• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Florida Governor to Sue Obama Administration Over Medicaid Expansion

No its way beyond the "paper stage" now..


No.... Its the program as a whole... Not just new, not just old, the whole entire program.
Again. No. The federal government covers the portion indicated of the program as a whole....

no it doesn't. the 10% is only for NEW enrollies. If the person would have qualified under the old system then the state has to enroll them and the 40/50 or whatever the split is takes affect. the cbpp isn't calculating in the this fact. just like you ignored it.

the 90/10 split only covers the Medicaid expansion. the states are continuing to pay the 60/40 splits for old patients and if new people signing up meet the criteria for the old system then they are charged for that.
Daily Briefing primer: ACA's Medicaid expansion | The Advisory Board Daily Briefing

From 2014 to 2017, the federal government will pay for 100% of the difference between a state's current Medicaid eligibility level and the ACA minimum. Federal contributions to the expansion will drop to 95% in 2017 and remain at 90% after 2020, according to the ACA.

it doesn't cover the WHOLE program just the expansion. So if you sign up and were eligible under the old system then you get put into that and the state wracks up the 60/40 cost. the federal government will only cover the expansion part not the legacy system.

But hey its not just good for the uninsured, its also good news for the economy!
"The Medicaid expansion is projected to generate increased state economic activity, such asincreases in state output, Gross State Product (GSP) and state and local revenues. Similar toprevious finding, a review of economic analyses of the Medicaid expansion show that Medicaid funds willdirectly support health care providers as individuals gain insurance and better access to health care services.However, since the federal government pays for the entire cost of coverage for newly eligible beneficiaries forthe first three years, a new surge of federal funds will flow into states with relatively little additional state costs.Studies show, therefore, that new funds as a result of the Medicaid expansion are anticipated to have anoticeable and sustained increase in state economic activity. Regardless of the economic impact model used, allof the studies analyzed anticipate positive increases to state output and Gross State Product (GSP). Themagnitude of the impact depends on the level of current and anticipated new Medicaid funding and theeconomic conditions within the state.The Medicaid expansion is expected to have a positive effect on jobs and earnings. Theseeconomic models also show the implications for jobs. Again, given the increase in spending and the influx ofnew federal funds that will filter through state economies, the studies show increases in employment. Anumber of studies also show increases in salaries and earnings tied to new jobs. " https://kaiserfamilyfoundation.file...tate-economies-looking-forward-to-the-aca.pdf

lol parroting obamacare misnomers is not facts.
neither is posting the left wing cbpp.

as i said you don't care about facts or impact that expanding Medicaid will have on the state. if FL expands Medicaid just wait for the income tax to pay for it.

Medicaid expansion is hugely bad for the state and the fact that they stepped into a wide hole in the ground without reading the fine print is exactly why you should read before you pass it.

rick scott should sue the SCOTUS already ruled on this and said that the federal government cannot cut funding to force states to expand Medicaid.
once again we see Obama breaking the law and doing his own thing.
 
Last edited:
Scott is spending billions deepening the Port of Miami for supertankers that will never come but he's worried about the 10% the State will pay for Medicaid in a few years?
The idea that we would need an income tax for that is asinine and untrue..

so how do you expect to pay for the multi billion dollar addition to Medicaid of which some of that won't be covered by expansion money?
 
I am sure some believe that.... but that debate is over. Its now the law of the land.

What we now have are Governors that are failing to respect the rule of law by capriciously denying their citizens benefits that are prescribed by law because of the chose to throw a personal tantrum.

As a sidebar, as much as you don't like healthcare reform, it was 1) desired by the electorate prior to the election of 2008 and 2) the plan as implemented was not crafted by the White House, but by Congress, based largely on a template that had right-wing roots....

actually they are respecting the rule of law please see the SCOTUS ruling on this issue.

the federal government can not only not force states to expand but they can't punish them by taking away federal dollars for programs.
so scott is following the rule of law Obama as usual is not.

no it wasn't desired. the majority of people and still the majority of people hate obamacare what lala land are you coming up with this?
no had nothing to do with right wing roots. and no Obama had a huge part to play in this.

it was his big huge accomplishment and it has turn into nothing but a disaster.
 
actually they are respecting the rule of law please see the SCOTUS ruling on this issue.

the federal government can not only not force states to expand but they can't punish them by taking away federal dollars for programs.
so scott is following the rule of law Obama as usual is not.

The feds aren't punishing anyone. ACA is reducing the fed pgm which reimburses hospitals that provide care to the uninsured. The program is ending for states that do not expand Medicaid *and* for states that do expand Medicaid.
 
Last edited:
along with most hospitals, supports the idea

Of course, because expanding medicaid makes it easier for them to get their money. The way it is now they get it, but it's a lot harder.

