Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Medicaid; The Forgotten Issue
Topic Started: Oct 24 2012, 02:11 AM (215 Views)
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Quote:
 
As we enter the final weeks of the 2012 campaign season, middle-class Americans are finally getting a glimpse of just how devastating Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan's radical plans for Medicare and Social Security would be for generations of seniors and their families. In spite of repeated attempts to deflect attention from their proposals to cut benefits and privatize these programs, it's clear that the more voters find out about the Romney/Ryan plan the less they like it. Unfortunately, Medicaid is not yet on the radar screen for most Americans. They don't realize that the Romney/Ryan plan for the 62 million Americans helped by the Medicaid program is just as destructive.

No political candidate should get a pass on a plan that fundamentally changes the Medicaid program by shifting responsibility to states through block-grants while cutting $810 billion in federal funding during the first decade alone, with even more cuts to follow. When Chairman Ryan included a similar Medicaid block-grant proposal in his budget last year, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Urban Institute estimated it would lead states to drop between 14 million and 27 million people from Medicaid by 2021. An additional 13 million people would also lose Medicaid benefits because of the repeal of health care reform promised by Governor Romney.

Many Americans don't realize that the largest component of Medicaid is long-term care for America's elderly followed by the disabled. People should be asking -- what will happen to those 30 million or more Americans who will likely lose their Medicaid coverage during a Romney/Ryan administration? Where will they go for health care coverage? As is often the case, there are no answers to these critical questions because so few people even know to ask them.

The Romney/Ryan block-grant strategy is especially problematic for people who need nursing home level of care. The average annual nursing home cost is prohibitively expensive -- over $75,000 for a semi-private room. No matter how hard they save for retirement, most middle-class families simply cannot afford the staggering costs of 24-hour skilled care and are forced to seek help from Medicaid. However, according to the Center for Medicare Advocacy, all too many nursing homes residents could lose their Medicaid coverage under the proposed Romney/Ryan plan.

States will also be able to change their Medicaid financial and eligibility rules, making residents and their relatives legally responsible for paying for a greater portion of nursing home expenses. To recover Medicaid costs, states could place a lien on the resident's property even if the resident's spouse or children continue to live in the home.

Likewise, the clock could be turned back on spousal impoverishment rules. Currently, nursing home residents' spouses are allowed to retain some of their assets and income to live in their own homes and communities. However, if the law changes, spouses could be required to contribute even more of their income forcing many who are living on the edge into certain poverty. Americans already contribute $450 billion in uncompensated care with many being forced to quit their jobs and tap into their own retirement funds to help care for a family member. Passing along even more costs to cash-strapped families does not make sense for our nation.

As our nation's population ages, we should be looking for ways to improve critical health care programs like Medicaid to protect our hardworking families. Medicaid is more efficient than private insurance (96 percent of funding goes directly to coverage) and provides a lifeline to young and old who are among the sickest, and most in need. The future of this program deserves close scrutiny during this election season and it is up to voters to ask the questions and demand straightforward answers.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-richtman/medicaid-the-forgotten-issue_b_1988548.html?utm_hp_ref=health-news&ir=Health%20News

The Romney Ryan plan is the real "death panel".
Edited by tomdrobin, Oct 24 2012, 02:12 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
So you think a one size fits all is the best plan?



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Berton
Oct 24 2012, 02:43 AM
So you think a one size fits all is the best plan?



Why do you continually make assumptions based on your ignorance?

There is no one size fits all plan currently. Medicaid varies from state to state.

The Romney Ryan plan just a block grant program to limit federal $$ participation (aka cuts the program). Maybe we can just euthanize all those seniors in nursing homes, or put them out on the street.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
I didn't make an assumption, I ask a question which you didn't answer.

But what Romney wants to do is give the States more latitude to make sure the citizens of their state get what they need rather than a one size fits all Federal plan. So which are you for, a one size fits all or a flexible plan to make sure people are getting what they need?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
tomdrobin
Oct 24 2012, 02:11 AM
Quote:
 
As we enter the final weeks of the 2012 campaign season, middle-class Americans are finally getting a glimpse of just how devastating Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan's radical plans for Medicare and Social Security would be for generations of seniors and their families. In spite of repeated attempts to deflect attention from their proposals to cut benefits and privatize these programs, it's clear that the more voters find out about the Romney/Ryan plan the less they like it. Unfortunately, Medicaid is not yet on the radar screen for most Americans. They don't realize that the Romney/Ryan plan for the 62 million Americans helped by the Medicaid program is just as destructive.

No political candidate should get a pass on a plan that fundamentally changes the Medicaid program by shifting responsibility to states through block-grants while cutting $810 billion in federal funding during the first decade alone, with even more cuts to follow. When Chairman Ryan included a similar Medicaid block-grant proposal in his budget last year, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Urban Institute estimated it would lead states to drop between 14 million and 27 million people from Medicaid by 2021. An additional 13 million people would also lose Medicaid benefits because of the repeal of health care reform promised by Governor Romney.

Many Americans don't realize that the largest component of Medicaid is long-term care for America's elderly followed by the disabled. People should be asking -- what will happen to those 30 million or more Americans who will likely lose their Medicaid coverage during a Romney/Ryan administration? Where will they go for health care coverage? As is often the case, there are no answers to these critical questions because so few people even know to ask them.

The Romney/Ryan block-grant strategy is especially problematic for people who need nursing home level of care. The average annual nursing home cost is prohibitively expensive -- over $75,000 for a semi-private room. No matter how hard they save for retirement, most middle-class families simply cannot afford the staggering costs of 24-hour skilled care and are forced to seek help from Medicaid. However, according to the Center for Medicare Advocacy, all too many nursing homes residents could lose their Medicaid coverage under the proposed Romney/Ryan plan.

States will also be able to change their Medicaid financial and eligibility rules, making residents and their relatives legally responsible for paying for a greater portion of nursing home expenses. To recover Medicaid costs, states could place a lien on the resident's property even if the resident's spouse or children continue to live in the home.

Likewise, the clock could be turned back on spousal impoverishment rules. Currently, nursing home residents' spouses are allowed to retain some of their assets and income to live in their own homes and communities. However, if the law changes, spouses could be required to contribute even more of their income forcing many who are living on the edge into certain poverty. Americans already contribute $450 billion in uncompensated care with many being forced to quit their jobs and tap into their own retirement funds to help care for a family member. Passing along even more costs to cash-strapped families does not make sense for our nation.

As our nation's population ages, we should be looking for ways to improve critical health care programs like Medicaid to protect our hardworking families. Medicaid is more efficient than private insurance (96 percent of funding goes directly to coverage) and provides a lifeline to young and old who are among the sickest, and most in need. The future of this program deserves close scrutiny during this election season and it is up to voters to ask the questions and demand straightforward answers.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-richtman/medicaid-the-forgotten-issue_b_1988548.html?utm_hp_ref=health-news&ir=Health%20News

The Romney Ryan plan is the real "death panel".
According to Mitt, states want to control medicaid.

Listen Tom, the federal government doesn't have any business being involved in Washington state's programs aimed at the citizens of the state. The state does not need a middle man collecting taxes and then putting it's nose where it is not welcome. Do you really think the citizens of Washington would let down their citizens? Who do you think has the best interest of me when I'm in Washington, the federal bureaucracy 3,000 miles away, or my legislature that is 80 miles away and my legislator is a neighbor?

Where do you come up with these fear mongering ideas? The sky will not fall on the states or their citizens if they get Washington out of the way. How about where you live? Do you have such little faith in yourself or your neighbors that you need Uncle Sam involved?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis