Kasich Has to Defend...Saving Lives

[calamity]

Only in today's GOP is something like saving lives considered to be a disadvantage. Good Grief.

Kasich responds to Bush's attacks on Medicaid expansion | The Columbus Dispatch

Gov. John Kasich accused Jeb Bush of “trashing” his opponents following the former Florida governor’s criticism of Kasich using federal dollars to expand health coverage to low-income people....

“I am for repealing Obamacare,” Kasich said. “But expanding Medicaid at this point, bringing our dollars back is working. It’s saving money and it’s saving lives. And that’s what really matters at the end of the day.”

 

[ecofarm]

Everything is about saving lives. Cheap rhetorical stunt.

 

[JumpinJack]

Only in today's GOP is something like saving lives considered to be a disadvantage. Good Grief.

Kasich responds to Bush's attacks on Medicaid expansion | The Columbus Dispatch

I agree. Things have gotten so crazy that common sense things that used to be acceptable to both parties is deemed evil.

Consider that Texas, Bush's brother's state, did not expand Medicaid. If you earn as little as $6,001, you don't have any health care. Plus, because there aren't many who qualify for it, there are few providers who will accept it. I think they tend not to get care at all, until they end up in the hospital.

 

[calamity]

Everything is about saving lives. Cheap rhetorical stunt.

You don't believe having access to a medical doctor for check ups and general maintenance or diagnostics if one feels a tightness in the chest or a lump in the breast is beneficial to longevity?

 

[Citizen.Seven]

I agree. Things have gotten so crazy that common sense things that used to be acceptable to both parties is deemed evil.

Consider that Texas, Bush's brother's state, did not expand Medicaid. If you earn as little as $6,001, you don't have any health care. Plus, because there aren't many who qualify for it, there are few providers who will accept it. I think they tend not to get care at all, until they end up in the hospital.

The states have a right not to expand medicaid, as determined by SCOTUS. Since the expansion is going to be very costly down the road, it was a rare instance of fiscal responsibility not to heed the siren call of (upfront) federal money.

 

[ecofarm]

You don't believe having access to a medical doctor for check ups and general maintenance or diagnostics if one feels a tightness in the chest or a lump in the breast is beneficial to longevity?

There are many plans, ideas and proposals for such and they're all about saving lives. Criticizing a proposal does not mean one is against saving lives. This is rhetoric on the order of "think of the children".

 

[calamity]

There are many plans, ideas and proposals for such and they're all about saving lives. Criticizing a proposal does not mean one is against saving lives. This is rhetoric on the order of "think of the children".

Unfortunately I knew a couple people who died from easily treated cancers, if caught early enough, because they did not have any health insurance and waited to see a doctor until they began hemorrhaging, one from the ass the other from the vagina. It's not something you take lightly after seeing it happen.

 

[ecofarm]

Unfortunately I knew a couple people who died from easily treated cancers, if caught early enough, because they did not have any health insurance and waited to see a doctor until they began hemorrhaging, one from the ass the other from the vagina. It's not something you take lightly after seeing it happen.

Hiding behind "I'm just trying to save lives, why do you criticize my plan!" is low class rhetoric. Everyone is trying to save lives, and everyone's proposal is subject to criticism.

 

[calamity]

Hiding behind "I'm just trying to save lives, why do you criticize my plan!" is low class rhetoric. Everyone is trying to save lives, and everyone's proposal is subject to criticism.

It wasn't his plan. He simply complied with the medicaid expansion, a part of Obama's plan, which other GOP governors abandoned once SCOTUS said they were free to do so. Those other governors did not implement any alternatives. In essence, the rhetoric is the attempt to turn GOP voters against another governor running for president for daring to work with Obama. IMO, that's actually dangerous, and it sets a poor precedent.

 

[ecofarm]

the attempt to turn GOP voters against another governor running for president for daring to work with Obama.

Well, that would appear a fair criticism. However, "he's criticizing him for trying to save lives" is not.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

It wasn't his plan. He simply complied with the medicaid expansion, a part of Obama's plan, which other GOP governors abandoned once SCOTUS said they were free to do so. Those other governors did not implement any alternatives. In essence, the rhetoric is the attempt to turn GOP voters against another governor running for president for daring to work with Obama. IMO, that's actually dangerous, and it sets a poor precedent.

Well, as Obama said, elections have consequences as do SCOTUS decisions. If sone govenors collaborated with BO, then that will affect future elections.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I agree. Things have gotten so crazy that common sense things that used to be acceptable to both parties is deemed evil.

Consider that Texas, Bush's brother's state, did not expand Medicaid. If you earn as little as $6,001, you don't have any health care. Plus, because there aren't many who qualify for it, there are few providers who will accept it. I think they tend not to get care at all, until they end up in the hospital.

