Some Texas counties want Medicaid dollars
Source: Washington Post
Posted at 11:58 AM ET, 08/27/2012
Some Texas counties want Medicaid dollars
By Lori Stahl
DALLAS This is not shaping up as a dream week for Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Monday morning headlines state the obvious: He wont be playing a major role at the Republican National Convention in Tampa.
Meanwhile back home, there's a small-scale mutiny afoot as some larger counties are openly resisting Perrys pushback against President Obamas plan to expand Medicaid as part of health care reform.
Perry, of course, is among a handful of Republican governors whove said their states wont participate in the Medicaid expansion. Even though hes no longer in the presidential contest, the stance gives Perry a platform for continuing to criticize Obama, saying the plan is too expensive and has too many federal strings attached.
Whether that stance is strictly partisan politics, or deeply felt principle, is in the eye of the beholder. For its part, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that states can opt out without penalty from the federal government.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/some-texas-counties-want-medicaid-dollars/2012/08/27/d23dd048-f058-11e1-b74c-84ed55e0300b_blog.html
SDjack
(1,448 posts)Massachusetts to annex them or form a new state and ask to be admitted into the Union.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Last edited Mon Aug 27, 2012, 09:38 PM - Edit history (2)
Whether that stance is strictly partisan politics, or deeply felt principle, is in the eye of the beholder.No, he and the other yahoos that are not fulfilling the promise of Medicaid should NOT get away with their 'partisan politics' or 'deeply felt principle.'
People will, are, and have DIED in this country, when their birthright was to get the best that could be made available.
In virtually every case, these yahoos are corporate lackeys who believe in denying the means to live on the persons within an artificial boundary line and want to enforce all kinds of discrimination on millions in their respective states.
They are not kings, neither or the lawmakers, and these officials do not their human rights.
Just because a person is tied to a location by owning property, has family membrers, or was born in a certain state amd cannot move, does not mean some idiot in the legislature or governor's mansion should be able to deny them what is necessary to live.
justabob
(3,069 posts)and doesn't deserve to get a pass on believing that it is ok to make people suffer and die for HIS principles or politics. ARG!!
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)It's really a different world from the rest of Texas when you visit those cities. I remember a trip to Austin, it was about as progressive as any of the cities up here in the NE like NYC, Boston, Philly.
Yes I live in Houston and agree that the larger cities in Texas are more progressive. I can't agree with a single word that comes out of Perry's mouth.
TexasTowelie
(112,101 posts)I'm currently living in Brenham. After nearly 30 years in the Austin and Dallas areas, I feel like I've taken a step back in time but I know that there are places in Texas that are even more backwards.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I think Annise Parker is pretty cool and would make a great governor of Texas.
oliverrams1
(60 posts)But no chance to be governor of this RED state.
avebury
(10,952 posts)justabob
(3,069 posts)I am so glad to hear it. I hope the cities give Perry hell. It is absurd that our health care system is in the state it is in. Perry says we'd be on the hook for all those bills after the three year federal subsidy, but I read elsewhere we'd actually end up coming out ahead financially, with a healthier population to boot.
Igel
(35,296 posts)If the models are right.
I've learned to distrust models. For the first 3 years of the recovery, every model that made a testable prediction was held to be true until it was actually tested, then it turned out wrong. Every model that didn't make a testable prediction couldn't, naturally, be tested--and we still hold those to be true.
Odds aren't favoring that just by accident every testable model was wrong but all the non-testable models are right.
For the record, the HCRA and ACA stipulate the assumptions that have to be put into a standard model. Even if the model is 100% right, there's still the question about the assumptions.
Take one non-federal assumption that was made in Mass. for Romneycare. With universal health-care, the outrageous cost of emergency room visits would decline fairly quickly. It seemed reasonable. It provided for a bit chunk of savings. Yet years after there was universal health-care emergency room visits had barely budged. Those who had used the emergency room for basic care continued to use it for basic care. The cost savings there were minimal.
That's one of the assumptions stipulated by law for the HCRA/ACA. The models we have say that emergency room visits should decline. The data we have say that they don't. We're ordered by Congress to believe the models, not the data.
We've started a new budget cycle in Texas. Let's see how the House and Senate treat Medicare/Medicaid this time.
justabob
(3,069 posts)about ER usage not changing even when people have better access. I guess once you start doing something one way, it is hard to think of other options. That was the gist of the analysis that I read about Texas and Medicaid... that the big savings would come from reduced ER usage. There was more, but I cannot remember the details. Ah well. Maybe the Lege will surprise in a good way for once? I am not going to hold my breath, but crazier things have happened, and these are crazy, crazy times.
mbperrin
(7,672 posts)They will continue to allow our physical structure to deteriorate (roads, schools, bridges, parks), our safety net to unravel (Medicaid, law enforcement) and will continue to allow huge companies like Exxon to pay nothing into state taxes.
Why should this time be different?
bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)lovuian
(19,362 posts)his Debates
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)benld74
(9,904 posts)oldsarge54
(582 posts)Don't blame Texas. We do have liberals, just not enough of them with money. Seems the only way we can get rid of governors are to send them to Washington.
DhhD
(4,695 posts)because of TX GOP is making decisions for low income and poor people. Instead of securing federal funding as Texans pay federal income tax, Governor Perry wants to give the Texas share to other states participating in the Medicaid Exchange of the ACA. Perry told the head of the TX Health and Human Services Commission to find money some other way. The Commissioner is resigning.
Perry is asking Texas Taxpayers to pay twice, through loss of federal monies return and money from education and other raided state programs like the Texas Parks and Wildlife. There are several articles on the DU Texas Group about the raiding of federal and state funds in state programs. Suppose everybody knows that most Texas school districts are currently suing the State of Texas/Texas TEA Legislature for not upholding the Texas Constitution when it comes to funding education. Then again, Perry put the bill for his Presidential Campaign on Texas Taxpayers.
GOP is the same everywhere; removing health care, education, etc. so wealthy and corporations will not have to pay taxes. Some of those tax free corporations are now leaving Texas.
karltrautman
(2 posts)Yes, its time. Taking the Medicaid dollars will help poor people in Texas. Does anyone think that the pressure to accept the Medicaid dollars will decrease in the future?
http://karltrautman.com/