This is what baffles me about the people who are dead set against ACA and expanding medicaid. The tax payers and people with health insurance are paying for the uninsured now anyway. An uninsured person shows up in the ER and the hospital treats them the hospitals are going to get their money from someone. If not ACA, or medicaid, then from other taxpayers funded programs or they'll pad the bills of the people with health insurance.

As long as there is a law saying hospitals HAVE to treat people w/o health insurance the tax payers and people with insurance are going to pay, one way or the other. ACA just makes it easier for the hospitals to get their money.
 
so how do you expect to pay for the multi billion dollar addition to Medicaid of which some of that won't be covered by expansion money?

According to the State of Florida, Medicaid expansion will produce additional costs of just under $1 billion/yr, not "multi billion dollar addition". Furthermore, it will bring an increase of $7.8 billion/yr in fed funds to the state for a net increase of $6.8 billion/yr

http://www.fdhc.state.fl.us/medicai...caid_Funding_and_Payment_Study_2015-02-27.pdf

Estimating the impact of Medicaid expansion in any state is not an exact science; a variety of
assumptions must be made. With that said, estimates adopted by the Florida Social Services
Estimating Conference (SSEC) in March 2013 indicate Medicaid expansion would have a
steady-state cost of just under $1 billion per year in additional non-federal funds when the
FMAP drops to 90 percent. For that additional cost, Florida would receive approximately $7.8
billion in additional federal funds annually
 

Pointless--and not clear they have much of a legal leg to stand on anyway.

Florida is close to becoming a poster child for what the ACA can achieve on the coverage side (compare the impressive 1.6 million its ACA-established marketplace has enrolled to the 80 people Marco Rubio's competing exchange in the state attracted) with the exception of the Medicaid expansion, which has wide support in the state. The zealots in their House have held out, and now are demanding free money to help pay down the costs associated with those left uninsured by their decision.

No need for a lawsuit, there's an easy way to get billions of federal dollars to help those folks and more out, and to keep hospitals and other health care providers in business: expand Medicaid. It's the smart move for the state economy, too.

States Expanding Medicaid See Significant Budget Savings and Revenue Gains | Apr 6, 2015
As some states continue to debate whether to implement Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act, early results from those that have done so show the impact this decision has had on their state budgets. States that expanded the number of people eligible for Medicaid are seeing big budgetary savings without reducing services. This report, prepared by Manatt Health Solutions, analyzes data from eight states, showing $1.8 billion in budget savings by the end of 2015 as a result of Medicaid expansion. The findings suggest that states expanding Medicaid should expect to see reduced state spending on programs for the uninsured and programs for high-cost patients, savings related to increased federal dollars for newly eligible Medicaid enrollees, and revenue gains related to existing insurer or provider taxes. In some states, budget savings could offset the cost of Medicaid expansion through 2021.
 
rick scott should sue the SCOTUS already ruled on this and said that the federal government cannot cut funding to force states to expand Medicaid.
once again we see Obama breaking the law and doing his own thing.

This is a weird position. Who gets to set conditions for Federal money? I thought it was Congress, spending Federal money, was able to set the rules for receiving it. Here you're saying that if the Feds provide $1 billion to Florida in grant money, the program expiring 6/30, Florida can sue and get that $1 billion forever and tell Congress and the CMS to shove it with their requirements - Florida can do as they damn well please and the Feds must continue to pay them $1 billion.

It's a pretty staggering position. Is Congress allowed to change requirements for social welfare recipients - e.g. increase the job search efforts for unemployment - that the welfare recipients can sue and demand the money continue forever and if they don't want to look for a job or get drug tested, they won't and Congress has no option but to continue the welfare?
 
Here you're saying that if the Feds provide $1 billion to Florida in grant money, the program expiring 6/30, Florida can sue and get that $1 billion forever and tell Congress and the CMS to shove it with their requirements - Florida can do as they damn well please and the Feds must continue to pay them $1 billion.

It's not even a grant. HHS has the authority to waive certain provisions (for 5 years at a time) of the Social Security Act at its discretion to allow state experimentation within social programs like Medicaid. The state gets to repurpose federal match funds that would've gone to Medicaid for their experiment but the whole thing has to be budget neutral to the feds, it has to adhere to whatever terms the state and feds agree to during the waiver approval process, and it has to be evaluated (it is ostensibly an experiment after all).

Florida's Low Income Pool operates under such a waiver. That waiver is about to expire and the feds apparently see little reason to waive federal law again to allow them to continue. And they're right. No waiver of federal law is needed to cover these low income folks (as was the case the last time Florida renewed this waiver five years ago), federal law now provides them the option to do that within the letter of the law thanks to the ACA.

I can't imagine the argument that not agreeing to waive federal law to provide Florida funds to do something that federal law now explicitly allows is coercive will hold water (not least because the agreement they're seeking has to be budget neutral by definition anyway). Perhaps this is the final "well, we tried!" CYA move for Scott et al. to show the rabid right before they finally relent and do the right thing.
 