What the insurance plan will pay the care provider (including up-front co-pays) is much more important to the care provider than how many have that particluar insurance plan.

When comparing reimbursement rates among health insurance plans, Medicaid is the lowest payer, meaning it’s not a moneymaker for doctors’ offices. Paired with the administrative requirements of accepting public insurance, doctors sometimes just don’t want the hassle.

You?ve Got Medicaid ? Why Can?t You See the Doctor? - US News

About 46 percent of physicians accept Medicaid, according to a 15-city survey last year by staffing firm Merritt Hawkins. That’s down about 10 percent from four years before. To encourage primary-care doctors to take Medicaid patients, the Affordable Care Act has temporarily increased the program’s payments to doctors, matching Medicare’s higher rates through 2014. But the boost doesn’t apply to specialists such as cardiologists and oncologists. “What they pay doesn’t even come close to covering expenses,” says Pat Howery, the administrator at Colorado West Otolaryngologists, an ear, nose, and throat clinic in Grand Junction. For a basic office visit, Howery says, UnitedHealth Group (UNH) pays $119 and Medicare $73; Medicaid comes in at $52. “You can’t make this up in volume,” he says. In January the clinic began limiting each doctor to two Medicaid appointments a day.

Doctors Shun Patients Who Pay With Medicaid - Businessweek

A physician friend of mine posted a copy of her Medicaid reimbursement on Facebook. Take a look at the charges compared to the actual reimbursement. She is paid between $6.82 and $17.54 for an hour of her time (i.e. on average, she makes less than minimum wage when treating a patient on Medicaid).

In reality, treating Medicaid patients is charity work. The fact that any physicians accept Medicaid is a testament to their generosity of spirit and missionary mindset. Expanding their pro bono workloads is nothing to cheer about. The Affordable Care Act’s “signature accomplishment” is tragically flawed – because offering health insurance to people that physicians cannot afford to accept is not better than being uninsured.

Why Would Any Doctor Accept Medicaid? - Better Health

 

[calamity]

Well, as Obama said, elections have consequences as do SCOTUS decisions. If sone govenors collaborated with BO, then that will affect future elections.

I'm surprised people do not vote governors out of office who refuse to provide basic healthcare to their constituents, especially if it is federally funded. But, maybe I should not be.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You don't believe having access to a medical doctor for check ups and general maintenance or diagnostics if one feels a tightness in the chest or a lump in the breast is beneficial to longevity?

One may find a care provider that accepts Medicaid to diagnose a problem (e.g. cancer) requiring very expensive care from a specialist but that does not mean that such a specialist will also accept Medicaid. Pretending that Medicaid is real insurance is like pretending that you can get a good steak for hamburger prices.

In reality, treating Medicaid patients is charity work. The fact that any physicians accept Medicaid is a testament to their generosity of spirit and missionary mindset. Expanding their pro bono workloads is nothing to cheer about. The Affordable Care Act’s “signature accomplishment” is tragically flawed – because offering health insurance to people that physicians cannot afford to accept is not better than being uninsured.

Why Would Any Doctor Accept Medicaid? - Better Health

 

[calamity]

One may find a care provider that accepts Medicaid to diagnose a problem (e.g. cancer) requiring very expensive care from a specialist but that does not mean that such a specialist will also accept Medicaid. Pretending that Medicaid is real insurance is like pretending that you can get a good steak for hamburger prices.



Why Would Any Doctor Accept Medicaid? - Better Health

This may be hard to argue against. It does suggest a fundamental problem though. I see the same thing happening in health insurance networks where some doctors leave because their fees are being squeezed to bare minimums by the insurance company and can no longer afford to do business with them. If this becomes a major trend, it will spell disaster.

 

[ttwtt78640]

This may be hard to argue against. It does suggest a fundamental problem though. I see the same thing happening in health insurance networks where some doctors leave because their fees are being squeezed to bare minimums by the insurance company and can no longer afford to do business with them. If this becomes a major trend, it will spell disaster.

Another problem with Medicaid is the $2K limit placed on personal (household?) assets. If you live on a family farm or own a family business then regardless of your income or abliity to work those assests must be sold before you can qualify for Medicaid.

Medicaid's Asset Rules | ElderLawAnswers

 

[JumpinJack]

The states have a right not to expand medicaid, as determined by SCOTUS. Since the expansion is going to be very costly down the road, it was a rare instance of fiscal responsibility not to heed the siren call of (upfront) federal money.

I don't think anyone argues they didn't have the legal right.

I think you'll find you're incorrect about fiscal responsibility. The states that expanded Medicaid and got the federal money are doing better financially in the medical care area.

