp.org/blog/more-evide...-state-budgets

    Now try and find a new argument that has not been empirically disproven, dimwit.

    It hasn't hurt states' budgets YET because the Feds paid 100% through the end of 2016 - it's only this year that the states will start to spend their own money:


    Now these states are coming to realize that they grabbed the short end of the ObamaCare stick — as costs are vastly outpacing expectations.

    A new report from the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability finds that enrollment in Medicaid expansion states is far higher than projected.

    It found that the 24 states that made enrollment projections before expanding their programs expected 5.5 million newly eligible people to sign up with Medicaid. The latest data available show that more than 11.5 million did so.

    "Some states have signed up more than four times as many," the report notes.

    In California, for example, UC Berkeley projected that 910,000 more Californians would enroll in Medicaid as a result of the expansion. Turns out that about 3 million did so.

    Not only are enrollment figures higher than expected, a report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services found that per-enrollee costs for newly eligible people were 49% higher than expected.

    And in March, the Congressional Budget Office increased its 10-year cost projection for ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion by $136 billion.

    Up until now, these overruns didn't matter to the states, since the federal government was picking up the bill.

    But starting January, states have to pony up 5% of the cost for all those newly eligible Medicaid enrollees. (The state share gradually increases to 10%.)

    https://www.investors.com/politics/e...aid-expansion/

    For instance, in Oregon:
    Oregon lawmakers are considering a plan to cut Medicaid expansion funds to fill a $1.8 billion hole in its state budget.
    https://healthpayerintelligence.com/...r-state-budget

    Instead, they passed a $550 million health care tax bill which OR voters are gonna vote on in January - whether to keep or not. That above $55 million Maine estimate, I suspect, will be way under estimated.

  12. #12
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    rmt wants poor people to suffer with untreated diseases, and die because health care is too expensive.

    USA spends over $1T / year on MIC corporate welfare and maintaining planetary hegemony, fighting unwinnable wars, but 10Ks Americans die every year because health care is too expensive and BigFood sells them pathogenic garbage.

  13. #13
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    It hasn't hurt states' budgets YET because the Feds paid 100% through the end of 2016 - it's only this year that the states will start to spend their own money:


    Now these states are coming to realize that they grabbed the short end of the ObamaCare stick — as costs are vastly outpacing expectations.

    A new report from the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability finds that enrollment in Medicaid expansion states is far higher than projected.

    It found that the 24 states that made enrollment projections before expanding their programs expected 5.5 million newly eligible people to sign up with Medicaid. The latest data available show that more than 11.5 million did so.

    "Some states have signed up more than four times as many," the report notes.

    In California, for example, UC Berkeley projected that 910,000 more Californians would enroll in Medicaid as a result of the expansion. Turns out that about 3 million did so.

    Not only are enrollment figures higher than expected, a report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services found that per-enrollee costs for newly eligible people were 49% higher than expected.

    And in March, the Congressional Budget Office increased its 10-year cost projection for ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion by $136 billion.

    Up until now, these overruns didn't matter to the states, since the federal government was picking up the bill.

    But starting January, states have to pony up 5% of the cost for all those newly eligible Medicaid enrollees. (The state share gradually increases to 10%.)

    https://www.investors.com/politics/e...aid-expansion/

    For instance, in Oregon:
    Oregon lawmakers are considering a plan to cut Medicaid expansion funds to fill a $1.8 billion hole in its state budget.
    https://healthpayerintelligence.com/...r-state-budget

    Instead, they passed a $550 million health care tax bill which OR voters are gonna vote on in January - whether to keep or not. That above $55 million Maine estimate, I suspect, will be way under estimated.
    "enrollment in Medicaid expansion states is far higher than projected"

    So the need for health insurance and accompanying health care is larger than anyone thought. Not really a surprise to me.

    What did jump out at me though:

    Did the "conservative Foundation for Government Accountability" provide any benefit analysis to the economy of making a large section of people healthier through access to medicine or appropriate medical care?

