I refuse to believe it will be as bad as this. If it were even a percentage point as nefarious, then where are all the people protesting?, all the golden oldies, where are they, they should be out there with signs and pickets, and their children the ones who are going to bare the brunt of this, where are they? Where is the organized protests, where is the howling and yowling? This weekend lazy americans that we are, we will stuff are fat faces with salted meats, drink rivers of beer and ale, consume potato chips and cheetos, enough to fill ten football fields, dance the night away like mindless zombies. the people of this country deserve what they are going to get, they have lost the capacity to feel anything but narcistic wants and needs, their whole life is going from one distraction to another with no unified purpose, bent over iPhones and iPods, they have lost the will and the energy to fight back other than pound away at keyboards and rant about Trump. Personally i am tired of the yammering and stammering, when you decide to fight back and pick up picket signs and march on Washington i am with you. until then, For myself i have decided to eat right, take off pounds and keep healthy, if there is going to be no medicaid or medicare i suggest you do the same. Till you are ready to grab a piece of cardboard and a crayon, give up the barbecue and beer and head to time square and start protesting then you are just fooling yourself, besides all the walking is good exercise.
3
The types of critical medical needs many people in this country have, which are inaccessible in the private insurance market, would astound people if they knew their diversity. In decades past, these tax dollars were spent- for institutionalization. Now, we are proposing simply not providing anything at all. Not only will this cause enormous, private, invisible suffering, it will mean the difference between the disabled who can function productively in society, and those who will not be able to at all.
23
As Abby Goodnough and Melissa Golden capture the personal accomplishments of Francis Isabell--her self-discipline to pass the bar exam and her determination to be a lawyer--as her personal aide, Christie Robertson, assists her with activities of daily living, they demonstrate the courage and commitment of a people with disabilities and the compassion of a nurse. They represent the millions of disabled people with dreams to become effective citizens. Long live the Medicaid program so that disabled people can achieve their dreams and fulfill common activities of daily living.
22
We tend to forget one crucial thing. The government should be us. We the people should be electing those who work for us and create the kind of society that we want to live in. The government is the only entity large enough and reliable enough to maintain and improve inftrastructure and protect us from foreign enemies and global environmental threats. It is the only entity large enough to give us the safety net that keeps our society decent and caring.
If our government is corrupt. If our government is not in line with our priorities then we have to vote them out
Only one problem. Our very system of democracy has been compromised. There have been attacks from within and attacks from outside our country with collusion from within. I think it's pretty obvious. This is a dire emergency and the beginning of the death of our way of life. And I don't think it's hyperbole to say so.
If our government is corrupt. If our government is not in line with our priorities then we have to vote them out
Only one problem. Our very system of democracy has been compromised. There have been attacks from within and attacks from outside our country with collusion from within. I think it's pretty obvious. This is a dire emergency and the beginning of the death of our way of life. And I don't think it's hyperbole to say so.
20
Under your Constitution there exists no Federal mandate whatsoever that I can find to supply healthcare services to citizens and, as such, the powers to provide such services are discretionary and that discretion is devolved to the individual States. Those wealthy States that can afford and wish to supply such services will (presumably) flourish, attracting population & employers while those States that cannot afford or decline to provide them will (again presumably) suffer the consequences. As for those of your citizens who've come to count on Federal healthcare assistance, Uncle Sam clearly doesn't want you anymore.
6
"promote the general Welfare" in the preamble covers federal healthcare should the people so decide. Th Constitution does not mention airplanes or rockets, but the US has the Air Force and NASA without having amended the Constitution to create them.
The Constitution of the United States of America
Preamble
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The Constitution of the United States of America
Preamble
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
17
Perhaps I'm missing something in this health care debate:
why is the discussion in the Congress and the media about how much is allocated to Medicaid? Only one in five Americans are Medicaid recipients (about 75 million people including children).
And four out of five Americans are paying for those lifetime health benefits for those one in five Americans who can not afford to take care of themselves and their children. That is not a sustainable business model for one thing, no matter where one stands ethically and morally and those wanting to keep everyone, especially poor people, alive longer.
Medicare recipients are pretty much a non-voting, non-taxpaying population. Why isn't the Congress and the media focusing more on the 80% of Americans who can afford to take care of themselves and their children, and those who pay the $449 billion spent on Medicaid in 2013, and more in every year since?
why is the discussion in the Congress and the media about how much is allocated to Medicaid? Only one in five Americans are Medicaid recipients (about 75 million people including children).
And four out of five Americans are paying for those lifetime health benefits for those one in five Americans who can not afford to take care of themselves and their children. That is not a sustainable business model for one thing, no matter where one stands ethically and morally and those wanting to keep everyone, especially poor people, alive longer.
Medicare recipients are pretty much a non-voting, non-taxpaying population. Why isn't the Congress and the media focusing more on the 80% of Americans who can afford to take care of themselves and their children, and those who pay the $449 billion spent on Medicaid in 2013, and more in every year since?
8
Well, you did miss something- this article is addressing those of us who are seriously disabled, but able to actually live in community settings instead of being warehoused in institutions, because of Medicaid's HCBS programs. Some of us were disabled from birth, but many- like me- became disabled later in life, after supporting ourselves and paying our taxes for decades. Perhaps it would be more convenient for you if I hurried up and died; my 7 and 9 year old children & husband would disagree. (And before you say anything, I had children before I became disabled.)
And I don't know if you meant Medicaid or Medicare in your second paragraph, but you're absolutely wrong on both counts. I'm on both types of insurance, and certainly pay taxes AND vote.
I've become much more politically active since I got sick- primarily because of people like you.
And I don't know if you meant Medicaid or Medicare in your second paragraph, but you're absolutely wrong on both counts. I'm on both types of insurance, and certainly pay taxes AND vote.
I've become much more politically active since I got sick- primarily because of people like you.
42
I read this and I'm conservative and I believe it is unquestionably government's job to take care of the poor people's health needs. Doctors have been doing that for millennia but Medicaid, you should know, does not enable the poor and sick to get care equal to those with private insurance and Medicare. At least one third of doctors will not accept a Medicaid patient. I think the percentage is higher and many, if not most of Medicaid patients are seen in hospital clinics and others are seen by less qualified doctors. Medicaid is rife with fraud as well. Before Medicaid and even after doctors saw patients in hospital clinics. We were not paid. It was our duty. Now doctors don't need to staff clinics as often. The patients go to Medicaid mills. Bernie Sanders may not be a conservative but he is right on target when he says we need universal health care for everyone of high quality, for rich and poor, namely, a single payer system like Canada.
21
Apparently, New Jersey is the worst in the country.
http://www.nj.com/healthfit/index.ssf/2015/03/nj_doctors_least_willing_t...
http://www.nj.com/healthfit/index.ssf/2015/03/nj_doctors_least_willing_t...
3
Canada does not have millions of illegal immigrants. Until its recent influx of Syrian refugees, it carefully restricted immigration to those who could contribute economically. In fact, it favored those who already had job offers before they even moved to Canada.
Virtually none of the well over 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. would be accepted on the basis of their being able to economically contribute to our country. Canada’s single payer system would not be sustainable if it added the same percentage of illegal immigrants to its population that we have in this country.
Virtually none of the well over 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. would be accepted on the basis of their being able to economically contribute to our country. Canada’s single payer system would not be sustainable if it added the same percentage of illegal immigrants to its population that we have in this country.
5
And one of the facts about the Canadian system is that everyone -- even the poorest -- pays into it, pays a lot. Here is a calculator that shows what a Canadian would pay in National and Provincial income taxes. Play with it and see the tax bite at various income levels.
http://www.ees-financial.com/calculators/TakeHomePayCalculator.htm
There are no free lunches in Canada either.
http://www.ees-financial.com/calculators/TakeHomePayCalculator.htm
There are no free lunches in Canada either.
8
Well, for one thing I worked for nearly 50 years and paid taxes every year,
I served my country as an army officer, and I obtained three college degrees.
I was never arrested, never took anything I didn't earn, never did illegal drugs, and never got a teenage girl pregnant. So, I've paid my dues. Also, I had my share of good luck, including being born white, male and a baby boomer.
So I started on second base.
I served my country as an army officer, and I obtained three college degrees.
I was never arrested, never took anything I didn't earn, never did illegal drugs, and never got a teenage girl pregnant. So, I've paid my dues. Also, I had my share of good luck, including being born white, male and a baby boomer.
So I started on second base.
6
I have read most of the comments in this section and I see that most of you think we should cut defense. So I have a questions to ask.Resources are finite and if we are going to cut what should we cut ? Let me give you a menu of choices and I would like to see come replies. This is the old guns vs butter argument which comes around every once in a while.
1, Pull our troops out of Korea.
2, Stop paying for the defense of Europe - leave NATO.
3, Close bases in Europe and remove our troops from the Baltics.
4, Don't build the new aircraft carrier.
5. Stop providing defense for Japan and others in the Pacific region.
6. Pull out of the Middle East and wind down all our military involvement there.
What I have listed will save a lot of money if you want to make meaningful cuts to defense so you can transfer some of that spending to health care.
Which ones would you choose?
1, Pull our troops out of Korea.
2, Stop paying for the defense of Europe - leave NATO.
3, Close bases in Europe and remove our troops from the Baltics.
4, Don't build the new aircraft carrier.
5. Stop providing defense for Japan and others in the Pacific region.
6. Pull out of the Middle East and wind down all our military involvement there.
What I have listed will save a lot of money if you want to make meaningful cuts to defense so you can transfer some of that spending to health care.
Which ones would you choose?
5
US spends as much on defense as the next 12 nations combined. Yet the budget keeps increasing. I do not think we need trillion dollar wars for oil. If the billionaires see a benefit to all these military adventures Then let the billionaires pay for it.
17
We as a nation have to stop pretending we are Independents as in politics. Legislature is formed and controlled by party. I know you might like your Republican Congressman; but the GOP is now the party of the very very rich, those that aspire to be that way and those duped by the propaganda. The Democraric Party is the party of the People. Populism only leads to what we have in the White House, a small child with small hands. Even if you don't like the Democrat or are afraid of losing the services that come from an entrenched Republican, think about the country as a whole. As for me I will only vote Straight Democrat from this point on. I am hoping the DNC can get its house in order and move a bit left. Democrats, Bill especially, are so beholden to corporations and big money. Bring back the death tax to allow social mobility, bring back taxes so we don't have these deficits to run wars 24x7 decade by decade. Where is the diplomacy, oh yes' the State Department was slashed. But we have a Militsry Industrial Complex to rival anyone in the history of this world. Cigarettes and bombs, we export the "good stuff."
9
Development and purchase cost for the next generation of weapons are not really high cost. The high cost is maintaining bases overseas, fighting too many wars, and providing defense for too many countries - as in why do Countries in NATO expect the US taxpayer to pay for their defense.
4
There are others for whom Medicaid already isn't an option and never has been. It's those living under the poverty level who have to shell out half their monthly income before they can qualify for Medicaid services. Obamacare provided straight Medicaid for able bodied people that the disabled and elderly didn't qualify for and paid for it at the expense of Medicare and Medicaid for the poor.
4
I think the real story is not about the Health care bill, but rather why Americans seem to generally be against eliminating insurance. Medical Costs are only high because they are spread over very large populations by private companies that may or may not pay for your treatment despite you paying them to do so. Our nations spends so much more on health care when compared to other countries, yet we truly don't get any different treatment than a person in South America or Asia. Medicine is the same no matter where you go, only the perception of value changes. And we have been duped by the system (no this is not an anarchist rant) to believe that our method is the best. In addition, to go against this system causes outcry from American Exceptionalists - of whom exist Americans regardless of anything are. Perhaps a single payer system is the answer, perhaps we eliminate insurance entirely and each person pays for care with highly regulated prices. This would, of course, bring down medical school prices, loans, but also salaries. Malpractice costs and insurance would also decrease to accommodate this change. Yet, it will certainly damage the allure of medicine for most med school applicants- they typically go into medicine for the money and not much else. It is an interesting conversation to have, but one that seems anathema to all but those with open minds.
8
If your treatment is not covered by your insurance company, did you read the policy before you got it? The policies I have had are pretty explicit about what is covered and what is not covered. I fear a lot of people to not read their policies carefully and understand fully what is and what is not covered. Don't just read the bullet points but read the small print also.
2
Surveys have revealed that doctors in
nations that provide health care to a it citizens are happier and more satisfied than US doctors.
People who want to make money go into finance these days. They want Wall Street not hospitals.
nations that provide health care to a it citizens are happier and more satisfied than US doctors.
People who want to make money go into finance these days. They want Wall Street not hospitals.
3
Many do not understand the Evangelical Christian doctrine about keeping the government out of their lives, or their anger about secular society trying to doing good works and help the neediest of our fellow citizens. This has really come to light with health care and woman's health services. Perhaps they see it as competing with their Churches; they want the needy and ill to come to their doors and ask for forgiveness and healing through Christ. They want to pray on the ill and heal them (anecdotally, they are 0 for 4 in my own life experience).
But in the meantime out there in the real world, the man that 88% of the Evangelical Christians voted for is not praying... he preying. He is preying on the weakest and those in need by transferring more of the country's wealth to the wealthiest.
I know of Evangelicals on the same Medicare that their political Savior, Don the Con Trump, is going to cut when it is politically expedient to do so. They wave their flags while wishing the secular forces (moderates, other Christians and liberals) ill will. And they pray that this flawed leader, Donald Trump will come to Christ and be a true instrument of God. I know what they are hoping for, but:
Man, do they have this guy wrong... If anything, he seems to be going in the wrong direction. I think the old expression is; shaking hands with the Devil...
But in the meantime out there in the real world, the man that 88% of the Evangelical Christians voted for is not praying... he preying. He is preying on the weakest and those in need by transferring more of the country's wealth to the wealthiest.
I know of Evangelicals on the same Medicare that their political Savior, Don the Con Trump, is going to cut when it is politically expedient to do so. They wave their flags while wishing the secular forces (moderates, other Christians and liberals) ill will. And they pray that this flawed leader, Donald Trump will come to Christ and be a true instrument of God. I know what they are hoping for, but:
Man, do they have this guy wrong... If anything, he seems to be going in the wrong direction. I think the old expression is; shaking hands with the Devil...
22
I am glad that the proposed cuts in Medicaid have brought to the general public's attention the plight of millions who might otherwise remain entirely invisible. Indeed, the safety net which includes Medicaid but is far from limited to that program has been carefully constructed for many decades through the hard work and advocacy of tens of thousands of very dedicated people. I believe that many Americans including many Congresspeople and Senators are unaware of exactly how it all works together and why each piece of the puzzle, eg the Not For Profits, Medicaid, SSI, OHM, DD etc etc comprise the last line of financial, emotional, and medical defense for the most vulnerable amongst us. I believe that the Republicans who are now leaning away from the Senate bill are being educated as to exactly what a 'yes' vote would mean, and how a 'yes' vote actually means a resounding NO to the very American citizens they are bound by their office to protect and serve. The bill will never pass, I believe the Republicans are better than that, Trump or no Trump, whip or no whip.
9
Here's a fun fact:
In 2013, Medicaid cost taxpayers approximately $449.0 billion.
The entire Apollo Space program cost $20.0 billion in 1970 dollars (during its first 15 years), estimated to be $110.0 billion in 2010 dollars.
So all you taxpayers who feel it's a moral imperative to provide free health care to those less fortunate, we' re now spending four times more every year in Medicaid costs than the U.S. spent to land a man on the moon, perhaps the single greatest accomplishment in the history of Mankind.
That's four times as much spent on Medicaid every year... every year... every year versus sending a man to the moon. So in comparison to the Apollo program, (over 15 years), that equates to 60 times more expense than putting a man on the moon. And for many who can remember that period in our history, there were many Americans who felt we were spending too much on NASA. Fifty years later, we're spending 60 times as much money, and people, particularly Times readers, are suggesting that's OK. It's not OK, if the cost of going to the moon was considered too much in the 1960's, then it should make sense that spending $449.0 billion or more every year, is not prudent spending of our tax money.
Some in Congress want to increase it by $45 billion in the new health care legislation. Everyone likes to say Medicaid is good, but now one in every five Americans are enrolled in Medicaid. Sometimes you can have too much of a good thing. Repeal and Replace Medicaid.
In 2013, Medicaid cost taxpayers approximately $449.0 billion.
The entire Apollo Space program cost $20.0 billion in 1970 dollars (during its first 15 years), estimated to be $110.0 billion in 2010 dollars.
So all you taxpayers who feel it's a moral imperative to provide free health care to those less fortunate, we' re now spending four times more every year in Medicaid costs than the U.S. spent to land a man on the moon, perhaps the single greatest accomplishment in the history of Mankind.
That's four times as much spent on Medicaid every year... every year... every year versus sending a man to the moon. So in comparison to the Apollo program, (over 15 years), that equates to 60 times more expense than putting a man on the moon. And for many who can remember that period in our history, there were many Americans who felt we were spending too much on NASA. Fifty years later, we're spending 60 times as much money, and people, particularly Times readers, are suggesting that's OK. It's not OK, if the cost of going to the moon was considered too much in the 1960's, then it should make sense that spending $449.0 billion or more every year, is not prudent spending of our tax money.
Some in Congress want to increase it by $45 billion in the new health care legislation. Everyone likes to say Medicaid is good, but now one in every five Americans are enrolled in Medicaid. Sometimes you can have too much of a good thing. Repeal and Replace Medicaid.
6
So, beyond the money put into the economy (an acknolwdged good thing), how did landing men on the moon benifit the average person in this country? Medicaid apending has enabled people formerly too sick to work to improve their health and get back into the economy as productive, tax paying workers. It cares for our parents and grandparents after they spent long lives as productive, tax paying workers. What you should be objecting to is not the amount spent, but that in other countries, that would have covered not just the medical care actually provided, but either more care, or money to spend on other issues. That is the true horror, the amount we spend in this country on healthcare with so little results as compared to other developed countries.hç
5
How convenient. Going to the moon accomplishes what? I put that up there with climbing Mt Everest. Might be great for bragging rights, but not much else.
But having medical coverage when you have cancer, well now that's worth something.
How much are we spending on supplying weaponry to the people who flew planes into the towers, on bombing civilians which creates radicals who want to fly planes into towers, and the military industrial complex of lucrative corporate government contracts?
I think that's a more apt comparison.
But having medical coverage when you have cancer, well now that's worth something.
How much are we spending on supplying weaponry to the people who flew planes into the towers, on bombing civilians which creates radicals who want to fly planes into towers, and the military industrial complex of lucrative corporate government contracts?
I think that's a more apt comparison.
10
Sorry, you completely missed the point, which is, take or leave the Apollo success story, covering every one in five non-working Americans with lifetime health care is not affordable to the other four out of five Americans who work and pay taxes. It's unsustainable.
Which frankly in the long run doesn't matter because by the turn of the next century, Florida will be under water, the east coast will be uninhabitable, and the U.S. will no longer be an economic or military power on he world stage. But history will look back and point out, at least the U.S. provided free lifetime health care to its least productive and most costly citizens.
Which frankly in the long run doesn't matter because by the turn of the next century, Florida will be under water, the east coast will be uninhabitable, and the U.S. will no longer be an economic or military power on he world stage. But history will look back and point out, at least the U.S. provided free lifetime health care to its least productive and most costly citizens.
3
These people will be at risk if everyone is just "dumped" into Medicaid. This IS happening now with Obamacare because not enough middle class healthy people are able to buy into a plan that satisfies their needs. The cost of the care with BC/BS and Aetna are forcing regular healthy people into these free services. We need to FIX that and it is not being addressed. There should be a way to buy into more affordable care plans. Obamacare is pulling people away from being able to negotiate a less expensive plan. Please can you look at this side of the problem because it is there in plain site!!
2
Over time Republicans will out dumb themselves again when they have a sick and uneducated population that will not be able to sustain the country. The GOP doesn't even pretend to be compassionate conservatives. Since they dont believe in the common good the country will reflect it with more displaced people and crumbling infrastructure since states alone cannot undertake large projects. Military expeditions that know no end or goal as well. Makes you proud to be American ...of what?
11
in the darkest halls of the U.S. Senate,
was heard the ever-repeating whisper,
soon to grow louder,
of the Republican't Party leaders:
"We have been here before, lads:
Let Them Eat Cake".
grrrrrrr
8
So much better both in terms of cost and quality of life. Double win that the miserly Republicans and the sick man want to sacrifice in the name of lower taxes for the uber wealthy
2
A fundamental question - how many dollars within our health care system are diverted to for-profit insurance companies?
Another fundamental question - how many dollars are diverted to pay jacked-up costs for medication?
We are a rich country, and we can afford to help our weakest members - children, the disabled and the elderly.
Another fundamental question - how many dollars are diverted to pay jacked-up costs for medication?
We are a rich country, and we can afford to help our weakest members - children, the disabled and the elderly.
13
The way to make Medicaid acceptable to a wide audience is to dispel the notion that it applies to minorities and the poor. This article does exactly that. More are needed featuring retired non-minority professionals who have simply exhausted their savings in elder care or nursing homes, non-minority families devastated by medical expenses either from illness or accidents, non-minority working poor who just can not cope with the slightest medical setback, etc. Opponents may then realize that Medicaid speaks to them and yes "There but for the grace of God go I".
15
Once in a while, you read an article that literally goes right through you. As I was reading this article, I felt like I was looking at myself in the mirror. Not in a bad way, but in a good way. I was so proud to see Frances living her life to the fullest, and not letting society define who she is. This is exactly what Medicaid has meant to me in my life.
To those of you who are not disabled, you cannot understand the joy that a disabled person gets from having full control of his or her life. This can be achieved (in my case) only with the help of others. Personal Care Attendants (PCA's) literally become your hands that dress you in the morning and help you with you your most personal needs. Believe it or not, once in a while, they even pick you up at a bar after an evening out with college buddies of 35 years.
I am appalled that a country that has done so much for me, personally, would now dare to say that the way Frances and I live our lives is too expensive, and their "solution" is to cut back on the things we need to continue that independence. So much for "making America great again".
To those of you who are not disabled, you cannot understand the joy that a disabled person gets from having full control of his or her life. This can be achieved (in my case) only with the help of others. Personal Care Attendants (PCA's) literally become your hands that dress you in the morning and help you with you your most personal needs. Believe it or not, once in a while, they even pick you up at a bar after an evening out with college buddies of 35 years.
I am appalled that a country that has done so much for me, personally, would now dare to say that the way Frances and I live our lives is too expensive, and their "solution" is to cut back on the things we need to continue that independence. So much for "making America great again".
21
Helping Frances and you live a decent normal life is fine, as long as both of your families have no means to provide the PCAs for your care.
What you need to understand is that when you go to the so-called "government" before you get support from your own family, you are not independent, but you are dependent financially on strangers instead of your own family. Parents who bring children to this world should feel they have an obligation to care for their kids when things don't go right. Making them the responsibility of the public at large, aka strangers, is simple a cop out. Same with elderly care. The family should be caring for the elderly and only when there is no possibility the taxpayers should step in.
What you need to understand is that when you go to the so-called "government" before you get support from your own family, you are not independent, but you are dependent financially on strangers instead of your own family. Parents who bring children to this world should feel they have an obligation to care for their kids when things don't go right. Making them the responsibility of the public at large, aka strangers, is simple a cop out. Same with elderly care. The family should be caring for the elderly and only when there is no possibility the taxpayers should step in.
8
Something tells me, without even knowing you, that you are quite fortunate financially. Do you have any idea what a power wheelchair costs? Do you have any idea what a van with a lift for said power chair costs? Do you have any idea the financial and emotional strain that a serious physical disability puts on a mother and father who have to worry about their son's care during the day?
Are you trying to tell me that I don't have the right to live independently? Why don't we take your logic one step further, and make everyone pay for public schooling, and if they can't afford it, it's their own fault. Due to your ignorance of disability, you obviously believe that if my parents aren't extremely wealthy, I don't have the same rights as you do to live the American Dream.
On a personal note, West Sider, you might be interested in knowing that I was able to work for four years in New York State. The reason I was able to do this was because of my attendants, who were paid for by Medicaid. Now my medical bills are paid for by Medicare, and not Medicaid.
See, West Sider, the problem with people like you is that you can't see out of your bubble, and imagine for one second how people might have to live in a way that is different from your own. That fact does not mean that I don't have the same right to self determination as you do. I urge you to read about people outside of your comfort zone. You might be surprised what you find.
Are you trying to tell me that I don't have the right to live independently? Why don't we take your logic one step further, and make everyone pay for public schooling, and if they can't afford it, it's their own fault. Due to your ignorance of disability, you obviously believe that if my parents aren't extremely wealthy, I don't have the same rights as you do to live the American Dream.
On a personal note, West Sider, you might be interested in knowing that I was able to work for four years in New York State. The reason I was able to do this was because of my attendants, who were paid for by Medicaid. Now my medical bills are paid for by Medicare, and not Medicaid.
See, West Sider, the problem with people like you is that you can't see out of your bubble, and imagine for one second how people might have to live in a way that is different from your own. That fact does not mean that I don't have the same right to self determination as you do. I urge you to read about people outside of your comfort zone. You might be surprised what you find.
14
Well, Westsider, I guess only families with 5 million or more in the bank should have children. Because otherwise, if their kids are unlucky enough to to be born with an expensive disability, they might not be able to afford their care. It's irresponsible for anyone who is not a multimillionaire to have children.
But of course if you have sex you might get pregnant, and that's irresponsible too. So you can't have sex either, not unless you have the millions set aside just in case you can get pregnant and the fetus ends up having a disability.
Does that about sum it up?
But of course if you have sex you might get pregnant, and that's irresponsible too. So you can't have sex either, not unless you have the millions set aside just in case you can get pregnant and the fetus ends up having a disability.
Does that about sum it up?
11
Ms Isbell is disabled and by definition receives Medicaid. Medicaid was created for the disabled, including the disabled elderly. It was not created for low income working people. We had all hoped that the ACA would create regulations and oversight to prohibit the ridiculous costs of healthcare that have been careening out of control since the early 90s. It only expanded costs. Oh, I know, the government has been telling us it cut costs, but it did not. It cut, and continues to cut, the monies it will pay for items determined by HHS as they implemented the law.
Sadly, healthcare costs (those WE pay, in addition those paid by the government) can be reigned in, but that was not Obama's agenda. Not sure it's the Reps agenda either as they whine like kids and demand too many special interests. You cannot create a good law when it contains special interests. Congress is incapable.
Sadly, healthcare costs (those WE pay, in addition those paid by the government) can be reigned in, but that was not Obama's agenda. Not sure it's the Reps agenda either as they whine like kids and demand too many special interests. You cannot create a good law when it contains special interests. Congress is incapable.
10
If capping Medicaid will rein in costs, why don't we take this approach with the Defense Department?
32
As I have said before, no government program ever shrinks in size or scope as time goes on. Liberals will always find an emotional appeal to demonize anyone who even suggests efficiency or accountability. That's why we are $20 TRILLION IN DEBT. I really think liberals want to bankrupt America so they can't say capitalism is a failed system.
3
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
seems simple enough that even a republican could understand - but probably not - they will truly understand when confronted by the maw of eternal fire.
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
seems simple enough that even a republican could understand - but probably not - they will truly understand when confronted by the maw of eternal fire.
19
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it”
-- Upton Sinclair
-- Upton Sinclair
16
Nice list of mythology for which there isn't one bit of evidence. Personally, I despise scare tactics.
3
these are just about all church going men - this is their bible not mine.
4
Seven years. Seven years. Seven years.
All they did was COMPLAiN and DISPARAGE and LIE.
Their own constituents will get thrown to the sharks under their slapped together "plan", but their filthy rich PAC donors will get yet more $$.
All long we, the taxpayers, continue to pay 100% their salaries, 100% of their benefits, and 100% their Cadillac family- included health overage (viagara covered too ! )
How abut just put the whole country on the same govt. insurance these hypocrites have.
There.
Problem solved.
All they did was COMPLAiN and DISPARAGE and LIE.
Their own constituents will get thrown to the sharks under their slapped together "plan", but their filthy rich PAC donors will get yet more $$.
All long we, the taxpayers, continue to pay 100% their salaries, 100% of their benefits, and 100% their Cadillac family- included health overage (viagara covered too ! )
How abut just put the whole country on the same govt. insurance these hypocrites have.
There.
Problem solved.
19
Nature bloody of tooth and claw...this is all "natural" behavior and attractive to all those who believe they will be winners.
From a broader perspective, this is not a species survival characteristic.
Depending on which parts of the bible you believe, not a particularly christian one either
From a broader perspective, this is not a species survival characteristic.
Depending on which parts of the bible you believe, not a particularly christian one either
7
Why aren't the Democrats traveling the country riling people up over this very real death panel?
Why aren't they scaring senior citizens that their Medicaid and Medicare is going away? Better notify the kids, they'll be moving in soon.
Why aren't they terrorizing working middle-agers with elderly parents and kids in college that without Medicaid granny and pop-pop will be coming home or staying home, better start saving and adding an addition on the house?
Where's liberal radio exhorting people that under the republicans the social safety nets they are completely unaware they benefit from is going bye-bye soon? Why isn't liberal radio screaming about death panels for the sick, old, elderly, people and children with disabilities? Where are the book tours with the latest books on how big pharma profits from drug addiction? How the richest country in the world can and should take of those who can't without raising any taxes? Start naming names, the greedy corporations, the lucruative prison system, drug rehab system, pill industry, medical abuse.
Where's the offense strategy, dog whistles, blatant scare tactics, us and them rhetoric?
All I hear are the republicans and their odious blatant lying, alternative facts, manipulations, and histrionics. Time to take a page out of the rights' playbook. And start talking in plain, down to earth scare tactics that people can understand.
It's time to take off the kidgloves.
Why aren't they scaring senior citizens that their Medicaid and Medicare is going away? Better notify the kids, they'll be moving in soon.
Why aren't they terrorizing working middle-agers with elderly parents and kids in college that without Medicaid granny and pop-pop will be coming home or staying home, better start saving and adding an addition on the house?
Where's liberal radio exhorting people that under the republicans the social safety nets they are completely unaware they benefit from is going bye-bye soon? Why isn't liberal radio screaming about death panels for the sick, old, elderly, people and children with disabilities? Where are the book tours with the latest books on how big pharma profits from drug addiction? How the richest country in the world can and should take of those who can't without raising any taxes? Start naming names, the greedy corporations, the lucruative prison system, drug rehab system, pill industry, medical abuse.
Where's the offense strategy, dog whistles, blatant scare tactics, us and them rhetoric?
All I hear are the republicans and their odious blatant lying, alternative facts, manipulations, and histrionics. Time to take a page out of the rights' playbook. And start talking in plain, down to earth scare tactics that people can understand.
It's time to take off the kidgloves.
18
meh,
Very well said.
Very well said.
4
All I know is a HMO I loved for 15yrs went down the drain after medicaid expansion. The customer service rep who took my complaint said she's been hearing this a lot lately. Nurses were overworked and rude! I left now I'm much happier under BCBS. How ironic my fave HMO Dr now in same Johns Hopkins network!!! Even my daughter whom qualified for medicaid between jobs saw the care difference and was glad to get back on employer healthcare!
2
Pro life. For an entire life.
5
NYT, please stop running stories like this. You are feeding the fire. Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, etc., cannot wait to dance on these people's graves. You are lifting their cold dead hearts with stories like these.
1
How is it possible that WE THE TAX PAYERS are forced to pay for these republican lawmakers (and their families) PREMIUM health care FOR LIFE...and yet THEY get to decide IF WE EVEN HAVE ANY???
Why isn't that the ONLY talking point moving forward with this healthcare debate?
Why isn't that the ONLY talking point moving forward with this healthcare debate?
16
Many people rely on the full and part-time jobs as caregivers for the disabled. Medicaid cuts will surely put many of these people out of work and out of income. I am sure that proponents of the cuts will say that they should "just do something else." My question is: like what? Making beds in luxury hotels? Manufacturing jobs are gone. Now retail jobs are disappearing as we become an online buying nation. Are these caregivers really so bad? I deal with many of these people in my town every day. They are some of the nicest, hardest-working people I know.
14
The central question Ayn-Randian Republicans ask themselves:
What would Scrooge McDuck do?
What would Scrooge McDuck do?
6
How about turning "freedom and choice" upside down: Give 'us' a standardize universal health care system AND let the rich have the freedom to choose something better and pay the price they can afford. Why is it only the 'ordinary' people are told we need to be "free" and/or "choose" to live or die?
18
While the "so-called president" was busy with his 9:21 AM boxing tweet, the rest of the Christian folk were at church. We were praying for the leadership of our country, among other things...
5
I wonder how California's community based model will change for the developmentally disabled being cared for by the state.
https://ww2.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2016/03/08/californias-last-instituti...
https://ww2.kqed.org/stateofhealth/2016/03/08/californias-last-instituti...
2
Medicaid is already highly efficient. How about we convert all other health coverage to Medicaid?! That would really be efficient.
8
I am a retired mental health/addictions counselor and in a career of over 30 years, a very important part of my job consisted of writing "Mental Status Reports" for the purpose of meeting very clear, but often difficult to prove guidelines that my clients persistent mental illnesses prevented them from working. Once "proven", they were eligible for SSI and the attendant Medicaid. I only made one mistake in helping my clients gain SSI/Medicaid and that mistake was rooted in the incorrect assumptions of the treating PMHNP, let alone a past psychiatrist. Almost all of my reports were approved although a few were approved by a Social Security judge on appeal. In other words, I would never have done reports unless the client was eligible! Even so, the SSI benefits were meager, while the Medicaid benefits were difficult to use in terms of finding a PCP and/or dentist, although in my case, getting access for my clients to psychiatric providers at community mental health clinics was easier.
Now the republicans, led by one of the most ignorant presidents in American history want to cut an already meager set of benefits under Medicaid. We already know that a certain % of Trump supporters are covered by Medicaid. I do not wish harm for them as Medicaid should never be a political football and yet that is what the GOP leaders and Trump are doing!
Regarding addictions treatment, if this bill is passed,it will lead to much suffering and death.
Now the republicans, led by one of the most ignorant presidents in American history want to cut an already meager set of benefits under Medicaid. We already know that a certain % of Trump supporters are covered by Medicaid. I do not wish harm for them as Medicaid should never be a political football and yet that is what the GOP leaders and Trump are doing!
Regarding addictions treatment, if this bill is passed,it will lead to much suffering and death.
14
I'm starting to wonder if MSNBC deliberately misinformed its viewers yesterday. At the bottom of the screen, they ran news that said the Democrats are open to "Medicaid" for all. It should have read Medicare for all. Corporate media trying to kill the single payer movement and momentum, including the corporate Democrats who killed it in California. Time for battle. People should not be robbed on a daily basis by the insurance and pharma industries and their mouthpieces from both parties.
5
Americans, All Together, regardless of culture, credo and social status, stand up for our Constitution is in danger. Our Nation can go on strike, We The People have a Voice. Ban the word 'Fear'. Go forward and fight for what is right, while our Country is still The Land of the Free.
5
I have been working on products for the Future Market, through Higher Education and Private Company Industries. When these products hit the Market, most of these Republicans will be "behind-the-times". I suppose they have not gotten the Memo yet, that it is "Them", that are going to need the Medicaid. Sometimes the World happens, and then Trump and the Republicans, are "out-of-business". Join the World today. PS. "Oui the People" is trending.
3
We need a universal health system that is funded with some of that tax money that we fund the never ending warring of the USA abroad. The American people do not want this warring (think about what things like white phosphorous do to the people that we attack with this hideous weapon of mass destruction). We do not want our young people conned in into going off to some war in the world on the excuse that they are 'protecting America" and have them return damaged. We want a more humane and decent country. We want health care for all and a cleaner environment. Make no mistake in thinking that the Democrats or the Republicans will ever deliver what we want. We need to vote them out and vote in parties like the Green Party. When the Democrats controlled Congress and the Presidency they could have had universal care but they liked their special interests too much. The upcoming election next year is the time to vote for good.
2
When the Democrats passed ObamaCare, they did not follow the example of Canada, The UK, France and other developed nations that offer universal care by increasing the cigarette tax in the $5 to $7 or more per pack range. There are 13 billion packs of cigarettes smoker each year. Raising the $1.01 Federal tax to $6 per pack would have raised $40 billion or more. The healthcare costs of tobacco are very, very expensive. Raising the tax contributes more than half the effect of getting people to quit.
The Democrats bowed to tobacco lobbies instead of doing the right thing and raising the tobacco tax. That is why we are in the mess that we are in. One can't blame the Republicans for bowing to the tobacco lobby since not a single Republican voted for ObamaCare.
In addition, ObamaCare has taken away billions of dollars from public hospitals such as those in NYC through the Disproportionate Share Hospital reductions.
By increasing Medicaid instead of taxing tobacco to pay for health programs and funding the Disproportionate Share Hospital fun, funds for state funding higher education decreases which means poorer young university students having even higher student loans to pay.
I wish NYT writer Ms. Goodnough would ask the leading Democrats why they didn't pass laws to increase tobacco taxes to the levels of Canada, The UK, and France. I wish she would ask them why they cut Disproportionate Share Hospital funds to public hospitals like ours in NYC.
The Democrats bowed to tobacco lobbies instead of doing the right thing and raising the tobacco tax. That is why we are in the mess that we are in. One can't blame the Republicans for bowing to the tobacco lobby since not a single Republican voted for ObamaCare.
In addition, ObamaCare has taken away billions of dollars from public hospitals such as those in NYC through the Disproportionate Share Hospital reductions.
By increasing Medicaid instead of taxing tobacco to pay for health programs and funding the Disproportionate Share Hospital fun, funds for state funding higher education decreases which means poorer young university students having even higher student loans to pay.
I wish NYT writer Ms. Goodnough would ask the leading Democrats why they didn't pass laws to increase tobacco taxes to the levels of Canada, The UK, and France. I wish she would ask them why they cut Disproportionate Share Hospital funds to public hospitals like ours in NYC.
8
I count 8 people in this article who would lose their jobs if Medicaid benefits were reduced -- the care providers, their clients, and family members able to work because their loved ones have professional assistance. All of them are either people with disabilities or women, many are people of color, in a state with a high rate of unemployment. Take away the politics and the morality, and frame it in terms conservatives understand: people working, making money, paying taxes, being a part of the economy and the community. Maybe then they can understand why these programs are so critical.
21
I used to work for a community-based program that helped people like Mr. Foster as well as people with mental illnesses like schizophrenia live in their own apartments and get jobs. Many of them got jobs bagging groceries and retrieving grocery carts, stocking shelves, picking up litter on the college campus and working in food service. They learned how to plan their meals, shop for groceries and budget their money. They were more organized and better at a lot of things than I was and I learned as much teaching them as they did from me. It is sad to think of the lives of these people, who have so much more potential than anyone gives them credit for, being squandered so the wealthy can avoid a tiny amount of taxation. As a middle-class person I am happy to pay taxes so people like this can have better lives. I don't understand the blackness in the hearts of the rich.
24
I worked in a similar setting, most of the people being helped had various levels of mental retardation. The costs of enabling these employees to hold jobs and live independently were high, but the rewards - for them, for their families, for the employers who provided jobs and intensive training, and for the people like me who did out best, were much higher. I also wonder at the cruelty felt by so many whose lives are already rich.
8
They are not Christians.
5
Apparently Americans have rejected the whole notion of shared risk insurance when it comes to healthcare and disability. Calling Medicaid a welfare program suggests that recipients are lazy and undeserving of care because they were born with the wrong skin color, or with cerebral palsy or became disabled because of MS or got old and didn't have a family to care for them. Once again, the Presidency of Donald Trump reveals more about how sick our society has become than anything else. I am ashamed and appalled by our callous disregard for one another's life if it exists outside of our family or our tribe. All the evidence points to a rapid decline of America as a country that has anything of value to offer it's citizens or to the world. I give us less than 50 years.
25
There's no question that the Medicaid expansion allows many more people to benefit enormously from health care services that they could not pay for themselves. A roll back of the expansion will be devastating to some of them. However, the article overlooks a few issues that are relevant to the discussion.
- Not all states expanded Medicaid coverage and those that did expanded it only a few years ago under the ACA. Some states will be right where they are today and others will be back where they were a few years ago (admittedly, not in a great place).
- There aren't enough resources in the world, human and financial, to provide all of the care that we want and need. Just think of the unmet addiction and mental health counseling shortfalls alone. Enacting a program that makes those services free on demand won't automatically make them available.
- We have yet to grapple with the core problem, which is the cost of care. The US spends twice the percentage of GDP on health care as other industrialized countries, many of which have socialized medicine programs. How do they do it? They pay doctors and other practitioners less and they ration services in ways and to an extent that we don't.
- Not all states expanded Medicaid coverage and those that did expanded it only a few years ago under the ACA. Some states will be right where they are today and others will be back where they were a few years ago (admittedly, not in a great place).
- There aren't enough resources in the world, human and financial, to provide all of the care that we want and need. Just think of the unmet addiction and mental health counseling shortfalls alone. Enacting a program that makes those services free on demand won't automatically make them available.
- We have yet to grapple with the core problem, which is the cost of care. The US spends twice the percentage of GDP on health care as other industrialized countries, many of which have socialized medicine programs. How do they do it? They pay doctors and other practitioners less and they ration services in ways and to an extent that we don't.
8
Trump/Republicancare would ration healthcare. Would kill my brother.
6
Thank you NYT for this insight article on Medicaid and the impact it has for millions of people. As a Dutch citizen I just can't understand that a lot of American people can't accept a democratic and fundamental principle that you care for one and another. Of course everyone pays tax to make this care for everyone possible! Not wanting this to do for your fellow American citizens is mind boggling to me. I hope the impact of undoing the Medicaid initiative by mister T. remains within foreseeable limits and doesn't effect the millions of people who now receive it.
26
A moment of glory will cost us dearly. And participatory democracy is more important than ever.
When President Trump ordered cruise missile to hit Syria and the largest depth-penetrating conventional bomb explode in Iraq, our millions of dollars just went away in a short span. And not a single senator or congressman or woman dare to say "wait a minute, and that is a lot of money which can be used for healthcare expenditure."