You will go to your grave never admitting it, but providing care when needed saves money in the long run, because it prevents more costly care down the road. Also, people who are healthier work longer hours, and are better able to improve their circumstances and be more productive. In short, it's better for the country and the state.

Besides, if a state purports to provide medical assistance to the poor, it should do so. Earning $6,001 is dire poverty. The states that didn't expand Medicaid and have such a low bar for poverty are basically providing care only to the homeless, instead of to the working poor. That makes no sense.

Just say what you mean. You don't care about other people. That's really it, in a nutshell. You've got your pony. More and more people in the country just don't care about anyone other than themselves.

 

[JumpinJack]

Another problem with Medicaid is the $2K limit placed on personal (household?) assets. If you live on a family farm or own a family business then regardless of your income or abliity to work those assests must be sold before you can qualify for Medicaid.

Medicaid's Asset Rules | ElderLawAnswers

I believe the homestead is excluded. The $2k is cash.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I believe the homestead is excluded. The $2k is cash.

Homestead covers a residence only - not a farm or business which are income properties. The residence is also only covered if the person is not expected to require permanent nursing home care.

 

[JumpinJack]

This may be hard to argue against. It does suggest a fundamental problem though. I see the same thing happening in health insurance networks where some doctors leave because their fees are being squeezed to bare minimums by the insurance company and can no longer afford to do business with them. If this becomes a major trend, it will spell disaster.

We are already seeing it. I'm experiencing it. Haven't found a dr yet to accept my Obamacare. (people who love Obamacare and refuse there are any problems with post lists of drs names; I just love it when people who don't understand the ACA plans post lists of things that are useless, as if I'm an idiot and don't know what I'm doing, or that I'm lying.) More and more people in the country just don't care about others. As long as they have theirs, they don't care.

 

[Greenbeard]

Everything is about saving lives. Cheap rhetorical stunt.

Perhaps, in a roundabout way. But this is literally about saving lives.

Boston, MA – A new study from Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) finds that expanding Medicaid to low-income adults leads to widespread gains in coverage, access to care, and—most importantly—improved health and reduced mortality. It is the first published study to look specifically at the effect of recent state Medicaid expansions on mortality among low-income adults, and the findings suggest that expanding coverage to the uninsured may save lives.

The results showed that Medicaid expansions in three states were associated with a significant reduction in mortality of 6.1% compared with neighboring states that did not expand Medicaid, which corresponds to 2,840 deaths prevented per year for each 500,000 adults gaining Medicaid coverage.

The groups that benefitted from Medicaid expansion in this study—older adults, racial and ethnic minorities, and those living in poor areas—are groups that have traditionally had higher mortality rates and faced greater barriers to care. The study results provide valuable evidence for state policymakers deciding whether or not to expand Medicaid, say the authors.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

I don't think anyone argues they didn't have the legal right.

I think you'll find you're incorrect about fiscal responsibility. The states that expanded Medicaid and got the federal money are doing better financially in the medical care area.

You will go to your grave never admitting it, but providing care when needed saves money in the long run, because it prevents more costly care down the road. Also, people who are healthier work longer hours, and are better able to improve their circumstances and be more productive. In short, it's better for the country and the state.

Besides, if a state purports to provide medical assistance to the poor, it should do so. Earning $6,001 is dire poverty. The states that didn't expand Medicaid and have such a low bar for poverty are basically providing care only to the homeless, instead of to the working poor. That makes no sense.

Just say what you mean. You don't care about other people. That's really it, in a nutshell. You've got your pony. More and more people in the country just don't care about anyone other than themselves.

"Saves money" for some by externalizing the cost to others. My costs gave gone up at a rate faster than pre-ACA, not to mention the obnoxiousness of required reporting of a private purchase. So tell me, since these BO people don't care about me, why should I care about them?

 

[sangha]

Hiding behind "I'm just trying to save lives, why do you criticize my plan!" is low class rhetoric. Everyone is trying to save lives, and everyone's proposal is subject to criticism.

No, the GOP is not trying to save lives. Medicaid expansion undeniably saves lives and the GOP (as a whole) opposes it and has no alternative

 

[sangha]

Another problem with Medicaid is the $2K limit placed on personal (household?) assets. If you live on a family farm or own a family business then regardless of your income or abliity to work those assests must be sold before you can qualify for Medicaid.

Medicaid's Asset Rules | ElderLawAnswers

The asset rules only apply to those who require Long-Term Care such as a nursing home.

There is no asset rule to qualify for Medicaid. It's based on income.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

I'm surprised people do not vote governors out of office who refuse to provide basic healthcare to their constituents, especially if it is federally funded. But, maybe I should not be.

I'm surprised people do not vote senators and reps who increase taxes and federal government intrusion into private lives. Oh, wait.