  14. #14
    Take the fcking keys away baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    93,155
    rmt with her typical we can't afford to help poor people but then the cunt is silent on Trump going $1.5 trillion into debt to give moar tax cuts to the rich.

  15. #15
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    6,202
    rmt wants poor people to suffer with untreated diseases, and die because health care is too expensive.

    USA spends over $1T / year on MIC corporate welfare and maintaining planetary hegemony, fighting unwinnable wars, but 10Ks Americans die every year because health care is too expensive and BigFood sells them pathogenic garbage.
    bou - I have no objections to paying for Medicaid for the disabled, poor elderly or children who can not fend for themselves. But, imo, able-bodied people who receive Medicaid should at least have work requirements. No one here says anything about the expansion taking away from the truly needy:

    Second, repealing Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion would actually eliminate a major source of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. As I have previously written, the Medicaid expansion gives states a greater incentive to cover able-bodied adults under expansion than individuals with disabilities previously eligible for Medicaid. And states have done just that: Illinois cut medication funding for special needs-children on the same day it voted to expand Medicaid under Obamacare, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich cut eligibility for 34,000 individuals with disabilities, even while expanding the Medicaid program to the able-bodied.

    Third, CCD did not speak out against Obamacare’s discrimination against individuals with disabilities prior to the bill’s passage. In a 14-page, single-spaced letter dated January 8, 2010, this coalition of disability groups said not one word about the fact that the proposed legislation gave state Medicaid programs a greater federal match to cover able-bodied adults than individuals with disabilities.

    In fact, CCD not only did not object to the way Obamacare discriminates against individuals with disabilities, it wanted to expand that discrimination. The coalition called on Congress to expand Medicaid further up the income scale than the legislation signed into law. Had Congress done so, even more able-bodied adults would have qualified for a higher Medicaid match rate than individuals with disabilities—further entrenching Obamacare’s perverse incentives.

    Let’s Be Clear: People’s Lives Are At Stake
    Given this history, it’s more than a bit rich for CCD to be calling on Americans to “stand up for people with disabilities,” as it said nothing about an issue of critical importance to those individuals seven years ago. On the one hand, it might be unsurprising that individuals working for disability rights groups—with generally leftist political leanings—did not point out a key flaw in a bill that sought to accomplish the liberal dream of universal health insurance coverage for Americans.

    But on the other hand, at least hundreds of individuals with disabilities have died awaiting access to Medicaid services since Obamacare’s enactment. These are just some of the more than half a million individuals with disabilities still on waiting lists for home-based personal care, even as millions of able-bodied adults obtain coverage under Medicaid expansion.

    http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/07/...ricans-suffer/

  16. #16
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    bou - I have no objections to paying for Medicaid for the disabled, poor elderly or children who can not fend for themselves. But, imo, able-bodied people who receive Medicaid should at least have work requirements. No one here says anything about the expansion taking away from the truly needy:

    Second, repealing Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion would actually eliminate a major source of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. As I have previously written, the Medicaid expansion gives states a greater incentive to cover able-bodied adults under expansion than individuals with disabilities previously eligible for Medicaid. And states have done just that: Illinois cut medication funding for special needs-children on the same day it voted to expand Medicaid under Obamacare, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich cut eligibility for 34,000 individuals with disabilities, even while expanding the Medicaid program to the able-bodied.

    Third, CCD did not speak out against Obamacare’s discrimination against individuals with disabilities prior to the bill’s passage. In a 14-page, single-spaced letter dated January 8, 2010, this coalition of disability groups said not one word about the fact that the proposed legislation gave state Medicaid programs a greater federal match to cover able-bodied adults than individuals with disabilities.

    In fact, CCD not only did not object to the way Obamacare discriminates against individuals with disabilities, it wanted to expand that discrimination. The coalition called on Congress to expand Medicaid further up the income scale than the legislation signed into law. Had Congress done so, even more able-bodied adults would have qualified for a higher Medicaid match rate than individuals with disabilities—further entrenching Obamacare’s perverse incentives.

