In a floor statement that threads the needle very carefully, Iowa’s senior Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican, blasted the Supreme Court’s decision that makes the Medicaid expansion optional for the states. Grassley laments that the ruling leaves the “poorest of the poor” with “all or nothing,” depending on which state they live in. But, he doesn’t call out the states that have begun to talk about turning down the expansion. Instead, he lays the blame on the Obama administration for any state that might turn down the expansion money eventually.
From the speech:
With this decision, states now have the option to expand Medicaid to cover people below poverty. Mr. President, the states had that option before the Affordable Care Act was passed. So what does this decision mean in real terms?
It will be up to the states to determine if they will cover the poorest of the poor. The federal government cannot guarantee coverage. So now people with jobs will have to purchase insurance under the tax mandate. People without an income, people who are below poverty are dependent upon the state in which they reside.
…
Now I know some people will believe that the choice is perfunctory, that Medicaid expansion will move forward because the federal government has offered to pay for more than 90 percent of the expansion.
But if you were a state, would you really trust a promise from a federal government that is $15 trillion in debt?
Read the whole statement here.
Subscribe
Chuck Grassley? Isn’t this the moron that kept shouting “Death Panels” back in 2010? When you watch this guy, he’s always reading from a script. Is Mitch McConnell working Grassley’s strings? Old fart!
Did I miss something? Since when does any Republican worry about poor people?
I am an Iowan represented by Senator Grassley and this is not the first time that I have agreed with the sentiment and not the conclusion. Sen. Grassley has hit upon something that seems extraordinarily important to not only the “poorest of the poor,” but to the future of our nation.
What does it mean to be an American, when for something as fundamental as access to health care, American citizens are abandoned by their federal government to a geographic lottery of sorts -live here you get the prize – live there, please die. While the death panels were shown to be a ridiculous exaggeration, are we now left with fate determining geographic zones of care?
It’s all or nothing? Before it was nothing or nothing and if it was up to Sen. Grassley it would stay that way.
It is the Republican states that have the most uninsured and face the biggest program. In fact, liberal states are already addressing the problem and will be least affected by the new law. Texas alone has more than 6 billion uninsured. The fact is if Republicans don’t do the right thing for all those people, now that they have the opportunity almost entirely on the federal dollar, if they don’t swallow their ideology and make the right choice, they will suffer the wrath of their own people. It is about time for them to be on the spot.
Joel, while I agree with the sentiment–Texas actually has more than 6 million uninsured.