Since no one objected to increased defense spending, money has to come from other parts of the budget. And consequently, our healthcare will suffer significantly from potential budgetary cuts.
We need to voice our concern on budget spending in order to preserve our most important priority spending. Otherwise, we will only regret and complaint afterwards. No matter how touching the story is, it will not change the budget.
When President Trump ordered cruise missile to hit Syria and the largest depth-penetrating conventional bomb explode in Iraq, our millions of dollars just went away in a short span. And not a single senator or congressman or woman dare to say "wait a minute, and that is a lot of money which can be used for healthcare expenditure."
Since no one objected to increased defense spending, money has to come from other parts of the budget. And consequently, our healthcare will suffer significantly from potential budgetary cuts.
We need to voice our concern on budget spending in order to preserve our most important priority spending. Otherwise, we will only regret and complaint afterwards. No matter how touching the story is, it will not change the budget.
10
Aside from the disabled, restricting eligibility is an excellent idea. They should require able bodied recipients to fill in the positions of assistant for the disabled while they are collecting Medicaid or any other public assistance. Those who refuse should lose their benefits. Restrictions should also include a ban on childbearing while collecting benefits.
11
This will be an unpopular reply but I fully agree about restrictions on childbearing while collecting benefits. The costs of prenatal and postnatal care, and the supply costs for taking care of a new baby, have significant impact on economic life. I'll leave you with this one last image: In supermarkets in my urban neighborhood, infant formula has often been contained within glassed, locked shelves. This measure would indicate a deterrent to shoplifting. But oh, no, let's rail about the rights of everyone to reproduce without thought to the consequences..
7
Not sure all of them would be suitable. If your daughter was disabled, would you want her cared for by any random person who had to do it to get his welfare check?
3
How would your "ban on childbearing" work exactly? Mandatory vasectomy or full on castration?
4
Shame on Avik Roy.
“The fiscal sustainability of Medicaid is essential to making sure that those who depend on the program can know it will be there for them in the future,” Avik Roy, a conservative health care analyst, wrote last week in Forbes.
If a family has two children and a budget for them, but then, the couple has twins, the same budget for four kids won't do.
Unless you deprive all the kids equally or favor some and let the others wither and maybe die - thinning the herd.
The population grows and situations can change in our economy necessitating more assistance from government.
The financial crisis of nine years ago, brought on by bad oversight of banks, is more likely to repeat under the Republicans with their lax regulations.
Medicaid spending undoubtedly went up after the last financial crisis. Would it be there to mitigate the needs of the most vulnerable after the next crisis?
More need, less money.
Some of the kids are going to suffer greatly.
And the perversion is the tax cuts for the wealthy make the Wall Street misdeeds more likely!
Increased reckless investment and greed impulse, less financial oversight, more chance of economic meltdown (like only nine years ago), less government funds available for cushioning the burden on the most broadly affected.
This health bill is suicide for Republicans.
That's their lunatic choice.
But it's homicide for millions.
It's incredibly unpopular.
Keep up the pressure.
“The fiscal sustainability of Medicaid is essential to making sure that those who depend on the program can know it will be there for them in the future,” Avik Roy, a conservative health care analyst, wrote last week in Forbes.
If a family has two children and a budget for them, but then, the couple has twins, the same budget for four kids won't do.
Unless you deprive all the kids equally or favor some and let the others wither and maybe die - thinning the herd.
The population grows and situations can change in our economy necessitating more assistance from government.
The financial crisis of nine years ago, brought on by bad oversight of banks, is more likely to repeat under the Republicans with their lax regulations.
Medicaid spending undoubtedly went up after the last financial crisis. Would it be there to mitigate the needs of the most vulnerable after the next crisis?
More need, less money.
Some of the kids are going to suffer greatly.
And the perversion is the tax cuts for the wealthy make the Wall Street misdeeds more likely!
Increased reckless investment and greed impulse, less financial oversight, more chance of economic meltdown (like only nine years ago), less government funds available for cushioning the burden on the most broadly affected.
This health bill is suicide for Republicans.
That's their lunatic choice.
But it's homicide for millions.
It's incredibly unpopular.
Keep up the pressure.
13
"If a family has two children and a budget for them, but then, the couple has twins, the same budget for four kids won't do. "
Are you kidding? Who on earth told the family who can't support themselves without taxpayers to have more kids?
I decided not to have a kid as a single person back in 1988 BECAUSE I was only making $125k a year and it wasn't enough to live my lifestyle then, and pay for the expenses of a child as well. Childbearing IS NOT a right, it's a luxury.
One fifth of the population expects the rest to pay their expenses. That is not sustainable.
Are you kidding? Who on earth told the family who can't support themselves without taxpayers to have more kids?
I decided not to have a kid as a single person back in 1988 BECAUSE I was only making $125k a year and it wasn't enough to live my lifestyle then, and pay for the expenses of a child as well. Childbearing IS NOT a right, it's a luxury.
One fifth of the population expects the rest to pay their expenses. That is not sustainable.
6
You seem to have been very fortunate -- so far -- in your life and in your heath and medical needs. What you (what no one) knows about the future is whether one's situation will change. Will your final years be spent in a nursing home, and will quality care be given to you? The same goes for any in your family, your friends. As for pregnancy, it happens -- to those who have and those who have not. Disability? Anyone can at any time become disabled, and whether someone receiving Medicaid would be suitable for giving adequate care to the disabled seems questionable at best. Perhaps you can count your blessings while you are among the blessed, and pray the road you travel in the future is smooth and straight.
10
@ Westsider
Half of all US income goes to the top 10 percent of earners; 76% of national wealth is held by the richest 10%.
This is not sustainable.
I have no kids either, but have no desire to let kid suffer and die for lack of healthcare in this wealthiest of countries.
Half of all US income goes to the top 10 percent of earners; 76% of national wealth is held by the richest 10%.
This is not sustainable.
I have no kids either, but have no desire to let kid suffer and die for lack of healthcare in this wealthiest of countries.
5
We need to start with a fundamental idea - that everyone needs and deserves health care. No one can do without it their entire lives.
Unfortunately, the people deciding who gets health care and who doesn't are men who have excellent health insurance. The older white men who created the Senate plan do not represent the majority of Americans. They especially do not include the most vulnerable populations - the poor, the elderly, the disabled - and women.
Until Republicans agree that the government should ensure that everyone gets good health care they can afford, the current debate is a waste of time.
Unfortunately, the people deciding who gets health care and who doesn't are men who have excellent health insurance. The older white men who created the Senate plan do not represent the majority of Americans. They especially do not include the most vulnerable populations - the poor, the elderly, the disabled - and women.
Until Republicans agree that the government should ensure that everyone gets good health care they can afford, the current debate is a waste of time.
18
All developed countries, except the United States, regard healthcare as a right and afford it to all their citizens.
American/Republican heartlessness render America/Republicans exceptional.
American/Republican heartlessness render America/Republicans exceptional.
7
Opposition to Medicaid is based on the belief that your tax money is going to undeserving lazy people (usually minorities) who refuse to work. The GOP has been pushing this mantra for decades. The Democrats have not emphasized Medicaid's greatest POLITICAL strength - its funding of nursing home and other services for the average WHITE family's elderly and disabled relatives.
15
" ... its funding of nursing home and other services for the average WHITE family's elderly and disabled relatives."
I'm fine with paying for the disabled within limits, no luxury lifestyle of leisure most working people do not have themselves. I'm also fine with providing nursing home care for the POOR elderly, but not those who put away their savings, at times in the millions, for their children in 'irrevocable trusts' to lean on their fellow citizens for elderly care.
Government doesn't pay for anything, your fellow citizens do and they are sick of the abuse.
I'm fine with paying for the disabled within limits, no luxury lifestyle of leisure most working people do not have themselves. I'm also fine with providing nursing home care for the POOR elderly, but not those who put away their savings, at times in the millions, for their children in 'irrevocable trusts' to lean on their fellow citizens for elderly care.
Government doesn't pay for anything, your fellow citizens do and they are sick of the abuse.
6
Take away the trillions spent on bombing civilians in other countries.
My 89 year old mother in law depends on Medicaid and the supplemental insurance she pays out of her social security to fund living in a nursing home.
We are over 60. I'm nearly 65 and still work for the medical insurance. Hubby was forced into retirement after his 30 year 60-80 hours a week job
got shipped south of the border.
We cannot take care of an 89 year old dementia patient at home.
Maybe we can drop mom-mom off at MarALargo?
These uber rich sycophants all have excellent federal medical coverage paid for by our tax dollars.
I earned my social security benefits during 50 years of working and when I can no longer drag myself into the office due to age and poor health (which is starting to fail) my earned benefits better be there.
My 89 year old mother in law depends on Medicaid and the supplemental insurance she pays out of her social security to fund living in a nursing home.
We are over 60. I'm nearly 65 and still work for the medical insurance. Hubby was forced into retirement after his 30 year 60-80 hours a week job
got shipped south of the border.
We cannot take care of an 89 year old dementia patient at home.
Maybe we can drop mom-mom off at MarALargo?
These uber rich sycophants all have excellent federal medical coverage paid for by our tax dollars.
I earned my social security benefits during 50 years of working and when I can no longer drag myself into the office due to age and poor health (which is starting to fail) my earned benefits better be there.
39
It it is very clear. There is no way these republicans are Christians.
39
"Conservatives argue that capping funding would make Medicaid more efficient."
Capping costs, which is what Medicare does, would make the entire healthcare delivery system more efficient.
Medicare for everyone. Now. And end this foolishness.
Capping costs, which is what Medicare does, would make the entire healthcare delivery system more efficient.
Medicare for everyone. Now. And end this foolishness.
22
Exactly, put limits on how much profit can be earned.
You can't charge (and get paid) more than the market will bear. Set the market and Medicaid and Medicare can be sustainable when it's no longer lucrative for the greedy as this goldmine it is.
We citizens have no say in this market. Stop blaming us when it's become a profit making enterprise. I read drug dealers were getting out of the illegal drug business and its dangers and going into the much more lucrative and safer pain pill, drug "treatment" revolving door, and nursing home overbilling business.
That's who profits. How do I profit from being old sick and poor? Just where is the profit for me in having cancer? Getting old? Having drug addiction? Being sick? Where is money going in my pocket? How am I capitalizing?
Think people.
You can't charge (and get paid) more than the market will bear. Set the market and Medicaid and Medicare can be sustainable when it's no longer lucrative for the greedy as this goldmine it is.
We citizens have no say in this market. Stop blaming us when it's become a profit making enterprise. I read drug dealers were getting out of the illegal drug business and its dangers and going into the much more lucrative and safer pain pill, drug "treatment" revolving door, and nursing home overbilling business.
That's who profits. How do I profit from being old sick and poor? Just where is the profit for me in having cancer? Getting old? Having drug addiction? Being sick? Where is money going in my pocket? How am I capitalizing?
Think people.
3
Imagine that.
The self-proclaimed "pro-lifers" don't actually care about the living.
The self-proclaimed "pro-lifers" don't actually care about the living.
31
It is clear that Trump only wants to confirm campaign promises. The ramification of repeal and replace, or just repeal only confuse and keep him from doing what he knows best, Tweeting insults to those that oppose him.
10
Trump promised better healthcare for all; promised to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
Trump is not trying to keep campaign promises to the public.
Trump is not trying to keep campaign promises to the public.
1
The shrinking of MediCare/MedicAid as proposed by Fake President Trump and the Republic Party is merely part of their Final Solution for America.
By letting nature take its course,
the Republic Party will be able to provide wealthy people with more money.
Natural wealth accumulation.
By letting nature take its course,
the Republic Party will be able to provide wealthy people with more money.
Natural wealth accumulation.
18
How can someone read this full article and not care for these people? All Trump does in Washington is talking about Medicaid/Medicare resources being converted to buy weapons! I can't even read the whole article, because it brings me tears in how much America changed for the worse. I am really sorry with the way this has been handled. Sadly, the American People is to blame for it, not Trump or the Republicans. The reason for that is they continue to vote for them, who care nothing for us, but for their own agenda. We had a chance to change that in Montana, Texas and Georgia a few days ago and they voted for Republicans again, how can you understand that? The same people who voted for them may need these benefits in the future, and they will be denied. I'm planning to go back to the U.S. next year after 9 years living and working in Brazil for the oil companies. Those companies destroyed this country by corruption and are leaving it as a wasteland. The same companies are heading back to the U.S. and they will do the same there, thanks to Trump and his oil dirty friends. Perhaps I'll go to live in Canada with my family when I return to the U.S. for a while. The reason is simple: America becomes bad, selfish and rude and is now ruled by cold hearted millionaires. It won't be the place I want to raise my kids anymore.
19
I'll tell you how people can read this article and not be swayed by the suffering of their fellow citizens or the details of the article's reporting. Much of conservative media has been misinforming it's viewers for decades now and convincing then of the so called "liberal" news bias. So Trump knowing this and will just shout fake news and fake media. All liberal lies right? That's how. So when the average conservative voter reads an article like this they'll just dismiss it out of hand.
5
After reading these poignant and persuasive personal stories, the abject callous cruelty of the Repiblicans' attack om Medicaid is obvious...except, it seems, to them. You would think that these mostly Bible-belt right-to-lifers would be strong proponents of Christian compassion and the right to live a healthy life. The hypocrisy is mind-boggling and worse as the so-called, and clearly misnamed, Better Care Reconciliation Act, is a death sentence, according to published estimates, to over 20,000 per year. This is simply an act of legislative criminality.
22
There is strand of Christianity in US in recent decades that focuses on the prosperity gospel philosophy - God's gifts in this world and the next go to those who work hard and 'deserve' these blessings. Those who are poor, sick, or disadvantaged in some way 'deserve' their troubles. Jonathan Swift's "Modest Proposal" and Ebenezer Scrooge's opening speech about 'are there not poorhouses?" show us that this meanness is part of human nature, especially of humans in groups.
15
It is all their fault by the millions for not being 'smart' enough to have been on the government welfare health care dole ever since their father died when they were a teen like Paul Ryan nor 'wise' enough to have had polio before being paid too much for working too little in Congress like Mitch McConnell nor meritorious qualified to inherit real estate wealth like Donald Trump.
The Trump partisan political base in the former Confederate States of America has the worst health and least access to healthcare in the nation. They should all honorably refuse to accept either Obamacare or Medicaid while whistling their 'Dixie' and waving their 'Stars and Bars.'
The Trump partisan political base in the former Confederate States of America has the worst health and least access to healthcare in the nation. They should all honorably refuse to accept either Obamacare or Medicaid while whistling their 'Dixie' and waving their 'Stars and Bars.'
15
I thought the constitution actually speaks to "promote the general welfare" of citizens of our country. If this isn't AGAINST the general welfare of millions of people I don't know what is. All this angst because our "leaders" choose war and serving the very richest Americans instead of promoting the health and lives of the rest of us. This should not stand. Throw these Republican bums out.
12
I wonder when the GOP is going to notice that the rural poor and elderly that they're so happy to let die (as well as the family they expect to care for them until they do) are Trump voters?
11
How could anyone with a heart and soul and a 'Christian" to boot, plan the destruction of Medicaid? Oh, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, of course.
6
Let's be clear that saying life without Medicaid is "no option" means in many cases they WILL DIE.
9
Let there be no mistake- this is what the Republican party stands for- the intentional inflicting of suffering and death upon the most vulnerable Americans in the pursuit of private greed.
That this debate is occurring around our Independence Day gives me great pause and is a sick irony.
At least ISIS is honest about wanting to kill Americans. They don't dress it up in Republican buzzwords about "entitlements" and "personal responsibility".
That this debate is occurring around our Independence Day gives me great pause and is a sick irony.
At least ISIS is honest about wanting to kill Americans. They don't dress it up in Republican buzzwords about "entitlements" and "personal responsibility".
11
I am reading comments from people who claim that it is "just too expensive" to help others through socialized medicine. Shame on you, shame! Since when have we been putting price tags on human lives?
How much are YOU worth? What are you going to do when an insurance company slaps a price tag on YOUR kid or YOUR elderly parent?
If you can't rid yourself of your selfishness and greed, then you're worth zero to any civilized society.
How much are YOU worth? What are you going to do when an insurance company slaps a price tag on YOUR kid or YOUR elderly parent?
If you can't rid yourself of your selfishness and greed, then you're worth zero to any civilized society.
15
Fantastic. Great that these benefits exist. I know first hand; I used to assist a man with cerebral palsy.
But everywhere you look the media plays it out that all there are, are sick and disabled people. Tons of ads for consult your doctor, etc.
There are millions of well folks, too. Best way we can all help drive down costs to benefit everyone is for the non disabled to exercise, eat right, and stop going to the doctor for every little hangnail. Take the power away from doctors. Not everyone can do this; sure. But enough can - millions could; and many are already doing so. More power to those (who can) who take responsibility for themselves! Best choice!
But everywhere you look the media plays it out that all there are, are sick and disabled people. Tons of ads for consult your doctor, etc.
There are millions of well folks, too. Best way we can all help drive down costs to benefit everyone is for the non disabled to exercise, eat right, and stop going to the doctor for every little hangnail. Take the power away from doctors. Not everyone can do this; sure. But enough can - millions could; and many are already doing so. More power to those (who can) who take responsibility for themselves! Best choice!
3
AB, it would be convenient and wonderful, actually, if all people had to do to remain healthy was to "take responsibility for themselves." "Exercise, eat right, don't go to the doctor for every little hangnail." That is all lovely advice, but your odds are still just like anyone else's for getting a serious illness...heart disease, cancer, diabetes, lupus, osteoporosis, dementia, and a slew of other horrendous conditions that just STRIKE OUT OF NOWHERE. You know why? Because even if you are so great at taking care of yourself, a lot of what happens to you is GENETIC...and ENVIRONMENTAL. (Such as if the government allows corporations that pay them off to dump toxic waste into our waters, and onto our lands, and spew it out into the air...some people are going to get very sick from that.) Everyone of us is going to get sick or disabled at some point in our lives, no matter what we do to stave off death and disease. So the "best choice" is to have health care available for everyone...SINGLE PAYER! And single payer will drive down costs, because the vile health insurance industry, that charges people a fortune, and then denies them care, will be eliminated.
4
I've been living in a state of disbelief for the last 8 months - watching in a waking nightmare as crucial social programs like Medicaid are gutted, education is handed to someone who doesn't believe in public schools, defense to a former general who way too often talks about "killing" people and means it, an attorney general who's a racist, an EPA director who is quickly undoing every possible environmental protection he can find, and a "president" who communicates in impulsive 140-character messages notable for their incoherence, falsity and childishness.
But underlying all this depravity is the worst nightmare of all: a political party that specializes in cruelty and meanness toward anyone who isn't rich has been put in charge of the United States of America, promoting the rapid disintegration of our country into a dystopia that even such prescient writers as William Gibson and Don DeLillo could not imagine becoming reality.
Like a nightmare, nothing makes sense, inmates are in charge of the asylum, ruling through hate, feat, intimidation, and inhumanity, and all the while laughing and boasting about it, cheering it on. For the first time, I can see how people not only elected Hitler but also became stellar concentration camp guards - the worst traits of human nature are adept at creating a nightmare that becomes horrendous reality. I never believed that it could happen here - that so many of my fellow citizens were so attracted to such barbarity. Now I believe.
But underlying all this depravity is the worst nightmare of all: a political party that specializes in cruelty and meanness toward anyone who isn't rich has been put in charge of the United States of America, promoting the rapid disintegration of our country into a dystopia that even such prescient writers as William Gibson and Don DeLillo could not imagine becoming reality.
Like a nightmare, nothing makes sense, inmates are in charge of the asylum, ruling through hate, feat, intimidation, and inhumanity, and all the while laughing and boasting about it, cheering it on. For the first time, I can see how people not only elected Hitler but also became stellar concentration camp guards - the worst traits of human nature are adept at creating a nightmare that becomes horrendous reality. I never believed that it could happen here - that so many of my fellow citizens were so attracted to such barbarity. Now I believe.
20
Let's consider one case that happened just a couple days ago:
A Medical Student was shot. In the head. In a hospital!
Undoubtedly has severe brain damage. To my knowledge he is still in critical condition.
Through no fault of his own, he will surely need years of care. Rehab. If he survives.
Will his country care for him?
That's what this is all about! It could happen to you.
A Medical Student was shot. In the head. In a hospital!
Undoubtedly has severe brain damage. To my knowledge he is still in critical condition.
Through no fault of his own, he will surely need years of care. Rehab. If he survives.
Will his country care for him?
That's what this is all about! It could happen to you.
15
Provide the minimum in services and give out the maximum tax goodies to the wealthy. The Republicans in Congress become highly indignant when a disabled or poor person's life is made more livable. Its all waste, fraud and abuse.
6
Perhaps the NYT could interview the wealthy behind the push to cut taxes which makes these services possible to try to understand
why/how they can be so greedy and whether they understand the repercussions. Also, I suspect there remains significant inefficiencies in these programs... what could be done to address them?
why/how they can be so greedy and whether they understand the repercussions. Also, I suspect there remains significant inefficiencies in these programs... what could be done to address them?
3
It breaks the heart to read these stories, and it's important to unmask of what is behind the cuts.
What the article doesn't mention is that the math underlying these calculations of cutting Medicaid and instead insisting on institutionalizing people who don't need to be in a nursing home doesn't add up: It would be more expensive, not less, in terms of federal dollars.
In Florida for instance, disabled children have been taken from their families who were caring for them and forced into old age homes despite the fact that nursing homes are less cost effective - that's of course aside from the fact that an end-of-life facility for old people is no place for 2-year-olds or teenagers who receive little to no attention, no stimulation, and sometimes not even the medical care necessary to keep them alive.
To put numbers to it: Court documents show that each CHILD in a nursing home costs $550 a day, more than twice of the cost for elderly residents and more even than 24-hour at home care. (And those kids didn't receive 24-hour care through Medicaid, the parents took care of them which Medicaid caps at a low rate.)
The Florida nursing home association and their PACs have spent $1.8 million between 2007 and 2013 to ensure that legislation is written in their favor to incur windfalls like this, and it will probably serve as a blueprint for other red states to do the same with the disabled population.
What the article doesn't mention is that the math underlying these calculations of cutting Medicaid and instead insisting on institutionalizing people who don't need to be in a nursing home doesn't add up: It would be more expensive, not less, in terms of federal dollars.
In Florida for instance, disabled children have been taken from their families who were caring for them and forced into old age homes despite the fact that nursing homes are less cost effective - that's of course aside from the fact that an end-of-life facility for old people is no place for 2-year-olds or teenagers who receive little to no attention, no stimulation, and sometimes not even the medical care necessary to keep them alive.
To put numbers to it: Court documents show that each CHILD in a nursing home costs $550 a day, more than twice of the cost for elderly residents and more even than 24-hour at home care. (And those kids didn't receive 24-hour care through Medicaid, the parents took care of them which Medicaid caps at a low rate.)
The Florida nursing home association and their PACs have spent $1.8 million between 2007 and 2013 to ensure that legislation is written in their favor to incur windfalls like this, and it will probably serve as a blueprint for other red states to do the same with the disabled population.
8
I shudder to think how many more will die if medicaid services are cut , not to mention the many more that will be born with disabilities because of the dissolution of environmental rules that are being dismantled at present , that will affect the health of many . Think of the damage done to DNA by chemicals in drinking water , air polluted by particulates causing asthma in children , the aim here is to totally dismantle medicaid because it will become even costlier with the dismantling of the EPA .Who benefits ? The corporations and those who own them will become even weathier. It is the case of health=wealth.
7
Big Pharma gets much of its revenue from the U. S. I am surprised they are not lobbying to preserve Medicaid.
I work in Paris with a variety of clients. Some are sales reps from Big Pharma, some, pharmaceutical researchers and some are from the French government.
According to my clients, Big Pharma loves selling drugs to the U. S. because Americans will pay whatever they ask. Sales reps' commissions are huge.
Big Pharma also loves the fast U.S. regulatory process from new drug to market. And, America permits drug advertising on T. V. and magazines, which is forbidden in Europe.
In France, each Big Pharma product is assessed by two ministries -- Health, Commerce (for product efficacy, research standards, harmful side effects, if there is a market for the drug) -- and two government entities -- the Insurance Commission and the Budget Office (for appropriate cost/benefit pricing).
Then the government offers a "take it or leave it" price they are willing to pay. Big Pharma takes it, because Europe follows the French model.
Big Pharma pays for research around the world, which conflates commerce with necessary healthcare. Their funding creates a built-in bias in the research. University researchers are paid to work for them.
The U. S. needs to follow the French model on pricing, and banning of drug ads, and strictly monitor generics manufacturing and drug research.
Removing care is not the answer.
Ensuring that all Americans continue to pay taxes, and not shirk them, is
I work in Paris with a variety of clients. Some are sales reps from Big Pharma, some, pharmaceutical researchers and some are from the French government.
According to my clients, Big Pharma loves selling drugs to the U. S. because Americans will pay whatever they ask. Sales reps' commissions are huge.
Big Pharma also loves the fast U.S. regulatory process from new drug to market. And, America permits drug advertising on T. V. and magazines, which is forbidden in Europe.
In France, each Big Pharma product is assessed by two ministries -- Health, Commerce (for product efficacy, research standards, harmful side effects, if there is a market for the drug) -- and two government entities -- the Insurance Commission and the Budget Office (for appropriate cost/benefit pricing).
Then the government offers a "take it or leave it" price they are willing to pay. Big Pharma takes it, because Europe follows the French model.
Big Pharma pays for research around the world, which conflates commerce with necessary healthcare. Their funding creates a built-in bias in the research. University researchers are paid to work for them.
The U. S. needs to follow the French model on pricing, and banning of drug ads, and strictly monitor generics manufacturing and drug research.
Removing care is not the answer.
Ensuring that all Americans continue to pay taxes, and not shirk them, is
11
Lilou, I believe that the "problem" with Big Pharma in The United States is that politicians accept pay offs or bribes from Big Pharma to keep prices high for Americans. You obviously live in a country that cares about their citizens ABOVE Big Pharma. Here, in the "great" United States of America, Big Pharma comes first to the government; the citizens be damned! Big Pharma pays off Big Time; the citizens do not...The citizens are A DRAG on the agenda of the corrupt politicians and the equally corrupt people who pay them off. -- France, by the way, supposedly had the best of all the world's health care delivery systems.
2
I think what you don't consider is that Pharma puts a lot of money into testing and developing new drugs. Alas that is very high cost and unfortunately US drugs are expensive because the new drugs are given a long time before a generic can be made -- this was done to help companies recoup some of the research and development costs.
What I don't like is the fact the Europeans do not shoulder any real part of the burden for creating new drugs. I think the new drugs when they come on the market, that part of that cost should be paid by European consumers - not only American consumers.
What I don't like is the fact the Europeans do not shoulder any real part of the burden for creating new drugs. I think the new drugs when they come on the market, that part of that cost should be paid by European consumers - not only American consumers.
2
Elin Minkoff -- Big Pharma has a very powerful lobby and gives lots of money to candidates on both sides of the aisle. Their pressure keeps prices high, and speeds new drugs through the FDA, perhaps too quickly. They support most of the research done at university hospitals now, and this skews the choice of new medications. It also skews the research a bit. We do have good health care here, but it's not perfect. We still have to pay out-of-pocket for some specialists and services, and much of the cost for dental work and eye care. Macron would like to make dental and eye care included in our coverage. I'm for that! We do rigourously vette new drugs, and do offer what we will pay, not accept what Big Pharma would like. That, and all the drug advertising in the U.S., are the key differences which keep our costs down. Well, also, we are willing to pay higher taxes to have good care for all, which is a bit of a hard sell in the U.S.
3
Memo to whom/who it may concern: Vote in 2018. Make sure that the person you choose will vote in Congress for those programs you value. If you voted for Trump last time around, forgive yourself. You can make it right in 2018.
10
What no one seems to understand is that cut backs will not improve our current situation. If you want improvements, you have to spend money of them. Infrastructure is not free, education is not free and health care is not free. We all have to pay and those with more should pay more.
13
Thank you for highlighting my nightmare. Our 17 year old son has autism and intellectual disability. When he turns 22, his services from the school district end and he will need aides like those you highlighted to live a semi-independent life. I find it impossible to plan for his future as I am supposed to do, because there might not be any supports for him. What is he going to do? He is not going to disappear when we die. Without learning to live a bit independently, he could end up in an institution, which costs far more. What are they thinking???
An institution over my dead body! We have EU passports, and will move to the EU to escape the heartless US, our birth country, if this evil abomination passes.
I might also add that the school districts will lose big time too, because, by law, they still have to provide services to disabled kids, but won't have Medicaid reimbursements to pay for them. Who will pay? It will come out of regular education, folks.
An institution over my dead body! We have EU passports, and will move to the EU to escape the heartless US, our birth country, if this evil abomination passes.
I might also add that the school districts will lose big time too, because, by law, they still have to provide services to disabled kids, but won't have Medicaid reimbursements to pay for them. Who will pay? It will come out of regular education, folks.
21
Tough decisions will have to be made -- and painful realities have to be faced. Would the taxpayers in Alabama choose to pay the costs of Isbell's "independent" lifestyle if they knew how much it would cost each one of them? I don't think so. When America had many decently paying maufacturing jobs there was more taxpayer money around to pay these costs. There were many who were happy to see manufacturing leave -- did they ever consider the consequences?
12
...and some of these people prefer funding war ( through the national debt ) since dick Cheney told us deficits don't matter, because Ronald Reagan proved it. To date: $5 trillion lost. Don't get me going about the thousands of lives destroyed.
6
By the way ... did you know that aggregate loss in total manufacturing employment in the U.S. from Reagan through Obama totaled 6,364,000 jobs (see BLS CES3000000001) ... and the entirety of that loss transpired over the course of GOP tenures? Destroy lives .. destroy jobs ... tax breaks for the wealthy ... the GOP legacy.
7
Yes, Maureen, tough decisions have to be made.
If you insist on throwing Miss Frances Isbell overboard to the waiting sharks of pain and destitution, I protest!
I vote we throw you overboard! If you are intellectually honest, than you should second my vote.
You must admit that you should act on your fiduciary principles and be an example of self-sacrifice for the greater financial good of Medicare and Medicaid's long term financial stability.
We should never forget that most of us Americans---- even AynRandian libertarians like Paul Ryan--- will eventually use Medicaid. For those of us who are lucky in our health we will not need Medicaid until the last few years of our life to pay for the nursing care and nursing home bills.
Some of us like Isbell will need it longer than others. We should not begrudge others for needing more care as we all fragile. We are all one bad fall, one speeding car, one burst vein in the brain away from being the one who needs lifetime, extensive Medicaid care.
If you insist on throwing Miss Frances Isbell overboard to the waiting sharks of pain and destitution, I protest!
I vote we throw you overboard! If you are intellectually honest, than you should second my vote.
You must admit that you should act on your fiduciary principles and be an example of self-sacrifice for the greater financial good of Medicare and Medicaid's long term financial stability.
We should never forget that most of us Americans---- even AynRandian libertarians like Paul Ryan--- will eventually use Medicaid. For those of us who are lucky in our health we will not need Medicaid until the last few years of our life to pay for the nursing care and nursing home bills.
Some of us like Isbell will need it longer than others. We should not begrudge others for needing more care as we all fragile. We are all one bad fall, one speeding car, one burst vein in the brain away from being the one who needs lifetime, extensive Medicaid care.
2
Our constitution clearly outlined two main reasons why Congress was given the power to raise revenue: 1) provide for the common defense; 2) promote the general welfare. Too many members of Congress over subscribe for defense and undercut welfare, under the mantra of "self responsibility' . The end result is the US falls short when nations are ranked on being socially progressive and health outcomes. Some are even proud of such low scores since it fits into the other mantra of "trickle down" which has proven to be false, but they cling to it anyway.
10
Defense does not come cheap especially when we have to pay for Europe's defense too.
1
Medicaid was made for the disabled and women who could not afford insurance and that form is not going anywhere. Medicaid will be funded more that it has been before just the rate of increase will be tied to the cost of living. The change will also be in how states decide to spend the money on the expanded side. Medicaid should never have been expanded so much. Obama just did a vote grabbing trick that the states would later get stuck with the bill. Now that medicaid is covering one in five Americans it will remain so the scare mongering of throwing people off or granny going over the cliff is untrue hype.
4
"the scare mongering of throwing people off or granny going over the cliff is untrue hype."
And you know this how? Please provide PROOF before making assertions of which you have NO EVIDENCE
And you know this how? Please provide PROOF before making assertions of which you have NO EVIDENCE
7
Please do more in this series. It is really powerful reporting and helps puts stories and places to facts and figures that can feel abstract and daunting. The cruelty of these proposed cuts becomes crystal clear when they are paired with the power of personal narrative.
18
A few years ago, T.R. Reid, in his book about America's healthcare system, quoted Bismarck (yes, that Bismarck) about why the government should ensure healthcare for all ... because it (illness, disaster, accident, etc.) can happen to anyone. It doesn't look for those who can afford it or won't be bankrupted by it. He believed that fact meant that the people shouldn't suffer physical or economic hardship because of the vagaries of illness or hurt. I often think of Bismarck's position when I read articles like this one about who we're willing to leave out of protection from the unpredictability and randomness of illness and hurt. If we started our conversations about healthcare with this idea -- the truly randomness and devastation of illness and accidents -- and the belief we should protect our people from the resulting lifestyle and economic tragedies, we might make some headway.
14
Please remember the cost of living in Bismarck's time. Also look at the state of health care at that time - before wonder drugs, vaccination, - you must not have heard how many people died when the influenza epidemic hit after WWI - no wonder drugs back then. Health care was really limited in Bismarck's time and what little there was did not cost that much. There were no expensive operations performed back them - so you can't equate what Bismarck said with today's cost. It is like comparing apples with oranges.
There is not right to health care in the constitution, Maybe because no such thing existed at that time. I don't know. But are we a Nation that says to bad you can not afford health care? Have we become a people that worries about the bottom line to the point that it's all that is important? Why should everyone not be entitled to heath care? Now is the time for Congress to stand up and be Leaders for the people of this Nation.
15
Since so many millionaires (who would benefit by lower taxes) live in blue states and so many poor people (who would lose health care) live in red states, the Republicans transfer of money from red states to blue would be huge.
7
Don't be fooled by the poverty of many red states. There are many millionaires and multimillionaires in red states. I live in an area of South Carolina still controlled in large part by one family company that owned hundreds of thousands of acres of undeveloped land at one time. It still owns substantial pieces of Myrtle Beach, including a lot formerly developed land that is now lying unused or underused, right in the center of town.
Great poverty often lies close by great wealth here. Guess which one matters to our politicians.
Great poverty often lies close by great wealth here. Guess which one matters to our politicians.
13
I can't imagine the prospect of having no health coverage or assistance when I need it. There is an expression "where but for the grace of God go I". Republicans need to put themselves in these people's shoes and imagine surviving without help. The need to imagine the fear and desperation that comes with caring for a loved one without basic health coverage or assistance.
Societies are remembered for their compassion and support for the disadvantaged. America is not going to like how the "Trump times" are remembered and how this reflects on the nature of American society.
Societies are remembered for their compassion and support for the disadvantaged. America is not going to like how the "Trump times" are remembered and how this reflects on the nature of American society.
16
Money for bombs but not for our people?
"As of August 2016, the US has already appropriated, spent, or taken obligations to spend more than $3.6 trillion in current dollars on the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria on Homeland Security (2001 through fiscal year 2016). To this total should be added the approximately $65 billion in dedicated war spending the Dept. of Defense and State Dept. have requested for fiscal year 2017, along with an additional $32 billion requested for the Dept. of Homeland Security in 2017, and estimated spending on veterans in future years, When those are included, the total US budgetary cost of the wars reaches $4.79 trillion..."
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2016/Costs%20of...
"As of August 2016, the US has already appropriated, spent, or taken obligations to spend more than $3.6 trillion in current dollars on the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria on Homeland Security (2001 through fiscal year 2016). To this total should be added the approximately $65 billion in dedicated war spending the Dept. of Defense and State Dept. have requested for fiscal year 2017, along with an additional $32 billion requested for the Dept. of Homeland Security in 2017, and estimated spending on veterans in future years, When those are included, the total US budgetary cost of the wars reaches $4.79 trillion..."
http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2016/Costs%20of...
18
Right Joanne. Sadly, after you exposed this terrible picture in how Trump will use the "saved money from Medicaid/Medicare" it won't change a thing because "the smart American people" just voted Republican again in Montana, Georgia and Texas, giving more power to Trump and the Republicans to do their deed. The time of compassion, friendship and giving is over in this country Joanne. We have to look some place else that has it!
1
Every person should be living to his or her fullest potential. When we refuse personal care to someone like Ms. Isabel, we lose a wealth of talent that society needs. When we take away personal care from someone like Mr. Harkins, we lose our humanity.
At one time, I was a counselor in a vocational rehabilitation sheltered workshop. Even the least able of our clients, a young man whose IQ was said to be 25, was a treasure. He had no speech but his delight at finding a newspaper photograph of us at a parade was so touching that I still recall it. Another man, who had severe cerebral palsy, could not toilet or feed himself and spoke with difficulty, became the disabled citizen of the year. He had a winning personality that kept the workshop happy. They were not burdens on society but additions to our joy.
America is a rich country, even in poor states. Do we want to be a compassionate and caring country or a mean and punitive one? Obamacare, with all its imperfections, represents the former. Trumpcare represents the latter. No care, Mr. Trump's latest suggestion, is unthinkable.
At one time, I was a counselor in a vocational rehabilitation sheltered workshop. Even the least able of our clients, a young man whose IQ was said to be 25, was a treasure. He had no speech but his delight at finding a newspaper photograph of us at a parade was so touching that I still recall it. Another man, who had severe cerebral palsy, could not toilet or feed himself and spoke with difficulty, became the disabled citizen of the year. He had a winning personality that kept the workshop happy. They were not burdens on society but additions to our joy.
America is a rich country, even in poor states. Do we want to be a compassionate and caring country or a mean and punitive one? Obamacare, with all its imperfections, represents the former. Trumpcare represents the latter. No care, Mr. Trump's latest suggestion, is unthinkable.
30
I am troubled by who is in power and their advocated values. GOP claims to be Pro-Life. But they are Pro-Birth only. By defunding Planned-Parenthood and limiting severely Medicare (40% of the poor are children under 18) children are put at risk. Cutbacks in education, medicine, and health will also adversely affect children. In another NYT article EPA has allowed pesticides which have the side affect of harming children's nervous systems to be used. The promotion of guns and ammunition in the public square has also threatened the lives of children (In Columbus children sitting on their front porch and inside living room couch were killed by a drive-by shooter). Why is the GOP at war with our children?
25
Why is the GOP against children? They are against them because when they grow up they will vote Democrat.
5
Many Americans do not understand is that Medicare is not single-payer. Almost everyone on Medicare has some form of additional health coverage, retiree coverage through a former employer, Medicare Supplement insurance or a Medicare Advantage plan from a private insurer, and/or Medicaid. In 2011 (for some reason the year listed in a 2017 CMS "Fact Sheet") 20% of all Medicare enrollees were also enrolled in Medicaid and 17% of all Medicaid enrollees were also enrolled in Medicare. In 2015, there were 11.4 million Americans enrolled in both programs.
The Republicans have intentionally hidden their plan to let Medicaid wither away in their bills to "Repeal and replace Obamacare". A straight repeal of Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) would increase not cut future federal deficits. The bills generate savings by cutting Medicaid as it existed long before Obama. For example, the Medicare Qualified Beneficiary Medicaid program that pays Medicare Part B premiums, deductibles and coinsurance for low income individuals was created under Ronald Reagan. The Specified Low Income Medicare Beneficiary Medicaid program which pays only the Part B premiums was created under George H.W. Bush and the Qualified Individual Medicaid program with pays Part B premiums for additional folks was created under George W. Bush.
Medicare itself is attacked by the bills since their repeal of the 3.8% tax on unearned income will speed the insolvency of Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund.
The Republicans have intentionally hidden their plan to let Medicaid wither away in their bills to "Repeal and replace Obamacare". A straight repeal of Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) would increase not cut future federal deficits. The bills generate savings by cutting Medicaid as it existed long before Obama. For example, the Medicare Qualified Beneficiary Medicaid program that pays Medicare Part B premiums, deductibles and coinsurance for low income individuals was created under Ronald Reagan. The Specified Low Income Medicare Beneficiary Medicaid program which pays only the Part B premiums was created under George H.W. Bush and the Qualified Individual Medicaid program with pays Part B premiums for additional folks was created under George W. Bush.
Medicare itself is attacked by the bills since their repeal of the 3.8% tax on unearned income will speed the insolvency of Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund.
12
Re your last paragraph:
Rural hospitals will be closing should the GOP bill become law. The very small hospitals those folks who will also lose heathcare coverage now depend on.
A double whammy for the most needy, rural states.
Rural hospitals will be closing should the GOP bill become law. The very small hospitals those folks who will also lose heathcare coverage now depend on.
A double whammy for the most needy, rural states.
13
Who will pay? These types of government programs are bankrupting the country. We need to cut back now in order to be able to provide some type of safety net to future generations.
2
You haven't, however, answered your own question -- or the obvious follow-up. What is your plan for the people who will be left without care? The quadriplegic who requires 24-hour care in order to (literally) live? The diabetic with the ongoing wound who requires wound care twice per week in order to stay out of the hospital with an infection? The person with stage 6 Alzheimer's who can no longer stay at home because it isn't safe for him or her to do so? If you want to "cut back now", there needs to be an answer -- and the answer will speak to who we are as a culture.
The bottom line is that we are the only industrialized country that treats healthcare as a profit center. The only industrialized country where bankruptcies due to healthcare costs are common. Our healthcare is the most expensive in the world but our overall outcomes put us in 37th place.
It's simple to say "we must cut back" -- but it isn't an answer or a solution.
The bottom line is that we are the only industrialized country that treats healthcare as a profit center. The only industrialized country where bankruptcies due to healthcare costs are common. Our healthcare is the most expensive in the world but our overall outcomes put us in 37th place.
It's simple to say "we must cut back" -- but it isn't an answer or a solution.
25
You really think that cutting back on safety nets now will provide safety nets for the future. That makes no sense. In fact this sort of Trump logic is why we are in trouble now, not the future.