    Let’s Be Clear: People’s Lives Are At Stake
    Given this history, it’s more than a bit rich for CCD to be calling on Americans to “stand up for people with disabilities,” as it said nothing about an issue of critical importance to those individuals seven years ago. On the one hand, it might be unsurprising that individuals working for disability rights groups—with generally leftist political leanings—did not point out a key flaw in a bill that sought to accomplish the liberal dream of universal health insurance coverage for Americans.

    But on the other hand, at least hundreds of individuals with disabilities have died awaiting access to Medicaid services since Obamacare’s enactment. These are just some of the more than half a million individuals with disabilities still on waiting lists for home-based personal care, even as millions of able-bodied adults obtain coverage under Medicaid expansion.

    http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/07/...ricans-suffer/
    Did the "conservative Foundation for Government Accountability" provide any benefit analysis to the economy of making a large section of people healthier through access to medicine or appropriate medical care?

  17. #17
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,019
    My old man just enrolled in medishare ... Will give updates tbh

  18. #18
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Did the "conservative Foundation for Government Accountability" provide any benefit analysis to the economy of making a large section of people healthier through access to medicine or appropriate medical care?
    Do they even give the tiniest HUMANITARIAN about poor people, and poor pregnant women, getting health care? no.

    They aren't called "Conservative Foundation for BigHealthCare Accountability" so don't GAF about Americans being fleeced for $1T+ per year, every year.

  19. #19
    The Boognish FuzzyLumpkins's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,829
    It hasn't hurt states' budgets YET because the Feds paid 100% through the end of 2016 - it's only this year that the states will start to spend their own money:


    Now these states are coming to realize that they grabbed the short end of the ObamaCare stick — as costs are vastly outpacing expectations.

    A new report from the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability finds that enrollment in Medicaid expansion states is far higher than projected.

    It found that the 24 states that made enrollment projections before expanding their programs expected 5.5 million newly eligible people to sign up with Medicaid. The latest data available show that more than 11.5 million did so.

    "Some states have signed up more than four times as many," the report notes.

    In California, for example, UC Berkeley projected that 910,000 more Californians would enroll in Medicaid as a result of the expansion. Turns out that about 3 million did so.

    Not only are enrollment figures higher than expected, a report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services found that per-enrollee costs for newly eligible people were 49% higher than expected.

    And in March, the Congressional Budget Office increased its 10-year cost projection for ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion by $136 billion.

    Up until now, these overruns didn't matter to the states, since the federal government was picking up the bill.

    But starting January, states have to pony up 5% of the cost for all those newly eligible Medicaid enrollees. (The state share gradually increases to 10%.)

    https://www.investors.com/politics/e...aid-expansion/

    For instance, in Oregon:
    Oregon lawmakers are considering a plan to cut Medicaid expansion funds to fill a $1.8 billion hole in its state budget.
    https://healthpayerintelligence.com/...r-state-budget

    Instead, they passed a $550 million health care tax bill which OR voters are gonna vote on in January - whether to keep or not. That above $55 million Maine estimate, I suspect, will be way under estimated.
    More fearmongering and handwaving from far right sources. You should have gone with the Heritage foundation article making this same claim.

    As was pointed out, most states saw direct savings from expansion. Whether or not them having to take a up a part of the bill will overrun that remains to be seen. Your article handwaves at what it sees as alarming particulars and misses the forest for those trees. Additionally as the article I posted pointed out, those studies do not consider ancillary benefits such as increased tax revenues and the like.

    In your zeal to find a case of a state going over budget you read a headline and did not read the article. You a troll of Darrin's or you just as stupid as he is? First of all as the article pointed out OR had expanded medicaid prior to Obamacare. Additionally, the article never points to medicaid costs causing the deficit.

    What you don't consider is that the increased demand without price controls is the cause of the overrun. Every other developed nation at least has a public option and they all pay half of what we do on health care. The rapidly inflating healthcare costs being tied to payrolls is a big reason for wage stagnation.

