Tag Archives: Medicaid

Shame on You, Rick Perry

What state has the highest percentage of residents without health insurance?  You might expect Mississippi or Alabama or Arkansas, which usually win these dubious-distinction contests, but in this case it’s Texas.

Twenty-four percent of Texans don’t have health insurance, and the federal government is offering expanded Medicaid that would insure more than one million of them.  Plus, it wouldn’t cost Texas anything for the first three years, and after that, Texas wouldn’t have to pay more than 90%.

You’d think any governor would jump at the chance to have a healthier work force and give kids a better start in life, but if your governor is Rick Perry, not so much.  Because, you know, the Medicaid expansion is part of evil Obamacare.

Somebody seems to be thinking more about 2016 GOP primary voters than about his own citizens.  Very sad, very shameful.

Don’t Have a Gun? You’re Paying the Price Anyway.

The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that gunshot wounds cost us $2.3 billion in medical bills a year  — and we taxpayers pay $1.1 billion of that through Medicaid, Medicare, and other government programs.

75% of the costs come from attacks, rather than accidents or suicide attempts.

While only 2% of gunshot wounds cause spinal cord injuries, those injuries comprise half the total costs.

Boehner’s Hearty “Bah, Humbug”

In a few hours the House will vote on the GOP’s Plan B, which would raise taxes only on those making more than $1 million a year.  Because, you know, those struggling folks making 7 or 8 or 9 hundred thousand dollars can’t possibly afford a penny more.

The GOP’s bill will also restore the cuts to defense spending that are part of the sequestration scheduled for January 1.

Now, you may be thinking, if they raise revenue by such a tiny amount and restore the defense spending, where are the deficit cuts the GOP is always promising?

Don’t worry, the GOP plan also cuts food stamps and Medicaid.

Nothing quite says “Happy Birthday, Jesus!” like snatching bread and medicine from the mouths of the poor.

It’s Not the Deficit, Stupid

From “That Terrible Trillion,” Paul Krugman, NYT:

“The first thing we need to ask is what a sustainable budget would look like. The answer is that in a growing economy, budgets don’t have to be balanced to be sustainable. Federal debt was higher at the end of the Clinton years than at the beginning – that is, the deficits of the Clinton administration’s early years outweighed the surpluses at the end. Yet because gross domestic product (GDP) rose over those eight years, the best measure of our debt position, the ratio of debt to GDP, fell dramatically, from 49% to 33%.

“Right now, given reasonable estimates of likely future growth and inflation, we would have a stable or declining ratio of debt to GDP even if we had a $400 billion deficit. You can argue that we should do better; but if the question is whether current deficits are sustainable, you should take $400 billion off the table right away.

“That still leaves $600 billion or so. What’s that about? It’s the depressed economy – full stop.

“First of all, the weakness of the economy has led directly to lower revenues; when GDP falls, the federal tax take falls too, and in fact always falls substantially more in percentage terms. On top of that, revenue is temporarily depressed by tax breaks, notably the payroll tax cut, that have been put in place to support the economy but will be withdrawn as soon as the economy is stronger (or, unfortunately, even before then). If you do the math, it seems likely that full economic recovery would raise revenue by at least $450 billion.

“Meanwhile, the depressed economy has also temporarily raised spending, because more people qualify for unemployment insurance and means-tested programs like food stamps and Medicaid. A reasonable estimate is that economic recovery would reduce federal spending on such programs by at least $150 billion.

“Putting all this together, it turns out that the trillion-dollar deficit isn’t a sign of unsustainable finances at all. Some of the deficit is in fact sustainable; just about all of the rest would go away if we had an economic recovery.”  Emphasis added.

72 Million Without Health Insurance?

The Commonwealth Fund predicts that under Mitt’s health insurance plan, 72 million Americans would be uninsured by 2022, primarily because of Mitt’s plans for Medicaid.

Under Obamacare, by contrast, they predict 27 million uninsured, compared to 60 million if Obamacare had not been enacted.

Their projections are based on calculations by MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, who worked with Mitt on Romneycare and with the President on Obamacare.

The Nut In a Nut Shell

Paul Krugman perfectly explains Paul Ryan and his budget.  If you read one column today, it should be this one because then you can explain Paul Ryan at cocktail parties brilliantly from now to November 6.  From “An Unserious Man,” NYT:

“On the tax side, Mr. Ryan proposes big cuts in tax rates on top income brackets and corporations. He has tried to dodge the normal process in which tax proposals are ‘scored’ by independent auditors, but the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center has done the math, and the revenue loss from these cuts comes to $4.3 trillion over the next decade.

