When Medicaid Expands, More People Vote

Nov 08, 2018 · 34 comments
WmC (Lowertown, MN)
Republicans' worst fears realized: an activated electorate that expects its government to actually function and provide services. How will the GOP respond? Enhanced voter suppression, no doubt.
Harold Rosenbaum (The ATL)
After realizing the Democrats were doing well with healthcare voter support, the Republicans went on the attack lying to the American public that they were in favor of pre-existing conditions & Medicaid. When, in fact, they tried to take that all away. Still 1/2 the country vote GOP. Go figure.
Mike (Philadelphia)
People who have been added to Medicaid are voting more in order to keep it from being taken away. A threat that something will be lost has twice as much motivating power as a promise that something new will be received. It's called "loss aversion." The political climate has continually reinforced the threat. It's a much more likely explanation than treatment for depression, better health, receiving information about voting, or people being grateful to the government.
rds (nh)
@Mike And when the money tuns out? Then what? Winning elections by making promises you can't pay for... wonderful. Any wonder so many states are financially going under?
Schneiderman (New York, New York)
@rds We can pay for it. Just need to raise taxes and cut military spending. But I understand that these may not be the values and judgments of many Republicans (and some Democrats).
Paul Gallagher (London, Ohio)
Health care is the one issue that could drive Rural America toward Dems, but only if it is positioned in starker terms than just the protection of pre-existing (hate the built-in redundancy of that term) conditions. Dems should explain that Medicare for all means coverage all year long even if your work is seasonal. That the price of medications you need, like insulin, won't double in three years if the government is negotiating the price. And that if they are self-employed farmers, the benefits they get can be just as good and cost-effective as those their city cousins get if we just eliminate the unearned profits the insurers collect.
rds (nh)
@Paul GallagherExcept they have to be 65. Some old farmers. Meanwhile if you want actual health care, you will be buying a supplemental plan.
William (Memphis)
The main reason the GOP hates it.
WFGersen (Etna, NH)
This fuels two fires: those GOP voters who say Democratic Party supporters only want "free stuff" and those Democrats who say the GOP wants to suppress voters even if it hurts the neediest among us.
Big Fan (Tampa)
Well this alone will keep Republicans fighting Medicaid expansion. Sad.
rds (nh)
@Big FanMaybe when tbe Democrats figure out a way to pay for it. What happens when the system goes broke? Two hospitals here no longer accept it for births because they pay so little compared to the cost of the service. All those people can celibrate a profram that is next to useless
Kristine (Illinois)
Just wait. Fox News will start a months long campaign where all of its taking heads thank the GOP for expanding Medicaid. And the old folks will believe it.
CEA (Burnet)
If the intent of the article was to imply that expansion of Medicaid somehow translates into more votes for Democrats, think again. At the food bank where I volunteer, many if not all the beneficiaries are also Medicaid beneficiaries, yet while encouraging those who came during my shift to vote they indicated that they might vote and that if they did they would vote for Senator Cruz because he was no socialist but instead was God-fearing and against abortions, and would stop the Central American migrant invasion! Obviously, they had been blinded by Cruz’s rhetoric and thus unable to see that Cruz and his GOP compadres in the Senate are intent on decimating Medicaid.
Inveterate (Bedford, TX)
Republicans, who run most states, surely don't want medicare-level participants voting!
5barris (ny)
@Inveterate I think that you intend to say "medicaid-level" rather than "medicare-level".
mls (nyc)
@Inveterate medicAID. Big difference.
Jay (Texas)
Causing more people to vote is why my state, Texas will be the last to expand Medicaid. Texas has a dismal record of voter turnout. Hopefully, with more people like Beto on future ballots, we'll eventually become enlightened to understand what it means to care for our brothers. As is, billionaire oilmen, banks and real estate special interests run state government. They don't want to end their good deal. With our regressive tax system, the bottom 40% pay a disproportionate four times as much in taxes as the 1%. https://itep.org/whopays/#The%2010%20Most%20Regressive%20State%20&%20Local%20Tax%20Systems Former Texas Food Stamp, TANF and Medicaid manager...
James (DC)
Wow, congrats, America! You're finally realizing that when basic needs are met, people can actually participate in society.
Uncommon Wisdom (Washington DC)
@JamesThe world is not your mother. The world does not owe free medical care, education, housing, or any of the other {XYZ is a human right] thing that the NYT commentariat declares to be the a necessity. This is a huge leap to posit that with more Medicaid, the voter rolls will expand and I do not believe it. There is no end to what the NYT declares to be a necessity to be paid for by the general public.