    I agree that Obamacare is flawed but it is flawed for the same reason that Bush's Medicare expansion was flawed. The problem is that demand for healthcare is a vertical slope and without cost controls, suppliers can charge anything the consumer can possibly afford because it is literally a life of death decision. The market itself is broken and just like in economies of scale, the government is much more efficient. As pointed out earlier the per capita healthcare spending in the rest of the developed world speaks for itself.

  20. #20
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    bou - I have no objections to paying for Medicaid for the disabled, poor elderly or children who can not fend for themselves. But, imo, able-bodied people who receive Medicaid should at least have work requirements. No one here says anything about the expansion taking away from the truly needy:

    Second, repealing Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion would actually eliminate a major source of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. As I have previously written, the Medicaid expansion gives states a greater incentive to cover able-bodied adults under expansion than individuals with disabilities previously eligible for Medicaid. And states have done just that: Illinois cut medication funding for special needs-children on the same day it voted to expand Medicaid under Obamacare, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich cut eligibility for 34,000 individuals with disabilities, even while expanding the Medicaid program to the able-bodied.

    Third, CCD did not speak out against Obamacare’s discrimination against individuals with disabilities prior to the bill’s passage. In a 14-page, single-spaced letter dated January 8, 2010, this coalition of disability groups said not one word about the fact that the proposed legislation gave state Medicaid programs a greater federal match to cover able-bodied adults than individuals with disabilities.

    In fact, CCD not only did not object to the way Obamacare discriminates against individuals with disabilities, it wanted to expand that discrimination. The coalition called on Congress to expand Medicaid further up the income scale than the legislation signed into law. Had Congress done so, even more able-bodied adults would have qualified for a higher Medicaid match rate than individuals with disabilities—further entrenching Obamacare’s perverse incentives.

    Let’s Be Clear: People’s Lives Are At Stake
    Given this history, it’s more than a bit rich for CCD to be calling on Americans to “stand up for people with disabilities,” as it said nothing about an issue of critical importance to those individuals seven years ago. On the one hand, it might be unsurprising that individuals working for disability rights groups—with generally leftist political leanings—did not point out a key flaw in a bill that sought to accomplish the liberal dream of universal health insurance coverage for Americans.

    But on the other hand, at least hundreds of individuals with disabilities have died awaiting access to Medicaid services since Obamacare’s enactment. These are just some of the more than half a million individuals with disabilities still on waiting lists for home-based personal care, even as millions of able-bodied adults obtain coverage under Medicaid expansion.

    http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/07/...ricans-suffer/
    Did the "conservative Foundation for Government Accountability" provide any benefit analysis to the economy of making a large section of people healthier through access to medicine or appropriate medical care?

  21. #21
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    bou - I have no objections to paying for Medicaid for the disabled, poor elderly or children who can not fend for themselves. But, imo, able-bodied people who receive Medicaid should at least have work requirements. No one here says anything about the expansion taking away from the truly needy:

    Second, repealing Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion would actually eliminate a major source of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. As I have previously written, the Medicaid expansion gives states a greater incentive to cover able-bodied adults under expansion than individuals with disabilities previously eligible for Medicaid. And states have done just that: Illinois cut medication funding for special needs-children on the same day it voted to expand Medicaid under Obamacare, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich cut eligibility for 34,000 individuals with disabilities, even while expanding the Medicaid program to the able-bodied.

    Third, CCD did not speak out against Obamacare’s discrimination against individuals with disabilities prior to the bill’s passage. In a 14-page, single-spaced letter dated January 8, 2010, this coalition of disability groups said not one word about the fact that the proposed legislation gave state Medicaid programs a greater federal match to cover able-bodied adults than individuals with disabilities.

    In fact, CCD not only did not object to the way Obamacare discriminates against individuals with disabilities, it wanted to expand that discrimination. The coalition called on Congress to expand Medicaid further up the income scale than the legislation signed into law. Had Congress done so, even more able-bodied adults would have qualified for a higher Medicaid match rate than individuals with disabilities—further entrenching Obamacare’s perverse incentives.