14
when everyone pays their FAIR share there will be enough - when someone like the orange whale in the white house can write off what everyone else can not - things need to change - including hard ail time for tax cheats.
1
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1212321#t=article
The 'Oregon Experiment' in 2008 began when the state expanded Medicaid but didn't have enough money to cover everyone. Selection of who was enrolled was done randomly - through lottery. Two years later, a study was unable to find any significant differences in health outcomes between those with and without Medicaid.
The 'Oregon Experiment' in 2008 began when the state expanded Medicaid but didn't have enough money to cover everyone. Selection of who was enrolled was done randomly - through lottery. Two years later, a study was unable to find any significant differences in health outcomes between those with and without Medicaid.
3
two years - ridiculous
1
The situation at hand is very difficult to address correctly, precisely given its nature, healthcare and well being, and the numbers, the federal deficit. My hearth aches at the thought that this wonderful woman could be left without her caregiver, derail her career and ultimately crush her dreams for which she fought so hard. On the other hand, the federal deficit of the US needs to be curbed. Social healthcare can't be financed through debt, its just unsustainable. You can't finance it either by indefinitely raising taxes on the rich and the corporations, who will ultimately relocate or flee if taxes breach 40-45% or so. So what do you do? We can't allow numbers abandon our caring nature and we can't allow our caring nature to blind us from the pressing numbers. Frankly, I do not know what the solution might be to one of the greatest problems of our time. I hope someone finds it, although I doubt POTUS Trump is up to the task.
8
There are many expenditures that can be cut to support our health. Military, police, firemen, highway/roads , and many others. Besides don't forget the great Cheney declaration "deficits don't matter".
11
Immigration is expanding number of people who depend on Medicaid coverage for health care and who will eventually need Medicaid to pay for their retirements into nursing homes. Unlike countries such as Canada and Australia, which accept immigrants based on their abilities to contribute to the economy, the U.S. accepts well over half of its immigrants based solely on family ties. This means Canada and Australia get immigrants who support themselves; whereas most of our immigrants are more likely to continually need government subsidies for housing, groceries, medical care, and so on.
If the federal government continues to accept poorly educated immigrants, then it should help the states pay for their Medicaid coverage.
If the federal government continues to accept poorly educated immigrants, then it should help the states pay for their Medicaid coverage.
10
Most immigrants are not U.S. citizens and those who are not are only eligible for Medicaid coverage if they entered the U.S. before August 1996.
3
In response to Dink Singer:
The government web site is confusing. It looks like every lawful permanent resident becomes eligible for Medicaid 5 years after entering the country. Many (including children, pregnant women, refugees, those granted asylum, Cubans, Haitians, battered aliens, and trafficking victims) need not wait the 5 years to qualify.
The government web site is confusing. It looks like every lawful permanent resident becomes eligible for Medicaid 5 years after entering the country. Many (including children, pregnant women, refugees, those granted asylum, Cubans, Haitians, battered aliens, and trafficking victims) need not wait the 5 years to qualify.
1
where are your facts?
I want to be more like the Good Samaritan in the gospel than I am. I'm glad that my taxes help the less fortunate and while I complain about paying them, I would pay more if we would do more to help those in need.
What's hardest right now is Jesus's other teaching: to love enemies and to do good to those who are hurtful. Figuring out how to love those who would strip or deprive benefits from people who need them has such little appeal. However, it may be the way out for a very wealthy nation that is rapidly becoming the poorest when it comes to basic civility and humanity.
What's hardest right now is Jesus's other teaching: to love enemies and to do good to those who are hurtful. Figuring out how to love those who would strip or deprive benefits from people who need them has such little appeal. However, it may be the way out for a very wealthy nation that is rapidly becoming the poorest when it comes to basic civility and humanity.
8
Before the politicians of both parties go any further in this mess of a health care debate, they need to look at the simple chart in this article on The Guardian British news web:
"America's broken healthcare system – in one simple chart
The US spends more money on healthcare than any other wealthy nation. But it hasn’t resulted in better health"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/datablog/2017/jul/02/us-healthcare-b...
This chart is a real eye opener on how badly we compare to other nations.
"America's broken healthcare system – in one simple chart
The US spends more money on healthcare than any other wealthy nation. But it hasn’t resulted in better health"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/datablog/2017/jul/02/us-healthcare-b...
This chart is a real eye opener on how badly we compare to other nations.
13
The Freedom Caucus wants to take freedom away from many in the disabled community that utilize Medicaid, allowing them to live outside of nursing home facilities.
Paul Ryan and his GOPers want to dismantle Medicaid. Rand Paul wants to dismantle the American Disabilities Act (ADA). Trump's Budget director thinks Social Security Disability is not real..Social Security..and wants to cut benefits.
The GOP under a clandestine move in their rules changes separated the Social Security funds, Old Age Survivors from the Disabled fund making the financial status for disability benefits more vulnerable.
The GOP agenda has malicious intent toward the disabled and the elderly which account for 65% of the Medicaid budget. The facts tells us of their intent. Their GOP health care bills do not increase flexibility nor innovation in Medicaid. The GOP bills along with Trump's let's dump Meals on Wheels budget will eviscerate Medicaid. The GOP are anti-disabled,they oppose their freedom.
Paul Ryan and his GOPers want to dismantle Medicaid. Rand Paul wants to dismantle the American Disabilities Act (ADA). Trump's Budget director thinks Social Security Disability is not real..Social Security..and wants to cut benefits.
The GOP under a clandestine move in their rules changes separated the Social Security funds, Old Age Survivors from the Disabled fund making the financial status for disability benefits more vulnerable.
The GOP agenda has malicious intent toward the disabled and the elderly which account for 65% of the Medicaid budget. The facts tells us of their intent. Their GOP health care bills do not increase flexibility nor innovation in Medicaid. The GOP bills along with Trump's let's dump Meals on Wheels budget will eviscerate Medicaid. The GOP are anti-disabled,they oppose their freedom.
10
This has all been paid for with borrowed money. Eventually, we wont be able to borrow and these people will be in worse shape. Much smarter to make drastic cuts on government funded medical treatments and the military now, when the pain will be less than in in the future.
1
This has not "all been paid for with borrowed money". In FY 2016, federal revenue covered 85% of federal expenditures so 15% of this has been paid for with borrowed money. But this bill does very little to change that. Over ten years the CBO estimates the bill would take $772 billion from low-income Americans in Medicaid benefits and give $773 billion in tax cuts to other Americans, most of it to the very wealthy.
The answer to deficits is to take back a little more of the tax cuts we have given the very wealthy. We could start by eliminating the preferential taxation of capital gains which would generate $109 billion in FY 2018.
The answer to deficits is to take back a little more of the tax cuts we have given the very wealthy. We could start by eliminating the preferential taxation of capital gains which would generate $109 billion in FY 2018.
4
I prefer the French solution of a few centuries ago for their
"let them eat cake class problem" the guillotine .
"let them eat cake class problem" the guillotine .
4
I'd like to remind you (and people who think like you) that America has a fiat currency. We don't borrow from anyone in the sense that you might borrow from the bank for a home loan. If they wanted to, the government could cancel its own debt to itself tomorrow by minting a 20 trillion dollar coin. So please stop with your lack of knowledge on the matter.
5
Speaking in purely economic terms, isn't it going to be more expensive to have large numbers of uninsured citizens? All these uninsured people are going to end up in emergency rooms when their symptoms are acute which is exponentially more expensive then getting them treatment at an earlier date. To absorb the cost of all these emergency room visits, hospitals will raise their fees and insurance rates will go up.
And why do we have insurance executives and pharmaceutical companies making billions of dollars in the first place? Oh yea, so they can donate to the Republican party.
And why do we have insurance executives and pharmaceutical companies making billions of dollars in the first place? Oh yea, so they can donate to the Republican party.
20
Carol, I am worried that along with the rest of their atrocities, the GOP will create legislation that says if you do not have health insurance, hospital emergency rooms will not treat you. These republicans are going to stop at nothing to cull the population of those whom they consider a drain or a drag. So, if that happens, I guess you just go and die in the hospital emergency room parking lot...if you cannot afford insurance.
3
Agreed. They would have people die in the parking lot and then have some minimum wage person with no benefits scoop corpses up in a truck and dump them in a ditch. Because, god forbid, we wouldn't want any of these low lives taking advantage of our tax dollars.
But these same republicans never seem to complain about the incredible waste spent in the department of defense.
But these same republicans never seem to complain about the incredible waste spent in the department of defense.
3
Delve into this bill and see what's in it.
Half of the babies born in this country are paid for by Medicaid. So you have infants, children, seniors, the elderly, disabled parents, families and low income ---all cut from programs. And left to their own devices.
Families with seniors, parents + grandparents who need nursing home care at some point in time will need aid from Medicaid ---because nursing home care is not affordable for most households when it becomes long term.
What will become of everyone?
Just to give our tax dollars to the wealthiest 400 families??
Republicans also want to kill The Prevention + Public Health Trust Fund that provides critical public health funds to the Centers for Disease Control as well as this nation's public health departments stretching across from ocean to ocean. Totally End It.
How is any of this sane???
Half of the babies born in this country are paid for by Medicaid. So you have infants, children, seniors, the elderly, disabled parents, families and low income ---all cut from programs. And left to their own devices.
Families with seniors, parents + grandparents who need nursing home care at some point in time will need aid from Medicaid ---because nursing home care is not affordable for most households when it becomes long term.
What will become of everyone?
Just to give our tax dollars to the wealthiest 400 families??
Republicans also want to kill The Prevention + Public Health Trust Fund that provides critical public health funds to the Centers for Disease Control as well as this nation's public health departments stretching across from ocean to ocean. Totally End It.
How is any of this sane???
25
Republicans decided not to participate in the crafting of the ACA and started voting to repeal it as before the ink was dry. Even though it was based on a conservative approach to health insurance created by the Heritage Foundation and adopted by a Republican governor in Massachusetts. This proves their goal was never to work on expanding health care. They just wanted to block anything Pres. Obama did, and of course give the rich a tax break.
In spite of having 7 years to improve upon the ACA they couldn't. The best they could do was the pathetic House and Senate bills which will deprive millions of health care. It couldn't be clearer.
The Republican bills are overwhelmingly rejected by people and organizations that actually think everyone deserves health care. That anyone takes it seriously is bizarre.
In spite of having 7 years to improve upon the ACA they couldn't. The best they could do was the pathetic House and Senate bills which will deprive millions of health care. It couldn't be clearer.
The Republican bills are overwhelmingly rejected by people and organizations that actually think everyone deserves health care. That anyone takes it seriously is bizarre.
17
So many people who voted for Trump will have parents, grandparents or even themselves on the street if AHA is replaced with the Republican plan. When the full Medicare cuts take place we will start our decline into a third world country. Many thousands of people who have worked all of their lives were never able to save for their old age. We currently have safety nets in place, but the Republican rich want every last penny for themselves. They have no conscience. Democracy only works for all of us if we don't take it for granted. The American people had a choice.
16
Obamacare requires anyone eligible for Medicaid to take it, in lieu of getting a subsidy to buy insurance coverage with better access to doctors. Why can't we change this to allow choice? For those who seem to believe this feature doesn't exist, please look at this link from California. Scroll down to Point 13.
http://www.dhcs.ca.gov/formsandpubs/publications/opa/Pages/QnAAffordable...
http://www.dhcs.ca.gov/formsandpubs/publications/opa/Pages/QnAAffordable...
3
I understand your point Kurfco, but question your premises. Here in NY, if you apply via the NY marketplace and qualify for the Medicaid expansion, you are indeed forced to select an expansion plan. But it is obviously much cheaper and is like any other plan in that it offers the essential benefits, pre-existing condition coverage and the like, and a network of hospitals and doctors. My understanding is that many such plans are superior to the "non-Medicaid" marketplace plans.
So why would someone who qualifies for the Medicaid expansion elect a non-Medicaid plan? I guess if they have a lot of savings and not much income, e.g., someone who retired before 65, they might qualify but have enough money to pay for another plan.
In that case, they could simply sign up for a plan directly with an insurer, not through the marketplace. They would get all the essential benefits, etc. They would just not receive a subsidy, they would have to pay the full premium.
So why would someone who qualifies for the Medicaid expansion elect a non-Medicaid plan? I guess if they have a lot of savings and not much income, e.g., someone who retired before 65, they might qualify but have enough money to pay for another plan.
In that case, they could simply sign up for a plan directly with an insurer, not through the marketplace. They would get all the essential benefits, etc. They would just not receive a subsidy, they would have to pay the full premium.
2
Three responses:
(1) In California, that expanded Medicaid, a family of four earning up to $64,638 must put the two kids on Medi-Cal/Medicaid. A family like this can afford to at least have the choice of whether to pay for insurance, with a subsidy.
http://hbex.coveredca.com/toolkit/renewal-toolkit/downloads/2016-Income-...
(2) In California, many doctors will not take a Medi-Cal/Medicaid patient because the reimbursement rates are so low (a cautionary tale about single payer, by the way). The pediatricians used by my grandkids don't take it.
(3) If you have been on the individual market recently, or if you have gotten an Obamacare policy and noticed the premium before any premium assistance, you will have seen how obscenely high the premiums are if there is no eligibility for a subsidy.
Why not offer the choice: Medicaid or Obamacare with subsidy?
(1) In California, that expanded Medicaid, a family of four earning up to $64,638 must put the two kids on Medi-Cal/Medicaid. A family like this can afford to at least have the choice of whether to pay for insurance, with a subsidy.
http://hbex.coveredca.com/toolkit/renewal-toolkit/downloads/2016-Income-...
(2) In California, many doctors will not take a Medi-Cal/Medicaid patient because the reimbursement rates are so low (a cautionary tale about single payer, by the way). The pediatricians used by my grandkids don't take it.
(3) If you have been on the individual market recently, or if you have gotten an Obamacare policy and noticed the premium before any premium assistance, you will have seen how obscenely high the premiums are if there is no eligibility for a subsidy.
Why not offer the choice: Medicaid or Obamacare with subsidy?
3
@Kurfco - It seems like the states have different approaches to this. To add to what Dan88 said, in New York when you sign up via the NY State of Health exchange, they do ask if you require financial assistance - if you say yes, then you are required to fill in financial information and then you are told what plans that you qualify for. You can say no, and shop the marketplace for any plan you want, but you of course would have to be able to afford it. There is also a subsidized plan for people who do not qualify for Medicaid, but who also can't afford expensive plans. It is called the "Essential Plan". And one more point regarding the NYS exchange, if someone signs up for Medicaid and gets insurance (not through the Dept of Social Services) but an insurance company, they can choose from a list of doctors who will accept them. If the person doesn't choose a doctor, then they will be assigned one.
1
After reading these comments it struck me that there are two fundamental forces colliding; one is the care that people need and the other is the cost to provide it. While we do have extremes such as people gaming the system without meaningfully contributing we also have people for whom the help is essential. Now add politics. What is fair? What really concerns me is the lack of bipartisan cooperation. I am not a historian so I can't say this is as extreme as it seems but the stakes are so large both individually and collectively that I strain to fathom the lack of willingness to work together. I blame republicans because the used this policy of not cooperating with Obama and the democrats as a political tool. It was somewhat effective but seems to fail in an ugly way when the truth must be reckoned with. The following election cycles should be telling.
8
We have unfunded wars, bailouts for big banks and other corporations and subsidize tax breaks for the wealthy. But when it comes to providing for the general well being of our citizens, especially the most vulnerable, balanced budgets are the top priority. Let's pay for education, health care, infrastructure needs and then figure out how much is left over for our bloated military and if we can afford to be kind to the wealthy.
20
I agree we should be concerned about the u.s., its citizens the country before we figure more ways to get more money to the rich. However, in my view this also means we take care of Americans before we import more people, many of whom will need our assistance once they get here. We simply can't be the rich uncle to the rest of the world as we have been for decades.
3
Sad truth is.... the republicans just don't care. These are people without souls.
26
Is it not caring that Republicans want to ensure that there is money left for the 99.9% of Americans? Medicaid costs can crowd out essential services for the majority of Americans. And even if you taxed Americans at 100% Medicaid costs will continue to increase until it forces States to go bankrupt.
4
Is it caring that the Republicans make paramount to this bill the repeal of the 2% tax on those making above $250,00 that has helped to fund the expansion of Medicaid?
I find it more than a bit inconsistent that Republicans adamantly seek to curtail a woman's ability to have an abortion but then place little to no value on ensuring a quality of life for all those born.
I find it more than a bit inconsistent that Republicans adamantly seek to curtail a woman's ability to have an abortion but then place little to no value on ensuring a quality of life for all those born.
13
"Is it not caring that Republicans want to ensure that there is money left for the 99.99% of Americans? Medicaid can crowd out essential services for the majority of Americans."
I would buy that if Republicans actually advocated for rich people like Trump "the self-proclaimed billionaire" to pay not only their FAIR SHARE of income taxes, but ANY income taxes at all. But they don't. Multiply Trump by all of the other rich people who are doing the same thing and if they all paid something, anything, then there would be a heck of a lot more money to work with. Instead, Republicans want want to cut taxes further that Obamacare required that helped to fund Medicaid.
I would buy that if Republicans actually advocated for rich people like Trump "the self-proclaimed billionaire" to pay not only their FAIR SHARE of income taxes, but ANY income taxes at all. But they don't. Multiply Trump by all of the other rich people who are doing the same thing and if they all paid something, anything, then there would be a heck of a lot more money to work with. Instead, Republicans want want to cut taxes further that Obamacare required that helped to fund Medicaid.
5
Make America Great Again, sighed The Snake.
8
A postcard from the real world, not the fantasyland of the usual
suspects showing up on cable to tell us that they are not
cutting Medicaid and things will be just fine.
You see these cretins from the Heritage Foundatin or
the INdependent Women's Forum and you ask where do they
fnd these people.
Word
suspects showing up on cable to tell us that they are not
cutting Medicaid and things will be just fine.
You see these cretins from the Heritage Foundatin or
the INdependent Women's Forum and you ask where do they
fnd these people.
Word
11
Why doesn't Trump and his fellow imbeciles just make it a law that cyanide pills can be purchased over the counter. It would be a windfall for the pharmaceutical
industry. Of course, Trumpcare would not cover it. (ha,ha).
industry. Of course, Trumpcare would not cover it. (ha,ha).
10
I will add that if you USED to make money, and got sick, and no longer do, you are equally worthless.
20
I'm sorry to have to point this out to people but what you are witnessing is simply mainstream conservatism, nothing more nothing less. The difference from the last 8 years is they now control everything so they have the chance to put their ideology to work on the American people.
Don't like it? Then get active in your community and get them out of power at every level of government. It starts at the state level since that is where the voting rights of citizens are controled and manipulated to their favor. Do nothing and this is just the tip of the iceberg of damage Mitch, Paul and there useful idiot will do.
Don't like it? Then get active in your community and get them out of power at every level of government. It starts at the state level since that is where the voting rights of citizens are controled and manipulated to their favor. Do nothing and this is just the tip of the iceberg of damage Mitch, Paul and there useful idiot will do.
27
Suicide is always an option, but please don't let the Soylent Green Corp. get us thereafter! (Wonder who's got stock in that these days . . .)
6
Why am I guessing that these two Alabama senators didn't see an issue with the University of Alabama giving Nick Saban an $11million/year contract. Unreal.....
18
People confuse Medicaid as a handout. It's a hand-up for so many. But our country is made up of people who 50 years ago would have been put into an institutions and forgotten about. Were those really the "good old days?"
20
It's going to have to be an option. The Orange Menace and the Congressional Criminals want to see people die. It's what they do. They think they are just helping sick people get closer to God.
12
Believing in God only means something if you respect all people and the planet God gave us. Golden Rule..that means caring for those less fortunate than us.,,,without exceptions....me..me..me...me....is not a holy attitude.....Going from Obama to Trump is going from the best of us..to the worst of us...I urge those who support Trump to free yourself from the burden of defending a small greedy man who has the charisma of Josef Stalin and the compassion of a serial killer. I am not a Christian but neither are these self serving Senators who want to take away meager health benefits from those who need it. I know a Christian when I see one....and Trump , Cruz and Lee et all do not qualify.
18
There are no more adjectives left to describe the heartlessness of the republicans our the dim witted president
10
This thread offers a goldmine to the Times. For an article or series, using reader ideas as support for "a more perfect union" which "provides for the general welfare."
Why not on July 4th!
Why not on July 4th!
4
It's also a goldmine for The Times to see where its coverage is severely lacking, such as in the area of costs (nearly $100 billion increase in Medicaid spending since 2013) and fraud (increase of 50% since Medicaid *expanded*).
The Times should also educate its readers about who else is receiving care under the Medicaid *expansion*. They are, in fact, "able-bodied".
The Times should also educate its readers about who else is receiving care under the Medicaid *expansion*. They are, in fact, "able-bodied".
4
AACNY - Many "able-bodied" people are now receiving Medicaid because their employers refuse to offer them access to insurance coverage. Yes, even full-time workers can be thrown under the bus by companies. They have legislators on their side who write laws that allow them to get away with it. Small businesses - exempt. Large businesses - cut employees' hours, for example. Work 40 hours a week at two more jobs? Tough luck. So why shouldn't a person who gets up and goes to work not be able to see a doctor when they are sick or injured or lose everything they have paying for it?
3
When the Republicans have finally killed most of us, they're going to wake up to discover that the only people left to kill are republicans.
9
When they've either killed us off or deported us, I'd love to have been around to see how they get their lawns mowed or their houses cleaned - or what about the organic veggies they think they deserve? Whose going to pick those? Or... one could go on, but what's the point? We'll be dead - or deported...
2
Vampire impersonator, Paul Ryan, says these people will CHOOSE not to have insurance. That's why he's calling it an "option." Wisconsin, you MUST remove this demagogue from office. He's done nothing for his district, has not held a town hall in two years, and has been "out of town" for at least 600 days. He is not doing his job, for his constituents, but will soon be killing Americans all across the country. For THIS issue, you still have a choice. VOTE RANDY BRYCE. HE will take care of his district because he is one of you.
13
Republicans say:
Let them eat cake
And die at home
Without a doctor.
What is wrong
With the Republican
party? It's a death
party for working
Americans.
Republicans
have not heart
And not brains.
Let them eat cake
And die at home
Without a doctor.
What is wrong
With the Republican
party? It's a death
party for working
Americans.
Republicans
have not heart
And not brains.
12
Use and abuse within the system,for sure.But this article shows that the people who are receiving it couldn't survive without it!
7
Not sure what you mean... hopefully not that a person smart enough to sit for the bar exam, but needs help negotiating moving through life, doesn't deserve the chance to gain that level of education and participate in the expenses of her own care. That's not abuse of the system.
My mistake. If a person with a disability is able to function without the need of Medicaid they shouldn't receive it. As this (quite obviously) is ''ripping off the government especially you and I who are tax payers. If people can get out there and work they shouldn't receiving Medicaid. disabled or not.
It is criminal,...... and stupid. "waivers" is the term assigned to further confuse people. The nursing homes that "house" people are just another for profit racket. The "disabled" are just part of the system. I am an "expert". I have experienced the stupidity as a parent of an incompetent person. You can't even get "day services" that provide care past 3PM. Ruinous for entire families. Then, fools march to the polls and vote for people who tell them, "we just don't have the money." America is bankrupt alright. Morally bankrupt.
14
Wouldn't it be nice if there was a political party in power that is prolife and sworn to uphold the sanctity of life? Oh wait ...
16
"When I was sick, you cared for me" - Beatitudes
".....unless we have to forego tax cuts for the wealthiest" - Republicans
".....unless we have to forego tax cuts for the wealthiest" - Republicans
21
Well it wasn't the Beatitudes: it's the part in Matthew 25 - my favorite: I was hungry and you gave me food; I was thirsty and you gave me drink; I was a stranger (refugee) and you welcomed me; I was naked and you gave me clothing; I was sick and you took care of me; I was in prison and you visited me.
That's the problem with the stuff Jesus said - it's so inconvenient for greedy, the xenophobic and the chronically self-absorbed.
Here's my other favorite verse - it's in Luke 6: "Why do you call me Lord, Lord and you don't do what I tell you?" Why indeed - I think it's called hypocrisy.
That's the problem with the stuff Jesus said - it's so inconvenient for greedy, the xenophobic and the chronically self-absorbed.
Here's my other favorite verse - it's in Luke 6: "Why do you call me Lord, Lord and you don't do what I tell you?" Why indeed - I think it's called hypocrisy.
2
What tax cuts? This is just a reversal of the wealth transfer policies put into place by Obamacare.
This Liar and Traitor in Chief is America's worst enemy, not Russia. He will make sure that those that need medical coverage get none. He will continue his assault on the poor, the seniors, children, and women. He cares nothing about them, except to use them for his own agenda of making money and accumulating wealth. He is already destroying our environment with deregulation, which will lead to more health problems with dirty air and water. He will continue to accommodate Russia and praise them, allowing them to continue to meddle in our democracy. All for his own personal quest to acquire more wealth in deals with them to enrich himself. This is America's worst terrorist...he who would sell this country out and not defend the country from our worst enemy. America will lead nothing but follow Russia with him as President. And this GOP Congress watches while this unfolds, like spectators at a game.
7
The first name of Alabama's Senator Strange is Luther, not Rodney. A Rodney J. Strange, according to Facebook, is chairman of the County Republican Commission in Chemung County, New York.
So this is what it means to be a Christian nation.
10
Being a Christian should require one to tolerate a 50% increase in Medicaid fraud. I really don't know where people get their ideas about Christianity. What they really seem to be suggesting are lobotomies, a suspension of all logic and reason. Throwing money at a problem doesn't make one a better Christian.
2
At the beginning the government sanctioned white supremacy, wealth and christianity. People were kidnapped, entrapped in legal scams and killed. Guns were common especially in the south where laws around the slave trade were unconcerned w human life and militias were prolific. Where did they find these people in this administration. I have not seen the likes of them since the 1950's but I sense the roots of their ideas go way back. We have a new civil war.
3
Christian nation does not mean being a bankrupt one. Charity begins at home. Families need to step up, not push their children's healthcare needs on the taxpayers.
2
Trump, McConnell, and Ryan: Fake healthcare and fake health insurance join fake infrastructure projects and fake foreign policy.
5
The people who decide to impose such caps (to assure insurance company profits) are death panels, Republican legislators in service of the Grim Reaper.
7
That doesn't matter to Republicans. Those people do not donate. They will die soon anyway. Republicans hate the poor, the disabled, the brown. They will not stop until they are defeated.
7
There are Churches and Charities that used to take care of many of these problems, they need to get back to these services if Americans wish to foot those bills, or there is always "Death with Dignity", the American People are the ones to decide, the many, not the biased few!
1
I see. They are to die. I hope you are pro-choice, then. Or are disabled children forced to be born in order to die?
3
Medicaid probably pays for over 70% of elderly long term care – or to put it another way they pay to keep Grandma in the nursing home. If this was not available it would be the responsibility of family to provide care. 50 years ago this was common. A child would have to keep their elderly parents in a spare bedroom and take care of them 24/7, if they were lucky they could afford a part-time care giver to come in and offer some relief. The reality is that a lot of Trump supporters would be effected by this. My sincere hope is that Trump supporters find out first-hand what this will be like. I hope they get a phone call from Grandma’s nursing home telling them to come get her since the benefits that paid for her care has been cut off. Maybe and just maybe then they will see that they were ‘on the Government dole’. Too many of them think it is someone else. Hey Trump supports – you are on the dole and have always been.
12
This is definitely where people will get a wake up call. The first step will be nursing homes cutting already meager staffing. Like all things healthcare, costs will simply shift, with increased rates of hospitalizations. It's a vicious cycle. And baby boomers are now getting there themselves. Standby...
2
During this health-care debate, some seem to believe that Medicaid is a giveaway for able-bodied people who prefer to rely on welfare rather than seek employment. This article tells another story that merits attention. No parent seeks to give birth to a child who is disabled; no adult chooses to develop a debilitating illness that prevents him or her from working. Not every family has the resources to care and advocate for a member with a lifetime disability. Each program, whether Medicaid, Medicare, or ACA, has its flaws that seem insurmountable to solve. I'd like our elected representatives to make an attempt. I am not rich by any means, and health insurance is the major outlay in this household, but I would pay more for an equitable system.
12
Truly needy cases. And of course the mere that these folks are here, live and being taken care of has nothing to do with Obamacare and Medicaid. Medicaid was serving the disabled since it was created. All obama did was to expand it to everyone within 400X the poverty level.
If Medicaid wasn't in place before Obamacare exactly how do you think these folks survived? Everyone wasn't dead before Obamacare and everyone isn't going to die when Obamacare gets repealed. Democrats are hysterical.
If Medicaid wasn't in place before Obamacare exactly how do you think these folks survived? Everyone wasn't dead before Obamacare and everyone isn't going to die when Obamacare gets repealed. Democrats are hysterical.
4
in the 50s they were institutionalized where they had no access to society. In the 70s and 80s, the disability rights movement got themselves back in homes with programs such as Medicaid. Republicans aren't just reversing what the ACA did, they are taking away Medicaid as we have known it in the long term. This is not just a return to how things were in 2008. This will be much worse, but the pain will be slow as they have the worst cuts for 10 years from now, and cuts after they get elected again in 2020
11
Yes, the idea that eliminating the *expansion* will result in dire circumstances is typical liberal logic.
People are essentially claiming that before Obamacare, Medicaid was a death sentence, which is ridiculous.
People are essentially claiming that before Obamacare, Medicaid was a death sentence, which is ridiculous.
2
Please NYT, isn't it time that you at least do a review piece on the California (SB562) and New York Single Payer legislative initiatives? It would be of interest to readers to know the fate of the California initiative The double-dealing and industry-fueled lobbying efforts of Big Drugs and Big Insurance are blocking the bill in committee to let it die a slow death there despite a Democratic Party super majority in our state. The Dem establishment is short-sighted and simply complicit.
Further, to at least briefly explore the thorough fiscal analysis of the California Single Payer Bill by Robert Pollin, economics professor, University of Massachusetts (Amherst) would be of service to your readership. The rational trend toward single payer for the nation must be given more air in the NYT!
Further, to at least briefly explore the thorough fiscal analysis of the California Single Payer Bill by Robert Pollin, economics professor, University of Massachusetts (Amherst) would be of service to your readership. The rational trend toward single payer for the nation must be given more air in the NYT!
18
Why do so many Republicans hate ordinary Americans?
7
"Why do so many Republicans hate ordinary Americans?"
KPB, because many ordinary Americans, millions of them, stand in the way of their cruel, greedy agenda, and stand in the way of their raking in much more cash even faster.
republicans are NOT a government. NOT.
KPB, because many ordinary Americans, millions of them, stand in the way of their cruel, greedy agenda, and stand in the way of their raking in much more cash even faster.
republicans are NOT a government. NOT.
3
Is anyone surprised? The malignant sociopathy that has gripped this presidency was on full display during the campaign when Trump mocked a disabled person to the delight of his adoring electorate. Expect more of the same ....
8
Just go for the one payer system used all over the world. Why are we always behind the curve on everything. On the other hand we still have free speech. For now. Tough choice.
6
My state has contracted with private insurance companies to administer its Medicaid Program. The private insurance companies are already cutting back on home services to people with disabilities for activities of daily living. I have talked to clients who cannot help themselves, for example, with toileting who can only have home health aides three days a week. Without an aid, they're left in their own waste. Previously they had assistance three times a day.
8
While I do admire Ms. Isbell and the rest of the people mentioned in this article nowhere have I read about the financial contributions from her family. In a society that has finite Resources aka you can't tax 100% of people's income hard choices have to be made.
And much like battlefield triage you should allocate the resources that will do the most good. The Republican plan increases Medicaid spending, although not at the current rate. When is an increase a cut? Much like you getting a smaller salary increase at work than you had in prior years. Do you say your salary was cut?
And much like battlefield triage you should allocate the resources that will do the most good. The Republican plan increases Medicaid spending, although not at the current rate. When is an increase a cut? Much like you getting a smaller salary increase at work than you had in prior years. Do you say your salary was cut?
7
She's 24 years old! Not a child!
4
Nobody is buying this line of argument John. What "family" members do you believe should be contributing to her care? Brothers and sisters? Aunts and uncles? Second cousins?
They have no legal obligation and for this level of care they probably won't have the money if they were so inclined. Her parents? Ditto. Are they supposed to spend all their retirement savings on her astronomical health costs? Then what do they do? Live in a bus station?
And what if she does not have any relatives to depend on? Can you imagine that that may be the case for thousands and thousands of Americans around the country? What do we do for them?
All for a trillion dollar tax cut for the rich?
This is why we call it a "society" that we live in. We are in this together, we look after our fellow citizens who need such help because it is only due to luck that we are not the ones facing their challenges.
They have no legal obligation and for this level of care they probably won't have the money if they were so inclined. Her parents? Ditto. Are they supposed to spend all their retirement savings on her astronomical health costs? Then what do they do? Live in a bus station?
And what if she does not have any relatives to depend on? Can you imagine that that may be the case for thousands and thousands of Americans around the country? What do we do for them?
All for a trillion dollar tax cut for the rich?
This is why we call it a "society" that we live in. We are in this together, we look after our fellow citizens who need such help because it is only due to luck that we are not the ones facing their challenges.
12
Likewise, while we are "triaging" and the very wealthy are getting more than their fair share of tax cuts, I would like to read about their own contributions that make them worthy of the "finite resources."
5
1 - How about removing tax exemptions for religious organization except their actual place of worship.
2 - How about a real audit of defense spending?
2 - How about a real audit of defense spending?
12
How about an audit of able-bodied people receiving Government handouts? Working off-the books these scammers should be not be able to feed at the Government trough.
3
I guess there could be people who think they shouldn't have to pay for medical care of truly disabled fellow Americans. I can't believe they are any more than a tiny minority. What is obvious, however, with a visit to any ER is that many Medicaid recipients are people who quite frankly have avoidable medical problems like smoking, drug and alcohol abuse, morbid obesity, multiple kids they have no intention or ability to pay for, etc. should the rest of, who some how have made the decision to not put poison in our bodies or have far more kids than we can afford, be burdened paying for those who have? Because of our ill thought out immigration laws, anyone who can get in the country gets free maternity care (which is the correct thing to do, however) and then gives birth to a u.s. citizen who also gets free tax payer funded care. Some of us think these issues need to be addressed. We have not problem helping take care of very deserving, disabled Americans.
4
"Free maternity care?" Where do you
live? And while you may be the paragon of healthy behaviors, you're still going to get old someday. I'm pretty sure cancer and auto accidents don't discriminate just because someone is smug and pompous.
live? And while you may be the paragon of healthy behaviors, you're still going to get old someday. I'm pretty sure cancer and auto accidents don't discriminate just because someone is smug and pompous.
3
The US is a very wealthy nation. Instead of trying to strip personal assistance and healthcare from millions of children and adults with disabilities, seniors, and all who need it, how about celebrating and expanding our ability to provide these services?
10
But consider what good could be done for able-bodied kids in Harlem who are not getting enough food. The cost of care for many of the people described in this article would pay for 100 times the number of kids needing to be fed.
4
And consider that if there are 10,000 such patients running up 1,000,000 dollars in health care apiece do you believe that is better than spending 10 BILLION on food for 1,000,000 kids?
2
I am not sure what you are saying...? So spend the money on food, and let the elderly, sick, poor, disabled patients DIE?????
You know what? This country can do BOTH, but the government would rather spend the money on tax cuts for the wealthy, the military-industrial complex, AND THEMSELVES.
You know what? This country can do BOTH, but the government would rather spend the money on tax cuts for the wealthy, the military-industrial complex, AND THEMSELVES.
3
A corollary to this illustration of the assistance that Medicaid provides - for some people, in some locations - does also bring into question how essentially unfair it is to fund the programs and decide eligibility on a state by state basis. - ( and sometimes - very frankly - it is going to vary county by county,because in states like NY, the Medicaid program is administered that way - rules may be the same but execution is not.
Some time ago the NYT ran a story about a school age girl in Florida who had primary care-taking responsibility for her mother ( or grandmother) and responsible also for running the household..... an outrageous picture of lack of care for our most vulnerable people. I also know that it can be very difficult to provide services in rural areas, which is a separate s issue.
So -- I think this should be funded by federal income taxes, and administered equitably nationwide. It is an expensive program to do well, and so it is not going to be funded in states with lower incomes. Someone mentioned the VA system, which is one model. Or devise another, but incorporate this into a federal mandate with funding.
Some time ago the NYT ran a story about a school age girl in Florida who had primary care-taking responsibility for her mother ( or grandmother) and responsible also for running the household..... an outrageous picture of lack of care for our most vulnerable people. I also know that it can be very difficult to provide services in rural areas, which is a separate s issue.
So -- I think this should be funded by federal income taxes, and administered equitably nationwide. It is an expensive program to do well, and so it is not going to be funded in states with lower incomes. Someone mentioned the VA system, which is one model. Or devise another, but incorporate this into a federal mandate with funding.
4
Exactly! That's the Reason for our Republic. To, among other things, "provide for the General Welfare."
Otherwise why be the UNITED States?
Otherwise why be the UNITED States?
6
Cheryl:
"...administered equitably nationwide"
In fact, "nationwide" administration leads to high costs and poor medical outcomes. The solution lies at the local levels.
"...administered equitably nationwide"
In fact, "nationwide" administration leads to high costs and poor medical outcomes. The solution lies at the local levels.
1
Thank you for this fine article. This one of the proper roles of government - to assist people. The lives of the people highlighted are made livable by our tax dollars. I am very happy to pay for this. I am happy to live in a country that assists people in this very basic way. Please, let's not change.
And wealthy people should be ashamed that they dodge taxes and make this assistance problematic. Pay up.
And wealthy people should be ashamed that they dodge taxes and make this assistance problematic. Pay up.
27
Wow. How controlling!
2
A government agency 20 hours a week to drive Mr. Foster around and help with housekeeping seems really odd. He needs a wife, friends, church family, neighbor, bicycle, and/or the bus? Perhaps move closer to town and walk? He has been on a wait list for eight years for this aide? Whatever I am missing should have been made more clear in the article.
3
Mr. Foster appears to be in good health despite his mental limitations -- can't he learn to use a bus? walk or ride a bicycle? Does it really make sense to pay a health aide upwards of $25 an hour (to an agency; likely the aide gets only $10 of that) to drive him to the supermarket and eat lunch with him at Subway? (and who pays for that lunch?)
Now, people who are paralyzed or quadriplegics or something, clearly need aides to help with the activities of life like eating, bathing, dressing, etc. But a high level person with Downs or mental retardation should be mostly functional, even if they cannot drive.
Surely families can do SOMETHING for such an adult child? and btw: 67 isn't really that old.
Now, people who are paralyzed or quadriplegics or something, clearly need aides to help with the activities of life like eating, bathing, dressing, etc. But a high level person with Downs or mental retardation should be mostly functional, even if they cannot drive.
Surely families can do SOMETHING for such an adult child? and btw: 67 isn't really that old.
4
Urban/suburban planning has created a car dependent society. The things you say would be more possible if there was thought to how a society as a whole functions, with more planning, instead of how do I function, singularly. His parents give him a place to stay and help him, but caregiving is tiring, and they will not live forever. His parents are doing a sensible thing--weaning his dependence from them. If they were to die tomorrow without this help, what would happen to him? At that point people would judge saying "they should have planned for contingencies."
Despite having Downs, he still has wants and needs for life outside of his parents. He may not do well outside a familiar environment. there are many factors you do not know before you judge.
These folks in this article are lucky. For every person like this, there are many others who have died from pressure sores for lack of turning in bed or pressure sores from an inadequate wheelchair.
Despite having Downs, he still has wants and needs for life outside of his parents. He may not do well outside a familiar environment. there are many factors you do not know before you judge.
These folks in this article are lucky. For every person like this, there are many others who have died from pressure sores for lack of turning in bed or pressure sores from an inadequate wheelchair.
4
He has epilepsy and a seizure disorder. I wonder if you'd consider that "good health" if it were you?
2
It's always been interesting to me that people who live in those state seemingly always vote Republican, even though it's the Republicans who always want to limit the help these very people need.
For sure these lawmakers would have no problem setting up legislation that would benefit them if one of their kin was in need.
Trump said during the rally that he loved his under educated.
On one hand one could say now that since he is the least educated president ever to 'serve' in the post, one can say he feels at home with the under-educated, but there are a lot of people who had to know better.
I just don't get it.
For sure these lawmakers would have no problem setting up legislation that would benefit them if one of their kin was in need.
Trump said during the rally that he loved his under educated.
On one hand one could say now that since he is the least educated president ever to 'serve' in the post, one can say he feels at home with the under-educated, but there are a lot of people who had to know better.
I just don't get it.
9
In my state, the rural voters vote Republican on social value issues and low taxes. They somehow think that they and their families will always receive social services if they need them because they're worthy and hardworking. It's those nonworking, urban, non-white, and immigrant people who shouldn't receive services. Of course, taxes should stay low and government small, no matter what services are needed.
4
It appears that every program has a constituency. As a country how do we effectively prioritize and do away with, or reduce, programs that are ineffective. It seems like a losing battle. Lobbyist will fight for who ever pays their way. With $20 trillion in national debt we have to come together and fight waste and protect those like the ones in this story. But how.....a 1% increase in interest rates will begin crowding out budget priorities.....we can say let's cut defense....ok, try closing a base...try Ft. Stewart, try the naval facilities in Norfolk....we can say tax the 1% more- -that won't do it.....where do we begin, how do we prioritize, how do we protect the poorest of the poor, the most defenseless, the most unfortunate and not bankrupt the greatest experiment this earth has ever seen.......
3
If your premise is based on concern that the debt is too high, then one does not take spending reductions and immediately turn them into tax cuts for the rich. No need to try and counter with the "lower taxes will cause government receipts to rise" talking point. They don't, see Bush II, Kansas, etc. You also appear to be using the classic "Oh, we don't know what's really going on, it's so tough, we're powerless anyway, you're one your on" argument, akin to the ones used by climate change deniers and other lobbyists and interest groups to remove regulations, controls and taxes to enable resource extraction companies, some in the investor class, and other industries to exploit the economy, the country and the planet to the detriment of regular citizens for their gain. But you see, we are a great country, a smart nation, and we CAN fix things and help people, educate and protect them, (including economically) keep the environment healthy and those who live in it. To throw one's hand up, and imply that it can't be done is an insult to what you've correctly called the greatest experiment this earth has ever seen, no ellipsis needed.