Pauly K (Shorewood)
@James You're so right. It's like compulsory education. Good for the people. Good for the workers. Good for the employers. Good for the nation. Massachusetts had compulsory education in 1852. Even Texas had it 1915. Now we just need to make healthcare more like education. We need to provide healthcare to all. This should be common wisdom.
Anonymous (n/a)
@Uncommon Wisdom Regardless of any effect on voter participation, I'd accept public subsidized healthcare for all - one payer - rather than private for-profit insurance companies with CEOs paid millions. Medicaid/Medicare administrative costs are much lower than those of private insurance companies. Editor’s note: This comment has been anonymized in accordance with applicable law(s).
Bob Sacamano (Washington D.C)
Yay...another reason for the GOP to oppose giving health care to poor people.
TheraP (Midwest)
Being treated with decency and respect goes a long way toward assisting people in participating fully in our democratic process. I applaud voters for ensuring that more uninsured people will now gain healthcare, and along with it, may be inspired to register to vote and to cast a vote. Anything we can to provide our fellow citizens with a sense of decency and respect, with assistance when they fall ill or need medical care or other social services is important to me and so many others who believe the words of the Declaration of Independence: that all men (and women) are created equal and have unalienable rights that no one should withhold from them.
Paul (Brooklyn)
Hey, give the average person what they need and they will vote for you. The democrats finally realized this outside big liberal central cities. While identity obsessed, extreme liberal politics work well in these cities they do not play well outside in rural areas and suburbs which is still a majority of the country.
Pat (Somewhere)
@Paul Not only do they not play well, but they also give the Republicans more ammunition to smear Democrats with all the usual dog whistles. Democrats have got to stay focused on the things that really matter to most people, including health care, jobs, protecting Social Security, etc.
MLChadwick (Portland, Maine)
@Paul "give the average person what they need and they will vote for you." Elected officials are *supposed* to address the needs and concerns of their constituents. Somehow, the GOP has twisted that into a belief that only the needs of corporations and multi-millionaires have merit. So they hand out Special Tax Breaks to the 1%, shrinking federal revenue, then claim that their everyday American constituents will just have to do without Medicare, Social Security, and the like, since there's no money left
Zach (Washington, DC)
Yet another reason the GOP hates it - not only does it help poor people, it makes them vote, and we can't have that.
Paul (Hanover, NH)
Now the GOP has another reason to block expansion of Medicaid. They certainly don't want poor people to vote.
Pat (Somewhere)
@Paul And if that fails they will simply claim that it was their idea all along, and many will believe it.
Bang Ding Ow (27514)
@Paul “'We can confidently say: When you expand Medicaid eligibility, participation goes up,' said .." Yet one more soft-science "study." Did they "control" for the aging patterns of Gen X and Gen Y? That alone would change things. Detroit was famous for "giving stuff away." Detroit went bankrupt. All the voting in the world will not prevent bankruptcy.
W. Michael Johnson (Narberth, PA)
Reading this review of possible primary causes linking the expansion of Medicare and the will to vote, I am reminded of Amartya Sen’s thesis in his book “Development as Freedom”. The relationships among basic human rights are not simple, but spill over in unexpected ways, building upon each other. Health care is a basic human right, as is the right to vote. Noting the multiplicity of types connections between these two rights only supports the wisdom of Sen’s observations of 20 years ago.
Pat (Somewhere)
Voter participation always increases when people have a personal stake in the outcome. But Democrats will need to keep healthcare front and center, along with jobs and the economy, as issues that are critical to virtually everyone. And Republicans might realize that their efforts to label the ACA as "Obamacare" could backfire as more and more people realize that the program benefits them and forever associate it with Democrats (as they should). So the GOP will continue to do everything they can to sabotage the program, and failing that they will tell their false-information voters that Obama was really a Republican and people owe their health coverage to the GOP.
E Campbell (Southeastern PA)
IMO the GOP underestimated the number of voters who are seeing their parents into frail old age (based on boomer demographics this is a huge number now seeing parents start to need Medicaid nursing homes, services etc). Threatening to take away the ACA as well as cutting SS and Medicare, with Medicaid also firmly in the GOP sights could have contributed to a higher turnout of voters looking to expand and preserve Medicaid services.
rds (nh)
@E CampbellTake a look at the facilities that accept those payments. Far from the best.