Last edited:

I think it's a bogus lawsuite. The federal government is essentially saying, "Hey, you knew the deal when you originally accepted federal Medicaid block grant funds. You knew that the funds were to be used to form your own state-sponsored health insurance exchange and that Medicaid expansion was part of it. You knew there was a deadline to having your state's HIE up and running and self-sustaining. And now you're trying to back out of the deal."

The FL State legislature's battle isn't with the federal government, i.e., the Obama Administration. It's with themselves.

From the OP article:

In 2013, Governor Scott astonished Republicans and Democrats when he announced that despite his antipathy toward the Affordable Care Act (he made the issue the focus of his 2010 campaign), it seemed unreasonable to deny the uninsured access to care. But this month, the governor changed his mind again, saying he had little confidence in the federal government’s ability to pay the long-term costs of adding so many Floridians to the health care rolls. His decision further emboldened the House to fight the Senate on any proposal for Medicaid expansion. The impasse over Medicaid this year has all but frozen work on a budget agreement between the House and Senate, which remained about $4 billion apart.

Under Medicaid expansion, the federal government pays for new enrollees — who are allowed to earn up to 138 percent of the poverty level — through 2016, and after that, the federal share never pays less than 90 percent.

Republican leaders in Florida said they expected to run out of time — the legislative session ends May 1 — and will most likely have to work out their budget disagreements during a rare special session.

Senate leaders are playing hardball with Mr. Scott, saying that his priorities — tax cuts and increased education funding — will suffer if the state loses more than $2 billion in federal hospital aid. On Thursday, the Senate president, Andy Gardiner, criticized the governor’s plan to sue and said the federal government’s move on indigent reimbursements for hospitals was not a surprise and was raised several times beginning last year.

This is an internal budget battle Florida's Governor is attempting to blame on the Obama Administration. It's not anyone else's fault that the Florida Legislature can't get their finances in order ahead of a deadline they were well aware of beforehand.
 
I think it's a bogus lawsuite. The federal government is essentially saying, "Hey, you knew the deal when you originally accepted federal Medicaid block grant funds. You knew that the funds were to be used to form your own state-sponsored health insurance exchange and that Medicaid expansion was part of it. You knew there was a deadline to having your state's HIE up and running and self-sustaining. And now you're trying to back out of the deal."

The FL State legislature's battle isn't with the federal government, i.e., the Obama Administration. It's with themselves.

From the OP article:



This is an internal budget battle Florida's Governor is attempting to blame on the Obama Administration. It's not anyone else's fault that the Florida Legislature can't get their finances in order ahead of a deadline they were well aware of beforehand.

Way I see it as well.
 
:lamo
Jesus Christ. Federalism is a system of government where there are essentially 2 layers of gov. The federal government and the state governments. The federal government has certain powers and responsibilities allocated to it while the states have all other remaining powers.

But go ahead tell me how I mediciaid expansion "has nothing to do with federalism"...


NOW tell me how MONEY, giving it to states [AS YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT], has to do with federalism, ...which is about POWERS......... NOT MONEY.

as you posted it has to do with the separation of powers..........there is something about money in federalism...

you have no idea what government is about.......no idea
 
NOW tell me how MONEY, giving it to states [AS YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT], has to do with federalism, ...which is about POWERS......... NOT MONEY.

as you posted it has to do with the separation of powers..........there is something about money in federalism...

you have no idea what government is about.......no idea
You cant be serious......
You gots no ideas what the gooooberment is about! :lamo
 
no it doesn't. the 10% is only for NEW enrollies. If the person would have qualified under the old system then the state has to enroll them and the 40/50 or whatever the split is takes affect. the cbpp isn't calculating in the this fact. just like you ignored it.

the 90/10 split only covers the Medicaid expansion. the states are continuing to pay the 60/40 splits for old patients and if new people signing up meet the criteria for the old system then they are charged for that.
Daily Briefing primer: ACA's Medicaid expansion | The Advisory Board Daily Briefing

From 2014 to 2017, the federal government will pay for 100% of the difference between a state's current Medicaid eligibility level and the ACA minimum. Federal contributions to the expansion will drop to 95% in 2017 and remain at 90% after 2020, according to the ACA.

it doesn't cover the WHOLE program just the expansion. So if you sign up and were eligible under the old system then you get put into that and the state wracks up the 60/40 cost. the federal government will only cover the expansion part not the legacy system.
No where in the article does that back up your point. Its literally not saying what you think its saying.


lol parroting obamacare misnomers is not facts.
neither is posting the left wing cbpp.

as i said you don't care about facts or impact that expanding Medicaid will have on the state. if FL expands Medicaid just wait for the income tax to pay for it.

