Obama finally called them out

FarmerChick

Super Self-Sufficient
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
11,417
Reaction score
14
Points
248
Medicaid Expansion: Health Care Reform's Newest Challenge
PrintShareEmailTopics: Health Costs, Medicaid, Politics, Health Reform, States, Uninsured

Jul 21, 2009

"Until the nation's governors staged a public revolt last weekend, few people were paying attention to one of the most far-reaching proposals being considered as part of overhauling the health care system: a dramatic expansion and redefinition of the Medicaid program," Time reports. "Redefining who is eligible for Medicaid would be one of the major means by which lawmakers hope to achieve universal health coverage which is one of the reasons that Governors, whose budgets already are straining under the program's growing costs, are so wary of the idea."

The Medicaid proposal, which "came to a boil as the National Governors Association met in Biloxi, Miss., could "hardly come at a worse time for the Governors. The recession has drained state coffers of tax receipts, even as public need for state safety-net services is growing. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, at least 48 states are facing shortfalls totaling $166 billion which is 24% of their total budgets. ... Nor, it seems, could the governors' rebellion have come at a worse time for President Obama's health-care-reform effort, which is being hit from every side by growing doubts."

Currently, many low-income adults are not eligible for Medicaid, but they could be if Congress decides to "make income alone the determinant of Medicaid coverage. Under the health reform bill now being considered by the House, all non-elderly people earning at or below 133% of poverty about $14,400 for an individual, and $29,300 for a family of four would be eligible." The House bill would have the federal government "pick up the entire cost of those newly covered under Medicaid $438 billion over 10 years," while a Senate finance draft version "would have the feds paying the additional cost for only five years, after which the states would have to pick up their typical share of existing Medicaid costs, which averages over 40%" (Tumulty, 7/21).

NPR interviewed Gov. Jim Douglas, D-Vt., who heads the National Governors Association. Douglas "says at 24 percent, his state has one of the highest rates of Medicaid enrollment in the nation. Douglas tells Robert Siegel that in Vermont, Medicaid costs $1.2 billion, a burden that is shared by the state and federal governments." He "estimates that by the end of the next decade, 25 percent across the nation will be enrolled in the program, and, unless costs are controlled, that figure could approach 30 percent. 'That really clouds out all the other responsibilities of state government,' he says" (7/20).

_________________________________


I couldn't link this for some reason? So just throwing out the article.

Good or bad I am not sure yet. I know fed. govt. wants to check fraud and overbilling etc. to find money to pay for this. That is the plan.
But then again, if someone is making under $29,300 per year for a family of 4---they sure need help with insurance!

BUT remember this stuff is not in stone yet...plans are being worked on and changing all the time.

We must have healthcare reform. And it has to happen ONE way or the other......
 

FarmerChick

Super Self-Sufficient
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
11,417
Reaction score
14
Points
248
I wouldn't call it a catastrophic SINGLE event...but I agree with Reinbeau that we all seen this coming, we all see the decline over the years, we all must acknowledge it, accept it and move forward to positive change.

Cause if we don't we are in for worse times (which are way far from over with already)......and one problem is lousey healthcare for the US along with tons of other major problems.

But yes, I seen many years of bad times for the US and rough change for the US ahead.

It doesn't have to hit in one day, fall apart this minute to declared a catastrophe. Not to me anyway. This is a long time coming catastrophe.
 

Wifezilla

Low-Carb Queen - RIP: 1963-2021
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
8,928
Reaction score
16
Points
270
Location
Colorado
They're talking about squeezing the waste and fraud out of Medicare
They can already do that without passing this new legislation. In fact, they should FIX WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE. The IHS example I gave has been ignored. 200 years....waste...fraud...heeelllloooooooooo. Fix that FIRST.
 

VT-Chicklit

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
302
Reaction score
0
Points
94
Location
Lake Champlain Islands
FarmerChick said BUT no where did you mention the cost of the plans on the nation etc.
All you mentioned in this post is not being able to see a doctor because of influx of new insureds on the system.