1
I would only add that even if this country is not so "great" and so "smart" -- maybe no other country is greater at patting themselves on the back -- there are countries already doing the job of healthcare cheeper and better than us. Who needs a "greatest experiment this earth has ever seen"? And who needs perfection when looking for a better solution. Canada's healthcare, for example, is not perfect but it is better, especially for the cost.
5
Regardless what Bush II did, what Brownback did explain to me what happens when interest rates rise (which they eventually will) ? Will those payments on our $21 trillion debt crowd out other budget worthy items (let's put our head in the sand and let future generations deal with this mess) and please- your argument from the Bernie base is getting stale - it always comes down the the rich getting richer doesn't it? Oh, taxing those nasty 1%ers 100% will not reduce this deficit, answer all your worthy liberal causes and save the environment......if that's the case tell me about Johnson's Great Society and the improvements in our schools, the eradication of poverty....etc
1
Big Pharma gets much of its revenue from the U. S. I am surprised they are not lobbying to preserve Medicaid.
I work in Paris with a variety of clients. Some are sales reps from Big Pharma, some, pharmaceutical researchers and some are from the French government.
According to my clients, Big Pharma loves selling medicines to the U. S. because Americans will pay whatever they ask. Sales reps' commissions are huge.
Big Pharma also loves the fast U.S. regulatory process from new drug to market. And, America permits drug advertising on T. V. and magazines, which is forbidden in Europe.
In France, each Big Pharma product is assessed by two ministries -- Health, Commerce (for product efficacy, research standards, harmful side effects, if there is a market for the drug) -- and two government entities -- the Insurance Commission and the Budget Office (for appropriate cost/benefit pricing).
Then the government offers a "take it or leave it" price they are willing to pay. Big Pharma takes it, because Europe follows the French model.
Unfortunately, Big Pharma pays for research around the world, which conflates commerce with necessary healthcare. Because they fund doctors' research, there is a built-in bias in the research.
The U. S. needs to follow the French model on pricing, and strictly monitor generics manufacturing and drug research.
Removing care is not the answer. Cutting Big Pharma profits and insisting that we all continue to pay our taxes is.
I work in Paris with a variety of clients. Some are sales reps from Big Pharma, some, pharmaceutical researchers and some are from the French government.
According to my clients, Big Pharma loves selling medicines to the U. S. because Americans will pay whatever they ask. Sales reps' commissions are huge.
Big Pharma also loves the fast U.S. regulatory process from new drug to market. And, America permits drug advertising on T. V. and magazines, which is forbidden in Europe.
In France, each Big Pharma product is assessed by two ministries -- Health, Commerce (for product efficacy, research standards, harmful side effects, if there is a market for the drug) -- and two government entities -- the Insurance Commission and the Budget Office (for appropriate cost/benefit pricing).
Then the government offers a "take it or leave it" price they are willing to pay. Big Pharma takes it, because Europe follows the French model.
Unfortunately, Big Pharma pays for research around the world, which conflates commerce with necessary healthcare. Because they fund doctors' research, there is a built-in bias in the research.
The U. S. needs to follow the French model on pricing, and strictly monitor generics manufacturing and drug research.
Removing care is not the answer. Cutting Big Pharma profits and insisting that we all continue to pay our taxes is.
25
REALITY: cuts in GROWTH could be offset by cutting fraud by individuals and hospitals if the media took the time to expose the issue instead of promoting the liberal agenda
5
Why don't you take "the time to expose" the fraud. Alas you will find that the poor are not the culprits but rather crony capitalism unfettered by pesky regulations that get in the way of free market theft.
7
Millions??? And how about when she is employed she pay for the assistance that she needs? At least in part?
6
Another reader suggested we eliminate the home mortgage interest deduction to help pay for Medicaid. Why not also eliminate the contribution deduction for donations to charities? We could use the additional annual tax revenues of over $50 billion to improve and expand Medicaid.
And the contribution deduction is worth more to the rich than the average taxpayer, so it would have the advantage of increasing taxes more for the rich than for the poor.
And charities thrived in the US long before the Internal Revenue Code existed. The quality of life in the US improved greatly after implementation of Medicaid.
And the contribution deduction is worth more to the rich than the average taxpayer, so it would have the advantage of increasing taxes more for the rich than for the poor.
And charities thrived in the US long before the Internal Revenue Code existed. The quality of life in the US improved greatly after implementation of Medicaid.
9
Quality of life improved by Medicaid? Got any objective evidence for that?
4
Did you read the article? Multiply these examples in Al by thousands more all over the US plus even more who are denied these "extra" services in states that have !long wait lists and no funds because they turned thumbs down on Obamacare. Oh and did I mention the other 74 million Americans ( 1/6 of the population) including 60 % of people in nursing homes and 36 million kids ?
6
Read Ms. Goodnough's article.
2
While my heart goes out to all of these brave men and women, part of me balks at the thought that this is solely a government problem. In each one of these stories the writer glosses over the fact that the family is moved away or otherwise fails to provide care for their relative. I think this is another battle in the "Are we going to rely on government to take care of all aspects of our lives?" They are already our largest employer and our largest religion (nationalism) and largest care taker. We should decide to either embrace these facts help government succeed or work to build the America we want to have.
10
Most adults become independent of parents. Why shouldn't the disabled adults?
8
Good point, but most adults are independent of the government why shouldn't disabled adults do so as well? Charity is the answer!!!
5
But poor people are also criticized for NOT moving away from a place with no jobs to a place where there are jobs. Those of us in a position to decide what's best for them really need to make up our minds about that.
5
Unfortunately, not only are the Republicans against Medicare funding. Plenty of Liberals and Democrats think they have all the coverage they need, so they don't care either. Most people will only care when it affects them. Remember Nancy Reagan's sudden advocacy for stem cell research?
14
Republicans don't mind betraying the vulnerable. They aren't even hiding the fact they plan to remove millions of disabled/ lower income from Medicaid to present $33 billion in tax cuts for the 400 wealthiest families.
Their hideous plan targets seniors, the elderly, parents & children.
To further weaken Medicare, the bill lets rich people deriving income from investments no longer pay the Medicare Tax. Plus, huge tax cuts go to insurance industries and drug companies.
And actual health insurance policies people not on Medicare/Medicaid will now obtain will cover far less. Millions could suffer as well since the bill repeals funding to help with out of pocket costs + deductibles!!!
As Barack Obama says, "It's a massive transfer of wealth from middle class/poor families to the richest people in America."
Their hideous plan targets seniors, the elderly, parents & children.
To further weaken Medicare, the bill lets rich people deriving income from investments no longer pay the Medicare Tax. Plus, huge tax cuts go to insurance industries and drug companies.
And actual health insurance policies people not on Medicare/Medicaid will now obtain will cover far less. Millions could suffer as well since the bill repeals funding to help with out of pocket costs + deductibles!!!
As Barack Obama says, "It's a massive transfer of wealth from middle class/poor families to the richest people in America."
23
The issue of all of this is how do we pay for the services and ensure their quality? The only person on earth who has ever rendered top quality healthcare without compensation was Jesus Christ. Liberals want to soak the rich who worked and disciplined themselves to make money as they transfer money to those who chose not to. In rendering a solution, it will not work unless drivers of poor health are address and prevention is implemented. I believe that we should tax alcohol, marijuana, tobacco, body mass index, and gasoline to fund their rescue system. All insurance premiums should be deductible by the individual and not for corporations. Everyone should buy their insurance as individuals and not obtain it from their employers, just like they do their car and homeowners insurance. A public option should be deployed as to hold private insurers accountable. Safety net hospitals should be funded so that those who fall through the cracks have a reasonable place to go. Providers must be encouraged to be cost efficient - I am a big fan of risk-adjusted provider-based care risk models such as bundled payments that promote physicians to hold drug and device companies accountable. As such, both the Democrats and the Republicans have valid points. Unfortunately, with the bullhorns that the liberals (e.g. NYT, MSNBC, CNN) and conservatives (WSJ, Fox) have, moderates with solutions are drowned out. Please pray for our nation to the God our money states that we supposedly trust.
2
Two things that come to mind.
Remember when Sarah Palin said that the DEMS were initiating a 'death panel'
Let's face without medical health a lot of people are going to needlessly die.
One the latest segment of REAL TIME with Bill Maher, one of the panelist noted that until people start feeling the effects and pain of not having health care, then they will realize how important it is.
Maybe this is what is going to have to happen.
Remember when Sarah Palin said that the DEMS were initiating a 'death panel'
Let's face without medical health a lot of people are going to needlessly die.
One the latest segment of REAL TIME with Bill Maher, one of the panelist noted that until people start feeling the effects and pain of not having health care, then they will realize how important it is.
Maybe this is what is going to have to happen.
5
We cant afford these hand-out programs. Virtue signalling that all need reduced cost or free care is great. Come up with a way to do it without bankrupting the nation and putting more on the backs of people that worked hard to get where they are.
2
I tend to agree. And I want Democrats, including those on these pages, to pay for my family's loss of healthcare coverage and increased taxes that came in the form of drastically increased deductibles that rendered my healthcare insurance virtually useless and massively higher premiums that served as a huge tax increase. I only hear crickets from liberals when I bring these points up, points which continue to be ignored, and cost the Democratic Party the Presidency and Congress and the Supreme Court. Crickets, Crickets and more Crickets - keep burying your heads in the sand.
5
Democrats have been in denial about the havoc wrought by Obamacare. They tout the 20 million newly covered, 20 million who will lose coverage, etc., but they rarely acknowledge the millions who have been negatively impacted by Obamacare. (Of course, what can they say, except they were terribly wrong? Politically, that kind of honesty is a non-starter.)
Liberals here are in their usual denial mode as well. It's the evil republicans, etc., etc. They ignore the fact that millions of Americans voiced their anger, and the only ones listening were republicans. Now republicans are acting on their behalf.
Liberals here are in their usual denial mode as well. It's the evil republicans, etc., etc. They ignore the fact that millions of Americans voiced their anger, and the only ones listening were republicans. Now republicans are acting on their behalf.
3
I find it odd that you find purchasing healthcare insurance such a travesty. Yes the ACA has problems that can be mitigated. Yet your president feels no reason to provide subsidies to you to make it less expensive to buy said insurance. As a retiring congressman from the great state of Utah said. "Don't buy an I Phone". All I can tell is you need to educate your self on these topics better. Further, you can blame the democrats all you want, but they're not in charge, as you point out. So I suggest that you call Tom Price at HHS. He is from your state.
3
Why do you think the democrats owe you anything? Get a better job with good health benefits, if you don't want to be stuck with the higher deductibles and higher premiums. The cost of health insurance pre ACA/Obamacare have always been rising and what have your republican law makers down to stem that growth? ..crickets. Obamacare has not increased the national deficit because of the taxes on the wealthy that was use to fund it and you party wants to eliminate coverage for 22million to give money back to people who don't need it--how will that help you?..Crickets. Blame the people who have done nothing to help lower the cost of health insurance-- your republican party-- for your plight and the fact that they have strongly supported wage stagnation that has kept you from earning more. People like you are quick to blame Obama for problems that existed before the ACA. Your premiums and deductibles were always going to rise because the cost of drugs and medical cost have been rising and will continue to rise in our current system. Keep voting for the republicans if you want. Do anything in their healthcare proposals address your issues of high deductibles /premiums?...CRICKETS. You are a sucker and they have you on the line and will not let you go.
5
The GOP diminishes itself by actively hurting people in WHEEL CHAIRS?
If you have a GOP friend who rationalizes this barbarity, he is no friend. He doesn't care if you live or die.
If you have a GOP friend who rationalizes this barbarity, he is no friend. He doesn't care if you live or die.
10
Or they believe that you won't need such or would not accept it.
4
I'd rather see Ms. Frances Isbell on the Supreme Court than that cold-hearted, robotic and predictable Gorsuch.
Special acknowledgement should be given to the caregivers of these needy folks.
Express your feelings at Town Hall meetings. Write/call your representatives. We must continue to educate and school every elected official who supports the Trump/Ryan/McConnell "mean" healthcare bill.
Special acknowledgement should be given to the caregivers of these needy folks.
Express your feelings at Town Hall meetings. Write/call your representatives. We must continue to educate and school every elected official who supports the Trump/Ryan/McConnell "mean" healthcare bill.
12
Well Gee a judge is to follow the law, not there personal ideas. She has no chance of being any judge at the federal level no matter her legal schooling.
2
"Well Gee a judge is to follow the law, not there personal ideas. She has no chance of being any judge at the federal level no matter her legal schooling."
Could you please explain your logic? She has as good a chance as any lawyer, if she is aggressive, smart, and goal-oriented of being a judge at the federal level someday. Please clarify why she does not.
Could you please explain your logic? She has as good a chance as any lawyer, if she is aggressive, smart, and goal-oriented of being a judge at the federal level someday. Please clarify why she does not.
2
Of course, the premise of the entire article is nonsense: if we don't tax, borrow, and spend trillions, these sympathetic folks will have to go without.
Nothing stops the states from creating such programs as they believe are necessary to serve their citizens. The difference is: the states have to pay their bills, while the feds borrow half a trillion a year.
One wonders: what did people like these folks do before 1965? Were there no families, friends, neighbors, churches, or charities, or if one insists on turning their care into a societal obligation, no state governments?
"Conservatives say" that when a quarter of the population is receiving welfare benefits, something's terribly wrong.
Like all leftist positions on all social programs, this article never once mentions how to pay for the things leftists believe are necessary. The ACA cut Medicare by $700B, added about the same amount in new taxes, and STILL blew a $1 trillion hole in the deficit. This doesn't even count the hundreds of billions in higher premiums and deductibles the lie that "you can keep your policy if you like it" produced.
Medicaid cost $553 billion in 2016, is perking along at double-digit rates of increase. And from the NYT. sympathetic stories about beneficiaries, and not a single, solitary syllable about how to pay for it, not even the obligatory -- and patently fraudulent -- "tax the rich".
Good intentions cannot be taken seriously absent a means to pay for them.
Nothing stops the states from creating such programs as they believe are necessary to serve their citizens. The difference is: the states have to pay their bills, while the feds borrow half a trillion a year.
One wonders: what did people like these folks do before 1965? Were there no families, friends, neighbors, churches, or charities, or if one insists on turning their care into a societal obligation, no state governments?
"Conservatives say" that when a quarter of the population is receiving welfare benefits, something's terribly wrong.
Like all leftist positions on all social programs, this article never once mentions how to pay for the things leftists believe are necessary. The ACA cut Medicare by $700B, added about the same amount in new taxes, and STILL blew a $1 trillion hole in the deficit. This doesn't even count the hundreds of billions in higher premiums and deductibles the lie that "you can keep your policy if you like it" produced.
Medicaid cost $553 billion in 2016, is perking along at double-digit rates of increase. And from the NYT. sympathetic stories about beneficiaries, and not a single, solitary syllable about how to pay for it, not even the obligatory -- and patently fraudulent -- "tax the rich".
Good intentions cannot be taken seriously absent a means to pay for them.
9
Another conservative who doesn't have the slightest clue about history. Many of these people would have been dead half a century ago. Those that were alive--excepting the very rich, who might have been kept at home--would almost certainly be in substandard facilities. Some lightly disabled might have been cared for by their stay at home mothers, who are now often forced to work, or lose the home their disabled child lives in, because of decreasing wages.
And please don't pretend we can't afford it. Anyone who has ever spent one minute studying other nations knows that's a compete fabrication. We are wealthier than virtually all the other first world and even aspiring first world nations that provide everyone with health care and take care if the disabled.
I cannot believe the coldness in your hearts. No, I can believe it--I always knew the pretense to humanity on the part of most economic conservatives was just that, a pretense. I really wish there were a God.
And please don't pretend we can't afford it. Anyone who has ever spent one minute studying other nations knows that's a compete fabrication. We are wealthier than virtually all the other first world and even aspiring first world nations that provide everyone with health care and take care if the disabled.
I cannot believe the coldness in your hearts. No, I can believe it--I always knew the pretense to humanity on the part of most economic conservatives was just that, a pretense. I really wish there were a God.
6
A third of the population of California is on Medicaid. In LA County, 40% are on Medicaid.
Michael: You needn't wonder what happened to "these" people before 1965. Accounts of their often short and painful lives abound if you move beyond your flawed first principles and take the time to look. In the extreme, you are heading down the slippery slope to Aktion T4.
4
Why do Republicans who claim to be PRO LIFE, seem to forget about people once they leave the womb? They really don't care about Life at all.
Do Republicans never get sick or have accidents? Do the never have children or relatives with disabilities? Do they not have aged parents and grandparents? Are all Republicans descended from White, Anglo Saxon, protestant Christians who came over on the Mayflower? If they went to church and read the bible they would remember the words and deeds of Christ. Seems they have forgotten that as well.
Do Republicans never get sick or have accidents? Do the never have children or relatives with disabilities? Do they not have aged parents and grandparents? Are all Republicans descended from White, Anglo Saxon, protestant Christians who came over on the Mayflower? If they went to church and read the bible they would remember the words and deeds of Christ. Seems they have forgotten that as well.
14
Because many of those people can choose, a fetus can't. And you seem to forget the idea of rendering to Caesar.
4
Vulcanlex--disabled children can't choose, either.
2
Hear ye all Reoublicans! Let us not forget...it was President Reagan who put the Katy Becket rule in place, otherwise known as the Home and Community based Medicaid waiver funding that serves persons with disabilities from birth to death in our country.
8
Let's face it when people think of Medicaid they think of welfare mothers in inner cities and illegal aliens making anchor babies. No one thinks of the millions of elderly people whose only means of survival is Medicaid. Then there are people like this future lawyer who relies on government assistance but is in turn creating a better society and we are all the better for it. Please make the next article on the millions of normal everyday Americans who have outlived their savings and social security is woefully insufficient as is Medicare. Maybe that will open some Republican eyes. Speak to some AARP officials. See where they stand. Everyone has a dog in this race. We will all get sick and we will all get old. Well maybe not. Under the Republican we will all get sick but will drop dead from no care so we don't have to worry about getting old.
7
Creating a better society? Or a more dependent on the government one? Such lawyers have a negative social worth in my view. Sort of how lawyers get disability for many who really don't qualify for it.
4
What would you do, if suddenly you became disabled...horribly disabled, let's say from an accident, Vulcanex? You are not able to walk, and cannot use your arms either; your spine has been severed. You have no family to take care of you, or they don't want to (nor are they obligated to do under the law)...You cannot feed yourself, toilet yourself, dress yourself...but your mind is still OK. You certainly cannot work anymore, so you have no income. Do you have private long term care insurance? What are you going to do?
1
So Trump wants to take away a woman's right to an abortion, and at the same time he doesn't want to support the children who are born with serious and lifelong medical needs. How will this make America great again? In the 1960s I worked in a state institution where children with developmental disabilities were warehoused, literally stacked against one another, and it was hideous. Is this where you want us to go as a country, Mr Trump? Do you even onow how the rest of us live?
13
And I can't help but wonder how many abortions that randy DT has paid for himself.
3
As it is, the US has shockingly bad level of services for people with congenital disabilities. Why should an adult with a Down syndrome live with his aged parents instead of a protected housing, as is done in many other countries? I am not talking about asylums but about communities with social and medical services that encourage work and creativity? And what does it mean that "services to disabled children won't be capped"? Children grow up. What then? But the worst aspect of this is that the same people demanding that parents and siblings sacrifice their entire lives to care for a severely disabled child with no governmental support will be up in arms if I suggest that abortion should be freely available is the fetus is abnormal. You'll hear cries of "genocide" and "eugenics". But turning the lives of an entire family into slow torture is just fine.
21
Pathetically and inhumanely, the GOP led federal government is well aware that there are options to life without Medicaid services. Here are three of them:
Suffering and death
Bankruptcy of patients' families
Homelessness
The issue for millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid? The GOP leadership simply does not give a rip about you, your family or your circumstance.
In the decades I've been on earth, I can't recall a more heartless, inhumane, abhorrent treatment of our fellow citizens. If I believed the GOP leadership could feel shame, I would wish it upon every single one of them.
Suffering and death
Bankruptcy of patients' families
Homelessness
The issue for millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid? The GOP leadership simply does not give a rip about you, your family or your circumstance.
In the decades I've been on earth, I can't recall a more heartless, inhumane, abhorrent treatment of our fellow citizens. If I believed the GOP leadership could feel shame, I would wish it upon every single one of them.
19
Well said, Sarah.
3
It troubles me greatly that for the GOP each citizen comes with a price on their head: Like a slave market, each of us, in their eyes, carrying price - our worth - Indelibly marked. With the disabled or poor or old or sick - deemed worthless! (Unless of course, they are a foetus.)
"Choose Life!" We are told by Moses, relaying a Contract between the Divine and Humans. A contract for living. A contract made with Liberated former slaves.
If the GOP were truly to CARE about Life, there would be no argument over care for the Environment or care for every single citizen and every person on this planet.
So what is it? Are we persons part of a GOP slave market? Each with a price, a value to them? Or are we precious human beings? Each and every one of us of EQUAL WORTH? The Declaration of Independence suggests the latter. The Constitution begins with Reasons for a United Republic, including "to provide for the general welfare."
The GOP has made "welfare" a kind of curse word.
But the Constitution holds it as a Virtue - for which people have shed blood.
I hold that truth to be self-evident.
And "general welfare" points to Universal Healthcare.
"Choose Life!" We are told by Moses, relaying a Contract between the Divine and Humans. A contract for living. A contract made with Liberated former slaves.
If the GOP were truly to CARE about Life, there would be no argument over care for the Environment or care for every single citizen and every person on this planet.
So what is it? Are we persons part of a GOP slave market? Each with a price, a value to them? Or are we precious human beings? Each and every one of us of EQUAL WORTH? The Declaration of Independence suggests the latter. The Constitution begins with Reasons for a United Republic, including "to provide for the general welfare."
The GOP has made "welfare" a kind of curse word.
But the Constitution holds it as a Virtue - for which people have shed blood.
I hold that truth to be self-evident.
And "general welfare" points to Universal Healthcare.
6
Every citizen has a price on his or her head. It's call fiscal prudence. New York State's Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo has been working for years to reduce Medicaid per-person costs.
This moral preening is typical of liberals, and there's no better stage for the sanctimonious than spending on the disabled.
This moral preening is typical of liberals, and there's no better stage for the sanctimonious than spending on the disabled.
1
We need to CUT THE MILITARY - which can be cut A LOT - and take care of our people. If we cut the military we'd have plenty of money, in this, the richest country in the history of the world. The fact that we don't just shows who we truly are - a militaristic society who sends bombs and toxic dumps all over the world for hegemoney. I truly hope there is a god who meets each and every one of us at the 'gate'. I'd love to be there to see Trump and his Horrible Cabinet meet up with god. Now that would be rich.
11
Not only that, with a smaller - and why not say drafted military - we would be less likely to go to war, which leads to PTSD and Disability, both of which cost a lot for adequate medical care. Possibly for a lifetime.
Yup, it would certainly give lots of money for citizen healthcare for all.
Yup, it would certainly give lots of money for citizen healthcare for all.
6
We do??? Now I want waste and excessive spending addressed, but our needs are vast and whatever is saved is needed for actual defense. Not to mention what do all those people do when you fire them?
3
I work with a co-worker who considers himself a "social conservative" (If that's a thing). He's one of those original blue-collared workers; a late Boomer who's never went to college. Last week, at a contract negotiation meeting, there was talk about a change in our premium plan. If these rumors are proven true, then we'll be seeing a percentage increase in health coverage: about 50% to be precise. For him it'll be a financial strain since his wife doesn't work and is part of a family plan. It'll be difficult for me as well cause the rent, along with other expenses, would leave me broke! After the meeting, he told me if this new bill passes I could opt out of healthcare since I am, and I quote, "a young guy". I maybe 33 years-old, I thought, but I'd be stupid not to have insurance. I responded by saying "but then I won't have any healthcare!" All I got was mumbling silence. This is the same guy who believes the federal government is wasting its time with the Russian investigation and finds the Virginia shooting more concerning. He's alright to work with, but boy do we have different opinions.
Personally if this bill does pass, then I'll have to reconsider my U.S. citizenship. What kind of a country throws its most vulnerable under the death bus!? A malevolent hoarding one, that's what!
Personally if this bill does pass, then I'll have to reconsider my U.S. citizenship. What kind of a country throws its most vulnerable under the death bus!? A malevolent hoarding one, that's what!
12
Vulcanalex, you are a cold-hearted, inhumane ignoramus! Your ignorance defies understanding. Have you ever been to a doctor or a hospital? They're not free! And if you are sick, really sick, and turn up at an emergency room your care will in the long run be paid for by the rest of us in taxes and higher medical charges. You need to get out more, to put on your thinking cap. And stop hiding behind this silly pseudonym.
Anyone can get cancer at any time. And you cannot get chemo without health insurance. Any care you do get--say, a bed in the ER when you are suffering complications from your cancer--is paid for by SOMEONE ELSE--say me, who is responsible enough always to have health insurance. I though you conservatives were against that? I thought you favored personal responsibility?
Why did not these people save money for their medical needs?
I have, out of my earnings in the military and academia.
Good for clawback.
I have, out of my earnings in the military and academia.
Good for clawback.
1
Why does health care have to be so expensive? Why can't Congress pass laws restricting drug companies' right to gouge the American public? Why are some people so fanatically opposed to the grotesquely wealthy paying their fair share?
Try saving more money each year than you make each year. Some people's health care needs exceed what they would be able to make even working 2 full time jobs.
Try saving more money each year than you make each year. Some people's health care needs exceed what they would be able to make even working 2 full time jobs.
1
Right. Every foetus should save money in case of a birth defect or a birth injury or bad genes or childhood illness or injury. Or to take care of parents needing healthcare.
Why couldn't they just "save up"? Because these were medical needs they were born with in many cases, and because the cost of providing this type of care (often for life) is far beyond what any person who isn't fabulously wealthy can accumulate.
I'm covered under Tricare. I'm thankful that the government cares for my husband and our family while he serves, but I'm not greedy or prideful enough to think military families are the only ones who deserve this level of care, or silly enough to think we could save for it on our own.
My mother's final illness, which included surgery and a short ICU stay, was over 100,000 dollars before insurance. That's just one illness. Even with our combined (good) wages, regularly contributing to savings and investments, we don't have 100,000 dollars to spare. Do you?
I'm covered under Tricare. I'm thankful that the government cares for my husband and our family while he serves, but I'm not greedy or prideful enough to think military families are the only ones who deserve this level of care, or silly enough to think we could save for it on our own.
My mother's final illness, which included surgery and a short ICU stay, was over 100,000 dollars before insurance. That's just one illness. Even with our combined (good) wages, regularly contributing to savings and investments, we don't have 100,000 dollars to spare. Do you?
3
I think it's too bad that rationing is a bad word to many people. I think it makes little sense to kick people off health care, but it also makes little sense to give people all the health care they want, letting future generations pay for it.
8
It's near impossible to discuss -- shall we call it prioritizing instead of rationing? - Oregon did years back and people went crazy. It's "death panels" all over again - - when it should be figuring out what we most want from our health dollars, and how best to achieve our goals. It's also about need vs want, and effective care vs useless interventions.
2
The same party that is trying to take away Medicaid is the one that has gerrymandered its way to control in the states and nationally, while continuing to enact measures that will suppress voter turnout. Trump even appointed a leader of the vote-quashing movement to head a national office he created in order to give the movement federal help. Take life-saving and prolonging care from those who have little or nothing, in order to reduce taxes on the wealthiest among us? That's the GOP plan too. It's a corrupt, unpatriotic and selfish party, with a buffoon for its "leader". Those Republicans with a conscience and some self-respect should abandon this party, because it has abandoned them.
4
Also, let Trump reimburse us for Melania's Trump Tower security and all his golf trips, which cost millions in just 100 days. That is enough money to keep many families well cared for.
4
Looking from the UK;
It seems to me that a group following a political objective are actively advocating and conspiring to cause the deaths of their fellow citizens ... and claiming their right to do so as a fundamental 'freedom'.
And that a number of citizens who do not expect to be the ones who die are quite happy for that fate to befall others.
That state of affairs is unlikely to last long before something gives, probably something violent and nasty.
It seems highly desirable that sensible decent people take action to ensure this is avoided.
It seems to me that a group following a political objective are actively advocating and conspiring to cause the deaths of their fellow citizens ... and claiming their right to do so as a fundamental 'freedom'.
And that a number of citizens who do not expect to be the ones who die are quite happy for that fate to befall others.
That state of affairs is unlikely to last long before something gives, probably something violent and nasty.
It seems highly desirable that sensible decent people take action to ensure this is avoided.
6
What is your health system's fraud rate? Our Medicaid fraud rate doubled to 12% of total Medicaid spending in just a few years under the Obamacare Medicaid *expansion*.
If your system's Administrators pulled a stunt like that, do you think people would just ignore it? Would your citizens want to throw more money at them?
That's pretty much what democrats are demanding.
If your system's Administrators pulled a stunt like that, do you think people would just ignore it? Would your citizens want to throw more money at them?
That's pretty much what democrats are demanding.
As a 74-year old man with a 32-year old, severly mentally and physically disabled son dependent on Medicaid for some support, I worry incessantly what will happen to him when His mother and I are no longer around to advocate for him.
I am scared to death for Kevin's future.
I am scared to death for Kevin's future.
213
Are you doing anything or are you just scared. There are ways to address this sort of issue. A trust is one option.
2
Do you think Bob does not know that? I would add that Medicaid and SSI force a person into penury. Our so-called safety net is in the case of disability, absolutely Dickensian.
5
Yes, A small one, since our life savings are modest, and I am unsure of my own circumstances around Medicare and SS. But money, though an issue, is not THE issue. It's really more about qualified and loving care. Care givers working for companies contracted with by govt. agencies for services, are paid nothing, are usually temporary, and can even be even predetory in the worst cases.
With proper advocates (like parents), the disabled are enormously vulnerable.
With proper advocates (like parents), the disabled are enormously vulnerable.
4
Republicans have been waiting 50 years since the inception of this option in Medicaid to cut it - these supports were funded before the ACA/Obamacare. If an individual is cut from the optional community supports, nursing homes and institutions are the only other option as they would remain an entitlement. In Colorado institutional services are $220K a year whereas community supports are only $80K. This makes no fiscal sense.
Additionally the federal funds that match state and local funds are based on a poverty/population formula, thus Colorado is at a 49/51 match, but poorer states like Alabama would be hit much harder on the cuts. On the other hand, Colorado has a cap on how much taxes can be raised (TABOR) thus with federal cuts, there are limits to how much federal loss can be compensated for locally.
This plan has a eugenics taste to it. People die when services are cut and the threat of living in a nursing home, regional center or institution certainly deprives many of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The US is no longer recognizable to me as a nation that supports freedom for its citizens, one and ALL.
Additionally the federal funds that match state and local funds are based on a poverty/population formula, thus Colorado is at a 49/51 match, but poorer states like Alabama would be hit much harder on the cuts. On the other hand, Colorado has a cap on how much taxes can be raised (TABOR) thus with federal cuts, there are limits to how much federal loss can be compensated for locally.
This plan has a eugenics taste to it. People die when services are cut and the threat of living in a nursing home, regional center or institution certainly deprives many of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The US is no longer recognizable to me as a nation that supports freedom for its citizens, one and ALL.
13
Republicans don't like government run services for citizens, like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. The public nature of the programs and legal oversight do not provide for patronage paybacks, bribes or 7 figure jobs for themselves or spouses, when leaving government, and people on these programs may become aware that the government can, and is, capable ot helping them. This is dangerous to core Republican ideology: that government should only serve the rich, and should strip mine the nation's wealth to transfer to their plutocrat backers, the rich, in order to create a one Party state.
5
These should be called earned benefits.
2
Medicare and SS are EARNED benefits, as most people pay into the system for over 40 years before collecting.
But Medicaid and welfare benefits are NOT earned at ALL. Most recipients have never paid one dime into the system. Therefore, they should be renamed as "UN-entitlements".
But Medicaid and welfare benefits are NOT earned at ALL. Most recipients have never paid one dime into the system. Therefore, they should be renamed as "UN-entitlements".
2
Concerned Citizen--simply false. Most recipients of Medicaid and welfare have also been taxpayers. Medicaid recipients in nursing homes often paid taxes for an entire working life. Others are temporarily down on their luck. Some are disabled children who become disabled adults, but many of those work too, though they may never make enough to pay their way completely. The only exception would be the profoundly disabled. And what would you have them do? Die?
3
The wasteful spending in Medicaid alleged by Republicans certainly isn't found in the meager wages we get supporting people with developmental disabilities. Instead, we're told we make a difference.
3
ever since the Cold war and Vietnam the Left has harped on the defense budget and that health care is treated badly. interestingly they almost never produce hard numbers.
2
Ever heard of this new invention called Google? Unless you are living net free the numbers are all over the place. Even if you live net free, you haven't noticed your own health care premiums have been exploding for the last 20 years? Maybe you just don't buy it.
2
hard numbers need to be put in perspective. it is an attribute that is not too common.
1
CMD from Germany wonders what happened to the compassion that used to be associated with America. At the risk of sounding simple minded, I think I have the answer:
Ayn Rand.
Rand developed a philosophy that, as the late Christopher Hitchens put it, was based on the idea that Americans weren't selfish enough. Her beliefs, which should have been rejected out of hand, found a ready audience among Americans who thought of themselves as special, including cold-blooded intellectual lightweights like Paul Ryan and Rand Paul and people with more money than god. They are determined to turn the US into a capitalist Shangri La like the one in Ayn Rand opus, Atlas Shrugged. They aren't interested in the fates of less-special Americans.
This is how a country built by communities of people working together under the motto "E pluribus unim" turned, in less than 50 years, into one where the motto is "Every man for himself." And if you think it looks bad from Germany, imagine how it feels to live here.
Ayn Rand.
Rand developed a philosophy that, as the late Christopher Hitchens put it, was based on the idea that Americans weren't selfish enough. Her beliefs, which should have been rejected out of hand, found a ready audience among Americans who thought of themselves as special, including cold-blooded intellectual lightweights like Paul Ryan and Rand Paul and people with more money than god. They are determined to turn the US into a capitalist Shangri La like the one in Ayn Rand opus, Atlas Shrugged. They aren't interested in the fates of less-special Americans.
This is how a country built by communities of people working together under the motto "E pluribus unim" turned, in less than 50 years, into one where the motto is "Every man for himself." And if you think it looks bad from Germany, imagine how it feels to live here.
17
I think you DO have the Answer!
Thank you! Well said.
Thank you! Well said.
4
Yes. The Republicans are engaged in a eugenics program driven by market forces. With robots replacing humans, it is better to kill off the surplus people rather than pay taxes to keep them alive.
4
Enough! Enough is enough is enough.
The truth is that we are at war. And, at stake is the notion of the sanctity of human life, any human life regardless of any "imperfections" even a single life might have to endure.
We must fight back with the most powerful tool available to us... The Vote (which as we speak "they" are plotting to take away from us with their escalating efforts to suppress voting).
The truth is that we are at war. And, at stake is the notion of the sanctity of human life, any human life regardless of any "imperfections" even a single life might have to endure.
We must fight back with the most powerful tool available to us... The Vote (which as we speak "they" are plotting to take away from us with their escalating efforts to suppress voting).
12
Bravo for the NYT for bringing these stories into the light of day. Please continue providing this type of coverage. Citizens should know more about what a great country we ALREADY are, with great aspirations to help the struggling among us. I hope the cruel and heartless among us can change their attitudes, and become compassionate towards our brothers and sisters that have been dealt difficult hands by the whims of fate. Remember, friends: "There but for the grace of God go l".
11
Thank you for this article, which shines a light on the reality of the situation for millions of Medicaid recipients. I work with children who receive Medicaid and most are not likely to ever obtain high wage employment due to their pre-existing cognitive and physical limitations. Cutting off this lifeline will result in what? States unable to provide for needy persons? Loss of healthcare employment for those who care for these folks? Many of those who have supported Medicaid cuts and the dismantling of the ACA will find themselves in need at some point in their lives. What then?
8
I cannot resolve the difference between values espoused by Republicans and policies they advance as they do not align coherently.
Many Republicans are Evangelical Christians and say every life is precious, but oppose most programs to help our most vulnerable citizens. Many who preach of the sanctity of life also support the death penalty.
Most Republicans advocate for personal responsibility and entrepreneurship, but seem determined to kick the ladder out from under every citizen not born to wealth or advantage. Rather than assist our self motivated and responsible neighbors from the underclass, they advance the interests of predatory lending, unaccredited for-profit "Colleges", slumlords, and other parts of Economic Darwinism.
Next, most Republicans claim to want fiscal responsibility. Despite this they shackle public assistance to means testing requiring a huge, expensive bureaucracy to administer. It makes no sense to spend $10 saving $5. Wasting money this way defeats the very purpose of assistance and raises the overall cost.
Finally, Republicans seem to have no problem with corporate welfare while decrying money spent to help people in need. The cost of tax breaks, subsidies and other direct and indirect assistance to business swamps what social programs exist in America.
If the Republicans actions supported their rhetoric many of us would have no problem with them. They seem mean spirited and use rhetoric for cover to dupe the poorly educated and poorly informed.
Many Republicans are Evangelical Christians and say every life is precious, but oppose most programs to help our most vulnerable citizens. Many who preach of the sanctity of life also support the death penalty.
Most Republicans advocate for personal responsibility and entrepreneurship, but seem determined to kick the ladder out from under every citizen not born to wealth or advantage. Rather than assist our self motivated and responsible neighbors from the underclass, they advance the interests of predatory lending, unaccredited for-profit "Colleges", slumlords, and other parts of Economic Darwinism.
Next, most Republicans claim to want fiscal responsibility. Despite this they shackle public assistance to means testing requiring a huge, expensive bureaucracy to administer. It makes no sense to spend $10 saving $5. Wasting money this way defeats the very purpose of assistance and raises the overall cost.
Finally, Republicans seem to have no problem with corporate welfare while decrying money spent to help people in need. The cost of tax breaks, subsidies and other direct and indirect assistance to business swamps what social programs exist in America.
If the Republicans actions supported their rhetoric many of us would have no problem with them. They seem mean spirited and use rhetoric for cover to dupe the poorly educated and poorly informed.
36
Bravo. Thank you for an eloquent post!
1
The lofty values and ideals that the US incessantly proclaims about human rights and lives are expressed through programs like Medicaid. A society is only as morally decent and good as its compassion for the less fortunate. By proposing to cut Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the rich, the Republicans are saying to the world and those less fortunate Americans that the US has no such lofty human right values, that such values and ideals are empty and just for propaganda.
Cutting Medicaid while increasing spending on the military and weapon programs cements once again American values and priorities. Americans should know that just slowing down the increase in defense budget would be enough to fund Medicaid and other much needed social programs. Until more Americans becoming informed and taking back their government, they should not ever think that the US respects and values human rights.
Cutting Medicaid while increasing spending on the military and weapon programs cements once again American values and priorities. Americans should know that just slowing down the increase in defense budget would be enough to fund Medicaid and other much needed social programs. Until more Americans becoming informed and taking back their government, they should not ever think that the US respects and values human rights.
8
True. More aircraft carriers wil not stop terrorism.
1
The arguments against Medicaid will be used against Medicare, then Social Security.
Get ready.
Get ready.
25
Once the republicans have gutted Medicaid, it will be on the Medicare. The goal is simple, more tax breaks for the wealth, and a land in which "tickle- down" economics will be the order of the day.
6
No mention of Medicaid clawback policy. It differs from state to state. If someone is on Medicaid age 55 and up, Medicaid can and probably will try to clawback any monies spent on care (usually by taking the primary residence, after person dies). When I researched it, I could only find the clawback applicable to age 55 and up. Under 55, I guess one is safe from the clawback, but not sure on that.
1
Why are you mentioning it? What's your point?
Has this country lost it's heart?
We don't seem to have a problem giving a blank check to the defense industry. Not to make light of the situation, but we SHOULD be getting much more bang for our buck. Instead all we seem to do is increase the share holder value of the defense contractors. And the only people who own those shares sit on the boards of those companies.
Don't like the way things are? The ONLY way things will change is by voting.
We don't seem to have a problem giving a blank check to the defense industry. Not to make light of the situation, but we SHOULD be getting much more bang for our buck. Instead all we seem to do is increase the share holder value of the defense contractors. And the only people who own those shares sit on the boards of those companies.
Don't like the way things are? The ONLY way things will change is by voting.
10
Not unless we PROTECT the VOTE!
1
The whole approach is flawed! There is over $750 billion of waste in our current system. Look at the Institue of Medicine's 2009 analysis....
This waste in large can be saved and earmarked to fund Medicaid and other healthcare needs. This includes
data interoperability to avoid unnecessary duplication of services, unnecessary ER admits, etc
The congress lacks the necessary expertise to address these complex issues.
Ironically, by cutting the Medicaid services the total cost to society goes way up! These folks in desperate need will flood
ERs if not given appropriate outpatient care. The hospitals will suffer huge losses for uncompensated care. This will mean large scale hospital closures in areas with large Medicaid populations like rural areas and inner city hospitals!
This will not make America great again!
Congress think in terms of data interoperability and be firm and expeditious in implementing the 21 st Century Cures Act which stipulates penalties for vendors of electronic medical records who try to data-block .
Don't allow theses vendors' lobbyists to slow down this process and you will see huge savings!! Think smart not just in terms of cutting finances and making tax-cuts for others....
This waste in large can be saved and earmarked to fund Medicaid and other healthcare needs. This includes
data interoperability to avoid unnecessary duplication of services, unnecessary ER admits, etc
The congress lacks the necessary expertise to address these complex issues.