“On the spending side, Mr. Ryan proposes huge cuts in Medicaid, turning it over to the states while sharply reducing funding relative to projections under current policy. That saves around $800 billion. He proposes similar harsh cuts in food stamps, saving a further $130 billion or so, plus a grab-bag of other cuts, such as reduced aid to college students. Let’s be generous and say that all these cuts would save $1 trillion.

“On top of this, Mr. Ryan includes the $716 billion in Medicare savings that are part of Obamacare….

“So if we add up Mr. Ryan’s specific proposals, we have $4.3 trillion in tax cuts, partially offset by around $1.7 trillion in spending cuts — with the tax cuts, surprise, disproportionately benefiting the top 1 percent, while the spending cuts would primarily come at the expense of low-income families. Over all, the effect would be to increase the deficit by around two and a half trillion dollars.

“Yet Mr. Ryan claims to be a deficit hawk. What’s the basis for that claim?

“Well, he says that he would offset his tax cuts by ‘base broadening,’ eliminating enough tax deductions to make up the lost revenue. Which deductions would he eliminate? He refuses to say — and realistically, revenue gain on the scale he claims would be virtually impossible.

“At the same time, he asserts that he would make huge further cuts in spending. What would he cut? He refuses to say.

“What Mr. Ryan actually offers, then, are specific proposals that would sharply increase the deficit, plus an assertion that he has secret tax and spending plans that he refuses to share with us, but which will turn his overall plan into deficit reduction.

“If this sounds like a joke, that’s because it is. Yet Mr. Ryan’s ‘plan’ has been treated with great respect in Washington. …What’s going on?

‘The answer, basically, is a triumph of style over substance. Over the longer term, the Ryan plan would end Medicare as we know it — and in Washington, ‘fiscal responsibility’ is often equated with willingness to slash Medicare and Social Security, even if the purported savings would be used to cut taxes on the rich rather than to reduce deficits. Also, self-proclaimed centrists are always looking for conservatives they can praise to showcase their centrism, and Mr. Ryan has skillfully played into that weakness, talking a good game even if his numbers don’t add up.

‘The question now is whether Mr. Ryan’s undeserved reputation for honesty and fiscal responsibility can survive his participation in a deeply dishonest and irresponsible presidential campaign.

“So will the choice of Mr. Ryan mean a serious campaign? No, because Mr. Ryan isn’t a serious man — he just plays one on TV.”  Emphasis added.

Mitt the Magician

From Scot Lehigh, “Romney’s fanciful tax plan,” Boston Globe:

“As a presidential candidate, then, Romney is teetering on the brink of a credibility chasm created by his party’s irreconcilable ideological demands.  To lead today’s GOP, one must be both a tax cutter and, rhetorically at least, a deficit hawk.  But the only way to fulfill both roles is by decimating entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid, to say nothing of other domestic programs.

“No wonder, then, that Romney is keeping things vague.  Like a magician using smoke and mirrors to help weave eye-catching illusions in a dim theater, he knows bright lights and expert scrutiny are the enemy of his legerdemain.

“And yet, it should tell voters something important that the GOP self-styled fiscal and economic answer man is proffering plans that can’t pass muster with the experts.”

This is why his campaign is built around lying about President Obama, he can’t use his ads and speeches to get into policy specifics as a serious, honest candidate would.  Mitt isn’t stupid, but he’s caught in a web of numbers that don’t add up and policies that don’t make sense.

 

H/T RJ

Y’All Can Die, Cause Perry’s Running for Prez in 2016

About 25% of Texans don’t have health insurance,  the highest rate in the country.  This is one area where Texas shouldn’t want to be bigger than everybody else.  This high number of uninsured is because states set eligibility based on the poverty line, and Texas sets theirs really low — at only 27% of that line.

By contrast, the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare would cover people up to 133% of the poverty line, which in states like Texas would make an enormous difference.  The cost to Texas for such an expansion?  Zero for the first three years, and then ten percent thereafter.

Sounds like a good deal, right?  Except that Texas Gov. Rick Perry says he won’t participate.  He’s going to hold his breath until all the uninsured turn blue.

Besides refusing to participate in the Medicaid expansion, Perry says he won’t set up an insurance exchange to help people buy coverage from competing private insurers.

This is all about Perry setting himself up to run again for president in 2016, this time without the back surgery, pain pills, and “oops.”  Of course, if he does need more back surgery and pain pills, no problem.  He has health insurance.

But ultimately I believe Perry, and other refusenik governors like Rick Scott of Florida, Scott Walker of Wisconsin, and Nikki Haley of South Carolina, will cave.  They will be under too much pressure from their hospitals and their citizens will not be pleased to watch so much federal money flowing to other states.