The only way I can interpret this post (and tell me if I am wrong)---is you advocate denying people coverage and healthcare because that may make you wait longer to be treated
I don't go on line until later in the evening and I was quite surprised to see that you seem to thnk that I am for denying coverage to anyone who really needs it.

My comment points out how, how the insured go to the doctor for things that they would not go for if they were paying out of pocket thus taking up the time of doctors, hospitals, equipment, and test facilities. We already have a higher ratio of patients to doctors than almost any developed country. The addition of more people over using the system because it was now "FREE" would cause there to be long waits for care, thus causing rationing. The rationing will just be due to a different cause from how care is rationed now. Obama Care does not really take care of the rationing problem. It just shifts the problem to another group. I pointed out that currently people who are uninsured can not be denied care for things that are emergencies but for other services they have to be able to pay. This may cause substantial debt and possibly bankrupsy, which I felt was better than having a life threatening disease and having to wait so long for the tests, care and possible denial of lifesaving medicines that you die.

I answer your question with: It has nothing to do with how long I have to wait to be treated for a cold, yearly well check up, pulled muscle, even simple broken bones or other care that treats things that are not life threatening or severe quality of life issues. As I stated

Obama Care is great if you are healthy and dont need much medical care. It will be a death sentence to many who get cancer, have liver failure, heart disease, or other catastrophic illnesses. These people will die waiting on a list! To see this, check out the stats for these diseases in countries with "Socialized Medicine". You will see, on a whole we do better on the "big stuff" than they do.
I have previously stated that Obama Care DOES NOT FIX THE PROBLEM and we will be spending huge amounts of money on something that I feel will actually make the problem worse because it does not take these issues into account. They are trying to completely change our health care system when only the problem parts need to be fixed. What they are proposing will only make matters worse.

They need to address portabiliy by removing the difficulties insurance companies have selling health insurance across state lines. That would bring TRUE competition between the companies and lower costs. Tort Reform is needed. The malpractice lottery that currently exists needs to stop. Lawyers take much of what is awarded. I am not saying that people who are injured due to neglegence should not be compensated, but the huge punative awards by juries cost everyone and lawyers get most of that money. Malpractice lawsuites have gotten to be too easy. Doctors are not GOD. They make mistakes because they are human and therefor should not be punished for this if they are not neglegent or grossly incompetent. They also need to address the need for more General Practicioners. Not by taking monies away from the Specialists, but by funding schooling for Doctors that become GP's. The current bills do not do this. They reduce fees to Specialists instead of promoting the education of GP's. Many doctors dont go into a General Practice because of the costs of schooling verses the long hours they need to work to recoup their investment.

I hope FarmerChick, this clarifes for you what I meant in my last post. I would hate to have you continue to think that I am cold hearted. I want the problems fixed in Health Care too. It is to all our benefit to do this. What a partisan Congress has slapped together in the short time that Obama initially gave them will not fix the real problems that exist and it will only make them worse. Congress needs to sit down without rancor on either side and look at what the real problems are and address ONLY those problems. They should not mess with what works for 85% of Americans. Fix the problems that cause the remaining 15% to be dissatisfied!
 

VT-Chicklit

Lovin' The Homestead
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
302
Reaction score
0
Points
94
Location
Lake Champlain Islands
Part of how they propose to pay for the the 900 billion or more that this new plan will cost is through "cutting out waste and fraud" in Medicare and Medicaid. They say they will get 400 billion by doing this.

I dont know where they came up with an amount of 400 billion dollars (I think they thought it sounded like a good number.) I would think that if they knew there was 400 billion dollars to be gotten from trimming waste and fraud, they would have done this already! They have been talking about that same waste and fraud for years and nothing has happened. We are currently in debt up to our eyeballs and these cost savings would help. Instead, they plan to spend them, if they actually get any, on another social program that will be a bottomless pit of waste and fraud. Just like the other social programs run by the government. This is because they do not have to be efficient, they just come to us for more money or print it in the basement. If they do not realize these savings from waste and fraud, it will be too late to shut down the changes to our health care system, even though it will no longer be deficit neutral. They will just tax us more until we can no longer pay. It is just another "Flim-Flam" that our government is trying to pull. I do not say this because the current group in power is Democrat. I think the Republicans "Flim-Flamed" us when they were in power, too.
 

SKR8PN

Late For Supper
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
2,686
Reaction score
0
Points
138
Location
O-HI-UH
VT-Chicklit said:
I think the Republicans "Flim-Flamed" us when they were in power, too.
Ain't THAT the truth!! :thumbsup



The truth of the matter is, there ISN'T 400 billion of waste and fraud to be discovered in the medicare/medicaid. That number has to be something they pulled out of thin air. :rolleyes: The only way they will ever save that kind of money is thru cost cutting, and THAT means few bennies for those that need it the most. Plain and simple.
The other way they are dancing the numbers would be to keep funding at it's current level and simply add another million people to the eligibility rolls....... that would have the same effect as "cutting" funding.........
 

Quail_Antwerp

Cold is on the Right, Hot is on The Left
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
6,905
Reaction score
6
Points
262
Location
Ohio
OK Folks, as someone who is on Medicaid, may I tell you what I see? I mean when we go to the Dr.'s.

When we're at the Dr.'s people are coming in for everything. Even things they don't need to come in for. All because they get Medicaid, and they think they can get unlimited free care. They come in, and they just want the Dr. to give them medication and send them home.

We only go for necessary things (ie. yearly checkups, and Ernie's follow ups for his back, etc). I don't run my kids to the doctor because they have a cold, a runny nose, etc. I don't even rush them in if they get a fever of 102 etc. I treat it at home first. If that doesn't work, they don't get better, then I call the Dr. and I can tell them, "We've tried this and this."

They bump their head, I grab a bag of frozen veggies and watch them for a couple hours. No rushing to the ER for possible concussions, etc.

Medicaid has problems because people rush to the doctor for every little bump and scratch they get. Every injury, or just because you sneeze, doesn't require a trip to the Dr.

I think there should be something added to medicaid to stop people from turning every scratch into a trip to the Dr. Some kind of repercussions for abusing the medical coverage.
 

sylvie

Recycled Spunk
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
1,881
Reaction score
3
Points
123
I've spent much time in many doctor offices with my DH.
What I see as waste is all the doctor's notes required for work. That is why most people are running in for seemingly minor problems. I don't understand why the doctor's notes are required if you have X amount of sick days anyhow.
 

Quail_Antwerp

Cold is on the Right, Hot is on The Left
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
6,905
Reaction score
6
Points
262
Location
Ohio
sylvie said:
I've spent much time in many doctor offices with my DH.
What I see as waste is all the doctor's notes required for work. That is why most people are running in for seemingly minor problems. I don't understand why the doctor's notes are required if you have X amount of sick days anyhow.
That's a good point, too! I forgot about employer's requiring a doctor's note if you call in sick!

Schools do it too, if you call your child in sick. "Oh little Johnny won't be excused from missing class today unless he brings a note in from his Doctor." How about I'm his MOM and I'm telling you he's sick, and I'm not going to waste a trip to the doctor just to get YOU a note?
 

FarmerChick

Super Self-Sufficient
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
11,417
Reaction score
14
Points
248
While I know it is a problem for cost etc.......one thing is everyone is entitled to go to a Dr. for whatever reason, at whatever time, and how many times they think they need.

We can't change that truly. You can't say, no Dr. visits for a possible cold with sniffles. Could you imagine the lawsuits from "stopping" people from going to a Dr. if needed. Could you imagine the protests against such a limit?

No, it can't happen.

You must be able to seek treatment when you deem necessary...and wow, that difference between people is incredible..LOL

I won't go unless I am on deaths doorstep, while another will go at the drop of a hat. Just the way it truly is and it won't change....but we sure can not ever limit someone from going to a Dr. if they feel they need it.

You have to cut costs in all places, but "stopping" people from going to a Dr. is not a cost cut that would be allowed.

My employers never required a note unless it went into the "personal leave for medical reasons" etc. and all that jazz.
 
Top