Medicaid expansion is hugely bad for the state and the fact that they stepped into a wide hole in the ground without reading the fine print is exactly why you should read before you pass it.

rick scott should sue the SCOTUS already ruled on this and said that the federal government cannot cut funding to force states to expand Medicaid.
once again we see Obama breaking the law and doing his own thing.
Do you always resort to ad hominems?
 
At some point, Republicans are going to come to the realization that Obamacare is here to stay and that it's working. Hopefully they will continue to attack it and threaten to repeal it until after the next election, however.
 
I think it's a bogus lawsuite. The federal government is essentially saying, "Hey, you knew the deal when you originally accepted federal Medicaid block grant funds. You knew that the funds were to be used to form your own state-sponsored health insurance exchange and that Medicaid expansion was part of it. You knew there was a deadline to having your state's HIE up and running and self-sustaining. And now you're trying to back out of the deal."

The FL State legislature's battle isn't with the federal government, i.e., the Obama Administration. It's with themselves.

From the OP article:



This is an internal budget battle Florida's Governor is attempting to blame on the Obama Administration. It's not anyone else's fault that the Florida Legislature can't get their finances in order ahead of a deadline they were well aware of beforehand.

With all of this stuff, you have to keep in mind that it's FLORIDA, for God's sake!
 
This is a weird position. Who gets to set conditions for Federal money? I thought it was Congress, spending Federal money, was able to set the rules for receiving it. Here you're saying that if the Feds provide $1 billion to Florida in grant money, the program expiring 6/30, Florida can sue and get that $1 billion forever and tell Congress and the CMS to shove it with their requirements - Florida can do as they damn well please and the Feds must continue to pay them $1 billion.

It's a pretty staggering position. Is Congress allowed to change requirements for social welfare recipients - e.g. increase the job search efforts for unemployment - that the welfare recipients can sue and demand the money continue forever and if they don't want to look for a job or get drug tested, they won't and Congress has no option but to continue the welfare?

yes they can sue because the federal government has linked the funding to expanding Medicaid which is a violation of the SCOTUS ruling.
I know it if difficult for you to accept facts. the government was going to renew funding but then they tied it to expanding Medicaid which the SCOTUS ruled unconstitutional
 
No where in the article does that back up your point. Its literally not saying what you think its saying.
sure it did I even quoted it to you.

From 2014 to 2017, the federal government will pay for 100% of the difference between a state's current Medicaid eligibility level and the ACA minimum. Federal contributions to the expansion will drop to 95% in 2017 and remain at 90% after 2020, according to the ACA.

why did you ignore it or do you not understand what this means?


Do you always resort to ad hominems?

You evidently don't know what an ad hominem is. you are doing nothing but spouting talking points which have already been disproven.
citing liberal biased sites that do the same thing are not arguments.
 
At some point, Republicans are going to come to the realization that Obamacare is here to stay and that it's working. Hopefully they will continue to attack it and threaten to repeal it until after the next election, however.

really still waiting for my insurance rates to go down. ol yea they haven't. I have been paying more and more since Obamacare than ever before.
still waiting on my 2500 savings per year.

ol yea that was a lie as well.

to say it is working is laughable.
Obamacare sends health premiums skyrocketing by as much as 78 percent - Washington Times

yea that is what you call success. :lamo maybe in hope and change land.
 
yes they can sue because the federal government has linked the funding to expanding Medicaid which is a violation of the SCOTUS ruling.

The funding is for the Medicaid expansion population (not covered under traditional Medicaid) and thus it exists only through a waiver of federal law approved by HHS.

HHS is under no obligation to continue waiving federal law so that Florida can pay for the medical expenses of that population. If they want to continue to do so and make sure their hospitals can continue to keep their doors open, they can do it in under the option now available in federal law: the ACA's Medicaid expansion. No more waivers for Florida.
 
yes they can sue because the federal government has linked the funding to expanding Medicaid which is a violation of the SCOTUS ruling.
I know it if difficult for you to accept facts. the government was going to renew funding but then they tied it to expanding Medicaid which the SCOTUS ruled unconstitutional
Do you have an excerpt and link for that ruling?
The present program Florida is under is ending.
 
Do you have an excerpt and link for that ruling?
The present program Florida is under is ending.

Not only is the present program ending, but florida has not submitted a formal request with a plan for renewal.

Scott’s administration said it discussed multiple LIP models with federal officials, but it never officially submitted a plan amid the talks.

Read more: Florida to sue over Obamacare Medicaid expansion - Marc Caputo and Rachana Pradhan - POLITICO
 
Not only is the present program ending, but florida has not submitted a formal request with a plan for renewal.

I know, and the Gov is an idiot and his Senate leader basically told him that.
But the Koch bros support the Gov and donate.
Funny how those with money have no issue with standing on principles on medical -Obamacare. Oh yeah, they can afford it.
 
Back
Top Bottom