Since the Supreme Court ruled that states won’t be required under the health law to expand Medicaid, Washington has been buzzing with estimates about the numbers of poor people who could be left uninsured. But the numbers so far have been inflated, because they included both those who would become eligible for the first time and those who already are eligible for Medicaid – and will still qualify – even if their state passes on the Medicaid expansion.
Today, the Urban Institute released a more detailed estimate with state breakdowns that looks only at those likely to be left uninsured if a state chooses not to expand Medicaid. According to the institute, 11.5 million of 15.1 million adults who are potentially eligible for Medicaid under the health law wouldn’t qualify either for that coverage or for federal subsidies to purchase private insurance through state online insurance marketplaces without an expansion.
Florida’s Republican Gov. Rick Scott said in a news release July 1 that his state won’t expand its Medicaid program, and governors or state officials in at least seven other Republican-led states, including Texas, Louisiana and Wisconsin, have said they likely won’t.
Subscribe
No doubt Texas will opt out with the cave dwellers they have down there as so-called “leaders”.
Ya, Ollie I agree, the truely smart evolved people have learned to live on other peoples money. Especially the money of the “cave dwellers”. The economy of Texas, run by Republicans, is better than any of the state run by democrats. If you don’t believe me compare Texas to California or New York.
There are studies that show that over 30 per cent of the population that could be enrolled in Medicaid are not. With or without expansion this will probably increase. Doesn’t make sense?..if you had the choice of getting charity care with no bills and no hassles , why would you go through an enrollment process?..there is a recommendation within ACA that states allow hospitals to access the states eligibility system and declare presumptive eligibility with proof. This will reduce charity and increase enrollment. Good for the hospital and the Patient.
Riskman,
Those people living on “other people’s money” just might be serving you burgers.
And if they have scurvy (true story) YOU get it. Then they don’t go to the dr. because they don’t earn enough to buy insurance on the individual market. They don’t get medical care. They go to work sick. They pass the sickness onto you. They end up in emergency rooms and can’t pay the bills.
Guess what? Then hospital jack up their rates to cover the unpaid emergency room care. And then hospitals want more money from insurance companies. And THEN insurance companies charge YOU more money in your premiums.
SO you see, when low income people don’t have access to medical care it affects YOU.
You want the Medicaid expansion for your own selfish reasons. Think of yourself first and push for the expansion of Medicaid. Your next minimum wage worker may be giving you something more than good service.
Now the question is – how would you fund U S healthcare
given:
– We have almost 50% of the wage earners that pay no income tax
what they pay in FICA, they get back and then some in EITC
per IRS reports
– and the average HOUSEHOLD income is under 50,000 per year, with 170 million households
per U S census income data
– health care as it is in the U S has a cost –
Medicare -almost 15,000.00 in taxpayer funds per person per year
Medicaid, almost 20,000.00 in taxpayer funds per person per year
what is not in that budget is wages, benefits, employer matching FICA and taxes, retirement, Building costs, printing costs, GSA costs, utilities, building services
source HHS 2012 budget and state matching medicaid budgets, and state administration costs
Together, those two plans are coverage for 1/3 the country who pay nothing for that
and ACA adds a taxpayer funded subsidy that up to 62% could qualify for
now how do you fund health care?
for a reference point
Germany, at much less cost of care, put in taxes on GROSS income at 15%, and just makes it
Oh no! JohnSpek has spread his nonsense further. I keep pointing out to him his basic errors in reading the HHS budget (and his math) but he keeps ignoring me.
If we multiply 50.1 million Medicare enrollees times $15,000 you get $751,500,000,000 in Medicare spending. I can’t get that no matter how I add up his figures unless he’s mistaking millions for billions.
Correct figures for Medicare and Medicaid spending are available on the Kaiser Foundation site.
“The economy of Texas, run by Republicans, is better than any of the state run by democrats.”
Why don’t we compare Texas to Massachusetts (or Taxachusetts as conservatives like to call it)?
Poverty rate:
TX=25%
MA=15%
Median Annual Household Income
TX=$47,601
MA=$60,923
Unemployment rate (May 2012)
TX=6.9%
MA=6.0%
State Budget Shortfalls, SFY2012
TX=$9 billion
MA=$1.8 billion
Yup. Texas is a real Republican state.
“RISKMAN96 SAYS:
JULY 6, 2012 AT 12:01 AM
Ya, Ollie I agree, the truely smart evolved people have learned to live on other peoples money. Especially the money of the “cave dwellers”. The economy of Texas, run by Republicans, is better than any of the state run by democrats. If you don’t believe me compare Texas to California or New York.”…
FACT: Texas ranks last for health care services and delivery! They have the highest uninsured rate in the nation. More than 25 percent of residents do not have health insurance of any kind.
Ollie called them “cave dwellers”.
I believe Ollie was right on target with the “facts”.
I suggest you do a web search for…
“Texas ranks last for health care services and delivery, report says”
Yeah, Texas…
Talk about the wild west? Isn’t their motto, Everything Is Bigger In Texas? Uh, apparently Texans missed health care. Nothing big about Texas health care, right? Maybe they wear their ten gallon hats a little too tight down thar, huh?