Ironically, by cutting the Medicaid services the total cost to society goes way up! These folks in desperate need will flood
ERs if not given appropriate outpatient care. The hospitals will suffer huge losses for uncompensated care. This will mean large scale hospital closures in areas with large Medicaid populations like rural areas and inner city hospitals!
This will not make America great again!
Congress think in terms of data interoperability and be firm and expeditious in implementing the 21 st Century Cures Act which stipulates penalties for vendors of electronic medical records who try to data-block .
Don't allow theses vendors' lobbyists to slow down this process and you will see huge savings!! Think smart not just in terms of cutting finances and making tax-cuts for others....
4
Despite a lot of public posturing about caring about these people, the GOP views the disabled, poor and elderly as mooches living off of taxpayer dollars.
And I'm hearing and reading a lot of "Why should my tax dollars pay for these people?" from Trump supporters.
And I'm hearing and reading a lot of "Why should my tax dollars pay for these people?" from Trump supporters.
16
Let's put common humanity aside for a moment, and look at the economic benefits of Medicaid.
The Medicaid money--does it really just vanish? The aides receiving salaries buy gasoline for their car, pay rent, pay taxes, support themselves--all that money goes right back into the economy. The lady with the law degree will be employed and pay taxes. The sibling able to work a job, the same. Mr. Foster staying active, out walking with his helper will be in better health and have less need of expensive medical care. All have a more positive life and in their way contribute to a better America.
That so many think taxpayer funded aid is an evil is puzzling. It is far more local economic stimulus than a billionaire stashing piles of money offshore, playing predatory financial games.
The Medicaid money--does it really just vanish? The aides receiving salaries buy gasoline for their car, pay rent, pay taxes, support themselves--all that money goes right back into the economy. The lady with the law degree will be employed and pay taxes. The sibling able to work a job, the same. Mr. Foster staying active, out walking with his helper will be in better health and have less need of expensive medical care. All have a more positive life and in their way contribute to a better America.
That so many think taxpayer funded aid is an evil is puzzling. It is far more local economic stimulus than a billionaire stashing piles of money offshore, playing predatory financial games.
39
Job Creation!
Universal Healthcare is Job Creation!
Universal Healthcare is Job Creation!
5
TheraP:
Actually, health care is being computerized. In home health care, for example, patients can now have their blood pressure read and weight taken by devices without having an aide there to perform the work manually. The data is transmitted to a nurse, who reviews the person's vitals to make sure he/she is eating, taking meds, etc.
Actually, health care is being computerized. In home health care, for example, patients can now have their blood pressure read and weight taken by devices without having an aide there to perform the work manually. The data is transmitted to a nurse, who reviews the person's vitals to make sure he/she is eating, taking meds, etc.
3
Can anyone imagine a country where access to education, police and fire protection or control of utilities was dependant upon your employer's benevolence with the government offering a sop to the poor who are not or cannot be employed? But that is exactly what we have done with our health system. The only way to make these services available to the poorest, the frailest and the most vulnerable in our society is to offer it to everyone. Medicare should be expanded to cover all citizens, as Johnson preferred at it inception and as Canada did at the time.
13
Please don't give them any ideas!!! I sure there are many nasty Republicans who would love to stop any pittance of federal funding for those essential services as well as health care.
The article last week referencing the health care cuts said 46% of the cost was due to 6 % of the Medicare users. So here is the question: are we going to bear the cost so the quality of life is worth living for all of us?
I say cut the military overseas by 90%, clean up the toxic bases here at home, reduce all state legislatures to a single house, and restrict all elective offices to one term no longer than 4 years. That should shut off the tap for the hog trough and maybe all of us can get to 75 with all of our teeth, the gold standard for health care for the rest of us.
I say cut the military overseas by 90%, clean up the toxic bases here at home, reduce all state legislatures to a single house, and restrict all elective offices to one term no longer than 4 years. That should shut off the tap for the hog trough and maybe all of us can get to 75 with all of our teeth, the gold standard for health care for the rest of us.
8
You'll have to look for something else to cut, most bases overseas are done. The ones we do have in Japan are pretty much paid for by them. The ones in S. Korea are a mix of us and them. I'm all for term limits, but not the form of state governments. This is a debate between what we can afford and what we want to do. You're not hearing the whole thing in the NY times, this article is just agitprop.
1
I wonder how much more money would be available if all the corruption were rooted out of the Medicaid merry-go-round.
I recently saw a televised report on Opioid addiction. Parents sent their daughter to rehab in Florida only to come to realize that the girl was bounced around from half-way house, to outpatient facility to halfway house in a convoluted sequence of rehab. The bills were staggering, close to a million dollars lining the greedy pockets of the people who ran these fraudulent healing houses. Medicaid paid. Patients were kept high on alternative drugs. The daughter eventually died. As do many others in this money-making scam.
I'm not saying all rehab places are corrupt but where is the incentive in making an addict better when one can make so much more on keeping them hooked?
As a healthy, by choice, tax-paying adult it bothers me to think my tax money is going to pay for people who choose to take opioids It galls me to contribute to the corrupt practice of so-called healers.
The people featured in the article deserve a hand. They have disabilities that were unpreventable. But as long as the system remains suspect and corrupt as I've described it is a tough pill to swallow to fund this via Medicaid.
I recently saw a televised report on Opioid addiction. Parents sent their daughter to rehab in Florida only to come to realize that the girl was bounced around from half-way house, to outpatient facility to halfway house in a convoluted sequence of rehab. The bills were staggering, close to a million dollars lining the greedy pockets of the people who ran these fraudulent healing houses. Medicaid paid. Patients were kept high on alternative drugs. The daughter eventually died. As do many others in this money-making scam.
I'm not saying all rehab places are corrupt but where is the incentive in making an addict better when one can make so much more on keeping them hooked?
As a healthy, by choice, tax-paying adult it bothers me to think my tax money is going to pay for people who choose to take opioids It galls me to contribute to the corrupt practice of so-called healers.
The people featured in the article deserve a hand. They have disabilities that were unpreventable. But as long as the system remains suspect and corrupt as I've described it is a tough pill to swallow to fund this via Medicaid.
9
" ... healthy, by choice ... "
I'd choose to be healthy, too. But my neck was broken in a car accident when I was 19. Despite the best possible care it healed crooked and I've been in constant pain since my 30s. I'm almost 60. So I choose to take opioids because I am far more productive when I can turn the pain down to 3 or 4 instead of leaving it at 11.
Here's my point: I got the best care because my parents has excellent health insurance. I was also able to go back to college and get my degree because I had a state scholarship and very low-cost federal loans. Because I had that degree I was able to get a series of increasingly well paid jobs with good insurance. So I can afford to see an out-of-network pain specialist and pay most of the cost myself. And in addition to writing my prescription she helps me figure out other strategies for keeping my dose as low as possible.
Knock out any one of those supports and I would not be in such a relatively good place. What happens to a poor girl with a broken neck and no insurance?
Disability is an equal-opportunity disaster. Instead of congratulating yourself on your good sense, think about what you would do if you woke up in an ambulance in god awful pain and no means of paying for more than medical stabilization. How would you deal with the pain if no one would write you a prescription for opioids? The neighborhood drug dealer might start to look pretty good to you.
I'd choose to be healthy, too. But my neck was broken in a car accident when I was 19. Despite the best possible care it healed crooked and I've been in constant pain since my 30s. I'm almost 60. So I choose to take opioids because I am far more productive when I can turn the pain down to 3 or 4 instead of leaving it at 11.
Here's my point: I got the best care because my parents has excellent health insurance. I was also able to go back to college and get my degree because I had a state scholarship and very low-cost federal loans. Because I had that degree I was able to get a series of increasingly well paid jobs with good insurance. So I can afford to see an out-of-network pain specialist and pay most of the cost myself. And in addition to writing my prescription she helps me figure out other strategies for keeping my dose as low as possible.
Knock out any one of those supports and I would not be in such a relatively good place. What happens to a poor girl with a broken neck and no insurance?
Disability is an equal-opportunity disaster. Instead of congratulating yourself on your good sense, think about what you would do if you woke up in an ambulance in god awful pain and no means of paying for more than medical stabilization. How would you deal with the pain if no one would write you a prescription for opioids? The neighborhood drug dealer might start to look pretty good to you.
15
I don't see why my tax money should go to find any federal money for road work in NY. Fortunately, that isn't the way government works, so you can keep driving.
2
Maybe if they felt we cared about them, maybe if the felt valued, they would not be turning to drugs in such numbers
4
How much do we pay for keeping our forces all over the world?
What is Pentagon’s (War Department) budget? If only we take out a very small portion and pay for our own citizen's needs of basic healthcare, I believe it would be productive and our tax dollars would be better spent than giving it to the war materiel manufacturers.
We are a Republic, we can make a difference, and all we need to do this 4th of July is to ensure that we let our Senators know that this policy of cutting/removing healthcare form disabled and less fortunate whose total savings have already been whipped out due to their illness is just not acceptable. It would be better and more effective if we show up at their office and tell them on their face that we will remember their actions in cutting our fellow brethren off from Medicaid in the next elections; and that this would be their last term as they take this inhumane action.
If they are truly concerned about providing healthcare to all; instead of repealing ACA just fix it and do not try to reinvent the wheel. Improve ACA by eliminating Insurance, just expand Medicare for all run by the same people who are currently running this program. This alone would do wonders for cost savings and bringing us in line with the rest of the world in healthcare delivery.
What is Pentagon’s (War Department) budget? If only we take out a very small portion and pay for our own citizen's needs of basic healthcare, I believe it would be productive and our tax dollars would be better spent than giving it to the war materiel manufacturers.
We are a Republic, we can make a difference, and all we need to do this 4th of July is to ensure that we let our Senators know that this policy of cutting/removing healthcare form disabled and less fortunate whose total savings have already been whipped out due to their illness is just not acceptable. It would be better and more effective if we show up at their office and tell them on their face that we will remember their actions in cutting our fellow brethren off from Medicaid in the next elections; and that this would be their last term as they take this inhumane action.
If they are truly concerned about providing healthcare to all; instead of repealing ACA just fix it and do not try to reinvent the wheel. Improve ACA by eliminating Insurance, just expand Medicare for all run by the same people who are currently running this program. This alone would do wonders for cost savings and bringing us in line with the rest of the world in healthcare delivery.
10
For all of us here in Europe, it is incredible that something as inhumane could even be considered. EVERYONE should have access to medical care, the handicapped have assistants. In the end, the money expended is a good investment. What also is incomprehensible is the attitude of the wealthy, the "why should I shell out premiums only to support people who can't pull their own weight?" I myself pay the highest level of premiums, but would never think along those lines; I was raised to think that Americans helped each other - I have had to realize that the monied ones, not all, but quite a few - have deep contempt for those who are less fortunate, refuse to see that not everyone has had the chance to get ahead. Over here, we do everything we can to integrate the handicapped into a working environment, and for the others, we have protected areas where they can work at jobs they can do. And no, they are not exploited. And yes, we consider every Euro-cent invested well worth the cost.
What has happened to the compassionate America I was taught to believe in?
What has happened to the compassionate America I was taught to believe in?
16
@CMD
The other side of the equation, I do pay to educate my neighbour's children through my property tax for the greater good of the society. It is amazing that the same people who have no problem getting my money to educate their children complain about their taxes going to pay for the care of some of us who cannot afford the basic care.
Our values have really plummeted since Ronald Reagan's days - he started the trickle down economics and the Republicans still love it.
The other side of the equation, I do pay to educate my neighbour's children through my property tax for the greater good of the society. It is amazing that the same people who have no problem getting my money to educate their children complain about their taxes going to pay for the care of some of us who cannot afford the basic care.
Our values have really plummeted since Ronald Reagan's days - he started the trickle down economics and the Republicans still love it.
8
CMD:
You have a very jaded view of the wealthy. Perhaps from reading the NYT. In fact, many oppose expanding Medicaid because of what they saw these last few years. Skyrocketing costs. No improvement in health outcomes. Doubling of fraud costs.
You are fortunate. You have a government that functions. Our federal govt. is notoriously incompetent. Its actual performance should never be confused with the dream-like, utopian view of it held by liberals. Haven't you noticed that the portrayals of Medicaid here in the NYT never even mention costs?
Imagine handing over your personal health care decisions to the EU bureaucracy? Imagine your country's having no say? That's the equivalent of Americans' handing over their health care decisions to our federal behemoth.
Americans have also just been through a federal overhaul of health insurance under Obamacare. Many are very angry over it. They've lost all choices (doctors, hospitals, plans) while being hit with huge price increases. Many are technically covered but cannot afford to access their care because of the high out-of-pockets associated with their coverage.
They were sold a bill of goods by Obama and democrats. They were told "some folks would have to pay a little more". No one said anything about 50% increases. They were told they'd love the plans they'd be getting. No one said anything about narrower networks for coverage they didn't need (ex., maternity).
You have a very jaded view of the wealthy. Perhaps from reading the NYT. In fact, many oppose expanding Medicaid because of what they saw these last few years. Skyrocketing costs. No improvement in health outcomes. Doubling of fraud costs.
You are fortunate. You have a government that functions. Our federal govt. is notoriously incompetent. Its actual performance should never be confused with the dream-like, utopian view of it held by liberals. Haven't you noticed that the portrayals of Medicaid here in the NYT never even mention costs?
Imagine handing over your personal health care decisions to the EU bureaucracy? Imagine your country's having no say? That's the equivalent of Americans' handing over their health care decisions to our federal behemoth.
Americans have also just been through a federal overhaul of health insurance under Obamacare. Many are very angry over it. They've lost all choices (doctors, hospitals, plans) while being hit with huge price increases. Many are technically covered but cannot afford to access their care because of the high out-of-pockets associated with their coverage.
They were sold a bill of goods by Obama and democrats. They were told "some folks would have to pay a little more". No one said anything about 50% increases. They were told they'd love the plans they'd be getting. No one said anything about narrower networks for coverage they didn't need (ex., maternity).
4
@ConcernedCitizen
Okay, then what should she do?
Okay, then what should she do?
2
We should do what many states are already doing. They are working to reduce their Medicaid per person spending by focusing on managing care and improving "outcomes".
Republicans have this one right. The states understand what their residents need and how to best address their needs.
The fact is that federal programs don't necessarily make people healthier. Under Obamacare, people did not get healthier (outcomes didn't improve). And emergency room visits did not decline. This was likely because the Medicaid population's behavior didn't change. For example, people still visited ER's because hospitals are forced by law to accept Medicaid patients and weekend ER hours are more convenient for working people.
The states need to intervene at the local level where specific changes need to occur. In NYS anyone on long term Medicaid will now have a case worker to oversee his/her care. This is just one of the moves made to reduce per person Medicaid costs.
Costs are something The Times and democrats don't want to talk about, but with which every state is dealing. Under the *expansion*, because of its loose eligibility requirements, costs have skyrocketed.
Republicans have this one right. The states understand what their residents need and how to best address their needs.
The fact is that federal programs don't necessarily make people healthier. Under Obamacare, people did not get healthier (outcomes didn't improve). And emergency room visits did not decline. This was likely because the Medicaid population's behavior didn't change. For example, people still visited ER's because hospitals are forced by law to accept Medicaid patients and weekend ER hours are more convenient for working people.
The states need to intervene at the local level where specific changes need to occur. In NYS anyone on long term Medicaid will now have a case worker to oversee his/her care. This is just one of the moves made to reduce per person Medicaid costs.
Costs are something The Times and democrats don't want to talk about, but with which every state is dealing. Under the *expansion*, because of its loose eligibility requirements, costs have skyrocketed.
4
@ AACNY
Leave healthcare to the states is just divide and conquer strategy, still fighting the Civil War as a southerner. Some states would do a good job of it, others would not.
Taking a trillion dollars out of healthcare as tax cuts for underrated millionaires and billionaires will result in death and suffering from less healthcare.
ACA has saved lives and improved healthcare results.
Ideology will not cut it.
Leave healthcare to the states is just divide and conquer strategy, still fighting the Civil War as a southerner. Some states would do a good job of it, others would not.
Taking a trillion dollars out of healthcare as tax cuts for underrated millionaires and billionaires will result in death and suffering from less healthcare.
ACA has saved lives and improved healthcare results.
Ideology will not cut it.
3
Randall:
You are the one fighting some imaginary battle. States are better equipped to handle the needs of their residents.
The ACA did NOT improve health outcomes, nor did it reduce emergency room visits. This is likely because it was primarily a Medicaid expansion.
And you are the one locked in an ideology that fixates on taxes and the rich, to the exclusion of everything else.
You are the one fighting some imaginary battle. States are better equipped to handle the needs of their residents.
The ACA did NOT improve health outcomes, nor did it reduce emergency room visits. This is likely because it was primarily a Medicaid expansion.
And you are the one locked in an ideology that fixates on taxes and the rich, to the exclusion of everything else.
2
Read about what decent, moral, compassionate, government officials with principles, do for their people: https://nyti.ms/2uquMG7
4
Aktion T-4.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4#Suspension_of_T4_killings.
Germany's policy of murdering the old, feeble, and disabled, seems about to be up and running again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4#Suspension_of_T4_killings.
Germany's policy of murdering the old, feeble, and disabled, seems about to be up and running again.
4
Indeed. The long memory is the enemy of tyranny.
3
Perhaps you should read up on German history after 1945. Our nation has learned from its mistakes and crimes, our young people are taught about the past to keep such things from ever happening again. I can assure you that any German reading this article is horrified by its implications. WE have destroyed our devils. Take care of yours.
3
The Republicans don't want us to feel compassionate towards people like these after they're born.
For the GOP, there are only two classes of humans the taxpayers should care about: fetuses and opiate addicts, because they're white, they hate liberals and they voted for Trump.
For the GOP, there are only two classes of humans the taxpayers should care about: fetuses and opiate addicts, because they're white, they hate liberals and they voted for Trump.
13
Trump and his supporters will take this as a personal attack of him.
First, none of those photos show a black person, that must be intentional to defame the whites. Then it misses the point of the new GOP TRUMPNOCARE bill(s). It is to give those who cannot afford their personal responsibility to pay for their own healthcare a option to freedom: free to die.
Yes the media are biased against the know nothing and incurious so-called president.
First, none of those photos show a black person, that must be intentional to defame the whites. Then it misses the point of the new GOP TRUMPNOCARE bill(s). It is to give those who cannot afford their personal responsibility to pay for their own healthcare a option to freedom: free to die.
Yes the media are biased against the know nothing and incurious so-called president.
4
I'm always amazed that Republicans get away with calling themselves "pro-life", by protecting fetuses while trying to kill everyone else.
16
Seriously, Jay? If you want to understand "pro life", you had better find another source of information beyond the NYT, which is always heavily biased against any spending cuts.
Recall how it brazenly pushed for Obamacare, claiming everyone would be so much better off and promising outcomes as if they had already been realized? Now compare that to the millions who cannot afford to access their care because of their high out-of-pockets and to those who don't even have an insurer in their state. (Never mind that outcomes never improved.)
Recall how it brazenly pushed for Obamacare, claiming everyone would be so much better off and promising outcomes as if they had already been realized? Now compare that to the millions who cannot afford to access their care because of their high out-of-pockets and to those who don't even have an insurer in their state. (Never mind that outcomes never improved.)
5
@ Jay
Right on.
ACA has saved a lot lives, improved others.
Improve ACA, move to universal healthcare.
Right on.
ACA has saved a lot lives, improved others.
Improve ACA, move to universal healthcare.
2
I've never met a republican that wanted to kill anybody. All that talk is coming from the left and it's dangerous. Now, I've met people who've disagreed with how things are done and want to do it differently. I know I disagree with some that the federal government handles, such as the VA, rehiring felons and paying back pay from their jail time. People are allowed to disagree without being 'evil', and maybe their ideas will be better. Stop demonizing the other and open your mind.
Paraphrasing: The soul of a country can be seen in how it cares for its most vulnerable.
How's that working for you, America?
How's that working for you, America?
14
I thought Republicans were "pro-life".
5
When I was in college, almost all State's budgets were in surplus and then came Medicaid forced on them. For this article to insinuate that the States are ramping up the costs is incredulous. Insurance costs too much because everyone is on a 'tit' including lawmakers.
For those with no insurance I say come with me to the local ER. I need prescriptions and Tennessee has a war on the poor just like Alabama (my birth state and embarrassment).
Let the hospital's cry a bit. Import your prescriptions from India. And finally get on all your GOP lawmakers "black-list" by giving them a big cussing out. Bring up their facts and follies; the Republicans are almost all hypocritical about everything say infidelity, sexual harassment and pedaphilia.
For those with no insurance I say come with me to the local ER. I need prescriptions and Tennessee has a war on the poor just like Alabama (my birth state and embarrassment).
Let the hospital's cry a bit. Import your prescriptions from India. And finally get on all your GOP lawmakers "black-list" by giving them a big cussing out. Bring up their facts and follies; the Republicans are almost all hypocritical about everything say infidelity, sexual harassment and pedaphilia.
6
There is no such thing as free care in emergency departments, and it's irresponsible to suggest that. It's not some nameless faceless "hospital" your hurting. First, the costs are redistributed to those who can pay. It's a zero sum game-- so you can pay with higher premiums and out of pocket costs, or you can pay through taxes. Second, you would never suggest that that those without food simply go to Grocery stores and shop lift. Grocery stores do adjust their prices upward for paying people to make up for such loses.
Finally, many emergency departments around the country are so crowded, and overwhelmed by patients that important care is delayed, resulting in worse outcomes and even death. All hospitals adjust their costs for 'no pay' or underinsured patients, or otherwise needlessly increase expense to deal with the volume. Again these costs are passed to all who have insurance and can otherwise pay.
As aside, delayed care really drives up health care needs and costs astronomically. Somebody is paying.
Finally, many emergency departments around the country are so crowded, and overwhelmed by patients that important care is delayed, resulting in worse outcomes and even death. All hospitals adjust their costs for 'no pay' or underinsured patients, or otherwise needlessly increase expense to deal with the volume. Again these costs are passed to all who have insurance and can otherwise pay.
As aside, delayed care really drives up health care needs and costs astronomically. Somebody is paying.
3
"Let the hospital's [sic] cry a bit"? No, you come with ME and work in my hospital's ER for a week. You'll see what it's like for the truly sick patients when you flood an already-overcrowded ER with people who should be going to a PCP instead.
4
Alabama voted for Trump.
They'll get what they voted for.
They'll get what they voted for.
6
Of course, not everyone in Alabama voted for Trump. For some people this would be poetic justice, but, unfortunately, not for everyone.
2
In fact, many of the people most likely to be affected by Medicaid cuts were among the 38% of Alabamans who voted against Trump. You can attack them for their misfortune of having been born in a state with an insufficient commitment to the welfare of its residents, and claim that they could move to another state, but most do not have a choice: it costs a significant amount of money to move hundreds or thousands of miles to a new home, and many would be leaving by the informal networks of family and friends who provide a safety net that neither federal or state programs come close to replacing.
Your cruel implication that the less fortunate in a conservative state are responsible for their own miseries because they choose not to move to a more generous state is the liberal version of the heartless conservative claim that being poor, or sick, is a choice, and help for the unfortunate is somehow an infringement on freedom.
Your cruel implication that the less fortunate in a conservative state are responsible for their own miseries because they choose not to move to a more generous state is the liberal version of the heartless conservative claim that being poor, or sick, is a choice, and help for the unfortunate is somehow an infringement on freedom.
1
Like Sarah Huckabee said "you knew what you were getting when you votes for him".
A healthier America is a stronger America.
6
The NYT wants us all to believe that it's Medicaid or nothing for these people whereas reality of course is more complex.
If and when Medicaid funding is cut, there is NOTHING stopping individual states from setting aside funds from their own state coffers to fill the void and custom tailor solutions--each for itself. Its local citizens can decide how, how much, and what to fund for their citizens without relying on Washington DC's taxation of the entire nation to pull it all off.
In fact, someone please explain what's wrong with that? Those states that require more such funding can raise taxes for their own citizens, whereas states that require less of such funding can make do with less.
When Trump's action against illegal immigration was imminent, the NYT rolled out sob story after sob story about families being broken apart to turn opinion against this administration. Now with action on health care, it's the same tack from NYT without any thoughtful analysis about ramifications of Medicaid cuts.
If and when Medicaid funding is cut, there is NOTHING stopping individual states from setting aside funds from their own state coffers to fill the void and custom tailor solutions--each for itself. Its local citizens can decide how, how much, and what to fund for their citizens without relying on Washington DC's taxation of the entire nation to pull it all off.
In fact, someone please explain what's wrong with that? Those states that require more such funding can raise taxes for their own citizens, whereas states that require less of such funding can make do with less.
When Trump's action against illegal immigration was imminent, the NYT rolled out sob story after sob story about families being broken apart to turn opinion against this administration. Now with action on health care, it's the same tack from NYT without any thoughtful analysis about ramifications of Medicaid cuts.
5
"NOTHING stopping individual states from setting aside funds from their own state coffers" except for the fact that the states with the most healthcare needs are often the states with the smallest tax bases and state coffers. Have you actually looked at the data on which states receive the most federally-funded benefits? You can raise taxes on citizens with minimal to no income all you like, but you're not going to get much actual money out of the deal.
1
That's because there was 'story after story'. As for the states who need more help raising taxes on their own citizens most of the receiving states currently are the poorest states, who pretty much supported Trump and all the rest of the Republican cabal. In the states that send more taxes in than they get back from the federal government people vote Democratic and don't really mind helping their poorer neighbors out. Including your state. If course you think that California will keep its current level of health care because they won't be supporting health care for other states, but if you look at the bill, you'll find that the savings aren't coming back to you. They're going to those big fat cat tax rate reductions.
You sound like Paul Ryan: "We want to restore the "freedoms" to the American people that Obamacare took away". Sure, the freedom to DIE, be left to drift in crushing poverty, the freedom to have insurance companies rip away your health insurance again. Where do you imagine the states will get this supposed money to set aside in their coffers? The states have a pitiful track record of fiscal surpluses, they can barely manage to balance their budgets every year (I live in NJ so trust me when I say its true). The federal government for millions is the only thing keeping these sorts of citizens ALIVE but you want the Hunger Games to replace it. Your argument is I'll informed and worthless like this bill.
1
Any Christian or Jew aware of the teaching of the Law and the Prophets and Jesus and who supports the GOP medical agenda is a HYPOCRITE of the worst sort. "Love your neighbor as yourself." It couldn't be clearer.
9
Are The two senators first interests keeping the government out of people's lives? Or to save tax money?
Are they anywhere near the Buckle of the Bible Belt.?
Is being a Christian merely a...state of being or action?
Am I my brother's keeper?
Are they anywhere near the Buckle of the Bible Belt.?
Is being a Christian merely a...state of being or action?
Am I my brother's keeper?
5
Let me add Matthew 7:12. I'll not write out the verse. Republicans, find it yourselves, take a good look at it, then claim that you are God-fearing Christians!
What the Reaperblican party and their Christian evangelical and Jewish orthodox backers want is a tax transfer to the wealthy so that they and only they can hold the charitable assistance purse. No one should worry; there will be healthcare available for the poor and needy, provided they join the right churches and synagogues, vote accordingly and proselytize to swell the ranks of the faithful. In this, Muslim immigrants have no place, hence the immigration ban. The aim is to move from "one person, one vote" back to one white and wealthy man, one vote as constitutional fundamentalism.
8
And dispensing funds from that purse means something beautiful: tax deductibles that can be claimed. If done with the appropriate fanfare, they can also demonstrate that they are charitable. There'll be enough people who'll swallow that little act hook, line and sinker.
2
The state death panels have renewed life.
1
Where are all the Trump supporters with their claims that Donnie was going to usher in bigger, better, cheaper, BEAUTIFUL health care? He's more than willing to sign into law whatever evil plan the Republicans come up with proving once again that a.) He's a liar b.) He's morally vacant c.) He's no populist d.) He's willing to throw his own supporters under the bus. Sad!
12
The irony is that the same people who would force women to have severely disabled children want to institutionalize or kill them once they're alive.
17
And you're an intelligent person. The ER is the LEAST of it. Meditate for a moment on the financial aspects of the sociological results of untreated illness.
I always wonder about these Conservative Libertarian types. Grudgingly, they force themselves to use airports, highways, the legal system, football stadiums, bridges and community buildings.
Not until Aunt Melba needs her gall bladder out do they yell their Safe Word.
I always wonder about these Conservative Libertarian types. Grudgingly, they force themselves to use airports, highways, the legal system, football stadiums, bridges and community buildings.
Not until Aunt Melba needs her gall bladder out do they yell their Safe Word.
5
'Taxes are what we pay for a Civilized society' located on the IRS building in Washington DC and credited to Supreme Justice O.W.Holmes,Jr.
A very simple concept to understand.
A very simple concept to understand.
14
In Canada, Great Britain, and many, many other civilized countries, if you need to go to the doctor or to the hospital – you can just go.
In America, medical bills are the number-one cause of bankruptcy.
And yet, the "for profit" health care companies, and the "for profit" insurance companies who are the only means of paying for it, have been stupendous FAILURES for shareholders and (especially) patients.
The Affordable (sic) Care Act never did provide coverage, and Medicaid is designed to take everything you own after you die.
If we can spend billions of dollars each month on the business of killing people half-a-planet away, we CAN spend far less money on the business of saving people here at home.
In America, medical bills are the number-one cause of bankruptcy.
And yet, the "for profit" health care companies, and the "for profit" insurance companies who are the only means of paying for it, have been stupendous FAILURES for shareholders and (especially) patients.
The Affordable (sic) Care Act never did provide coverage, and Medicaid is designed to take everything you own after you die.
If we can spend billions of dollars each month on the business of killing people half-a-planet away, we CAN spend far less money on the business of saving people here at home.
5
Many, like yourself, blame the profit-driven behavior of the insurers but ignore the gross incompetence of the Federal Government for our high costs. Surely, the latter is a huge contributing factor that will not disappear once we move to a national system.
The thought of a Congressman in some other state driven by re-election motives deciding which medical services I should receive or which drugs I should take (ex., based on potential kickbacks) is just as anathema to me as the insurers' profit motives.
The only ones I would begin to trust (other than myself) with health care decisions is my local government because at least I have the most direct control, in the form of a vote, over its actions.
I can easily follow what my County and State are doing to reduce Medicaid per person costs and improve outcomes. (They promote their efforts all the time.) Their efforts seem completely disconnected from what is playing out at the national level and what is showcased in the NYT coverage.
The thought of a Congressman in some other state driven by re-election motives deciding which medical services I should receive or which drugs I should take (ex., based on potential kickbacks) is just as anathema to me as the insurers' profit motives.
The only ones I would begin to trust (other than myself) with health care decisions is my local government because at least I have the most direct control, in the form of a vote, over its actions.
I can easily follow what my County and State are doing to reduce Medicaid per person costs and improve outcomes. (They promote their efforts all the time.) Their efforts seem completely disconnected from what is playing out at the national level and what is showcased in the NYT coverage.
2
Instead of taking care of our people we prefer to wage numerous wars in Civil War torn countries. Then using 5th generation warfare we brag how many cavemen we slaughter. Home of the brave? I say NO.
6
A tax break for the rich at the expense of the disabled. Exactly what Jesus would do.
5
It's hard for me to understand how the GOP love a man who wandered homeless, accepting the meals and hospitality of others, did no work for money and even gathered a bunch of workers to give up their jobs - order to take up his own homeless, itinerant, hospitality-dependent lifestyle!
They love Jesus but excoriate those living his lifestyle!
They love Jesus but excoriate those living his lifestyle!
2
Probably time to think about which kid is going to share so that grandma or granddad or both can move into that empty room. You have plenty of time to think about it so no excuses when they get thrown out of their home.
3
If taking care of people and making sure they have fulfilling and healthy lives is how my tax dollars are used, then I am satisfied. My money is wasted on battleships, bombs, and protection schemes for DT's grifter adult children.
8
Yeah, but all these folks will have "access" to Health Care.
3
Americans have also had a glimpse of "rationing" under Obamacare in the form of dramatically reduced networks and choices, and they don't seem to care for it very much.
Many promoting Canadian- or UK-style systems rarely mention that rationing is their primary cost reduction method. It is also why private systems exist to supplement these state systems.
Many promoting Canadian- or UK-style systems rarely mention that rationing is their primary cost reduction method. It is also why private systems exist to supplement these state systems.
1
22 million fewer covered under medicaid = 1 million fewer health care jobs.
Oh, I forgot the 800 wonderful coal mining jobs saved.
Thank you jobs killing Republican party.
Oh, I forgot the 800 wonderful coal mining jobs saved.
Thank you jobs killing Republican party.
4
It took years and years ( and sometimes they still don't ) for the press\media\4th estate to call out LIES by politicians. They are actually starting to use the word, which overall is gaining traction and having an effect.
Now, if the same culprits can only stop talking in the abstract about health care. People that care going to be cut off from government supplied health care insurance, or private plans that will now cost too much, are not at the end of the road, out of options or seeking alternatives.
They are going to be displaced, now in an incredible amount of pain or discomfort, or are going to DIE:
Please say as much as loudly and as clear as you can. Especially in titles.
Now, if the same culprits can only stop talking in the abstract about health care. People that care going to be cut off from government supplied health care insurance, or private plans that will now cost too much, are not at the end of the road, out of options or seeking alternatives.
They are going to be displaced, now in an incredible amount of pain or discomfort, or are going to DIE:
Please say as much as loudly and as clear as you can. Especially in titles.
5
USA population is about 320 millions. Let’s say 40% is disqualified because of age limitation to be a president and we want top 1% of moral, intellectual, reputation, health, education, and anything high qualification to lead our country. There are about 2 millions candidates to be a real president and government officials in this country. America should be in better hand.
6
Frank Justin
"If this is such a good way to spend our tax dollars, what return do we get?"
What are you expecting in the way of a return? Why isn't it enough for you to know critical, life sustaining needs are being met?
It is truly confounding to realize public discourse about domestic policy has been reduced to whether or not there is profit, financial gain in caring for those in need.
"If this is such a good way to spend our tax dollars, what return do we get?"
What are you expecting in the way of a return? Why isn't it enough for you to know critical, life sustaining needs are being met?
It is truly confounding to realize public discourse about domestic policy has been reduced to whether or not there is profit, financial gain in caring for those in need.
20
Yes - thank you. Fully agree. The notion of always expecting a measurable return on tax dollar spending is absurd.
9
In medicine, "return" is measured in health "outcomes", which are very poor under the Medicaid program. It has very high costs and poor outcomes.
1
The hypocrisy if GOP is remarkable. What returns do we get from our "investment" in bloated defense contracts? Meanwhile food stamps deliver 3 dollars to the GDP for every dollar spent. Hiding behind the voodoo economics cloak of invisibility are a bunch of greedy trolls.
So access to Medicaid for children is not supposed to be capped. What happens when they turn 18? What happens when you hit the cap? Can you apply for more funds if it's life-threatening or are you left in the dust?
8
Because the Federal and state governments impose income taxes even on very poor people in this country, those who qualify for Medicaid and would lose it if the Republican proposals pass, it would be as though we were paying our own executioners for killing us. But I, for one, will not pardon them!
8
After reading the Abby Goodenough article about disabled people on Medicaid, it is quite annoying that the Republicans want to eliminate this pipeline for life.
GOP shame on you, which brings us back to the need to print more money. It was reported that 75% of the very wealthy got that way through inheritance, making them as lazy as those accused thus by them.
There is a simple solution. Print more money to pay for medicaid and don't attach it to the national debt, just for a little while, at least until Trump brings the jobs back home. Printing more money for medicaid won't cause inflation.
It'll be awesomw. It will be brilliant. It will work beyond ourwildest dreams. It keep the structure of the ACA. It will help pass the vindictive AHCA. Taxes will be cut as will all medicaid services will be afforded the ability rebuild a GOP as compassionate and conservative.
With the Print More Money model, all disabled people and those who can't afford, will get the necessary love and financial support they need.
T turn mean into green by printing more money. Read End This Depression by Paul Krugman. And sign an executive order to print more money.
GOP shame on you, which brings us back to the need to print more money. It was reported that 75% of the very wealthy got that way through inheritance, making them as lazy as those accused thus by them.
There is a simple solution. Print more money to pay for medicaid and don't attach it to the national debt, just for a little while, at least until Trump brings the jobs back home. Printing more money for medicaid won't cause inflation.
It'll be awesomw. It will be brilliant. It will work beyond ourwildest dreams. It keep the structure of the ACA. It will help pass the vindictive AHCA. Taxes will be cut as will all medicaid services will be afforded the ability rebuild a GOP as compassionate and conservative.
With the Print More Money model, all disabled people and those who can't afford, will get the necessary love and financial support they need.
T turn mean into green by printing more money. Read End This Depression by Paul Krugman. And sign an executive order to print more money.
1
It's hard to understand a political party dedicated to taking money from sick people to bundle into tax breaks for the wealthy. What would drive a party to make this act of theft a central cause of its agenda? What kind of mean spirit fills the souls of the Congressional Republicans?
12
We need to boot the abled bodied off of Medicaid so that its benefits can go to the truly needy like those mentioned in this article. Those abled bodied are thieves stealing from the truly needy and the taxpayers. Changing how Medicaid is funded will force states to make the choices needed to ensure that the truly needy get the benefits they need.
5
R. Spears;
Boot the able bodied off Medicaid ? All programs of every kind, including those which give billions in tax breaks to industry in the form of subsidies ( hand outs) have people who abuse them. The focus on cutting medicaid is a war on the poor, the old, and the dialed. Period.
Boot the able bodied off Medicaid ? All programs of every kind, including those which give billions in tax breaks to industry in the form of subsidies ( hand outs) have people who abuse them. The focus on cutting medicaid is a war on the poor, the old, and the dialed. Period.
1
What about those working FULL TIME at low income jobs, (I see Wallmart) who do not have health insurance through work? Able bodied, working full time! Adding additional part time work will not get them employer provided insurance and purchasing thru the market is bound to be out of reach. So, tell me, exactly, other than the almighty $$$$, some luck and access to an education, makes YOU more deserving of getting regular checkups to prevent disease and treatment for illness and injury? Exactly what?
1
Oh please given me a break. Just about everyone on it is truly needy. That is why they are on it.
1
Why the meanness ?
Why the penny pinching by those who have more than enough to live on ?
I used to be proud to call America home,
but I wish I was Swedish or Canadian now.
Why the penny pinching by those who have more than enough to live on ?
I used to be proud to call America home,
but I wish I was Swedish or Canadian now.
15
You certainly cam leave and become Swedish.....
You won't.
You won't.
3
C O,
Buy me an one way ticket and citizenship
and I will.
Buy me an one way ticket and citizenship
and I will.
1
How many Americans will die avoidable deaths because of the GOP plan that takes takes health insurance away from 20 million Americans to give tax breaks to the wealthy? But if a much much smaller number of Americans die due to international terrorism, we seem to have trillions of dollars available to invade other countries. This is insanity.
11
No, it is US backed terrorism in another guise. Letting your own people die should get the US on a list of state sponsors of Terrorism.
2
Avik Roy: We have to cut Medicaid for "fiscal sustainability"
No, the Trumpcare bill cuts taxes on the rich. This isn't about balancing the budget. It's about Republican politicians who want to take healthcare from the poor to give tax breaks to billionaires.
No, the Trumpcare bill cuts taxes on the rich. This isn't about balancing the budget. It's about Republican politicians who want to take healthcare from the poor to give tax breaks to billionaires.
14
Sounds like something Bernie would say. Why isn't he president? Oh yeah... it wasn't his "turn".
1
Gutting Medicaid is the Koch Brothers, the DeVos' family & the Mercer's philosophy of no government assistance at all & letting private charities help. But be sure to avert your eyes as they use government tax credits & exemptions to feather their own nest. Remember what Leona Helmsley said, "Only little people pay taxes." And that's the way they want to keep it now that they control every single part of the federal government & most of the states.
12
No one can judge this situation honestly without mention of illegal immigrants receiving Medicaid. This is why Trump won.
2
Remember that terrible Joe Wilson outburst, "You lie!"? What drove Wilson to shout that out was the fact that Obamacare had no mandated check for citizenship. It denied care to illegal immigrants but did not require health care providers to check for citizenship -- as every other federally provided benefit must do.
The verification step was quietly inserted afterward. Given Obama's and democrats' proclivity for bypassing laws when it comes to illegal immigrants, Wilson was prescient (although completely out of line for his disrespectful behavior).
The verification step was quietly inserted afterward. Given Obama's and democrats' proclivity for bypassing laws when it comes to illegal immigrants, Wilson was prescient (although completely out of line for his disrespectful behavior).
2
That is fake news! They don't get Medicaid except for the rarest of circumstances when they are treated emergently in the hospital (ie, they'd die on the sidewalk of the hospital discharged them). (Oh and even in these conditions, hospitals fight for reimbursement.) But then the Medicaid ends. They're also excluded from Social Security, period.
Marty:
Emergency room visits are not "rare." ER's are still being used for basic medical care under Obamacare. Their usage didn't diminish.
Emergency room visits are not "rare." ER's are still being used for basic medical care under Obamacare. Their usage didn't diminish.
2
How do Republicans square the cuts with their oft touted claim for treating all with dignity and respect? It's time our politicians walk the talk instead of just giving lip service to showing love for all, what Christ demands.
8
Some on here seem to believe that taxes paid by all Americans are aimed at reasonable health care recipients...LIKE THEM. And all the rest (whoever they are) can just stumble off into the dark and die. This toxic self-centeredness would be shocking were it not so prevalent among republicans, especially. This country is divided...split into warring sectors. Too many people look at government as just another business. It's not. Its reason for being is to democratize benefits because WE ALL pay into the kitty, the U.S. Treasury Our biggest problems is that the rich stopped paying anywhere near their FAIR taxes starting 35 years ago and it's gotten real bad in the last ten. Citizens of the United States say they love their country. Their behavior speaks volumes to the contrary.
9
Military spending and endless wars are more of a priority than caring for our fellow men.
6
It's the same thing. Caring is shown by cleaning up undesirables, in war and in the community. Make America white, nondisabled, Christian again.
1
If past and current administrations defunded some of the pet projects and true govt. waste, the funds would be there.