    Let’s Be Clear: People’s Lives Are At Stake
    Given this history, it’s more than a bit rich for CCD to be calling on Americans to “stand up for people with disabilities,” as it said nothing about an issue of critical importance to those individuals seven years ago. On the one hand, it might be unsurprising that individuals working for disability rights groups—with generally leftist political leanings—did not point out a key flaw in a bill that sought to accomplish the liberal dream of universal health insurance coverage for Americans.

    But on the other hand, at least hundreds of individuals with disabilities have died awaiting access to Medicaid services since Obamacare’s enactment. These are just some of the more than half a million individuals with disabilities still on waiting lists for home-based personal care, even as millions of able-bodied adults obtain coverage under Medicaid expansion.

    http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/07/...ricans-suffer/
    Did the "conservative Foundation for Government Accountability" provide any benefit analysis to the economy of making a large section of people healthier through access to medicine or appropriate medical care?

    (sorry for the reposts, this thread prolly got buried)

  22. #22
    Garnett > Duncan sickdsm's Avatar
    My Team
    Minnesota T'Wolves
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Post Count
    3,976
    All we here is repeal of obamcare will hurt poor people but the fact is that as of now the middle classgets ed on health care and people are going to die. I've been to the doctor 4 times this year, nothing has been figured out. Insurance will probably go up to $20k year for young, otherwise healthy family of 4. 6500 deductible, no copays just all out of pocket. Prescriptions are half price if I pay out of pocket, they double if i put them through my insurance. They don't think it's cancer but can't rule that out. Should I spend another $6k to verify something is minor? I guarantee you that I'm not in the minority. Meanwhile others are going to ER instead of the clinic because over the counter medicine is paid 100% through ER visits for them.

    Boutons and the rest of his jabronies here saying the middle class.

  23. #23
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    All we here is repeal of obamcare will hurt poor people but the fact is that as of now the middle classgets ed on health care and people are going to die. I've been to the doctor 4 times this year, nothing has been figured out. Insurance will probably go up to $20k year for young, otherwise healthy family of 4. 6500 deductible, no copays just all out of pocket. Prescriptions are half price if I pay out of pocket, they double if i put them through my insurance. They don't think it's cancer but can't rule that out. Should I spend another $6k to verify something is minor? I guarantee you that I'm not in the minority. Meanwhile others are going to ER instead of the clinic because over the counter medicine is paid 100% through ER visits for them.

    Boutons and the rest of his jabronies here saying the middle class.
    Sorry to hear about your health problems. (and health insurance problems)

    OCare was as good as could get through congress. Subsidies for people to purchase insurance, and an expansion of Medicare.

    You point out a lot of the inefficiencies and short comings of our health care system.

    We ration health care in this country by the ability to pay, so people find what routes they can to help with that, such as ER visits.

    This leads to really inefficient outcomes, such as someone not being able to afford $200/month for prescriptions, then getting sick, and going to the ER to the tune of $100,000.

    There is no free market solution for this, as much as Republicans might wish for it. There just isn't.

    Single-payer is the only rational way to go. Get all the costs out in the open, and quit all the inefficient cost-shifting. Every other industrialized county does this for a reason.

  24. #24
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Boutons and the rest of his jabronies here saying the middle class.
    Also:
    You should take a deep dive into the details of the GOP tax plan, and its attempt to, yet again, gut the ACA. The non-partisan analysis is that the middle-class gets a tax increase, and that funds the tax cut for the wealthy.

  25. #25
    Garnett > Duncan sickdsm's Avatar
    My Team
    Minnesota T'Wolves
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Post Count
    3,976
    Once again partisian politics is all anyone knows on here. I never said I was for trumps version. I am for the full repeal of ACA however. Burn it down to build it back up. Single payer is the only way but I'm afraid that's flawed also. No amount of tweaking will work. People like Bou don't care about the middle class or small business owner. We are not going to matter until everyone is ed. Aca was a bandaid, a crappy one at that.



    Burn it all down.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •