NYT: White House's Planned Medicaid Cuts Cause Rift With States

[DeepModem Mom]

Planned Medicaid Cuts Cause Rift With States
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: August 13, 2006

WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 — The White House is clashing with governors of both parties over a plan to cut Medicaid payments to hospitals and nursing homes that care for millions of low-income people.

The White House says the changes are needed to ensure the “fiscal integrity” of Medicaid and to curb “excessive payments” to health care providers.

But the plan faces growing opposition. The National Governors Association said it “would impose a huge financial burden on states,” already struggling with explosive growth in health costs.

More than 330 members of Congress, including 103 Republicans, have objected to the plan. A letter signed by 82 House Republicans says it “would seriously disrupt financing of Medicaid programs around the country.” A bipartisan group of 50 senators recently urged President Bush to scrap the proposed rules, which were set forth in his 2007 budget and could be issued before the end of this year.

Medicaid finances health care for more than 50 million low-income people, with money provided by the federal government and the states....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/13/washington/13medicaid.html

[msongs]

1. republicans want 300 billion to destroy then rebuild in Iraq however, so

why not let the american people know the republicans want to help iraqis but NOT HELP americans?

sounds like a vote getter to me : -)


Msongs
www.msongs.com/2007politicalcalendars.htm

[Supersedeas]

14. get your Petroleum based priorities straight--the tuxedo 'base' needs

attention.

[pinto]

2. There's an understatement.

And, of course, "fiscal integrity" in this case means dismantlement. Domestically this is the Admin's agenda with Medicare and Medicaid. Glad to see some challenges being made. California already supplements Federal funding to our MediCal program. Federal cuts would stretch this support to the limit.

[Zorra]

3. 330 members of Congress: 227 Democrats, 103 republicans --

just for the record.

Oh, boy! 103 republicans!

The author of the article had to say, "including 103 Republicans", because it is such a rare occurence that a republican does anything that remotely hints of human decency.

No need to mention Democrats -- because they're always the ones doing good things for Americans -- so that is just taken for granted.

[undergroundpanther]

4. What about excessive payments

To Halliburton Asshole, What about excessive payments to weapons makers dick wads? What about the bridge to nowhere idiots,Cut THAT..What about the excessive payments to fucking churches with faith based crap? What about the bloated Pentagone black hole..Shut that thing up..What about excessive salaries for all the greedy fucking useless asshole congress roaches and the idiot chimp? Fuck the rich piggies trim their fucking pork for once.I hate rich people that are fucking us over.

[ninkasi]

7. You've got that right, Undergroundpanther

No expense is ever spared to spread taxpayer money to the already rich, but God forbid a poor or elderly citizen, or a child (no longer a fetus) is in need, then the Republican party is all for fiscal restraint. They are greedy, self-serving, hypocritical assholes, all of them. With our most vulnerable citizens in dire need, all the GOPig party can think of is screwing them, and lavishing even more tax cuts to the ultra wealthy.

It was more than enough several years ago, it is embarrassing now. How can these people look at themselves in the mirror, without the mirror cracking in disgust?

[ShockediSay]

5. Federal tax cuts for the rich, a shell game, increasing burden on states'

property owners and budgets for, well, in this case health care.

[nedbal]

6. the bridge to nowhere idiots,Cut THAT

[WhiteTara]

13. NOOOOOOOO screams ucky Ted

that's my bridge and no one can stop me from making millions on my property on that island!

[Lasher]

8. Those 103 Republicans object only because of the election coming up

The very presence of those Republicans in Congress helps ensure the GOP will control Congressional leadership - which in turn ensures the ongoing dismantling of Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and VA benefits will continue.

You would think that Junior would be doing his moderate impression until after November. I guess he figures the party's over, and he wants to do as much damage as possible between now and then.

[gatlingforme]

9. I would not expect anything less from Bu$h - he can give a rats ass

about people with low income - or for that matter, anybody that does not contribute to his coffers.
Bush is an effing asshole.
His mother should be used for target practice by our troops in Iraq.

[salin]

10. This is a huge story.

Not sure who benefits. Rolling back the rolls - forces local health providers to carry a greater load of "no insurance" folks, from whom they will receive fewer dollars than medicaid reembursement. The provision in the regs to disallow states from using taxes on providers to offset the new costs to the state - doesn't seem to be much of a boon to the providers - as the increased costs (in terms of costs of care for those newly without any type of coverage (as in kicked off medicaid) ) will certainly be greater than the savings from ending a providers tax. This is a net loss for providers as well as for states. So what drives this (besides just the joy of further impoverishing more people that seems to give glee to bushco)?

I suspect that it has something to do with their woodies for the idea of ending health insurance altogether and ending the talk of "single payer" health care by creating a system where healthcare costs are off the backs of employers and fully on the backs of workers via 'health savings accounts' - as if those with low pay earn enough to put $ into HSAs and to cover the costs of a) the monthly premiums for self-insured insurance; and b) the high deductables that often a part of the 'catastrophic' type insurance coverage being pushed by those wanting to end employer-covered health care.

[underpants]

16. This is a HUGE issue-almost ignored by the press until now

overhead costs via the current health care providers 15%
overhead costs via Medicaid and Medicare 3%

The government does it much more efficiently than the private sector is willing or able to.

[Earth_First]

11. Say it with me: Universal Single-Payer Healthcare System n/t

[salin]

12. Bush choses to defy Congress (they voted against this) and screw states

*AGAIN* all in a seeming march to cripple those in greatest economic need.

I hope that this story gets much more coverage. I hope that the gop plans to push through SS privatization after the elections - gets ton of coverage during the elections. I hope that the GOP desire to SWELL the number of uninsured americans - through executive fiats like this - and through pushing changing the tax code to force employers to stop providing health benefits (by removing the tax breaks/incentives employers get for providing that insurance).

Why does George Bush and why do his cronies hate Americans, unless they are really, really, filthy rich? That is the question that should be repeated again and again.

[goforit]

15. Federal Gov't takes your money & nevers gives any back!

When is everyone gonna get the picture?

It's highway robbery.

[Politicub]

17. Cutting medicaid is one of the most evil things this admin could do

But I'm sure that they think nothing of depriving the poorest of the poor any preventative medical treatment. After all, they are only for themselves and the people who already have insurance.

It takes a sick electorate to punish the poor for, well, being poor.

[Supersedeas]

18. Pubby's with a pre-election concern about Health Care...NO WAY