1
The Republican Party has always championed itself as the party of Christian family values. They cherish life so much that they are working hard to curb women's reproductive rights. And yet, God forbid a child is born with disabilities or into a poor family. This bill shows how little they really care about life. Those who support it should be ashamed of themselves.
9
@Karen Darnell: The Republican party wants to curb women's reproductive rights so that they can control those bodies. It's all and only about control.
3
sophia:
Typical liberal myopic arrogance. It's all about YOU or your body. Trump fires a missile in Syria, and every liberal screams he's trying to distract from...whatever their issue is.
Newsflash: Not very act by a republican is not all about YOU or an issue that you consider to be THE most important issue. Pro-lifers care about the unborn. Controlling women is something very few actually engage in. Feeling controlled, on the other hand...
Typical liberal myopic arrogance. It's all about YOU or your body. Trump fires a missile in Syria, and every liberal screams he's trying to distract from...whatever their issue is.
Newsflash: Not very act by a republican is not all about YOU or an issue that you consider to be THE most important issue. Pro-lifers care about the unborn. Controlling women is something very few actually engage in. Feeling controlled, on the other hand...
2
It's remarkable what upsets certain people about "government waste." Like pornography, it seems to be in the mind and wallet of the beholder.
The very same people who decry Medicaid spending have no problem with defense spending, or eliminating a tax break which they desire. Or countless other government guarantees they enjoy.
Me first! So what if others could die.
The very same people who decry Medicaid spending have no problem with defense spending, or eliminating a tax break which they desire. Or countless other government guarantees they enjoy.
Me first! So what if others could die.
9
To not use swear words when describing republicans after reading that article will be very difficult but I'll do my best. It makes me physically ill that we have an entire political party that is INTENTIONALLY trying to take away these people's healthcare. Some of the most vulnerable members of our society are being told that they are beneficial to our capitalist society so they don't deserve benefits. Its sickening. I know republicans don't believe in altruism but what about common human decency?
6
Trump epitomizes the worship of force and the practice of cruel intolerance, an ugly spirit now emerging and taking hold in the US. It is the antithesis of securing a national minimum of civilised life ... open to all alike, of both sexes and all classes, by which we mean sufficient nourishment and training when young, a living wage when able-bodied, treatment when sick, and modest but secure livelihood when disabled or aged. What’s so unreasonable and unjust about that?
11
You should know that the Dump Trump 2018 budget cuts 30% from Veterans Administration even though they want to send young women and men to war. That added in makes this idea insane.
7
Nearly 20% of Alabamans live below the poverty line. Over 900,000 people. A million Alabama residents are eligible for Medicaid - this state didn't accept the Medicaid expansion through Obamacare. Seems like enough people with some skin in the game could vote out Republicans senators who are putting the death nail in their own coffin with a Republican governor putting the lid on. There is a special election in December for Jeff Session's spot - get with it Alabama. Organize, register voters, get out to vote, turn off your TVs. Or you only have yourselves to blame when you lose these valued and needed services.
5
Wealthcare or healthcare? What do we the people need?
4
The worse part of all this partisan rancor is the uncertainty, and the painful stress, this is causing for the the most vulnerable members of our society.
5
Yes, indeed. For people who are sick now or handicapped, this is slow-drip torture and a health risk by itself. It's beyond disgusting.
I heard William F. Buckley talk once, and he simply stated that the only purpose of the federal government is for defense.
I disagree, but at least he was being forthcoming about his ideology.
The modern "conservatives" are less than honest. They DISGUISE what they believe through fancy language, faux goals (we must reduce the deficit), and phony solutions i.e.
the churches will provide.
Then they wave the flag, proclaim all is well, as they pocket more tax cuts.
Their deflections, let's be clear, will kill innocent people.
I disagree, but at least he was being forthcoming about his ideology.
The modern "conservatives" are less than honest. They DISGUISE what they believe through fancy language, faux goals (we must reduce the deficit), and phony solutions i.e.
the churches will provide.
Then they wave the flag, proclaim all is well, as they pocket more tax cuts.
Their deflections, let's be clear, will kill innocent people.
4
I'd love to see Medicaid for all and a universal system, but it currently costs 553 billion dollars a year to give 70 million Americans that coverage. Can we find 2 trillion dollars more per year to cover everyone? That feat seems like an impossibility.
3
Medicaid is a notoriously ill-suited system to provide universal health care because of its high costs and poor outcomes.
2
That's because it covers only poor and disabled...more healthy people in pool would lower per capita cost substantially.
2
Susan Hofstadter:
The Dept. of Health and Human Services reported last year that fraud was estimated to be 12% of the Medicaid budget. It is estimated to have DOUBLED under the Medicaid *expansion*. What would the cost of fraud be under a national system? Granted the federal government is starting to use "big data" to find fraud, so that cost trajectory should change.
Then there is the issue of system capabilities. Our federal government couldn't even build the "front end" to a system (that's all the "exchange" was). There wasn't even one project manager who had responsibility for the entire project, end-to-end, to make sure the front end worked with the back end. Of course, this could be a function of Obama's poor management skills and inexperience. (He was primarily a salesman, out on the road selling with Sibelius and seemed to not know what was actually happening with the exchange project or what Obamacare would actually do.)
A national system may not be technically feasible, given our federal government's technical IQ. There is also the issue that medical outcomes are improved by addressing health care at the local level (ex., at delivery). Another federal behemoth won't necessarily make people healthier. That happens at the state and local level.
The Dept. of Health and Human Services reported last year that fraud was estimated to be 12% of the Medicaid budget. It is estimated to have DOUBLED under the Medicaid *expansion*. What would the cost of fraud be under a national system? Granted the federal government is starting to use "big data" to find fraud, so that cost trajectory should change.
Then there is the issue of system capabilities. Our federal government couldn't even build the "front end" to a system (that's all the "exchange" was). There wasn't even one project manager who had responsibility for the entire project, end-to-end, to make sure the front end worked with the back end. Of course, this could be a function of Obama's poor management skills and inexperience. (He was primarily a salesman, out on the road selling with Sibelius and seemed to not know what was actually happening with the exchange project or what Obamacare would actually do.)
A national system may not be technically feasible, given our federal government's technical IQ. There is also the issue that medical outcomes are improved by addressing health care at the local level (ex., at delivery). Another federal behemoth won't necessarily make people healthier. That happens at the state and local level.
2
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Will someone explain to me how cutting medicaid promotes the general Welfare? Silly me - it promotes the general Welfare of rich people - How could I have missed that!
5
Touching as these stories are, we* don't elect reps on ability to readily burst tears at sob stories. Furthermore, every cut is bound to be painful, and evidence showing it, only justifies it's being done right. And finally, there's the race element in this story, highlighting whites only, presumes GOP lawmakers can only be swayed with sob stories of whites in distress.
An insulting presumption on what's behind the budget cuts, whose goals are NOT racially targeted, but to get more bang for the Medicaid buck, reduce waste and fraud, inject responsibility wherever entitlement exists, and restore Medicaid spending to its proper context: the entire budget at large.
Which, without proposed cuts, consumes over a quarter of our budget. Given a deficit of $500 billion, that's $125 billion in borrowed money to sustain Medicaid spending alone. That's not just unsustainable, it's unacceptable to a large swath of tax-payers. And will continue to be so unless and until the deficit reduces, the GDP goes up, and Medicaid waste/fraud, estimated by the OMB at over 10%, drastically goes down. BTW, the last bit also has a human face: for every 10 of Eric, Frances and Matthews, there's smart-alec Dr. Joe living the high life complete with 5 car garage and millions in the bank.
So unless you're on Joe's side (who spends his time these furiously calling the AMA these days), relax, all's good, America's greating again.
* excluding bleeding-heart liberals of the Kristof variety
An insulting presumption on what's behind the budget cuts, whose goals are NOT racially targeted, but to get more bang for the Medicaid buck, reduce waste and fraud, inject responsibility wherever entitlement exists, and restore Medicaid spending to its proper context: the entire budget at large.
Which, without proposed cuts, consumes over a quarter of our budget. Given a deficit of $500 billion, that's $125 billion in borrowed money to sustain Medicaid spending alone. That's not just unsustainable, it's unacceptable to a large swath of tax-payers. And will continue to be so unless and until the deficit reduces, the GDP goes up, and Medicaid waste/fraud, estimated by the OMB at over 10%, drastically goes down. BTW, the last bit also has a human face: for every 10 of Eric, Frances and Matthews, there's smart-alec Dr. Joe living the high life complete with 5 car garage and millions in the bank.
So unless you're on Joe's side (who spends his time these furiously calling the AMA these days), relax, all's good, America's greating again.
* excluding bleeding-heart liberals of the Kristof variety
3
"...Medicaid waste/fraud, estimated by the OMB at over 10%..."
That means Medicaid is working at 90% efficiency. Sounds pretty good to me.
I wonder how many profit-oriented businesses can reach that bar?
That means Medicaid is working at 90% efficiency. Sounds pretty good to me.
I wonder how many profit-oriented businesses can reach that bar?
@Duane
You mean slightly under 90%. Waste/fraud= improper payments of over $100 billion annual = pushing the legal bar ripping the government off. All going to, err, profit-oriented businesses and individuals.
Still sound good to you? Didn't think so either. Enjoy your Aha moment. Mitch McConnell says hi.
You mean slightly under 90%. Waste/fraud= improper payments of over $100 billion annual = pushing the legal bar ripping the government off. All going to, err, profit-oriented businesses and individuals.
Still sound good to you? Didn't think so either. Enjoy your Aha moment. Mitch McConnell says hi.
1
@TMK:
Instead of answering my question, you invented some numbers. And you fail to distinguish between waste and fraud. Neither of which can be entirely eliminated in any system, whether public or private.
But here is some information about the private sector:
"The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners' (ACFE) 2012 Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse gives a broad overview of how this problem is affecting companies around the world. Here is a sampling of their findings:
The typical organization loses 5% of its revenues to fraud each year. The median loss in the cases in their study was $140,000. More than one-fifth of these cases caused losses of at least $1 million. The frauds lasted an average of 18 months before being detected. The smallest organizations suffered the largest losses because they typically employ fewer anti-fraud controls. In addition, fraud affected small businesses disproportionately because they have fewer resources to act as a financial cushion.
Perpetrators with higher levels of authority tend to cause much larger losses. The median loss among frauds committed by owner/ executives was $573,000, the median loss caused by managers was $180,000, and the median loss caused by employees was $60,000." (source: https://www.incorp.com/help-center/business-articles/employee-theft-and-...
Instead of answering my question, you invented some numbers. And you fail to distinguish between waste and fraud. Neither of which can be entirely eliminated in any system, whether public or private.
But here is some information about the private sector:
"The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners' (ACFE) 2012 Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse gives a broad overview of how this problem is affecting companies around the world. Here is a sampling of their findings:
The typical organization loses 5% of its revenues to fraud each year. The median loss in the cases in their study was $140,000. More than one-fifth of these cases caused losses of at least $1 million. The frauds lasted an average of 18 months before being detected. The smallest organizations suffered the largest losses because they typically employ fewer anti-fraud controls. In addition, fraud affected small businesses disproportionately because they have fewer resources to act as a financial cushion.
Perpetrators with higher levels of authority tend to cause much larger losses. The median loss among frauds committed by owner/ executives was $573,000, the median loss caused by managers was $180,000, and the median loss caused by employees was $60,000." (source: https://www.incorp.com/help-center/business-articles/employee-theft-and-...
Here she is folks, Exhibit A in the Republicans' position that too many Americans are spending money on the newest iPhone rather than paying their medical bills.
BTW, not that I'm adept with my IPhone, but it clearly has all kinds of utility for people with various kinds of handicaps.
Republicans AND Americans don't care about any of these people. Americans demonstrated in last years election just how bigoted, nasty, and hateful they really are. Trump represents just how Americans really feel about everything and anything. However most Americans fail to realize one thing. "But for the grace of god each one of them could be in the same position as this lady and other disabled people are in."
6
The people pushing this bill read the stories of the individuals affected by and dependent on Medicaide and think "good riddance" to anyone who in their eyes is 'non-productive'. Hypocrites Mitch McConnell, Trump, Paul Ryan and millions of others would have no problem if America rounded up every disabled person in America and euthanized them, while touting themselves as 'pro-life'. The end goal is to let families, NGOs and charity take the place of government support, so in the future no tax money is spent on the neediest and most vulnerable in our society. The rich will be able to afford to care for their disabled offspring (should they choose) but the middle class will be on their own. This economic eugenics has been the goal of some of our richest citizens for decades. One can hear Republican leadership working on the healthcare bill behind closed doors repeat the Koch Brothers refrain "perhaps they'd better die, and decrease the surplus population". Our leaders are owned by multinational corporations who believe people who do not consume their products or whose labor cannot be exploited profitably should not exist. The only way the disenfranchised, the poor, the sick, the unfortunate and the downcast are going to live with a government that disrespects and mocks them is if they take up armed resistance to their 'betters' and cause as much pain to the elite as the wealthy few are planning to reign upon them.
4
Ok. So the Republivans are supposed to be the pro-life party, right? They tell women not to have an abortion when their child will be born with overwhelming disabilities. But once those children are born, what happens? They cut the very programs that support all these persons with mental and/or physical challenges. But it doesn't end with a paucity of help for the children born to hardship, their parents are also stripped of the help they may need to get off drugs, get educated, or find new work for themselves.
I have to ask myself if the GOP is just trying g to keep a certain segment of the population in an endless cycle of poverty and dispair? I suppose this helps the 1% somehow, but I just can't go there.
I have to ask myself if the GOP is just trying g to keep a certain segment of the population in an endless cycle of poverty and dispair? I suppose this helps the 1% somehow, but I just can't go there.
6
What is going on is almost inter-party warfare, when what we really need is mutual, cooperative soul-searching -- a searching for the soul of America.
Some of us believe that America is too soft, too feminized, and not "business-like" enough (code for pay-your-own-way, dog-eat-dog). We're so eager to correct the softness we deem dangerous that we cut corners -- running the occasional red light, you could say, particularly when we think nobody's looking.
Some of us don't think America is too soft, too feminized. If anything, we tend to think it's too "business-like" (understanding, as we do, that "business-like" is code for pay-your-own-way, dog-eat-dog). We're criticized and mocked for so-called weakness; the code words used are "big government," "tax and spend," "liberal," "socialist," "progressive," "bleeding heart," and, if we're a woman, "bleeding out of ...wherever." We so-called softies don't much like confrontation. We tend to shrink under fire -- under the fire of those (on the get-tough side) who would be delighted to wipe us out.
Ultimately, this battle has degenerated to the point where neither group can stand the sight of the other. "Win whatever it takes" versus mutuality and cooperation -- the two value systems are mutually exclusive. Truly, they are.
The general character of our society is at stake, as is its spiritual health.
Make no mistake. Right now we're going down the toilet.
What do you stand?
Some of us believe that America is too soft, too feminized, and not "business-like" enough (code for pay-your-own-way, dog-eat-dog). We're so eager to correct the softness we deem dangerous that we cut corners -- running the occasional red light, you could say, particularly when we think nobody's looking.
Some of us don't think America is too soft, too feminized. If anything, we tend to think it's too "business-like" (understanding, as we do, that "business-like" is code for pay-your-own-way, dog-eat-dog). We're criticized and mocked for so-called weakness; the code words used are "big government," "tax and spend," "liberal," "socialist," "progressive," "bleeding heart," and, if we're a woman, "bleeding out of ...wherever." We so-called softies don't much like confrontation. We tend to shrink under fire -- under the fire of those (on the get-tough side) who would be delighted to wipe us out.
Ultimately, this battle has degenerated to the point where neither group can stand the sight of the other. "Win whatever it takes" versus mutuality and cooperation -- the two value systems are mutually exclusive. Truly, they are.
The general character of our society is at stake, as is its spiritual health.
Make no mistake. Right now we're going down the toilet.
What do you stand?
2
We are a capitalist economy so there is no such thing as "too business-like." Wealth is capitalism's scorecard. Like nature itself, capitalism is cold, cruel and heartless. The pursuit of fame and fortune is the basis of all that is great about this country. For those who feel this is too harsh, the world is littered with failed socialist states like Greece and Ireland.
The Republicans see money, and not persons. When they say we can't afford Medicaid as it is currently administered, what they are really saying to 74 million people is, "we can't afford YOU." Listen to their words. They are inhumane.
3
Paul Ryan has never held a private sector job in his life and always has been able to rely on government assistance. How about all those who vote for Trumpcare give up their socialized medical benefits and demonstrate true freedom by going out in the market and negotiating the best deal.
8
This goes for our heartless Wisconsin governor also. 'Mr. take responsibility' -- which of course, I also support in general, life, broad-stroke terms -- has always had a gov't job with juicy benefits.
The son of a pastor, he has zero empathy or compassion for people with genuine struggle.
The hypocrisy in Wisconsin government knows no bounds.
The son of a pastor, he has zero empathy or compassion for people with genuine struggle.
The hypocrisy in Wisconsin government knows no bounds.
More money than they could spend in ten lifetimes and still not enough. It rankles me that many of them dare to call themselves moral OR Christian. If they succeed, it would almost be worth it because the ripple effects would be disastrous for the GOP. Not only will people die in the ensuing chaos, the workforce will suffer massive losses as the system teeters on the brink of collapse. Perhaps that is what is needed to wake the country.
1
The silence from Democrats on this issue is deafening. Other than a few fist shakings by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer at the podium in reaction to some Republican idiocy, not a peep has been heard from upcoming 2018 candidates or the DNC. They should have had coordinated and aggressive messaging by now. It's a no-brainer. But why should we expect them to change? They still have not learned the lessons from Hillary's defeat. How hard is it to craft a short message that every Democrat uses over and over when speaking publicly?
2
Actually the " problem" is that most on the left are not responsive to lock-step, party-line, talking-points oriented campaigns that work so well for the right wing. Also, most Americans are not enamored of the permanent campaign mode...Democrats are speaking out against Republican plans, but you don't hear them in the media because that stuff is not "sexy" like Russian spying and Trump tweetstorms.
They're letting the Republicans hang themselves. Everyone knows what the Democrats' position is: retain and improve Obamacare or more to a single-payer system. Clear enough for you?
Susan Hofstadter:
They tried lock-step party-line talking points when Obamacare was sold. Look at where that got democrats. They've been losing elections ever since.
The problem democrats have is that Obamacare is a huge failure. They have nothing but "everyone will die" in their arsenal. Unsurprisingly, these were the same arguments made to sell Obamacare.
They tried lock-step party-line talking points when Obamacare was sold. Look at where that got democrats. They've been losing elections ever since.
The problem democrats have is that Obamacare is a huge failure. They have nothing but "everyone will die" in their arsenal. Unsurprisingly, these were the same arguments made to sell Obamacare.
2
The United States' folks are a caring society, as we recognize that our union is what makes us strong, and that justice is achieved only when it is applied to the least among us (a chain being only as strong as it's weakest link). And health care ought to be a reflection of our common humanity. Given that Medicaid is the major contributor in achieving this, it makes sense we want to share our wealth equally. And an excellent reason to stop the cruel and un-representative decision of a bunch of congressmen in denying our needs and wishes. And the fraudster in the White House, highly ignorant and a demagogue, seems willing to sign anything, however stupid, to show he is not as incompetent as we know he is. The public outcry we are witnessing is a good start, but requiring perseverance and close attention.
3
Fee free to give as much as you like to charity (the appropriateness of which can be argued another time) but keep your hands off my wallet.
3
This is not a matter of charity, justice instead.
1
Every Senator that votes for Medicaid decreases, should be forced to tell all disabled in their state, in person so they can see the constituents eyes, that due to his/her vote, their Medicaid services will be cut or stopped. It's easy to maintain the herd mentality when in Washington and follow your party blindly or selfishly. Having to face those whose lives will be hurt may give them a better perspective. We are all part of humanity correct?
4
The solution to the dilemma of the Republicans not being able to find an acceptable alternative to Obamacare was briefly hit on, by the same Republicans. This was to work with the Democrats. The idea was treated as appetizing as eating a live rat, but at least they found their solution, and one used frequently 50 years ago.
Obamacare's basic structure would be left in place, and both parties would work on the parts that needed a second look.
Is it now so much a better idea to repeal it completely until "some other time", and in this interim allow the poor and disabled to crawl unaided towards death?
What is the matter with these people, and with Trump who dismissed the idea of bipartisanship forthwith.
It's sickening.
Obamacare's basic structure would be left in place, and both parties would work on the parts that needed a second look.
Is it now so much a better idea to repeal it completely until "some other time", and in this interim allow the poor and disabled to crawl unaided towards death?
What is the matter with these people, and with Trump who dismissed the idea of bipartisanship forthwith.
It's sickening.
2
Such an easy solution: take the money out of the Pentagon budget. Where are the cries to cut waste in military spending and rein in those who profit from endless war?
5
There are many spending adjustments the government can make that will allow for health care to continue and help all our citizens as it is supposed to do. Decencies three biggest enemies are Trump, Ryan and McConnell. All three are failing to care for their constituents: the citizens of America. They were not elected to destroy and they need to be strongly reminded.
2
This article misleadingly focuses on highly sympathetic individuals whose services are apparently not directly at issue in the proposed legislation. Alabama already can cut the services to Ms. Isbell under current law -- I doubt it will & certainly hope it does not. But such cuts are not imposed by the Republican bill. Not until many paragraphs in does the article acknowledge: "Much of the debate has centered on Republican proposals to roll back the recent expansion of the [Medicaid] program to millions of low-income adults WITHOUT DISABILITIES." The real argument being made is that block grants to the States should be as high as possible so that no poorer State elects (as it can under current law) to pare back services to the disabled. This argument should be presented honestly instead of implying that the bill would cut services to the featured individuals in obvious need.
7
When a commenter mentioned "able-bodied" recipients on Medicaid, she was called a liar and ignorant. It's no wonder The Times' readers don't know about the Medicaid *expansion* or the GOP bill. They only know what little they read in The Times.
The truth is that the Medicaid *expansion* added poor able-bodied Americans to the rolls of Medicaid. It's also true that the costs were double what the CBO estimated.
We never had a chance to debate whether people without disabilities should receive Medicaid before Obama pushed this through. It seems we're not going to have an honest debate about it now either.
The truth is that the Medicaid *expansion* added poor able-bodied Americans to the rolls of Medicaid. It's also true that the costs were double what the CBO estimated.
We never had a chance to debate whether people without disabilities should receive Medicaid before Obama pushed this through. It seems we're not going to have an honest debate about it now either.
1
no matter the outcome in Congress it is for certain that the middle class particularly those workers who in private industry will end up being at the losing end. of course, and particularly the editorial board of the nyt and most liberal readers don't care one iota about the middle class.
2
And your recommendation is?
Medicaid is not an entitlement program; it is a public insurance program.
Social Security and Medicare are entitlement programs: you are entitled to receive their benefits because you have paid into them over the years from your salary.
The distinction is important, because "entitlement" has become a pejorative modifier in political discourse. And that is a falsehood intended to drive public opinion toward cutting Social Security and Medicare.
Medicaid is the final layer of our social safety net: it protects you regardless of whether you ever were able to enter the workforce and no matter how poor you are. The federal matching system of funding ensures that states cannot exploit the system, because they have to put state funds in. It's a well-designed system that should be expanded, not cut.
But the very wealthy see things differently. To them we are as bugs on the sidewalk. It is nothing to them if we are crushed. Remember Leona Helmsley's words? "Only the little people pay taxes."
Social Security and Medicare are entitlement programs: you are entitled to receive their benefits because you have paid into them over the years from your salary.
The distinction is important, because "entitlement" has become a pejorative modifier in political discourse. And that is a falsehood intended to drive public opinion toward cutting Social Security and Medicare.
Medicaid is the final layer of our social safety net: it protects you regardless of whether you ever were able to enter the workforce and no matter how poor you are. The federal matching system of funding ensures that states cannot exploit the system, because they have to put state funds in. It's a well-designed system that should be expanded, not cut.
But the very wealthy see things differently. To them we are as bugs on the sidewalk. It is nothing to them if we are crushed. Remember Leona Helmsley's words? "Only the little people pay taxes."
13
The rate of increase in spending for Medicaid will lessen under the Republican bill and some people, now eligible under the ACA, would lose coverage. It is also true that the ACA raised the threshold at which people could deduct medical expenses on their federal tax. The Republicans restore that. That would mean thousands of additional dollars to a broad swath of vulnerable families throughout the nation. There are winners and losers in both plans but the debate has become political, not factual. What else is new?
3
Politicians make this out to be a very complicated issue, and very difficult to "solve." It is all to avoid talking about the honest and patriotic solution: raise taxes.
E pluribus unum is as integral to the foundation of U.S. values as any other creed. The tax avoiders want to change that and it is wrong.
E pluribus unum is as integral to the foundation of U.S. values as any other creed. The tax avoiders want to change that and it is wrong.
9
In a world where artificially intelligent robots are rapidly replacing human workers, why pay taxes to keep unnecessary people alive?
2
You are apparently assuming that you will never find yourself or a dear family member to be suddenly disabled. We're all only one severe accident away from something that could compromise us for the remainder of our lives. Or maybe you're somehow special and immune from the vagaries of misfortune. Proposing that the disabled should just be warehoused or left to die is barbaric.
4
If the value of your labor isn't sufficient to cause your employer to provide comprehensive health insurance, then you shouldn't have it. Period. What is the point of success, than if other than your paycheck, everyone else gets the same treatment? Someone making twenty times as much as you should have twenty times better schools for their kids, twenty times better government services, twenty times better benefits at work, twenty times nicer housing/neighborhoods, twenty times better service in restaurants, twenty times better vacations, etc.
1
Maybe we should tax all the robots to make up for tax revenue lost when people lose their jobs.
"Disabled children would not be subject to spending caps." That is, not until they reach the age of 21. Many, if not nearly all, severely disabled children will continue to need assistance throughout their lives, and the amount of assistance they need only increases as they get older. After decades of wage stagnation for middle-and working-class people, and with the number of people living in poverty, most families need all able-bodied members to work outside the home and bring in money. They cannot afford (literally cannot make ends meet) to care for grown children in their homes without assistance. Are we going to return to institutionalization for these people?
3
I hope not.
Institutionalization isn't free either.
Worse would be returning to eugenics.
I was glad to see that 2 of 3 of the people profiled have, or are working towards, employment. Why isn't Mr. Harkins finding some work? Surely there is SOMETHING he can do. Apparently Alabama isn't yet an "Employment First" state.
Institutionalization isn't free either.
Worse would be returning to eugenics.
I was glad to see that 2 of 3 of the people profiled have, or are working towards, employment. Why isn't Mr. Harkins finding some work? Surely there is SOMETHING he can do. Apparently Alabama isn't yet an "Employment First" state.
A wonderful story about overcoming a seemingly impossible hurdle. Bravo Ms. Isbell! She is a wonderful example of why we need to provide care for those who can't. In addition to maintaining and expanding Medicaid support for such deserving people is the need to better exam the system and insure only those in need receive subsidies. The extraordinary growth of federal programs over the last 10 years suggests there is significant opportunity in terminating wasteful spending and redirecting it to people like Ms. Isbell.
4
This massive cut will also destroy special education services in public schools, which rely on Medicaid dollars to pay for speech, occupational, and physical therapy. The kids won't get the services they need to become independent citizens and tens of thousands of professionals will be unemployed. This is because the GOP bill will make conditions like Autism too expensive for parents to hire therapists, and underfunding will make force therapists to leave the profession. It's happening in Texas.
As a speech-language pathologist, I have a lot of anxiety about losing my job, my house, and what new career I will have to start with. For my kids that I work with, I have anxiety for the lack of care they will receive and the undue pressure it will put in their families.
As a speech-language pathologist, I have a lot of anxiety about losing my job, my house, and what new career I will have to start with. For my kids that I work with, I have anxiety for the lack of care they will receive and the undue pressure it will put in their families.
12
We survived, even thrived, as a nation without "services" for over two centuries. We can do it again.
3
First, congratulations to Frances Isbell. Only 24 years old and graduating from law school....well done!
Our society doesn't need to return to the days when people with afflictions were shuttered in institutions and forgotten. We're a wealthy nation, and we can certainly afford to provide assistance to those who need help. Families do provide caregiving, but they can't stay awake 24 hours per day, and in some cases they aren't able to transfer the person by themselves. They need help.
Our society doesn't need to return to the days when people with afflictions were shuttered in institutions and forgotten. We're a wealthy nation, and we can certainly afford to provide assistance to those who need help. Families do provide caregiving, but they can't stay awake 24 hours per day, and in some cases they aren't able to transfer the person by themselves. They need help.
5
When you say "we are a wealthy nation", whose wealth are you referring to exactly?
3
Our collective wealth: the GDP, or the per capita income. Certainly not YOUR money.
1
Drs, the U.S. is about 10th in the world in GDP per capita. (Ahead of Denmark, the Netherlands, Canada). That makes us a wealthy nation. The "whose wealth" question has to do with distribution.
If it bothers you that people die of curable illnesses when the knowledge exists to help them, then universal healthcare is the answer and is the model in the civilized world where 24 of the 25 wealthiest countries have just that.
One fundamental thing to not lose sight of, though, is it isn't just who pays for healthcare, but it is how much healthcare costs.
When you have for-profit healthcare, the profit comes before the healthcare.
Demand for wellness is what economist call "inelastic" - that is people will want medical treatment regardless of the price. Think of the term "your money or your life". It is not OK to allow hospitals that are built with public funds or pharmaceuticals that are granted patents to then engage in highway robbery.
One fundamental thing to not lose sight of, though, is it isn't just who pays for healthcare, but it is how much healthcare costs.
When you have for-profit healthcare, the profit comes before the healthcare.
Demand for wellness is what economist call "inelastic" - that is people will want medical treatment regardless of the price. Think of the term "your money or your life". It is not OK to allow hospitals that are built with public funds or pharmaceuticals that are granted patents to then engage in highway robbery.
7
That would make sense if 1. It had always been that way and 2. It was 1501.
1. The State began collecting taxes to provide basic care for the Indigent during the Colonial era. When hospitals began opening, they were owned and funded by local, state and federal government, and did not start charging patients until 1900.
2. We no longer pay the doctor with two chickens and a cow. My friend just got a bill for $150,000 for one night in the hospital for appendicitis. One night. Too bad he chose the wrong family.
1. The State began collecting taxes to provide basic care for the Indigent during the Colonial era. When hospitals began opening, they were owned and funded by local, state and federal government, and did not start charging patients until 1900.
2. We no longer pay the doctor with two chickens and a cow. My friend just got a bill for $150,000 for one night in the hospital for appendicitis. One night. Too bad he chose the wrong family.
6
I have a 27 year old daughter who is disabled and we work every day to help her to become independent. I am very lucky to be home with her to help but, I know that I will not be able to do that her entire life. These are only a very few stories there are so many more parents that I know personally doing the same thing. Republicans need to develop empathy
11
Yep.
I put in 35 years at a professional career until my Bipolar became too difficult to manage and I had a complete breakdown. Last year I went on Disability in the hopes of working really hard on healing so I could get back out there.
That was right as the campaign was beginning, and I live in the state of Ryan and Walker.
I have been such a wreck about it my physical and mental health have deteriorated and I am a danger to myself. I am going Inpatient in a few hours, for the last time.
I put in 35 years at a professional career until my Bipolar became too difficult to manage and I had a complete breakdown. Last year I went on Disability in the hopes of working really hard on healing so I could get back out there.
That was right as the campaign was beginning, and I live in the state of Ryan and Walker.
I have been such a wreck about it my physical and mental health have deteriorated and I am a danger to myself. I am going Inpatient in a few hours, for the last time.
16
Good luck to you! I hope you feel better soon.
1
I feel your pain, deeply and empathetically.
I wish your relief and success in your next steps. It is a brave act to seek the help you know you need ... and deserve.
All the best.
I wish your relief and success in your next steps. It is a brave act to seek the help you know you need ... and deserve.
All the best.
There is something fundamentally wrong with a society that spends more on its military than it does taking care of its poorest citizens. Spending 1.7 billion a day on the military is so normal now that it isn't even debated (or mentioned for that matter), but helping the poorest and most in need? Well, that has to be fought tooth and nail by Republicans. Some in this country seem to have what I can only describe as warped views on what a nations priorities should be.
31
The fact that anyone is considering doing this to our citizens, let alone an entire political party, cannot be undone. My family is highly productive and patriotic, but can no longer trust that this country will be safe, stable and decent by the time our children are grown.
We have been fighting the rise of irrational extremism in this country for thirty years - and have lost. We are emigrating to Australia for our children's sake - and their children.
We have been fighting the rise of irrational extremism in this country for thirty years - and have lost. We are emigrating to Australia for our children's sake - and their children.
21
This is a great example of our tax dollars put to good use to help our fellow citizens. This highlights the big fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans. Republicans have never supported funding for the disability community or the working poor. Their idea of small government always includes cuts to Legals Services Corporations and Disability Rights Organizations who are in place to help these people. The Republican priority has always been tax cuts for the rich and increased federal defense spending. This is one reason why I am a Democrat.
25
Is it really our tax dollars put to good use to help our fellow citizens.
In my state Medicaid consumes over one-third of our state's budget?
One-third or more in most other states. One in five Americans, about 75 million recipients get Medicaid benefits.
If this is such a good way to spend our tax dollars, what return do we get?
In my state Medicaid consumes over one-third of our state's budget?
One-third or more in most other states. One in five Americans, about 75 million recipients get Medicaid benefits.
If this is such a good way to spend our tax dollars, what return do we get?
4
Frank, You have got to be kidding. Reread your first sentence again. To. Help. Our. Fellow. Citizens. Please help me understand what is so offensive about that?
I've written and erased paragraphs but I can't come up with anything else because your response, like that of our leaders (POTUS, MoC, State/Federal), leaves me aghast.
I've written and erased paragraphs but I can't come up with anything else because your response, like that of our leaders (POTUS, MoC, State/Federal), leaves me aghast.
1
The return you get is knowing that fellow Americans are alive instead of dead.
2
This is a great example of our tax dollars put to good use to help our fellow citizens in need of special care and services. This is a big fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans. Republicans have never supported funding for the disability community and the working poor as they always look to cut funding to Legal Services Corporations and Disability Rights Organizations. Their idea of small government does not include federal dollars for this part of our population. Rather their priority has always been tax cuts for the rich and increased federal spending.
5
Republicans simply don't care about folks like this.
They serve the interests of the wealthy exclusively.
They serve the interests of the wealthy exclusively.
13
Why can't the VA take over medicaid? Aren't they the experts at taking care of low income folks?
6
These people are far more productive to humanity to the "mentally challenged" people in the White House and Congress
28
We live in the most wealthy nation the world has ever seen. We have more billionaires than you can shake a stick at, and yet, we cannot seem to afford to provide healthcare for our citizenry, as most of the civilized world has seen to do. This is not about giving every American a big new car, or giving away a new three bedroom home on a lake. It's not about gold door knobs in every bathroom. This is about allowing all Americans to visit a doctor and cure their illness without fear of going into bankruptcy to do so. It seems to me that a government form on the basis of creating a "more perfect state" would see that as a good goal. I have to wonder why people who currently occupy our Senate and House of Representatives oppose affordable measures that would provide basic healthcare to all of our county's citizens.
26
In my opinion, the move to cut Medicaid is driven for many by prejudice, anger at poor and minorities. In addition to paying for care late in life for millions of elderly people, it supports care of a large population that might be a new, but never discussed demographic. There are countless people alive today who in recent decades would never have survived. Extremely premature infants, children with severe chronic diseases and cancers, thousands of diabetics on renal dialysis. People with any sort of transplant, from kidney to heart to liver to limb. Pols need to stop the craziness of cutting Obama's name out of everything and examine how to make new discoveries and economic challenges maintainable. Chopping leaves from a tree will kill it; pruning it will make it stronger and live longer. Hope we come to our senses soon.
23
A lot of modern medicine is really an attempt to push back against nature. In the end, it's an effort in futility. We will all die, eventually. Expensive methods to delay the inevitable only postpones this fact of life.
1
Look, this is pretty simple. The GOP wants to minimize costs that its wealthy donors have to spend (taxes). By minimizing Medicaid, Medicare and veteran's care they do that. First, is the reduced initial costs by reducing or eliminating their contributions for health care for others. Second, is by reducing their costs of Medicare and Social Security by encouraging earlier deaths of Americans. The earlier we die the reduction in future costs.
16
Why don't Americans put their collective foot down?
They can require universal care, which pres. Trump promised, as a term of staying in office.
People who need care, and their families and friends need to speak up, email politicians and demand care as a basic right.
Either politicians must enact it, or be voted out of office.
Let's also not forget that universal healthcare is also less expensive that the status quo.
They can require universal care, which pres. Trump promised, as a term of staying in office.
People who need care, and their families and friends need to speak up, email politicians and demand care as a basic right.
Either politicians must enact it, or be voted out of office.
Let's also not forget that universal healthcare is also less expensive that the status quo.
26
I abhor the reduction in medicaid. Solid, basic medical care should be available to all. I would embrace baseline coverage from a single payor so no child or adult is without healthcare. The wealthy or well employed can buy even more coverage if they like.
But an option to provide an aide to a law school student? A member of the upper middle class? Will she pay the people back for this support when she earns six figures? I guess I could support this if it were state funded, and the people of the state voted for it.
But, my initial reaction is that this is an inappropriate government service when there are people who can't get antibiotics or teeth pulled.
Sorry, but you didn't choose a sympathetic subject for me.
But an option to provide an aide to a law school student? A member of the upper middle class? Will she pay the people back for this support when she earns six figures? I guess I could support this if it were state funded, and the people of the state voted for it.
But, my initial reaction is that this is an inappropriate government service when there are people who can't get antibiotics or teeth pulled.
Sorry, but you didn't choose a sympathetic subject for me.
15
David writes, "But an option to provide an aide to a law school student? A member of the upper middle class? Will she pay the people back for this support when she earns six figures?"
When she earns six figures, she'll be self-funding her continuing care and also paying taxes on that greatly enlarged income.
I get it that you'd prefer this brilliant young woman's future should be restricted to whatever she could accomplish without an aide.
Since her spinal muscular atrophy makes her unable to walk or even roll over in bed without assistance, would you prefer she spend her life in bed until she dies of infection from bedsores?
Would you be willing to help pay for an aide as long as the aide does no more than turn her over in bed now and then?
Just keep in mind the phrase "penny wise and pound foolish." Restricting her to bed would save each of us a few pennies money now while forfeiting the taxes she'd pay while practicing law.
When she earns six figures, she'll be self-funding her continuing care and also paying taxes on that greatly enlarged income.
I get it that you'd prefer this brilliant young woman's future should be restricted to whatever she could accomplish without an aide.
Since her spinal muscular atrophy makes her unable to walk or even roll over in bed without assistance, would you prefer she spend her life in bed until she dies of infection from bedsores?
Would you be willing to help pay for an aide as long as the aide does no more than turn her over in bed now and then?
Just keep in mind the phrase "penny wise and pound foolish." Restricting her to bed would save each of us a few pennies money now while forfeiting the taxes she'd pay while practicing law.
23
People frequently go to college and law school on a combination of grants and loans. I'll bet the young woman cited in this article has student debt in the six figures - law school plus her undergraduate studies. Remember: Not only is there not universal health care in America, likewise there is not universal advanced education. In most 'civilized' or 'advanced' countries in the world (such as Switzerland) healthcare and education are birth rights - as they should be in the U.S. I believe healthcare and advanced education should be free and available to all regardless of socioeconomic status.
Your assumption that she began as a member of the "upper middle class" is unsupported. I find it simply amazing with her physical impairments she has not only completed college (4 years) but completed law school (an additional 3 years) - no matter if she is the first in her family to graduate from college, law school or is the relative of someone who succeeded academically. The US needs a highly educated workforce if we are to compete in the rapidly changing world. If some Americans need a little more assistance to reach their educational goals, we, as a society, will benefit.
I believe in single payer or Medicare for all. No one should do without appropriate medications, healthcare, supplemental or dental care.
I, too, would love more diversity on the Supreme Court. Having a disabled Supreme Court justice to bring that perspective to our nation would benefit us all.
51
@David: I'd be curious to know how you handle things in Switzerland. Switzerland is very expensive, very small (5 million) and very homogenous (all white) compared to the US, and has the most costly health care system in Europe (spend almost as much as Americans do). BUT IT IS NOT SINGLE PAYER. Swiss health care is based on a system of mandatory, NON PROFIT insurance coverage.
How do you handle the care of adults, such as in this article, who have very significant disabilities, and require extremely costly care their entire lives? Do they get private aides, someone to drive them to supermarket and out to lunch? are they in institutions or kept at home? as cultures are all different in how they feel about such things, and how they treat such individuals, I am genuinely curious. Does Switzerland have the equivalent of the US "ADA" laws?
How do you handle the care of adults, such as in this article, who have very significant disabilities, and require extremely costly care their entire lives? Do they get private aides, someone to drive them to supermarket and out to lunch? are they in institutions or kept at home? as cultures are all different in how they feel about such things, and how they treat such individuals, I am genuinely curious. Does Switzerland have the equivalent of the US "ADA" laws?
8
I remember seeing a bumper sticker saying something like "I am not required to pay for your problems,." I assume that includes healthcare. Maybe that person gets healthcare from the VAor Medicare -- which all of us pay for with taxes? If Congress cuts medical care, won't we pay for the medical care of the uninsured when they go to the emergency room -- which, through their hospitals, will pass costs on to the rest of us by increased insurance premiums?
I believe it makes sense to directly help people who need medical care -- rather than though a cost shift. Let's remember that we're all in the same boat, all here to help each other "for the common good "
I believe it makes sense to directly help people who need medical care -- rather than though a cost shift. Let's remember that we're all in the same boat, all here to help each other "for the common good "
61
And I bet if that individual has the bad luck of getting sick and needing state of the art treatment and drugs (no one in this country could afford this except the top .1% ) They would watch their family members pursue every possible option for them, including asking for help from others or asking for some form of charity because they cannot imagine life without their family member. And Im certain they drive on roads, and will take Medicare and SS when available. Im sorta disgusted with this rugged individual attitude in this country as it seems to encourage selfishness, greed, and the lack of knowledge that our society benefits when everyone is safe, healthy and prosperous.
1
I'm pretty sure people like the Kochs or Mercers would be happy to get their tax breaks--an extra boat or Mercedes--while people like Frances ZleBellbsnd others described here languish in a preMedicaid existence from hell.
Which is why they're counting on Mitch McConnell to help them out.
Isn't it sick how discussion of the Senate replacement bill rarely includes any ideas to use that tax break money to plow into the post-ACA healthcare system instead of helping rich folks add another million to their pile?
Which is why they're counting on Mitch McConnell to help them out.
Isn't it sick how discussion of the Senate replacement bill rarely includes any ideas to use that tax break money to plow into the post-ACA healthcare system instead of helping rich folks add another million to their pile?
124
The Republicans are despicable people.
But we all know that...
But we all know that...
1
Fiscal sustainability of the Medicaid-an open-ended entitlement programme for the millions of poor, disabled, and vulnerable-is the main concern for the fiscal austerity hawks and diehard Republicans, but not the theft of precious public resources by the rich and the weapon dealers. How long the Republican conservatives would continue deceiving the public with their hollow claims of representativeness? Sooner than later this bluff will be called.
47
to withold finacial, social and physical help to these people is cruel and unjust. we all benefit from compassion.
47
I've always wondered why we don't just increase, as needed, the social security and Medicare payroll taxes paid by employees and employers to ensure adequate funding for escalating retirement and medical costs. If I'm not mistaken each party is responsible at 6.2% for social security and 1.45% for Medicare. That seems like a small amount (total 15.3%) when considering the overall benefit one receives during their lifetime.
Why not start raising them incrementally each year, as needed, to cover these future anticipated costs. Also, an additional small designated tax percentage could be added for Medicaid benefits as well to cover the employee if needed in the future. This would at least cover a large portion of the population, as well as provide additional funding for low income and disabled persons, as not all persons will use their benefits.
I know the Republican Party is against all tax increases, but they must realize to ensure the well being of our country and population these are basic requirements for modern functioning society . They should keep in mind, additional benefit payments still go back into the economy, supporting most small businesses and corporations.
Why not start raising them incrementally each year, as needed, to cover these future anticipated costs. Also, an additional small designated tax percentage could be added for Medicaid benefits as well to cover the employee if needed in the future. This would at least cover a large portion of the population, as well as provide additional funding for low income and disabled persons, as not all persons will use their benefits.
I know the Republican Party is against all tax increases, but they must realize to ensure the well being of our country and population these are basic requirements for modern functioning society . They should keep in mind, additional benefit payments still go back into the economy, supporting most small businesses and corporations.
28
Sorry, but 15.3% is plenty. In NYC we pay over half our salary to taxes and SSI and such.
10
In Europe people pay more taxes but they get free medical care, education, and retirement. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. We can pay less and get less, as we are doing now, or we can pay more and get more.
34
This is indeed the BEST way to fund these programs. SS and Medicare amounts cut off after incomes at 150K or close, if I am not mistaken. If every earner kept paying these taxes, these programs would be fully funded.
6
Judging from the deaths of my parents, I probably have between 4 and 12 years of life left. I live in a state that has blocked Medicaid expansion and whose default answer to those seeking help is "no" or "get a job". The stress of all of this Republican heartlessness will probably shorten the number of years I have left. That ought make them happy.
64
Robert, you've hit it on the head. Wyoming has beautiful, lush open spaces, snow capped mountains, majestic prairies and crystalline waters, but also the coldest, cruelest hearts in the US. Their mottos should be "you're on your own" and "Get off my Land". What is it about the less populous, mostly rural societies that are so reluctant to embrace the plights of their neighbors? Why do red meat raising states choose leaders like Dick Cheney and Gianforte? Do they believe people are no different than the cows they raise and butcher for great profit, or are they frightened or stingy or even paranoid in the face of that vast land? How can one live in such a beautiful, open space and feel human need is universal and their is plenty for all to share if we are wise and compassionate? Maybe they are tired from wringing a livelihood out of the hills and streams of America and don't have the opportunity to experience fellow humans in all their infinite variety. Whatever it is, beauty of place is no substitute for barrenness of the soul.
1
I hate to put it this way, but yes it will make Republicans happy. Alan Grayson pegged their plan perfectly: stay healthy or die. Republicans prefer you dead and cheap to alive and costly. They don't worship Jesus. They worship money.
1
It's not just heartless. It's just plain stupid. Cutting Medicaid to give tax-cuts to the rich?!? How very backwards :(
1
I don't know why the Democrats have a hard time devising a "message" that could reinvigorate their party. What about (1) promising to undo EVERYTHING that Trump, his cabinet, and the Republicans have done and (2) taking some inspiration from previous Democrats like FDR (infrastructure, Social Security) and LBJ (Medicare and Medicaid) toward much-needed Medicare for All, shedding all that corporate sponsorship, or step aside and let a citizen-supported Sanders-like candidate eat their lunch.
47
The problem is a portion of the electorate who is convinced by the Right that a robust social safety net is "socialism" that will threaten their freedom. That, and talking sane taxation is an absolute third rail. I don't know what the solution is when people would rather be ignorant than challenged to think.
1
Spending is not going to decline under the Republican plan, it is not going to grow as fast as it would under the current law. At least 30% is going to fraud, so it would be cost effective to audit the current spending to eliminate those people who are working off-the-books and are earning too much to be eligible. Or to have the able bodies childless adults become ineligible.
7
And your evidence of a 30% fraud rate?
And spending on a per person basis will decline, when you account for inflation, and the growth of an aging population.
And spending on a per person basis will decline, when you account for inflation, and the growth of an aging population.
14
Do you have a citation on that fraud claim you're making?
A you obviously have not been paying attention to the a Republicans for very long. The ultimate goal is to end, not reduce, but completely terminate all social programs-Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, housing assistance, etc.
For over 40 years I have watched and listened to Republican complain about and plan the demise of the social safety net as if to do so will eliminate poverty.
For over 40 years I have watched and listened to Republican complain about and plan the demise of the social safety net as if to do so will eliminate poverty.
Let's keep it simple, folks. Stop bellyaching about the GOP. Republicans are what they are, and we all know what that is.
Instead, start pushing HARD for single payer, Medicare for all. Push hard enough that the corporate Democrats are pushed completely out of the way -- in other words, take over the Democratic Party and make single payer its platform.
The real work begins now.
Instead, start pushing HARD for single payer, Medicare for all. Push hard enough that the corporate Democrats are pushed completely out of the way -- in other words, take over the Democratic Party and make single payer its platform.
The real work begins now.
73
The unions, particularly the civil servants, are not going to give up their taxpayer paid health insurance in exchange for Medicaid. That is why the Democrats did not pass single payer in 2010.
Medicare has a 20% co-pay and no out of pocket maximum. It is also not going to be popular with the 49% of the population that has employer provided health insurance..
Medicare has a 20% co-pay and no out of pocket maximum. It is also not going to be popular with the 49% of the population that has employer provided health insurance..
6
Yes the federal government does pay 70% of health insurance premiums for civil servants. Civil servants pay the remaining 30%. Yes this is very generous. This is one way of attracting and keeping skilled individuals. I worked for the federal government for 33 years and do not regret a minute of it. Contracting work out supposedly saves money, but it actually does not because the government is paying salary and benefits to the contractor. In addition the contracting company has to make a profit.
13
Universal single payor has no premiums or co-pays for anyone. Employees with additional benefits, outside of universal medicare, would keep them, but outside of universal coverage. Likely employers would pay for those, as they do now.
The reason this makes no sense to the average citizen is because they don't really understand how Republicans are funded for office and where their loyalties are. As a result of the 2010 Citizens United decision and the 2014 McCutcheon decision congressmen can receive unlimited secret money. The Republicans are simply trying to create the best health care system for their secret donors NOT Americans in general.
55
Hillary raised three to four times as much dark money as Trump, and was unsuccessful at buying the election.
ObamaCare was designed to satisfy the big medicine cronies, not to provide healthcare to the people.
The average Democrat has been gruberized. Democrats sell their programs on a false narrative, leading their followers to believe that the clean power plan will reduce CO2 and that sending two planeloads of currency to Iran will result in peace.
ObamaCare was designed to satisfy the big medicine cronies, not to provide healthcare to the people.
The average Democrat has been gruberized. Democrats sell their programs on a false narrative, leading their followers to believe that the clean power plan will reduce CO2 and that sending two planeloads of currency to Iran will result in peace.
1
In Ohio late Friday night, Governor Kasich--one of the governors who has fought hardest for Medicaid expansion--had to exercise his line item veto power to save Medicaid funding from a freeze that many state Republicans tried to impose on expansion enrollments.
Those funds are, among other things, critical to the state's efforts fighting opiate addiction.
"The legislature put $170 million in for opiates -- we don't want to take away the almost $300 million [Medicaid dollars] that would be used in addition," Kasich said shortly after using his line veto power, then signing the bill.
There is a risk that the legislature may override the Governor's veto next week.
Those funds are, among other things, critical to the state's efforts fighting opiate addiction.
"The legislature put $170 million in for opiates -- we don't want to take away the almost $300 million [Medicaid dollars] that would be used in addition," Kasich said shortly after using his line veto power, then signing the bill.
There is a risk that the legislature may override the Governor's veto next week.
33
To those wondering why more people don't care about the welfare of our vulnerable citizens: if you don't produce money or aren't already wealthy, you are NOT WORTH ANYTHING. There is no humanity. Follow the money. You won't find medicaid recipients at the end of the line.
26
Citizens are worth about $30,000/yr for governments. That's approximately how much money gov. spends per capita. One would think that gov. by the people
would first fund healthcare and education out of that $30,000 per capita that it spends in citizens' names.
The public needs to wake up and see what is going on.
would first fund healthcare and education out of that $30,000 per capita that it spends in citizens' names.
The public needs to wake up and see what is going on.
1
Families, not the government, should take care of their loved ones in need.
Welfare should be available only when a family's resources are exhausted.
Welfare should be available only when a family's resources are exhausted.
13
Educate yourself. Medicaid for the elderly is after the person's "resources are exhausted". 2/3 of people in nursing homes are on Medicaid.
Are your elderly parents or relatives being taken care of by you?
Are your elderly parents or relatives being taken care of by you?
41
The commenter urged that Medicaid be available only when the family's resources are exhausted. You responded by stating that Medicaid, for the elderly, is available only when the person's resources are exhausted.
In other words, you were not responsive.
In other words, you were not responsive.
4
Of course families should take care of their own. But many people a) don't have families, b) are related to people who have no resources to share, and/ or c) suffer enormous financial and personal burdens from having to care for their sick family members. In the case I think you're alluding to here, the woman in question who appreciated the help of a caregiver has a disabled brother and an ailing mother. Why should she sacrifice her personal economic stability and the freedom to pursue her desired occupation when, as an incredibly wealthy nation, we have the resources to free her from the bad luck of being born the sister of a disabled individual? Add to that the fact that her brother's caregiver also now has a job. Sounds like the economy is humming along! Let's just hope they caregiver is actually being paid a living wage for all their hard work.
37
Makes me so sad to read these stories.
We are all a heartbeat away from
vulnerability or an unexpected medical
issue. What kind of people are we
if we do not use our government to
provide necessary assistance? Our political
leadership is purposely destabilizing health
insurance. How do these Republicans
live with themselves? Thank you for putting
a human face on the statistics.
We are all a heartbeat away from
vulnerability or an unexpected medical
issue. What kind of people are we
if we do not use our government to
provide necessary assistance? Our political
leadership is purposely destabilizing health
insurance. How do these Republicans
live with themselves? Thank you for putting
a human face on the statistics.
75
Karen,
Here's a fun statistic for you to consider about Medicaid:
The U.S. spent approximately $20 billion in 1970 dollars ($110 billion in 2010 dollars) for the first 15 years funding the Apollo Space Program. We now spend approximately $449 billion annually on Medicaid alone. So every year we spend four times more on Medicaid than the total 15 years spent to land a man on the moon.
I'm not saying putting a man on the moon was a good thing or a bad thing, but EVERY SINGLE YEAR U.S. taxpayers are spending four times that amount on free health care for life for one in five Americans who now receive Medicaid.
How much is enough, and how much is too much?
80% of taxpayers can not continue to fund free lifetime health care for the 20% non-tax paying, non-voting, uneducated people. We can't continue to say it's about keeping people alive. They have to have some responsibility keeping themselves alive also.
Here's a fun statistic for you to consider about Medicaid:
The U.S. spent approximately $20 billion in 1970 dollars ($110 billion in 2010 dollars) for the first 15 years funding the Apollo Space Program. We now spend approximately $449 billion annually on Medicaid alone. So every year we spend four times more on Medicaid than the total 15 years spent to land a man on the moon.
I'm not saying putting a man on the moon was a good thing or a bad thing, but EVERY SINGLE YEAR U.S. taxpayers are spending four times that amount on free health care for life for one in five Americans who now receive Medicaid.
How much is enough, and how much is too much?
80% of taxpayers can not continue to fund free lifetime health care for the 20% non-tax paying, non-voting, uneducated people. We can't continue to say it's about keeping people alive. They have to have some responsibility keeping themselves alive also.
2
In 2008 Oregon expanded Medicaid, but didn't have enough money to cover everyone. A lottery decided who received and who didn't receive Medicaid coverage.
After two years a study found that those with Medicaid were no more healthy than those without.
After two years a study found that those with Medicaid were no more healthy than those without.
8
Some of the results of that study surprised people but when you read about the criteria used to measure improvements in health they are up for debate.
For instance, how do you really measure the impact of getting a relatively small number of people treated for diabetes?
SOME people did start getting treatment that would not have happened without the Medicaid.
There are SOME people out there not getting treated who will suffer much more profoundly as the years go by.
This was just a 2 year study. How would things have looked after 5 or 10 years?
Plus the people with Medicaid did not have as many unpaid bills and financial stress which eventually does make you sick. People don't even eat right when stressed and avoiding phone calls from bill collectors, their self esteem craters and they start to drink more or look to other ways to escape their realities.
It's a fact that 10's of millions of Americans are not as healthy as their parents or grandparents were.
A lot of people need health care more than ever since the economic pinnings of their middle class lives are cratering.
The same thing happened in Scotland and Northern England. Drinking, drugs, marital problems including abuse all increased dramatically when the industrial economy fell apart.
For instance, how do you really measure the impact of getting a relatively small number of people treated for diabetes?
SOME people did start getting treatment that would not have happened without the Medicaid.
There are SOME people out there not getting treated who will suffer much more profoundly as the years go by.
This was just a 2 year study. How would things have looked after 5 or 10 years?
Plus the people with Medicaid did not have as many unpaid bills and financial stress which eventually does make you sick. People don't even eat right when stressed and avoiding phone calls from bill collectors, their self esteem craters and they start to drink more or look to other ways to escape their realities.
It's a fact that 10's of millions of Americans are not as healthy as their parents or grandparents were.
A lot of people need health care more than ever since the economic pinnings of their middle class lives are cratering.
The same thing happened in Scotland and Northern England. Drinking, drugs, marital problems including abuse all increased dramatically when the industrial economy fell apart.
41
To Loyd Eskildson, Phoenix, AZ -- A study? What study? Any study can reach any conclusion anyone wants, it just depends on how you set up the study and how it is administered. Any ONE study doesn't tell anyone anything.
25
There are simply too many variables for the results of that study to be seen as a foregone conclusion. People and their lifestyles vary widely and two years is too short a time to even get an accurate measure of how healthy or unhealthy a single individual is or will be in the future, much less attempting to compare them to each other.
2
People on Medicaid genuinely need the help. They are the least of us, the elderly and disabled. If we cut back on Medicaid spending people will die. Are we really that cruel, I guess we're about to find out.
93
There are able bodied childless college graduate adults living with their prosperous parents who are receiving food stamps and Medicaid. There are wealthy people who "Medicaid plan" so that they will use taxpayer money to pay for their home health aides and nursing homes rather than their own money.
People re not going to die if Medicaid is not permitted to grow as fast as possible.
The Republican plan does not reduce Medicaid spending. It allows Medicaid to grow at a slower rate.
People re not going to die if Medicaid is not permitted to grow as fast as possible.
The Republican plan does not reduce Medicaid spending. It allows Medicaid to grow at a slower rate.
8
If you know of people ripping off the medicaid system you should turn them in. It is illegal for them to do that.
If everyone who claims to know of medicaid and other health care fraud reported it to the government, we could proably afford lower premium prices.
If everyone who claims to know of medicaid and other health care fraud reported it to the government, we could proably afford lower premium prices.
12
You are partially right about the Medicaid planning. Some wealthy people avoid spending down their money for nursing homes so they can leave it to their heirs. Part of the problem is this -- if you enter a nursing home your money will be spent down to virtually nothing, after which they start in on your SPOUSE's money, even if it was earned separately. Your SPOUSE then lives in poverty for the rest of her days. None of this means we throw the people in this article under the bus. We are smart enough to fix the program, and we should do that. This business of throwing the baby out with the bathwater every time there's an issue is a smokescreen for wealth transfer from the poor and working-classes to the wealthy.
3
Rep Paul Ryan dreamed of ending Medicaid at fraternity keggees during college, which for him was financed by Medicare survivor benefits since his father had died.
Rather paying forward the favor afforded him by his country, he dreamed of killing the poor and lower middle class (working or disabled) -- a true blue nephew of his aunt Ayn Rand (her magnus opus - "The Virtue of Selfishness").
Rather paying forward the favor afforded him by his country, he dreamed of killing the poor and lower middle class (working or disabled) -- a true blue nephew of his aunt Ayn Rand (her magnus opus - "The Virtue of Selfishness").
181
He isn't literally a nephew of Ayn Rand, is he? Is that Medicare survivor benefits or Social Security survivor benefits?
14
Stating that Ryan dreamed of killing people degrades the discussion, no matter how many commenters recommend it. Stop it.
1
Social Security survior benefits, thanks.
Not real nephew, nephew in sense of George M. Cohen's Yankee Doodle Dandy -- "I'm a true blue nephew of my Uncle Sam, born on the fourth of July."
"
Not real nephew, nephew in sense of George M. Cohen's Yankee Doodle Dandy -- "I'm a true blue nephew of my Uncle Sam, born on the fourth of July."
"
1
Thank you NYT for continuing to be the champion of the people by putting faces on the consequences of the insensitive "work" of elected officials who fail to understand that governing a country involves something more than erasing Obama and punishing Democrats . As taxpayers, if we can fund a white house staff that includes a contestant on a TV show, we can take care of the unfortunate. We need more real bios like these to awaken the true patriots on this Independence Day that these are our neighbors, and the unclothed emperor, along with his friends and family, are responsible for every last one of us.
59
Some people are trying to criticize the media for being obsesses with Russia. True international spying, sleazy financial dealings might make more interesting reading compared to health care which most people don't care about until it affects them or someone they are close to.
I'm glad there are articles like this because more people are in fact deliberating health care, I supported ACA but never knew much about the Medicaid expansion.
I hope the legislative process is forced to become a more bipartisan one and voters, the media and everyone else starts examining what is at stake here.
It's always been a complicated issue, I never really thought much of how differently women are impacted at various stages of their lives once they reach a child bearing age.
And yet the Senate version was written up in secret by 13 Republican white men.
I think the US desperately needs a long hot summer hashing everything out instead of a secretly and quickly drafted piece rammed through the system right before a big summer holiday.
People keep touting the fact that the Republicans control so many state and local branches of government but it is Republican governors from some big and moderate sized states that are putting pressure on Washington to deal with the effects of changes in Medicaid coverage.
I'm glad there are articles like this because more people are in fact deliberating health care, I supported ACA but never knew much about the Medicaid expansion.
I hope the legislative process is forced to become a more bipartisan one and voters, the media and everyone else starts examining what is at stake here.
It's always been a complicated issue, I never really thought much of how differently women are impacted at various stages of their lives once they reach a child bearing age.
And yet the Senate version was written up in secret by 13 Republican white men.
I think the US desperately needs a long hot summer hashing everything out instead of a secretly and quickly drafted piece rammed through the system right before a big summer holiday.
People keep touting the fact that the Republicans control so many state and local branches of government but it is Republican governors from some big and moderate sized states that are putting pressure on Washington to deal with the effects of changes in Medicaid coverage.
18
The agenda from most to least important.
1. Republican pride and hubris
2. Blow up Obama's plan
3. Pretend to listen to Americans and their needs and worries
4. To make America even more mediocre again
National health insurance rivals FDR's programs in size and relative cost. To exclude Americans from the discussion is cynical and immoral. From a more practical viewpoint, I'm paying for it and it's my right to look under the hood.
1. Republican pride and hubris
2. Blow up Obama's plan
3. Pretend to listen to Americans and their needs and worries
4. To make America even more mediocre again
National health insurance rivals FDR's programs in size and relative cost. To exclude Americans from the discussion is cynical and immoral. From a more practical viewpoint, I'm paying for it and it's my right to look under the hood.
30
The only reason I hope the bill passes is so that Repubs are forced to own it.
14
The Republicans lied to us or made a horrendous mistake in deciding to go to war with Iraq based on info that certain WMDs were manufactured and stored in Iraq. They were not forced to own that, what makes you think they will own this?
2
I get it, but at the cost of how many peoples' lives?
3
I often think that, too, Barbara, but I am petrified for people who will suffer and die from this cruelty. On the one hand, you want the fall out upon the republicans to be so swift and brutal, (if they pass this atrocity) that they are forced to go and hide under the rocks from under which they crawled out...but people are going to be in abject fear and hysteria if they cannot get health care, and the consequences are going to be horrific.
2
On top of the moral objections readers are offering is also the fact that the would-be oligarchs want to distract all of us from their most heinous plot of all, namely, to wrest total control of the government (and hence, the economy) away from the people. Vote suppression, gerrymandering, and a stacked Supreme Court will, if successful, combine to lock the bevy of billionaires -- the Koch brothers, Sheldon Adelson and all the others -- into power.
42
Democrats cynically added the Medicaid expansion to Obamacare so that there would be a huge outcry by the press when the repeal happened. Here we are.
The states that expanded Medicaid and their press friends bet that it would continue untouched. They lost the bet, game over.
The states that expanded Medicaid and their press friends bet that it would continue untouched. They lost the bet, game over.
7
Helping people get healthcare is not cynicism!
Ever heard of compassion?
Ever heard of compassion?
62
Expanding Medicare to cover able bodied childless adults, who have average medical costs of $800/year, for which we are paying Medicaid insurers $3000/year was a gambit to make a misleading increase in the number of insured and to make a gift to the insurers who administer the state Medicaid programs.
Ever heard of a false narrative? Ever heard of Gruber? Do you realize that big medicine was the intended beneficiary? Ever heard of Democrats taking money from working people and giving it to their friends?
Ever heard of a false narrative? Ever heard of Gruber? Do you realize that big medicine was the intended beneficiary? Ever heard of Democrats taking money from working people and giving it to their friends?
3
You seem to be making a lot of unsubstantiated accusations. It would be helpful if you would substantiate all these claims. Actually, I have never heard of any of those things. Perhaps you could tell us where you heard them.
10
With regard to the strikingly mean-spirited notion that some people belong to the "surplus population," I think the Republican politicians and right-wing corporate executives look at this article and say to themselves: "It's bad enough these people don't build our wealth like healthy people do, so why would we compound that problem and spend money on them...It's like feeding the birds, we're throwing away good money, and all we end up with are fat birds." (This fat birds bit is from Mary Poppins.)
The more technology advances and people rely on it to live day to day, they essentially become more and more needy. I think our great grandparents and their ancestors of the past would look at modern people living in suburbs and cities today as hopelessly unskilled and reliant the way people with disabilities are reliant on help to live day to day. I don't intend to denigrate people with disabilities by comparing them to modern people who can do very little for themselves beyond pushing buttons at work and shopping, but I understand if they are offended.
The skills people have today are extremely specific, patronizing and are the result of an extraordinary division of labor and high technology. When we have lost work due to technology, and artificially intelligent robots do the vast majority of work, we'll be on the sidelines with no way to earn a living and go shopping. We'll be like those who need help because we can't help ourselves and instead of Medicaid, we'll want welfare.
The more technology advances and people rely on it to live day to day, they essentially become more and more needy. I think our great grandparents and their ancestors of the past would look at modern people living in suburbs and cities today as hopelessly unskilled and reliant the way people with disabilities are reliant on help to live day to day. I don't intend to denigrate people with disabilities by comparing them to modern people who can do very little for themselves beyond pushing buttons at work and shopping, but I understand if they are offended.
The skills people have today are extremely specific, patronizing and are the result of an extraordinary division of labor and high technology. When we have lost work due to technology, and artificially intelligent robots do the vast majority of work, we'll be on the sidelines with no way to earn a living and go shopping. We'll be like those who need help because we can't help ourselves and instead of Medicaid, we'll want welfare.
5
Build up a fake argument for someone else, and then argue that they are wrong. Perhaps it would be helpful if you had a clue about what conservative opinions are.
1
Hey ebmem,
You can pretend to ignore the past 40 years of conservative Republican political acts, but everyone else, including Ryan, McConnel, Pence and their predecessors know that is exactly their argument and modus operandi. Have you not heard of their bible "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand? I know there are some compassionate conservatives out there in society, but most of us would just call them closeted liberals.
You can pretend to ignore the past 40 years of conservative Republican political acts, but everyone else, including Ryan, McConnel, Pence and their predecessors know that is exactly their argument and modus operandi. Have you not heard of their bible "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand? I know there are some compassionate conservatives out there in society, but most of us would just call them closeted liberals.
1
Interesting that the article focuses on Alabama instead of a state like NY or even Texas or Florida. Few states are more penurious with Medicaid dollars. With that said, Alabama does offer optional services that are not required even under the ACA, so there's no reason to think they'll jettison them if they are faced with federal caps.
More to the point is the question of where all the money will come from if we make no changes to Medicaid, Medicare, and social security. Taxes on people in the "comfortable
More to the point is the question of where all the money will come from if we make no changes to Medicaid, Medicare, and social security. Taxes on people in the "comfortable
7
Being optional, these services are, in fact, highly at risk of being cut when federal dollars stop flowing in the future at the same rate they are now. The state will have to find savings somewhere.
16
I assume you didn't mean to submit your comment so soon.
"Taxes on people in the 'comfortable'..."
What? Rich people should pay more in taxes. A lot more. Tell me why I am wrong. It cannot be because they "earned it". My taxes, the infrastructure and military it pays for, my CHEAP labor all helped them make that money.
"Taxes on people in the 'comfortable'..."
What? Rich people should pay more in taxes. A lot more. Tell me why I am wrong. It cannot be because they "earned it". My taxes, the infrastructure and military it pays for, my CHEAP labor all helped them make that money.
38
In NY, the state government would cut optional services and blame it on the federal government. In a state like Alabama, they refused to insure able bodied childless adults so that there would be funds for things like helping someone who had profound physical disabilities would be able to attend college. Different places, different priorities.
In NYS, IVF is considered an essential service that insurers must cover so that wealthy people who waited until they were in their late 30's to have children can socialize the $20,000 per try cost. No the case in red states.
In NYS, IVF is considered an essential service that insurers must cover so that wealthy people who waited until they were in their late 30's to have children can socialize the $20,000 per try cost. No the case in red states.
2
In the GOP's eyes the greatest sin is to be poor, elderly, and sick. For you are seen as a drain on our nation's economy. If they could pass a law where if you over the age of 65, and below or at the poverty line then they would have you killed. In essence this is what their version of healthcare bill would do. They rather save a dollar than save a life.
34
And, even worse, it was so many elderly voters who put the idiot in the White House. They get government benefits and then say they hate the government because they watch too much Fox News. So sad.
2
This cynicism, while fashionable, destroys the very idea of debate. So much of it comes from the left. If the other side is not only wrong, but immoral, the holy war is on.
Let's not forget how SCOTUS helped this attack on Medicaid by stopping the mandatory ACA expansion. It's the poor states who refused it who are leading the charge, not the poor states who accepted it (let alone the blue states).
If you live in a blue state, and want to see the future: you will end up like Alabama (or Mississippi or Texas) if the Republicans get their way.
I feel sick thinking about how the poor are treated in those states, let alone the disabled. The only word to describe the intentional limiting of opportunities and causing of human misery to defenseless and innocent people like that is evil.
If you live in a blue state, and want to see the future: you will end up like Alabama (or Mississippi or Texas) if the Republicans get their way.
I feel sick thinking about how the poor are treated in those states, let alone the disabled. The only word to describe the intentional limiting of opportunities and causing of human misery to defenseless and innocent people like that is evil.
26
These GOP proposals remind me of the WW2 Germans' methods of dealing with their undesirables, only in slow motion.
61
To Hector in Bellflower--your comment really sums it up better than anything I have yet seen. I hadn't thought of this but, yes, and it leaves a sinking feeling in my stomach. Is there anything we can do to stop this? Are we all helpless to stop this?
2
This article illustrates what's truly wrong in our country, namely that the very people elected on slogans such as "repeal and replace" stand ready and willing to do conscious harm to other Americans in need.
Donald Trump and his ilk in the GOP pander to the worst instincts in our ever-increasing society of "meanness." Contrary to those who pontificate that health care is not a basic American right, the Constitution guarantees "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
As McConnell, Ryan and the GOP race to the bottom to see who can put the most lipstick on this pig of a healthcare bill they, and those *they* hold dear, should be made to face Ms. Isbell and live a day in her shoes.
Donald Trump and his ilk in the GOP pander to the worst instincts in our ever-increasing society of "meanness." Contrary to those who pontificate that health care is not a basic American right, the Constitution guarantees "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
As McConnell, Ryan and the GOP race to the bottom to see who can put the most lipstick on this pig of a healthcare bill they, and those *they* hold dear, should be made to face Ms. Isbell and live a day in her shoes.
349
I see health care in the same light as educating our children. We are "mandated" to educate our children and we all pay whether or not we have children or children in school. Why? Because it is good for society, community and economy. Healthy people can work and take care of themselves and their families. It just makes good sense on many levels. Also, this proposed bill addresses health care AND gives a big tax break. Why are these tied together and why do we not see that keeping people well allows them to be productive and is part of the greater good.
2
Yes, "live a day in their shoes." I heartily agree. What if Trump, along with those who are drafting this health care, (really a "sick care" bill, give up an afternoon of golf, and instead invest their time and understanding of what real people are facing by going go to visit a nursing home, assisted living, or memory care center, to be there for their constituents.
2
For the indifferent, Trump will come for you next. Many of his hand picked "advisors" want to tax your company medical plans, an effective salary cut.
It can happen to you.
It can happen to you.
58
The Con Don and Robber Barons want millions to die. More for them.
Looking back at history The Con Don is no accident. America was founded by those who either wanted to get rich quick or escape "government". Many were at the bottom of the heap of humanity. Crooks and con artists had a free run to steal from everyone else and "the wild west" was glorified along with the mafia and other "lawbreakers".
Lincoln, FDR and other socially conscious citizens worked hard to save the country - The United States of America. Now The Con Don and his Robber Barons - and their operatives on OUR Supreme Court of the United States - are intent on destroying every social good WE have built with sweat and OUR taxpayer money and belief that America is something grand - something better than other government constructs.
Democracy is not a spectator sport. It's a living, breathing ever-changing thing and WE must protect it if we really believe in it. It is time for another massive Women's March to Get Out The Vote for every election from this day forward before they can further stifle voter participation. We must make people aware of the danger America and the world are facing with would-be dictators trying to take over in every corner of the world.
Looking back at history The Con Don is no accident. America was founded by those who either wanted to get rich quick or escape "government". Many were at the bottom of the heap of humanity. Crooks and con artists had a free run to steal from everyone else and "the wild west" was glorified along with the mafia and other "lawbreakers".
Lincoln, FDR and other socially conscious citizens worked hard to save the country - The United States of America. Now The Con Don and his Robber Barons - and their operatives on OUR Supreme Court of the United States - are intent on destroying every social good WE have built with sweat and OUR taxpayer money and belief that America is something grand - something better than other government constructs.
Democracy is not a spectator sport. It's a living, breathing ever-changing thing and WE must protect it if we really believe in it. It is time for another massive Women's March to Get Out The Vote for every election from this day forward before they can further stifle voter participation. We must make people aware of the danger America and the world are facing with would-be dictators trying to take over in every corner of the world.
24
What you are against is called feudalism.
4
An article in Wapo stated that the "Justice" Dept. switched from the previous Administration's position of defending workers' rights in three cases before the Supreme Court. They are now supporting the corporations against the workers. Trump's bogus voter "fraud" outfit wants to compile the personal info of American voters and use it for more voter suppression. Now your online info can be sold to anyone. Rivers and lakes can now be polluted with no restrictions. Immigrants can be dragged off in cuffs in front of their children. Are we great yet? RESIST!!!
2
This business of the Trump team wanting to get copies of all the voter lists from all the states and all of the people's addresses and Social Security Numbers is REALLY Scary!!!
3
If you are going to take away someones health care and relegate them to die, you might want to take their guns too.
22
No Daniel...The GOP wants to leave their guns with them, because when they are so sick, cannot get health care, and are relegated to die, they can take out their gun, and blow their brains out, thus alleviating their suffering. Or kill their sick family member or friend to alleviate THEIR suffering.
3
Republicans call themselves the right to life party. Unless youre already born. Then you only have the right to die.
43
I said to a republican
"I just don't hear a lot of compassion in their policies."
She replied
"Compassion is for losers."
End of conversation.
"I just don't hear a lot of compassion in their policies."
She replied
"Compassion is for losers."
End of conversation.
44
What a terrible place America must be to live in now - governed by a mob devoid of all compassion.
1
The common complaint among those who want to ax expansion of medicare is that it will increase the deficit. See Stephen Brill in today's WaPo. He focuses on cost cutting via negotiation with pharmaceuticals and hospitals. By negotiating we can drop costs significantly. It's what all other Western countries do.
15
Yes, Lhistorian, but if you negotiate prices, the politicians will not get their pay offs anymore. They do NOT want to negotiate prices because the big health care corporations, and big pharmaceutical companies PAY THEM OFF to keep prices high for us. That is the name of the game. Yes, this is A GAME to them, and the game is to keep them and their rich cronies in the money, and see how many of us they can wipe out in the process. IT IS PURE EVIL.
3
"There's a fundamental antipathy to spending the public purse on health care services for poor people..." said the Director of Alabama's Disability Advocacy Program.
That says it all.
Many of the citizens of Alabama, a poor red state which gets over $3 in federal aid for every $1 it pays in taxes, benefit from government help. Apparently they don't mind that much accepting money from the public purse.
Do these conservative voters realize how dependent they are on government support? Or is it a question of, I've got mine (and I deserve it) but you deserve the same?
The ignorance and selfishness of these people is deplorable.
That says it all.
Many of the citizens of Alabama, a poor red state which gets over $3 in federal aid for every $1 it pays in taxes, benefit from government help. Apparently they don't mind that much accepting money from the public purse.
Do these conservative voters realize how dependent they are on government support? Or is it a question of, I've got mine (and I deserve it) but you deserve the same?
The ignorance and selfishness of these people is deplorable.
25
I would imagine that cuts in these programs will begin to address then lessen that 3:1 ratio. That's a good thing. A very good thing.
5
Eric: when liberals criticize red states for "taking more than their share"....this is precisely what the money is going for. Red states have more poor people, and more people in Medicaid -- AND more elderly, therefore more folks on Medicare and SSI and Medicaid in nursing homes.
The monies are going for the exact things that the liberals WANT -- and yet the mock red states for doing precisely what liberals want them to do.
The monies are going for the exact things that the liberals WANT -- and yet the mock red states for doing precisely what liberals want them to do.
2
Concerned, You got that wrong. We liberals are not mocking red states for taking more than they give in federal dollars. We know they need the support and are fine with that. What we object to is the foolishness, hypocrisy, and ignorance of red staters for their "antipathy to spending the public purse" when they benefit so directly from it. They are biting the hand that feeds them.
1
Republicans see Medicaid as a welfare program. That's the problem. And one that benefits too many minorities for their taste.
21
Constitution - wants us to "provide for the General welfare"
Does the GOP not like the words of the Constitution?
Does the GOP not like the words of the Constitution?
1
A lot of information about projected "cuts" to Medicaid but no mention of what the Obamacare Medicaid expansion has actually cost. We have a few years' data now. Nor is there any comparison of the actual costs to the projected costs.
How can you have an honest discussion about a program without mentioning its costs? Seriously, NYT, you have to do better.
How can you have an honest discussion about a program without mentioning its costs? Seriously, NYT, you have to do better.
5
Please complain as well about the costs of Trumpcare- in the lost potential in our population's people.
We do know that millions will be without care. As you can see in this article, having a disabled body does not always mean one has a disabled mind. These folks' contributions also have value to the culture. Someone who is finishing their law degree is not a warehoused body.
We do know that millions will be without care. As you can see in this article, having a disabled body does not always mean one has a disabled mind. These folks' contributions also have value to the culture. Someone who is finishing their law degree is not a warehoused body.
16
Lost potential? McKinsey estimates that 40% of jobs will be eliminated by 2030.
2
The University of Alabama is a rather conservative school in a very conservative state. Their national representatives are all Republicans. Their governor is a Republican. That is not Ms. Isbell's fault. I do want to know what her extended family's political views are. My experience tells me they look at her situation as being good for people like here and that it would not change. After all, she worked hard so she deserves the aid. They probably don't realize that when they vote for Republicans (and, yes, they do. Maybe not her parents, but I used to live in the state next door. They voted for Trump and the Republicans) they are endangering their relative's future. They are too narrow minded. They are too concerned with race. They are too blind to the Truth. Yes, I am making an assumption about her extended family, but I am probably right. If you have lived in that part of the country you are nodding in agreement as you read this. On that note, let us not forget Trump's mocking of the disabled.
21
Absolutely. There are one or two people like that in my family even though THEIR OWN SON is on the spectrum and gets a range of extremely helpful and useful services. It boggles my mind.
25
This important program must remain sustainable. Able bodied individuals finding employment to help pay for this sustainability would help; so would keeping those investment taxes. There should be no reductions in care to disabled people or children, the original beneficiaries of Medicaid. The people mentioned in this article should not receive diminished services or aid.
9
Can someone please help me understand how it is that Republicans, who are generally Christian, so they like to say, and follow the teachings of their Jesus, go to their church and worship their Jesus one day and the rest of the days turn around and treat those much less fortunate than themselves so hatefully by taking away their healthcare, their food stamps and other safety measures? How hypocritical and mean can such a large segment of our population be? The election of these Republicans currently in power demonstrates the severe moral decline of our present society? Do these so called Christians sit in the pew of their church on Sunday and repent that they are so selfish and greedy, hoping that their Jesus will forgive them for being Republican?
26
It's a heretical form of christianity that they believe in.
17
They are not Christian, but it's fun and profitable to proclaim they are.
28
I think that's a Seattle resident's fantasy caricature of heartland Christianity. Christians are not consigned to mutely accept the damage wrought by social liberalism and then scurry to help pick up the pieces on terms dictated by the left.
When the left finally acknowledges the damage caused by abortion, illegitimacy, the destruction of the traditional family unit and devaluation of the institution of marriage, there'll be a lot of Christians who pitch in to make this a better world. They already do.
When the left finally acknowledges the damage caused by abortion, illegitimacy, the destruction of the traditional family unit and devaluation of the institution of marriage, there'll be a lot of Christians who pitch in to make this a better world. They already do.
2
government efficiency is an issue and should seek a solution, but cutting funding is just about as lazy as a solution as one can muster when the cost of readjustment is someone's life.
10
Is this what we really want for our country? Discard the elderly, the poor, the ill regardless of age, all in service of tax cuts for the wealthy. Shame on us.
17
Too bad these folks aren't millionaires or billionaires, because in that case the Republicans would have empathy for them.
Oh well.....
Oh well.....
10
Good article, but the assumption that states will choose to cut services for people such as these is questionable. Willowbrook is still seared in the memory of many and no one wants to see that movie a second time. More likely is a decrease in Medicaid's very expansive benefit package for the non-disabled or a decrease in eligibility among healthy adults without children.
I do not disagree with any of the othe
I do not disagree with any of the othe
5
So, what do you do when your needed care is cut off? You can all thank your new president and the Republican government that you elected.
Maybe a few minutes thinking about that might have been useful before you went and voted last November. Just saying.
Maybe it's time to call your Congressman and Senator and remind them that they were elected to protect the citizens (you) not harm them.
President Trump, Senator McConnell and Representative Ryan all have excellent heath insurance paid for by the citizens of the US. They can afford the best of medical care with no worry of deductibles and pre-existing conditions. Thankfully they are covered by your tax dollars. What about the rest of you.
You might want to give some thought about a universal health care system vice the mish-mash of systems that populate the various states. Your health care system is overly complex and needlessly expensive. Everyone would have a basic right to health care; end of story. It's within your power.
Maybe a few minutes thinking about that might have been useful before you went and voted last November. Just saying.
Maybe it's time to call your Congressman and Senator and remind them that they were elected to protect the citizens (you) not harm them.
President Trump, Senator McConnell and Representative Ryan all have excellent heath insurance paid for by the citizens of the US. They can afford the best of medical care with no worry of deductibles and pre-existing conditions. Thankfully they are covered by your tax dollars. What about the rest of you.
You might want to give some thought about a universal health care system vice the mish-mash of systems that populate the various states. Your health care system is overly complex and needlessly expensive. Everyone would have a basic right to health care; end of story. It's within your power.
20
The Republicans consistently choose funding the military over helping Americans. That's a recipe for disaster because whenever the military gets what they want, they start wars that makes even more people disabled and in need of help.
25
It's not even that they favor the military over medicine. It's just that they are absolutely fine with people suffering. Maybe they even enjoy it. Perhaps it makes them feel better, assuming that they feel at all, which is a big assumption.
13
It is unlikely Medicaid cuts, even if block grants to the States, would hit the folks highlighted here. I think most agree Medicaid is fine for the disabled, that need it, and the elderly, who need it.
It's the people who don't need it that has driven this a program where 1 in 5 within the country is on it and 1 in 2 babies are born under it. It is unfair to the 125 million hard-working families trying to feed and house themselves to add an extra person to their family.
The ACA proved how poorly engineered it was with it's sky-rocketing premiums, co-pays and deductibles. The Medicaid expansion just added icing to the cake.
Better to sweep it all away and start over with a new approach, hopefully, a bipartisan one.
It's the people who don't need it that has driven this a program where 1 in 5 within the country is on it and 1 in 2 babies are born under it. It is unfair to the 125 million hard-working families trying to feed and house themselves to add an extra person to their family.
The ACA proved how poorly engineered it was with it's sky-rocketing premiums, co-pays and deductibles. The Medicaid expansion just added icing to the cake.
Better to sweep it all away and start over with a new approach, hopefully, a bipartisan one.
5
Who are you to say they don't need healthcare?
11
Its, not it's. It's useful to know the difference between a pronoun and a contraction. What the Republicans are trying to sneak though is contraction.
7
Interesting that someone whose handle is "Save the Farms" is passing judgment on who needs and doesn't need Medicaid. I don't suppose you'd know anything about farm subsidies, would you? Talk about burdening the taxpayer...
10
Then-Representative Alan Grayson described the Republican's idea of health care perfectly:
1. Don't get sick.
2. If you do get sick, die quickly.
That's it. That's the entire plan. If you're disabled, if you're poor, if you're sick, the GOP wants you to drop dead as quickly as possible so that you'll no longer be a burden on the system. Because apparently, having "values" means that money is more important than human life.
1. Don't get sick.
2. If you do get sick, die quickly.
That's it. That's the entire plan. If you're disabled, if you're poor, if you're sick, the GOP wants you to drop dead as quickly as possible so that you'll no longer be a burden on the system. Because apparently, having "values" means that money is more important than human life.
38
The Republicans seem to have adopted the Nazi concept of "nutzlose fresser," or useless eaters. In other words, if you are unable to work and produce a profit for your employer due either to age or disability, you should be left to die. Of course the rules change if you are a high-level politician, for example a certain former vice president who received a heart transplant beyond the usual cutoff age--and at the taxpayer's expense.
158
Bullying the very most vulnerable. How Christ like of the Republican Party.
125
Christ, born in a stable, would have been left to die by the GOP.
31
This is a remarkably mean and invidious comment.
The GOP goal of making money off healthcare at every point possible is the problem. People's health should not be up for grabs to the highest bidder, in America.
320
Dear Reader,
Health care is a business. It costs money. What if Walmart operated like health care. "Attention Walmart shoppers. Fill your shopping baskets. Everything is free."
Health care is a product, just like buying a car. Albeit quite an expensive product, especially when you really need it. Admittedly, we could find better ways to fund it (i.e. single payor system), but it's naive to think it's anything more than a business. Medicaid is insurance, that one out of every five Americans qualifies for. That's hundreds of billions of dollars spent every year on a population that does not, or can not work.
Medicaid needs to be repealed and replaced, yet some in Congress are advocating a $45 billion increase over the next ten years.
Health care is a business. It costs money. What if Walmart operated like health care. "Attention Walmart shoppers. Fill your shopping baskets. Everything is free."
Health care is a product, just like buying a car. Albeit quite an expensive product, especially when you really need it. Admittedly, we could find better ways to fund it (i.e. single payor system), but it's naive to think it's anything more than a business. Medicaid is insurance, that one out of every five Americans qualifies for. That's hundreds of billions of dollars spent every year on a population that does not, or can not work.
Medicaid needs to be repealed and replaced, yet some in Congress are advocating a $45 billion increase over the next ten years.
2
God bless Lyndon Johnson!
48
Kelly Ann Conway says they should go to work.
6
If she ends up in jail, her children may need Medicaid.
She could spend all their inheritance on legal fees. And still go to jail.
She could spend all their inheritance on legal fees. And still go to jail.
13
She can give them jobs...pay them to tape her mouth shut. That should be lucrative work.
1
It deeply disturbs me with the full realization of what we have become as a nation . No compassion for those less fortunate. No consideration at all as to the problems that those with physical disabilities are going through. WE have become mean, heartless, and arrogant.
465
Laissez-fair capitalism concentrates wealth in the hands of a relative few, leaving many economic victims in its wake.
Many nations of lesser wealth provide better healthcare for all.
Many nations of lesser wealth provide better healthcare for all.
14
WE have NOT become mean, heartless, and arrogant. We are outnumbered (due to gerrymandering and other dirty tricks) and the terrorists have won. The GOP gleefully does al Qaeda's work of destroying the US, and installing villains into political office. Remember, even Cheney/Bush were actually elected ONCE.
What to do? Act to move toward the promise of what our country should be, or move to a better bet? As for Earth, there is no Plan B. But as for the US?
What to do? Act to move toward the promise of what our country should be, or move to a better bet? As for Earth, there is no Plan B. But as for the US?
15
It is certainly not all of us who have no compassion for the less fortunate. I am distressed over this republican death care bill to the point where I often cannot function...and it will not affect me. Believe me, I, and I think many of other people, such as yourself, who comment here, are losing sleep over this, and during the daylight hours we are preoccupied with this nightmare. Most of the people who comment here are NOT mean, heartless, and arrogant, but rather kind, moral, and they are hurting and agonized for what is going on that will harm our less fortunate American brethren. For the people who do comment here that are not hurting for the less fortunate, and who are arrogant, heartless, and mean, I don't know how you got to be like you are, but it is nauseating and vile.
1
The Republicans are starting up the death panel as we breath right now.
34
Maybe it's too much of a generalization to point the finger at the billionaire class (as a whole) for the republican attack on medicaid and the poor. Make no mistake though, this isn't standard conservative ideology at play here. This effort is underwritten by (and explicitly for) select members of the ultra-rich, their end goal (seemingly) is to see the poor die or at least live out their remaining lives in misery.
This is the most brutal form of population control imaginable; evil knows no bounds.
This is the most brutal form of population control imaginable; evil knows no bounds.
33
But conservatives go along with this premeditated murder, on the scale of genocide.
9
Yup! No family planning paid for. But no medical care for those who couldn't afford family planning. Then the genocide.
It's insane!
It's insane!
15
Not so long ago, during W's administration, I would bemoan the fact that we lived within a nation that reflected complete spiritual aridity.
During that time, I believed with all my heart that we did.
And, here we are today.
It's a bit different. Now we find ourselves in a nation that cheers on spiritual bludgeoning.
However, in the face of this, there are articles like this that tell stories to make you lean into the challenge of championing the well being of others while protecting and expanding realms of kindness and respect.
During that time, I believed with all my heart that we did.
And, here we are today.
It's a bit different. Now we find ourselves in a nation that cheers on spiritual bludgeoning.
However, in the face of this, there are articles like this that tell stories to make you lean into the challenge of championing the well being of others while protecting and expanding realms of kindness and respect.
5
We must realize that we live on this globe, and that the party is over.
The American Dream was based not on hard work ( ... others work harder and longer hours) but on a fluke of history. At the turn of the 20th century Europe was committing suicide and Asia was on its knees. We had monopoly on capital, skills, and technology.
The terms of trade were in our favor. During 1914-45 they became better. After WWII it was said in the Capitals of Europe that America is so rich that Europe could live well on its throwaways, and Asia is so poor that it could survive on Europe's refuse.
70 years later Asia sits on a pile of cash, Europe ekes out an existence by not having children, and here we are reeling under a mound of debt. Then we were masters, and China, India, Africa were slaves, willing to work on starvation wages, that they refuse to do now.
Asian wealth is based on education that we neglected. Our poor rather than harping for handouts should get education. Our rich should realize that unless they help the poor, their own peace of mind will be a mirage.
Rather than sabre-rattling around the globe we should learn from Asia and live in peace. When we had cash military projection was affordable, and made tactical sense (to protect our wealth). Now, what do we need to protect? Military outreach only hastens impending poverty.
The American Dream was based not on hard work ( ... others work harder and longer hours) but on a fluke of history. At the turn of the 20th century Europe was committing suicide and Asia was on its knees. We had monopoly on capital, skills, and technology.
The terms of trade were in our favor. During 1914-45 they became better. After WWII it was said in the Capitals of Europe that America is so rich that Europe could live well on its throwaways, and Asia is so poor that it could survive on Europe's refuse.
70 years later Asia sits on a pile of cash, Europe ekes out an existence by not having children, and here we are reeling under a mound of debt. Then we were masters, and China, India, Africa were slaves, willing to work on starvation wages, that they refuse to do now.
Asian wealth is based on education that we neglected. Our poor rather than harping for handouts should get education. Our rich should realize that unless they help the poor, their own peace of mind will be a mirage.
Rather than sabre-rattling around the globe we should learn from Asia and live in peace. When we had cash military projection was affordable, and made tactical sense (to protect our wealth). Now, what do we need to protect? Military outreach only hastens impending poverty.
18
The United States sits on a huge pile of cash, most of which is in the hands, of the richest 10%. Time to revert to tax rate of the Eisenhower administration -- 91% at $400,000 in 1955 dollars.
That created the American middle class.
That created the American middle class.
16
Completely accurate and, unfortunately, well-beyond the the comprehension, or the caring, of most Donald Trump supporters. They willingly elected and continue to support a man who is the very face of America's decline.
14
Fine. As long as we return to the welfare, food stamp, Medicaid, Section 8, student loans and SS taxes of that era as well.
3
This is heartbreaking AND infuriating. Satan himself could not devise a better " plan " to abuse and, yes, torture people. Tell me, GOP, should these people just shut up and die??? Or be warehoused in a decrepit
Nursing Home? This is, until even those are closed down.
Please think about your actions when you are sitting in your Church
And may God have mercy on your benighted soul. I surely don't.
Nursing Home? This is, until even those are closed down.
Please think about your actions when you are sitting in your Church
And may God have mercy on your benighted soul. I surely don't.
32
From the outside it looks like Americans are so hung up on any hint of socialism that they refuse to insist on what the rest of the developed world has- something similar to single payer. The national gun fetish seems entrenched too. You guys accept things as normal that the rest of the world thinks are bizarre.
66
It's not normal, believe me! It's crazy that some believe we should live this way.
Fewer and fewer people own guns. Many gun owners have arsenals!
For many of us, living here feels like captives to a system we abhor.
Fewer and fewer people own guns. Many gun owners have arsenals!
For many of us, living here feels like captives to a system we abhor.
10
Not all of us. Some of us are disgusted.
3
Woody Allen, at a recent American Film Institute event honoring Diane Keaton, described the part of California she came from as so conservative that "if you help a blind person across the street, they call you a Socialist." This is the attitude that blocks this country's path to universal healthcare.
14
Great article. If the GOP succeeds in taking away peoples' Medicaid, it will indeed wreak havoc on the lives of many of the most vulnerable Americans.
And, as if that weren't despicable enough, the GOP plan would result in an additional 22 million people losing access to health care coverage. What would the consequences of that be in real life terms? Well an article in last week's New England Journal of Medicine, the medical field's pre-eminent and most highly regarded publication looked at just that question. After analyzing all the relevant data, the conclusion is that approximately 30,000-100,000 people per year would die as a result. Yes, you read that right. That's 1 million additional unnecessary deaths over the next ten years. Then there's the financial insecurity, loss of productivity, increased costs to the health care system, and loss of quality of life and emotional well being that goes along with losing health insurance.
The GOP plan is the most myopic, despicable, most unAmerican bill I have ever seen.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMsb1706645
And, as if that weren't despicable enough, the GOP plan would result in an additional 22 million people losing access to health care coverage. What would the consequences of that be in real life terms? Well an article in last week's New England Journal of Medicine, the medical field's pre-eminent and most highly regarded publication looked at just that question. After analyzing all the relevant data, the conclusion is that approximately 30,000-100,000 people per year would die as a result. Yes, you read that right. That's 1 million additional unnecessary deaths over the next ten years. Then there's the financial insecurity, loss of productivity, increased costs to the health care system, and loss of quality of life and emotional well being that goes along with losing health insurance.
The GOP plan is the most myopic, despicable, most unAmerican bill I have ever seen.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMsb1706645
26
The only answer is a single payer system.
50
Sure. Why should the Republican Senators care about these folks? They are all have comprehensive government (!) health insurance, and none of their billionaire contributors will ever need Medicaid.
"Are there no prisons? And the Union workhouses? Are they still in operation?" Ebenezer Scrooge has nothing on Mitch McConnell and his cohort. If only some ghosts would visit them at night....
"Are there no prisons? And the Union workhouses? Are they still in operation?" Ebenezer Scrooge has nothing on Mitch McConnell and his cohort. If only some ghosts would visit them at night....
20
it's so obvious we need a wealth tax to pay down our debt
15
It makes me physically ill that these white entitled men can make these decisions. Men who have the finest medical care money can buy. They don't want women to have the choice to end a pregnancy when a fetus is defective, and they don't want to pay for the care of the child that results from that pregnancy after it's born. I'm so depressed.
203
Better to be angry than depressed.
8
You are right, Ellen...but I am both. Angry and depressed.
2
What should be limited is how much of our country's economic assets (money) one person can control (wealth). estate taxes are intended to help limit this.
33
Yes, and it's actually only a very small number of people who are subject to inheritance taxes. People whose heirs will still be wealthy, even if much of the inheritance is taxed.
When the GOP tries to pass tax legislation, we need to organize like crazy to oppose their desire to do away with inheritance taxes. It immoral to keep one's immense riches solely for oneself. We are all part of the human family. And we need to share with our extended family.
When the GOP tries to pass tax legislation, we need to organize like crazy to oppose their desire to do away with inheritance taxes. It immoral to keep one's immense riches solely for oneself. We are all part of the human family. And we need to share with our extended family.
15
i have been fortunate enough in life, so far, to not have needed to rely on Medicaid. Probably because of that, I was not aware of how many Americans are dependent on Medicaid. The fact that we are a country that provides needed assistance for so many makes me feel proud to be an American--a feeling I have not experienced in some time.
Now I understand, from reading Ms. Goodnough's article and many others on the subject, how much my quality of life is improved by Medicaid. I am glad that I do not have to live among people whose pain could be lessened if our nation chose to spend more of our wealth on their medical care.
How can anyone care more about having more money than about taking care of our needy? How is such a position morally defensible? I am far from rich but would support paying higher income taxes to support Medicaid.
Now I understand, from reading Ms. Goodnough's article and many others on the subject, how much my quality of life is improved by Medicaid. I am glad that I do not have to live among people whose pain could be lessened if our nation chose to spend more of our wealth on their medical care.
How can anyone care more about having more money than about taking care of our needy? How is such a position morally defensible? I am far from rich but would support paying higher income taxes to support Medicaid.
445
Thanks for patting yourself on the back. Did you vote for Trump, Bush, Reagan?
Medicaid makes you proud to be an American. I'm ashamed that 75 million, one out of every five people in the U.S. qualify for Medicaid, free life-time care, which consumes from one-third to 40% of all states budgets. Money not spent on infrastructure, schools, technology, and science. Often Medicaid costs cover addictions, teenage pregnancies, opioid and drug rehab programs.
Plus this same under-educated, under achieving population are generally irresponsible. I was a community nurse for 25 years, I went into their homes, and saw how squalid the living conditions are. In my state, Medicaid patients were so irresponsible as to not show up for the MD appointments almost 50% of the time, that at one point several years ago, the state offered Medicaid patients a $5.00 coupon good toward any Friendly's ice cream store, just for showing up for their MD appointment. They're getting free medical and weren't even showing up for their free appointments.
The American taxpayer has no idea how foolishly we spend our Medicaid dollars. And some in Congress want to add $45 billion into the new health care legislation. Medicaid needs to be repealed and replaced.
Plus this same under-educated, under achieving population are generally irresponsible. I was a community nurse for 25 years, I went into their homes, and saw how squalid the living conditions are. In my state, Medicaid patients were so irresponsible as to not show up for the MD appointments almost 50% of the time, that at one point several years ago, the state offered Medicaid patients a $5.00 coupon good toward any Friendly's ice cream store, just for showing up for their MD appointment. They're getting free medical and weren't even showing up for their free appointments.
The American taxpayer has no idea how foolishly we spend our Medicaid dollars. And some in Congress want to add $45 billion into the new health care legislation. Medicaid needs to be repealed and replaced.
3
The law student and others are able to pursue a full and appropriate life because of these relatively small benefits. Taking these away would be wasteful of human potential. It would be wonderful for the law student to achieve a seat on the Supreme Court, not just for her, but for all of us.
66
And the sooner, the better!
8
The Trump/GOP budget priorities:
1. Cut taxes for the wealthy.
2. Increase the military budget to kill more people in other countries.
3. Decimate healthcare and other social programs to kill more people in this country.
1. Cut taxes for the wealthy.
2. Increase the military budget to kill more people in other countries.
3. Decimate healthcare and other social programs to kill more people in this country.
257
Spot on.
1
Billions of dollars are wasted as doctors practice defensive medicine. The code word is "just to make sure". Why not, they may treat thousands of cases with care and compassion but that one case could rob them of everything they made since they started practice.
That's where the discussion ought to be - How to reassure the doctors that their life is secure, so they are not going around ordering everything under the sun
That's where the discussion ought to be - How to reassure the doctors that their life is secure, so they are not going around ordering everything under the sun
6
That's their excuse. Greed drives the medical industrial complex. Fear of law suits has little effect. Instead of developing relationships with patients and investing time in conversation, they just do unnecesssary tests and procedures running up big bills with little benefit to patients.
Remember we spend almost twice as much as other countries achieving mediocre results in comparison.
Remember we spend almost twice as much as other countries achieving mediocre results in comparison.
7
None of these examples in the story have anything to do with doctors ordering tests
10
Just ask your primary physician next time you see what their biggest fear is.
There are lot of components to why the spending is high. How about CEO's pay. In a hospital in Upstate NY the CEO makes 7 million a year. Its just not CEO, there is CMO, CNO, CFO, big administrative wing. They get rewarded if they devise better plans to increase revenue. Hey, why should a non profit spend so much on administrative staff.
Also it will help if more people take responsibility to exercise more, quit smoking, eat healthy food, take the medications as prescribed etc.
There are lot of components to why the spending is high. How about CEO's pay. In a hospital in Upstate NY the CEO makes 7 million a year. Its just not CEO, there is CMO, CNO, CFO, big administrative wing. They get rewarded if they devise better plans to increase revenue. Hey, why should a non profit spend so much on administrative staff.
Also it will help if more people take responsibility to exercise more, quit smoking, eat healthy food, take the medications as prescribed etc.
Thank you to these reporters for telling the stories of those who might be affected.
46
Cherry picked very well!
4
Recounting the hopes and challenges of vulnerable, courageous people is not cherry picking, Doctor. There are legions of people in need, in case you didn't notice.
8
Thank you for your compassion, Doctor.
3
Compassionate conservatism, without the compassion . . .
22
Let's rein in what we spend on foreign military adventures.
Doesn't "putting america first" mean we prefer helping our own citizens to destroying the lives and countries of foreigners?
Doesn't "putting america first" mean we prefer helping our own citizens to destroying the lives and countries of foreigners?
565
Agree . We lose all wars and trillions of dollars and still don't change our strategy.
13
@bob: George W. Bush alone squandered $4 trillion on military adventures, including the unjustified invasion of Iraq he lied us into so he could run for re-election as a "War President."
2
'Foreign military adventures' enrich defense corporations, and that is money in the pockets for Republicans, as those industries provide campaign cash and high paying sinecures when they leave Congress. There are no such easy patronage, graft, bribery opportunities or other financial rewards to Republicans for social safety net programs.
2
If Medicaid only paid for help outside of nursing homes since the early 1980's, how did people like this survive prior to 1980?
8
If you read the article the answer to your question should be clear.
7
Great question! The short answer is that in many cases they didn't. In other cases, we institutionalized them, which is to say we warehoused them. For example, when I was young in the 50's and 60's in Wisconsin, there were no disabled students in my schools. This was because students who got severely ill went to places like the Mendota State Hospital, which was originally planned as a mental health facility. There you had people there who were violently mentally ill cheek and jowl next to people who suffered from MS or other medical disorders. As a society, we treated spina bifida as indistinguishable from Down's Syndrome or from psychosis.
Mainstreaming students, although expensive, has permitted young disabled citizens to take their place among the rest of society. This is especially clear if you have a family member who suffers from one of these severe illnesses. I hope we can all be grateful for that and look aggessively for ways to support them.
Mainstreaming students, although expensive, has permitted young disabled citizens to take their place among the rest of society. This is especially clear if you have a family member who suffers from one of these severe illnesses. I hope we can all be grateful for that and look aggessively for ways to support them.
134
That's a great question
There is only one word for GOP intentions: genocide.
A tax cut is not worth one life.
If we really want to reduce government spending we could easily reduce the bloated defense budget and abolish welfare for profitable business in all its forms.
Hurting Francis and others without first exploring rational alternatives is simple sadism.
A tax cut is not worth one life.
If we really want to reduce government spending we could easily reduce the bloated defense budget and abolish welfare for profitable business in all its forms.
Hurting Francis and others without first exploring rational alternatives is simple sadism.
196
In short, Democrats are focused on trying to maximize the number of people who have decent health insurance, and are willing to accept whatever tax increases and arrangements with health insurers and other private interests are needed to make that happen. They seek the broadest possible availability of health care, whatever the cost and political trade-offs it takes to achieve it.
Republicans are focused on trying to minimize taxes, especially on investment income, and keeping federal subsidies for health care to a minimum. They are willing to accept the wrenching consequences that attaining those goals might have for Americans’ insurance coverage, betting that lower taxes and smaller government will fuel a more vibrant economy.
This is a "bird in the hand" (decent healthcare) vs "a bird in the bush."
I want the "bird in the hand" and not the wild shot "at the bird in the bush."
Republicans are focused on trying to minimize taxes, especially on investment income, and keeping federal subsidies for health care to a minimum. They are willing to accept the wrenching consequences that attaining those goals might have for Americans’ insurance coverage, betting that lower taxes and smaller government will fuel a more vibrant economy.
This is a "bird in the hand" (decent healthcare) vs "a bird in the bush."
I want the "bird in the hand" and not the wild shot "at the bird in the bush."
16
Except that in the case of the Republcians, the "bird" is a vulture and the "bush" is a thicket of stinging nettles.
6
How can helping these people even be a question? What has happened to our society where reducing care for the disabled is even being considered? These are human beings, not entries on a tabulation sheet.
We are the wealthiest nation on earth. Yet many, primarily conservatives, think we should reduce spending on these who are most vulnerable.
Most of these conservatives claim to be religious evangelicals. So I ask them. Was Jesus Christ a wealthy man? Was John the Baptist? Apostle Paul. Did any of the apostles claim that poverty was a moral failing? Was sickness a moral failing to them? What did they teach?
I am a Jew. The very foundation of Jewish culture and law is based on assisting the poor and the weak. How did we get from the 3000 year old tradition of Judaism, modified through Jesus who lived a Jewish life, to where we are now where we have policy debates about throwing these vulnerable people away? It appears there are aspects of including religious teachings in secular law, as championed by the right, that I do not understand. Something to do with justice.
We are the wealthiest nation on earth. Yet many, primarily conservatives, think we should reduce spending on these who are most vulnerable.
Most of these conservatives claim to be religious evangelicals. So I ask them. Was Jesus Christ a wealthy man? Was John the Baptist? Apostle Paul. Did any of the apostles claim that poverty was a moral failing? Was sickness a moral failing to them? What did they teach?
I am a Jew. The very foundation of Jewish culture and law is based on assisting the poor and the weak. How did we get from the 3000 year old tradition of Judaism, modified through Jesus who lived a Jewish life, to where we are now where we have policy debates about throwing these vulnerable people away? It appears there are aspects of including religious teachings in secular law, as championed by the right, that I do not understand. Something to do with justice.
461
Materially we are the wealthiest nation. Morally, psychologically , and spiritually we are circling the poverty drain.
34
Beautful posting. True Mensch.
4
Bruce,
I so agree with you. Think about Mother Teresa. Living a life for lepers, giving up her family of wealth to live among and serve the poorest, sickest of all.
These legislative proposals are appalling.
MIMA
I so agree with you. Think about Mother Teresa. Living a life for lepers, giving up her family of wealth to live among and serve the poorest, sickest of all.
These legislative proposals are appalling.
MIMA
6
Definitions of morality don't only come from religions but from a human instinct of compassion and empathy: Most people would agree that it is immoral to take away the essential support for living of such people to just give the very rich a tax break they won't even notice. But that's precisely the objective of the Republican legislation in the House and Senate.
106
Hari, you just said it yourself, "... it is immoral to TAKE AWAY THE ESSENTIAL SUPPORT FOR LIVING..." That's right, somewhere along the line one in five Americans could not provide adequately for themselves and their children, so the U.S. government essentially GAVE them their existence, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in free, lifetime health care.
I was educated in a Christian high school and university, however, I also worked for 20 years as a nurse. And from that daily experience I conclude no amount of Medicaid money can off-set the shear amount of stupidity many people exercise in pursuing unhealthy choices, that is drug and alcohol addiction, teenage pregnancies, and many other high risk choices, all of which are covered by Medicaid. My privately paid for insurance does not give me those benefits, and I've paid into the Medicare system for nearly 50 years. Why are they treated better benefits and provided for by my government any better than myself?
I don't disagree about your observations about the 1% or corporate welfare, but those are separate issues. Don't use those failures to bolster your opinion about providing free lifetime health care to the 20% of Americans who can't earn their own way, often because of a lifetime of poor decisions.
I was educated in a Christian high school and university, however, I also worked for 20 years as a nurse. And from that daily experience I conclude no amount of Medicaid money can off-set the shear amount of stupidity many people exercise in pursuing unhealthy choices, that is drug and alcohol addiction, teenage pregnancies, and many other high risk choices, all of which are covered by Medicaid. My privately paid for insurance does not give me those benefits, and I've paid into the Medicare system for nearly 50 years. Why are they treated better benefits and provided for by my government any better than myself?
I don't disagree about your observations about the 1% or corporate welfare, but those are separate issues. Don't use those failures to bolster your opinion about providing free lifetime health care to the 20% of Americans who can't earn their own way, often because of a lifetime of poor decisions.
1
"Reduce Medicaid spending by $250 billion" - Ross Douthat
"15 million would come off the Medicaid rolls" - CBO score for Senate healthcare bill
"For Millions, Life Without Medicaid Services Is No Option" - NYT headline
The nation faces a moral crisis, and it's not trump's vulgar tweets.
"15 million would come off the Medicaid rolls" - CBO score for Senate healthcare bill
"For Millions, Life Without Medicaid Services Is No Option" - NYT headline
The nation faces a moral crisis, and it's not trump's vulgar tweets.
158
It wasn't too long ago that New York State Governor Cuomo (D) was very happy to announce that he was able to reduce Medicaid per person spending to a 13 year low. There's no reasonable elected official who is not trying to reduce his highly inefficient and ineffective Medicaid spending.
3
No sane person would claim that Medicaid is optimally efficient. It is (like the ACA) the result of political compromise and our obsession with Federalism. As a result, it entails needless layers of administrative costs, and (in the name of savings) profits and overhead for the private insurance companies who administer it. Oh yes, a majority of Medicaid spending is through private HMOs. Yet traditional government-run Medicaid has an administrative cost of only 2%, as opposed to 17% for commercial plans. So when we accuse public programs like Medicaid and Medicare of inefficiency, it helps to know what one is talking about and to have a point of comparison. There are much more elegant and effective ways to curb Medicaid spending than simply telling states to make do with less.
Furthermore, at some point we as a society need to grapple with relative spending priorities. Perhaps before we squeeze more pennies out of care for the sick and disabled, we could demand a bit more fiscal stewardship of our defense budget (for example).
Furthermore, at some point we as a society need to grapple with relative spending priorities. Perhaps before we squeeze more pennies out of care for the sick and disabled, we could demand a bit more fiscal stewardship of our defense budget (for example).
6
There is one category of Medicaid recipients that would gladly give it up. Under Obamacare, anyone eligible for Medicaid must take it in lieu of going on an Obamacare policy with a subsidy. In states that expanded Medicaid eligibility, the earnings threshold is very high. For instance, in California, a family of four earning up to $64,638 a year must put their kids on Medicaid even if they would prefer to have them on their Obamacare policy. They don't get that choice. Because most doctors will not take Medicaid patients, this option is nowhere near as attractive as the drafters of Obamacare apparently thought it to be.
Here is the 2016 California Medi-Cal (their Medicaid) eligibility table:
http://hbex.coveredca.com/toolkit/renewal-toolkit/downloads/2016-Income-...
There are potentially a lot of people who can come off the Medicaid rolls and do so of their own volition. Give them the choice.
Here is the 2016 California Medi-Cal (their Medicaid) eligibility table:
http://hbex.coveredca.com/toolkit/renewal-toolkit/downloads/2016-Income-...
There are potentially a lot of people who can come off the Medicaid rolls and do so of their own volition. Give them the choice.
9
The person who wrote this does not know what they are talking about.
7
Andy Sandfoss,
Here is one more link for you.
http://www.cahba.com/advice/2013/09/mixed_coverage_families.html
It is pretty straightforward.
Here is one more link for you.
http://www.cahba.com/advice/2013/09/mixed_coverage_families.html
It is pretty straightforward.
3
I'm guessing you posted this without bothering to look for yourself?
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/01/27/many-children-unable-to-be-inc...
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/01/27/many-children-unable-to-be-inc...
1
Before cutting services to the elderly, young and disabled, lets take a long hard look at pooled trusts. One group of people who are receiving benefits they should not be entitled to are those who have diverted assets and income to trusts, transferred property to family members and then have the rest of us pay for their care while protecting their income and assets. Why aren't the Republicans addressing that "entitlement"?
244
OK this is a complicated topic. Firstly, I have done pooled trusts for people so I know what I'm talking about. For those not familiar with them they are completely legal, and contained in both Federal and state law. The concept is that ONLY people with disabilities are allowed to keep extra income or assets and still qualify for Medicaid. The extra money must be put in a special type of trust where (a) the funds are controlled by a 3rd party and can only be used for certain expenses, and (b) if there is money left when the person dies, it goes back to the state to repay the cost of Medicaid services received. Yes, these can be used by middle-class elderly people to shelter excess income rather than contribute to the cost of their care. But, you need to understand that NY (and probably most other states) expect everyone in the state to be able to live on $825/mo. of income, regardless of housing/food/utilities costs. So if you have a $800/mo. Social Security check and $500 rent upstate, are you more poor than someone with $1500/mo. Social Security and $1200 rent in NYC? No, they are equally poor, but only the first would qualify for Medicaid. The second (if determined disabled) could use a pooled trust to qualify for Medicaid. It essentially allows you to get the deduction for shelter costs that Medicaid should (but doesn't) allow.
9
So don't pick on pooled trusts. There are people getting rich on Medicaid, but it ain't people with disabilities (hint: hospitals and managed care plan executives).
7
Exactly right, imo.
Here's another anecdote about those who would be affected by the changing Medicaid system.
I was diagnosed with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia at age 20 a few years ago. My 8 month treatment ended up costing over $2 million (if I didn't have insurance) and stopped me from being a full-time student. Unfortunately, if you're not a full-time student, then you cannot get health insurance through my university. If you're also not employed (like I obviously was), then it's entirely possible that you'll have to buy your own insurance to stay insured under new laws. But who is going to sell insurance to someone just diagnosed with leukemia?
Thankfully, under the Affordable Care Act, I was able to stay on my parent's insurance, and we only had to pay a few thousand throughout the whole ordeal. I worry that if the Republican plan ends up passing, it's going to hurt people like those in this article and those like me. How can you afford to get the insurance policy you need when you have such a serious pre-existing condition like cerebral palsy? What about being diagnosed with a potentially life-ending disease that forces you out of a job or out of school?
I was diagnosed with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia at age 20 a few years ago. My 8 month treatment ended up costing over $2 million (if I didn't have insurance) and stopped me from being a full-time student. Unfortunately, if you're not a full-time student, then you cannot get health insurance through my university. If you're also not employed (like I obviously was), then it's entirely possible that you'll have to buy your own insurance to stay insured under new laws. But who is going to sell insurance to someone just diagnosed with leukemia?
Thankfully, under the Affordable Care Act, I was able to stay on my parent's insurance, and we only had to pay a few thousand throughout the whole ordeal. I worry that if the Republican plan ends up passing, it's going to hurt people like those in this article and those like me. How can you afford to get the insurance policy you need when you have such a serious pre-existing condition like cerebral palsy? What about being diagnosed with a potentially life-ending disease that forces you out of a job or out of school?
375
And the insurance doesn't cover the long-term care that the disabled need. Most nursing home residents depend on Medicaid at some point; will they be turned away? This is also penny-wise and pound-foolish, because nursing home care undoubtedly costs more than home aides do.
16
Glad you recovered and hope you are doing well. Thank you for sharing your experience and your family's experience.
7
Michael -- even BEFORE the ACA, a student age 20 would have been on his parent's health insurance.
The ACA only extended this from 23 to 26 -- three years! -- it did not fundamentally change the idea that students who are over 18 but still in college would be covered as dependents on their parent's policies.
The ACA only extended this from 23 to 26 -- three years! -- it did not fundamentally change the idea that students who are over 18 but still in college would be covered as dependents on their parent's policies.
1
Without Medicaid many elderly would be faced with no therapy after a near death experience, I guess this is exactly what the GOP Congress want the death of millions of elderly who cannot afford private healthcare. The baby boomers are about to be the biggest population of elderly in the U.S.. Cash dollars twinkle in GOP eyes, they want them to pay for extended therapy. Even now the elderly are denied the healthcare benefit of therapy that physicians demand they do to become mobile and have a quality of life. Slow healthcare of the elderly that cannot pay is an indirect way of sifting out the "free loaders" according to the GOP. Callousness cannot describe this slow death the GOP want to direct. WE who are educated and in power to stop this madness are responsible for those who cannot speak and will not be heard by our so-called representatives.
44
"Elderly" would be people over 65; all people over 65 are on MediCARE not MediCAID. Unfortunately, many people get the terminology mixed up -- it doesn't help the names are so similar -- and don't know which program covers what.
ALL elderly on MediCARE get rehab treatment covered after a hospitalization, so your statement about "near death experience" is incorrect. My elderly aunt, in her late 80s and early 90s, had ELEVEN hospitalizations in about 6 years -- the staff at the rehab knew her by name! -- and every time, was sent to a 5-star rehabilitation hospital on Medicare. When she broke her hip, she was in rehab for 4.5 months.
Anyways, this article is about disabled ADULTS who are relatively young and who have profound disabilities, and who require very costly, one-on-one accommodations from Medicare. The article lists the services, but of course, NOT THE COSTS. The costs are astronomical.
It is absolutely untrue however, that MediCARE does not pay for physical therapy for the elderly.
ALL elderly on MediCARE get rehab treatment covered after a hospitalization, so your statement about "near death experience" is incorrect. My elderly aunt, in her late 80s and early 90s, had ELEVEN hospitalizations in about 6 years -- the staff at the rehab knew her by name! -- and every time, was sent to a 5-star rehabilitation hospital on Medicare. When she broke her hip, she was in rehab for 4.5 months.
Anyways, this article is about disabled ADULTS who are relatively young and who have profound disabilities, and who require very costly, one-on-one accommodations from Medicare. The article lists the services, but of course, NOT THE COSTS. The costs are astronomical.
It is absolutely untrue however, that MediCARE does not pay for physical therapy for the elderly.
1
@Concerned Citizen: A large percentage of those on Medicaid are destitute elderly people. They need both Medicaid and Medicare to survive.
8
Concerned Citizen--
Things must be pretty good in your Anywheresville. Glad things were good for your aunt.
Here in the boonies of north Missouri the facility where my 75 y/o mother was provided *therapy* 2-3 days per week, for less than an hour per day, and Medicare paid only for the first 90 days after her hospitalization. Five years later in Independence, MO, her older 89 y/o sister got even less *therapy* and her Medicare Advantage plan gave her less than two weeks & then the nursing home told my cousin her mom would be on private pay, so we took her home & did our best.
Things must be pretty good in your Anywheresville. Glad things were good for your aunt.
Here in the boonies of north Missouri the facility where my 75 y/o mother was provided *therapy* 2-3 days per week, for less than an hour per day, and Medicare paid only for the first 90 days after her hospitalization. Five years later in Independence, MO, her older 89 y/o sister got even less *therapy* and her Medicare Advantage plan gave her less than two weeks & then the nursing home told my cousin her mom would be on private pay, so we took her home & did our best.
1
It's a wonderful thing that people with disabilities can participate in life. Just like you and I.
But the wealthy want to prevent that.
Why?
Why should wealthy people begrudge life's opportunities or joys to people who, through no fault of their own, happen to be disabled?
I simply can't understand the heartlessness, the selfishness,
Whereas, when I read about these people, it brings me great joy!
I also look at these personal care assistants. They have a job, because these people need them. That's good too. That also makes me happy.
It's a downer to think of the greedy rich though.
Let's bring more joy.
But the wealthy want to prevent that.
Why?
Why should wealthy people begrudge life's opportunities or joys to people who, through no fault of their own, happen to be disabled?
I simply can't understand the heartlessness, the selfishness,
Whereas, when I read about these people, it brings me great joy!
I also look at these personal care assistants. They have a job, because these people need them. That's good too. That also makes me happy.
It's a downer to think of the greedy rich though.
Let's bring more joy.
223
Let's bring more joy.
As your comment did for me.
As your comment did for me.
3
Wonderful, TheraP...so kind. We should all want to bring more joy, and to see more joy.
3
This isn't just the wealthy driving this. The GOP is backed by a ton of blue collar middle of America types who have heeded the rallying cry of "change" or whatever alternative facts trump is spewing. It's a very NIMBY attitude to take. However many of these voters don't acknowledge (or choose not to admit) that Medicaid and other entitlements play a very large part of their lives. You can't tell me that a large percentage or Trump or GOP supporters arent tied to Medicaid in some fashion. A vast majority of our nation voted this man, (and others in support of disembowling medicaid and other entitlements) into office.
3
These are the people Medicaid should be paying for, not the millions of able-bodied people on Medicaid who do not work. The truly disabled are represent a tiny portion of the Medicaid budget.
15
Real welfare is the billions given to the petroleum, cole and big farm in subsidies. Huge tax breaks for the nations largest corporations and wealthiest 1%. YOU try working and living on $7.50 an hour v.s. Welfare. The $7.50 is the same as slave labor - why "call it work?"
163
In Alabama, according to state data, 82% of Medicaid beneficiaries are "aged, blind, & disabled" or are children. That's not much of a "tiny portion." The rest are other adults including pregnant women, parent caretakers, and recipients of family planning services. Childless "able-bodied" adults almost never qualify.
130
Plenty of people who work make low salaries and/or are underemployed. Many employers offer ridiculously high cost "benefits" that are worse than worthless.
It sounds like you believe that people who use Medicaid just sit t home all day basking in the glow of free government healthcare. Seriously? I've been on it when I was studying full time to become a teacher (you know, so I could contribute to society). It's not great but it does the job. Believe me when I say that nobody wants to be on Medicaid. For many (including many of my students) it is a necessity and a matter of survival.
It sounds like you believe that people who use Medicaid just sit t home all day basking in the glow of free government healthcare. Seriously? I've been on it when I was studying full time to become a teacher (you know, so I could contribute to society). It's not great but it does the job. Believe me when I say that nobody wants to be on Medicaid. For many (including many of my students) it is a necessity and a matter of survival.
41
If we want to continue to refer to ourselves as a first world, civilized nation, we cannot cut services such as these.
133
I can just envision conservatives reading this and thinking "So what. It's unfortunate, but it;s not government's job to take care of these people."
We, as a society, choose our government so as to organize and improve society itself. To protect us not only from threats from without (as in defense), but from each other (as in crime) and from adverse natural events (as in natural disasters and diseases). It is a collective exercise in negotiating with each other so that our society reflects our values. How do you negotiate with people whose values say that the sick and disabled and elderly should fend for themselves? In order that people who are already rich can get a tax cut? Because the proposed cuts to Medicaid would result in exactly that. How can you call such values anything but pure greed?
We, as a society, choose our government so as to organize and improve society itself. To protect us not only from threats from without (as in defense), but from each other (as in crime) and from adverse natural events (as in natural disasters and diseases). It is a collective exercise in negotiating with each other so that our society reflects our values. How do you negotiate with people whose values say that the sick and disabled and elderly should fend for themselves? In order that people who are already rich can get a tax cut? Because the proposed cuts to Medicaid would result in exactly that. How can you call such values anything but pure greed?
778
In addition to this, I think we forget how thin family and community ties are for many. Our country is enormous and when people move for school or job opportunities we are literally moving hundreds or thousands of miles away. This disperses the resources of families- our energy, our time, our muscle power, our emotional support and financial resources- are scraped thin over time and space until the family is not much of a support network at all. These caregivers & medicaid funding help bridge the yawning gap that remains.
10
OK, fine, but this is not what President Trump was elected to do. He is on record for promising a improved replacement to the ACA, that would take care of everyone at a lower cost.
4
But Kay....most of the benefits described here vary from state to state, and are not mandated by Federal law. It seems like it is totally random what you own state might offer -- luxe benefits in Taxachusetts, but skimpy benefits in Mississippi or Alabama.
And is this sustainable? Remember the money to provide a small number of disabled adults with "personal assistants" (at a likely cost of $25 an HOUR or more -- do the math!) means that thousands of other people in those states don't even have basic health care.
And is this sustainable? Remember the money to provide a small number of disabled adults with "personal assistants" (at a likely cost of $25 an HOUR or more -- do the math!) means that thousands of other people in those states don't even have basic health care.
4
If the Republicans want money for tax reform why not repeal the mortgage interest deduction instead of slashing Medicaid? Why is it ok for me to pay to subsidize someone's housing costs but its not ok for me to pay to subsidize someone's healthcare?
440
The simple answer is that special interests will finance the politicians who promise to RETAIN this tax break.
Legal bribery codified by the GOP Supreme Court.
Legal bribery codified by the GOP Supreme Court.
15
Why not go after the concentration of money at the top?
9
Good point!
4
It comes down to morality; the more fortunate help the less fortunate, and if you don't believe that, you certainly are not a Christian.